I do think she made some very good points, but I am uncomfortable with the public nature of all the exchanges. I understand that she wanted to inform the whole school of her views, but it still feels inapproriate...especially her responses to Dean Matthews. Dean Matthews asked to meet with her one-on-one and then the latest email is sent out with those two quoted paragraphs...very odd, inapproriate and uncomfortable.
Plus all this comes out right as the school starts the Diversity Roundtables.
I fully believe in the First Amendment, and the associated protection and promotion of a cocophony of voices from diverse and antagonistic sources. But public disclosure of correspondence intended to be private and the making of veiled threats undermines West's credibility and the salience of her arguments. Throwing Calhoun and Matthew under the bus in front of the whole law school gets her nowhere.
The way that she's handled any sort of private gripes she has with individual professors or administrators -- by copying the entire school -- is reprehensible. Email correspondence is intended to be private. She needs to be punished somehow for the completely inappropriate way she's handled things.
However, if she were to get punished, it would be way too easy for her to turn around and say "the white-based administration at CU Law is trying to suppress my black voice." This is a huge lose-lose, and I see it getting messy quick. Crazy thing though... snippy messages to Calhoun & Dean Matthew? A formal civil rights attorney and a black woman don't exactly strike me as opposed to minority plight.
But while we're on the topic, she actually raises a good point for law school administrators everywhere to consider: Why the hell do we allow lesser-qualified students into law schools just because their skin is a different color? AA admits don't come to school with the same qualifications as their classmates. They're not as smart, so they do worse. The finish lower in the class, get discouraged, and tend to do terribly on the bar.
Go on, flame away. I'm certain this doesn't come across as some heady Boulder "enlightened" point of view, but I'm not the first to call a spade a spade: http://daily.stanford.edu/tempo?page=content&id=15487&repository=0001_article
She chose to attend a T1 school knowing her incoming credentials likely were lower than the published medians. I don't even want to get into the AA debate here, but I will say that *full ride* does not = *gun to head.* No one forced her to come here. CU made it attractive for her to come here. There's a difference. She seems smart and articulate. I fail to see why it would have been impossible for her to make law review, participate in moot court, or get good grades. (And I don't look at minority students and assume they had inferior incoming credentials, either.) Minority students do make law review, participate in moot court, and get good grades. However, if Ms. West's incoming credentials were so low that CU was *reckless* in admitting her, perhaps she should have been self-aware enough to realize that the odds were against her making law review and getting into the top 10%. Hell, if Harvard made a clerical error and let me into its law school I'd seriously wonder whether I could survive the experience. To me, it looks as if CU saw some potential in Ms. West, and it looks as if Ms. West herself believed she had that same kind of potential. It seems as if the blame is misplaced here. (I also disagree that AA exists so that white people can look at minorities in class. That's just bunk. Whatever its failings in workability, it's meant to do just what Beatlaw said.) Also of note: I'm bothered that Calhoun and Matthew were skewered by Ms. West. Talk about the wrong targets.
Good point, Beatlaw. To clarify, maybe I should have said "generally lower undergrad grades & a lower LSAT" instead of "not as smart." I guess just "not as smart" by the measures that law school admin committees use when making admissions decisions.
Blaw, I wouldn't kid myself into thinking that I could compete academically w/ most Harvard Law students if I were admitted there either. But if they made a mistake and let me in, I'd be there in a heartbeat. Doesn't a Harvard degree always look better than a CU degree, no matter what your grades are? Doesn't a CU degree look better than some anonymous T3 school, no matter where you finish in the class?
since West already sent these emails out, and they're very much public, can someone just post them on the blog? i'm not on that email list apparently. it's times like this i still wish i had a blog ...
But CU isn't Harvard. I'd probably go to Harvard because just to graduate from Harvard is something, even being bottom 10%. But if CU let me in and I had incoming credentials that were markedly lower than the median, I'd think twice. I would. I actually have a friend in this position. Abysmal LSAT. He's applying to T3 and T4 schools because he wants to be competitive. He told me even if CU let him in he wouldn't come because he'd rather be in the top half at his T3 and T4 school than the bottom 10% of a T1. And no, I think certain schools have a reputation where graduating from there is enough. That's not most schools. In most instances you'd be better graduating in the top 10% of a T3 than the bottom 10% of a T1. I guess my main point is that she's placed the blame on CU. That's not entirely fair. CU gambled on her, and she gambled on CU. If I play PowerBall and lose my buck, do I blame PowerBall?
Man that xoxo thread is sickening. And I make a motion that we consider deleting the emails and their excerpts that are being posted. None of us turly understand the whole situation. The posting of the emails to the entire school seems to have been triggered by a conversation between Calhoun and West which none of us were party to, so anything we say about the reasons for placing the emails out is speculation.
I guess that really leaves us with a discussion of affirmative action at CU, and if you want to continue it go ahead, but I really don't this blawg devolving into what we are seeing on that xoxo thred.
I won't go delete the posting of the emails, but I think we should discuss leaving them up.
Editorial discretion and respect for the privacy of Professor Calhoun and Dean Matthew motivated my removal of the emails, not disagreement with their content. Discussion can (and did) continue without the emails being available to the wider universe. I'm more than happy for the debate to continue, but not by throwing Courtney, Dean Matthew, or Professor Calhoun under a bus.
One, comments weren't connected to the HS post. Two, CU Law, the emails were available on xoxo before you finished posting them here. The attacks on them were in full bloom before the emails were posted here.
Pom: As far as I'm concerned, your criticism of the "crows," myself included, is justified. Sensitivity was not the rule of the day. However, the argument will be that she sent the emails to everyone in the school, and people *were* discussing it. Her emails also touched on broader, controversial issues of interest to many. Most of the discussions, at least on this blog, related to her arguments and were not personal attacks on her. But I agree that a more nuanced interpretation of her email messages should have more elicited more sympathy than criticism.
Anyone else catch the fact that Courtney CC'd the Colorado Daily on her last email? To me, it looks like she's making a name for herself, not "having personal problems."
Did you see the latest? She was requested to not include 5 people in these exchanges and she refused. I can only hope that she can't comply with the request due to technical reasons, and not because of her attempt to keep the whole school involved. My guess though is the latter!
Anon, I don't know Courtney, and haven't spoken to her. My post come in response to the inclusion of the Colorado Daily in the CC field of the last email (as HS pointed out). If she is going to publically throw the school and good professors under the bus, I think it is just fine to impune her motives (I haven't done so before this point). If she is receiving emails or requests from people asking her not to send it to them, maybe she should listen to them as well and not use the list serves (and I will email her with just such a request). If you have talked to her about this, tell us why she is using the listserves. Help us understand this, because I still don't know why this has become a very public fight between her and the school, and why we were made parties to it.
HS--if there were a difference between "having personal problems" and "making a name for yourself" there would be no reality TV.
i do know courtney, but not well enough to have had these conversations with her. she seems more frustrated than mentally ill. it seems an issue that's important to her is finally getting some traction, and she's not going to shy away. she's been living with this feeling of hurt on her own for a long time--i'd imagine it makes little difference to her if she involves the whole school now.
I found myself agreeing w/ many of her points in her most recent email from yesterday. It's refreshing to see a black person stand up and say, "I want to be fairly evaluated on my skills and talents rather than given free handouts because of the color of my skin."
I'd like to hope that this is a commonly-shared belief amongst blacks and that certain loudmouths like Sharpton are just the vocal minority. Here's to evaluating everyone on a level playing field. I just wish that if theis thing snowballs and blows up, it weren't happening here. CU has dealt w/ enough over the last few years and isn't really the bad guy -- the School is just a microcosm for law schools, and the nation, as a whole.
The part where I differ with her is when she says, "White males receive the greatest benefits from racial discrimination laws. Not only are they (generally speaking) more attractive to employers because they are white and male but also because they are the least likely to sue for racial discrimination. For white men, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is like having a Master's degree to add to their resumes."
I'm a white male. If I were a black male w/ my GPA, LSAT score & law school grades, I'd be at a Top 20 school with a big firm job already locked up. So that I'm not buying
hampster, I actually believe that I control where I end up in life and take full responsibility for myself. I'm not a victim of society being out to get me, and even if I were, the power to improve my lot in life rests solely on my shoulders. If I'm reading Courney's emails correctly, that's what she's saying too -- and I applaud it.
I'm just tired of hearing people complain about their circumstances without taking it upon themselves to do something to make things better. But I'm fine with letting people with that sort of attitude continue to do their thing, and I'll continue to do mine. I was just contesting one particular point in Courtney's email.
34 comments:
I just don't know what to say...I don't like the fact that we are all parties to this interaction.
I did miss the e-mails. Were they sent to the whole law school?
Is she suing? Is she threatening to sue? I'm confused.
i didn't get any of them, though i did receive one in another context last week. forward?
I do think she made some very good points, but I am uncomfortable with the public nature of all the exchanges. I understand that she wanted to inform the whole school of her views, but it still feels inapproriate...especially her responses to Dean Matthews. Dean Matthews asked to meet with her one-on-one and then the latest email is sent out with those two quoted paragraphs...very odd, inapproriate and uncomfortable.
Plus all this comes out right as the school starts the Diversity Roundtables.
Legal...Check your yahoo mail. They are forwarded to you
I fully believe in the First Amendment, and the associated protection and promotion of a cocophony of voices from diverse and antagonistic sources. But public disclosure of correspondence intended to be private and the making of veiled threats undermines West's credibility and the salience of her arguments. Throwing Calhoun and Matthew under the bus in front of the whole law school gets her nowhere.
The way that she's handled any sort of private gripes she has with individual professors or administrators -- by copying the entire school -- is reprehensible. Email correspondence is intended to be private. She needs to be punished somehow for the completely inappropriate way she's handled things.
However, if she were to get punished, it would be way too easy for her to turn around and say "the white-based administration at CU Law is trying to suppress my black voice." This is a huge lose-lose, and I see it getting messy quick. Crazy thing though... snippy messages to Calhoun & Dean Matthew? A formal civil rights attorney and a black woman don't exactly strike me as opposed to minority plight.
But while we're on the topic, she actually raises a good point for law school administrators everywhere to consider: Why the hell do we allow lesser-qualified students into law schools just because their skin is a different color? AA admits don't come to school with the same qualifications as their classmates. They're not as smart, so they do worse. The finish lower in the class, get discouraged, and tend to do terribly on the bar.
Go on, flame away. I'm certain this doesn't come across as some heady Boulder "enlightened" point of view, but I'm not the first to call a spade a spade:
http://daily.stanford.edu/tempo?page=content&id=15487&repository=0001_article
Attempt to link to the article I just mentioned
She chose to attend a T1 school knowing her incoming credentials likely were lower than the published medians. I don't even want to get into the AA debate here, but I will say that *full ride* does not = *gun to head.* No one forced her to come here. CU made it attractive for her to come here. There's a difference. She seems smart and articulate. I fail to see why it would have been impossible for her to make law review, participate in moot court, or get good grades. (And I don't look at minority students and assume they had inferior incoming credentials, either.) Minority students do make law review, participate in moot court, and get good grades. However, if Ms. West's incoming credentials were so low that CU was *reckless* in admitting her, perhaps she should have been self-aware enough to realize that the odds were against her making law review and getting into the top 10%. Hell, if Harvard made a clerical error and let me into its law school I'd seriously wonder whether I could survive the experience. To me, it looks as if CU saw some potential in Ms. West, and it looks as if Ms. West herself believed she had that same kind of potential. It seems as if the blame is misplaced here.
(I also disagree that AA exists so that white people can look at minorities in class. That's just bunk. Whatever its failings in workability, it's meant to do just what Beatlaw said.) Also of note: I'm bothered that Calhoun and Matthew were skewered by Ms. West. Talk about the wrong targets.
Good point, Beatlaw. To clarify, maybe I should have said "generally lower undergrad grades & a lower LSAT" instead of "not as smart." I guess just "not as smart" by the measures that law school admin committees use when making admissions decisions.
Blaw, I wouldn't kid myself into thinking that I could compete academically w/ most Harvard Law students if I were admitted there either. But if they made a mistake and let me in, I'd be there in a heartbeat. Doesn't a Harvard degree always look better than a CU degree, no matter what your grades are? Doesn't a CU degree look better than some anonymous T3 school, no matter where you finish in the class?
since West already sent these emails out, and they're very much public, can someone just post them on the blog? i'm not on that email list apparently. it's times like this i still wish i had a blog ...
But CU isn't Harvard. I'd probably go to Harvard because just to graduate from Harvard is something, even being bottom 10%. But if CU let me in and I had incoming credentials that were markedly lower than the median, I'd think twice. I would. I actually have a friend in this position. Abysmal LSAT. He's applying to T3 and T4 schools because he wants to be competitive. He told me even if CU let him in he wouldn't come because he'd rather be in the top half at his T3 and T4 school than the bottom 10% of a T1. And no, I think certain schools have a reputation where graduating from there is enough. That's not most schools. In most instances you'd be better graduating in the top 10% of a T3 than the bottom 10% of a T1. I guess my main point is that she's placed the blame on CU. That's not entirely fair. CU gambled on her, and she gambled on CU. If I play PowerBall and lose my buck, do I blame PowerBall?
very well said, stallsworth
Typical XOXO.
Agreed.
I don't think it exactly adds.
Man that xoxo thread is sickening. And I make a motion that we consider deleting the emails and their excerpts that are being posted. None of us turly understand the whole situation. The posting of the emails to the entire school seems to have been triggered by a conversation between Calhoun and West which none of us were party to, so anything we say about the reasons for placing the emails out is speculation.
I guess that really leaves us with a discussion of affirmative action at CU, and if you want to continue it go ahead, but I really don't this blawg devolving into what we are seeing on that xoxo thred.
I won't go delete the posting of the emails, but I think we should discuss leaving them up.
Wow. What else can I say. Complaining because she got a good grade in a seminar seems to capture the whole incident.
gridlocker, you should've deleted everyone's names if you were going to post that on xoxo.
No, I'm really sure this is legit (at least from the responses from the Dean and the original professor).
And after reading the xoxo conspiracy theory, this isn't an Administration plant, just one upset student who publicly lashed out the school.
Why would anyone read that message board in order to learn real information? Just sad.
Editorial discretion and respect for the privacy of Professor Calhoun and Dean Matthew motivated my removal of the emails, not disagreement with their content. Discussion can (and did) continue without the emails being available to the wider universe. I'm more than happy for the debate to continue, but not by throwing Courtney, Dean Matthew, or Professor Calhoun under a bus.
I agree. Hence the alteration of the post above.
Thanks HS.
One, comments weren't connected to the HS post. Two, CU Law, the emails were available on xoxo before you finished posting them here. The attacks on them were in full bloom before the emails were posted here.
Pom: As far as I'm concerned, your criticism of the "crows," myself included, is justified. Sensitivity was not the rule of the day. However, the argument will be that she sent the emails to everyone in the school, and people *were* discussing it. Her emails also touched on broader, controversial issues of interest to many. Most of the discussions, at least on this blog, related to her arguments and were not personal attacks on her. But I agree that a more nuanced interpretation of her email messages should have more elicited more sympathy than criticism.
Anyone else catch the fact that Courtney CC'd the Colorado Daily on her last email? To me, it looks like she's making a name for herself, not "having personal problems."
--"Google.cn"
Did you see the latest? She was requested to not include 5 people in these exchanges and she refused. I can only hope that she can't comply with the request due to technical reasons, and not because of her attempt to keep the whole school involved. My guess though is the latter!
Is there a new e-mail? If so, would someone please forward it to me? I don't think any of these were sent to the class of 2006.
Anon, I don't know Courtney, and haven't spoken to her. My post come in response to the inclusion of the Colorado Daily in the CC field of the last email (as HS pointed out). If she is going to publically throw the school and good professors under the bus, I think it is just fine to impune her motives (I haven't done so before this point). If she is receiving emails or requests from people asking her not to send it to them, maybe she should listen to them as well and not use the list serves (and I will email her with just such a request). If you have talked to her about this, tell us why she is using the listserves. Help us understand this, because I still don't know why this has become a very public fight between her and the school, and why we were made parties to it.
HS--if there were a difference between "having personal problems" and "making a name for yourself" there would be no reality TV.
i do know courtney, but not well enough to have had these conversations with her. she seems more frustrated than mentally ill. it seems an issue that's important to her is finally getting some traction, and she's not going to shy away. she's been living with this feeling of hurt on her own for a long time--i'd imagine it makes little difference to her if she involves the whole school now.
Thanks Legal...It helps to get more prespective on this whole thing.
I found myself agreeing w/ many of her points in her most recent email from yesterday. It's refreshing to see a black person stand up and say, "I want to be fairly evaluated on my skills and talents rather than given free handouts because of the color of my skin."
I'd like to hope that this is a commonly-shared belief amongst blacks and that certain loudmouths like Sharpton are just the vocal minority. Here's to evaluating everyone on a level playing field. I just wish that if theis thing snowballs and blows up, it weren't happening here. CU has dealt w/ enough over the last few years and isn't really the bad guy -- the School is just a microcosm for law schools, and the nation, as a whole.
The part where I differ with her is when she says, "White males receive the greatest benefits from racial discrimination laws. Not only are they (generally speaking) more attractive to employers because they are white and male but also because they are the least likely to sue for racial discrimination. For white men, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is like having a Master's degree to add to their resumes."
I'm a white male. If I were a black male w/ my GPA, LSAT score & law school grades, I'd be at a Top 20 school with a big firm job already locked up. So that I'm not buying
hampster, I actually believe that I control where I end up in life and take full responsibility for myself. I'm not a victim of society being out to get me, and even if I were, the power to improve my lot in life rests solely on my shoulders. If I'm reading Courney's emails correctly, that's what she's saying too -- and I applaud it.
I'm just tired of hearing people complain about their circumstances without taking it upon themselves to do something to make things better. But I'm fine with letting people with that sort of attitude continue to do their thing, and I'll continue to do mine. I was just contesting one particular point in Courtney's email.
Post a Comment