My Sentiments after attending the Same Set of Conferences

Frustrations from the Front: The Myth of Theological Liberalism

~ Dan Wallace ~

Last week nearly 10,000 people invaded the French Quarter of New Orleans for a three-day conference. It wasn’t a convention of Mardi Gras mask-makers, a congregation of Bourbon Street miscreants, or an assembly of Hustler devotees. No, this was the annual meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature. This is a collective of the world’s religious scholars. SBL is the largest society of biblical scholars on the planet. The program of lectures and meetings is the size of a phone book for a mid-sized city. Too many choices! So many great biblical scholars were there: N. T. Wright, Jon Dominic Crossan, D. A. Carson, Bart Ehrman, Stanley Porter, Frederick Danker, Alan Culpepper, Craig Evans, Robert Stein, Joel Marcus, April Deconick, Elaine Pagels, John Kloppenborg, R. B. Hays, Peter Enns, Buist Fanning, Harold Attridge, Luke Timothy Johnson, Peter Davids, Craig Keener, Ben Witherington, Rikki Watts, Robert Gundry, Emanuel Tov, Walter Brueggemann, Eric Myers, Eugene Boring, J. K. Elliott—that’s just a small sampling of the names. Liberals and evangelicals, theists and atheists, those who are open and those who are hostile to the Christian faith—all were there.

A Brief Editorial Worth Reading

Editorial by D. A. Carson

Here is just a sample.

Would it be unduly cynical of me to suggest that most of us are more likely to feel troubled by something we have said or done that has upset a colleague or parishioner than by something that has dishonored God? Some do not want to be too closely associated with anything the scholarly guild judges old-fashioned or fundamentalist: that, surely, would be shameful. On the other hand, Jesus says some blunt things about those who are ashamed of him and his words (Mark 8:38). The question resolves into something pretty straightforward: Whose approval do we most earnestly desire? Whose approval do we want when we prepare for a lecture (whether to deliver it or to learn from it)? Whose approval do we seek when we preach a sermon? Whose approval matters most when we write a paper or slog away at a dissertation? Whose approval do we hunger for when we choose a vocation, decide how to use our time, take pains to build links of affection and accountability in the local church, exercise, bring up our children, nurture our families, read, lead a Bible study, help a neighbor?

Read the whole editorial.

Ideological Allegiance Required by Cultural Marxists Fascists

Teeth-Bared Teachers' Edfrom NAS

by Peter Wood

In January 2010, “planners” at the flagship campus of the University of Minnesota will make a fateful decision. The College of Education and Human Development will decide whether to adopt the recommendations of the Race, Culture, Class, and Gender Task Group to make race, class, and gender politics the “overarching framework” for teacher education.

We know about this thanks to a heads-up article in the (Minneapolis) Star Tribune by NAS member Katherine Kersten. We’ve worked with Kersten before; she has been an admirable thorn in the side of the Minnesota education establishment. In this case, Kersten has snagged some mischief-in-the-making while there may still be time to stop it.

The Race, Culture, Class, and Gender Task Group, which is apparently too sensitive to call itself a task force, calls for a form of teacher education that tries to make would-be teachers into exemplars of alienation from American cultural norms. They would like to ensure that every student on track to become a teacher in Minnesota public schools has worked through and rejected “white privilege, hegemonic masculinity, heteronormativity, and internalized oppression.” If the task group has its way, Lake Wobegon won’t be the only town in Minnesota where all the children are above average. The task group calls for future teachers to understand that meritocracy is just a “myth.”

The task group’s recommendations, strange as they sound, sound familiar to us. Several years ago, the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), the nation’s leading accreditor of schools of education, cobbled together new standards that included rules for future teachers to have the right “disposition” to teach. Among the dispositions NCATE thought desirable was “social justice.” In 2006, NAS challenged the use of “social justice” as a disposition, arguing that it was tantamount to mandating an ideological viewpoint. Art Wise, then NCATE’s president, backed down and removed the rule. Under its new president, however, NCATE appears to have reverted to an approach that puts ideological indoctrination at the center of teacher education. Glenn Ricketts wrote about this in January.

We hope that the citizens of Minnesota will scotch this particular descent into educational malpractice. But our alert goes out to the other 49 states as well. A substantial number of people in responsible positions in our nation’s schools of education see nothing amiss and a great deal to gain by attempting to turn teacher training into hard-core leftist political agitation. The time to act is before a task force group is convened to bring agitprop to your state.

See also Katherine Kersten's "At U, future teachers may be reeducated. They must denounce exclusionary biases and embrace the vision. (Or else.)"

Update: Read the vacuous response by Jean Quam, Dean of the College of Education, published in the Star Tribune opinion section.

In her Nov. 22 column, Katherine Kersten suggested that the future of teacher preparation at the University of Minnesota will be a process of ideological indoctrination denouncing "the American Dream." Just the opposite is true. The American Dream lives and thrives in the College of Education and Human Development.

The college is engaged in a significant rethinking of its teacher education programs, and its main focus is on improving student learning across Minnesota. The Teacher Education Redesign Initiative, with support from education partners throughout the state, will be a national model for preparing teachers for the real challenges of a 21st-century classroom.

Read the whole opinion piece.

Political Correctness Will Destroy Our Nation. It already is.

Within the past two weeks I have taken two airline flights. When I was being processed by TSA agents in the Minneapolis airport I noticed that the agent viewing bags via the x-ray machine flagged a bag to be hand inspected. It was not my bag, fortunately this time. It turned out to be a bag belonging to a Middle Eastern man. Before he arrived at the inspection desk, the TSA agent put on her gloves in preparation to give the bag a thorough inspection. However, as the man approached the desk her entire demeanor suddenly changed. Had it been my bag (I speak from much experience.), she would have rifled through the bag, removing numerous items for close inspection, even probably with chemicals. However, she adopted a demeanor of deference, even an obsequious posture, stumbling all over herself as she tried extra hard to be as nice and sweet as possible. She did not even unzip the man's bag. Instead, she spoke apologetically to him as if she were inconveniencing him needlessly.

So, with this fresh upon my mind, the following brief essay is very apropos.


Diversity: An Ideology

George Seaver Web Exclusive

Most reasonable people have now recognized that Major Nidal Malik Hasan's actions in the Fort Hood massacre were not caused by pre-post-traumatic stress, by bullying, or by mental troubles, but were in accordance with his religious beliefs. Yet too many commentators resorted to the inadequate terms of political correctness to try and explain the event. What gives PC its pervasiveness, persistence, and power to influence behavior?

The influence of politically correct ideology was demonstrated by the senior Army General and Army Chief of Staff George Casey, when he stated that "as horrific as this tragedy was, if our diversity becomes a casualty, I think that's worse." He then ordered his commanders to be alert for anti-Muslim actions in their troops, as did the secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano. This attitude is larger than this event, and so deserves a comprehensive investigation.

It is well known that political correctness has pervaded the academic world, as documented in literature and demonstrated by well-publicized speech codes, harassment policies, and postmodern curricula. What is not well known is that the same attitude also permeates the military, the FBI, and the CIA.

Read the whole essay.

Also, read "National Security Threatened by Devotion to Diversity."

The Danger of Education Failure

"An Unsuccessful Education Can Ruin You"

October 30, 2009 By Ashley Thorne

The Chronicle of Higher Education has an article, "Course Reminds Budding Ph.D.'s of the Damage They Can Do," about a seminar taught at the CUNY Graduate Center on the ethics of teaching. Steven M. Cahn teaches the class, and he seeks to dispel the notion that all education is innocuous:

"People often think that education works either to improve you or to leave you as you were," Mr. Cahn says. "But that's not right. An unsuccessful education can ruin you. It can kill your interest in a topic. It can make you a less-good thinker. It can leave you less open to rational argument. So we do good and bad as teachers—it's not just good or nothing."

Read the whole article.

Intellectual Diversity or Nonsense?

Intellectual Diversity or Nonsense?

October 28, 2009 By Ashley Thorne

Two professors at Pennsylvania State University at Abington have published an intriguing article in the Chronicle of Higher Education (subscription required). They tell about a class they team-teach, "Religion in American Life and Thought," from two fairly divergent perspectives:

We could not be more different. Mel Seesholtz has a reputation for criticizing the dogma-based sociopolitical agenda of organized religion; Bryan Polk is the chaplain at Abington College. Mel is a James Joyce scholar; Bryan prefers to study Neolithic stone circles in England. Although we both teach English classes, Mel focuses on literature and courses on science, technology, and society; Bryan teaches religious studies and mythology. Mel is a laid-back facilitator of classroom discussions; Bryan is a more formal lecturer. Mel is a vegetarian (heading toward vegan); Bryan is a gourmet cook who enjoys virtually every kind of meat.

The professors describe how their teaching method - of listening to and learning from one another's views - captivates students' attention:

For instance, during a class discussion of the debate over the phrase "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, Mel suggested that the phrase turned the pledge into a public prayer. Bryan then opined that, for him, the problem was not with the word "God" but with the word "under," because it privileges faith systems that believe in a masculine, sky, warrior deity. The students immediately picked up the "aha" expression on Mel's face, and his "I never thought of it that way" restarted the dialogue with a different focus.

They boast, "Our classroom has become an arena for the free exchange of ideas in which everyone's opinion is welcomed and respected." A free exchange of ideas sounds wonderfully refreshing...but what about the second half of the sentence - "everyone's opinion is welcomed and respected"? Should everyone's opinion be welcomed and respected? Is that what intellectual diversity means? Hearing different arguments and making no judgments on the merits of any? Or should we, after hearing various sides of the issue, weigh each one's accuracy?

Read the whole article.

U of I President Does the Right Thing. He Resigns.

University of Illinois President B. Joseph White resigns
Admissions scandal sinks leader

By Jodi S. Cohen, Stacy St. Clair and Tara Malone Tribune reporters
September 24, 2009

As pressure mounted during the summer from an all-consuming admissions scandal, University of Illinois President B. Joseph White carried in his pocket a motivational card reminding him to "Keep Calm and Carry On."

And for several months, he did. He launched an overhaul of the admissions system. He publicly apologized for the abuses. He defended his record.

But on Wednesday, White announced he no longer could carry on as president. He said he will step down at the end of the year, forgoing a $475,000 retention bonus due in February and allowing a new board of trustees to choose a leader.

White's resignation is the latest fallout from revelations that the university had a formalized admissions system that allowed subpar but politically connected applicants to get in over more qualified candidates. Six trustees have already been replaced.

"Joe White has shown great leadership in this decision and leaves the university without the scars of a termination," said board Chairman Christopher Kennedy, who was appointed by Gov. Pat Quinn last month.

White, who teaches about ethics and leadership, will remain at the university as a business professor earning about $300,000 a year, as allowed in his contract. White also will continue to work on a fundraising campaign that was among his major initiatives.

The board, meanwhile, expects to pick an interim president within weeks and a permanent replacement by the start of next school year. . . .

Both businessmen had urged White to stay several weeks ago at an awards banquet. Since then, the faculty and student senate issued the equivalent of a no-confidence vote in White and Urbana-Champaign Chancellor Richard Herman, and the new trustees seemed eager for different leadership. White recognized he could not save his job, said Downey, who called White "a great educator and a great leader."

Read the whole article.

Also see University of Illinois trustee resigns over admissions scandal.

Grade Inflation or Academic Dishonesty?

A Minority View: Academic Dishonesty
by Walter E. Williams

College education is a costly proposition with tuition, room and board at some colleges topping $50,000 a year. Is it worth it? Increasing evidence suggests that it's not. Since the 1960s, academic achievement scores have plummeted, but student college grade point averages (GPA) have skyrocketed. In October 2001, the Boston Globe published an article entitled "Harvard's Quiet Secret: Rampant Grade Inflation." The article reported that a record 91 percent of Harvard University students were awarded honors during the spring graduation. The newspaper called Harvard's grading practices "the laughing stock of the Ivy League." Harvard is by no means unique. For example, 80 percent of the grades given at the University of Illinois are A's and B's. Fifty percent of students at Columbia University are on the Dean's list. At Stanford University, where F grades used to be banned, only 6 percent of student grades were as low as a C. In the 1930s, the average GPA at American colleges and universities was 2.35, about a C plus; today the national average GPA is 3.2, more than a B. . . .

What is being labeled grade inflation is simply a euphemism for academic dishonesty. After all, it's dishonesty when a professor assigns a grade the student did not earn. When a university or college confers a degree upon a student who has not mastered critical thinking skills, writing and problem-solving, it's academic dishonesty. Of course, I might be in error calling it dishonesty. Perhaps academic standards have been set so low that idiots could earn A's and B's.

Read the whole column.

Free Online Access to SAGE Journals until October 31

Register for Free Online Access to all SAGE Journals until October 31, 2009

Register now and you will have access until October 31, 2009 to:

• more than 260,000 articles from 500+ journals
• content back to 1999
• one of the largest and most powerful collections of business, humanities, social sciences, and science, technical, and medical content in the world
• more than 25 research methods journals—from qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods to evaluation
• 273 journals ranked in the 2008 Journal Citation Reports® including those from the 10 disciplines where SAGE publishes the most ranked titles: Communication, Criminology & Penology, Special Education, Industrial Relations & Labor, Political Science, Mathematical Psychology, Social Issues, Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, Sociology, and Urban Studies

Register Today!

Activation only takes a couple of minutes and then you can access all the journals on our award-winning online platform, SAGE Journals Online.

The Happiest Student on Campus This Week

The happiest student on campus this week.

The kick worth $22,250.00.

Read the story here.

Choosing the Right College

Choosing the Right College, the guide for college-bound students recommended by Thomas Sowell.

Wise Counsel from Thomas Sowell

Choosing The Right College
By: Thomas Sowell

There is so much for high school seniors and their parents to know about colleges that they not only need to get a lot of information but also need to make sure it is the right kind of information.

A number of college guides have useful information but, unfortunately, the best-known and most pretentious of these guides — "America's Best Colleges"— is grossly misleading.

There is no such thing as a "best" college, any more than there is any such thing as a "best" wife or a "best" husband. Who would be best for a particular person depends on that person.

Would we not consider it absurd if someone collected statistics on people and then used those statistics to rank individuals according to who would make the "best" wife or husband? Yet that is the approach "America's Best Colleges" is based on.

A college that would be best for a particular student could be a terrible place for that student's brother or sister. One of them might find West Point a great experience, while the other would fit in perfectly at Reed College— and each might be miserable at the other institution.

Choosing the college that is right for a particular person is not about the rankings of institutions. It is about matching a student with an institution that can enable that person to flourish while there, and to graduate with an education that is a foundation for a fulfilling life in the years ahead.

Among the things you need to know about a particular college is whether it has a real curriculum or just a smorgasbord of courses, so that it is possible to graduate knowing nothing about history, economics or science, for example. Some of the most prestigious colleges in the country are places where you can graduate completely ignorant of such fundamental subjects.

What also matters is whether the intellectual atmosphere is one in which competing ideas are explored and debated, or one in which there is a prevailing orthodoxy of political correctness that a student can challenge only at the risk of being ridiculed by the professor, given a low grade or— in some places— suspended or expelled for violating a campus speech code by giving an honest opinion about things where an orthodoxy is imposed, such as issues involving "race, class and gender."

In short, what is important is not choosing the "best" college, according to some statistics that conceal the arbitrary choices behind the objective-looking numbers.

Read the whole column.