Heh. I didn't say she was a "mere right-winger," though. I identified her as a right-winger only in the context of establishing that even the most rabid affirmative action opponents, and ones with true right-wing chops, acknowledge the existence of the stereotype threat. Thus, I described her not as having been blinded by ideology, as you suggest, but rather as not having been blinded by ideology (at least not enough to deny the existence of the stereotype threat). Her "empirical sense" is not at issue here, though, given that she did not actually do any primary or peer-reviewed secondary research on the topic.
Well, as a former liberal myself, I do remember that liberals often characterize their ideological opponents as either mean-spirited and hateful, blinded by ideology, or generally lacking in intellectual capacity. I thought your "right-winger" remark was directed towards forwarding that propensity, which is why I wrote the reply I wrote.
I do see what you're saying, though, about Wax's allowing for the existence of the "stereotype threat." I don't think she would say that the threat's effects can be conclusively established by the studies conducted thus far, but she does allow that it may have an effect ("
suggest that stereotype threat..." versus "
establish that stereotype threat"; "Does this mean that stereotype threat plays no role?
Not necessarily" versus "Does this mean that stereotype threat plays no role?
No" ). I do think, though, that reasonable people can disagree with me on this characterization.
Also, you're going to have your anti-AA troll card pulled if you fail to recognize that someone who received her advanced degrees at Harvard and Columbia can be an ideologue. Your friends won't like this argument one bit. 
Ha! Well, I agree with you on that. Still, her advanced non-law degree was an MD in neurology, not a PhD in Critical Gender Studies. I'd wager that a neurologist has a pretty good grasp of the necessity of finding empirical observations, versus endlessly spouting unsubstantiated theory and barely-substantiated conjecture. 'Course, I could be wrong on that bet.
ETA: FWIW, I agree with Wax that the stereotype threat is not the magic bullet some commentators would like it to be. For one, I don't know how much it accounts for the test gap. More important, even if it is a significant factor in testing disparities, I don't know how we can do away with it in order to make sure the same results aren't reproduced down the line. I think the encouragement and reassurance Wax allows is a good start; in the law school context, academic support resources for struggling students and pre-orientation, skills-based training programs are other fine ideas.
Yeah, I definitely agree with you that encouragement does play a role in bolstering academic achievement (I can attest to this from my own experiences). I'm not sure that differential effects of encouragement or outright discouragement on the academic performance of different ethnic/racial groups is enough to morally or causally justify AA programs, but I do think that society as a whole benefits when the academic performance of its constituents is maximized, so it makes sense to, within reasonable costs, pursue policies that take steps to maximize encouragement and minimize discouragement.
663 Replies
122551 Views