Indeed, it's very interesting, and this was what got me started on the topic in the first place of course:
3 White college students file racial discrimination complaint against professor
- Thread starter Enzom21
- Start date
- Status
Negative reviews are probably going to be more expressed during evaluation time, but these complaints in the OP don't seem to be new. In looking through those reviews, they seem to have existed back in 08 even, and her reviews did seem to get better at a point. Whether she had groups of students that were more receptive to her opinions, or whether she toned it down in those years while being more vocal in those opinions this year is the question.
IHaveCandy
Banned
Man, a lot of this mess is why I wish we stopped identifying ourselves by race so much. It's a really crappy method of idenfication. It feels a lot like when some software runs really crappy because it is running legacy coded necessary to have support of other older software. You know you could make a far better solution, but it would ruin compatibility with older software. In this case, the older software is history. WIsh we could collectively as a species say "alright, we all understand that race is a category we used to identify people in groups for a really long time, but we're gonna stop now. From now on, race is no longer a meaningful word outside of speaking about history."
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
I generally find that the negative reviews on Rate My Professor are more honest and direct, when the criticisms relate to specific pedagogical choices or general demeanor. There are plenty of hack MFA writers with shit teaching skills employed by my alma mater, for example, but many have VERY positive reviews because they were "likable" or "easygoing", or students were bowled over by how "brilliant" they were. Rate My Professor is honestly a pretty useless site, sometimes, but I know that after a while, I always went for the negative reviews.
There's a difference between including structural racism and centering the course around it - especially if the course was an Intro course, as seems to have been the case, for Intro courses generally have a structure, logic, and purpose that professor's personal ideologies and interests can get in the way of.
Also, it's not always evident that courses will have such focuses. For example, I once took a course just called "The American Novel" in the course catalog, but when I actually got there on the first day, I discovered that it was "Race in the American Novel". I tend to despise the way Academia treats things like race and gender and would not have taken said course had I known, but by that time, most of the classes I might have otherwise been interested in were already full. In an ideal world, there would be perfect transparency, but this is not always the case.
Wait, "uppity" is racist too? And "dinks"? I mean, they're pejorative, but I've never seen any sort of racial connotation applied to them. I believe you, but that's three non-racist (from my experience) pejoratives in one day that are suddenly racist. Crazy.
Byakuya769
Member
What I am suggesting is that the repeatability of the claims or whether they are new or not isn't determinative of their validity. I'm a bleeding heart liberal who went to a mid-tier business school. You better believe I had to sit through a bunch of proselytizing on issues I did not agree with. That didn't mean I then had the right to hijack the class with my disagreement, and tell the teacher I should not even be learning about their views.
Though interestingly enough, the one time a adjunct professor shared a more liberal economic philosophy, he was quickly complained about from students who sucked at corporate finance.
Do you live in the United States?
RustyNails
Member
if ur black n proud y cant I be white n prod??
IHaveCandy
Banned
If the proselytizing was inhibiting the education you are paying for, I don't see any problem with being vocal about that issue.
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
The humanities, generally speaking, are more structured around debate and conflict, and students generally feel more free to voice disagreements and discontent with teachers' views and approaches. Now, as I said, these students might very well have been assholes, but the quote at the top of this page also makes it seem like she was not one who wanted to be challenged, lest her "authority" be eroded.
Edit: I'm from the Chicagoland area and have never heard "chip on his/her/their shoulder" used in a racial way. It always referred to somebody having something from their past that influenced their present actions in a tangible way.
What I see is that she seems to be following a particular format/curriculum over her tenure, and it rubs people the wrong way.
Every race/sexism thread I see on NeoGAF is often populated with a similar reaction from posters who look at the discussion as a personal attack, when it is nothing of the sort. I highly doubt the professor stood in front of the class, pointed specifically at the three students in question, and told them that they were the bad guy.
Racism is a topic worthy of discussion, but it has been no surprise that many of the people that want to shut that discussion down are people of privilege. A similar thing can be seen in economics discussions. Where often, the people with economic privilege, have a hard time empathizing or understanding those that do not.
For a not so volatile example of what I'm getting at, think of Gamer side, where you may see a thread with a particular topic like, "Should I buy a 3DS or a Vita?" You'll find many posts of "but why not both.gif.jpeg" etc, etc, from those that have the luxury (read: privilege), of being able to have both, and they honestly probably don't understand why the thread starter can't just run out and buy both platforms, thus alleviating his problem altogether. There could be many, many reasons why they can't get both, and when they explain that to the thread, there is understanding on both sides. But it's still an example (and a minor one, at that), of an instance of privilege. Ditto for the PC Master race. Not everyone can just rush out and build a gaming PC, so a gaming console, despite not being as powerful as a top end PC, may be a better choice for many gamers.
When racism, sexism, and poverty is concerned, however, there is a very distinct lack of understanding and empathy, and a huge push to just shut the conversation down, and for those affected to simply "get over it," and "stop talking about it, so it will go away." This leads to the affected people to get frustrated, and angry, because they feel marginalized and dismissed like a naughty child caught doing something inappropriate. And that sucks for them, and it sucks for everyone, because it doesn't lead to any real change of the issue/conflict.
Minorities don't bring up racism, and women don't bring up sexism, to make white males feel bad. We bring up those issues because they are happening, and they bother us, and we should work together to eliminate both.
Yeah, I know. It's crazy. "Uppity" has definitely been a known pejorative here in the states. I didn't know about "dink" until I was much, much older. If memory serves, "dink" is a derogatory terms used to describe a Vietnamese person. I think it was coined during the Vietnam War, but I could be mistaken, it could be much older.
IHaveCandy
Banned
Yeah, I think we can all agree that shooting them down immediately to go file a racial complaint is kinda silly.
I think the question here is how the class was structured. If the entire class was structured around racism discussion I can see the students having less of a leg to stand on. If it wasn't structured this way and the teacher is just going off the rails, then they have a right to be upset. The school did what they thought was appropriate (Not saying it was the right decision). It's more confusing that while she is suing other professors completely irrelevant to the situation decided to dog pile on the lawsuit.
For the record, I avoid any classes that involve philosophy or any kind of open-ended discussion.
flamingotripod
Member
Yes, it is. It's tied up with the history of lynching in the United States, and the term is associated generally with black people who don't "know their place."
I also was not aware of its status, but I got the impression it was more of a UK thing?
... Anyway, I think it's just important for everyone to remember that we don't all have the same backgrounds and might inadvertently say something with a negative connotation attached to it out of ignorance rather than crypto-racism.
Angelus Errare
Banned
Eventually this thread will boil down to "why can't I say "nigga"".
RoninChaos
Member
B, how do you think she should have handled it?
Or on the other hand she could be continuing the discussion of racism well past the limit needed and ignoring other work that is needed to complete the class. Both situations are a possibility.
I doubt the professor did that too and it doesn't show that it happened.
It absolutely is worthy of discussion. You can't call "privilege" in this situation unless you can describe what "privilege" these kids have.
Gaming side scares me sometimes.
I agree with all this.
Yes, uppity is most certainly a racist term. It was usually followed by nigger. "That uppity nigger thinks he's better than us!"
Foghorn Leghorn
Unconfirmed Member
I've heard it at jobs my entire life, like when someone is upset with management and is still upset by it or someone didn't get the promotion they thought they deserved.
Am I a bad person if I keep using uppity? I call my brother "uppity" all the time because he has strong opinions about things he knows nothing about.
Spelling it out like that, I can see the racist connotations, but I never associated that word with the racist origins.
The more you know.
UltimaPooh
Member
Recurring since when? The negative reviews that brought up race was from 07 and 08. Reviews after that don't bring that information up.
If we were to go by the reviews if anything it shows that she doesn't bring up racism that much these days.
Uppity it more derogatory than racist. You can easily put uppity before woman.
Yeah, but to be fair, I live in Utah. There aren't a whole lot of black folks here, so in all the interactions I see, white people are usually so happy to see black people around that they become super nice. I'm not sure I've ever actually seen IRL a white person call a black person a "nigger," except maybe facetiously between very good friends, or adopted siblings. Even then I can't remember any, but it's possible.
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
I think it's probably rarer these days for younger folk to call a black person "nigger" directly, but the word still seems to have currency as a unit of hate when used as a generalization. I remember waking up at 3 am one night when my roommates were having a raucous party they were trying to get under control, walking out into the living room, and hearing a friend of theirs reprimanding someone who had thrown a bottle by saying, "I don't want Roommate X and Roommate Y's neighbors to think we're acting like a pack of niggers!" It was framed as a joke, but the person's internal perspective is obvious and shines through.
Byakuya769
Member
The professor? How she should have handled the disruptions? Looks like she handled it fine if she tried to explain the lesson and then told the students after repeated interruptions that if they had a problem, file a complaint.
The question is whether the students were aware of the course material before they signed up for it. If not, then it's their prerogative to file a complaint about the professor or give them a negative review at the end of the course. Same as you could complain about the economic philosophies that you were being taught. I'm just saying that the complaints that these students had about the teacher don't seem to be new. Whether the students feel that professors lecturing on their soapbox on issues dear to their heart, but seemingly irrelevant to course material, is something that's out of line is up to those students and the faculty.
Byakuya769
Member
No one is disputing their option to file a complaint. In dispute is whether or not they should hijack a class lecture. And whether or not their objections are likely valid. The professor told them to file a complaint if they had an issue.
Ah if that's the question then I agree with the professor that if they have a complaint, then they should file it. And they should probably drop the class if they're still in that timeframe.
I don't understand why you're taking her account as a completely true description of the events. Salon unfortunately only interviewed her, so we've got her account. But the actual letter of reprimand condoned her teaching the subject of structural racism, but condemned her singling out and targeting specific individuals.
So at that point it's her word against theirs. Normally, I would side with a professor by default. But the ratemyprofessor comments also mentioned students being singled out--not feeling singled, but actually being singled out. Multiple students, from years ago. It would seem she recognized the issue, as her ratings after '09 or so made no mention of it. But perhaps she slipped into that again on this occasion.
So again, there's no way to know whether the students were actually singled out, as they could be twisting the story, but the balance of the evidence weighs against her. I don't see anything supporting her account, besides the fact that she's a professor. I'm willing to listen, though, if you can give a good reason to believe her story over theirs and the account in the letter of reprimand.
Byakuya769
Member
My contributions in this thread have been: 1) discussing the usage of white pride and 2) questioning why anyone took negative reviews as determinative. Never have I said her account is undoubtably correct. I have only done what you're attempting to do to me. Difference being, the people I responded to actually said what I characterized them as saying.
Fenderputty
Banned
Someone should start a thread for phrases with racist/sexist origins so the rest of us know. I'm with you here.
Also, it's my opinion that college professors teach because they love to hear themselves talk. It's not uncommon for professors to get a little preachy. That being said, institutional racism is real and is a problem. If you take offense to the discussion of institutional racism, even if repetitive, it's time for some self reflection.
robotzombie
Member
brilliant post.
Edit: I just realized I think this is the 3rd or 4th time I've randomly singled out a Hawkian post as being awesome. You seem to impress me quite often...
That's not a bad idea. A lot of these things have fascinating origins. Quite relevantly, "chip on the shoulder" does not have a racist etymology by any stretch of the imagination. (Neither does "uppity," as its origin it just what you'd expect, but its use in a pejorative sense toward blacks has definitely permeated the collective consciousness in General American English.)
Wow, thank you sincerely :O
Apparently, and some evidence that it carries that connotation in parts of the American midwest.
This was the salient point, really. A "chip on one's shoulder" is certainly not ubiquitously racist (as some pejoratives absolutely are) but may well be used in such a way where you come from; there's just no reason to view as some kind of insidious red flag for bigotry.
GungHo
Single-handedly caused Exxon-Mobil to sue FOX, start World War 3
Even when not followed by "nigger"... the implication of "uppity" is that the person addressed is over-reaching their caste and speaking out of turn. While it could be applied to someone of any ethnicity/sex, the connotations are definitely foul.
Fenderputty
Banned
Whoa, not sure what I did to deserve the aggressive response. A simple, "I don't fully trust her account either" would have sufficed.
But when you post things from her account, like:
and you assume pompidu's seeing the reviews as determinative rather than as supportive evidence, and that a proper rebuttal to his view of the reviews is to construct a hypothetical scenario based on the professor's account:
...then hopefully you can forgive me for misunderstanding your position. You seemed to be operating in all your posts from the presumption that the students were speaking out of turn, just as her account says. I believe you when you clarify your thoughts on the credibility of her account, but hopefully you can see why I would get the impression you fully believed her. But either way, apologies for the misunderstanding.
EDIT: And just to clarify where the apparent misunderstanding actually took place, it was after you said the issue was whether the students should hijack a lesson, not whether they did hijack a lesson. Again, it was assuming they did. Perhaps you were not talking about these particular students, but none of the reviews mentioned anything about complaining or hijacking, so it seems you were talking about the students in the OP, and said the issue is whether they should hijack the lesson. I admit that now I can see you may have been conducting the discussion under the implicit if-they-did-hijack-it assumption without actually believing they did, but nothing I saw tipped me off, so again, I don't think the misunderstanding was unreasonable at all.
These implications are encapsulated in the top two (the best-rated) definitions of the word per Urban Dictionary:
The "dictionary definition" (what you'd find in Merriam-Webster) concerns only the first, but its connotations are pretty well-documented in media. This one I've heard plenty of times myself, but just like anything else sociolectal differences make it totally possible that you might never have encountered it.
Byakuya769
Member
Is my assertion incorrect? And in the post am I making an assertion that her account is to be believed (though it is the only one we have)?
Given pompidu's posts, there is no other reading but to assume the negative reviews were determinative for his/her belief that she was in the wrong.
No need to forgive, I'm not particularly bothered by it. But it is tiresome to constantly see, "WAIT! Why are you assuming the person of color, who is the only one who has provided a story, is the one to be trusted here!!!!" pop up in these sorts of threads, time and time again. Particularly when I haven't gone out of my way to address whether her account is true or not, but am responding to other poster's reaction to the DISCUSSION of the SUBJECT in a particular class.
My experience shared in this was clear. If a professor has differing views from you and you put yourself out there to refute them, well yea, you may feel yourself singled out. Now, absent any other word from the students, we have feelings of being singled out (not sure how you determining feelings and ACTUALLY being singled out are different, you accept the letter's finding as completely authoritative when that is in dispute as well?) and the professor's recount of what she told the students. Given what she said was said, I could easily see how a student could feel singled out, and I'm not sure how either contradicts the other. They easily work in concert.
Thus we're back to what the thread has been discussing, whether the topic was appropriate in the class, and if she had a history of inappropriately bringing the topic up in class. How do a minority of reviews show that the topic was inappropriately discussed in class? And why would anyone need to assume the professor's story to question that, when they can simply read the majority of positive reviews?
I'm assuming she had a structured argument that passed the college's requirement for instruction. And the students' use of "all the time" is probably hyperbolic, and possibly more of an exasperated complaint from someone who feels uncomfortable. Now if that's the case, and if in her Mass Communications class, the history of media and the representation of women and minorities in media was a often referenced topic, then racial discussions would predictably occur. Holy shit, you have to talk about black people, women, the 60s and the 70s and the change in the media, you're out of the suburbs now kid.
Some people feel like they should never have to hear about that, ever, and if you talk about racism, and white people, you're attacking white people. But if you have a problem with hearing that from a teacher, you don't go after them like they're your henpecked mother. You take your notes, you ask a piquant question if you can manage, and if you really have a problem, you address it after class.
Some people feel like they should never have to hear about that, ever, and if you talk about racism, and white people, you're attacking white people. But if you have a problem with hearing that from a teacher, you don't go after them like they're your henpecked mother. You take your notes, you ask a piquant question if you can manage, and if you really have a problem, you address it after class.
Devolution
Member
Uppity nigger has long been a phrase. I can't believe the shit I read on here sometimes.
Zoe
Member
So why not educate rather than deride? Not all of us end up around people who use such language.
Devolution
Member
Byakuya769
Member
Some english professor used an English class for a soapbox and made you read books on black stuff, huh?
Zoe
Member
You've heard it from somewhere. If not physically around you then from other interactions or media.
I've never heard it in a racial sense.
This is how I've always heard it.
Fenderputty
Banned
New things everyday and such. I honestly thought uppity always referred to someone who walks through life with their nose in the air.
Devolution
Member
jim-jam bongs
Member
I don't think you need to have been exposed to people saying the phrase directly to have heard the term "uppity negro" or similar. I didn't even grow up in the US and I was familiar with it because of books/films etcetera. Also:
http://www.fdfny.org/blog/2011/09/18/these-uppity-negroes-lbj/
http://www.fdfny.org/blog/2011/09/18/these-uppity-negroes-lbj/
- Status