Georgetown law professor fired after Zoom conversation made public

[hyruga]

That's why in some university exams, you are actually not required to submit your name. You just have to write in your ID number and the marking will be more unbiased.

[Raptorsin7]

@hyruga I'm pretty confident that Georgetown does blind grading for law school. But i guess people are worried about how her racist tendencies influence how she teaches students of color

[Forestluv]

9 hours ago, Raptorsin7 said:

@Forestluv @Derek White What do you think will happen to the professor she was talking to? At the end of the clip you see him nodding his head in agreement. I bet many students will think he's complicit in this situation due to his silence.

It may create an atmosphere where you have to check every potentially racist statement or at least show some opposition or hesitation.

The male professor voluntarily resigned. Yet I don't know how "voluntary" it was. He could have been stigmatized and pressured to resign.

I don't think forcing out the male professor sets a bad precedent. He pretty much went along with what she said with "yea, yea". 

Terminating someone for that would put extreme pressure on people to be able to interpret sentiment / intention of their peers and challenge them on anything that could be perceived as racist. I think it's fair to ask what level of "calling out / calling in" is required of faculty. For example, if a colleague of mine told me they sexually assaulted a student, I would be required to call him out by reporting him. Yet what if a colleague mentions he has some cute girls in his class this semester? Would I be required to challenge him on exactly what he meant by that? Would I be fired if I didn't report him? Requiring that type of "calling out / calling in" is very problematic.

Here, I wouldn't even know exactly what to call out or report? The male professor seemed to be like "yea, yea whatever". He wasn't contributing or advancing the conversation. I think it becomes very problematic to require someone in that position to call her out/in. 

Consider that there aren't clear standards of what counts as "racist" or "inappropriate". Some stuff is obvious, yet other stuff isn't. For example, one of my colleagues mentioned that during her field trip all the white students went into one van and all the minority students went into another van. So on the trip home she intentionally mixed up the students so each van had a diverse mixture. I was like "oh, ok" and I moved on. Yet would something like that be "racist"? Would I be required to challenge her and ask if any students complied or resisted? Did she put any pressure on students? Did she penalize a student's grade for not complying? What if a student resisted? Is that student "racist"? Would I have to contact that student? Would I have to report them?

That level of vague micromanagement is super problematic. Imo, part of the process is cultural evolution. I worked at a Uni in California that was naturally diverse - white people were majority minority. Everyone interacted with people of different races all the time. There were likely aspects of systemic racism at the Uni, yet the culture of people just naturally interacted well together. Independent diversity coaches weren't needed to tell people what is racially inappropriate. . . And then I worked at a college that was 90%+ affluent white. It was a homogenous community and simple. Diversity coaches weren't needed to coach white people about white people since it was 90%+ affluent. Yet when the demographics changed to only 50% affluent white, the dynamics changed and a lot of white faculty became awkward and didn't know what is appropriate. And often, they had good intentions - most of the white faculty wanted more diversity. So when a Hispanic woman was hired, white faculty might tell her "I'm so glad you are here, we really need minority faculty like you here. Welcome". The white prof. was intending to welcome the new prof and had no idea how what they said is inappropriate. When called out on it the white prof might say "Huh, how was what I said wrong?". Then things get tricky. . . 

[Tetcher]

 

Quote

 

It is not malicious or conscious bigotry. She lacks DEI awareness and skills. That is a distinction from a statistical fact. 

Imagine a doctor stating a statistical fact that 10% of his patients are unhealthy and he has no idea why, and he doesn't treat them. It's not about the statistical fact that 10% of his patients have are mysteriously ill. The problem is that he is unable to diagnose them as having cardiac problems and unable to treat them. This doctor isn't being malicious, yet he lacks awareness and skills. 

 

How are you going to help 10% of patients mysteriously ill if you're not allowed to acknowledge they're ill ?

Quote

She didn't get fired. She voluntarily resigned.

Her colleague resigned, she got fired.

Quote

 

Yet what type of sense making are you offering here? Your "sense-making" is a simple counter-position to the position you dislike. This is a simple black racism vs anti white racism construct.

You criticize those on the forum going unchallenged, yet how willing are you to challenge your construct. Other people have offered nuances much deeper than a surface level black vs anti-white construct. This example involves minority students performing poorly in a classroom. What are the underlying causes of this? How much of this is due to a student's background? How much about this has to do with individual motivation? How much to do with college course structure, support resources? How can we improve pedagogy to expand accessibility and student success?

You mention looking at societies through a lens. Yet there are other lenses you can be looking through. 

 

Anti white racism on this forum is going unchallenged and unmoderated is the statement I made. I can see what you're doing against other forms of racism, what are you doing against anti white racism as a moderator ?

What construct of mine that I'm unwilling to challenge are you referring to ?

Instead of firing her Georgetown law school should have set up a process that address the questions you're raising and offered this teacher avenues to help those students facing difficulties. That would have been helpful, instead they got rid of an experienced teacher pushing disadvantaged students furthermore down.

Quote

You mention looking at societies through a lens. Yet there are other lenses you can be looking through. 

I mentioned those lenses because those are the lenses used by those fueling anti white narrative. I don't look at the world through those lenses myself.

[Forestluv]

1 minute ago, Tetcher said:

How are you going to help 10% of patients mysteriously ill if you're not allowed to acknowledge they're ill ?

Yes, the doctor needs to acknowledge they are ill. I keep making this point over and over and over again. . . 

It's not pointing at acknowledging the illness. I'm talking about acknowledging the illness and then moving toward figuring out the etiology of the illness. 

The point is that the doctor acknowledges the illness and then talks about how these patients give him angst and drive him crazy. That is not moving toward figuring out etiology and helping the patients. 

As well, the patients are not "mysteriously ill". They are "mysteriously ill" to the doctor because the doctor lacks awareness and the desire to learn about their illness, understand them and help them.

1 minute ago, Tetcher said:

Her colleague resigned, she got fired.

Yes, thanks for the clarity. Her colleague "resigned", yet I'm skeptical if it was fully voluntary. I suspect there was a lot of pressure on him to resign.

1 minute ago, Tetcher said:

Anti white racism on this forum is going unchallenged and unmoderated is the statement I made. I can see what you're doing against other forms of racism, what are you doing against anti white racism as a moderator ?

Racism is against forum guidelines, yet there will be grey areas of what counts as "racism" (for all races).

It may appear that there is heavier moderation in some areas due to asymmetry of racism. 

If 90% of people speak Spanish and 10% of people speak English, there is an asymmetry of language speakers. If an English speaker believes there should be 50% Spanish and 50% English, he will perceive things as being biased.

1 minute ago, Tetcher said:

What construct of mine that I'm unwilling to challenge are you referring to ?

Your simple binary constructs. Black vs. White, Racist vs. Non-racist etc. 

1 minute ago, Tetcher said:

Instead of firing her Georgetown law school should have set up a process that address the questions you're raising and offered this teacher avenues to help those students facing difficulties. That would have been helpful, instead they got rid of an experienced teacher pushing disadvantaged students furthermore down.

I agree that simply firing her does not address the underlying issues that the faculty member raised about black students performing poorly. Acknowledging a problem is important to addressing it. The administration plays a role in this. If they are recruiting low income, underprepared black students, it is irresponsible not to give them the resources they need. It's also irresponsible if Georgetown is virtue signaling by firing the faculty member.

However, the faculty member also has some responsibility. She is untrained in DEI awareness and skills. I don't know how much of that is her responsibility. Both the faculty member and the administration are responsible for those resources.

If my college wanted me to teach R coding in my courses and I don't even know what R is, it's not fair of them to expect me to have the skills to teach it. It is a shared responsibility: I have to be personally responsibility to acknowledge I lack skills and have the willingness to learn R, yet the college would also need to provide the resources for R training. They can't expect faculty members to spend their own time and money on it. 

I don't see the problem as having one cause with one person responsible. There are multiple inputs of causation and shared responsibility of many people, 

1 minute ago, Tetcher said:

I mentioned those lenses because those are the lenses used by those fueling anti white narrative. I don't look at the world through those lenses myself.

There is nothing "anti white" I am proposing. I am advocating for addressing why certain students are failing and providing them the resources and help to be successful. There is nothing "anti white" about that. However, in this case the failing students are disproportionately black and a white faculty member may be unqualified to address the problem - and she may even be exasperating the problem.

Again, that is not "anti-white", that is observing data and dynamics from a diagnostic perspective. 

You have mentioned the idea of "anti white" many times. Overuse of that lens will create distortions. We will not be able to evaluate a complex system objectively and design solutions with that lens being pre-dominate. That is what I was referring to as a simple binary construct (anti-white vs anti-black). That lens is far to simple to solve a complex problem with various inputs of causation, perspectives and degrees.