next »

[Anonymous]

"The schism has caused people like the activist David Horowitz to call on universities to hire more Republican faculty members and be more tolerant of conservative students."

I'm interested in Horowitz's response here - is he suggesting affirmative action for Republicans?

[AET]

I certainly hope that Darwin takes care of them because there are people who are not fit to teach.  One thing that seems clear to me is that most people on this forum have not taught K-12 (I've taught high school biology), or do not have children, (19, 18, 12), are not a member of a minority group (African American woman).  I am also currently a prof of ed leadership.  With all of that said, if there is any doubt whatsoever of the need of individuals with certain dispositions in teaching, sit in a high school teacher's lounge for a week.  Better yet, go to a lounge in a high poverty, high minority school.  You will find many teachers claiming these students have no abilities, no chance of making it and they don't see themselves as part of the problem or solution.  Indeed they are.  Teachers have to be able to see all children as having potential. They have to see beyond kids' circumstances and maintain high expectations.  They have to remove the excuses that students give for themselves and that teachers give to themselves. Many teachers tell students they will never become anything because they are "failing" science as a freshman in high school.  ( I have had teachers tell my African American son some similar types of things and it thoroughly angers me.  He's now a freshman in college.) While I agree that we cannot measure "disposition" and that we should not even try, I in no way believe that just because someone is an "expert" in biology that they makes them somehow suitable to teach and reach children.  Teachers have to do both.  In this demographically changing society with a growing gap between rich and poor, the mostly white teaching corps will have to have the "disposition" to REACH and TEACH a mostly minority student body.

[AET]

I certainly hope that Darwin takes care of them because there are people who are not fit to teach.  One thing that seems clear to me is that most people on this forum have not taught K-12 (I've taught high school biology), or do not have children, (19, 18, 12), are not a member of a minority group (African American woman).  I am also currently a prof of ed leadership.  With all of that said, if there is any doubt whatsoever of the need of individuals with certain dispositions in teaching, sit in a high school teacher's lounge for a week.  Better yet, go to a lounge in a high poverty, high minority school.  You will find many teachers claiming these students have no abilities, no chance of making it and they don't see themselves as part of the problem or solution.  Indeed they are.  Teachers have to be able to see all children as having potential. They have to see beyond kids' circumstances and maintain high expectations.  They have to remove the excuses that students give for themselves and that teachers give to themselves. Many teachers tell students they will never become anything because they are "failing" science as a freshman in high school.  ( I have had teachers tell my African American son some similar types of things and it thoroughly angers me.  He's now a freshman in college.) While I agree that we cannot measure "disposition" and that we should not even try, I in no way believe that just because someone is an "expert" in biology that they makes them somehow suitable to teach and reach children.  Teachers have to do both.  In this demographically changing society with a growing gap between rich and poor, the mostly white teaching corps will have to have the "disposition" to REACH and TEACH a mostly minority student body.

[%sig%]

[Chicken Little]

It is not only students who suffer under the liberal fascism prevalent in our college. Faculty now live under the threat of being outed as a conservative, being shunned and insulted. I was asked outright at a pre-semester "softball party"  whenther I was a Republican or a Democrat. When I declined to state, I was immediately on the list of poeple to avoid, and have been out of the loop ever since. By that I mean, for example, the coordinator making my next semster's schedule without talking to me and assigning me a class without telling me so I could get my book order in on time. A conservative that shares my cubicle space was told that he would not make tenure. Period. "Disposition" is a code word form systematically excluding anyone who does not tow the (aging) Boomer ideological right-think.

[Worried about the Future]

This is the study that came to mind when posting earlier:



http://www.goacta.org/press/Press%20Releases/11-30-04PR.htm

[John]

Of course I can't speak for Horowitz nor can I read his mind, but my guess is that his intention is not to suggest "affirmative action for Republicans", but to open up the closed shops that the left now enjoys in academia.

[%sig%]

[Mike]

I guess I've been living in some sort of delusional state for most of my life. I have been a student in, an employee of, or both at five different universities (public research, private research, comprehensive) for 34 of the past 35 years. I've taught, I've worked in student affairs, and I've been an administrator. The oppressive, unethical gulag of wimpy leftist pseudointellectuals that so many describe here bears no resemblance to anywhere I've ever worked. I've seen my share of bizarre left wingers and bizarre right wingers, but by far the majority of my academic colleagues have been pretty much mainstream: moderate conservatives and moderate liberals. Of course, this all assumes that the terms "liberal" and "conservative" still have meaning, which is a dubious proposition at best (e.g., how did Republicans come to be the party of "borrow and spend" and Democrats the advocates of fiscal responsibilty?).

Extemists of all types demonstrate a consistent pattern of lying and distorting in order to support their positions, primarily because extremist positions are almost never correct. Liberals have known for at least a generation that most significant segments of American society are dominated by conservatives: corporations, the military, the media, churches, government. Yet self-described conservatives continue to whine about leftist oppression in higher education.

Henry Kissinger was right.

[C, Sociology Professor]

College should be a place where students critically examine what they believe and why they believe it.  This goes for the so-called liberals and the so-called conservatives.  My sense as a college professor is that the overwhelming majority of my students do now know what they believe; they're still trying to figure things out.  

I teach sociology, not education, but I try to make my classroom a place where students from all kinds of viewpoints can be heard so long as (1) their opinions are not mere gut-reactions and are rather arguments that can be backed up with evidence and some kind of logic, and (2) that they do not openly insult and act with hostility toward others.  For example, it would be perfectly fine for someone to say, "I believe gay marriage would threaten the traditional family," an argument that can be examined, critically evaluated, and judged based on its factual merits.  It is not acceptable for a student to say "I think ***s are ruining our country," a gut-level reaction that does open itself up to critical examination but rather simply serves to intimidate and silence others (and to protect the person who articulates it by confusing the line between opinion and jingoism).  

Usually this works just fine as a rule-system.  It allows students to think about what they believe and why they believe it, and a lot of people end up changing their minds, including me sometimes.

All this said, the so-called argument that college campuses are "slanted" in the liberal direction is hog-wash.  So-called conservatives do not even know, usually, what the term "conservative" means.  A real conservative is someone who advocates using the past as a direct template for our present and future world(s).  They view the inventions of the 17th and 18th century as modernizing evils.  Capitalism, a real conservative would say, is destructive to social order because it reduces status and authority to money.  Real conservatives praised religion because it maintained strict order and obedience amongst the lower classes, and ensured that everyone stayed in their place.  "Conservative" individuals do not exist any longer, or if they do, they're a rare breed.  What we have in their place are individuals who believe that, because college professors ask them to examine what they believe rather than just being comfortable in their doctrine, get upset and cry about it.  They don't want to be told that they have to make arguments that make sense, are logical, and can be backed up with accurate facts and logic.  They want to simply "believe."  "I have a right to believe what I believe," they say.  Well, this much is true, but it does not entitle them (be they "liberal" or "conservative") to a good grade.

If so-called conservatives do not want to be challenged in liberal arts classrooms, then there are plenty of things they can major in and ensure that they will never, ever be asked to examine themselves, their lives, or the world they live in.  I recommend:  business, finance, marketing, engineering, many of the sciences, or medicine.  These, by the way, are the departments with the lion's share of university resources these days, anyway.

[Regional]

Well, these things could also have other causes. For example, your "cubie" could not be getting tenure because he did not publish enough, or did not bring in enough money, or because he is a lousy teacher.

Also, people COULD be avoiding you because you're a presumptuous jerk. I mean, heck, that's why they avoid me.

Yay!

[Mike Malone, U. of Cincinnati]

While I have yet to read all the comments in detail .... it seems that what might be lacking is an actual operationalized definition of "dispositions." The following statement is that which we have adopted in our institution. The statement is probably not as "politically charged" as many would like to have it be (i.e., it does not exactly fan the flames that burn relative to opinions regarding Colleges of Education), however, it is what we use (approved by NCATE and the Ohio Department of Education) and has yet to engender any great cries of ... well ... anything (yet!).


Dispositions are the values, commitments, and professional ethics of candidates that influence behaviors toward students, families, colleagues, and communities and that affect child learning, motivation, and development, as well as the candidate¡¦s own professional growth. Dispositions are guided by beliefs and attitudes related to values such as caring, fairness, honesty, responsibility, and social justice (NCATE, 2001, p. 53).

--The candidate demonstrates professional behavior in attendance.

--The candidate demonstrates professional behavior by being punctual.

--The candidate demonstrates initiative.

--The candidate is responsible.

--The candidate is responsive to constructive feedback/supervision.

--The candidate has rapport with children/peers/others.

--The candidate is committed to high ethical and professional standards.

    --The candidate maintains high ethical and
       professional standards (e.g. respecting
       confidentiality)

     --The candidate cites program policies and
        professional practices and responds appropriately.

--The candidate maintains a professional appearance.

--The candidate demonstrates a commitment to reflection, assessment, and learning as an ongoing process.

--The candidate is willing to work with other professionals to improve the overall learning environment for children.

--The candidate appreciates that knowledge includes multiple perspectives and that development of knowledge is influenced by the perspective of the "knower."

--The candidate is dedicated to teaching/providing interventions and to keeping informed and is competent in the discipline and its pedagogy.

--In designing curriculum/interventions, the candidate appreciates both the particular content of the subject area and the diverse needs, assets, and interests of the children. The candidate values both short and long-term planning: the former to adjust to unexpected insights and changing circumstances; the latter to enable sequential, cumulative experiences for in-depth or "mastery" learning.

--The candidate is committed to the expression and use of democratic values in learning environments.

--The candidate takes responsibility for making the child¡¦s environment a safe harbor for learning, in other words, a place that is protected, predictable, and has a positive climate.

--The candidate recognizes the fundamental need of children to develop and maintain a sense of self-worth and that student misbehavior may be attempts to protect self-esteem.

--The candidate believes that all children can learn and persists in helping every child achieve success.

--The candidate values all children for their potential as people and helps them learn to value each other.

[%sig%]

[Prof210]

Let's hope that these attitude surveys are used to increase diversity of viewpoints on our campuses.  A campus with no "right wing" ideologues is as sterile as one with nobody on the left wing.

[%sig%]

[whoa]

In the conservative area I live in my belief is that disposition is about the same as whether your degrees are from colleges dominated by LDS doctrines.   Sorry to say so, but I have seen more BYU than Notre Dame or U of Anywhere.  Not that this is a bad thing. . .

[The Emperor's Clothes]

C, Sociology Professor wrote:

  I
> recommend:  business, finance, marketing, engineering, many of
> the sciences, or medicine.  These, by the way, are the
> departments with the lion's share of university resources these
> days, anyway.

That's because they actually conduct useful research and produce graduates that can accomplish something other than mental masturbation.

[senior faculty]

Lady, what in the world are you talking about????

Dee, Professor of Music wrote:

> I believe it is vitally important that anyone who plans on
> becoming a teacher, needs to step back and examine their
> disposition.  It is one thing to have good grades, good
> communication with professors and students, but if your
> disposition is not a good one you could have some serious
> roads to travel.
>

I have no idea what that means.

> Being able to communicate with students is one thing, but if
> your attitude (disposition) is a heartfelt one, I believe you
> will be a great instructor.  


wrong, wrong, wrong.  

Let's see, this says it doesn't matter if you have the foggiest
idea of what you're talking about. So long as you have a
"heartfelt disposition" you will be great.

Well, the teachers who ultimately did the best for me weren't the touchy, feely types. They were the ones who, at the time, I thought were real a**holes because they were never satisified. They could never be pleased. They always were on my butt to do better.

They are the ones I remember. They were the ones who taught me to be the best I could be.


>
> I have learned over the years to put my personal feelings aside
> and just "listen" to the students.  Don't take sides, and be
> objective.  You are in the classroom to "teach" and you have to
> be teachable as well.  After all, being a teacher, is an
> education in itself.  You can learn alot just by listening and
> communicating fairly with your students and colleagues.
>

Sorry lady, but I have nothing to learn from my students. They don't know anything about my subject area when they come into the class and their opinions are completely irrelevant. (I teach the physical sciences)


> The world is your textbook, and students are just a small part
> of that world, but they still turn to those of higher education
> to learn "more".  Open not just your eyes, but your heart as
> well.  Students need "good, heartfelt" mentors to keep our
> world "morally right".  Get back to teaching, not a
> "performance in the classroom".


more leftist tripe...

>

[Benjamin.N.Nweke----Literal an]

The fact is on the purpose of such dispositions.The students are being treated to observe the process of social justice and the scourge of racism.I do not link such designs to any political machination rather it supports the fact of education professors inculcating fairness upon their gradaunds in relation with their treatment of others.
Here the term social justice does not come in as a political science topic rather it came in as a way of valuing things,considering things,feeling about issues based on the application of good reasonings.Hence,it makes students to interact freely and confidently on issues that are relevant to society and humanity well being.The idea of social justice makes the students to be more human and free from racial distractions in their relational exhibitions.
The abuse of a previlege creates injustice.The scourge of racism creates the necessity for this approach.Hence,if the education professors becomes able to inspire the desire for social justice and the feeling that all people are the same (may be free thinking) upon their students the future of their colleges and humanity remains to remember such as the substance of historical legacy.

Benjamin.N.Nweke.
Literal analyst.