ACADEMIC TEACHING
State-related is a technical term defined by Pennsylvania law. It includes only Pennsylvania State University, Temple University, and the University of Pittsburgh. The University of Pennsylvania is a private university which gets only a small fraction of the state money going to state-owned and state-related schools.In the two days of legislative debate on the Horowitz-inspired resolution (stopped only by a rare moving of the previous question), I was the most vociferous legislative leader in opposition to it.This pseudo-investigation has the potential to cause intimidation of many professors and to make the investigators a national laughingstock.Not a single text of a Pennsylvania complaint was released, but the Horowitz web site, Students for Academic Freedom, quotes one student as saying he or she was victimized for conservative beliefs because his or her paper was both spellchecked and proofread and therefore had to be deserving of a high grade.Concerned Pennsylvania legislators could use back-up support from state and national members of the academic community. We need to know about reality-based practices and principles to be able to win the media war against Horowitz developed theories and fantasies.We need to know about how courses materials are selected, and what the range of accepted choices are, and the extent to which this may differ from institution to institution.We need to know about drop and add practices, and the resolution of grading disputes. We need to know about the range of practices in regard to the expression of political opinions by faculty, and the use of materials that may have relevance to current political controversies in courses.We need to know what materials have produced in other states that led to better judgements by other state legislatures against having such an investigation in the first place.And we need to know anything else that experienced academics or other informed persons think is relevant to dealing with Horowitz's propoganda in a definitive and persuasive way.We would welcome the help of readers in these efforts to preserve true academic freedom in Pennsylvania and elsewhere.
July 8, 2005
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/bitchphd/112083639527355290/
*
This whole incident indicates the absurdity of attempting to measure fairness and objectivity, as a resolution in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives wants us to do in the case of what courses are taught in Pennsylvania colleges and universities and whether there is a balanced presentation of the subjects taught.
Government at any level cannot do the impossible. Fairness in materials selected is in the eye of beholder. There always are people to the left and right of whomever is selected as a spokesperson for any point of view, and there always is the question of how persuasive the selected opposition spokesperson is, as well as whether his or her views are being adaquately represented.
It has been said that the left took over English departments and the right took over governments. I am not enthusiastic about this distribution of energies, but I do not believe that any govermental harassing of any academic departments is at all justified. I am old enough to remember when an academic today often allied with the right, Eugene Genovese, was attacked by Richard Nixon as a dangerous left-wing radical.
Intellectuals often are guilty of thinking, and thinking often leads to change of views. Thinking should be encouraged, and not harassed by Mickey Mouse investigations or other means.
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:IA196nGNNsIJ:www.michaelberube.com/index.php/weblog/comments/frontpage_post_mortem/+%22mark+b+cohen%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=265
*
David Horowitz is not particularly interested in the idea that students whose feelings are hurt need governmental protection: he strongly opposed that idea in the context of the debates on political correctness and affirmative action.
What David Horowitz is interested in is using the existence of offended students as a club to any existing faculty who are not radical right wingers into silence or acquiescense in Republican hegemony. It is a sad day in America when professors have defend themselves from attack for critical social commentary by pointing out they are registered Republicans.
Academic freedom to hold any opinion backed by 100% of all students or a majority of the Pennsylvania legislature is not true academic freedom: it is a sick joke. Just as Horowitz tried to argue against affirmative action by saying it violated civil rights laws (in reality in was created by civil rights laws), so here he is arguing against the academic freedom of faculty by stating it modified by the academic freedom of the students not to have their feelings or grades hurt in any way.
This man could have been a great lawyer, but as a provider of a continuous stream of deceptive doubletalk, he is a menace to those who value honest dialogue as well as those who value academic freedom.
July 22, 2005
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:GJOeq75ArdEJ:www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/07/21/hea+%22mark+b+cohen%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=299
*
David Horowitz is not particularly interested in the idea that students whose feelings are hurt need governmental protection: he strongly opposed that idea in the context of the debates on political correctness and affirmative action.What David Horowitz is interested in is using the existence of offended students as a club to any existing faculty who are not radical right wingers into silence or acquiescense in Republican hegemony. It is a sad day in America when professors have defend themselves from attack for critical social commentary by pointing out they are registered Republicans.Academic freedom to hold any opinion backed by 100% of all students or a majority of the Pennsylvania legislature is not true academic freedom: it is a sick joke. Just as Horowitz tried to argue against affirmative action by saying it violated civil rights laws (in reality in was created by civil rights laws), so here he is arguing against the academic freedom of faculty by stating it modified by the academic freedom of the students not to have their feelings or grades hurt in any way.This man could have been a great lawyer, but as a provider of a continuous stream of deceptive doubletalk, he is a menace to those who value honest dialogue as well as those who value academic freedom.
July 22, 2005
http://repmarkbcohen.blogspot.com/2006_06_01_repmarkbcohen_archive.html
*
July 8, 2005
http://www.haloscan.com/comments/bitchphd/112083639527355290/
*
This whole incident indicates the absurdity of attempting to measure fairness and objectivity, as a resolution in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives wants us to do in the case of what courses are taught in Pennsylvania colleges and universities and whether there is a balanced presentation of the subjects taught.
Government at any level cannot do the impossible. Fairness in materials selected is in the eye of beholder. There always are people to the left and right of whomever is selected as a spokesperson for any point of view, and there always is the question of how persuasive the selected opposition spokesperson is, as well as whether his or her views are being adaquately represented.
It has been said that the left took over English departments and the right took over governments. I am not enthusiastic about this distribution of energies, but I do not believe that any govermental harassing of any academic departments is at all justified. I am old enough to remember when an academic today often allied with the right, Eugene Genovese, was attacked by Richard Nixon as a dangerous left-wing radical.
Intellectuals often are guilty of thinking, and thinking often leads to change of views. Thinking should be encouraged, and not harassed by Mickey Mouse investigations or other means.
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:IA196nGNNsIJ:www.michaelberube.com/index.php/weblog/comments/frontpage_post_mortem/+%22mark+b+cohen%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=265
*
David Horowitz is not particularly interested in the idea that students whose feelings are hurt need governmental protection: he strongly opposed that idea in the context of the debates on political correctness and affirmative action.
What David Horowitz is interested in is using the existence of offended students as a club to any existing faculty who are not radical right wingers into silence or acquiescense in Republican hegemony. It is a sad day in America when professors have defend themselves from attack for critical social commentary by pointing out they are registered Republicans.
Academic freedom to hold any opinion backed by 100% of all students or a majority of the Pennsylvania legislature is not true academic freedom: it is a sick joke. Just as Horowitz tried to argue against affirmative action by saying it violated civil rights laws (in reality in was created by civil rights laws), so here he is arguing against the academic freedom of faculty by stating it modified by the academic freedom of the students not to have their feelings or grades hurt in any way.
This man could have been a great lawyer, but as a provider of a continuous stream of deceptive doubletalk, he is a menace to those who value honest dialogue as well as those who value academic freedom.
July 22, 2005
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:GJOeq75ArdEJ:www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/07/21/hea+%22mark+b+cohen%22&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=299
*
David Horowitz is not particularly interested in the idea that students whose feelings are hurt need governmental protection: he strongly opposed that idea in the context of the debates on political correctness and affirmative action.What David Horowitz is interested in is using the existence of offended students as a club to any existing faculty who are not radical right wingers into silence or acquiescense in Republican hegemony. It is a sad day in America when professors have defend themselves from attack for critical social commentary by pointing out they are registered Republicans.Academic freedom to hold any opinion backed by 100% of all students or a majority of the Pennsylvania legislature is not true academic freedom: it is a sick joke. Just as Horowitz tried to argue against affirmative action by saying it violated civil rights laws (in reality in was created by civil rights laws), so here he is arguing against the academic freedom of faculty by stating it modified by the academic freedom of the students not to have their feelings or grades hurt in any way.This man could have been a great lawyer, but as a provider of a continuous stream of deceptive doubletalk, he is a menace to those who value honest dialogue as well as those who value academic freedom.
July 22, 2005
http://repmarkbcohen.blogspot.com/2006_06_01_repmarkbcohen_archive.html
*
posted by Comment on Pennsylvania Legislation at 11:56 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home