<p>
</p>
<p>You could Google “phyllis schlafly outcomes based education” to see what some critics on the right dislike about OBE.</p>
<p>
I have suspected that these very possibilities might apply to certain CC posters over the years - but never to you, alh. If you are a composite, or the product of someone’s imagination, please don’t tell me. :)</p>
<p>sewhappy:
You are throwing out a lot of vague accusations and innuendo. Maybe this is coded language that others on the board understand. However, it is difficult for me to even imagine these “unassailable truths” which are being forced upon our kids. evolution? climate change? minority rights? Please tell me I’m wrong.</p>
<p>I think it is possible there is a horrible repressive young professor at Princeton teaching a straitjacket kind of course. I think it is also possible this is not true. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It seems to me that there isn’t any “right” about history. There are just different ways to interpret.</p>
<p>When my own children took freshman seminars the point never seemed to me to be to indoctrinate or teach a “right” answer. The point usually seemed to be to teach them to look at a piece of literature or historical event from a variety of points of view. I can remember a class where each student was assigned to analyze the same material using a different approach and then all gave presentations.</p>
<p>
</code></pre>
<p>[Historiography</a> - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historiography]Historiography”>Historiography - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>I don’t understand this. Mythmom can explain it better. I am pretty sure it doesn’t create close-mindedness.</p>
<p>alh, I’d be very specific about what I raised here and give details on the class readings, lecture notes, etc but there is a privacy issue at stake, as you no doubt can appreciate.</p>
<p>In broad terms, I think we have most of our universities now run by children of the Sixties who came of age rebelling against corporations, military, injustice in all its many forms from economic to race to gender. That’s all good, of course. Noble and terrific. But the adherence to that mindset that you find in places like many universities has become almost fascist in it’s dictates on what is true or fact or beautiful. It has become it’s own flavor of repression. </p>
<p>Animal Farm-esqe in a sense.</p>
<p>I’m assuming this would be an example?
[Teachers</a> No on 74 button spurs petition drive by gay parent – Olympic Peninsula Daily news](<a href=“http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/article/20121118/news/311189979/teacher-8217-s-8216-no-on-74-8217-button-spurs-petition-drive-by]Teachers”>http://www.peninsuladailynews.com/article/20121118/news/311189979/teacher-8217-s-8216-no-on-74-8217-button-spurs-petition-drive-by)</p>
<p>Can I point out that our doctors, ministers, musicians, CEOs, museum directors, mailmen, generals, and maybe even the guy stocking the shelves someplace- are all possibly those dreaded “children of the 60’s.”</p>
<p>Animal Farm works against you- the idea that any one concept is the only one worthy of adhering to. You are painting a generation in monochrome.</p>
<p>How do you get from one prof, who is supposedly insisting on his viewpoint, to generalizing, with ultimate certainty, about Fascism and repression? Are you viewing this openly?</p>
<p>Also, if D’s prof is young, he’s not a child of the 60’s- those guys are in their 60’s now. That prof, if he’s, say, 30-ish, would be a product of the Reagan era, no?</p>
<p>lookingforward: Did you read the WSJ article sewhappy linked to? #98</p>
<p>sewhappy: The article you linked to profiles someone dedicated to preserving free speech rights on campuses. Usually the free speech rights which need to be defended are those that are counter to prevailing campus culture. The fact someone is able to successfully defend these rights indicates to me free speech rights usually exist. There are political clubs of all persuasions on college campuses. There seems to me always a tension between the rights of various rather extreme groups. Isn’t that part of the educational environment we want for our children? </p>
<p>I am pretty sure if your daughter didn’t care for the seminar, she had the right to switch to some other class? Was every seminar repressive? It isn’t exactly Animal Farm imho 
or 1984</p>
<p>How do we get from this:</p>
<p>
to this:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s exactly this kind of superficial thinking and leaps of thought that I seek to avoid in my classroom, and that I call students out on. How can you go from ‘not introducing any conservative or neutral ideas’ in a single reading list at one university to the conclusion that ‘the mindset’ at ‘many universities’ has become ‘almost fascist’.</p>
<p>I vowed I wouldn’t return here, but I will just say one or two things.</p>
<p>Ah, if only our universities were being run by children of the sixties!! Ha. Many are being run by younger people who think us rusty, old dinosaurs. (No one needs to tell me this is a mixed metaphor.)</p>
<p>My D is in a graduate history program and the teacher who is her biggest headache, and is very influential, is around 30, give or take.</p>
<p>She just finished a major work of “historiography.” The point, as aptly pointed out, is to question the teller. Whose point of view are we receiving? No doubt, there is great fun to be had in eating pumpkin pie and turkey on Thanksgiving, but some period accounts suggest at the first TG colonists ate a thin, clam chowder, neither NY nor NE, just clammy, plus some other harvest vegetables.</p>
<p>Historiography would examine these accounts and draw conclusions. Some might be that the dinner was horrible. (I ate a “historically accurate” TG dinner at Plymouth Rock. Kids begged to never go back.) Another might be that it was delicious. Another might be that everyone was so hungry that it didn’t matter. Another might be that it was a political sit-down in which Europeans and Native Americans broke bread. Another might be that it was a political sit-down where Europeans and Native Americans cagily scoped each other out expecting future conflict.</p>
<p>All accounts should be examined side-by-side with an awareness of the agenda of the writer/speaker/diarist.</p>
<p>And yes, we see things through lenses. “My country right or wrong, love it or leave it” vs. “My country is an imperialist, war-mongering, evil empire,” is one paired opposition.</p>
<p>I have exaggerated both these positions, and there are many in between. Kids should be exposed to them all.</p>
<p>Bay: You and I disagree about many things. However, I do agree with you that a professor trying to influence his/her students’ votes is egregious behavior. I would never do it. I just beg my students to vote knowing full well that many of them have different political positions than mine.</p>
<p>As for us crazy hippies? Well, I was at Woodstock. I would also say that I love the US, especially New York and Long Island, my home turf. We have wanted this to be an even better place than it is, just like I never give up gently “advising” my children whom I adore. And really, as Dylan says, many times I need to give myself a good talking to.</p>
<p>Most reputable academic departments present multiple points of view. There is no hegemonic narrative.(This is a current jargon word I hate, but I include it to be up-to-date. I’d much rather say monolithic, probably another odious, jargon word from my day.)</p>
<p>And as for K - 12, on the first anniversary of 9/11 my kids were forced to go to an assembly, put on t-shirts that said, “Let’s roll,” and required to sing “Proud to be an American.” There was no Pax Christi (a Catholic peace organization) or any other peace organization represented. However, they exercised their Constitutional rights and refused to put on the t-shirt or sing the song and, much to their delight, they were kicked out of the assembly.</p>
<p>The principal called irate, but I pointed out that they were merely exercising First Amendment rights. Neither was disruptive or rude in any way; neither tried to influence any other students to not participate.</p>
<p>Whose position was most American? I think we need a historiographical analysis of that. (See winky face.)</p>
<p>These are complicated issues. There isn’t one way to be American or to educate. In our department when we teach composition (no TA’s) we often debate the question of form vs. content. Of course, both are important to an essay. Some think grammar paramount. Some think ideas are. I’ve been teaching in my department for twenty-eight years, and the same debate is still raging.</p>
<p>My point? That both positions are well represented in the department. This is true of many academic departments.</p>
<p>PS: I would rather be politically incorrect and each our “traditional” TG foods than the briny clam chowder. But this is a question each can decide for him/herself.</p>
<p>One more thing: alh I think you are absolutely awesome. I was planning to PM this to you, but I want all this world to see this. I hope you are a thirty-year-old hipster (Wiliamsburg?) and a 13-year-old and a mum and dad and are writing a novel with internet snippets. This is our very own imaginary CLOUD ATLAS, and I love the image. I hope it’s all true.</p>
<p>I also love the way you present ideas.</p>
<p>In my last post I prefaced with “In broad terms”. I’m not writing a thesis on my thoughts on these issues. I’m musing and posting about an overall sense I have with where our education establishment has been heading for awhile now.</p>
<p>alh, the fact that administrators in authority on campuses like Fordham are making statements like that quoted in the article I linked is truly troublesome. And not at all isolated. Sure, it’s good that free speech defenders can still tread into these incidents. But is it not deeply ironic that academics – those defenders of open minded thought and free discourse – would be the ones needing the call outs?</p>
<p>I don’t care deeply about this issue. My kids are navigating the waters of current academia and the workforce quite well. They are learning to keep their heads down, go with the flow. Yay! </p>
<p>Knowing my DD she will pull out an A in the seminar. She will feed this professor what he wants to digest. And I suppose that is a valuable lesson for her going forward in life.</p>
<p>Back to the topic: regarding post #109, is this the sort of solution that you have in mind?</p>
<p>[Virginia</a> New Achievement Standards Based On Race And Background](<a href=“HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost”>Virginia New Achievement Standards Based On Race And Background | HuffPost Latest News)</p>
<p>It certainly seems controversial – both supporters and detractors make good points.</p>
<p>Knowing my DD she will pull out an A in the seminar. She will feed this professor what he wants to digest. And I suppose that is a valuable lesson for her going forward in life.</p>
<p>That is certainly her choice, but I would be disappointed in either of my kids if they gave up their values so easily for pay/grades.</p>
<p>Heaven forbid, she ever had to hang on to what she believed, in the face of a real challenge.</p>
<p>Like maybe Facism.
</p>
<p><a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist_(insult[/url])”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascist_(insult)</a></p>
<p>^ Not values, really. At 19, her values are still evolving. But she is being treated to a lesson in what it is to be close minded and made to stay within the boundaries of approved thought. There is some loss of innocence in that lesson.</p>
<p>Since the point (ymmv) of freshman seminars is to open the minds of students - staying in a close minded class just seems foolish. If you honestly believe Princeton is a close minded institution, I can’t imagine why you would want your daughter to attend. Are there parents who believe getting the credential is worth losing the opportunity for an education?</p>
<p>otoh - if there are alums and parents and students who want Princeton to be more “open-minded” I’d like to think they’d be very vocal. I kind of doubt many Princeton alums are intimidated by faculty or administration.
…</p>
<p>Thanks frazzled, mythmom</p>
<p>I’d agree that fundamental values may change for many people as they get older and have more experience in life.</p>
<p>But opportunities to choose between doing the right thing and what is easiest come along as soon as children can reason.</p>
<p>If the prof actually changed her mind, then she should be honest with herself & admit it.</p>
<p>I don’t think the question of whether or not a professor can be disagreed with is a political issue. I think it’s an issue of temperament. Some people can’t bear to hear/support/nurture ideas different from their own, while others feel very comfortable with a plurality of ideas. Of course, the latter is preferable.</p>
<p>I once gave an A+ to an essay that argued that the Gulf War was a shining example of US Foreign Policy. For a college frosh, the essay was well organized and well argued. I did give myself the luxury of telling the writer I didn’t agree with him, but I saw this as a sign of respect – that his argument was worthy of serious consideration. It didn’t make me right – it was just my opinion. The student had no objections to this, and is grade showed my sincerity in telling students that learning to think and write didn’t mean parroting my positions or “giving the teacher what she wants to hear.”</p>
<p>The more I teach the less threatened I become and the better I am at listening to my students. We hippies are still learning.</p>
<p>I did balk this year when one student called a very beautiful John Donne poem “a simply atrocious poem.” I was happy for him to say it didn’t interest him or that he hated it, but I insisted that he simply didn’t have the background or credentials to make such a normative statement. This led to a discussion of evidence in writing. It did get heated on his part, but I ended up changing the subject and apologizing anyway because I want him to learn. He’s 18; I’m 60. I should be able to concede. I lied. I’m 61. </p>
<p>When they had to write an exam on any of five poems, I was quite flabbergasted to see that he had chosen the Donne poem and that he understood the subtle, spiritual points it was making about faith. He did an impressive job. He never verbally backed down from his position, but I didn’t ask him to, nor did I ask him to write about this poem.</p>
<p>Of course, it’s better when professors are flexible. When they’re not, sometimes it’s important to stand one’s ground, and sometimes it’s fine to just spout party line depending on the student’s goals. I always chose the former because I wanted to hone my skills. If a particular course is not important to a student, I see nothing wrong with going for the A if it furthers other life goals. The fault is with the professor.</p>
<p>I’m not sure how this impacts K - 12 education, however. I really think student motivation is the key there. Without national qualifying exams for college admission or an association of grades and earning potential in the minds of students, most students lack the motivation to make learning a priority. There just aren’t enough students who love learning for learning’s sake, nor do I think there will ever be. We can engage students more, though, if we tailor education to activities they enjoy and respect. Still, a basic skill set is a must for mastery of knowledge and application of knowledge, and acquiring this will always involve some tedium.</p>
<p>Perhaps fuller participation of parents in the process and parents demanding that students acquire these skills might help.</p>
<p>It’s a difficult question when culture is swiftly drifting in other directions.</p>
<p>I think all or at least most, kids start out loving learning for the sake of learning.
But the education system in many areas kills that, and tries to replace it for a love of jumping through hoops.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For students, there are various degrees of giving up on your “values” when progressing through the stages of education. Fwiw, in college, this is overwhlemingly an issue confronting the more conservative student in a mainstream colleges. Indeed, there are conservative and religious colleges where a “liberal” might feel oppressed, but common senses dictates that few liberal-minded students would select such a college in the first place. </p>
<p>On the other hand, conservative studens do NOT have such luxury as it is a given that, with rare exception, the faculty of colleges and universities will be overwhelmingly liberal and left-leaning, not to mention the occasional TAs. </p>
<p>A conservative student can, however, navigate such a landmine-covered field by picking the right battles, in addition to learning from divergent opinions and positions. In this regard, picking the right battles might very well entail to engage in “challenging” discussions for the classroom or for the student-faculty sessions, but take a different --and more subtle-- tack in papers and examinations. A combative attitude will indeed not transfer well to your academic records, and grades DO have a relative importance. Depending on the teachers, it might be wise to show how a student … saw the lights and understood the merits of the presented theories, and came around. Few teachers remain insensitive to their own success in converting the hard cases. Other might reward the student who is able to present a balanced view, which in academia translates to a slightly off-center position, but still on the … left.</p>
<p>In the end, this has really nothing to do with abandoning one’s values, but everything to do with learning how to learn from the “other side” and learn how to survive in a hostile, unbalanced, and at times poisoned and overbearing environment. </p>
<p>Given the political proportional divide in this country, it is a fact that colleges are a far departure from the “real life” but they also offer an opportunity for the students to get an early read of what will come later in life, and how to maintain your values dspite being in an obvious minority.</p>
<p>Gosh, I wish we knew what this course was. Maybe it’s all about one perspective. And those who stray, miss the point.</p>
<p>MMom, re 129, not only whose pov are we receiving, but within what context, value system, assumptions or set of wider needs, at the time it was written. TG is a great example, because we’ve only recently looked at the effects on Native Americans, added that perspective.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There are books on biases in college classrooms. Two that I have recently read are </p>
<p>“One-Party Classroom” by Horowitz and Laksin and
“The Victims’ Revolution: The Rise of Identity Studies and the Closing of the Liberal Mind” by Bawer. </p>
<p>Bawer’s book has been reviewed recently in several publications.</p>