Yeah, no, going to respectfully disagree with you Bauglir. I'm undeserving of disappointment. Respectfully, you're making assumptions about me making assumptions. No. I'm not. Please read further and suspend judgment and emotion while doing so. Difficult request online but I respect and trust you enough to know you can handle it.
Yes, complaints are overdone, and yes, you often have people throwing out B.S. complaints (I've had more than a few to say the least). Hell I've had to deal with the completely B.S. and stupidly complaining idiots. I once knew a prosecutor who got a complaint launched against him by a person who exclaimed that the prosecutor was at fault for making him "so mad he screamed in court and got in trouble for it." So now it's somebody else's fault how an individual behaves? No. I'm not disagreeing with him on that. Actually, I'm agreeing with him on that particular point.
That's not what this is really about though.I'm also far from insensitive to the situation faced by adjuncts and actually think that should be fixed in favor of the adjuncts generally. Higher wages, better contracts, etc. This dude does have tenure though, "In early 2009, I
was an adjunct." Note that past tense.
Also I'm not making assumptions or caricature. I'm going directly off what he put in his post. I hate quoting, and this guy has expressed a desire to remain anonymous so I'll erase this after I make my point so as not to trace back to his article:The following is a spoiler quote detailing an account the author, a professor experienced.
In early 2009, I was an adjunct, teaching a freshman-level writing course at a community college. Discussing infographics and data visualization, we watched a flash animation describing how Wall Street's recklessness had destroyed the economy.
The video stopped, and I asked whether the students thought it was effective. An older student raised his hand.
"What about Fannie and Freddie?" he asked. "Government kept giving homes to black people, to help out black people, white people didn't get anything, and then they couldn't pay for them. What about that?"
I gave a quick response about how most experts would disagree with that assumption, that it was actually an oversimplification, and pretty dishonest, and isn't it good that someone made the video we just watched to try to clear things up? And, hey, let's talk about whether that was effective, okay? If you don't think it was, how could it have been?
The rest of the discussion went on as usual.
The next week, I got called into my director's office. I was shown an email, sender name redacted, alleging that I "possessed communistical [sic] sympathies and refused to tell more than one side of the story." The story in question wasn't described, but I suspect it had do to with whether or not the economic collapse was caused by poor black people.
My director rolled her eyes. She knew the complaint was silly bullshit. I wrote up a short description of the past week's class work, noting that we had looked at several examples of effective writing in various media and that I always made a good faith effort to include conservative narratives along with the liberal ones.
Along with a carbon-copy form, my description was placed into a file that may or may not have existed. Then ... nothing. It disappeared forever; no one cared about it beyond their contractual duties to document student concerns. I never heard another word of it again.
That was the first, and so far only, formal complaint a student has ever filed against me.
The professor failed to deal with this situation correctly and could've done a much better job in tons of ways by doing exactly what he is saying others won't. The irony is palpable. The complaint is that this professor is being censored, when he is blowing off this (admittedly wrong, perhaps very racist) student. The professor could have handled this very differently, as most of them could. It's about bad student relations between faculty and staff, who are being paid by those students and thus should respect them. He could have defused the situation and perhaps even educated a racist student.
It's about the flawed process that pervades our society.
In a perfect world, I would like ever so much to talk to this professor in a private vacuum on equal footing over coffee/drink of his choice and relay the following:The SettingA movie was shown about Wall St.'s recklessness messing up the economy (a point a absolutely agree with personally).
The situation:The professor asks if the film was "effective." A student made a very inappropriate remark (due to: racist wording and ideas, as well as unsupported statements). By making this remark, the student is essentially trying and failing to say that he does not think the film was effective and stating why he (incorrectly) believes it was not effective.
The professor's inappropriate response:Blows (inappropriate, racist comment making) student off. He avoids the substance of the question (the racist portions, and blaming Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae), shifts the student to talk about the film in what the professor sees as if it was effective (The student is trying to say it wasn't, for the wrong reasons).
The student's inappropriate response:Other than clearly being wrong to blame black people and make a racist statement, which is rather not cool, the student reports this incident. This isn't justified on the student's part really. The student continues making off base and inappropriate comments and calls the professor "communistic."
End result: Racist student still believes racist ideas and incorrect notions blaming black people for the recession. Professor passed up an opportunity to improve the situation and explore those portions that were perhaps legit counterpoints (government v wall street, who caused it), while refuting the underlying racist assumptions in the student's remarks.
Clarification:THE STUDENT IN QUESTION IS AN ASSHOLE FOR BEING RACIST. I am NOT sympathizing with that individual. The world is full of assholes and you really can't control them. All you can control is your response to the situation and the professor could have done better.
______________________________________________________________________________________
Alternative response the professor could have given to the racist remark: (skip ahead for the purpose color coding)
"
Well, I can see you might feel strongly about that. I disagree, as do many others. Let me also caution you against some of the words you used, because that could be perceived as somewhat being a little against "black people." We wouldn't want to hurt people based on the color of their skin, because there's nothing wrong with black people as a group, they're a lot like everybody else. Right? That said, what about, and I quote, "Government kept giving homes to black people, to help out black people, white people didn't get anything, and then they couldn't pay for them," as you asked. First, may I suggest that might not be supported by evidence. Do you have numbers proving that the government did that? Also, "giving" homes might be a bit strong, but maybe "financing" homes. Because, I don't quite imagine it's quite as ... well ... "black and white" as your statement may suggest. Perhaps it didn't exactly happen that way? Now perhaps you feel there was something not brought up in the film, and maybe you don't feel it was "effective," based on something? I'm sure you don't mean to imply that race played any bad role or anything that could be thought of as racist, right? Maybe you feel that government played more of a role in causing the recession than Wall Street. Maybe that, without the notion of race in there, might be a more appropriate line of questioning."__________________________________________________________________________________________
You see what just happened there? That's a.) good student relation skills, b.) trying to engage in a constructive dialog about race and disproving racist notions, c.) engaging what may be seen as an (more legitimate once its stripped of the racist crap) alternative point of view.
Let's look at the communication skills the professor could have applied and how they can be color coded and parsed out of my little example speech there, shall we? (Just highlight the text if the corresponding colors aren't helpful for you to look at is my suggestion).
1.)
"Recognizing feelings." Feelings are incredibly important, because they guide most people's actions. Without making a value judgment, as a tactical matter, this is always good to do. Multiple purposes are served. First, it lets the person know you are listening and taking them seriously. There's a very dangerous set of dueling narratives in this country that the "other side" doesn't listen, doesn't get it, and doesn't care. "Those damn Conservatives/Liberals, or A/B." Second, this professor is talking about exploring alternate viewpoints, doing that requires calming the emotions within people.
2.)
Asserting authority and correcting. Intentionally or not. This student is being racist by blaming poor black people. Not cool. This exposes the racist element of the statement. Moreover, there's a hint of social justice in there. You don't make racists not racists by telling them to shut up or brushing them off, you talk to them about it. You expose the reasons they are incorrect. That leads me to:
3.)
Exposing logical flaws and fallacies This is the heart of this teacher's job. This is the education people are paying for and striving to achieve. This should be the first step towards showing logical soundness in other areas, after you weed out the BS logical fallacies, and incorrect lines of thought.
4.)
Addressing the other side of the argument This is exactly the logical result of the professor's question. He asks if the film is "effective." Well at heart, there's only a couple of different answers he can expect, "yes" or "no," (or maybe a third option, I dunno but yeah). Well, this was the "no" response, sadly tainted with some racist shit that needed washed off.
You see the techniques here (applied by the professor and the one I suggest using). You see the alternatives and thought processes behind those as well as the different results? You see how the professor actually DID brush the (racist) guy off, I exclaim incorrectly? Do you see the inadvertent harm brushing people off in a discussion environment (that he paid to be part of) causes both to the education process and to society at large? Do you see how harmful viewpoints thrive on the idea that they are "legit but being ignored" (the "lame stream media won't cover it!") when people are blown off? Do you see how the professor absolutely is expressing some lovely arrogance and head in posterior positioning? A LOT of people who are now more OK with gay people, stopped being homophobic once they could talk to somebody who is gay and also a pretty ok person after all....
I deal with far worse than this student every freaking day man. I've had to talk people out of crimes by addressing the incorrect ideas in their heads that they are using to "justify" their behavior. It's a communication skill in direct conflict to the old school idea most colleges are built upon and the notion of a "college kid." Moreover, it's an attempt to more accurately deal with the major problem of society's bad ideas running rampant on all sides. This is the "seeing both sides of it."
I'm using the examples he provides to form my opinions, not assuming, but I sadly can't spend all the time I would like to explaining myself.
Edit: Suffice it to say he keeps right on doing exactly this repeatedly by pointing things out as if they should be obvious to the reader, when clearly they aren't to the people complaining (those darn kids!), like the part about how he opposes harassment victims having to show proof. Hey, me too. Let's discuss that, in a respectful manner that includes all sides. Shit, I'm all for due process, but you also have to explain it from the victim's point of view in a justice system that often leaves victims feeling left out in the cold while providing lawyers for guilty as hell defendants (and I've been that provided lawyer). Same deal with his abortion rights debate being canceled argument. Same deal with the librarians calling a colleague creepy argument. Same deal over and over and over again. This isn't an assumption I'm making. This is a pattern he's showing that leads to a set of reasonable and logical conclusions showing that, like o so many in higher ed, they don't get it.
He absolutely is an old professor refusing to change. Look at what he's writing, "Commentators on the left and right have recently criticized the
sensitivity and
paranoia of today's college students."
....
So, "damn kids! Get off my lawn!" Wow. Those are your customers and you're using outdated tactics. Bullshit, and I'm calling him on it while being constructive and providing actual examples and alternatives. AKA being helpful instead of just bitching. These are the future of society who will eventually inherit the earth. Maybe instead of the complaining he does, he should talk about it and explain why he's right with those individuals and counter the narrative he's opposing.
Maybe this professor could use his words instead of smugly assuming he's automatically right and the damn kids are wrong.
His job isn't to be smart, which he clearly is. His job is to educate and explain. Use. Your. Words.
Author
Topic: Calm and Cool Progressive Discussion Thread (Read 1247309 times)