I don’t teach at Georgetown but at a large midwestern state university in almost that exact tier — perhaps just a few rankings higher.
I sit this afternoon finishing grading nearly 300 essays of my graduate students. I have many students of color. It’s a different population obviously, but I suspect not all that different.
What this Georgetown prof writes is bunk. A myth. If there is a statistical correlation between race and low grades in this professor’s classes, my bet would be that the causality rests with the teacher s*cking and not with the students. A good professor would not have this problem.
Law school is a different ball game. And sorry, but it’s very believable that black students who got admitted due to AA would struggle more than their white and Asian classmates with stronger backgrounds.
I see, so were their comments lies? Were they fabricated? Are they racist? Or as you seem to suggest, are they just failures at teaching?
And if they are failures at teaching, why did the white folks do significantly better? Why weren't they at the bottom of the class as well?
With all due respect, your post is bunk.
“graduate students”
Do you teach incoming freshman? What do your colleagues say about their college readiness?
My wife graduated from one of the top vet schools in the country and the few black students who were enrolled were at the bottom of the class. One of her employees is enrolled at the same school right now and it is the same way.
And to be clear, I’m not saying that all blacks got in due to AA. But often times a majority did. The problem is that the top law schools are very competitive and the grading is usually done on a curve. The result of AA in such an environment is that a black student with a 3.3 Undergraduate GPA and slightly above average LSAT scores is thrown in with a huge pack of people with 3.9s and top 10% LSAT scores. Given the intensity and speed of these law schools, there is no realistic way for the AA black students to catch up fast enough on their study and writing skills to produce exams that are as strong at the rest, which again, given the importance of curving and ranking students in law schools, means they will be notably at the bottom. What this professor said is absolutely true.
Honestly, while what she said is uncomfortable to discuss, inconvenient even, I don’t believe it’s that far-fetched considering what we understand with respect to racial differences in entrance exam results. IOW, there’s a reason the progressive left wants universities to abandon the ACT/SAT and that reason is people of some ethnic backgrounds do worse than white students, appreciably worse.
There are exceptions, of course. Asians generally do better than ethnic Europeans and African IMMIGRANTS do better than Americans of slave ancestry. Again, there are reasons for this, many of which make for even more uncomfortable conversations.
And, these differences don’t just manifest themselves in college performance. For decades, Military entrance exams have shown a pronounced variation between ethnic European applicants and minority candidates. These differences also rear their head in military occupational specialty training. Generally, minority students appreciably under-perform ethnic Europeans.
Does that mean their an racial component to IQ? Probably not. But, exploring and better understanding this dynamic is important for society if we’re going to remedy it. Firing this person just for broaching the subject, particularly if she’s NOT factually incorrect, only prolongs the time before a solution is reached, IMO.
Please define "color" and "race" as used in your post. Please also tell us what subject you teach.
And if they are failures at teaching and they, "Suck" at teaching, why did the white folks do significantly better? Why weren't they at the bottom of the class as well?