David Horowitz Wins a Round
For all the controversy over the "Academic Bill of Rights", David Horowitz's statement of his views of academic freedom, the document has been adopted rarely. But on Thursday, the board of the College of DuPage, a community college outside Chicago, adopted as official policy a statement based on the Horowitz document.
…
The policies adopted by the DuPage board Thursday include language that some professors fear will make it impossible for them to explain to students that issues such as evolution are not in question in reputable scientific circles. For example, one measure states: "Faculty members will be free to present instructional materials which are pertinent to the subject and level taught. Faculty members have a duty to present controversial issues in an unbiased manner which respects their students’ rights to academic freedom to determine for themselves the proper resolution of such issues."....
4 comments:
If more people understood the authentic meaning of "unbiased," this might not be so bad. After all, being "unbiased" does not mean being "neutral." It means not having a vested, selfish interest in believing a thing, and having examined the evidence thoroughly and in good faith (either oneself, or through finding the works and consensus of experts, as most of us must do). So in a perfectly unbiased manner, I can believe and teach that the earth is round. In the same manner, I can teach that natural selection is a fundamental truth about life on earth.
The trouble is, though, our uneducated public does *not* understand the meaning of "unbiased," and often interpret it to mean something like "neutral." Worse, popular opinion and the status quo are often treated as "unbiased," and the minority or unpopular view is often perceived to be "biased" just because it departs from popular opinion.
There are a host of confusions here that make good teaching and even the well-justified *taking a stand* on issues difficult for teachers. Yet we have an obligation to do so--and to attempt to get our students to see what "bias" really amounts to.
As always, you're right, MAH. But, in my experience, trustees and administrators cannot be counted on to understand the difference between being unbiased and being neutral. I do believe that I am being entirely unbiased when I tell students that it is silly to reject Darwinian natural selection or to deny that occurrence of the "big bang." I have no doubt, however, that some deans will declare such statements to be biased exactly because they take a side in a controversy. What bothers me most about the elements of the ABR that were quoted is the implicit suggestion that student opinion regarding an area of faculty expertise is as valid as faculty opinion. Why then did I bother to get a degree? What is the point of taking courses and acquiring degrees if the validity of one's views (in the area in question) do not more or less increase?
Excellent point, Chunk. To think students have, really, a right "to determine for themselves the PROPER resolution of such issues" (my emphasis) is patently absurd.
To determine for themselves what they think the evidence supports with their (for most) extremely limited knowledge and experience: *that*, I suppose, is a right that one might be able to get behind. But only if they carry a corresponding obligation to be fair-minded and to continue to acquire more evidence and training in critical thinking....
--mad as hell
I, as a student, have no desire "to determine for (myself) the proper resolution of such issues". I spend my money and time at school to get instruction and guidance from those who have more knowledge than I. What will the experience become if teachers are hobbled in such a way? Will it just be like staying home and reading the internet?
ES
Post a Comment