Penn State Sued over Alleged Racist Attacks on White Professor
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Pennsylvania State University is being sued by former professor Zack De Piero , who previously taught English at Penn State Abington. He is alleging an extensive array of racist and retaliatory actions by the university. One of the allegations concerns grading students based on race.
The complaint is blunt to the point of badgering. The rhetoric may be problematic for some judges, but the real question is whether these allegations can be proven. If so, Penn State could find itself in a difficult position with statements and policies linked to administrators.
There are roughly 40 defendant trustees, professors, and administrators named in the complaint below. This includes Professor Liliana Naydan who was an Associate Professor of English and served as De Piero’s Supervisor and Chair of the English Department and Writing Program Coordinator.
De Piero alleges that he was “individually singled out for ridicule and humiliation” due to his race. He also alleges that he was expected to follow and support the view that “White supremacy exists in the language itself, and therefore, that the English language itself is ‘racist.”
De Piero also alleges that faculty were encouraged to participate in anti-racist workshops and trainings, including one titled “White Teachers are the Problem.”
What is most interesting about the complaint is that it alleges policies that would violate core academic freedom principles from the content of his classes to grading. He alleges that he was told to adopt a race-based grading system. Specifically, he alleges that the failure to grade minorities on par or better than whites would be treated as de facto racist:
“Defendants instructed De Piero that outcomes alone — regardless of the legitimacy of methods of evaluation, mastery of subject matter, or intentions — demonstrate whether a faculty member’s actions are racist or not. Defendants call this “social justice” and “antiracism.” At the core of their ideology, Defendants discriminate twofold on the basis of race. First, Defendants’ bigotry manifests itself in low expectations. They do not expect black or Hispanic students to achieve the same mastery of academic subject matters as other students and therefore insist that deficient performance must be excused. Accurate assessment of abilities, if it happens to show disparate performance among different racial groups, is therefore condemned as “racist.” econd[sic], Defendants’ bigotry manifests itself in overt discrimination against students and faculty who do apply consistent standards, especially white faculty.”
What was most notable is this added alleged statement:
Defendant Naydan expressed this corrosive race-based ideology on March 29, 2019, when she emailed Plaintiff and two other white faculty members that “racist structures are quite real in assessment and elsewhere regardless of the good intentions that teachers and scholars bring to the set-up of those structures. For me, the racism is in the results if the results draw a color line.”
If true, Penn State was stating that a racial differentiation in grading result would be treated as de facto discrimination. If such a differentiation existed for a faculty member, it would require elevating or lowering scores based on race. Some of the other allegations could be matters of interpretation and personality conflicts. However, the attributed comment on assuming discrimination from race-based results suggests a cognizable policy.
The threshold motion to dismiss will be key. If this case goes to discovery, Penn State could face potentially embarrassing inquiries, including emails and depositions.
De Piero is currently an assistant professor of English at Northampton Community College.
Tags
Who is online
425 visitors
He alleges that he was told to adopt a race-based grading system. Specifically, he alleges that the failure to grade minorities on par or better than whites would be treated as de facto racist:
Equity in Action. Race based grading is required to achieve it.
Now liberal democrats think that African Americans aren't smart enough to pass college without their help? Their racism is getting worse not better.
Racial paternalism seems to fill an emotional void.
"The complaint is blunt to the point of badgering. The rhetoric may be problematic for some judges, but the real question is whether these allegations can be proven."
Not to worry Zack, there's a slew of commenters on NT taking your side without having heard a word from the accused.
I was also struck by the lack of comment from "the other side" of this story. Maybe it is because they are being sued, but without the university's side readers cannot know where the actual truth lies.
Good point. Dailykos would never publish a story based on one side of it.