While chatting with a colleague, they made the following observation about my work as a K-12 educator in educational technology. I found it a fascinating perspective and insight. So, I wrote it down, waited a few years before sharing it online. ;-) At the end, I share the results of The Orwell Test applied to the assertions. It offers an alternate way of gauging the accuracy, but as you’ll see, it’s a matter of opinion as these things often are without evidence.
You were the token Latino in the 80s. They could hire you and not get backlash about not having Latinos/diversity. But you’re good, you exceeded their expectations, and you have real individual power and ability. And it freaks out those above you in the power structure. Further, it’s been forty years of hard work and you’re not seeing the payout because your presence and the presence of other tokenized people like you didn’t change the power structure, it just allowed them to say “Diversity!”
Which was a purposeful way they set things up, because they had no intention of letting the power structure change. And you’re feeling the effects even harder now because you’re looking around and wondering why things haven’t changed.
And it’s because you have not been let into the group in charge, and they have actively excluded you and other ethnic and racial groups as groups. They also only mentor the same people who remind themselves of themselves, like white old men mentor young white men. So, no mentoring, no being let into the inner circle, even active dislike/refusal to promote.
The Orwell Test Applied to the Assertions Above
Here’s The Orwell Test, as generated by an AI:
Application of The Orwell Test
| Area | YES/NO | Summary | Reason for Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Facts | NO | The narrative describes a long career marked by systemic barriers and a lack of change in the power structure, despite the presence of diversity. | The scenario suggests that despite individual achievements and the appearance of diversity, the underlying power dynamics and structures remain unchanged, indicating a systemic issue not supported by positive change or evidence of effective inclusion. |
| Source | NO | The source of this narrative is implied to be the individual’s personal experience and observation over four decades. | While personal experiences are valuable, they may not always provide a complete or unbiased view of broader systemic issues without additional evidence or corroboration from multiple sources. |
| Method | NO | The method described is personal observation and experience without mention of systematic analysis or engagement with broader data or studies. | Relying solely on personal experience without engaging with broader data, research, or analysis can limit the understanding of complex systemic issues and may not employ professional techniques of factual reporting. |
Conclusion
Based on The Orwell Test, this narrative would be considered highly suspect or potentially propagandistic due to failing all three criteria: it lacks verifiable facts supported by broader evidence, comes from a single source without corroboration, and does not employ a methodological approach that includes engagement with broader data or research. This assessment suggests a need for caution and further investigation into the claims made within the narrative.
It’s important to note that while personal experiences and observations are crucial for understanding individual and collective challenges, evaluating systemic issues requires a comprehensive approach that includes diverse sources, verifiable data, and methodological analysis.
Citations removed