Sidwell Paid a family $50K and agree to change grades??????????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's certainly possible the family's suit is flimsy, but it's also possible the Sidwell was a bad actor.

Given what's publicly known, which one is the likelier possibility in your opinion and why?

PP here. I don't think I have sufficient facts to say with any certainty--do you? It's certainly possible both parties bear some responsibility for the outcome.

No one is asking for certainly. I'm simply trying to ascertain, based on your best guess, how the blame should be apportioned. You seem to think it's 50/50 or close to it, correct?

I have no idea, and I don’t think it’s important to apportion blame by percentages. I imagine both sides contributed to this mess. I am disappointed that many people on this thread are jumping to the conclusion the family of color are opportunists and scammers, and that Sidwell is squeaky clean. In my observation it seems that people of color may need to resort to taking what would be seen by white people as extreme action in instances where they believe there were not treated fairly. I do not know this family, and I do not presume to speak for them. To white people in our culture their actions may look shady, but perhaps seek to understand what it might be like to experience an undercurrent of bias in society and then experience this situation.

You are racist, see racism everywhere, and won't stop until Sidwell apologizes to that family for all the racism and injustice in the world -- even if it's obvious they are a pair of scammers.

Have a blessed life, I'm pretty sure having nothing to do with Sidwell.

You must live a very sad life.

Your judgment is very poor.

No surprise

Well I’m glad. I wonder why you seem so angry. Kindness and compassion for others brings a great deal of happiness - as does forgiveness .

[Anonymous]

bump

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's certainly possible the family's suit is flimsy, but it's also possible the Sidwell was a bad actor.

Given what's publicly known, which one is the likelier possibility in your opinion and why?

PP here. I don't think I have sufficient facts to say with any certainty--do you? It's certainly possible both parties bear some responsibility for the outcome.

No one is asking for certainly. I'm simply trying to ascertain, based on your best guess, how the blame should be apportioned. You seem to think it's 50/50 or close to it, correct?

I have no idea, and I don’t think it’s important to apportion blame by percentages. I imagine both sides contributed to this mess. I am disappointed that many people on this thread are jumping to the conclusion the family of color are opportunists and scammers, and that Sidwell is squeaky clean. In my observation it seems that people of color may need to resort to taking what would be seen by white people as extreme action in instances where they believe there were not treated fairly. I do not know this family, and I do not presume to speak for them. To white people in our culture their actions may look shady, but perhaps seek to understand what it might be like to experience an undercurrent of bias in society and then experience this situation.

Sidwell is hyper-sensitive to any appearance of racial insensitivity to the point where they will give more leeway to students of color. My take is that this family is leveraging that advantage to get what they want. Not saying it's right or wrong, but the current climate certainly empowered their course of action.

Well, I’ll say it: it’s wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's certainly possible the family's suit is flimsy, but it's also possible the Sidwell was a bad actor.

Given what's publicly known, which one is the likelier possibility in your opinion and why?

PP here. I don't think I have sufficient facts to say with any certainty--do you? It's certainly possible both parties bear some responsibility for the outcome.

No one is asking for certainly. I'm simply trying to ascertain, based on your best guess, how the blame should be apportioned. You seem to think it's 50/50 or close to it, correct?

I have no idea, and I don’t think it’s important to apportion blame by percentages. I imagine both sides contributed to this mess. I am disappointed that many people on this thread are jumping to the conclusion the family of color are opportunists and scammers, and that Sidwell is squeaky clean. In my observation it seems that people of color may need to resort to taking what would be seen by white people as extreme action in instances where they believe there were not treated fairly. I do not know this family, and I do not presume to speak for them. To white people in our culture their actions may look shady, but perhaps seek to understand what it might be like to experience an undercurrent of bias in society and then experience this situation.

Sidwell is hyper-sensitive to any appearance of racial insensitivity to the point where they will give more leeway to students of color. My take is that this family is leveraging that advantage to get what they want. Not saying it's right or wrong, but the current climate certainly empowered their course of action.

Well, I’ll say it: it’s wrong.

+2.

It is wrong and unfair to all the other kids and families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's certainly possible the family's suit is flimsy, but it's also possible the Sidwell was a bad actor.

Given what's publicly known, which one is the likelier possibility in your opinion and why?

PP here. I don't think I have sufficient facts to say with any certainty--do you? It's certainly possible both parties bear some responsibility for the outcome.

No one is asking for certainly. I'm simply trying to ascertain, based on your best guess, how the blame should be apportioned. You seem to think it's 50/50 or close to it, correct?

I have no idea, and I don’t think it’s important to apportion blame by percentages. I imagine both sides contributed to this mess. I am disappointed that many people on this thread are jumping to the conclusion the family of color are opportunists and scammers, and that Sidwell is squeaky clean. In my observation it seems that people of color may need to resort to taking what would be seen by white people as extreme action in instances where they believe there were not treated fairly. I do not know this family, and I do not presume to speak for them. To white people in our culture their actions may look shady, but perhaps seek to understand what it might be like to experience an undercurrent of bias in society and then experience this situation.

Sidwell is hyper-sensitive to any appearance of racial insensitivity to the point where they will give more leeway to students of color. My take is that this family is leveraging that advantage to get what they want. Not saying it's right or wrong, but the current climate certainly empowered their course of action.

Well, I’ll say it: it’s wrong.

+2.

It is wrong and unfair to all the other kids and families.

That’s quite a blanket condemnation. I’m surprised that you think it effects other kids.

[Anonymous]

This is a silly thread.

The OP is only the unvetted opinion of the plaintiff and not worth talking about. It seems to purposefully cut off the brief appendix, which has to include the lower court decisions - which discuss the whole record and repeatedly concludes the plaintiffs are bringing up silly claims, such as a mention of Nigerian heritage in a letter of recommendation an adverse action when the student herself focused on her Nigerian heritage in her personal essay. A silly complaint for which the plaintiff paid Sidwell almost $50k for wasting its time, not the other way around.

That's what the court decision says. Anything said to the contrary on this thread is wrong - inexplicably so.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-1356/97268/20190423135448437_Adetu%20Appendix%20E%20File%20Apr%2023%202019.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's certainly possible the family's suit is flimsy, but it's also possible the Sidwell was a bad actor.

Given what's publicly known, which one is the likelier possibility in your opinion and why?

PP here. I don't think I have sufficient facts to say with any certainty--do you? It's certainly possible both parties bear some responsibility for the outcome.

No one is asking for certainly. I'm simply trying to ascertain, based on your best guess, how the blame should be apportioned. You seem to think it's 50/50 or close to it, correct?

I have no idea, and I don’t think it’s important to apportion blame by percentages. I imagine both sides contributed to this mess. I am disappointed that many people on this thread are jumping to the conclusion the family of color are opportunists and scammers, and that Sidwell is squeaky clean. In my observation it seems that people of color may need to resort to taking what would be seen by white people as extreme action in instances where they believe there were not treated fairly. I do not know this family, and I do not presume to speak for them. To white people in our culture their actions may look shady, but perhaps seek to understand what it might be like to experience an undercurrent of bias in society and then experience this situation.

Sidwell is hyper-sensitive to any appearance of racial insensitivity to the point where they will give more leeway to students of color. My take is that this family is leveraging that advantage to get what they want. Not saying it's right or wrong, but the current climate certainly empowered their course of action.

Well, I’ll say it: it’s wrong.

+2.

It is wrong and unfair to all the other kids and families.

That’s quite a blanket condemnation. I’m surprised that you think it effects other kids.

Of course it does.

When you start applying different standards to a given student and/ of family, everyone around notices and it changes the dynamics.

Think about your workplace. Don't you think you'd notice if a young employee starts sleeping with the boss and starts getting all this crazy bonuses and promotions ahead of people who deserve it more? Don't you think that would impact morale?

[Anonymous]

This is a silly thread. There is nothing about this case which suggests anyone was treated differently one way of the other.

The hypotheticals would be strained even if this case were being correctly presented. It's not.

I guess people just like to hear the sound of their own keyboard clicking?

[Anonymous]

Though, folks certainly have a right to file a complaint if they feel like they're being treated differently. That's the beginning and end of it. Next topic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's certainly possible the family's suit is flimsy, but it's also possible the Sidwell was a bad actor.

Given what's publicly known, which one is the likelier possibility in your opinion and why?

PP here. I don't think I have sufficient facts to say with any certainty--do you? It's certainly possible both parties bear some responsibility for the outcome.

No one is asking for certainly. I'm simply trying to ascertain, based on your best guess, how the blame should be apportioned. You seem to think it's 50/50 or close to it, correct?

I have no idea, and I don’t think it’s important to apportion blame by percentages. I imagine both sides contributed to this mess. I am disappointed that many people on this thread are jumping to the conclusion the family of color are opportunists and scammers, and that Sidwell is squeaky clean. In my observation it seems that people of color may need to resort to taking what would be seen by white people as extreme action in instances where they believe there were not treated fairly. I do not know this family, and I do not presume to speak for them. To white people in our culture their actions may look shady, but perhaps seek to understand what it might be like to experience an undercurrent of bias in society and then experience this situation.

Sidwell is hyper-sensitive to any appearance of racial insensitivity to the point where they will give more leeway to students of color. My take is that this family is leveraging that advantage to get what they want. Not saying it's right or wrong, but the current climate certainly empowered their course of action.

In my experience the hypersensitive people are the white people (not just talking at Sidwell) who are hypersensitive when anyone dares to point out that race and implicit bias play a role every single day in the experience of black people and brown people in a way that disadvantages and burdens them. When I make a conscious effort to consider whether implicit bias or racism (broad definition of unconscious racism) is playing a role in how I am interacting with a person of color or whether my understanding of the situation is wrong I get pushback and defensiveness from white people (I’m white). Just pointing out that parents seemed to be judging a black boys behavior more harshly than the same behavior by a white boy resulted in my white friends getting pissed at me. Maybe what you perceive as giving more leeway is really just people correcting for the implicit bias they have come to recognize.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's certainly possible the family's suit is flimsy, but it's also possible the Sidwell was a bad actor.

Given what's publicly known, which one is the likelier possibility in your opinion and why?

PP here. I don't think I have sufficient facts to say with any certainty--do you? It's certainly possible both parties bear some responsibility for the outcome.

No one is asking for certainly. I'm simply trying to ascertain, based on your best guess, how the blame should be apportioned. You seem to think it's 50/50 or close to it, correct?

I have no idea, and I don’t think it’s important to apportion blame by percentages. I imagine both sides contributed to this mess. I am disappointed that many people on this thread are jumping to the conclusion the family of color are opportunists and scammers, and that Sidwell is squeaky clean. In my observation it seems that people of color may need to resort to taking what would be seen by white people as extreme action in instances where they believe there were not treated fairly. I do not know this family, and I do not presume to speak for them. To white people in our culture their actions may look shady, but perhaps seek to understand what it might be like to experience an undercurrent of bias in society and then experience this situation.

Sidwell is hyper-sensitive to any appearance of racial insensitivity to the point where they will give more leeway to students of color. My take is that this family is leveraging that advantage to get what they want. Not saying it's right or wrong, but the current climate certainly empowered their course of action.

In my experience the hypersensitive people are the white people (not just talking at Sidwell) who are hypersensitive when anyone dares to point out that race and implicit bias play a role every single day in the experience of black people and brown people in a way that disadvantages and burdens them. When I make a conscious effort to consider whether implicit bias or racism (broad definition of unconscious racism) is playing a role in how I am interacting with a person of color or whether my understanding of the situation is wrong I get pushback and defensiveness from white people (I’m white). Just pointing out that parents seemed to be judging a black boys behavior more harshly than the same behavior by a white boy resulted in my white friends getting pissed at me. Maybe what you perceive as giving more leeway is really just people correcting for the implicit bias they have come to recognize.

+1. This is a difficult conversation, one that goes beyond Sidwell, and is it one that people, esp white people, do not want to have. I think it’s why we are more comfortable shutting this thread down, blaming the parents or calling them scammers, complaining about the unfairness or reverse racism, rather than considering that there’s also a greater systemic issue that may play into what’s going on. (I am white btw).

[Anonymous]

I love how last two posters need to share "I'm white" as if that somehow validates their very poor thinking skills.

You believe you belong to some superior race? No? Then why don't you discuss intelligently this specific case rather than writing some blahblahblah.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I love how last two posters need to share "I'm white" as if that somehow validates their very poor thinking skills.

You believe you belong to some superior race? No? Then why don't you discuss intelligently this specific case rather than writing some blahblahblah.

Being white does not make one superior but it conveys advantages in our society.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's certainly possible the family's suit is flimsy, but it's also possible the Sidwell was a bad actor.

Given what's publicly known, which one is the likelier possibility in your opinion and why?

PP here. I don't think I have sufficient facts to say with any certainty--do you? It's certainly possible both parties bear some responsibility for the outcome.

No one is asking for certainly. I'm simply trying to ascertain, based on your best guess, how the blame should be apportioned. You seem to think it's 50/50 or close to it, correct?

I have no idea, and I don’t think it’s important to apportion blame by percentages. I imagine both sides contributed to this mess. I am disappointed that many people on this thread are jumping to the conclusion the family of color are opportunists and scammers, and that Sidwell is squeaky clean. In my observation it seems that people of color may need to resort to taking what would be seen by white people as extreme action in instances where they believe there were not treated fairly. I do not know this family, and I do not presume to speak for them. To white people in our culture their actions may look shady, but perhaps seek to understand what it might be like to experience an undercurrent of bias in society and then experience this situation.

Sidwell is hyper-sensitive to any appearance of racial insensitivity to the point where they will give more leeway to students of color. My take is that this family is leveraging that advantage to get what they want. Not saying it's right or wrong, but the current climate certainly empowered their course of action.

In my experience the hypersensitive people are the white people (not just talking at Sidwell) who are hypersensitive when anyone dares to point out that race and implicit bias play a role every single day in the experience of black people and brown people in a way that disadvantages and burdens them. When I make a conscious effort to consider whether implicit bias or racism (broad definition of unconscious racism) is playing a role in how I am interacting with a person of color or whether my understanding of the situation is wrong I get pushback and defensiveness from white people (I’m white). Just pointing out that parents seemed to be judging a black boys behavior more harshly than the same behavior by a white boy resulted in my white friends getting pissed at me. Maybe what you perceive as giving more leeway is really just people correcting for the implicit bias they have come to recognize.

+1. This is a difficult conversation, one that goes beyond Sidwell, and is it one that people, esp white people, do not want to have. I think it’s why we are more comfortable shutting this thread down, blaming the parents or calling them scammers, complaining about the unfairness or reverse racism, rather than considering that there’s also a greater systemic issue that may play into what’s going on. (I am white btw).

Except that the parents are scammers and blame others for their daughter's perceived bad luck. Penn, not Yale. Oh, the shame!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's certainly possible the family's suit is flimsy, but it's also possible the Sidwell was a bad actor.

Given what's publicly known, which one is the likelier possibility in your opinion and why?

PP here. I don't think I have sufficient facts to say with any certainty--do you? It's certainly possible both parties bear some responsibility for the outcome.

No one is asking for certainly. I'm simply trying to ascertain, based on your best guess, how the blame should be apportioned. You seem to think it's 50/50 or close to it, correct?

I have no idea, and I don’t think it’s important to apportion blame by percentages. I imagine both sides contributed to this mess. I am disappointed that many people on this thread are jumping to the conclusion the family of color are opportunists and scammers, and that Sidwell is squeaky clean. In my observation it seems that people of color may need to resort to taking what would be seen by white people as extreme action in instances where they believe there were not treated fairly. I do not know this family, and I do not presume to speak for them. To white people in our culture their actions may look shady, but perhaps seek to understand what it might be like to experience an undercurrent of bias in society and then experience this situation.

Sidwell is hyper-sensitive to any appearance of racial insensitivity to the point where they will give more leeway to students of color. My take is that this family is leveraging that advantage to get what they want. Not saying it's right or wrong, but the current climate certainly empowered their course of action.

In my experience the hypersensitive people are the white people (not just talking at Sidwell) who are hypersensitive when anyone dares to point out that race and implicit bias play a role every single day in the experience of black people and brown people in a way that disadvantages and burdens them. When I make a conscious effort to consider whether implicit bias or racism (broad definition of unconscious racism) is playing a role in how I am interacting with a person of color or whether my understanding of the situation is wrong I get pushback and defensiveness from white people (I’m white). Just pointing out that parents seemed to be judging a black boys behavior more harshly than the same behavior by a white boy resulted in my white friends getting pissed at me. Maybe what you perceive as giving more leeway is really just people correcting for the implicit bias they have come to recognize.

+1. This is a difficult conversation, one that goes beyond Sidwell, and is it one that people, esp white people, do not want to have. I think it’s why we are more comfortable shutting this thread down, blaming the parents or calling them scammers, complaining about the unfairness or reverse racism, rather than considering that there’s also a greater systemic issue that may play into what’s going on. (I am white btw).

Except that the parents are scammers and blame others for their daughter's perceived bad luck. Penn, not Yale. Oh, the shame!

+1.

But it is all because of the British Empire and how they colonized Nigeria, destroying the hopes for this lovely family and student.