LAC mistake for a conservative kid?

Parents Forum
561

<p>I think the story of the teacher with the George Bush joke is actually illuminating for this thread. That teacher is probably a liberal (but see below). And that teacher is being inappropriate and insensitive in making a joke that assumes that all of his students share his view. (Although, maybe I would make some allowances for body language and tone of voice, if he did it in a way that somehow implicitly acknowledged that he was saying something outrageous that not everybody would agree with.) </p>

<p>But is that teacher pushing a liberal agenda? Is he teaching his class that George Bush is, in fact, insane, and grading students down if they fail to “remember” that they have learned that particular fact? No way! He’s making a joke that is either too PC or not PC enough, depending on whose P we’re looking at. Or maybe it’s PC the other way . . . maybe in context it was clear that he was saying that George Bush was insane because he expanded the size of the federal government, was fiscally irresponsible, and imposed unfunded mandates on state governments. (Plenty of conservatives have big issues with the last Bush Administration.)</p>

<p>Now, when I was a student I had classes with conservative professors who WERE pushing their agenda, and that was fine with me. I don’t think they ever graded anyone down for disagreeing with them, but I’m sure they graded people down for disagreeing with them without demonstrating that they understood the teacher’s points – and that’s as it should be. But, apart from that, those classes were full of moments when the teachers teased their more-liberal students by making some sort of outrageous statement. That isn’t pushing an agenda; it’s making a joke that actually acknowledges a diversity of views by playing with it.</p>

<p>Of course, I admit that there’s a big difference here between college or graduate school and middle school. A middle school teacher ought to be much more careful, because his students are less likely to believe that he isn’t always right or serious, while college and grad students really ought to be able not to dissolve into tears because the teacher disagrees with them. My bottom line, though, is that there is absolutely nothing wrong with being a liberal (or conservative) and acknowledging it in class. What’s wrong is requiring students to parrot your views to do well, or not making certain they know that you HAVE an opinion with which others may differ,</p>

562

<p>winchester, a better conservative equivalent for “treating creationism as if it were worthy of serious scientific notice” might be “treating religion as it were not worthy of serious scholarly notice.”</p>

563

<p>emeraldkity, thanks for the levity;-)</p>

<p>mrs. weasley, thanks for the extra data, quotes, and perspective.</p>

<p>geeps, fang makes a point that i, too, often struggle with while reading your posts. to say something should be obvious, or clear, does not necessarily mean that it is–at least to us dense folk. when talking to my students i often make the mistake of assuming something is, or should be, ‘obvious’ to them, when if fact it’s only obvious to me. (at least it makes abundant sense in my head). if i were to just repeat, over and over, that it (the idea or concept) should be obvious, frustration will set in with all parties and dialogue ceases. if, on the other hand, i take the time to elaborate or explain the concept from another point of view or provide specific examples and i listen to their feedback of my explanation, we begin to develop a more ‘constructive’ dialogue. i truly understand your frustration with some of us, and you have legitimate concerns for your child while trying to find a college experience which will best suit his educational goals.</p>

<p>sounds like you have your answers, and that’s cool. . .best wishes as he navigates high school and beyond;-)</p>

<p>did anyone read the NYT’s article yesterday—‘in climate debate, exaggeration is a pitfall’? it was in the science section and addressed this issue of how something is communicated. one can hurt one’s case or help one’s case depending on how it is presented.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/science/earth/25hype.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=al%20gore&st=cse[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/science/earth/25hype.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=al%20gore&st=cse&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

564

<p>Interesting. Gore removed the controversial slide from his presentation after the Belgian group he cited said he misrepresented their conclusions. George Will, and the Washington Post, refuse to admit error even after the Arctic Climate Research Center Will cited said their results were exactly the opposite of what he said they were.</p>

565

<p>jeep,
If your son is looking for the bigger university experience and is willing to go out of NE, he might consider Brigham Young (30,000 kids), Liberty (11,000) or Azuza Pacific (5000).</p>

566

<p>Also consider Harding in Arkansas (6100 kids). They have a private enterprise program which might interest your son.</p>

567

<p>I suggest your son applying to some liberal schools because that’s where they can engage them. If he applies to schools like Hillsdale (a great school nonetheless), he would only open one more spot at Harvard for a liberal.</p>

568

<p>The OP didn’t make it clear what level of selectivity he thought he’d be looking for, and as his son is only a freshman it’s hard to know anyway, but Liberty is well below the academic selectivity normally considered here on CC. Looking over the website, I get the impression that a student with the right religious qualifications will be accepted if he has an SAT of 800 (M+V) or better and GPA of a 2.0 or better.</p>

569

<p>If you don’t want your teachers to ever mention, as fact, something you consider a “liberal opinion”, I don’t think there are any schools out there that are appropriate. And the same would be true if you wanted to avoid teacher ever mentioning, as fact, a “conservative opinion.”</p>

<p>I’m working towards a science degree and I have teachers who believe in global warming and those who don’t. Both the pro- and anti-GW teachers couch their beliefs as facts–and why not? They believe they are facts. They don’t have to add a little disclaimer at the end saying, “By the way! There are some people out there who disagree with my opinion! You may form your own opinion, which may be different from mine!” Well, no duh. Anyone not smart enough to realize that should not be in college.</p>

570

<p>By the way! There are some people out there who disagree with my opinion!</p>

<p>O. M. G. !

  • ded*
    :p</p>
571

<p>Yep, Liberty, I believe, is ranked as one of the least selective colleges in the nation. I think their acceptance rate is above 90%.</p>

<p>Nevertheless, the OP’s son could get an excellent education there if he stuck with majors in government, business, english, biblical studies. If he chooses to major in biology, then that’s a problem!! </p>

<p>And I do know some bright homeschooled (perfect SATs) kids who go there. These kids think the behavoir code is a pita, but they absolutely love the faculty. The professors are deeply committed to the kids. </p>

<p>These kids aren’t seeking alternate truths (anymore than my son is seeking to be dissuaded from his atheism). They feel, through their faith, that they have found the truth already. They want to live a Christ-centered life in college and Liberty allows them to do it.</p>

572

<p>I said this in Post #551.
My daughter came home from high school the other day with a great example. Her teacher was trying to describe an concept by using an example. The concept he was trying to communicate was the idea that something, or someone, could be so totally off the wall crazy that nobody in their right mind would ever think of it/him/her as being in the realm of rational behavior. He pondered for a moment, searching for the example he needed, and then light dawned, “Of Course! George Bush! (V8 moment) Nobody in their right mind thinks that guy is sane!” The kids in the class nod knowingly. “Oh, we get it now.”</p>

<p>JHS said this in Post #561.
“I think the story of the teacher with the George Bush joke is actually illuminating for this thread.”</p>

<p>The thing is, it wasn’t a joke. The teacher was using “crazy” and “sane” as euphemisms, to be sure. He didn’t mean clinically insane in true medical terms. He was exaggerating to make a point. But otherwise he absolutely was serious. My daughter has been in his class all year. His political views were evident to her from the very beginning of the school year. She knows his “body language and tone of voice.” She can tell when he’s joking and when he’s not. He wasn’t joking.</p>

<p>That said, he’s a good teacher. The course is English Literature. My daughter will have a better appreciation of literature and will be a better analyst of it by the end of the year.
Additionally, my daughter is old enough and smart enough and broad minded enough to put the politics aside - actually, she’s kind of amused by it - and listen for his larger point. </p>

<p>Is he a perfect teacher? No. Far too often he uses politics to illustrate his points. [NOTE: * Of course * there are stories in literature, or parts of stories, for which, in the process of analyzing, political topics are a natural part of the discussion. I’m not talking about that.] Rather, politics seems to be this teacher’s comfort zone. It’s his path of least resistance when he’s searching for a way to illustrate a point. And when he does use politics in this way, it seems to always be at the expense of conservatism. But I’ve never heard that the class veers off of the main topic of analysis of literature into a free wheeling discussion of politics. He seems to be fair in his grading – it’s always about the literary topic, or the students’ analytical abilities. I haven’t really looked that closely, but as far as I know the novels and plays he uses in the class are what most would agree to be “classics,” and quite appropriate for such a course. </p>

<p>On a scale of 1 to 10 I’d give this teacher a 7.5 or 8. If he were truly politically neutral I’d give him a 9.5 or 10. Within his academic element, he really does seem to be that good. </p>

<p>But believe you me, if I perceived the political thing to be a large enough issue either the teacher, the department head, the principal, or the school board, as appropriate, would be hearing from me about it. As it is, my thought is to give him and possibly his department head a friendly “talking to” at the end of the school year.</p>

<p>But he definitely was not joking. Not at all.</p>

573

<p>Winchester, you just described a joke. The teacher used obvious irony – not only is it not true that “no one in his right mind thinks that guy is sane”, reality is that no one in his right mind thinks he is not sane, however stupid or misguided they believe him to be – as well as hyperbole – playing off his own reputation for liberalism and dislike of Bush by suggesting that he thinks so little of Bush that Bush must be crazy. The joke doesn’t work unless it’s clear that everyone knows the teacher’s views are a little extreme. Essentially, he’s making fun of Bush, but also making fun of himself for being irrational about Bush’s rationality. That’s a joke.</p>

<p>Now, I won’t argue that this isn’t pushing a liberal agenda to some extent. He’s implicitly saying that cool people think little of Bush, and that it’s socially acceptable to make fun of Bush. But he’s not teaching his students that Bush is crazy as a factual matter, or even wrong as a factual matter. Moreover, by using hyperbole he’s tipping students off that his own views on this topic may be idiosyncratic or extreme, which gives them permission to discount those views.</p>

<p>I could see a conservative teacher doing exactly the same thing with Bill Clinton, or Al Sharpton. I wouldn’t get my panties in a twist over it at all.</p>

<p>Actually, I prefer it when teachers make their biases clear. That way, students can deal with them as biases. The real problems come when teachers incorporate their agendas into their teaching – which everyone does, and which is not realistic to avoid – but don’t make clear that they are doing that. (You know, like saying we have to invade Iraq because they have weapons of mass destruction, and not mentioning your personal family vendetta or your desire to have U.S. troops stationed in the oil fields.)</p>

574

<p>I believe you winchester- I am a " progressive" and I would agree that it gets old when one " side" demonizes the other, or when issues are painted as black/white.</p>

<p>I also agree with JHS- you have to know where they are getting their background.
It is essential to understand the context and be able to put comments in perspective.
I also think it is really old when people exaggerate to make a point, how then are we supposed to know when they aren’t?
There are so many * true* things that seem far fetched, that I don’t think it is really necessary to indulge in hyperbole.
It’s like the boy who cried wolf.</p>

<p>I blame talk radio</p>

575

<p>JHS, you said:</p>

<p>Winchester, you just described a joke. The teacher used obvious irony – not only is it not true that “no one in his right mind thinks that guy is sane”, reality is that no one in his right mind thinks he is not sane, however stupid or misguided they believe him to be – as well as hyperbole – playing off his own reputation for liberalism and dislike of Bush by suggesting that he thinks so little of Bush that Bush must be crazy. The joke doesn’t work unless it’s clear that everyone knows the teacher’s views are a little extreme. Essentially, he’s making fun of Bush, but also making fun of himself for being irrational about Bush’s rationality. That’s a joke.</p>

<p>As Ronald Reagan famously said, “There you go again.”</p>

<p>I told you, in fact, what happened. The teacher was not joking. </p>

<p>It’s not a matter of interpretation. It’s not a matter of definition. It’s not subject to your revisionist history style of rationalization.</p>

<p>Next we’ll be talking about what the definition of the word “is” is.</p>

576

<p>JHS, you said:</p>

<p>Winchester, you just described a joke. The teacher used obvious irony – not only is it not true that “no one in his right mind thinks that guy is sane”, reality is that no one in his right mind thinks he is not sane, however stupid or misguided they believe him to be – as well as hyperbole – playing off his own reputation for liberalism and dislike of Bush by suggesting that he thinks so little of Bush that Bush must be crazy. The joke doesn’t work unless it’s clear that everyone knows the teacher’s views are a little extreme. Essentially, he’s making fun of Bush, but also making fun of himself for being irrational about Bush’s rationality. That’s a joke.</p>

<p>As Ronald Reagan famously said, “There you go again.”</p>

<p>I told you, in fact, what happened. The teacher was not joking. </p>

<p>It’s not a matter of interpretation. It’s not a matter of definition. It’s not subject to your revisionist history style of rationalization.</p>

<p>Next we’ll be talking about what the definition of the word “is” is.</p>

577

<p>I <em>KNOW</em> I did not double-post, or say the same thing twice in the same post.</p>

<p>***, over?</p>

578

<p>*** = double you, tea, eff.</p>

<p>;-)</p>

579

<p>I didn’t make it say ***. It automatically did that. I actually typed the letters. Thus the “translated” post.</p>

580

<p>winchester,
What grade does this teacher teach?</p>