New York Times Finally Admits The Left’s War On Standardized Tests Was ‘Misguided’
The Times concludes that the left's war on SATs has failed to make higher education more 'equitable' and has done a disservice to disadvantaged students.The Times concludes that the left's war on SATs has failed to make higher education more 'equitable' and has done a disservice to disadvantaged students.CNN host abruptly ends segment when guest whips out the facts about affirmative action's impact on Asian students
CNN host Abby Phillip ended a segment with a fair admissions advocate on Thursday when he used facts to demonstrate the downside of affirmative action.
Kenny Xu — a board member for Students for Fair Admissions, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court case — told Phillip that academic excellence, not race, "should be prioritized" in college admissions.
"I think that admissions should be only based on merit," he said. "Why are we asking a university to calculate somebody's level of diversity? I think that sets a very bad precedent for anybody trying to get into college. We should be treated on the basis of our merits. We should be treated on the basis of how hard we work, or study, our SAT scores, our grades."
But Phillip pushed back. She asked why admissions boards should not consider "other factors" that students "bring to the table" like socio-economic background.
Xu argued you cannot do that fairly because, inevitably, admissions standards are changed for applicants from a disadvantaged socio-economic background versus applicants from a privileged background.
"We don't want that. We want black students to succeed. We want every student to succeed, low-income students to succeed," he pointed out. "But you have to put them in scenarios, in places where they are likely to succeed. And lowering your standard to admit somebody of a socio-economic status or race would not help you do that. In fact, you would harm their graduation rate and excellence."
Phillip responded that standards aren't lowered — but Xu held his ground, despite Phillip's attempts to interrupt him.
"The standard is lowered, as admissions data shows. Asians have to score 273 points higher in the SAT to have the same chance of admission as a black person," he argued. "So, the standard is lowered for black Americans."
Phillip then abruptly ended the segment.
"Kenny Xu, thank you for your perspective. Really appreciate you joining us today," she said.
— (@)
The phenomenon that Xu described is well documented.
Five years ago when the case went to trial, the Harvard Crimson reported on the Ivy League school's admission data. The paper showed that Asian students who applied to Harvard produced the highest average standardized test scores among applicant demographics, yet had the lowest admission rate. Black applicants, on the other hand, had the lowest average standardized test scores, but enjoyed the highest admission rate.
As CNN legal analyst Elie Honig explained, what the Supreme Court objected to was not diversity per se, but admission boards giving "specific numerical bump [in admissions] based on race."
"What I think is really interesting is there is a recognition here ... that racial diversity is a virtue, it is a value. They're not saying it's a bad thing or it's meaningless," Honig explained of the Supreme Court's decision. "The question is: What are the constitutional means to get there?"
The answer to that question, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested, is to honor the "colorblind" Constitution.
In his concurring opinion in the case, Thomas acknowledged that American society is not "colorblind." But that reality should not prevent our laws from being race-neutral, he argued.
"Racialism simply cannot be undone by different or more racialism," Thomas wrote.
"This vision of meeting social racism with government-imposed racism is thus self-defeating, resulting in a never-ending cycle of victimization," he observed. "In the wake of the Civil War, the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment charted a way out: a colorblind Constitution that requires the government to, at long last, put aside its citizens’ skin color and focus on their individual achievements."
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
'Are you disciplining African-American boys more than you’re disciplining white boys?' School district will consider race when students break behavioral rules
A school board in Washington state adopted a "culturally responsive discipline" policy earlier this month requiring students' race and ethnicity to be taken into consideration after they break behavioral rules and punishment is administered.
What are the details?
The board for Clover Park School District — which is about an hour south of Seattle — passed the measure March 14 by a 3-2 vote after some debate among board members.
"The Board recognizes the negative and disproportionate impact of exclusionary discipline practices," the policy reads, adding that the main goal is to minimize discipline that keeps students out of the classroom.
When one board member asked what a culturally responsive discipline policy "might look like," deputy superintendent Brian Laubach replied that the question for schools would be, "Are you dispersing discipline across the ethnicities, the racial groups, equitably?" For example, "Are you disciplining African-American boys more than you’re disciplining white boys?" he added.
Laubach also noted that "classroom teachers" and "administrators who dispense that discipline" for behavioral violations would be asked why sending students out of the classroom was chosen for discipline instead of other options that would have kept them in class.
The state defines “culturally responsive” as harnessing “knowledge of student cultural histories and contexts, as well as family norms and values in different cultures; knowledge and skills in accessing community resources and community and parent outreach; and skills in adapting instruction to students' experiences and identifying cultural contexts for individual students."
Board member Paul Wagemann wasn't down with the proposed policy.
“Let’s say we both commit the same offense,” Wagemann posed in an analogy, presumably related to students of color versus white students. "Then the question should be, 'What are the consequences of that offense? And how do we go through that process?' That’s how I see it. And to be fair, if we both did the same thing, we should get the same consequence ... and I think that’s how most children on the playground like to see it. Most of us as citizens in our community like to see it that way. That it’s equal.”
With that he dismissed the idea that the powers that be in the district would “have to look at [a student’s] nationality, or where he was born, or where he lived” prior to administering discipline. Instead, Wagemann said, plain and simple, "He did an offense; I did the same offense. We should suffer the same consequence. And I think that’s what our system should do."
March. 14th, 2022 CPSD School Board Meetingyoutu.be
More pushback
Conservative commentator Jason Rantz also blasted such policies, which he said are running rampant in Washington state.
"Lazy progressive activists claim it’s racist to punish racial minorities because the presumption should be that those students are already oppressed," he wrote. "White people are deemed oppressors, so you should punish them because of their so-called privilege."
Georgetown law professor laments on Zoom call that some black students do poorly in her class and gets fired for racism
A professor of law at Georgetown University expressed her angst that some of the lower grades in her class were from black students, and she got immediately fired for racism.
Professor Sandra Sellers was speaking to David Batson, another professor at Georgetown, on a recorded Zoom call when she spoke about the academic achievements of her black students.
"I hate to say this — I end up having this, you know, angst every semester — that a lot of my lower ones are Blacks. Happens almost every semester," Sellers said.
"Mmm hmm," Batson replied and nodded.
"And it's like, oh, come on," Sellers added. "Get some really good ones, but there are also usually some that are just plain at the bottom. It drives me crazy."
"Yeah," Batson responded.
"So, I feel bad," Sellers said.
That video was made available to students, some of whom called for Sellers to be fired. The Georgetown Black Law Students Association released a statement calling for Sellers be immediately fired, demanding Batson apologize for not correcting Sellers, and that all of the grades be re-assessed for implicit racial bias.
"Not only is this situation revealing of Sellers' true beliefs about Black students, it is also illustrative of the conscious and unconscious bias systemically present in laws school grading at Georgetown Law and in law school classrooms nationwide. The difference is that Sellers was caught and her racism was broadcast for the world to see," read the statement.
In response to the furor on Thursday, Georgetown dean Bill Treanor said that Sellers had been fired and Batson put on administrative leave for nodding along.
"I am appalled that two members of our faculty engaged in a conversation that included reprehensible statements concerning the evaluation of Black students," said Treanor.
Sellers apologized for her comments in her resignation letter to Treanor.
"I am deeply sorry for my hurtful and misdirected remarks. While the video of this incident is an excerpt from a longer discussion about class participation patterns, not overall grades, it doesn't diminish the insensitivity I have demonstrated," wrote Sellers.
WUSA-TV reported that students of Batson would be regraded without his input over the affair.
Here's the video of the professors' Zoom call:
Georgetown Law professor fired after being caught on video making racially insensitive commentswww.youtube.com
Thomas Jefferson name dropped from school due to pain his legacy can cause black students, board says
A Virginia elementary school named after Thomas Jefferson is dropping the name of the third president of the United States, author of the Declaration of Independence, and iconic Founding Father after the Falls Church School Board voted 7-0 for the change, WTOP-FM reported.
The station said the board also voted Tuesday night to change the name of a high school named after George Mason, another Founding Father.
What are the details?
"After deep and careful consideration of everything I've heard and read, I conclude that renaming both schools is in the best interest of our students and a necessary part of our equity work," board Chairman Greg Anderson said Tuesday, WTOP said.
The move to drop the schools' names began in the summer at the height of social unrest sparked by the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, the station said.
Some school board members said their thinking evolved over the months in favor of changing the school names, and they began to understand the hurt the Jefferson and Mason names can cause black students, WTOP reported.
"The voice of some African Americans in our community who spoke up pushed me off the fence on to the side of seeing that it is essential we change the names," board member Shannon Litton told the station. "What I heard from them is that this matters."
Board Vice Chairwoman Shawna Russell said students should not feel marginalized or uncomfortable, WTOP said: "We must serve all the children. … We need to find names welcoming to all."
Most parents against name changes
The board's unanimous vote to drop the names came despite a community survey that found 61% of the parents of Thomas Jefferson students and 57% of George Mason High parents were opposed to the idea, the station said.
A major reason survey participants said they were against changing the school names is because Jefferson and Mason were Founding Fathers who greatly contributed to Virginia and the nation, the station added.
"I considered the survey results and the community discussion that followed, and I revisited our public hearings … I conclude that the public is split, and if you go beyond the simple number, I've heard reasoned perspectives from those in favor of retaining the names and from those in favor of changing the names," Anderson said, according to WTOP.
One of the speakers at the board meeting, Dr. Jennifer Santiago, said she represented those in the minority who favored dropping the names, the station noted.
"While there are many times majority rules works in issues of equity, it is the opposite that is needed," Santiago said, WTOP reported. "If the majority rule worked for traditionally marginalized groups, we would not have systemic racism."
Former student William Henneberg — who attended the elementary and high schools — said the name change is a bad idea, the station reported.
"Do not encourage our students to be victims or to use offense as a means to shut others down," Henneberg said, according to WTOP. "Encourage our children to be critical thinkers."
But Santiago disagreed, saying the majority's decision-making has ruled for a long time and that those in the minority are most impacted in this case, the station said.
"We need to listen very strongly to the minority response to this survey," Santiago said, according to WTOP. "Because the voices making up that number are the ones most negatively affected by the lives and legacies of these two men."
The renaming process will begin with the board's meeting next Tuesday, the station said.
'Petty tyrants'
On her Wednesday night show, Fox News' Laura Ingraham called the Falls Church board members "petty tyrants" for their vote, which she said sides with the "purgers of history."
Here's her segment, which explores the woke educational trend nationwide:
Ingraham: School board bows to 'radical activists' youtu.be
(H/T: The College Fix)
Boulder at major college got called racist name in 1925 newspaper story — and black students this summer called for its removal. That plan is underway.
At the University of Wisconsin-Madison is a 70-ton boulder named Chamberlin Rock — in honor of Thomas Crowder Chamberlin, a geologist and former university president, the Wisconsin State Journal reported.
But on Oct. 9, 1925, the Wisconsin State Journal printed a story about the process of digging up the boulder — and it was referred to in the story as a "n*****head," which was a commonly used expression in the 1920s to describe any large dark rock, the paper said.
It's unclear if or for how long the boulder was called that racist name, the Journal said, adding that the term itself appeared to fade from common usage by the 1950s. In addition, the paper said university historians identified the news story as the only known instance of the offensive term being used.
Fast forward to 2020
But in the wake of George Floyd's death in May and the nationwide protests and rioting that followed — including the tearing down and demands for removal of statues and monuments with any connection to racism — the Wisconsin Black Student Union followed suit over the summer and called for the removal of Chamberlin Rock, the Journal said.
And just last week UW's Campus Planning Committee unanimously voted to recommend to Chancellor Rebecca Blank that the boulder be removed, the paper reported.
Plan to remove 70-ton boulder from UW-Madison's Observatory Hill moves forward https://t.co/sTdKvTf3nG— Wisconsin State Journal (@Wisconsin State Journal)1605738007.0
Blank has previously indicated she supports the rock's removal, the Journal added, although a timeline for such a project hasn't been established.
UW's Black Student Union President Nalah McWhorter said the boulder is a symbol of daily injustices students of color face on the predominantly white campus, the paper said.
"This is a huge accomplishment for us," she told the Journal on Wednesday. "We won't have that constant reminder, that symbol that we don't belong here."
Kacie Butcher, the university's public history project director, said there was a Ku Klux Klan presence throughout Madison in the 1920s and on-campus minstrel shows, the Capital Times reported.
"That racism hasn't left campus. It's just changed, and this rock … is a symbol of this ongoing harm," Butcher said, according to the Times. "We have a real opportunity here to prioritize students of color and their experiences — something we haven't really done historically — and this is an opportunity for us not to trivialize these demands, but instead truly engage in these really complex conversations."
Now what?
As far as what will happen to the rock once it's lifted from its spot, the Journal said options include burying it at its original resting place, breaking it apart and disposing of it, or moving the rock to the Ice Age Trail — a thousand-mile footpath formed by glacial ice in Wisconsin.
More from the paper:
The Black Student Union is conducting a survey and hosting an open forum on Sunday to gather feedback on members' preferences, which it will then take back to the Campus Planning Committee.
The group is also working with the Department of Geoscience, which sees educational value in the rock and its rich geological history. Carried by glaciers from perhaps as far north as Canada, the boulder was excavated from the side of Observatory Hill in 1925.
Geochronology professor Brad Singer told the committee the department prefers it be relocated so instructors can continue using it as a teaching tool.
UW-Madison needs to secure approval from the Wisconsin Historical Society before removal begins because the rock is located near an effigy mound.
The first step requires UW-Madison to submit a request to disturb a catalogued burial site. All Native Tribes of Wisconsin are notified during the process, which can take 60 to 90 days and includes a 30-day comment period. A qualified archeologist is also required to be on site during removal.
Officials estimate the cost to remove the boulder ranges from $30,000 to $75,000, the Journal said.
Once the rock is gone, McWhorter told the paper that the Black Student Union will focus on generating ideas for how students of color can reclaim the space, such as installing a piece of art.
"So it becomes a way to celebrate instead of having it as an empty space reminding us of what it once was," she added to the Journal.
Anything else?
The school's Black Student Union over the summer also called for the removal of an Abraham Lincoln statue on campus.
McWhorter at the time said the iconic former president who abolished slavery was "very publicly anti-black" and that "just because he was anti-slavery doesn't mean he was pro-black."
Since then the school's College Republicans launched a petition in opposition to the school's student government passing legislation that calls for the removal of Lincoln statue, the College Fix said.
The legislation from the Associated Students of Madison says the Lincoln statue is a "remnant of the school's history of white supremacy," the outlet said.
“UW-Madison student gov votes to remove Lincoln statue, a 'remnant' of 'white supremacy'”“Students argue that Pre… https://t.co/sCcynh7nMP— Eduardo Neret (@Eduardo Neret)1603907514.0
But Blank, UW's chancellor, pushed back on demand to remove the Lincoln statue, the Fix said, which cited her June statement on the matter:
The university continues to support the Abraham Lincoln statue on our campus. Like those of all presidents, Lincoln's legacy is complex and contains actions which, 150 years later, appear flawed. However, when the totality of his tenure is considered, Lincoln is widely acknowledged as one of our greatest presidents, having issued the Emancipation Proclamation, persuaded Congress to adopt the 13th Amendment and preserved the Union during the Civil War.
Blank also said as the "leader of UW-Madison, I believe Abraham Lincoln's legacy should not be erased but examined, that it should be both celebrated and critiqued," the Fix noted.
Today's top stories
freebeacon.com
freebeacon.com
thefederalist.com
www.theblaze.com