On Friday, The College Fix — a libertarian news website focused on higher education in the United States — issued out an unsurprising development in the saga of American colleges scarily metamorphosing into utter insanity.
The story revolves around Asao Inoue, a professor at the University of Washington-Tacoma with a Ph.D. in Rhetoric and Composition. Inoue, with his clear distinguishment in the art of writing, is planned to lead a seminar next month hosted at American University. The topic of the seminar? Why college professors should stop grading the quality and content of college papers — to combat racism, of course.
That isn’t a joke. On the seminar’s own website, it writes in gargantuan words, “Grading Ain’t Just Grading: Rethinking Writing Assessment Ecologies Towards Antiracist Ends.” One plenary description on the site writes that “Inoue will discuss the ways that White Language supremacy is perpetuated in college classrooms,” while another writes how “white racial habits of language” predominate the judgments of college papers.
Inoue has been outspoken about the apparent racism in college paper grading for years. In one paper, he wrote how professors should grade papers based on the labor and time it took to write it rather than the quality and content of the paper itself.
This is all done through the guise of “social justice.” Year after year, European American students outscore African American students in various aptitude and intelligence tests. To Inoue and hundreds of other left-leaning college professors, this jarring inequality in scores equates to inequity. Unequal test scores, to them, means systemic discrimination. This conflation was the driving force behind affirmative action and still remains its foundational overtone.
In Inoue’s eyes, white college students outscouring black and Hispanic students is a clear sign of the systemic racist college standards. To combat that, he argues, the quality of the paper must be ignored. Quality is now a by-product of racism.
Remember when colleges actually attempted to prepare students for the future? Or how about the time when college campuses actually prioritized hard work and merit and were indifferent to the quantity of melanin a student harbored in their skin?
Those were good times.
Daniel Schmidt is a 16-year-old paleoconservative political commentator and opinion writer. In his freshman year of high school, he founded The Young Pundit, a hard-hitting political commentary outlet that features young American nationalists critical of both the Left and the Right. To read more about Daniel, click here.