<p>Hunt, If a student said to me, “This person shared with me that they are in the NRA in a way that made me feel very uncomfortable”, I’d pass that on. If the student said, “I fear members of the NRA, this person is an NRA member and so I’m uncomfortable”, we’d have a different situation. But as I said, I am going to err on the side of caution every time. I am not an expert in security or psychology. That’s someone elses job for a reason.</p>
<p>Idmom06, Until proven otherwise, I go on the assumption that the teacher acted in good faith. Nor do I think it’s appropriate for a teacher to have to defend their actions when their superior and the campus police thought her credible.</p>
<p>This topic was nagging at me and I finally realized why. Not only do I expect my son’s professors to exercise caution if he feels unsafe, if my son’s behavior is making someone feel unsafe, then I hope that that would be reported.</p>
<p>My kid is a compassionate, kind soul with good social skills. However, that does not insulate him from the things that can go wrong in the late teens, early 20s. We won’t be living with him, seeing him everyday. If his behavior changes for the worse, I hope that someone will take note and pass it on to an authority figure. I’d rather a false alarm than people who are well-meaning or unqualified to make the call decide he’s fine.</p>
<p>This topic was nagging at me and I finally realized why. Not only do I expect my son’s professors to exercise caution if he feels unsafe, if my son’s behavior is making someone feel unsafe, then I hope that that would be reported.</p>
<p>My kid is a compassionate, kind soul with good social skills. However, that does not insulate him from the things that can go wrong in the late teens, early 20s. We won’t be living with him, seeing him everyday. If his behavior changes for the worse, I hope that someone will take note and pass it on to an authority figure. I’d rather a false alarm than people who are well-meaning or unqualified to make the call decide he’s fine when he is not.</p>
<p>Just picking a couple of sentences, pretty much randomly:</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Well actually she didn’t imply a conversation, there’s no evidence that she hasn’t elaborated more, and she most probably can’t tell anyone (excepting authorities) anymore about the conversations. Besides, what could the professor POSSIBLY say that would make this controversy go away?</p>
<p>Time to move this thread to the Politics sub-Cafe?</p>
<p>NewHope - she stated the presentation made her students uncomfortable. Unless she is the Amazing Kreskin, students had to have said something to her…or else she is not being truthful… the aforementioned ‘mouse in her pocket’ being appropriate here.</p>
<p>No need to move the thread. I think there isn’t much more to say.</p>
<p>There are those who question authority and those who do not…and there are those who are pretty loosey-goosey on their principles when it comes to authority depending on their political ideology… and I find often all these groups do is annoy the cr*p out of each other. But, not everyone in authority possesses good judgment, nor are they competent. I believe that was the general gripe here at CC about George Bush. Ironic that those same people will now express complete deference to, and confidence in, a President who has now tanked the DOW to unbelievable lows.</p>
<p>Oh good grief. There is rebel with a cause and then there is rebel without a brain. Not passing on a student’s concerns fall into the second group. Passing on the concerns is not the same as beliving that those in authority are always competent. And not taking this seriously because people bashed GWB? Just ridiculous.</p>
<p>Wait, I forgot, this professor is just a hater of the 2nd Amendment who has been lying in wait to report one of her students. No doubt rubbing her hands together and saying “Bwahahaha!” on her way over.</p>
<p>God I hope that none of my kids professors, or any professor, even decides to ignore something so they can prove they “question authority.”</p>
<p>I agree Hunt. (And I really can’t believe we agree on something. ;)) </p>
<p>What was it Chris Matthews said yesterday about GWB? That he wasn’t [intellectually] “curious”? Ideology shouldn’t even enter into the equation when we are talking about our liberties. We SHOULD be curious, ask questions…and scrutinize actions. (and now… the notion of moving the US Census under control of the White House and Rahm Emanuel comes to mind. Imagine if we were talking Karl Rove?)</p>
<p>I think if the prof wanted to restrict free speech and was opposed the the material presented, she’d have cut off the presentation before it was over. Or she’d have not allowed the topic at all to begin with.</p>
<p>Moreover, if it was about the topic per se, she’d have countered with arguments and/or asked challenging questions of the presenters to put them on the spot (or encourage the class to counter the arguments). Nothing wrong with the latter in an academic setting, but why didn’t she if this was only about the topic? </p>
<p>Given the student in question doesn’t mention any of this (which would be in his interest to do so, to show the professor’s bias and opposition to the topic), I doubt it happened. This leads me to believe it was about her concerns about this particular student that arose during the presentation, not the topic per se he chose to present on. It was not about his freedom of speech- which clearly he had the full opportunity present- it was about looking into a student who might pose a threat.</p>
<p>jhs; sorry you aren’t able to read or understand what I wrote. I specifically said we don’t know the whole story. As such, the next sentence “implies” that IF the current story, as we understand it, is true; then the teacher needs to be canned. There’s no jumping to conclusion here. What I wrote is accurate to what I meant.</p>
<p>It just shows that universities need to have in place better procedures to handle such incidences. In this case, the person who filed the complaint should not have been revealed to the student. The professor appears to have followed a correct procedure by consulting with the departmental Chair as well as the Dean so that other responsible persons are made aware of an incidence in the class room. The campus police should have stated simply that a safety complaint had been filed. To name the professor introduces added pressure on the student that is irrelevant to the investigation.</p>
<p>I know this isn’t a court case or anything, but I still believe in being able to confront your acuser. Maybe not face to face, but this entire situation should/could have been handled in the classroom. Apparently it wasn’t so bad that the teacher stopped the presentation. The complaint by the other student was an after the fact complaint. That tells me that the professor and the majority of others didn’t “Feel Uncomfortable”. At least not to the same degree. Therefor, the professor should have brought it up in class for discussion.</p>
<p>The student has not been accused and should not be accused unless he/she made a direct threat. If a direct threat were made, then the standard procedure would be to place the student on a leave of absence and under psychiatric care immediately prior to any investigation. </p>
<p>If rules on public safety are clearly delineated to students, then this incident would not have generated controversy. What I tried to say in my previous post is that public safety rules at universities need to be better communicated to students; in some places, procedures need to be better developed. To me, such procedures are as important as those dealing with academic issues such as plagiarism.</p>
<p>This fails the reality test. You are proposing that unless something is so threatening that the presentation must be stopped, then it could not be a valid concern. Of course the students reported it “after the fact.” In real life, people do not stand up in a group, point to the person they feel scared of and then the group talks about it, including the person they have been made uncomfortable by. </p>
<p>Once again, the idea that only a direct threat is valid is absurd. That’s not even the burden for a restraining order but it should be the burden to report a something to campus police?</p>
<p>padad, I had the same concern. This was not a trial or even a disciplinary board. It was a teacher following guidelines. Reporting concerns to the proper authorities is annoymous, this should be too.</p>
<p>No person is going to be ‘uncomfortable’ with arguments about carrying weapons, gun laws, or anything like that. Angry or frustrated, maybe. Disagreeing, yes. But uncomfortable? Sure some people are squeamish about politically incorrect topics such as incest, but guns?? In THIS culture? So much so you are afraid to have a debate in class on the ISSUE? I don’t buy it for a minute. </p>
<p>If she stopped the discussion, THAT would have been restriction of free speech. Not to mention, completely unprofessional because to call out a student in a public forum about her beliefs about him being a threat would have been entirely inappropriate (debating the TOPIC is an entirely different matter and completely legitimate to do). </p>
<p>She did not. She let him make his case, and privately (the other students would be unaware of this) went to those that could investigate him, not because he takes a particular stance on guns, but because of what he probably SAID that reflected something about HIM. </p>
<p>This simply doesn’t make sense that its about “the topic” and it has everything to do with what this young man was saying that conveyed that HE personally was a potential threat.</p>