Thursday, January 10, 2008

In the, MY GOD, READ THE TEA LEAVES, department

I'm reading through my RSS feeds this morning before heading off to the State capitol for a fun filled day of meetings. The first paragraph of this Inside Higher Ed article caught my eye.

A law student received a 1.948 grade point average her first year, just below the 1.95 GPA students need to guarantee their spot at Southern Illinois University’s School of Law for a third semester. The student, a white woman with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia and type II bipolar disorder, petitioned for readmission, per the law school’s policy. The student says she is one of six who applied for readmission. Among the others, none were disabled, four were racial minorities, and two had such low grades that were only eligible to petition for readmission after the law school allegedly changed their grades. Only Lisa Dawn Rittenhouse, who claims that she had the highest GPA of the six, was denied readmission.


Ok, call me insensitive but...

Speaking as someone with some documented cognitive challenges (so I am sympathetic), it appears that this student is attributing her performance (< 2.0 gpa) to cognitive deficits. If it's truly her cognitive capacity that is making it difficult to perform well in the classroom, how in the world does she expect this to remedy itself when she starts to practice law? I for one don't want her representing my fiduciary interests, or protecting my legal rights.

Grades mean more than a ticket to employment. They're supposed to be an assessment of mastery... an indicator of competence. If you're not doing well, it might be because you are in the wrong freaking field.

Sigh..