I'm going to debate a Repuke about this bill on local radio

It's going to be this Monday morning on San Diego's KPBS radio station from 9:30 am -10 am

Here's the link to the bill:

http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0001-0050/sb_5_bill_20041206_introduced.html

I'm thinking of calling them on the alleged "liberal" slant in the state college system by demanding that they prove it and not move from that position as long as I can, since that seems to be what is being addressed in this bill. Any thoughts on it?

Andra I think)

"teachers should not take unfair advantage of a student's immaturity by indoctrinating him or her with the teacher's own opinions"

Post-secondary school students are, by and large, at or over the age of 18. They are recognized by the law as adults; they have the right to vote; they have ability to join, or be drafted into, the armed forces. Why do proponents of this legislation assume that these students are "immature".?

"Students shall 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"

Please provide specific instances in which student's grades were affected based on their political or religioius beliefes. How do you propose to determine that such bias has occurred in order to implement this law in the future?

She's currently Department Chair of Computer Science at a state community college and she said that teachers can't do that, they have to follow the guidelines in their syllabus, and all syllabuses (sp?) and cirriculum have to be approved by the department before semester begins anyway. In her words, "the syllabus is their bible" and if they deviate from that then they can get in serious trouble.

Most Universities already have policies in place for prevntion and grievance processes fro students.

Q you should ask: I thought Conservatives opposed redundant Govt funtions? Since public universities already have a system for students to express grievance and obtain relief for "injury" why do you want to duplicate those sytems?

1) "Please provide a legal definition for indoctrination?" To the best of my knowledge there is no working test for the term, nor could there be.

2) "Why do you hate the Fisrt Amendment?" Facetious on my part, but is a question I would love to ask these totalitarians.

Also look for responses to the "Academic Bill of rights" by scholar Todd Gitlin & Stanley Fish. They can provide some material to work with.

And wear your best suit and a power tie. Money green is a good color for radio audiences in San Diego.

;)

I might try to counter that "1) it doesn't matter if the bias is liberal or conversative. I happen to believe that the bias is liberal, but this bill will protect the student regardless; and 2) the bill is designed to protect students in the future. If no bias is occuring, no harm will be done, but if it is, the student will receive the protection he/she deserves."

I don't actually believe any of that, but that's what I'd expect the counter to be.

If I were a student, I would find the language of the bill offensive, as it speaks of college students like they are first-graders. I think I would argue that, and/or the impossibility of enforcing the bill objectively in a way that doesn't stiffle free inquiry.

"The Legislature further declares that intellectual
independence means the protection of students from the imposition of
any orthodoxy of a political, religious, or ideological nature. "

from Section 1 66015.8 (a)(1)(D) of the bill
SB 5, as introduced, Morrow. Public postsecondary education
standard: Student Bill of Rights.

For California's state legislature to DICTATE what intellectual independence is negates the meaning of freedom right out of the chute. This self-negating wording -- conservatives hoping to impose their own 'orthodoxy' in academia -- is as bad as the McCarthyist tactic of claiming that there is indeed a 'liberal orthodoxy' worthy of protecting students from !

California's legislature shouldn't be forced to 'drink the Kool-Aid' that these rightwingnuts are serving up. I'm KICKING this to the 'greatest page' since academic freedom comes from free minds.

The bill assumes that students are immature: "teachers should
not take unfair advantage of a student's immaturity by indoctrinating
him or her with the teacher's own opinions..." and are incapable of rendering independent thought by the time they've reached community college level !

This bill is the very definition of what any conservative worth his/her stripes would call 'The Nanny State' !

Let's hope these helpless students are out of their intellectual diapers before they've reached the age of 18 and can, God forbid, vote and make decisions for themselves....

I had a few professors with strong beliefs different from mine. A couple of them did cross the line and put some of their beliefs on the test.

But I always knew I wasn't tested on my agreement. I was tested on my knowledge and reasoning.

So I learned the professor's position inside and out. I learned exactly what concepts provided the foundation, and I learned (in the library) what the strongest criticisms were.


On the test, I demonstrated how much I knew of the professor's beliefs and got an A.





After taking the class, I was in top form to debate anybody on the subject.






There's a big difference between knowing somebody's opinion and agreeing with that opinion.

Heck, most Freepers know next to nothing of my opinion. All they know is that they disagree with it.

The intro to 1.D, in addition to that stupid reference to the immaturity of adult students, says "Teachers should not" be "indoctrinating (students) with the teacher's own opinions."

This completely contradicts a following paragraph which states "teachers are and should be free to
pursue their own findings and perspectives in presenting their views". I say scratch the earlier sentence that calls adults "children" and says teachers shouldn't teach.

Other than that I don't see a problem with this. It sounds like the Fairness Doctrine that used to apply to the media. I think someone should offer an amendment to this proposed bill stating that this should apply to talk radio stations, televised broadcast news programs, and cable news outlets as well as to the universities.

And could give conservatives grounds to force out teachers that are too "liberal".

depending on who's definitions you are using, you've got.....a license to conduct witch-hunts !

teachers could end up 'hoisted upon their own petard'.

equal treatment of obviously worthless views ? Would physics teachers have to give equal time to 'flat earth' doctrine holders just to placate them ?

This bill panders to irrationality and disguises it as legitimate discourse. Reason enough to ignore the bill IMHO.

The bill says that "Curricula and reading lists in the humanities and socialsciences shall respect the uncertainty and unsettled character of all human knowledge in these areas, and provide students with dissenting sources and viewpoints.

So nothing in hisotry (a social science) is certain and thus dissenting viewpoints must be taught. And what about religious history (another social science) -- do teachers have to teach the view that Jesus was African American? That Mary and Jesus were married? That Jews drink Christians blood? If nothing is certain...

Also, the first provision: "Students shall 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." So if you're teaching a biology class and there is a question asking the student to describe evolutionary theory and he answers by saying it started with Adam and his rib, if you flunk him do you get sued?

Call Bullshit on 'em.

onenote

by Bush relatives George Herbert Walker and Prescott Bush, who tried to overthrow FDR be required learning in all California schools !

The book "The Plot to Overthrow the White House" by Jules Archer needs to be put back into circulation along with the movie "The Plot to Overthrow FDR (Smedley D. Butler)"

www.ihffilm.com/r547.html

which details how former 2 time CMOH winner USMC Gen Smedley D. Butler blew the whistle on this attempted coup d'etat against FDR. Very few schools even mention this event, and Archer's book is so hard to find it goes for around $300 !

Yes, let's make our kids more aware of the hidden history that's being kept from them. BTW, the Bonus Army's efforts in 1932 paved the way for the exceedingly successful GI Bill after WWII, which ended up paying back over $7 for every dollar spent on the bill (according to a Congressional study).

A lot of these responses have good points, I'll have to bring them up with whoever I deal with.

The force behind this "bill" is not students, it is well-funded conservative activist David Horowitz. He's recently been exposed trumpeting false stories of "persecutuion"

Ask, "if this really is such an endemic problem, why do you have to make up stories to support your cause?"

http://mediamatters.org/items/200503160001

Those part of the Liberal Arts degree?

English?
Math?
Science?
History?
Speech?
Business?
Music?

What is liberal about specific classes?

Are English classes liberal if it doesn't mention religion as favorable?
Are Music classes liberal if it is not Christian music?
Are Speech classes liberal if it is not to learn how to do a sermon?
Are Science classes liberal if faith healing is not taught?

for example. Even more recently the 'banned' music list immediately after 9-11 and the blowback on the Dixie Chicks...

McCarthyism comes mainly from the RIGHT wing, not the left.