As usual, the comments are insightful and compelling. They bring up the fact that it really isn’t that hard to get rid of “problem” teachers–all the administration has to do is harass them until they’ve had enough and leave. Done. Problem solved.
I’ve seen this in the state government, as well, so yeah, it’s not really that hard to get rid of someone. All you need is a bully in the midst while the administration looks the other way (or even worse–participates).
Urged on by conservative special interests such as Americans for Prosperity, Republican leaders pressed hard to eliminate due process rights for teachers.
~~~~~~~~
The handiwork of the Koch Brothers. Destroy public education so the Koch brothers don’t have to pay one more penny for unionized workers. More for me…poverty wages for you…
Dispatches from the Underclass has a post up on academic freedom and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
I clicked on the link to the letter, and the part about the union’s collective bargaining agreement stood out:
“institutional discipline or restraint in their discussion of relevant matters in the classroom…” [the CBA prohibits] “explicit or implicit threat of termination or discipline for the purpose of constraining a faculty member in the exercise of his or her rights under such principles of academic freedom.”
~~~~~~~~
“Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject.”
This was clarified later with the following:
“The intent of the 1940 statement is not to discourage what is “controversial”. Controversy is at the heart of the free academic inquiry which the entire statement is designed to foster. The passage serves to underscore the need for teachers to avoid persistently intruding material which has no relation to their subject.”
~~~~
This is one of the reasons that teacher’s unions must be protected–they protect teachers that bring up uncomfortable subjects with passionate debate. The Vietnam War would probably still be going on if it weren’t for the passionate debates of that time. And the Afghan war would have ended long ago. The Iraq War would have never begun had there been passionate debate on the subject of Weapons of Mass Destruction and as I previously posted, the way that Iraq society was presented to us and the reality of their society.
As the letter continues, the use of the word “balance” is questionable (Faux News, anyone?). It’s a vague term that can be interpreted in many ways…it’s a word that anyone in power can use to silence those that present valid complaints. One student made a complaint against the professor. Then Dr. Corey had the student “spy” on the professor and report back on whether it was “balanced” or not. WTH?
I disagree, however, with the letter’s statement that “students don’t possess the training or expertise to challenge a professor”…this is not giving students enough credit. Again, I’m thinking of the 60s and the students questioning professors and all authority. They raised valid questions. It’s not that students don’t have the training or expertise, but that one single student, with biases, should not be allowed to shut down an entire class because he/she does not agree with the way the subject is presented. He/she is a student, and as such, has to take some responsibility towards his/her education, and that means not always agreeing with a professor.
If the student disagrees, then he/she has options: quit the class, or listen and perhaps examine why he/she is opposed to the professor/subject matter….and maybe, just maybe, change one’s mind after evaluating the subject. It’s known that Israel does not present the Palestinian side of things in their schools. I don’t think they speak of the Palestinians at all, but in negative terms. Where’s the balance there?
The assessment of Professor Chehade’s classroom was one of openness. He allowed differing viewpoints…which is what you want in…ahem…a balanced classroom. Other students’ assessments were one of openness.
Something else that nags at me while reading this–did this student purposely take this class in order to get it cancelled? Because a class such as this is probably an elective–one that a student has an option of taking among several in that particular subject matter–so I would question the student’s motives if that were the case. The more I read, the more it sounds like a set-up. And the spineless administration caved at the first “shove”.
Another thing that bothers me is that we don’t live in a vacuum–this is only one class in that student’s career. If the student wants to get at the truth, he/she can take more classes taught by other professors whom will offer a different perspective. The student can also take the initiative and read books on the subject to gain a broader perspective. There is also the community- other students, friends, parents, neighbors, whom also can offer their perspectives. My experience has been that the truth is somewhere in between.
It’s important to note that professors are not given free reign to do as they please in their classrooms–as the letter states–proselytizing (although I can state that some of my professors came close to this, thankfully, it was just a few of many good professionals); and teaching subjects that are not a part of that section.
And just for the record, I would love to attend Professor Chehade’s class.
I found 5 Broken Cameras on youtube:
In the next part of the report, the controversy about free speech about the Palestinian/Israeli conflict at the University of Michigan. Be sure to click on the link where Max Blumenthal writes about the smear campaign. There is a video by Dishell up that speaks volumes.
In the speech, Max is passionate. He is Jewish and yet is speaking out on what he calls apartheid by Israel. The whole idea of Israel being “pure” is so ludicrous. There is no such thing as a “pure” race. We’re all mutts, so to speak. And as Blumenthal illustrates, one couple can’t even be together because of this stupidity. Can you say Romeo and Juliet? Can we ever learn anything from history…?
Diane Ravitch has a post up on the repubs and DFERs (Democrats in favor of charter schools).
She notes that in 1988, advocates were saying that charters would cost less because of less bureaucracy. Remember that, folks, when they say “less government meddling”…the actual results speak volumes…
You would think that Rahm Emanuel would think twice before messing with Karen Lewis, but he apparently hasn’t been, um…schooled. (sorry, bad pun I know)
She once again delivers a smackdown of the mayor by calling him on the divide-and-conquer politics.
Be sure to click on the links to Fred Klonsky’s blog, which also gives some insight to what is going on in Chicago. What goes on there, is most certainly going on around the country. Bless Karen Lewis.
Diane Ravitch has a post up on the “new” SAT. I haven’t seen the test, so I have to go by what Diane is describing. I do know that I when I first heard of the “new” SAT, I was sure there was some connection to the brainless Common Core. Yep.
It’s troubling that the writing section will be optional. Being able to write well-constructed sentences is an art. It should be a part of the test.
Diane quotes Superintendent Cohen, whom is critical of the “new” SAT:
Nowhere in our new, vaunted Common Core State Standards are teachers told to be concerned with nurturing young people’s imaginations or their original thoughts about the books they read, about the way nature works, about whether our government’s policies are good or bad, about whether the Pythagorean theorem could be used to help design a better bridge over the Hudson river, or whether “a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” Nor will the “new” and “fairer” SAT ask students to write about such matters.
~~~~~~~~
Absolutely. Spot on. It’s not enough to be able to repeat what another wrote–but to be able to interpret what they wrote and take it beyond that to expand the dialogue. Or to offer another point of view and facts or theory to back what you’re saying.
As I’m reading the article, I thought about when I took the SAT’s in high school. It was a gamble on my part, because I did not take the college-bound courses offered. That was the time that my Mom was pouring cheese soup over crackers for dinner sometimes….college seemed like an unreachable dream, so I took the easier courses offered. Personally, I don’t think those courses should have been an option–all the students who were capable should have been in the college courses. One really can’t know their potential until they are tested. And when you’re young and unsure of yourself, being tested means taking a risk–putting yourself out there for possible failure. Teenagers would rather die than face what they perceive as humiliation (when in fact it is a growing moment that should be supported, and not humiliated, as some like to do.) And when you’re poor, your options become even more limited because taking a risk could mean consequences for the family (if one risked going to college, and failed, that money spent on tuition is lost.)
I did pass the SAT’s, and was admitted to Indiana University but on a probationary status. I ended up not going because of being unsure of myself (probationary status to me meant “failure”) and interference by someone else. Being supported would have made all the difference at this point in time–maturity, too.
I’m telling this story because I had some rough years in middle school and high school. My grades reflected that. But they didn’t reflect my potential. As you know, I went on to college and graduated much later. It illustrates how badly misguided the Common Core and Race to the Bottom are–we are who we are at any point in time, but who we might grow to be is not measurable by any human tool.
I just watched one of the most interesting Nature shows to date. And no animal violence, go figure! /just a little snarky
The program was on plants and their ability to communicate with one another.
It started with showing a plant that could not produce its own food, so it was basically a vampire plant that sucked the life out of other plants. It seemed to prefer certain plants over others–the tomato being one of them. The scientists performed an experiment where they placed the vampire plant in the middle, with the tomato plant on one side, and another plant placed on the other side.
Using time-lapse photography, they showed the vampire plant doing this little whirling dance around and around until it finally latched onto the tomato plant. It did this 9 times out of 10. So, it basically chose the tomato plant. Isn’t that interesting?
Then they went on to another plant in the west that was making a nuisance of itself. The name escapes me, but it has destroyed native grasses that the cattle farmers rely on to feed the cattle. The scientists were trying to find out why this particular plant was able to thrive. The rancher pulled up a plant by its roots, and showed a small worm/larvae just going to town on the roots…and yet the plant was still thriving. So there had to be another reason the plant was able to fend for itself. They discovered that it was sending out chemicals via its roots that killed off other competitor plants’ roots. Isn’t that amazing?
They also said they knew that plants sent off scents, but they discovered that they also send off warning scents, or what amounts to a “scream” by the plant when they are being attacked. They illustrated this by stating that the smell associated with freshly mowed grass is the grass “screaming” from being attacked. The theory is that the plants are trying to warn the other plants that they are being attacked. The other plants in the area beef up their defense mechanisms. Wow.
Finally, they wondered about “mother” trees aiding her “babies”. The theory wasn’t new, they said, but they hadn’t been able to prove it. So, a research team injected radioactive carbon into a douglas fir and then went back after a time with a geiger counter to see where the carbon ended up. They found the most concentrated amount in baby firs nearby. They also found it in carbon “trails” to other firs in the area that belonged to the same plant family. I had one issue, though, with this–and this may have been done, but the program didn’t show it–they didn’t run the geiger counter on the ground or around the trees before injecting the fir with the radioactive material. This, to me, would have been a “control” to make sure that the radioactivity wasn’t already there from, God forbid, Fukushima or some other source.
So…all of this is not news to the Native Americans, whom have always believed that plants had a “life”. Everything is connected–plants, too.
Yeah, we’re slow as always in catching up to the wisdom. But at least we’re getting there. 🙂
Fred Klonsky has this up on the ethnic cleansing of Chicago Public Schools. But I would go a step further and say not just ethnic, but prejudice against the poor in general. They have made it abundantly clear that they don’t believe the poor have any worth or value or potential.
He links to the Chicago Teachers Union website. This just says it all:
Schools slated for “turn around” include McNair, Dvorak and Gresham elementary schools. At McNair, 52 percent of the staff are African American; at Dvorak 70 percent of the teachers are African Americans; and at Gresham 65 percent of educators are African American. Black students are 97.1 percent of the student body and 98 percent of them are low-income.
~~~~~~~
They also make note that most of the educators are in their 40s and 50s–a favorite target of the schools-for-fun-and-profit mob. Get rid of the higher paid older folk, and you can a) pay younger ones much, much less, and b) get more compliant employees who are desperate for a job and will subject kids to enforced abusive testing because without a union to help them protest, they’re SOL.
Eagle 
You must be logged in to post a comment.