Monday, May 16, 2011

LAUSD: defending an indefensible view about "balance"

     The Los Alamitos Unified School District school board have taken plenty of heat for acting to require instructors to teach “both sides” of the global warming debate.
     So they’re crying foul. Today, according to Nayeli Pagaza, who originally reported LAUSD’s action,
     …[D]istrict officials suggested critics were "politicizing" and misinterpreting Los Alamitos Unified's policy on teaching "controversial issues."
     "We are not trying to micromanage teachers," board member Diana Hill said Saturday morning.
     Board President Karen Russell, a former science teacher, said she "absolutely believes in global warming," but nevertheless thinks it's important to challenge students and teach them “another side” of the issue.
     Yeah, but the guy who spearheaded the “both sides” policy wasn’t thinking about “challenging” students. He’s a conservative Republican who believes global climate change is a “crock of crap”—the product, not of science, but of liberalism:
     Board member Jeffrey Barke, a doctor, led the charge, saying he thought climate change was a crock and didn't want "liberal" teachers indoctrinating young minds.
     It turns out that Dr. Barke is thin-skinned:
     “I should’ve chosen my words better," Barke said Saturday, "but I don’t think I deserve having people question my medical license and sending me derogatory comments or personal attacks."
     Barke described some of the criticism as “silly” and “offensive,” including suggestions that skepticism toward climate change is akin to denying the moon landing or the Holocaust.
     But the poor schnook thinks he’s got some real science on his side:
     “There are flaws in the data that concern global warming and I respectfully disagree that more than 90 percent of scientists believe global warming exists,” he said. “There are hundreds of reputable scientists such as Bjorn Lomborg and Ian Plimer who deny the causes and concerns of global warming.”
     Pagaza notes—correctly—that Lomborg acknowledges that global warming “is real and man-made.” Plus Lomborg is not a natural scientist; he’s a political scientist at a business school.
     And Plimer? Pagaza informs us that this geologist's skepticism “has been lambasted by other scientists.” That’s putting it mildly.
     So, again, Barke is all sizzle and no steak.
     Pagaza also quotes incoming Superintendent Sherry Kropp:
     "We want our students to develop into complex, critical thinkers who are able to discern fact, opinion, science, etc. The board’s interest is that courses present a balanced curriculum that represents multiple perspectives of controversial issues…."
     The LAUSD wants students to develop into “complex” thinkers? What on earth does that mean?
     Students should, says Kropp, be able to “discern fact, opinion, science, etc.” –Sure, but anyone who can do that ipso facto knows that the “opinion” that the evidence for global warming is poor is false and that scientific efforts to account for the empirical data inclines one to suppose that global warming is real and that human activity is causing it.
     So Kropp offers rhetoric, not logic. It’s meretricious guff like hers that gives administrators a bad name.
     And just what is a “balanced” curriculum, anyway? What is supposed to be balanced with what? I don’t believe that this LAUSD crew are capable of giving a coherent answer to that question. They’re sans clue.
* * *
     At this point, the LAUSD Barkesters have made these remarks, among others:
“I believe my role in the board is to represent the conservative [position] and I’m not a big fan of global warming.” (Barke)
“[I]f we leave it to teachers to impose their liberal views, then it would make for an unbalanced lesson.” (Barke)
“An unbalanced lesson would portray only one side. All we want is to have teachers teach the various scientific theories out there.” (Kropp)
“We define a topic to be controversial if it has more than one widely held view.” (Kropp)
“If the textbook talks about the evil adventures of humanity, we want teachers to describe an opposing view.” (Barke)
“Teachers and textbooks are biased.” (Barke) (All from Pagaza’s original post.)
     AN IDENTIFIABLE VIEW. These remarks imply a particular view: that (1) instructors should teach “balanced” lessons and that (2) balance is a matter of teaching “both sides” of a controversy—(3) where “controversy” is relative to the political sphere, not the scientific.
     Call it the “political balance” (PB) view of instruction.
     Contrary to Barke, this view does indeed imply that, if a significant minority (or, indeed a majority) of citizens denies a view embraced by the relevant authorities, then instructors ought to teach that contra-authority view too.
     And that means that Social Studies teachers should teach “birtherism” when discussing President Obama.
     Reductio ad absurdum, dude.
     The Barkesters deny that they are “micromanaging” teachers. But, of course, that’s exactly what they’re doing, for they’re prepared to tell (or are telling) instructors what to teach in the classroom. Simply denying it isn’t an argument. It is an indication that they have no argument.
     I recall a similar episode, fifteen years ago, in the (then-) Saddleback Community College District. Trustee Steven Frogue, a Holocaust denier (according to many of his Foothill High School students, and judging by some of his remarks to the media), questioned a course about the Holocaust:
     Richard Prystowsky, who last year began teaching "Understanding the Holocaust" at Irvine Valley College, said he was shocked when Frogue raised questions about his course and his brief involvement with the ADL. Prystowsky once assisted the ADL on an oral history of the Holocaust. (LA Times)
     Hey, lots of people agreed with Frogue. After a while, members of Orange County’s Institute for Historical Review started coming to meetings, defending the guy and shouting, "The Holocaust never happened!"
     As you know, whether the Holocaust happened is controversial.

I went to a garden party...

Songs for summer, for summer parties, for old friends and new ones...



But it's all right now, I learned my lesson well.
You see, you can't please everyone, so you got to please yourself




*

Sunday, May 15, 2011

So why again does OC have that awful reputation?

Former OC GOP chair Tom Fuentes with friend
     The OC Reg has finally caught up with the Los Alamitos Unified School District fubar that was first reported in the Patch and then noticed by the noisy Huffington Post (California Struggles to Out-Dumb Texas).
     Naturally, as in most such debacles, there’s a right-wing OC Republican in the woodpile:
     Los Alamitos Unified School district trustees unanimously agreed to update the policy on controversial issues at the request of board member Jeffrey Barke, who said he is concerned about "global warming dogma" and wants students to be offered a balanced perspective on the topic.
     "There are two clearly divergent opinions on global warming," Barke said in an interview. "There are those who believe that global warming is a fact, created by man's impact on the environment and the consequences will be devastating. There are others on the conservative side who believe it's much ado about nothing. It's overhyped and politically motivated, and the science is not solid, and there's room for more studies."
. . .
     Barke, a doctor who has a practice in Newport Beach, said he is a Republican and his conservative political leanings come into play "from time to time" but not on this subject.
     "On this particular issue, I'm not pushing my view. I just want the kids to be presented with balance."
Barke
     As I noted previously, Dr. Barke is remarkably clueless: yes, among ordinary citizens, there are divergent opinions about global warming. But among the relevant scientists, there is consensus both that global climate change is very likely occurring and that human activity is (likely) helping cause it. No doubt, in OC, a sizeable minority is skeptical about the Holocaust (OC is home to the Institute for Historical Review). So should history teachers pursue “balance,” too, in their treatment of the Holocaust? Naturally, the relevant experts are not skeptical about the Holocaust. So, should we Orange Countians blow 'em off, since many of us disagree with 'em?
     Actually, the original Patch post (May 11) did a better job identifying the “philosophy” behind the board’s action:
     “I believe my role in the board is to represent the conservative voice of the community and I’m not a big fan of global warming,” said board member Jeffrey Barke, who led the effort….
. . .
     “Most teachers are left to center, and if we leave it to teachers to impose their liberal views, then it would make for an unbalanced lesson,” Barke said. “Some people believe that global warming is a crock of crap, and others are zealots.”
. . .
     “We define a topic to be controversial if it has more than one widely held view,” said Assistant Superintendent Sherry Kropp….
. . .
     “If the textbook talks about the evil adventures of humanity, we want teachers to describe an opposing view,” Barke said. “Teachers and textbooks are biased.”
. . .
     Kropp said, “An unbalanced lesson would portray only one side. All we want is to have teachers teach the various scientific theories out there.”
     OK, so what’s next for the “balance” police? Astrology in physics courses? Chi in biology? Birtherism in social studies?
     Luckily, lots of sensible people (yes, we do have those too here in the OC) have come out against the board’s move, reminding Barke and his Barkettes that scientific method is neither liberal nor conservative. It follows the evidence, come what may.
     And that, of course, is why scientists worry about global climate change.
     —Republicans? Not so much.
A still from "the OC"
ALSO in today’s OC Reg: Mexican America history – through baseball:


For a recent update on David Nazar's coach "kickback" story, which seems to involve Saddleback College coaches, go HERE

Rainy day entertainment


Jason sent us this lovely postcard from hell (aka the Salton Sea), made by a So Cal writer.

Saturday, May 14, 2011

The chirpy Mr. B


     H & L RETIREES HONORED. Went to a shindig last night organized by the School of Humanities and Languages (of Irvine Valley College). ‘Twas a big hit, thanks in part to host Jeanne and her fabulous yard and home in an unincorporated zone against the Tustin hills. Partiers celebrated the careers of four stalwart and beloved colleagues who are about to retire. I forgot to bring my camera though. I think Beep took some pics. Glenn and Gwen and one or two other administrators were in attendance. Some previously celebrated retirees, too.
     We "humanists" are also very happy with our most recent hire: a shiny new historian. (See how positive I can be? I'm almost chirpy!)

     IVC SCHOLARSHIPS. Thursday’s IVC Scholarship Award Ceremony seemed to go very well; and it was well attended too. We’re glad, and we’re happy for the scholarship recipients. But there are faculty who do have issues with the scholarship process, which is not always what it should be. We’ll bring this up some time after commencement.

     EARLY COLLEGE. There’s continued peevishness among some (many?) faculty about administration’s devotion to the troubled Early College program. The program was originally pursued, about six years ago, sans faculty imprimatur and despite faculty objections that have proved prescient. A year ago, the Academic Senate completed a survey of program instructors—mostly part-timers—and its results were distinctly negative. And so the endless WTFs over EC grew louder. Administration always respond as though there can be no going back on this thing. Why? What is sacred about this benighted program?
     The fundamental problem with EC seems to be that a bunch of high school kids will act like a bunch of high school kids, and bringing college instructors to them doesn’t change that. Also, a high school will act like a high school, not a college, and that means our EC instructors face constant pressures to lower standards and otherwise accommodate these youngsters and their, um, ways. Because most EC instructors are adjuncts (aka employees with little-to-no job security), they are wise not to complain loudly. Nevertheless, the aforementioned survey managed to reveal some severe problems.
     Naturally, administration has “taken steps.” By the Fall of 2010, they commenced chirping that the problems have been “addressed.” But some of the same old complaints continue to be heard. I do believe the problems are intrinsic to efforts to bring college to high schools. These kids are just too immature.
     I’m told that, unsurprisingly, there will be some course cutting next semester, and that is why some have grown particularly peevish about the continued Early College fubar. Why devote our resources to this misbegotten hybrid monstrosity when, owing to a lack of resources, our regular students will find it more difficult getting the courses they need?

Federal Art Project, 1937
     FUENTES; THE 2010 ELECTION. I have heard that trustee Tom Fuentes’ health has taken a turn for the worse. Don’t know any details, but I'm sure it's true. In 2012, Jay, Lang, Meldau, and Fuentes will be up for reelection, but will they run? It seems likely that Frank Meldau will run (he just replaced John “corruption/incompetence poster boy” Williams, who quit at the end of December to focus on his catastrophic County situation). Don’t know about Lang, but he’s got to be sick and tired of the trustee gig, ‘cause it ain’t getting him any closer to the County Treasurer’s office. That’s what he wants, and it’s clear he’ll sell his soul to get it. Indeed, he sold it, and that got ‘im bupkis.
     If he had a shred of decency, he’d just go home and start writing apologies.
     It could be that the Faculty Association will have its hands full pretty soon, maybe promoting two or three candidates at once. Will the usual suspects—Education Alliance, the local GOP—put real money behind the usual Neanderthals? If so, look forward to a period of Sturm und Drang.

     SAME OLD BOARD? As you know, the board (and Poertner?) have decided to take the low road with regard to the “prayer” issue. Despite the plain language (SEE) of the recently ratified settlement agreement (of “Westphal v. Wagner”)—according to which, whether to have a prayer at the commencement ceremony is to be "within the sole discretion of the event planners"—they’re claiming that Prez Burnett gets to impose a prayer on Saddleback’s commencement next week. In fact, Saddleback’s planning committee unanimously decided to opt for a moment of silence instead.
     “I’m the decider,” says Burnett, I guess. And the board is backing him up. Why? Do they think this will make them look good?
     Remember a decade ago, when the law plainly said that hiring policies are to be developed jointly by the district and faculty senates? Nevertheless, our board argued that that meant that they could listen to faculty input, utterly ignore it, and then ratify whatever the hell they wanted to?
     So the old pattern continues. Too bad. I was hoping things were finally changing.

Chalk art on the sidewalk, IVC
     IVC’S PUBLIC SCULPTURES. In case I didn’t make myself clear enough last week, I do think that the public sculpture program we’ve got going at IVC is a great thing for the college. Has it cost us some money? No doubt, but it does add a new and interesting dimension to the campus. I had my doubts two years ago, but now I think it’s great. Have you seen the new crop of weird-assed Alphabet People and iron oak boxes? What do you think? Love it.

Abject stupidity in Los Alamitos: representing the "conservative voice" (2nd try)

Barke
     Abject stupidity has poked its empty but familiar head above the horizon once again, this time in Los Alamitos, home of the world's most notorious watermelon patch....

     The above—it's all that's left of my recent post about a decision by the Los Alamitos Unified School District board to compel teachers of a "global warming" class to come in and prove that they aren't forgetting to teach students the "conservative" side of the global warming story—namely, that GW is a "crock of crap."
     Yeah, really. It's all explained in the Los Alamitos Patch HERE.
     As I recall, the name of the board member who pushed for this measure was "Barke." Dr. Barke.
     Be sure to read some of the comments. There's like 200 of 'em, and most of 'em slam the Barkester and his benighted crew, including the Superintendent. I think her name was Meowe.
     For some reason, blogger was down for about a day (starting maybe late Thursday) and the upshot seems to be that my "Barke" post got lost in cyberspace.
     But do read the Patch piece. It's a doozy.

The Morning Matinee: I am Worried About my Grade



("Found" via Facebook - not a Rebel Girl Production.)

Roy's obituary in LA Times and Register: "we were lucky to have you while we did"

  This ran in the Sunday December 24, 2023 edition of the Los Angeles Times and the Orange County Register : July 14, 1955 - November 20, 2...