Is it really common for professors to invite students to their houses.

[Anonymous]

I went to a top SLAC and we had weekly seminars at professors' homes and often invited at the end of the semester for a fun dinner. In graduate school, we also were invited to professors' homes in large groups for parties. These homes were in walking distance to the campuses, so it was easy to attend these gatherings.
The problem with Amy and Jed is that they were explicitly instructed NOT to socialize with students at their home bc of the sexual harassment allegations, particularly against Jed.

[Anonymous]

My spouse speaks fondly about events at professors' houses in the early 2000s at at T-14 law school.

I am now a tenured professor, and no, I do not invite students to our house! I could envision inviting my small department faculty to the house (if I had the best house for entertaining, which I'm not sure I do) but not students. No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My DH is a law prof. Totally normal and usually there is an open signup or it is a seminar/reading group. Many years we host students for Thanksgiving who can’t go home for whatever reason (our family is out of town, so why not). The school encourages mentoring strongly and there is a budget for lunches/coffee/etc. with students. How are you supposed to write a good, personal recommendation if you don’t know them at least a little? Also, it helps you connect different personalities to the right clerkships.

I think the Amy Chua situation was a problem because her husband is a creep who isn’t supposed to be around students socially.

I think there were other problems with Chua as well. I think it wasn't just that her husband is on suspension for sexual harassment, but also that she and her husband would make remarks and say gossipy, exclusionary things about students who were not necessarily in attendance. And that's really exclusionary and hurtful and, given the amount of power that Chua and Rubenfeld wielded over securing clerkships (Chua used to sit on the clerkship committee and was extremely influential over matching students with federal judges until the dean asked her to step down), extremely unfair.

I have A BUNCH of opinions about the Chua stuff. If you read the comments on her twitter, a LOT of them are obviously racist and anti-asian and a lot of people are still angry at her for the whole Tiger Mom phenomenon.

And, too, I think a lot of people are angry at her for supporting the Kavanaugh nomination and writing a supportive editorial about him in the NYT and about why he was a judge she would want her child to clerk with. There are two layers to this anger -- just anger over supporting this republication nomination when it should have gone to Merrick Garland. But also the fact that she wrote this editorial saying her daughter Sophia was supposed to clerk with him in the court of appeals and now would not be clerking with him at the SCt so clearly she was not biased -- and then Sophia doubled down and said she wouldn't be clerking for him since she was serving in the military -- and THEN Sophia actually did clerk for him at the Supreme Court. Talk about quid pro quo, lying, privilege, the works!!!

And then there is the other side about how did all this info about Chua's agreement with the Dean ever get into the hands of the Yale Daily News in the first place? Clearly the Dean shouldn't be leaking those types of agreements.

I don't understand the disconnect between what the students alleged happened at Chua's house (dinners with students and important members of the legal community) and what Chua said happened (individual meetings with individual students in crisis when her husband Jed wasn't home). Did they have dinner and wine or not? Were there other important lawyers there or not?

I also saw a tweet from Chua yesterday saying to leave her kids out of it. I understand it but I don't think that's fair given the fact that Chua used her privilege to help her oldest daughter Sophia get a clerkship with Kavanaugh -- and this year in a few months it will be Lulu's turn to apply for clerkships. These are not 16 year old kids -- they have graduated college and are in law school already, they are full adults who are making decisions to use Chua's (and until recently, Rubenfeld's) power to go into the legal field and secure clerkships etc. Sophia is on twitter retweeting Chua's tweets -- why exactly should she be kept out of it and not be expected to defend her or her mom's decisions?

On the other hand, the anti-asian comments and bias is undeniable. So it's hard to criticize but not be a part of that.

[Anonymous]

Yes, I went to events at professors’ houses both in college and law school. My dad is a professor and had an event for his grad students at our house every year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DH is a law prof. Totally normal and usually there is an open signup or it is a seminar/reading group. Many years we host students for Thanksgiving who can’t go home for whatever reason (our family is out of town, so why not). The school encourages mentoring strongly and there is a budget for lunches/coffee/etc. with students. How are you supposed to write a good, personal recommendation if you don’t know them at least a little? Also, it helps you connect different personalities to the right clerkships.

I think the Amy Chua situation was a problem because her husband is a creep who isn’t supposed to be around students socially.

I think there were other problems with Chua as well. I think it wasn't just that her husband is on suspension for sexual harassment, but also that she and her husband would make remarks and say gossipy, exclusionary things about students who were not necessarily in attendance. And that's really exclusionary and hurtful and, given the amount of power that Chua and Rubenfeld wielded over securing clerkships (Chua used to sit on the clerkship committee and was extremely influential over matching students with federal judges until the dean asked her to step down), extremely unfair.

I have A BUNCH of opinions about the Chua stuff. If you read the comments on her twitter, a LOT of them are obviously racist and anti-asian and a lot of people are still angry at her for the whole Tiger Mom phenomenon.

And, too, I think a lot of people are angry at her for supporting the Kavanaugh nomination and writing a supportive editorial about him in the NYT and about why he was a judge she would want her child to clerk with. There are two layers to this anger -- just anger over supporting this republication nomination when it should have gone to Merrick Garland. But also the fact that she wrote this editorial saying her daughter Sophia was supposed to clerk with him in the court of appeals and now would not be clerking with him at the SCt so clearly she was not biased -- and then Sophia doubled down and said she wouldn't be clerking for him since she was serving in the military -- and THEN Sophia actually did clerk for him at the Supreme Court. Talk about quid pro quo, lying, privilege, the works!!!

And then there is the other side about how did all this info about Chua's agreement with the Dean ever get into the hands of the Yale Daily News in the first place? Clearly the Dean shouldn't be leaking those types of agreements.

I don't understand the disconnect between what the students alleged happened at Chua's house (dinners with students and important members of the legal community) and what Chua said happened (individual meetings with individual students in crisis when her husband Jed wasn't home). Did they have dinner and wine or not? Were there other important lawyers there or not?

I also saw a tweet from Chua yesterday saying to leave her kids out of it. I understand it but I don't think that's fair given the fact that Chua used her privilege to help her oldest daughter Sophia get a clerkship with Kavanaugh -- and this year in a few months it will be Lulu's turn to apply for clerkships. These are not 16 year old kids -- they have graduated college and are in law school already, they are full adults who are making decisions to use Chua's (and until recently, Rubenfeld's) power to go into the legal field and secure clerkships etc. Sophia is on twitter retweeting Chua's tweets -- why exactly should she be kept out of it and not be expected to defend her or her mom's decisions?

On the other hand, the anti-asian comments and bias is undeniable. So it's hard to criticize but not be a part of that.

Poster you were responding to here—yes, you are right there is a lot to Chua that is problematic, I don’t follow her or any other law Twitter scandals so you definitely know more details than I do. She and her family have been aiming to be the Kardashians of Legal Academia for so long it isn’t funny.

But what isn’t problematic is the concept of professors having groups of students over for perfectly normal social occasions, to get to know them, to mentor them, and to help them make connections down the road. That is a good thing for students (if you aren’t a racist creep). Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. I personally would be perfectly happy entertaining students less, but it isn’t good for the students.

I think the other elephant in the room is COVID. No one has been entertaining like normal because of COVID. So that is a bit weird.

[Anonymous]

I had dinner with a group of other students at a couple of professor's houses during undergrad, but it was part of an honor society thing where they also talked about their career path in the field and it was only the professor, their spouse, and the 7 or 8 students that signed up and there was no alcohol or anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can’t imagine it now, but in the late 90s I knew of peers who would go to professors’ houses. It was usually a situation where the professor was their advisor, the sponsor for a club the students was a leader in, or a small team of students being coached for a competition.

I knew of one male prof who used to invite the hunky jocks and athletes for tutoring seasions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Undergrad in the 90's (Ivy) - I went to parties at the houses of two professors I worked for as a research assistant (they both invited all of the undergrad research assistants). And to my German professor's house (small, friendly class of eight - he and his wife made us German food). Good memories.

It's very common in STEM for graduate students - hell, I house sat for my advisor a few times. Not sure why it's a problem.

Because it creates a conflict of interest when it comes to GRADING. Gee, for Ivy graduates, a lot of you people seem pretty thick not to get why this is problematic.

Grades don't matter very much in STEM gradate programs. As long as you pass the core classes, no one cares if it's an A or B or whatever.

Research - that's what everyone cares about, not grades. And yes, research reputations and opportunities are often based on relationships. For example, if professor has grant funding available for a fabulous project, they're going to support the student (or post doc) that they work well with, since they could very well be working together for 3-5+ years, and the professor has a professional interest in the result almost as much as the student does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Undergrad in the 90's (Ivy) - I went to parties at the houses of two professors I worked for as a research assistant (they both invited all of the undergrad research assistants). And to my German professor's house (small, friendly class of eight - he and his wife made us German food). Good memories.

It's very common in STEM for graduate students - hell, I house sat for my advisor a few times. Not sure why it's a problem.

Because it creates a conflict of interest when it comes to GRADING. Gee, for Ivy graduates, a lot of you people seem pretty thick not to get why this is problematic.

Grades don't matter very much in STEM gradate programs. As long as you pass the core classes, no one cares if it's an A or B or whatever.

Research - that's what everyone cares about, not grades. And yes, research reputations and opportunities are often based on relationships. For example, if professor has grant funding available for a fabulous project, they're going to support the student (or post doc) that they work well with, since they could very well be working together for 3-5+ years, and the professor has a professional interest in the result almost as much as the student does.

I for one think this is absolutely fair too. If you were going to be working closely with someone for YEARS wouldn’t you want it to be someone you like who isn’t obviously an asshole for at least the length of a dinner party? I know I would.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Undergrad in the 90's (Ivy) - I went to parties at the houses of two professors I worked for as a research assistant (they both invited all of the undergrad research assistants). And to my German professor's house (small, friendly class of eight - he and his wife made us German food). Good memories.

It's very common in STEM for graduate students - hell, I house sat for my advisor a few times. Not sure why it's a problem.

Because it creates a conflict of interest when it comes to GRADING. Gee, for Ivy graduates, a lot of you people seem pretty thick not to get why this is problematic.

Grades don't matter very much in STEM gradate programs. As long as you pass the core classes, no one cares if it's an A or B or whatever.

Research - that's what everyone cares about, not grades. And yes, research reputations and opportunities are often based on relationships. For example, if professor has grant funding available for a fabulous project, they're going to support the student (or post doc) that they work well with, since they could very well be working together for 3-5+ years, and the professor has a professional interest in the result almost as much as the student does.

Grading was blind at my school for finals. Papers not so much.

[Anonymous]

Yes, very common.

[Anonymous]

I remember a family member at an Ivy law school inviting students to dinners. Even thanksgiving I think, to include foreign students who had no place to go.

[Anonymous]

One of my grad school profs had weekly spaghetti dinners for all the grad students in my program.

A number of my undergrad profs had dinners for students at their homes once or twice a year, but that was typically upperclassmen/seniors.

[Anonymous]

I can recall at l least twice in undergrad when this happened. Once was for a cell biology class with over 100 people. The professor was famous for his lasagna dinners and invited the entire class in groups on 20, scheduling one every other week or so throughout the semester. He was truly beloved and while a brilliant researcher also really put a lot of time and effort into his teaching and relationships with students. The amazing outpouring of support from hundreds of people whose lives he touched during a zoom retirement party was evidence. This was at a top school, so many of those people are now heads of departments at hospitals etc. it was really cool to see. Same guy let me regularly photograph his family for a documentary project on caring for family members with dementia. That was before I had him for class though (another faculty member connected us).

Second one was a small senior seminar in the humanities. Was also a really nice gesture and a professor I look back on fondly.

I hope my kids have similar experiences. Both events were non exclusive - I.e. everyone was invited. Both contributed to an environment that was really welcoming and promoted healthy, academic-minded socializing. I also participated in a program where weekly dinners with program faculty were part of the deal, though those were mostly on campus (I think one was hosted at someone’s house).

Very different from the sketchy drama prof who gave back rubs and invited me to coffee. I declined that one.

Duke in the 1990s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve read a few stories about how Amy Chua was recently suspended from the Yale law faculty for inviting students to her house for parties, and the comments have a lot of remarks about how it’s common for professors to do this.
I’m pretty shocked about this, I was certainly never invited nor knew of anyone else who socialized with their professors off campus.
My husband never heard of this happening during law school either.
How does this even work? Unless the professor, is invited ALL of their students to their home, which is highly unlikely, inviting a select few students to your house for parties, shows outrageous favoritism. How can universities possibly justify allowing professors to do this?

It's outrageous, especially these days.