Manifesto for a new university in Austin

[mahagonny]

They lost Zimmer from Advisory Board. Evidently, Pinker is also distancing.

This doesn't mean they don't agree with Weiss's take on the state of higher education. It could mean they don't want arrows flying at them or prefer to make the point differently.

From Zimmer's resignation statement (my bolding):

"While the new organization's commitment to a liberal arts education and free expression reflects topics that are very important to me, I resigned from the Advisory Board on November 11, noting that the new university made a number of statements about higher education in general, largely quite critical, that diverged very significantly from my own views."

Well, maybe. Nevertheless, Anyone who says 'higher education is broken because it is intolerant of conservatives' is saying something that will draw the ire of many who tend to be vocal and have platforms from which to give their views. Anyone who says 'higher education is broken because republicans defunded it' has an enormous support group of those same people.

[marshwiggle]

The whole concept of "liberal professors" who "brainwash" or intimidate poor callow, hapless college students into becoming weak-willed liberal robots is simply more conservative propaganda to get gullible people agitated.

So, in conservative religious institutions, is the whole concept of "conservative professors" who "brainwash" or intimidate poor callow, hapless college students into becoming weak-willed conservative robots  simply more liberal propaganda to get gullible people agitated?

[RatGuy]

Can anyone cite studies that support the notion that professors give out better grades to students who share their politics? Here's one (PDF format) that effectively debunks this idea.

Claims of unfairness are easier to take seriously when there's evidence to back them up.

Someone on the old Fora posted a study on student perception of instructor bias. The conclusions were along the lines of "students who believed their college instructors had a political bias (either way), those students had on average slightly lower grades than the control group. Those students who believed their instructors had a political leanings opposite to their own did considerably worse than the control group. Finally, self-identified conservative students scored worse than self-identified liberal students when they believed that their instructors held opposing beliefs, even in the same professor."

IIRC the original poster's point was the importance of withholding or obfuscating any overt political or religious viewpoints, from a student learning perspective. I wish I still had a link to that study, but it might be useful in this context.

[Wahoo Redux]

The whole concept of "liberal professors" who "brainwash" or intimidate poor callow, hapless college students into becoming weak-willed liberal robots is simply more conservative propaganda to get gullible people agitated.

So, in conservative religious institutions, is the whole concept of "conservative professors" who "brainwash" or intimidate poor callow, hapless college students into becoming weak-willed conservative robots  simply more liberal propaganda to get gullible people agitated?

Probably.

Who says that?

P.S.----Don't start playing the righteously victimized conservative.  That is cliché. 

[Ruralguy]

1. This U of A thing is bogus. Its just a money-grab smokescreen for disseminating a particular point of view ( hesitate to say "conservative ideology" because it may not be precisely that).

2. I try to not reveal my politics, but even as a scientist, I tend to say certain things such as that global warming is real, and that can lead  students to assume I have a certain general world view (an incorrect one to a certain extend in my case).

[marshwiggle]

The whole concept of "liberal professors" who "brainwash" or intimidate poor callow, hapless college students into becoming weak-willed liberal robots is simply more conservative propaganda to get gullible people agitated.

So, in conservative religious institutions, is the whole concept of "conservative professors" who "brainwash" or intimidate poor callow, hapless college students into becoming weak-willed conservative robots  simply more liberal propaganda to get gullible people agitated?

Probably.

Who says that?

Historically, when all education was effectively religious, that was part of the point of education; i.e. to inculcate the proper doctrine, etc. As it would still be in seminaries and so on. So the rise of non-religious institutions was among other things an attempt to avoid the traditional conservative religious bias.

The extent to which that is still the case, or perceived to be, is a matter of debate.

P.S.----Don't start playing the righteously victimized conservative.  That is cliché.

As I've said, I don't call myself a conservative - I'm a centrist, and have voted for the Green party in several elections.

[mahagonny]

The whole concept of "liberal professors" who "brainwash" or intimidate poor callow, hapless college students into becoming weak-willed liberal robots is simply more conservative propaganda to get gullible people agitated.

So, in conservative religious institutions, is the whole concept of "conservative professors" who "brainwash" or intimidate poor callow, hapless college students into becoming weak-willed conservative robots  simply more liberal propaganda to get gullible people agitated?

Probably.

Who says that?

Historically, when all education was effectively religious, that was part of the point of education; i.e. to inculcate the proper doctrine, etc. As it would still be in seminaries and so on. So the rise of non-religious institutions was among other things an attempt to avoid the traditional conservative religious bias.

The extent to which that is still the case, or perceived to be, is a matter of debate.

P.S.----Don't start playing the righteously victimized conservative.  That is cliché.

As I've said, I don't call myself a conservative - I'm a centrist, and have voted for the Green party in several elections.

Count yourself lucky that's all you got called.

The good news is the far left has gone so far left the party is losing any semblance of unity, which will probably lead to a red wave next year, which is the best thing that could happen among the possible outcomes.
ETA: That Jewish professor at Princeton, Katz I believe, was/is a liberal and they threw him out for not being liberal in the ways they require. Good luck to them.
Academics often give me the impression they don't care if their presence is helping the republicans win more that it's helping their own party.

[jimbogumbo]

They lost Zimmer from Advisory Board. Evidently, Pinker is also distancing.

This doesn't mean they don't agree with Weiss's take on the state of higher education. It could mean they don't want arrows flying at them or prefer to make the point differently.
[/quote]

They both released statements. Pinker said he wants to concentrate on book project. Zimmer explicitly DOES disagree with her and other Advisory Board members statements regarding the state of higher education.

[Caracal]

2. I try to not reveal my politics, but even as a scientist, I tend to say certain things such as that global warming is real, and that can lead  students to assume I have a certain general world view (an incorrect one to a certain extend in my case).

Exactly. I don't spend my time in class giving opinions on politics. Why would anyone care what I think about the infrastructure bill? However, I can't avoid any kind of judgement or statement about things that might be seen as political. The Civil War example I gave earlier is pretty similar to Ruralguy's global warming one. Secession was about slavery and I'm not going to pretend to students that this is something where reasonable people disagree. (Although we do spend lots of time reading and talking about it, I don't expect them to take it on faith from me.) I can't help if it if the occasional student sees that as a sign of my liberal bias.

I do relate history to recent events sometimes when its relevant and useful. For example, when we talk about anti masonic movements, I often bring up Qanon. The other day I brought up QAnon in the context of rumors among freepeople after the Civil War about a planned federal land redistribution. I usually say something like "obviously none of this is true at all" because...it isn't and I don't think it would be very responsible of me as an instructor or citizen to bring up insane ideas in class and act like they are up for debate by reasonable people. I'm sure there are students who have seen this as examples of my liberal bias.

[mahagonny]

2. I try to not reveal my politics, but even as a scientist, I tend to say certain things such as that global warming is real, and that can lead  students to assume I have a certain general world view (an incorrect one to a certain extend in my case).

Exactly. I don't spend my time in class giving opinions on politics. Why would anyone care what I think about the infrastructure bill? However, I can't avoid any kind of judgement or statement about things that might be seen as political. The Civil War example I gave earlier is pretty similar to Ruralguy's global warming one. Secession was about slavery and I'm not going to pretend to students that this is something where reasonable people disagree. (Although we do spend lots of time reading and talking about it, I don't expect them to take it on faith from me.) I can't help if it if the occasional student sees that as a sign of my liberal bias.

I do relate history to recent events sometimes when its relevant and useful. For example, when we talk about anti masonic movements, I often bring up Qanon. The other day I brought up QAnon in the context of rumors among freepeople after the Civil War about a planned federal land redistribution. I usually say something like "obviously none of this is true at all" because...it isn't and I don't think it would be very responsible of me as an instructor or citizen to bring up insane ideas in class and act like they are up for debate by reasonable people. I'm sure there are students who have seen this as examples of my liberal bias.

So if one decided they didn't want to be perceived as liberal-biased, they could use an example of false conspiracy charges that come from persons/news outlets identified as well left of center as well as the example of Qanon. Or that come to be circulated among the political left, somehow. Say like, every other time.

[Caracal]

2. I try to not reveal my politics, but even as a scientist, I tend to say certain things such as that global warming is real, and that can lead  students to assume I have a certain general world view (an incorrect one to a certain extend in my case).

Exactly. I don't spend my time in class giving opinions on politics. Why would anyone care what I think about the infrastructure bill? However, I can't avoid any kind of judgement or statement about things that might be seen as political. The Civil War example I gave earlier is pretty similar to Ruralguy's global warming one. Secession was about slavery and I'm not going to pretend to students that this is something where reasonable people disagree. (Although we do spend lots of time reading and talking about it, I don't expect them to take it on faith from me.) I can't help if it if the occasional student sees that as a sign of my liberal bias.

I do relate history to recent events sometimes when its relevant and useful. For example, when we talk about anti masonic movements, I often bring up Qanon. The other day I brought up QAnon in the context of rumors among freepeople after the Civil War about a planned federal land redistribution. I usually say something like "obviously none of this is true at all" because...it isn't and I don't think it would be very responsible of me as an instructor or citizen to bring up insane ideas in class and act like they are up for debate by reasonable people. I'm sure there are students who have seen this as examples of my liberal bias.

So if one decided they didn't want to be perceived as liberal-biased, they could use an example of false conspiracy charges that come from persons/news outlets identified as well left of center as well as the example of Qanon. Or that come to be circulated among the political left, somehow. Say like, every other time.

So, I should use an example that will be less familiar and less relatable to students in order to pursue some illusory idea of balance. Sounds like bad pedagogy. I don't try to broadcast my political views to students, but I also don't really care what students think about what I believe. I mostly just want them to think that I'm fair, open to the discussion of ideas and arguments I might not agree with, and am generally not a jerk.

[mahagonny]

In the news. The defensive reaction against the project is a story. I expect someone noticed the deluge of negativity thoughtful discussion here.

https://spectatorworld.com/topic/university-austin-meteor-higher-education/

And this, which is a good example of the fear noted by spectator world.com:

https://www.thenation.com/article/culture/university-austin/

I'm still trying to figure out what this 'deep contradiction' is. They claim that Univ of Austin intends to subvert other universities. How, by existing?

[Wahoo Redux]

Ideologues need to explain why other people disagree with them.  In our era, ideologues blame institutions and organizations rather than examining what they believe or the perspectives of other people.  The whole purpose of UATX falls apart if one does not buy the argument that colleges are "pressure cooker(s) of ideological conformity."

I think the whole project is silly, but that is not the real issue.

UATX is doomed because it decided to establish in 2021 as higher ed is imploding.  They are simply too late to the party.

[mahagonny]

Ideologues need to explain why other people disagree with them.  In our era, ideologues blame institutions and organizations rather than examining what they believe or the perspectives of other people.  The whole purpose of UATX falls apart if one does not buy the argument that colleges are "pressure cooker(s) of ideological conformity."

I think the whole project is silly, but that is not the real issue.

UATX is doomed because it decided to establish in 2021 as higher ed is imploding.  They are simply too late to the party.

Six female freshman enrollees for every four males is not a story about dropping birth rates or COVID. It's something else, and I expect a pet topic for (progressive) academics to avoid discussing (as long as we're making predictions).

[marshwiggle]

Ideologues need to explain why other people disagree with them.  In our era, ideologues blame institutions and organizations rather than examining what they believe or the perspectives of other people. 

That's true of ideologues of both the right and left. The trick is figuring out how to get people to see themselves as ideologues. They typically just think their view of the world is entirely and objectively self-evident, and people who disagree with them are just doing so out of hostility rather than reason.