Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Academic Bill of Rights
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 59 of 178 (215843)
06-10-2005 10:00 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by Faith
06-09-2005 8:43 PM


How do we differentiate tough professors that demand critical thinking and challenge opinions and professors who are intimidating students?
quote:
By their ridicule of and absolute refusal to give any credence to the other side of an issue.
So, a History professor who ridicules and absolutely refuses to give any credence to the "other side" of the "Holocaust issue" is "intimidating students", not "demanding critical thinking and challenging opinions"?
Is it wrong for this History professor to ridicule Holocaust denial?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by Faith, posted 06-09-2005 8:43 PM Faith has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 60 of 178 (215845)
06-10-2005 10:05 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by CanadianSteve
06-10-2005 12:27 AM


Re: It is not a call for more government
quote:
The problem is that the system does not challenge leftist beliefs, only conservative ones.
Care to show evidence of this claim?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by CanadianSteve, posted 06-10-2005 12:27 AM CanadianSteve has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 65 of 178 (215856)
06-10-2005 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Faith
06-10-2005 10:14 AM


quote:
Curriculum is not a problem. It's the noncurriculum stuff that's the problem.
Can you show me the language in the bill which protects curriculum from censorship and is restricted only to non-curricular statements?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Faith, posted 06-10-2005 10:14 AM Faith has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 67 of 178 (215860)
06-10-2005 11:05 AM


here is what the AAUP thinks about the bill
link to essay
An excerpt:
Skepticism of professional knowledge, such as that which underlies the Academic Bill of Rights, is deep and corrosive. This is well illustrated by its requirement that "academic institutions . . . maintain a posture of organizational neutrality with respect to the substantive disagreements that divide researchers on questions within . . . their fields of inquiry."7 The implications of this requirement are truly breathtaking. Academic institutions, from faculty in departments to research institutes, perform their work precisely by making judgments of quality, which necessarily require them to intervene in academic controversies. Only by making such judgments of quality can academic institutions separate serious work from mere opinion, responsible scholarship from mere polemic. Because the advancement of knowledge depends upon the capacity to make judgments of quality, the Academic Bill of Rights would prevent colleges and universities from achieving their most fundamental mission.
When carefully analyzed, therefore, the Academic Bill of Rights undermines the very academic freedom it claims to support. It threatens to impose administrative and legislative oversight on the professional judgment of faculty, to deprive professors of the authority necessary for teaching, and to prohibit academic institutions from making the decisions that are necessary for the advancement of knowledge. For these reasons Committee A strongly condemns efforts to enact the Academic Bill of Rights.

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Faith, posted 06-10-2005 11:09 AM nator has replied
 Message 107 by CanadianSteve, posted 06-10-2005 11:19 PM nator has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 73 of 178 (215866)
06-10-2005 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by Faith
06-10-2005 11:09 AM


Re: here is what the AAUP thinks about the bill
Faith, you couldn't have possibly read the entire AAUP essay explaining why they believe the ABOR is a bad idea since I only posed the link a minute ago.
Maybe, since they are university professors, they have a perspective and legitimate points regarding this bill that you haven't thought of, since you are not a university professor.
Perhaps you should read and attempt to honestly undestand that perspective before you arrogantly dismiss it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by Faith, posted 06-10-2005 11:09 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by EZscience, posted 06-10-2005 11:40 AM nator has not replied
 Message 92 by Faith, posted 06-10-2005 6:24 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 85 of 178 (215960)
06-10-2005 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by jar
06-10-2005 12:22 PM


Re: It is not a call for more government
quote:
I pointed out in another message in a thread far, far away, that the teachers that had the biggest effect on me were the ones that challenged things I believed. Quite often they drove us like cattle until we saw the light and agreed with their position only to then turn the herd around and drive us back the other way.
Indeed, the best, most persuasive and compelling arguments I have ever heard in favor of Creationism have come from writers like Dawkins and Gould as they played "devil's advocate".
It is this ability to argue from any angle, to examine ALL evidence, is what makes science so powerful.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by jar, posted 06-10-2005 12:22 PM jar has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 116 of 178 (216114)
06-11-2005 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Faith
06-10-2005 6:24 PM


Re: here is what the AAUP thinks about the bill
quote:
You are right I was in a rush and didn't take the time to read it completely and am not taking the time to read it now although I may eventually.
Then I can't see where you have any business coming down one way or the other regarding this bill if you aren't interested in learning what the university professors think about it.
quote:
But I'm sure you posted it without reading through the arguments on my side of this too.
Well, you would be wrong.
I read the entire text of the bill for myself.
quote:
The point is that all the objections that are being posted here are treated as if nobody ever thought of them before, but when they are checked out it turns out they have reasonable answers, in fact have been answered many times over. The Academic Bill of Rights has been in the works for years now and has received tons of complaints that have been answered at length by David Horowitz and Sara Dogan and other representatives of the ABOR.
Well, What about the complaints raised right here?
quote:
Without reading through the evidence on the ABOR side of this everybody here just keeps throwing up uninformed objection after objection.
Um, my link that you don't feel like reading lists some very informed objections.
Also, we keep asking you to provide evidence of your claims of widespread, pervasive intimidation of conservative students, but you have yet to do so.
A list of a few incidents, some of which are questionable, does not suffice, sorry.
quote:
I understand that the sites that have been linked have a LOT of information on them and it is hard to sort through it all. NEVERTHELESS this automatic unthinking assumption that objections would not have been considered and answered in all that material is nothing but a reflection of the anti-conservative paranoia and prejudices that the bill is designed to address.
Attempts to legislate academic thought tends to get academics rather antsy, it's true.
Please read the link I posted, and then come back and explain specifically how the American Associateon of University Professors' concerns are completely unfounded.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Faith, posted 06-10-2005 6:24 PM Faith has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 117 of 178 (216115)
06-11-2005 9:26 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by Faith
06-10-2005 7:26 PM


Re: Lovers of lies and hatred all of you
I'd just like to say that this message of yours, faith, is a prime example of what the Academic "Bill of Rights" is all about; people like you who simply cannot tolerate contrary opinion.
quote:
You are the anti-intellectual kneejerk mindless accuser of people who has no respect for anything decent, you and most others here.
Nanny nanny boo boo! Poo poo head!
quote:
Anyone who can say that it could possibly be objective fact that Bush is a war criminal has no respect for true intellect,
So, some ideas should be banned from the classroom?
You are suggesting that there are some ideas that should be off limits for discussion?
quote:
for clear thought, no respect for the majority of decent Americans who voted for him, no respect for human beings, period, no respect for truth, for reason, for reality, no mind, no heart, no human decency.
So...someone who thinks differently from you is evil.
Got it.
quote:
No respect for the American values of tolerance and giving the benefit of the doubt and treating your opponent with respect. No respect for American freedoms.
Are you planning to acutally address the question any time soon?
quote:
The Leftist propaganda juggernaut is destroying everything true and good in this country and you and most others here are just riding along on it, blindly, unthinkingly, having NO idea of the true source of its evil anti-American smear campaign, while a very few of us have the guts to look it in the face and call it what it is. It's insanity, it's lies, it's evil. Get an education in what matters.
I'd love to see you at an academic conference, frothing at the mouth and ranting as you are escorted out of the building.
LOL!
You are certainly great entertainment, Faith, that's for sure.
I have no respect for your views, but you are entertaining.
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 06-11-2005 09:32 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Faith, posted 06-10-2005 7:26 PM Faith has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 118 of 178 (216117)
06-11-2005 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by Phat
06-10-2005 7:39 PM


Re: Do something about it/ AAUP
quote:
Would you rather sacrifice American security and economic clout in the interests of human morality?
Yes, between those two, I choose morality.
I am frankly disturbed that you, a Christian, would think there is any choice at all in the matter, Phat.
However, this is a false dichotomy.
quote:
If so, you may have a good heart but you had best be prepared for the consequences.
Yeah.
Peace on earth, good will towards all people.
That would suck.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Phat, posted 06-10-2005 7:39 PM Phat has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 119 of 178 (216119)
06-11-2005 9:45 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by CanadianSteve
06-10-2005 11:35 PM


Re: There is nothing about quotas or preferential hiring
quote:
(Consider that more women enter university now than men, and they even outnumber men in Medicine and law faculties.
Is this true? Can you please show this to be the case?
quote:
What do the feminists say? Sure, but men still outnumber women in hard sciences: Wonder why they don't complain that women outnumber men in all other faculties, or in particular professions, like teaching and nursing?)
Please show your statistics that women outnumber men in faculty positions in all other professions besides the hard sciences.
Math faculty are mostly women? Engineering faculty are mostly women?
Political Science?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by CanadianSteve, posted 06-10-2005 11:35 PM CanadianSteve has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by Faith, posted 06-11-2005 11:49 AM nator has replied
 Message 123 by CanadianSteve, posted 06-11-2005 11:52 AM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 133 of 178 (216169)
06-11-2005 1:22 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Faith
06-11-2005 11:49 AM


Re: Summary response to Schraf
Replies, please.
Message #116
Message #117

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Faith, posted 06-11-2005 11:49 AM Faith has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 134 of 178 (216172)
06-11-2005 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by CanadianSteve
06-11-2005 11:52 AM


Re: There is nothing about quotas or preferential hiring
quote:
I didn't mean to say that women outnumber men in faculty positions. I meant as students.
Then maybe you should say "students" rather than "faculties".
quote:
And , just as more women get into university ebcause they get better High School marks, so faculty should be determined on merit.
Right, just like women who do the same work as men should get paid the same.
...except thay don't, do they?
quote:
And yet, affirmative action made it easier for my daughters to get into law school and med school than my sons. That was dumb. They had equal opportunity
Did they, though?
If they had been trying to get into law and med school in the 1950's, do you think it would have been just as easy?
Why or why not?
Do you think that the attitudes towards women in higher education have become completely egalitarian in a single generation?
I don't.
quote:
(and a ton of encouragement) and didn't need affirmative action, nor deserved it.
Tell that to all of the Title 9 athletes.
quote:
The same applies for faculty. There should be an objective determination process, and whoever best qualifies gets the job: Period.
I agree.
But women have been shown to be discriminated against in many areas of academia, at almost all levels.
Read a LOT of info about this and related issues, including affermative action here

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by CanadianSteve, posted 06-11-2005 11:52 AM CanadianSteve has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 140 by CanadianSteve, posted 06-11-2005 5:34 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 141 of 178 (216249)
06-11-2005 7:08 PM
Reply to: Message 140 by CanadianSteve
06-11-2005 5:34 PM


Re: There is nothing about quotas or preferential hiring
quote:
Everyone has heard about "lies, damn lies and statistics." To argue that women don't earn equally for the same work is such a statistic. The truth is next to impossible to determine, but we do know that a) women tend to feel more obligation to family and therefore leave work for periods of time, decline promotions that will take them away from their children, and so on. We also know that, regardless of what is actually true, women can form companies just like men and hire who they will.
Uh, we are talking about women in academia, are we not?
Women cannot "form a university" any more than men can.
link
Bold added by me.
Please pay particular attention to the italicized bolds where it says that women are leaving academia to persue other careers, not because of family issues.
But we still have far to go. Unlike men, women in science and math face a series of barriers in their careers. Women drop out of the sciences at almost every significant transition: after high school, after their freshman year in college, between undergraduate and graduate school and between graduate school and work. Too many women in the pipeline leave before they have the chance to prove their worth.
Women who continue on the path face the ubiquitous glass ceiling, as a 2001 report from the National Council for Research on Women, Balancing the Equation, demonstrates. In academia, discrimination and traditional academic practices inhibit women's progress to the top. While the number of women science professors continues to rise, relatively few reach leadership positions. Despite the fact that women have been earning more than one-quarter of the Ph.D.s in science for the last 30 years, fewer than 10 percent of today's full professors in the sciences are women, according to the National Academy of Sciences. In addition, the wage gap persists; figures from the National Science Foundation show that in 2001, women working in computer and mathematical science fields earned $72,500, compared to $85,000 for men.
In the sciences, a seven-year study published in the American Economic Review found that women in the United States are twice as likely as men to leave occupations related to science and engineering to pursue careers in other fields. The study is consistent with the experiences of prominent women scientists who met at Mills College in 1994 to discuss the advancement of women in science. Their report challenged all sectors of societyindustry, business, educational institutions, legislatures and government agenciesto develop strategies and practices that help, rather than hinder, girls and women from pursuing their scientific interests.
Did you even read any of the studies on the page I linked to?
quote:
In other words, there is equal opportunity. The bottom line is that justice will not be accomplished through quotas. But were it otherwise, then I guess conservatives should be demanding quotas on faculty hiring.
Was there equal opportunity in women's sports at the university level before Title 9?
quote:
You quoted me: "And yet, affirmative action made it easier for my daughters to get into law school and med school than my sons. That was dumb. They had equal opportunity."
You responded: "Did they, though?"
Obviously they did. That is why there are more women entering Law school and Medicine faculties than men these days.
Do you mean as students or as faculty?
(and anyway, you're wrong. There are still slightly more male enrolees in medical school than women as of 2003)
There are not more female medical and law school FACULTY.
That's the point, Steve. Women might be starting out in those fields as undergrads, but they are often pushed out the higher they try to climb.
quote:
Then you ask: "If they had been trying to get into law and med school in the 1950's, do you think it would have been just as easy?"
Maybe, perhaps probably, not. But what transpired 50 years ago is not relelvant to today's reality.
Dude, how do you figure it's not relevent?
The people who had these sexist, discriminatory attitudes (whiich persisted in blatant form well into the 1870's) are still in power now!
quote:
You ask: "Do you think that the attitudes towards women in higher education have become completely egalitarian in a single generation?"
Probably, given that there are more women in higher education than men.
There are NOT more women than men in positions of leadership and power in academia.
Women are greatly outnumbered in most fields, with the presence of women getting smaller and smaller the higher the degree or position.
Let's look at medical schools in the US:
Sorry, that page was not found. | AAMC
The proportion of all women faculty at the full professor rank is 11%; 30% of men are full professors. On average there are 26 women full professors per medical school, including non-tenured and basic sciences faculty, compared to 171 men at that rank.
As of 10/1/03, 10 of the 126 U.S. medical school deans are women.
Nationally 30% of faculty are women. The percent of tenured women faculty is 17%. The percent of tenured men faculty is 31%.
At those schools supplying data for division chiefs, an average of 16% of chiefs were women in 2002. Women department chairs number about 251, that is about 10% of all department chairs (an increase from 10% last year). Eighteen schools have no women chairs.
quote:
Regardless, solutions, especially to entirely subjective determinations, do not come from quotas. Were it otherwise, not only should conservatives demand quotas on faculty hiring, but men should demand that education faculties have 50% make students. Smae for nursing faculties. And arts faculties.
The thing is, can men show that arts, education, and nursing programs have consistently discriminated against men, or have men always been welcome?
Where are the masses of men reporting discriminatory practices?
This message has been edited by schrafinator, 06-11-2005 07:12 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by CanadianSteve, posted 06-11-2005 5:34 PM CanadianSteve has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by CanadianSteve, posted 06-11-2005 8:05 PM nator has replied
 Message 143 by CanadianSteve, posted 06-11-2005 8:38 PM nator has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 161 of 178 (216390)
06-12-2005 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 142 by CanadianSteve
06-11-2005 8:05 PM


Re: There is nothing about quotas or preferential hiring
Your rant had nothing to do with any of the facts I provided or the points I raised or the questions I asked.
So, try again.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by CanadianSteve, posted 06-11-2005 8:05 PM CanadianSteve has not replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 162 of 178 (216391)
06-12-2005 10:15 AM
Reply to: Message 143 by CanadianSteve
06-11-2005 8:38 PM


Re: apology for unintended sarcasm
Did female collegiate athletes have equal access before or after Title 9?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by CanadianSteve, posted 06-11-2005 8:38 PM CanadianSteve has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by CanadianSteve, posted 06-12-2005 10:26 AM nator has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024