DealMonkey
Lifer
- Nov 25, 2001
- 13,136
- 1
- 0
Riiiiight Cad, it's quite clear what side of the aisle Horowitz sits on. Have you checked out Frontpagemag.com lately? Don't play stupid with me.
:thumbsup:Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I don't agree with you and furthermore any "cure" for this alleged problem would be far worse than the "problem" itself. Let the Universities deal with it and keep the Government out of it entirely.
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
:thumbsup:Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I don't agree with you and furthermore any "cure" for this alleged problem would be far worse than the "problem" itself. Let the Universities deal with it and keep the Government out of it entirely.
I don't see any particular problem with a professor throwing in his opinion when it's on topic UNLESS he subsequently penalizes a student for disagreeing with him.
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: digitalsm
The fact of the matter is on the vast majority of college campuses, conservative students and conservative student groups are harassed. By professors, adminstration, and fellow students.
It needs to stop.
The harrassment is in your mind.
Yep, just figments of people's imagination... :roll:
CsG
Well the original quote was that this is happening on the "vast majority of college campuses". A few examples of what I agree is bad behavior does not make it a widespread and huge problem. The fact is that most situations are dealt with just fine, and the few instances where problems come up should be dealt with on their own. I don't see the need for vague laws...do you?
No, and I don't see a need to ignore the issue, nor to try to claim it is "free speech" for a "professor" to indoctrinate kids.
CsG
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Riiiiight Cad, it's quite clear what side of the aisle Horowitz sits on. Have you checked out Frontpagemag.com lately? Don't play stupid with me.
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Here, Cad, are the very first words from your own link:Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
No, you obviously have missed the point if you think it's to "muzzle college professors". Try reading the link.
CsG
Even in Horowitz's attempt to frame the issue, he shows his bias loud and clear. It's quite clear what this legislation is designed to do.While Colorado Professor Ward Churchill declares his undying hatred for the United States to 1,000 cheering students in Boulder, in Ohio, four courageous state senators led by Larry Mumper have filed Senate Bill 24, modeled on the Academic Bill of Rights, to ensure that educational standards are restored to college campuses and diverse viewpoints flourish.
Originally posted by: BBond
Diverse viewpoints do flourish on college campuses. For example, no one is preventing the student in the OP from experssing her own opinion. Or anyone else for that matter.
If their beliefs aren't worth defending, or if they are too embarassed to express their beliefs in public that's their problem.
I thought you CONservatives were for smaller government. Now you want government in the classroom.
Ridiculous.
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: CycloWizard
:thumbsup:Originally posted by: Red Dawn
I don't agree with you and furthermore any "cure" for this alleged problem would be far worse than the "problem" itself. Let the Universities deal with it and keep the Government out of it entirely.
I don't see any particular problem with a professor throwing in his opinion when it's on topic UNLESS he subsequently penalizes a student for disagreeing with him.
I dont have a problem with professors talking about their viewpoint. Thats not what this is directed at. Its directed at profs that only accept their viewpoint, and penalize/disparge/scold/mistreat those that dont agree with that viewpoint.
I agree there shouldnt be any law to "fix" this problem. But there is a problem. Alot of people in this thread spout opening students up to "diversity", hint: its not diverse if theres only one viewpoint given.
The best profs, are ones who offer multiple viewpoints, allow for open discussion, and are not politically correct. Doesnt matter their political leanings.
Academic Bill of Rights
I. The Mission of the University.
The central purposes of a University are the pursuit of truth, the discovery of new knowledge through scholarship and research, the study and reasoned criticism of intellectual and cultural traditions, the teaching and general development of students to help them become creative individuals and productive citizens of a pluralistic democracy, and the transmission of knowledge and learning to a society at large. Free inquiry and free speech within the academic community are indispensable to the achievement of these goals. The freedom to teach and to learn depend upon the creation of appropriate conditions and opportunities on the campus as a whole as well as in the classrooms and lecture halls. These purposes reflect the values -- pluralism, diversity, opportunity, critical intelligence, openness and fairness -- that are the cornerstones of American society.
II. Academic Freedom
1. The Concept . Academic freedom and intellectual diversity are values indispensable to the American university. From its first formulation in the General Report of the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure of the American Association of University Professors, the concept of academic freedom has been premised on the idea that human knowledge is a never-ending pursuit of the truth, that there is no humanly accessible truth that is not in principle open to challenge, and that no party or intellectual faction has a monopoly on wisdom. Therefore, academic freedom is most likely to thrive in an environment of intellectual diversity that protects and fosters independence of thought and speech. In the words of the General Report, it is vital to protect ?as the first condition of progress, [a] complete and unlimited freedom to pursue inquiry and publish its results.?
Because free inquiry and its fruits are crucial to the democratic enterprise itself, academic freedom is a national value as well. In a historic 1967 decision ( Keyishian v. Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York ) the Supreme Court of the United States overturned a New York State loyalty provision for teachers with these words: ?Our Nation is deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom, [a] transcendent value to all of us and not merely to the teachers concerned.? In Sweezy v. New Hampshire, (1957) the Court observed that the ?essentiality of freedom in the community of American universities [was] almost self-evident.?
2. The Practice . Academic freedom consists in protecting the intellectual independence of professors, researchers and students in the pursuit of knowledge and the expression of ideas from interference by legislators or authorities within the institution itself. This means that no political, ideological or religious orthodoxy will be imposed on professors and researchers through the hiring or tenure or termination process, or through any other administrative means by the academic institution. Nor shall legislatures impose any such orthodoxy through their control of the university budget.
This protection includes students. From the first statement on academic freedom, it has been recognized that intellectual independence means the protection of students ? as well as faculty ? from the imposition of any orthodoxy of a political, religious or ideological nature. The 1915 General Report admonished faculty to avoid ?taking unfair advantage of the student?s immaturity by indoctrinating him with the teacher?s own opinions before the student has had an opportunity fairly to examine other opinions upon the matters in question, and before he has sufficient knowledge and ripeness of judgment to be entitled to form any definitive opinion of his own.? In 1967, the AAUP?s Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students reinforced and amplified this injunction by affirming the inseparability of ?the freedom to teach and freedom to learn.? In the words of the report, ?Students should be free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study and to reserve judgment about matters of opinion.?
Therefore, to secure the intellectual independence of faculty and students and to protect the principle of intellectual diversity, the following principles and procedures shall be observed.
These principles fully apply only to public universities and to private universities that present themselves as bound by the canons of academic freedom. Private institutions choosing to restrict academic freedom on the basis of creed have an obligation to be as explicit as is possible about the scope and nature of these restrictions.
1. All faculty shall be hired, fired, promoted and granted tenure on the basis of their competence and appropriate knowledge in the field of their expertise and, in the humanities, the social sciences, and the arts, with a view toward fostering a plurality of methodologies and perspectives. No faculty shall be hired or fired or denied promotion or tenure on the basis of his or her political or religious beliefs.
2. No faculty member will be excluded from tenure, search and hiring committees on the basis of their political or religious beliefs.
3. Students will be graded solely on the basis of their reasoned answers and appropriate knowledge of the subjects and disciplines they study, not on the basis of their political or religious beliefs.
4. Curricula and reading lists in the humanities and social sciences should reflect the uncertainty and unsettled character of all human knowledge in these areas by providing students with dissenting sources and viewpoints where appropriate. While teachers are and should be free to pursue their own findings and perspectives in presenting their views, they should consider and make their students aware of other viewpoints. Academic disciplines should welcome a diversity of approaches to unsettled questions.
5. Exposing students to the spectrum of significant scholarly viewpoints on the subjects examined in their courses is a major responsibility of faculty. Faculty will not use their courses for the purpose of political, ideological, religious or anti-religious indoctrination.
6. Selection of speakers, allocation of funds for speakers programs and other student activities will observe the principles of academic freedom and promote intellectual pluralism.
7. An environment conducive to the civil exchange of ideas being an essential component of a free university, the obstruction of invited campus speakers, destruction of campus literature or other effort to obstruct this exchange will not be tolerated.
8. Knowledge advances when individual scholars are left free to reach their own conclusions about which methods, facts, and theories have been validated by research. Academic institutions and professional societies formed to advance knowledge within an area of research, maintain the integrity of the research process, and organize the professional lives of related researchers serve as indispensable venues within which scholars circulate research findings and debate their interpretation. To perform these functions adequately, academic institutions and professional societies should maintain a posture of organizational neutrality with respect to the substantive disagreements that divide researchers on questions within, or outside, their fields of inquiry.
Originally posted by: DZip
Free speech by a college professor is one thing, retaliation against a student that disagrees is another. When I was in college (35 years ago), the liberal ideas of free love, drug experimentation, anti-war, anti-establishment, government owes me mantra was all I heard from my professors. And look where we are today. Killing unborn babies is a right, drug experimentation is "just part of growing up", having children might include marriage, college degrees mean nothing since you can buy them on the internet, evening television is unfit for family viewing, advertising appeals to the animal instincts of humans, and the best of all, someone else is responsible for our actions.
So colelge is just stupposed to be giving more facts and thats it? And trust me when ANYTHIng can be politicized. Already in my cell molecular engineering my professor has gone though countless of times saying "guys, for us it doesn't matter whether you take ideas such as evolution or other ideas like intellegent design~ for us it really doesn't matter" because a few students complained that the accompanied bio book speaks that evolution is right. Or on a lot of comments he is ALWAYS trying to sidestep issues because he didn't want it to turn into a political bloodbath. College, regardless if you are in some Upper Div Poly Sci class, or even classical mechancial physics will ALWAYS have controversy attached to it...and that is the point! We are supposed to think now. If you daughter thinks now, that is great and absolutely wonderful; that is good she disagrees with proefssors, but if she engages debate with a professor (remember these guys spend their lives studying a subjet) and the professor shows the flaws in her arguments~ well what do you expect?Today my youngest daughter is in a state college in Ohio. She is a Christian, and eager to learn about life. She complains all the time about professors trying to attack her belief in a God. The literature, history, politics, ethics classes all have a strong liberal leaning and are anti-religion. I don't have a problem with these professors having their own belief and values, but to use them as a benchmark for their students is wrong. Their job is to provide all the information needed and let the decision of politics be up to the individual student.
This county is the best country in the world. Why do we provide the enemies of our society sanctuary in our colleges and universities? I was taught in elementary school, when our biggest threat was the USSR, that communism and socialism get their foothold in the education and brainwash the people. I fear that the same threat we faced in the 50's and 60's from outside our country have finally made their way into our education system. We need to address this now. If we wait...they will come for me, and no one will be there to help.
Originally posted by: SuperTool
So if a professor is a KKK member, the university shouldn't be able to deny him promotion or tenure based on his political beliefs?
And we are going to have rightwing hacks check professor's curriculums to make sure they include "other viewpoints?"
Originally posted by: digitalsm
So where exactly is the a "christian attack" or right wing agenda?
...
Faculty will not use their courses for the purpose of political, ideological, religious or anti-religious indoctrination.
...
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: digitalsm
So where exactly is the a "christian attack" or right wing agenda?
...
Faculty will not use their courses for the purpose of political, ideological, religious or anti-religious indoctrination.
...
It's all said right there. I don't think it's a Christian attack or a right wing agenda in particular, although they seem to mainly be the people behind this, I think it allows the possibility for attack on ANY point of view some people don't agree with. The concept of avoiding indoctrination means we must define the very thin line between teaching and whatever it is we're worried about.
My problem is that this seems far too broad, it reads more like a tool to quash opinions you don't agree with than a "Bill of Rights". Perhaps someone who supports this could explain to me exactly what this will prevent (and why it won't hurt things outside of that area) without using the word indoctrination.
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: SuperTool
So if a professor is a KKK member, the university shouldn't be able to deny him promotion or tenure based on his political beliefs?
And we are going to have rightwing hacks check professor's curriculums to make sure they include "other viewpoints?"
Again I point toward the Vice President of the ACLU on this matter.
But Ill comment none the less. Your comment about the KKK, is stupid at best. And it really wouldnt be any different from a liberal prof who thinks religious people are facists, or compares people to Nazis.
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: SuperTool
So if a professor is a KKK member, the university shouldn't be able to deny him promotion or tenure based on his political beliefs?
And we are going to have rightwing hacks check professor's curriculums to make sure they include "other viewpoints?"
Again I point toward the Vice President of the ACLU on this matter.
But Ill comment none the less. Your comment about the KKK, is stupid at best. And it really wouldnt be any different from a liberal prof who thinks religious people are facists, or compares people to Nazis.
:roll:
Yes it would be very different. Thinking someone is a facist or nazi is not the same as wanting someone dead.
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: Rainsford
Originally posted by: digitalsm
So where exactly is the a "christian attack" or right wing agenda?
...
Faculty will not use their courses for the purpose of political, ideological, religious or anti-religious indoctrination.
...
It's all said right there. I don't think it's a Christian attack or a right wing agenda in particular, although they seem to mainly be the people behind this, I think it allows the possibility for attack on ANY point of view some people don't agree with. The concept of avoiding indoctrination means we must define the very thin line between teaching and whatever it is we're worried about.
My problem is that this seems far too broad, it reads more like a tool to quash opinions you don't agree with than a "Bill of Rights". Perhaps someone who supports this could explain to me exactly what this will prevent (and why it won't hurt things outside of that area) without using the word indoctrination.
Its simple, provide multiple viewpoints. AKA, provide diversity.
Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
We don't need government interfereing in education... what we DO need to do is understand why there are more liberal professors than conservative ones? How does this happen? The country, over the long haul, has seemed to be pretty balanced between liberals and conservatives, so why are there so many more liberals in academia?
THOSE are the questions we should be addressing, not trying to legislate the problem away.
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
We don't need government interfereing in education... what we DO need to do is understand why there are more liberal professors than conservative ones? How does this happen? The country, over the long haul, has seemed to be pretty balanced between liberals and conservatives, so why are there so many more liberals in academia?
THOSE are the questions we should be addressing, not trying to legislate the problem away.
It's no great mystery, it's simply the case that intelligent people are more likely to hold liberal, than conservative, opinions.
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
We don't need government interfereing in education... what we DO need to do is understand why there are more liberal professors than conservative ones? How does this happen? The country, over the long haul, has seemed to be pretty balanced between liberals and conservatives, so why are there so many more liberals in academia?
THOSE are the questions we should be addressing, not trying to legislate the problem away.
It's no great mystery, it's simply the case that intelligent people are more likely to hold liberal, than conservative, opinions.
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Originally posted by: SuperTool
So if a professor is a KKK member, the university shouldn't be able to deny him promotion or tenure based on his political beliefs?
And we are going to have rightwing hacks check professor's curriculums to make sure they include "other viewpoints?"
Again I point toward the Vice President of the ACLU on this matter.
But Ill comment none the less. Your comment about the KKK, is stupid at best. And it really wouldnt be any different from a liberal prof who thinks religious people are facists, or compares people to Nazis.
:roll:
Yes it would be very different. Thinking someone is a facist or nazi is not the same as wanting someone dead.
Hate, is hate. Its something "liberals" have failed to grasp.
I might add, alot of you self described liberals should look up the word liberal, because alot of you are way off track, and its no wonder the GOP so successfully turned "liberal" into a "bad" word that Kerry had to run away from.
Originally posted by: digitalsm
Its simple, provide multiple viewpoints. AKA, provide diversity.
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: aidanjm
Originally posted by: BlinderBomber
We don't need government interfereing in education... what we DO need to do is understand why there are more liberal professors than conservative ones? How does this happen? The country, over the long haul, has seemed to be pretty balanced between liberals and conservatives, so why are there so many more liberals in academia?
THOSE are the questions we should be addressing, not trying to legislate the problem away.
It's no great mystery, it's simply the case that intelligent people are more likely to hold liberal, than conservative, opinions.
Buahahahaha!!!! :laugh:
CsG
