I'm a big fan of President Obama. I think he's doing the best that he can to address a number of domestic and international challenges. I was never one who drank the Obama kool-aid and I don't think he's the Messiah. But his pragmatism generally resonates with me. As the President's popularity is on the decline, it is not inconceivable that Haiti could the crucial negative data point in the way that Katrina was for G.W. Bush. Katrina, rightly or wrongly, signaled that the Bush Administration was incompetent.
Monday, January 18, 2010
Sports, MLK, JR, and the Hiring of Derek Dooley
Late last week, the University of Tennessee hired Derek Dooley as its head football coach. Coach Dooley replaced Lane Kiffin, who left the university to become head football coach at the University of Southern California.
Today is Martin Luther King, Jr. day. And for some strange reason, I cannot stop thinking about the connection between Dr. King and the hiring of Coach Dooley.
Then it hit me.
Too often, we think of sports as a diversion, as a way for us to escape from our everyday problems. When we sit in front of the television to watch our favorite teams, we don't like to think too much about anything. We just like to root for our teams.
But Dr. King knew better. Sports were far more important than that. Not only are sports tremendously powerful both politically and symbolically, but the athletes themselves are influential role models for the youth of the nation. More importantly still, Dr. King understood that the athletic arena was more than a place were sports took place, but an important window to issues of racial justice.
This is probably why the picture of a black player, Terrence Cody, blocking a field goal at the end of the game to preserve an Alabama victory over Tennessee, stayed with me for as long as it did. This is the same state that gave us George Wallace, he of "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever" fame. The University of Alabama is also the institution where Wallace made his defiant stand against federal troops and racial integration. To see a black player lead Wallace's old university to victory is, to put it bluntly, jarring.
This is also why I pay close attention every time a football coach is hired and a search begins for his successor. In the National Football League, the so-called "Rooney Rule" requires teams to interview minority candidates during the search process. This rule has led to the hiring of many black coaches since its inception, leading some to question whether the rule is "still relevant." As expected, teams have learned to live with the rule, but also to work around it. It is now commonplace for teams to conduct "sham" interviews, that is, to interview black coaches they have no intention to hire, in order to comply with the rule. This is exactly what happened during the last two searches, by teams in Seattle and Washington D.C.
This brings me back to the hiring of Coach Dooley. Who is he? He happens to be the son of legendary Georgia coach Vince Dooley. Prior to his hiring by Tennessee, Derek Dooley coached at Louisiana Tech, where he complied a less-than-stellar record of 17-20. Nothing his record suggests he will be a great coach or a mediocre one. Nothing. Yet the University of Tennessee tagged him to lead the Volunteers for next year and beyond.
This hiring is a great example of the hypocrisy found within the affirmative action debate. Critics of affirmative action argue that decisions should be made on the basis of merit and nothing else. Unfortunately, credentials are only questioned when they involve candidates or applicants of color. Derek Dooley can be hired by a major football program and not a critic is found. Before Dooley, Tennessee hired Lane Kiffin, whose only head coaching experience involved a disastrous tenure coaching the Oakland Raiders. In fact, some commentators have pointed out that Dooley may be a better hire than Kiffin was at the time. How is that for setting a low floor?
Today, major college football boasts only four black head coaches. This is in a sport where, in 2008, 50% of the players in Division I-A, 25% of the assistant football coaches, and 13% percent of the offensive and defensive coordinators were black. A pool exists, in other words, for Athletic Directors to give opportunities to black candidates. Instead, the Kiffins and the Dooleys of the world continue to move forward. `
This is nothing, I suppose, that a good ol' proposition could not cure. If only we could find Ward Connerly when we needed him.
Today is Martin Luther King, Jr. day. And for some strange reason, I cannot stop thinking about the connection between Dr. King and the hiring of Coach Dooley.
Then it hit me.
Too often, we think of sports as a diversion, as a way for us to escape from our everyday problems. When we sit in front of the television to watch our favorite teams, we don't like to think too much about anything. We just like to root for our teams.
But Dr. King knew better. Sports were far more important than that. Not only are sports tremendously powerful both politically and symbolically, but the athletes themselves are influential role models for the youth of the nation. More importantly still, Dr. King understood that the athletic arena was more than a place were sports took place, but an important window to issues of racial justice.
This is probably why the picture of a black player, Terrence Cody, blocking a field goal at the end of the game to preserve an Alabama victory over Tennessee, stayed with me for as long as it did. This is the same state that gave us George Wallace, he of "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever" fame. The University of Alabama is also the institution where Wallace made his defiant stand against federal troops and racial integration. To see a black player lead Wallace's old university to victory is, to put it bluntly, jarring.
This is also why I pay close attention every time a football coach is hired and a search begins for his successor. In the National Football League, the so-called "Rooney Rule" requires teams to interview minority candidates during the search process. This rule has led to the hiring of many black coaches since its inception, leading some to question whether the rule is "still relevant." As expected, teams have learned to live with the rule, but also to work around it. It is now commonplace for teams to conduct "sham" interviews, that is, to interview black coaches they have no intention to hire, in order to comply with the rule. This is exactly what happened during the last two searches, by teams in Seattle and Washington D.C.
This brings me back to the hiring of Coach Dooley. Who is he? He happens to be the son of legendary Georgia coach Vince Dooley. Prior to his hiring by Tennessee, Derek Dooley coached at Louisiana Tech, where he complied a less-than-stellar record of 17-20. Nothing his record suggests he will be a great coach or a mediocre one. Nothing. Yet the University of Tennessee tagged him to lead the Volunteers for next year and beyond.
This hiring is a great example of the hypocrisy found within the affirmative action debate. Critics of affirmative action argue that decisions should be made on the basis of merit and nothing else. Unfortunately, credentials are only questioned when they involve candidates or applicants of color. Derek Dooley can be hired by a major football program and not a critic is found. Before Dooley, Tennessee hired Lane Kiffin, whose only head coaching experience involved a disastrous tenure coaching the Oakland Raiders. In fact, some commentators have pointed out that Dooley may be a better hire than Kiffin was at the time. How is that for setting a low floor?
Today, major college football boasts only four black head coaches. This is in a sport where, in 2008, 50% of the players in Division I-A, 25% of the assistant football coaches, and 13% percent of the offensive and defensive coordinators were black. A pool exists, in other words, for Athletic Directors to give opportunities to black candidates. Instead, the Kiffins and the Dooleys of the world continue to move forward. `
This is nothing, I suppose, that a good ol' proposition could not cure. If only we could find Ward Connerly when we needed him.
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Help for Haitian Earthquake Victims
One of the difficulties that Haitians are currently experiencing is the difficulty of telling aid organizations where they are and what their needs are. For example, I have an aunt and an uncle in Port-au-Prince who is taking care of 300 people affected by the earthquake. They need water, baby supplies, and masks. But they have no way of connecting to the aid organizations in Port-au-Prince and of course those organizations have no way of connecting to them and people like them. I saw a report on CNN yesterday where some UN folks simply went to a location and waited for people to go them. The location was not picked on the basis of population density or where there was the most need. It was simply where the UN folks felt like stopping. This is where technology can help.
Friday, January 15, 2010
Haitian Earthquake, Poverty, and Culture
As bodies are being recovered in Haiti and in what one hopes is at the very least the midst of the devastation but more likely its infancy, the armchair analysis of why the earthquake's effects are so tragic in Haiti have already started. Pat Robertson has offered his take, Haitians made pact with the devil, which is why they're so cursed. John Stossel has offered his take, which is that Haiti lacks economic freedom. And NY Times columnist David Brooks, not to be outdone by Robertson and Stossel, chimes in with the old chestnut that Haitians are poor because of their culture. Of the three, I find Brooks the most problematic not least because I have always thought of Brooks as one of the more thoughtful and reflective prominent columnists.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
The Earthquake in Haiti
As an Haitian-American, I cannot put in words the feelings of helplessness, sorrow and grief that I am experiencing as I hear and watch on television what is going in Haiti. I imagine that my feelings would be similar even if I were not of Haitian descent. But to see the intense suffering of those whose faces and stories are familiar to me is close to unbearable.
I cannot imagine what it is like to be in a country where all basic services are unavailable: very little medicine, little potable water, no medical support, no government services, no one to bury the dead, few equipment to look for the living, no home to go to, few places to use the bathroom and take a shower, children looking for their parents, parents looking for their kids, etc. I can't imagine a situation where tomorrow does not bring hope but only brings more sorrow.
I have heard and read many news accounts describing the Haitian people as resilient. No human being should ever have to be this resilient.
I cannot imagine what it is like to be in a country where all basic services are unavailable: very little medicine, little potable water, no medical support, no government services, no one to bury the dead, few equipment to look for the living, no home to go to, few places to use the bathroom and take a shower, children looking for their parents, parents looking for their kids, etc. I can't imagine a situation where tomorrow does not bring hope but only brings more sorrow.
I have heard and read many news accounts describing the Haitian people as resilient. No human being should ever have to be this resilient.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
The Face of Affirmative Action?
Anybody interested in the debate over race and merit in higher education should take a look at the story of Harold Fernandez, recently documented in the New York Times. While his story might not change your views on the use of race in admissions, it should certainly help you consider your views more carefully.
Mr. Fernandez came to the United States as an undocumented immigrant in 1978, as a 13 year old. Through hard work and perseverance, he gained admission to Princeton University. He arrived at Princeton two weeks before most students in his class, as part of a university program for poor and minority students who came from high schools without the rigorous course work to which most other Princeton freshmen had been exposed. He also assumed his SAT scores were lower than most of his classmates. He was hardly the traditional Princeton freshman, likely an "undeserving beneficiary of affirmative action."
But he proved them wrong. After his first semester, his grades placed him among Princeton's top freshmen. He worked hard -- really hard -- and took advantage of the opportunity Princeton afforded him. Isn't that what higher education should be about? Isn't that what affirmative action should be about?
The second part of his story is just as important as the first. In the spring of his freshman year, Princeton asked Mr. Fernandez to bring his green card to the adviser to foreign-born students in order to verify his immigration status. This presented a seemingly insurmountable obstacle, since Mr. Fernandez was an illegal immigrant, and the copy of the green card he had previously sent Princeton was a forgery, and not a very good one at that. This posed a grave problem: he had accepted federal monies that were not available to illegal immigrants. He had also violated Princeton's honor code.
At this point in the story, I couldn't help but think of the life story of Christopher Langan, as examined by Malcolm Gladwell in Outliers. A brilliant student, with an IQ between 195 and 210, Mr. Langan was unable to navigate the myriad obstacles posed by both Reed College and Montana State University. Officials at both schools were unwilling to help him, and so his vast potential was not maximized.
Mr. Fernandez faced similar obstacles. But the one part of this story that bears paying close attention focuses on how Princeton officials responded to his problems. He first went to one of his professors, who in turn spoke to the adviser and to William Bowen, then president of the university. A few days later, he met with the director of studies. After telling her what he had done, her answer shocked him then, and shocks me today. In his words: "Just as I was feeling crushed by the gravity of these issues . . . she went on to say: 'But Harold, both problems have solutions.'"
Princeton did not have to do any of this. In fact, they could have, as Mr. Fernandez acknowledged, "shrugged [him] of as an unscrupulous intruder." They chose instead to treat him as one of their own. They even chose to help his finally with their immigration status.
Mr. Fernandez went on to graduate magna cum laude and Phi Betta Kappa, and went on to attain degrees from Harvard medical School and New York University Medical Center. Today he is a cardiac surgeon in Roslyn, New York.
This story should be mandatory reading to admissions officials across the country.
I am not encouraged. As a recent study documents, students of color are lagging behind all other students in admissions at the nation's law schools even while class sizes increase. This is true even as their LSAT scores and grade point averages increase. I suspect the same holds true in other areas as well.
Try to make sense of that in light of Harold Fernandez's story.
Mr. Fernandez came to the United States as an undocumented immigrant in 1978, as a 13 year old. Through hard work and perseverance, he gained admission to Princeton University. He arrived at Princeton two weeks before most students in his class, as part of a university program for poor and minority students who came from high schools without the rigorous course work to which most other Princeton freshmen had been exposed. He also assumed his SAT scores were lower than most of his classmates. He was hardly the traditional Princeton freshman, likely an "undeserving beneficiary of affirmative action."
But he proved them wrong. After his first semester, his grades placed him among Princeton's top freshmen. He worked hard -- really hard -- and took advantage of the opportunity Princeton afforded him. Isn't that what higher education should be about? Isn't that what affirmative action should be about?
The second part of his story is just as important as the first. In the spring of his freshman year, Princeton asked Mr. Fernandez to bring his green card to the adviser to foreign-born students in order to verify his immigration status. This presented a seemingly insurmountable obstacle, since Mr. Fernandez was an illegal immigrant, and the copy of the green card he had previously sent Princeton was a forgery, and not a very good one at that. This posed a grave problem: he had accepted federal monies that were not available to illegal immigrants. He had also violated Princeton's honor code.
At this point in the story, I couldn't help but think of the life story of Christopher Langan, as examined by Malcolm Gladwell in Outliers. A brilliant student, with an IQ between 195 and 210, Mr. Langan was unable to navigate the myriad obstacles posed by both Reed College and Montana State University. Officials at both schools were unwilling to help him, and so his vast potential was not maximized.
Mr. Fernandez faced similar obstacles. But the one part of this story that bears paying close attention focuses on how Princeton officials responded to his problems. He first went to one of his professors, who in turn spoke to the adviser and to William Bowen, then president of the university. A few days later, he met with the director of studies. After telling her what he had done, her answer shocked him then, and shocks me today. In his words: "Just as I was feeling crushed by the gravity of these issues . . . she went on to say: 'But Harold, both problems have solutions.'"
Princeton did not have to do any of this. In fact, they could have, as Mr. Fernandez acknowledged, "shrugged [him] of as an unscrupulous intruder." They chose instead to treat him as one of their own. They even chose to help his finally with their immigration status.
Mr. Fernandez went on to graduate magna cum laude and Phi Betta Kappa, and went on to attain degrees from Harvard medical School and New York University Medical Center. Today he is a cardiac surgeon in Roslyn, New York.
This story should be mandatory reading to admissions officials across the country.
I am not encouraged. As a recent study documents, students of color are lagging behind all other students in admissions at the nation's law schools even while class sizes increase. This is true even as their LSAT scores and grade point averages increase. I suspect the same holds true in other areas as well.
Try to make sense of that in light of Harold Fernandez's story.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)