Professor Blatantly Requires Students To Profess Beliefs They Don't Have

Assuming at least some of what's in the student's lawsuit is accurate, I can already hear Ricky saying, "Lucy, you got some 'splainin' to do."

The lawsuit, Brooker v. The Governors of Missouri State University (MSU), was filed on Oct. 30 by the Alliance Defend Fund on behalf of Emily Brooker, a student in the university's school of social work. The ADF, a Christian legal group that advocates religious freedom, accuses tax-funded MSU of retaliating against Brooker because she refused to sign a letter to the Missouri Legislature in support of homosexual adoption as part of a class project.

Wow. That's so blatant that it amazes even me--and you'd think that I'd expect this kind of stuff. So the professor and the school apologized to the student, right? Of course--in Alternate Reality World.

On Dec. 16, Brooker faced a two-and-a-half hour ethics review conducted by faculty, including Kauffman. Brooker was permitted neither legal representation nor her parents' presence. A written transcript of the meeting was not allowed.

It should be noted, however, that this is standard procedure in academia. Closed and unrecorded hearings at which students are not allowed legal representation are common on campuses across North America.

Again, wow. And remember, this is a state school that gets taxpayer money--so check out this little First Amendment faux pas:

In their third accusation, the committee allegedly claimed "that Ms. Brooker's Christian beliefs conflicted with the National Association of Social Worker Code of Ethics (NASWCE)." It demanded she write a paper on how to "lessen the gap" between her personal beliefs and professional obligations.

Let me remind you that her personal beliefs at issue here relate to homosexual adoption--and while I may or may not share her particular views on this topic, she's not far from the mainstream at all.

Here's another case in point:

[L]ast year Rhode Island College’s School of Social Work required a master’s degree student, who identified himself as politically conservative, to publicly advocate for political causes to which he morally objected. When the student refused, he was informed "he could no longer pursue a master’s degree in social work policy" at the college.

I guess you can't be a conservative and a social worker. So much for that whole liberal "diversity" thing.

Interesting Email From Human Resources Today

I had heard nothing about this until a friend at another school forwarded it to me today--and a few minutes later, my principal forwarded it to our staff:

**********************************
Teachers and Other Certificated Employees,


On September 28, 2006, the Governor signed SB 1209, an omnibus education bill with impact in thirty different provisions of the Education Code. The bill takes effect January 1, 2007. The item of interest to most teachers is the elimination of the requirement for 150 hours of professional development for credential renewal. If your credential expires after December 31, 2006, you are no longer required to attend the 150 hours before you can renew the credential. Following is the text from the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing:



Professional Growth Requirements
“Beginning January 1, 2007, the renewal of professional clear credentials will no longer be linked to professional growth requirements. This new development affects teaching and service credentials including Designated Subjects Credentials. The removal of professional growth as a credential requirement includes both the 150 hours of activities and the experience requirement. Child Development Permits will maintain a professional growth requirement for renewal.” (boldface mine--Darren)

Another change as of January 1, 2007, all credential renewals must be completed on line through the Commission’s web site at http://www.ctc.ca.gov. The District will no longer be able to assist you in renewing your credentials by submitting your renewal application.



This information will also be included in the letters we send to certificated staff to remind you to renew your credential. For further information on credentials, you are encouraged to view the Commission’s web site at http://www.ctc.ca.gov.

xxxxxx, Director

Human Resources
**********************************

I always thought the 150 hours to be nothing more than another administrative hoop to jump through, nothing more than a haze. I shed no tears over its departure, and I don't think it will affect the professionalism of California's teaching corps one iota.

Update, 11/08/06: One teacher today brought up an interesting point--if we now don't have to do anything other than teach for 6 months out of 5 years in order to renew our credential, for what are we paying the $75 renewal fee? Before, paying a fee and renewing in person at least gave the Commission an opportunity to see that we've done *something*. Now that we really don't have to do anything and must renew online, what's the purpose of the renewal and the fee? I know, it's to keep people at the CTC employed.

No JROTC in San Francisco Schools?

Apparently the school board's going to vote it out, according to Ed Wonk (see blogroll at left). As I said in my comment to EdWonk's post: If I were the Secretary of Defense, I'd cancel Fleet Week in San Francisco indefinitely.

A perceptive cadet says this:

"If San Francisco wants to be an example to the world, they would allow the program to continue to practice openness and tolerance."

Perhaps he now realizes that the liberals in San Francisco are the antithesis of openness and tolerance. Don't believe me, or want some evidence? Type "San Francisco" into the search box at the top of this page, and a mere fraction of the posts I've written about that city--complete with their links, of course--will be displayed for your perusal.

Mess With Rumsfeld? You Don't Know *How* He'll Get You!

This site is just too funny not to link to!

Tidbits From The High School Exit Exam

Dan Weintraub, blogger extraordinaire for the major Sacramento newspaper, has uncovered some interesting facts about the administration of the California High School Exit Exam and the elimination of bilingual education in California (state law now allows for some transition classes, and then students are taught in "regular" classes and English Learners are held to the same standards as everyone else).

[S]tudents who started school speaking another language but were later reclassified as fluent in English are passing the test at a higher rate than students in general.

Excellent news for everyone except those who think that English Learners should be ghettoized in their own special classrooms for their entire school careers, as was done with bilingual education (that was anything but bilingual).

The report also noted that 90,000 10th grade students remained classified as English learners -- meaning they are not yet fluent -- and more than half of them have been registered in US schools for ten years or more.

Obviously we still have some room for improvement, but at least we're moving in the right direction.

Should The State Pay For Doogie Howser's Education?

Joanne (see blogroll at left) has a fascinating story about a parent who is suing the State of California to pay for her 14-year-old son's pre-med studies at UCLA. Her argument is that he's required to be in school until age 16, and that the state constitution guarantees a free and appropriate education to everyone up to age 16. The state says that he could go to a public high school if he wants a free education, seemingly ignoring the "special needs" of a boy who left school at age 7 to start junior college.

Incidentally, the UCLA tuition costs less than his school district would receive from the state if he attended K-12 public schools. I hope mom wins.

Windows, Mac OS, and Politics

Apparently the linked video is a spoof a few years old or something, but I found these comments entertaining:

Today a reader sent me a link to a video I am sure George will enjoy. Take a look at Why Macs Suck.

I had no idea Macs had such a range of exasperating problems. But the nature of the problems is not surprising. They all revolve around the Operating System as God and the User as Insignificant Annoyance. Which reflects the Mac's liberal origins. An operating system is like a government. Windows is like a Republican government. It gives you a tremendous amount of power and lets you run your own life, even if it screws up a lot. And if you screw up, it allows you to fix the problem yourself. The Mac OS is like a liberal government. It gives you very little power and tells you what's good for you, and when something goes wrong, you have to run to an anointed Mac official to get it fixed.

And the Mac OS takes more of your money, because you're not qualified to decide what to do with it. You may not realize it, because you're just a potato-eating, truck-pull-watching User, but this is what's best for you.

Good one :-)

Hat tip to Right Wing Nation (see blogroll at left) for the link to the original post.

Teaching the Theory of Evolution in Schools

Imagine if it were taught this way!

South Park is pretty funny sometimes.

Update: Here's the direct YouTube link. South Park is copyrighted, so it may not last for long....

I Had A Rough Childhood--Let Me Into An Elite University

Even if my grades don't justify it.

Joanne (see blogroll at left) has a great post that includes a discussion of academic affirmative action. Here are some important points:

California passed an identical measure 10 years ago. Universities responded by letting students argue they've overcome barriers such as poverty, discrimination and disability. It's served as a de facto substitute for racial and ethnic preferences but hasn't equalized the numbers of low-income, black or Hispanic students admitted to the University of California system.

Last week a UC committee suggested revising the eligibility system that reserves the top-tier universities for students who graduate in the top 12.5 percent of the class based on grades and test scores. They want to let C+ students try to persuade admissions officers that their motivation, inititiative and leadership skills will make them successful.

I read a UC-Davis study they cite: UC students who get special consideration for overcoming hardships or showing initiative do worse than their below-average grades and test scores would predict, not better. The exception is students who admissions officials have decided show strong leadership skills. Leaders do better than their academic index number (grades and scores) would predict but not as well as students admitted solely on grades and scores. Students admitted in the bottom quartile of the academic index are significantly less likely to graduate in five years than students in the top half of the class or even the third quartile. (boldface mine--Darren)

You don't say. And John from Discriminations (see blogroll at left) makes a guest appearance in Joanne's post as well.

JoanneJacobs.com Is Up and Running Again

After 5 days of hosting difficulties, Joanne's site (see blogroll at left) is up and running again.

If you were discouraged because you couldn't get to her site for awhile, try again now--everything's fixed, and she's got plenty of new posts.

Talk About Media Bias!

From Reuters, via Yahoo News:

A leaked video of the lavish wedding laid on by Myanmar junta supremo Than Shwe for his daughter has sparked outrage among ordinary people in the military-ruled and deeply impoverished nation.
(boldface mine--Darren)

Is that the official term in Myanmar? I didn't know they spoke Spanish there.

There are more examples in the story. Go take a look--tell me if you find "objective journalism" there.

Update, 11/5/06: Here's some more information about media bias.

Interesting View On Discriminatory Admissions at Towson University

From John at Discriminiations (see blogroll at left):

Before making fun of this, perhaps it should be said that the Towson standard — discrimination is fine but “blatant” discrimination isn’t — is pretty much identical with the standard Justice O’Connor applied in Grutter...

Since Towson’s intent seems to be to come up with some admissions gimmick that will admit more males, this does at least appear to be sex discrimination, whether “blatant” or not I’ll leave to others to decide.

I Did Not Know This

The National Black Republican Association states that Dr. King was a registered Republican.

It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans.

I knew the 2nd part, but not the first. I'm impressed--and insufferably pleased to be in such good company politically.

That same paragraph ends thusly:

And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: Slavery, Secession, Segregation and now Socialism.

What do the libs say about "diversity" now? Probably that the authors of the linked post are Uncle Toms like General Powell, Justice Thomas, and Secretary Rice.

Hat tip to Lillian Perry (see blogroll at left).

Interesting Quotes Relating To Events At School Today

At the mere mention of CTEN, a few teachers at my school act as if I want to perform human sacrifice.

Nah, that would be culturally-sensitive to our Aztec students, or something. But you get the idea. Conniption fit--and I don't even know if I spelled 'conniption' correctly.

Anyway, while reading NewsAlert (see blogroll at left) tonight, I came across some quotes that help describe and quantify my disappointment with my colleagues.

At the end of a post about a possible reinstatement of the so-called Fairness Doctrine, Steve opines:

Some people think everyone should have the same political views.

And in a post about a ballot initiative in the South Bay Area comes this quote from the San Jose Mercury News:

Measure A in many ways pits urban residents against rural landowners. The rural landowners are overwhelmingly outnumbered: Only 98,000 people, or 6 percent of the county's 1.7 million residents, live in unincorporated Santa Clara County. The rest live in cities such as San Jose, Palo Alto and Sunnyvale.

In other words, Jefferson's feared "tyranny of the majority" can strike even when we vote on something. I'm sure that the u-bots don't mind, though.

Carnival of Education

This week's is over at The Median Sib.

The Gift That Keeps On Giving--More Brilliance From California Educator Magazine

From page 13 of the October 2006 edition:

Librarian Chris Enterline hardly looks like a freedom fighter as she neatly stacks the shelves. But when her district tried to ban books about gays and lesbians in the the school library where she worked, she got fighting mad and went to bat for students' First Amendment rights.

Let's look at the First Amendment, shall we? It reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Exactly what student First Amendment rights were violated? Assuming we're talking about free speech here, who was forbidden to speak by not having a book in the library? "Banning" books may not be a smart thing to do, and it may not even always be the right thing to do, but it's certainly legal.

So the CTA uses this situation to show, somehow, that it is a strong supporter of the First Amendment. How ironic, then, that in the same issue of California Educator, pg 10 finds these words:

So-called Academic Bill of Rights legislation that's being considered in several states would stifle debate and silence controversial views on college campuses, according to Kathy Sproles, president of NEA's National Council for Higher Education.

Really? Let's see what an "academic bill of rights" would include:

1. All faculty shall be hired, fired, promoted and granted tenure on the basis of their competence and appropriate knowledge in the field of their expertise and, in the humanities, the social sciences, and the arts, with a view toward fostering a plurality of methodologies and perspectives. No faculty shall be hired or fired or denied promotion or tenure on the basis of his or her political or religious beliefs.

2. No faculty member will be excluded from tenure, search and hiring committees on the basis of their political or religious beliefs.

3. Students will 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.

4. Curricula and reading lists in the humanities and social sciences should reflect the uncertainty and unsettled character of all human knowledge in these areas by providing students with dissenting sources and viewpoints where appropriate. While teachers are and should be free to pursue their own findings and perspectives in presenting their views, they should consider and make their students aware of other viewpoints. Academic disciplines should welcome a diversity of approaches to unsettled questions.

5. Exposing students to the spectrum of significant scholarly viewpoints on the subjects examined in their courses is a major responsibility of faculty. Faculty will not use their courses for the purpose of political, ideological, religious or anti-religious indoctrination.

6. Selection of speakers, allocation of funds for speakers programs and other student activities will observe the principles of academic freedom and promote intellectual pluralism.

7. An environment conducive to the civil exchange of ideas being an essential component of a free university, the obstruction of invited campus speakers, destruction of campus literature or other effort to obstruct this exchange will not be tolerated.

8. Knowledge advances when individual scholars are left free to reach their own conclusions about which methods, facts, and theories have been validated by research. Academic institutions and professional societies formed to advance knowledge within an area of research, maintain the integrity of the research process, and organize the professional lives of related researchers serve as indispensable venues within which scholars circulate research findings and debate their interpretation. To perform these functions adequately, academic institutions and professional societies should maintain a posture of organizational neutrality with respect to the substantive disagreements that divide researchers on questions within, or outside, their fields of inquiry.

So the CTA, Defender of the First Amendment, is against these principles.

And remember, these two stories I've quoted from are in the same issue of the magazine. If I've said it once, I've said it a thousand times: hypocrisy is a strong point of the Left.

Surprise, Surprise! Hypocrisy in October 'California Educator' Magazine

When those libs get emotional, all reason goes out the door.

As I am wont to do lately, I skip most of the stuff in California Educator Magazine. Honestly, I just don't have the stomach for such intellectually deficient reporting. Truly vapid. I mean, let's turn to page 31, shall we?

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed into law a CTA-opposed bill that purports to help schools of greattest need, but instead will actually restrict their ability to attract and retain more of the highly qualified and experienced teachers they need.

Ah yes, let's blame this bill on the governor, completely forgetting that the bill had to pass through the two Democrat-controlled houses of the legislature.

SB 1766 by Sen. Jack Scott (D-Pasadena) gives site administrators expanded powers to reject qualified teachers who want to work at low-decile schools.

Perhaps the intent of the law, a law submitted by a so-called 'friend of education' (code for Democrat), was intended to stop situations like this one, but I digress.

The story continues on page 32, where Babs gives us this gem:

"It shows once again that politicians don't understand how public schools operate," says CTA President Barbara E. Kerr.

OK, Babs, let's take you at face value there. In fact, to a large degree I'll even agree with you on that point. Could you please explain to me, then, this:




Whom do you trust to "understand how public schools operate", Babs? The parents? You don't seem to trust them much on Prop 85. You've already stated you don't trust politicians, so who's left? The teachers? Yes, let's have no accountability whatsoever to the people who pay our bills.

Brilliant.


Legal mumbo-jumbo: The above scans of pages from the October 2006 California Educator magazine are posted here under the doctrine of "fair use".

Coming Out of the Conservative Closet

Eric hits the nail on the head about conservatives who are expected to stay in the closet around liberals.

You can say that Republicans act the way that Democrats are portrayed in the linked post above, but I don't see it. I've seen too many cases of liberals' letting their emotions carry them away, however.

This excerpt really struck home for me:

While I can't prove my suspicions, I'd even go so far as to speculate that one of the reasons the outing of gay Republicans struck a raw nerve is because so many non-gay Republicans are so used to life in the closet that they were quick to react to the real reason for the outing: what makes gay Republicans so disgraceful is not their homosexuality, but their Republicanism! While Democrats might have missed it, few Republicans missed the fact that they weren't outed merely for being gay.

They were also outed for being Republican.

By the way, the author of that last excerpt? Gay.

And since I'm just not pleased with liberals in general, I'll link to this, too, which shows that conservatives donate more to charities than liberals do. So much for all that compassion.

And how about this one, highlighting the CTA's good friends, International A.N.S.W.E.R.? The answer is "yes", we can question their patriotism.

Kerry Shows His True Colors Again

Watch the video--during which Kerry said nothing about the President--and see if you buy the leftie spin that he was making a (very lame) joke about the President and not, as seems exceedingly likely from the video, about the intelligence level of our service members.

He respects servicemembers? This is the same guy who threw someone else's medals over the White House fence, maligned our soldiers in Vietnam with patently untrue statements, and then stated that Americans in Iraq are terrorizing women and children by bursting into their homes at night? Sorry, F-bomb, I'm not buying it. And these folks aren't, either.

By the way, some stats about the quality of our military members can be found here.

Update, 11/1/06: Apparently, a Democrat congressional candidate in Iowa is sufficiently offended, or at least thinks he can score points by acting offended, that he canceled a campaign appearance with Kerry.

Update #2, 11/1/06: Now Kerry, ostensibly to keep himself from becoming a distraction, has withdrawn from all campaign appearances for this election cycle. His non-apologies (primarily on the Imus show) are pathetic; had he said something like what he's posted on his web site, he might have gotten through this with only a couple cuts and bruises.

BTW, here's the opinion of some of our military personnel. Odd, though, that the weapon in the background appears to be a Soviet-built ZSU-23-4 anti-aircraft gun....

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/images/troops_kerry_1.jpg

Update #3, 11/4/06: This picture was taken at West Point during last night's pasting of the Army football team by the Air Force football team.

Frat Suspended Over "Insensitive" Party Theme

I don't get this. I really don't.

If you go over the line in making fun of a group of people, then you merit the social opprobrium that comes with that excess. This kind of activity should not merit "official" intervention, to include the requisite tearful apologies and threats of legal action from the NAACP (what laws were broken, again?).

BALTIMORE - Johns Hopkins University has suspended the Sigma Chi fraternity because of a "Halloween in the Hood" party that drew protests by black students.

The invitation to the party, posted on the Web site Facebook, encouraged guests to wear "regional clothing from our locale" with jewelry including "bling bling ice ice, grills" and "hoochie hoops..."

Black Student Union members protested the party on Monday, saying the appearance of the image and the language on the invitation highlighted racial tensions at Hopkins and the strained relations between the university and the surrounding community...

University officials suspended all the fraternity's activities pending a full investigation. President William Brody said in a statement that he was "personally offended" and called the matter "deeply disturbing."

I'll bet that if they threw a Hillbilly Party, or a NASCAR party, or a WASP party--in other words, anything mocking red state voters--they'd be given the prize for most entertaining party.

And if others threw an ordinary party and came dressed the way the Sigma Chi brothers mocked, no one would think anything was peculiar.

I guess some people are more equal than others.