[partition]

I just think it's a tragedy that the prof only goes this far.

The observation in the article you paraphrased is more the realization of a student or bright child, not a fucking professor. It's sad that we let things degenerate this far in regard to CS education. Only in CS is this "let the rest fail" the conventional wisdom (conventional idiocy that is).

And yes, racial segregation of classes is something that enriches the upper class in general, and the prof is advocating this and that alone makes me hold her in contempt.

[kaitai]

1) Do note that most college professors receive no training or education in teaching. That's not what many are hired for; it's sort of peripheral to the job. It's not a CS-only problem, either.

2) The post does not advocate racial segregation, but desegregation. And as noted in the comments, interventions targeted at improving learning for women/racial minorities/veterans/distance students/etc tend to improve learning for everyone.

[iak8god]

> And yes, racial segregation of classes is something that enriches the upper class in general, and the prof is advocating this

What in the world are you talking about? This?

"...there are substantial differences in the way that various segments of the population learn ... maybe we need to use pedagogies that work better for each group."

Do you really view this as a proposal to segregate classes by race or along any other lines? The obvious intent is to change how the material is taught to accommodate these differences, not to establish separate CS courses for each group.

[partition]

What could "use pedagogies that work better for each group" possibly mean other than racial and gender segregation?

Here I'll break this down into pseudocode.

    for each group in racial_gender_groups:
        teachWithMaterialFor(group);

Hell, she even cited "genetics" and "the way the brain is wired." You can't get any more blatant than this.

[kaitai]

Even if you assume the most intellectually lazy thing here, this is not yet an argument for segregated classes. For a lazy example, I'll use height: men are on average taller than women. It does not mean we need to segregate them from each other. It means that we need to put items at a level where most people can reach them, and provide mechanisms for people who are dramatically shorter than the norm. That's nice for the ladies, but also helps short guys, people of any gender who are in wheelchairs, little people, etc. All without segregating.

In my classes I have a lot of students educated under a Chinese system and then many educated under a US system. They come with different background. I don't segregate them, but I do actively think about how their learning experiences have been different and how I can challenge all with material that doesn't needlessly advantage one over the other. Every now and then I have a German or a Cameroonian and that seems to work fine for them too.

I'm not a fan of arguments from genetics or brain wiring for teaching. It gets lazy, as noted above. But men and women do have some difference, and training your Crossfit crew for pull-ups with methods that are based on your experiences of the genders' musculatures and previous experience with pull-ups is just sensible. A lot of our CS experiences come with cultural context, rather than from brain wiring. Fine.