Here is a nice entry in an online network of colleges. It draws a fruitful parallel between the management of persons through “Taylorism” and the grouping of persons by race, gender, sexuality, religion, etc. Taylorism was the science of industrial efficiency developed more than 100 years ago by Frederick Winslow Taylor, a science that tried to manipulate labor and behaviors in order to maximize a system (an assembly line, a bureaucracy, etc.). The author, R. J. O’Hara, sees a complementary engineering in today’s identity categories in higher education:

Liberal education — education for a life of liberty rather than a life of servility — is education that cultivates agency as opposed to reflex, original thought and judgment as opposed to pattern-behavior determined by one’s race, class, sex, or nationality, or by one’s role as a machine-part. . . .
This same outlook drives my own moral revulsion toward the views of educational neo-Taylorists like Scott E. Page, who dreams of using Complex Systems Theory to engineer the perfect university-machine, with just the right number of each kind of part. “At a university, people learn from each other as well as their professors,” says Page. True enough. But he deduces from this that the mix of types in a university must be precisely engineered so the industrial process of education will operate at maximum efficiency — precisely engineered according to criteria of his own devising, of course.
In carrying out this engineering, universities must take special care not to become overpopulated with the wrong types. “Another suburban kid who was raised to score high on tests,” says Page, “doesn’t add all that much to the mix.”
A mind that can make such a pronouncement is a mind that cares only for parts and nothing for persons, only for vulgar determinism and nothing for free agency, only for automation and nothing for originality, only for templates and nothing for beauty.
Another suburban kid, another Negro, another rich Jew, another preppy snob, another stupid pig-iron worker, another autistic retard, another dumb mick—the chart says we have enough of that type already. They’re just interchangeable parts, anyway. It’s not like they’re persons.