". . . it's hard to see how her stated beliefs are compatible with teaching (e.g., interacting with and fairly and objectively evaluating a wide variety of students, including those she views as inferior based on their appearance)." It may be hard to see, but people are complex. Sometimes they bend over backwards to show that they are no…
". . . it's hard to see how her stated beliefs are compatible with teaching (e.g., interacting with and fairly and objectively evaluating a wide variety of students, including those she views as inferior based on their appearance)."
It may be hard to see, but people are complex. Sometimes they bend over backwards to show that they are not what they think you are. Professor Wax is not the first to face such questions, and the answer doesn't lie in whether we can imagine one outcome or another. It's a matter of evidence.
I have no doubt that in a case like Wax's, the Dean of the Penn Law School has full data on her grading patterns, student evaluations, and information gleaned from student and faculty reports. That's part of a dean's job. If there is evidence of bias in grading or other treatment of students,the dean has a number of options, short of starting due process mechanisms for tenure revocation (which are quasi-judicial, based on hearings and evidence--it would be a legal violation not to follow handbook procedures and Penn would lose a lawsuit). Among these would be assigning other faculty to audit her courses and do all grading; restricting Wax's appointment to research and administraive duties and adjusting her salary; suspending Wax for cause and setting non-negotiable terms of remediation. If there is, indeed, a pattern of mistreating students then that would be a basis for dismissal, not Wax's views.
But based on my own experience in cases of these kinds, Wax probably doesn't approach individual people of color with the biases we assume she must have when making generalizations about race. And, being a lawyer, Wax is probably very careful to make sure that whatever she may feel, her instructional behavior does not make her vulnerable to any kind of disciplinary action. If it doesn't, what we imagine about her psychology is irrelevant, and certainly not the basis of a job action.
". . . it's hard to see how her stated beliefs are compatible with teaching (e.g., interacting with and fairly and objectively evaluating a wide variety of students, including those she views as inferior based on their appearance)."
It may be hard to see, but people are complex. Sometimes they bend over backwards to show that they are not what they think you are. Professor Wax is not the first to face such questions, and the answer doesn't lie in whether we can imagine one outcome or another. It's a matter of evidence.
I have no doubt that in a case like Wax's, the Dean of the Penn Law School has full data on her grading patterns, student evaluations, and information gleaned from student and faculty reports. That's part of a dean's job. If there is evidence of bias in grading or other treatment of students,the dean has a number of options, short of starting due process mechanisms for tenure revocation (which are quasi-judicial, based on hearings and evidence--it would be a legal violation not to follow handbook procedures and Penn would lose a lawsuit). Among these would be assigning other faculty to audit her courses and do all grading; restricting Wax's appointment to research and administraive duties and adjusting her salary; suspending Wax for cause and setting non-negotiable terms of remediation. If there is, indeed, a pattern of mistreating students then that would be a basis for dismissal, not Wax's views.
But based on my own experience in cases of these kinds, Wax probably doesn't approach individual people of color with the biases we assume she must have when making generalizations about race. And, being a lawyer, Wax is probably very careful to make sure that whatever she may feel, her instructional behavior does not make her vulnerable to any kind of disciplinary action. If it doesn't, what we imagine about her psychology is irrelevant, and certainly not the basis of a job action.