 A “private” conversation on achievements of black students Two adjunct professors at The Georgetown University Law Center were staying on a Zoom videocall after conclusion of an open class session, unaware that their private conversation was being recorded on video. In the conversation between the two, Professor Sandra Sellers was recorded as saying: “You know what? I hate to say this,” … “I end up having this angst every semester that a lot of my lower ones are Blacks — happens almost every semester. And it’s like, ‘Oh, come on.’ You know? You get some really good ones. But there are also usually some that are just plain at the bottom. It drives me crazy.” Professor David Batson, who was co-teaching the class, nodded while murmuring Mm-Hmm, and apparently said: “What drives me crazy is, you know, the concept of how that plays out. And whether that is, you know, my own perceptions playing in here and when certain, my own, you know, my own unconscious biases, you know, playing out in the scheme of things.” Professor Sellers also talked about the behaviour of one of her Black students “...when he did talk, they were a bit jumbled. It’s the best way I can put it, it’s like okay let me reason through that what you just said.” The 40 second clip was uploaded on Twitter by a student and shared among students. The complaint by black students After publication of video the Black Law Students Association complained to Georgetown University’s Law Administration. They wrote that “Professor Sellers was speaking in reference to the only Black student in her class.” They argued that “These racist statements reveal not only Sellers’ beliefs about Black students in her classes, but also how her racist thoughts have translated to racist actions. Professor Sellers’s bias has impacted the grades of Black students in her classes historically, in her own words.” They also argued that Professors remarks had ableist undertones, denigrating Black students, and claimed that Professor Sellers’ remarks were illustrative of the conscious and unconscious bias found in Georgetown Law’s grading The students demanded that Georgetown Town Law take action to:
Georgetown Law Center reaction In a message to the Georgetown Law Community the dean, Bill Treanor, wrote: “I have further reviewed the incident and have now spoken to Professor Sellers and Professor Batson, giving each the opportunity to provide any additional context. I informed Professor Sellers that I was terminating her relationship with Georgetown Law effective immediately.” With regard to Professor Batson’s inaction the dean wrote that he had “been placed on administrative leave pending the investigation by the Institutional Office of Diversity, Equity and Affirmative Action.” The dean also announced more work “to address the many structural issues of racism reflected in this painful incident, including explicit and implicit bias, bystander responsibility, and the need for more comprehensive anti-bias training.” Sellers’ and Batson’s resignation remarks In resignation letter Sandra Sellers wrote: “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. I would never do anything to intentionally hurt my students or Georgetown Law and wish I could take back my words. Regardless of my intent, I have done irreparable harm and I am truly sorry for this.” After being placed on administrative leave Professor David Batson also chose to resign, writing: "I understand, however, that I missed the chance to respond in a more direct manner to address the inappropriate content of those remarks. For this I sincerely apologize. This experience has provided me, and I hope others, an invaluable opportunity to reconsider what actions should be taken when we encounter sensitive remarks.” The disturbing reaction of the Law School Although Sellers and Batson were not tenured professors with the protection belonging to tenure, it would seem that the dean’s reaction was rash and apparently carried out without the benefits of due process. According the “Faculty Handbook” it is only in cases where a faculty member’s conduct poses a serious risk to safety or to the effective operations of the University, (that) the Executive Vice President may place the faculty member on administrative leave with pay. An article on the Academe Blog concludes: “Even if the suspension could be justified under this policy merely for discussing race and grading (and clearly it cannot), a summary dismissal could not. And that’s what the Law School dean openly admitted that he did. The dismissal of Sellers without an investigation is an even clearer violation of Georgetown’s policies. While a suspension with pay is allowed in extraordinary conditions pending an investigation, a dismissal is not.” (Academe Blog). Perhaps one might defend the strong reaction by remembering that Professor Sellers herself found her actions so outrageous that she preferred to resign, and this also seems to have been the case with Professor Batson’s resignation. Or, now it becomes a bit speculative, the explanation may be that they have been brought to see that dismissal would be the outcome under all circumstances, given the outrage that their private conversation had given rise to. One is reminded of the MeToo praxis where it often seems that due process and the rule of law is ignored in return for a mob-like persecution. A social media inquisition that does not worry about insight, knowledge or evidence. The mass chorus of accusations acts as the torture that forces the accused to admit to his crime. Thus, the overly harsh and quick reaction by Dean Bill Treanor could be seen as given in to similar accusations and to his own “angst” for student and social media reactions if he did not give in to the demands of the complaining students. Racism or genuine concern? Was what Professor Sellers said in the recording a vocal expression of extreme racism? So evident and extreme that her colleague Professor Batson ought to have protested vehemently? Hardly! She expressed angst of having again to find Black students at the bottom when they were graded. An expression of racism? It might have been if the poor grading was a consequence of prejudice against Black students and how they performed in class. But Law School grading would usually be blind, with students being identified just by a number, meaning that the identity of a student is not known and certainly not whether he or she is White or Black. With this being the case one might rule out that Blacks are ending up at bottom because of prejudice. “Clearly, there is an enormous difference between a professor noticing racial disparities in grades and one engaging in racist grading, and there is no evidence yet presented that either instructor committed any racist discrimination in their grading.” (Academe Blog). Stretching one’s interpretation a bit one might perhaps find Professor Sellers’ description of a Black student as talking a bit jumbled could be interpreted as containing the slightest whiff of racism. Or she may just have been venting her frustration that Black students aren’t performing better. Thus, it might be reasonable to see her angst and outburst as a genuine concern like Professor McWhorter did in an article on Substack: “I'm pretty certain Sellers was expressing frustration at the depressing persistence of a racial achievement gap — and at the multifarious, nebulous reasons for it. That is not racism in my book; I have frequently felt the same way. I agree her expression of that frustration was graceless, but who among us hasn't sounded graceless in private?” (McWhorter). Somehow the whole story of what happened leads one to suspect that one cannot utter genuine concern over the poor performance of Black students without being accused of racism, which of cause would be abhorrent. And the woke reaction from a prestigious Law School certainly does not bide well for a genuine understanding of why Black students do not perform better. The performance of Black students in general Professor Sellers’ is certainly not alone in being concerned that Black students perform worse than students from other ethnic groups. Statistics found in the publication “America’s High School Graduates” show a disturbing picture, when comparing the relative performance of high school students:  The GPA (Grade Point Average) is the system of judging a student's performance and is followed throughout the United States. In this case it shows generally rising GPA scores, but note the differences between ethnic groups: With Asian/Pacific Islanders outperforming the other groups, followed by the White, the Hispanic and at the bottom the Black ethnic group. An exhaustive study of law school students by UCLA Law professor Richard Sander published in 2004, showed that more than 50% of Black students ended up in lowest class decile, compared to only 5.6% of White students. Data may be a little old, but these differences are an ongoing concern, also in the UK A report by British "Advance HE" shows that the difference between ethnic groups can also be found at UK universities. Here the calculated the proportion of undergraduates who obtain a first or 1: 2 grading:  Thus, Professor Sellers uttered a truth borne out by statistical data. Not only in the US but also in the UK. Which raises the question of how her concern could even remotely be seen as an as a blatant expression of racism, as the student complaint asserted.
It might actually be more concerning, that she expresses angst to discover that Blacks end up at the bottom. As if it was somehow a fault of hers. Showing that this topic is so infused with racial problems that it embarrassing even to talk about it in private. This would in fact seem to be the real problem with the recorded conversation. Don’t mention the wa… or in this case don’t mention the bad grades of Black students. Who is actually advocating racism? The complaining Georgetown Law School students demanded not only Professor Sellars immediate dismissal. They also demanded a critical assessment of the current grading systems, indirectly alleging that the grading system in itself creates a disadvantage for Black students. Making one wonder if they are saying that the grading system is inherently racist, and that the criteria would have to be changed to be advantageous for Black students. Furthermore, the students demanded the hiring of “more Black professors who will be better situated to fairly assess Black students in a non-biased manner.” Thus, actually saying that only Black professors would be able to treat Blacks students fairly. How that follows at least for the blind grading is difficult to follow, but more concerning is the demand that Blacks have to be graded by Blacks in order receive fair grades. This sounds like the students are advocating a kind of reverse racism. Strange one might think. Was the idea not to give up discerning according to race at all? Apparent Black students want to abandon this idea, advocating instead for preferential treatment, not equal treatment. They are not alone At the University of Washington, a group of Black students sent an email to UW President Ana Mari Cauce requesting that final grading policies be changed as black students were disproportionately impacted by the coronavirus pandemic and stress produced by “the blatant killing of their peers by people set to ‘protect and serve,’” (Referring of cause to the George Floyd case). (The Herald) This case even seems to affect Black students in the UK. According to BBC the National Union of Students (NUS) has argued for “Black students emotionally affected by the death of George Floyd and its aftermath should be offered leniency by universities.” According to BBC Oxford University and other universities are to take up their demands. Presumably this would mean more time to work on coursework, having another attempt at an exam – and perhaps more lenient grading? While the use of strict quotas in affirmative action have been given up, preferential treatment in various forms is found in University admissions. At least in one case resulting in a curious anti-preference law suit. In this case it was alleged that Harvard University imposed a “racial penalty” on Asian American students in admissions. “That Harvard admissions officers use a subjective “personal rating” assigned to each student to discriminate against Asian Americans.” Data apparently showing that Asian American students “averaged the highest scores in an academic rating but received the lowest personal ratings, and that they were admitted at lower rates.” Harvard has denied any bias and “that at most it provides a “tip” in favor of underrepresented students.” BTW Is it really okay for Law School students to publish what one must assume was a private conversation between two faculty members about the performance of their students, with the participants seemingly unaware that they were being recorded on after a class session on Zoom? |
