Let me warn you about college studies

[hoosier]

It's (Not) Academic


By Edwin J. Feulner
President, The Heritage Foundation
May 24, 2002



Parents should pay close attention to what courses students are expected to take at collegees and universities.

Used to be, parents had to warn their college-bound sons and daughters not to let frat parties and football games interfere with their studies. Now they have to warn them about the studies themselves.

Indeed, parents should pay close attention to the drivel and drool that passes as intellectual inquiry on many, if not most, college campuses. In particular, they should examine what certain courses take as their "starting point"-the premises that students are expected to accept before they sign up.

Consider the "starting point" found at Virginia Tech, the University of Maryland and many other schools, where "Women's Studies" textbooks denounce marriage as an "instrument of oppression" and portray traditional motherhood as a tool to instill women with a "slave" mentality.

Equally troubling is the "starting point" of the University of California-Santa Cruz's course "Environmental Inequality," where students learn how "modern society not only assaults nature, it does so in ways that reproduce existing social inequalities."

Matters aren't much better at Vassar College in Poughkeepsie, N.Y., where students of "Black Marxism" learn that "the growth of global racism suggests the symmetry of the expansion of capitalism and the globalization of racial hierarchy." In plain English-an endangered species on far too many campuses-this means one thing: Capitalism equals racism.

Then there's what you might call Bible studies at Harvard University. Students in its "Multicultural Biblical Criticism" get to "critique" the Bible in the unforgiving glare of "ethnicity, feminist, womanist, black, queer, liberation theological, postcolonial and Third World studies." (Does God get a chance for rebuttal?)

Wacky courses aren't new, of course. Done right, they can serve a valuable purpose-to challenge beliefs and make us consider other perspectives. But the courses listed here aren't calls for useful debate on family structure, the environment, or the role of women, race and God in society. They're transparent, unapologetic efforts to indoctrinate students with viewpoints that, in many cases, slip well past the confines of mainstream liberalism.

College used to be a place where students were exposed to the accumulated wisdom of the ages and tested the values they brought from home against those of other students and their professors. Some of their values weathered these tests, others were found wanting. Either way, students came away educated, not indoctrinated.

Today, professors occupying the margins of any accepted political tradition throw out highly questionable "starting points" from which discussion begins. And dissenters? They often are encouraged to go elsewhere.

But how, in such an environment, can meaningful debate take place? If students are insulated from anyone to the political right of Fidel Castro, are they really being educated for the leadership roles we will expect of them in another generation?

We've reached the point where the American flag can't fly in dormitory dining halls at Arizona State because it's "insensitive to the international students" who live in the dorm, where stay-at-home moms are caricatured as unthinking minions, and where "womanist" critiques reign supreme.

But do students-not to mention the parents who foot some rather hefty tuition bills for many of them-really desire the educational equivalent of fool's gold? If not, it's time we started asking why so many colleges are salting their own mines with such trash.

[carnation]

There were tons of articles like that published in the seventies because so many colleges were offering weirdo courses exactly like that back then.

[mmcat]

the timing intrigues me...
i thought a lot of that nonsense had gone away
mmcat

[SilverTurtle]

Yes... God forbid that college students are challenged to think about anything that would go against the Christian white males thinking and beliefs.

Sure, there are going to be professors that staunchly hold beliefs different than yours. But if it's something you believe, then why should that change anything?

Most of those "weirdo" classes I had in my liberal arts education were my favorites. Because they gave you pause... they taught you (or at least me) to think from different perspectives and take different things into consideration. Challenge the status quo. Does that mean that just because I had to take a stance in one class that I changed my entire belief system? No. Did those classes make me think about why I hold the beliefs that I do? Yes. Did they make my belief in various religious/political/societal ideals stronger? You bet they did... because now I had analyzed them and come to my own conclusion on them.

I hope that everyone expects to have some of their core values challenged at college. Sometimes that happens in the "real world". Are you ready for it?

And if I weren't willing to re-evaluate my own opinions and beliefs, I would have never gone greek!

[Betarulz!]

I think this article is just another article by those in the Conservative Christian segment of the media, trying to provide more evidence that "society is falling apart". (sorry if this represents your world view). As SilverTurtle says "God forbid college students are challenged to think." I totally agree with that statement.

Noticing the source of the article: The Heritage Association, I know I'm dead on.

Several people have posted about the timing of this article. I think that looking back at recent American history you can see cycles in the spiritaulism of Americans, that corresponds closely with economics and the world aboard. Usually in the late stages of a continued economic growth, and then during the following economic slump there seems to be a jump in the spirituality of the populace as people begin to feel that materialism has grown too important. For the current feelings we can also add the impact of 9/11. With this increased pressure to return to "Christian (or Family) Values" college is again returned to a place where young people go and "forget" how they were raised, they become "liberalized" and other sorts of things. Hence we see classes like those mentioned in the article called to question b/c they do go against what many conservatives (and some liberals as well) feel is right.

I really just see this article as one of those meant to scare "Good Christian" parents, and ultimately undermine the need of a college education for a small group of students. These are probably students who would have gone on a binge anyway that first month of college, since they finally would be out from under that eye that had always watched them during childhood.

Also must say that it is interesting that "Frat parties" are specifically mentioned...

[ZTAngel]

I would think those classes would be interesting. They get you to question yourself and your opinions. After all...isn't that what college is for? A growing experience and a shaping of the person that you will one day be. The article seems to be written from the viewpoint that students are brainwashed by their textbooks and professors. They're not. All the textbooks and professors are doing is challenging our morals and values. Personally, I find classes like that to be fascinating.
I will never forget during my Sophomore year when I took a World Religions class. The professor was obviously an Athiest. One day during class, she wrote on the board a list of reasons why people believe God exists. One by one, she made us rethink each theory with her own personal view on how these theories might be incorrect. She definitely ruffled more than few feathers during that class. And for the deeply religious....they never came to class again. Did she convert a single student into conforming to her views? Not at all. It wasn't her intention at all; her intention was to have us think "outside of the box". Her theories were interesting indeed but I like to think that my faith is a lot stronger than to have a single professor be able to change it in just one class period. And, if there is a college student out there that is that easily manipulated than I truly feel sorry for him/her....they shouldn't be in an atmosphere that encourages free thinking.

[mrblonde]

I feel that the purpose of the university is to educate, not subvert. It bothers me any time opinion is presented as fact, such as the example given that marriage was invented to oppress women. Perhaps it was, perhaps it was not. Without substantial factual evidence, no one's opinion should be a 'correct answer' on a test. Most college graduates will tell you that college is the place where they formed many of the ideas that they carry with them today. I think that experience to these kinds of classes; presenting their personal feelings in hard text, closes the mind instead of opening it.

[ROWDYsister]

I figure if you're in college it's because you're smart enough and ambitious enough (well, for the most part) to resist being brainwashed. Do people actually think that "poor little college kids" will swallow anything you tell them just because it's in your textbook or your tweed-wearing prof is talking about it? Um, no. College, for many, is a last chance to think about things they would never think about otherwise b/c after your undergrad years you're expected to follow a certain path. I think it's good that there is such an array of courses being offered. I was expecting the article to talk about freshman biology and omitting the theory of evolution or something.

[DeltaSigStan]

Ok, I'll admit it. I took a Women's Studies class this last semester (No, I didn't take it thinking I'd hook up with girls).

The one day we discussed frats. I was alone to defend myself, being the ONLY greek in a class of 5 guys and 45 girls. They ripped FRATS (not GREEKS) apart, citing every stupid generalization you've ever heard about the frats. Our parties promote rape culture, that most houses are still all white or really racist, and that we should not be allowed to limit our membership to select members (there was much more but I can't remember all right now).

Everytime I tried to defend us, I got "well, this is a Women's Studies class so let's change the "topic"". Then why we're we discussing frats in the first place? She mentioned no good that us Greeks do, and the hard work we do to try to break those stereotypes.

Then came the bombshell. She HAD to bring up our Auburn chapter. Being a Filipino, she asked me if "you went to your Auburn chapter, do you think you'd be accepted as a brother?" I honestly said "I don't know", and the class ripped me apart "Where's the faith and brotherhood in that?"

Sure, these classes have helped the women's equality movement, but they perpetuate the idea that fraternities prmotoe nothing but negetivity.

[ROWDYsister]

DeltSigStan's post sounds like a complete nightmare! Not only were they ripping into him, but they wouldn't even give him a chance to defend himself! Some people...

[DeltAlum]

I don't know enough about these particular courses to comment, but ran across this story in Friday's Ohio University Post just after looking at this thread. I offer it for information purposes:

Women’s studies responds to review of texts
by Jen Strawn
Staff Writer

Students spend hours taking notes in class and reading textbooks on a daily basis, but could the facts presented in these books mislead students, or even present false information? Christine Stolba, author of Lying in a Room of One’s Own: How Women's Studies Textbooks Miseducate Students said they might be.

In her review of five women’s studies textbooks Stolba found several errors. For example, information in the books she reviewed contained factual errors such as publishing debatable or incorrect data as factual knowledge.

“The books also committed errors in interpretations because they would present evidence, but they were only telling part of the story,” Stolba said. “Among specific topic areas mentioned in these texts they silenced outlooks that were more conservative.”

However, professors in the Women’s Studies department at Ohio University feel that while some textbooks may contain such errors, their program does not mislead students. Women’s Studies faculty member Christie Launius said the textbook required for her class, not reviewed by Stolba, offers multiple sides to many issues.

“Certainly, when choosing a textbook I am interested in finding one that offers a range of viewpoints,” Launius said. “I guess the problem is that these books do offer a feminist perspective. If you don’t agree with the feminist perspective on issues such as work and family, of course you’re going to have a problem with them. It’s a loaded issue from the get-go.”

Stolba said the problem with many women’s studies textbooks is that the feminist perspective often is based in ideology and not scholastic knowledge. Scholastic knowledge and not ideology is key to a liberal arts education, she said.

“Women’s studies have not created scholarship,” Stolba said. “They had the opportunity, and they squandered it by being too invested in their ideology.”

Director of Women’s Studies at OU, Susan Burgess, said the program has created scholarship. The American Association of Colleges placed women’s studies within the top 10 disciplines that further a liberal education.

“There are over 600 plus programs at universities across the country,” Burgess said. “I don’t know why someone would say that it is not academic.”

Stolba said instructors could combat biases in textbooks by assigning reading assignments written by critics of women’s studies.

Launius said she encourages the students to provide the alternative perspectives. Through discussion, students are challenged to examine the book in a critical manner.

“I’m not asking for students to agree with the analysis in the book. I want them to engage in it,” she said. “What I want the class to do is take the book’s analysis seriously, chew it over, and see what they think of it.”

The textbook offers one of the many viewpoints examined in class discussions, Launius said. She said in her class it is important to respect all students’ opinions, even though they may disagree with what the text presents.

“My end goal isn’t to convert all my students into feminists,” Launius said. “My goal is to help students become more knowledgeable of the feminist analysis on the institutions that shape women’s lives.”

[Peaches-n-Cream]

This was an issue in colleges in the early nineties. Many professors were accused of being proponents of the First Ammendment unless confronted by beliefs that were contradictory to their agenda. I believe that it is important to have access to as much information as possible so one can make an informed decision. The colleges which fit the description in the article do not seem to be giving their students that information and are selling them short. I think that the lesson is that students and their parents need to play an active role in their education.
I actually agree with some of the points in the article. The problem arises when professors cross the line from education into indoctrination into a belief system that was way beyond (outside the realm of) mainsteam liberalism. If students deviate from that limited perspective, they might find themselves in a situation like DeltaSigStan.

[squirrely girl]

i'm sorry but i've gotta post on this one too. normally i'd agree with the whole statements of "it's college, you're suppossed to think and open your mind, etc." however, i've been in a situation where it just didn't work out that way.

at my last school, students were required to take and ethnic diversity course as part of the gen-ed requirements. not a prob. i signed up for "intro to ethnic studies". it sounded okay. first day of class, my teacher had all members of fraternities and sororities raise their hands, and then proceeded to tell the class that "sororities and frats are defacto organizations that promote racism" - never mind that my sorority is open to all religions and ethnic backgrounds. if you're cool, you're cool.-

what the hell is up with that. i mean gawd. if you wanna make a statement like that. hey. fine with me. but to find out who the members are first and then accuse them of being racist?!?!?!?! WTF?!?!?!

needless to say i dropped that class. some people might look at that as copping out, but i look at it as refusing to be in the presence of ignorant people (who have control over my grades)

ah well. since then, i've avoided classes that have to do with a single race, gender, religion, etc. i love "hot-button topics" and i love debates. but i'm not going to sit in a college class that i have to pay for by the hour and be accused of being racist just because i joined a sorority.

btw. i thought it was a little odd, because over half of the class was greek and there are 14 NPC's, 17 IFC's, 7 NPHC's, and 2 hispanic GLO's on campus. what a place to be making comments like that.

okay. i think i'm done with my rant now. you may now return to your normally scheduled program.

marissa

[Dedante]

"We've reached the point where the American flag can't fly in dormitory dining halls at Arizona State because it's "insensitive to the international students" who live in the dorm,"

OK, had to put in my 2 cents here...
I am, or rather was, one of those international students in the US, though not at ASU, and this is totally ridiculous!
I never saw an American flag as an insult but rather as a symbol and a reminder of where I was and how much I liked it.
Neither America nor my own country (Holland) is perfect but I still have a fantastic time every time I cross the Atlantic, on business, or to visit friends.
I am all for hospitality (of which I experienced a lot while being in the US) but unfortunately some people simply push it too far.
And for the record: I bought an American flag and it is still on display in my house to show my support for my 'second home', especially since Sept. 11!

About a year ago I enrolled in a 400-level Hawaiian Studies class entitled "Issues in Modern Hawaii" as an elective for my Poli Sci major. I knew that taking this class would be a challenge because its instructor, Dr. Haunani-Kay Trask, is known locally as a very controversial political activist and she's also the leader of Ka Lahui Hawai`i, an organization that believes in sovereignty for the Hawaiian people. In an article that appeared in the Ottawa Citizen, she was quoted saying that Canadians "are not wanted as visitors to Hawai`i...If 10 Canadians decided not to come to Hawaii because of something I said, I'd be very happy." When Canadians talked about how nice people in Hawaii are to visitors, Trask told an audience in Victoria, B.C., "Of course they're nice to you -- that's their job, they're supposed to be nice to you. That doesn't mean they really want you there."

Okay, so this was my HWST 499 professor. Basically, I knew what I was getting into as I showed up for class on the first day. Each person was instructed to introduce themselves and say a little bit about themselves. When it came to my turn, she asked about my ethnicity. I replied that in addition to being keiki o ka `aina , I was also of Filipino and Japanese descent. As soon as I said "Japanese"...she went off on why Japanese people are bad because "they like to buy up our land and build their stupid hotels."

As a professor, one would assume that he/she would be open to any kind of dissent that could come up in class. Not Dr. Trask. What gets me is how my university could allow a professor like Dr. Trask (and the many closed-minded ones working on my campus) to continue to be on the faculty!!! About two years ago, Porteus Hall was re-named the Social Sciences Building after it was discovered that Dr. Porteus made racist comments about Asian-Americans decades ago! And they let racist professors like Dr. Trask run rampant today!

I dropped HWST 499 2 minutes after class was dismissed that day.