150 Law School Deans Ask American Bar Assoc. to Require Training for Bias and Anti-Racism
“The letter does not define what “anti-racism” training would consist of.”
Nothing is immune from the progressive agenda. Even the study of law is becoming mired in social justice.
Josh Blackman of the Volokh Conspiracy writes at Reason:
150 Law School Deans ask ABA to require “every law school [to] provide training and education around bias, cultural competence, and anti-racism”
Yesterday, I wrote about faculty and students being required to take pledges to support certain values, such as diversity and inclusion. These pledges do not define what actions have to be taken to support these values. There are great risks to sign.
Today, I learned that 150 law school deans (including my own) asked the American Bar Association to require “every law school provide training and education around bias, cultural competence, and anti-racism.” The letter does not define what “anti-racism” training would consist of.
I suspect many schools will consider requiring students, and perhaps faculty, to take the Harvard University Implicit Bias Test, known as IAT. (The American Bar Association Section on Litigation already promotes the test.)
These tests do not accurately predict racism. The results cannot be replicated on multiple administrations. And there is a very weak correlation between test results and actual behavior. I encourage you to read a lengthy review in Vox (no right-wing rag) about the implicit bias test. Here is an excerpt:
Only the IAT doesn’t predict subconscious racial biases, at least based on one test. So one time with the IAT might not tell you much, if anything, about your actual individual views and behavior.
As Lai told me, it’s not clear if the test even predicts biased behavior better than explicit measures: “What we don’t know is … whether or not the IAT and measures like the IAT can predict behavior over and above corresponding questionnaires of what we would call explicit measures or explicit attitudes.”
The big problem with the test is it doesn’t only pick up subconscious biases.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Biases like expecting people to obey the law, support themselves and treat others with respect. These are racist because the vast majority of blacks won’t follow them.
Who writes this crap? “Only the IAT doesn’t predict subconscious racial biases, at least based on one test.” “Only the IAT” — in proper English, this means that that EVERYTHING except the IAT (including tea leaves) predicts subconscious racial biases. I do not think that this what was intended.
The headline of this article states that 150 Deans are asking the ABA to require training, but the body of the article states that the Deans are asking the ABA to require the law schools to provide training — in other words, to offer (not necessarily to mandate) such anti-racism courses. Big difference.
As if by the time they’ve gotten to law school the students haven’t already been inundated with the crap “training” in K-12 and especially their undergraduate colleges???
And as if they won’t be inundated by it at their future employers (probably with mandatory annual training — perhaps mandatory “continuing legal education” requirements in order to maintain their bar admission)?
This isn’t about “lifetime learning” nor “anti-racism” (that phrase and “equity” and “systemic racism” being the new Progressive terms du jour).
No, it’s about cradle-to-grave indoctrination via something resembling Maoist struggle sessions.
“Anti-racism” is not a synonym for “non-racism”. “Anti-racism” is active bias against whites.
That is not training, it is indoctrination and abuse of power.
I see my alma mater is on the list, so there’s another reason not to contribute any time or money to them.
Strange, why would the ABA want an IAT test? I thought all law schools taught nothing is Black or White, just Grey.