I’m guessing that the professor’s quote wasn’t “white English is the oppressors’ language", or else it would have been quotedas one sentence like that, rather than broken into two noun phrases. If the professor was talking about communicating to underprivileged minority students, then I can see why it would be legitimate to suggest using some non-standard variety of English, since “white English” is perceived as language of the “oppressors".

Kenny Easwaran, graduate student at uc berkeley, at 7:50 am EDT on May 23, 2005

Are sloppy arguments better than ideology?

What dreary work. . . trolling through Ed Department websites looking for scarlet words. Kudos to KC.

Unfortunately, his argument (?) is based on a familiar kind of hocus-pocus, pull-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps. It works like this: he has two “facts” — - a recent poll that suggests liberal faculty dominate campuses, and some language about “social justice” lifted from Ed. Dept. homepages (though most of the links are bad or don’t lead to the offending pages and languages). Juxtapose these two things together and we’re to assume that one accounts for the other or that they have some necessary logical relationship. All of this buttressed by the usual empirical anecdote.

Neither leg of this shaky argument is worth much. Closer scrutiny of the survey alluded shows that it’s riddled with problems and is in fact way out of line with other more scrupulous social science efforts to gauge faculty political affiliation. The de-contextualied Education language is just that — - decontextualized. Marquette for instance is a Jesuit institution — - and as befitting a religiously-affiliated institution — - the Ed program there explains its mission in language consistent with Jesuit beliefs. The U. of Toledo quotes from the Dean of their College of Ed are actually preceded by his statement that: “our educational system in the United States is rooted in a firm belief in democracy.” Indeed, it’s a good thing that the Ed schools generally invoke a “more humane society” as a general goal — - mission-statement-wise it’s a notch more particular than “excellence” and something a little more intellectually and ethically meatier than “better test scores.”

As for the Brooklyn College example — - yet another in an endlessly masochistic conservative exercises in “he said, she said, the liberal said etc.” How many of us couldn’t dredge up similar anecdotes splashing the left or right. Makes you wonder if the whole thing isn’t the usual “making of private grievance into public issue” rhetorical device.

G. Debs, Professor at CUNY, at 8:46 am EDT on May 23, 2005

Pay for it, yourself, sir

Speaking for the working-class (the poor slobs who are trying to make a living, in economies where government costs range between 16% of GDP and 40% of GDP) — why don’t you back Air America with your own pension funds? And require NPR/PBS to make their own way? And let those funds, go to the poor?

Sir, who gave you, the right to tax the working-class, for your vacous, inane thumb-sucking? As Japan, South Korea, China, and India surpass the USA in so many ways? If you’re looking to start another “Boston Tea Party” about the out-dated, pedalogical dreck that you’re dumping on the working class and their children — keep it up. You’ll get it.

Art, Graduate Student at Midwest university (public), at 10:31 am EDT on May 23, 2005

So, the percentage of college professors identifying themselves as liberal as vallooned since 1984. I suppose one explanation is the usual conservative one: liberals have captured higher ed through bias in hiring, etc. But that’s hardly the only plausible explanation. Perhaps the trend has something to do with the rightward drift of mainstream political discourse during the Reagan years. Perhaps the professoriate has not so much drifted leftward as the rest of the country has drifted rightward, leaving more and more faculty to define themselves as an increasingly conservative culture defines them, as “liberal.” Then again, maybe the Reagan Revolution convinced legions of intelligent young conservatives that greed is indeed good, and that comparatively low-paying careers in academia are bad. Greedy conservatives might be self-selecting themselves out of the academy; the problem might not be rooted so much in liberal bias as in faulty conservative values.

Who knows? It’s an empirical question that really ought to be investigated before conservatives go popping off about it. Unless, of course, their concern is not the truth itself but delegitimizing an institution that resists their agenda.

David Mazel, at 2:53 pm EDT on May 23, 2005

Responses

Many thanks to those who took the time to read or comment upon the piece. To respond to some of the posts, in order of appearance:

1.) on Mr. Easwaran’s comment: Indeed, as reported by the students, the professor’s quote was “white English is the oppressors’ language.” I broke it up to produce a more user-friendly writing style, but I probably should have reproduced the quote as is.

2.) on Prof. Debs’ comment: My apologies for any lack of clarity in the article, since I tried to say that a three-step process on dispositions/social justice exists (ideological imbalance; social justice requirement; new NCATE guidelines requiring assessment on the social justice requirement). Without the third (NCATE) aspect of the tale, there wouldn’t be much of a story here.

on the links: I’ve tested the links the the various social justice requirements in both Mozilla and IE, and they seem to work, but perhaps they’re not functional with Opera or another smaller browser.

on digging out the social justice goals: I don’t control where Ed Departments place the various goals in their internal documents. I do plead guilty to reading the various mission statements/conception documents of the ed schools.

on the polls of ideological imbalance in the faculty: even the Educational establishment (as seen in the AAUP quote) is no longer making the claim that each of the myriad surveys on the issue that have appeared are structurally flawed; the new claim is that the ideological imbalance doesn’t matter.

Finally, as for Marquette, it indeed is a religious institution. But if Prof. Debs wants to wager that the conception of social justice held by Marquette’s Ed faculty is closer to that of Pope Benedict than to the contemporary secular Left, I’d be happy to take the wager.

3.) on Mr. Proyect’s comment: I’m not aware of too many people who describe ABC News as a “rightwing” media outlet.

4.) on Mr. Mazel’s comment: This essay is not about the reasons for an ideological imbalance among the nation’s faculty. It instead seeks to point out the danger of requirements that can become little more than political litmus tests given the ideological imbalance among the nation’s faculty.

KC Johnson, Professor at Brooklyn College, at 5:58 pm EDT on May 23, 2005

Disposition for Bias

Frankly, it is not the business of the professoriate to indoctrinate the captives in their classrooms in any political ideology. Of course, it is much easier to do this when you hold the absolute power of the grade, the dissertation or employment over those you seek to oppress.

If the professoriate wants to support any political ideology, then they should get off their lazy duffs and make it happen outside the classroom. Perhaps they feel that their ideology is so weak that, without coercion and brainwashing, they couldn’t convert the masses.

The student pays for the service provided by the faculity. None of us wants to shell out money to be brainwashed. Most of the students are smart enough to come to their own conclusions. Perhaps that is what the academic ideologues fear most.

Redleg, at 6:30 pm EDT on May 23, 2005

disposition or mere mornitude

I have been an education perfesser for eight years. Before that, sociology for 25 years. In my experience at my current and no doubt last post, and based on an analysis of about 200 ed school websites, there were no more than 5 ed schools that did NOT tout political ideology as their main sales pitch and curricular core. Social justice, equality, diversity, multi-cultural senstivity.

It was rare to find an ed school that even mentioned effective teaching in passing. Or skill at analyzing curricula. Or skill at designing instruction. Or knowledge of the preponderance of research, or even a hint that reading the research might be a good idea.

No, the role of teacher was presented as an ersatz assortment of values, skills, and “practices” that most closely resemble social work in a group-therapeutic milieu, the purpose of which is to “liberate children from the oppression” of external authority, rules for reasoning, right answers, practice, and mastery; and to produce a just society, whatever that may mean.

Of course, classroom teachers realize in about 10 minutes that the bilge served up in ed schools is a prescription for establishing an environment designed to produce egoism, confusion, and ignorance.

It may seem harsh to say this (but it is true) that most ed perfessers are neither brigtht enough nor well-read enough to have any reasoned political philsophies and positions. The push ideologically correct dispositions for two reasons.

1. That’s about as precise as they can get. [Not one ed school in my sample had an inventory of skills that defined a prepared teacher. In other words, they don’t even KNOW what an effective teacher is supposed to look like.]

2. Ed schools and their certifying organizations (NCATE, INTASC, etc.) CAN’T point to any data showing that graduates leave ed schools knowing how to teach anything.

Therefore, pushing dispositions is their default position.

As to a left bias on campuses generally? All you have to do is read syllabi in the social sciences, English departments, and history.

See if you can find a course that focuses on conservative topics or that has students reading conservative writers.

For example, see if you can find a history course with a title that is anything like “America’s core values” or “America as a civilization.” Fat chance. But you’ll find all sorts of courses with titles such as “Racial, class, and sexual inequality in America.” Or, “American hegemony.”

But this, too, in part reflects the poor education and mental negligibility of the current professoriate outside of Classics (though Classics has its share of pomo imbeciles) and the sciences. Unable to think of serious questions, and certainly unable to answer them, their default career is merely writing drivel wrapped around an evocative theme, such as gender apartheid, or gender as a social construction, or the Pequod as a microcosm of psychotic patriarchy.

Professor Plum, at 4:38 am EDT on May 24, 2005

ABC

I am really not surprised that Professor Johnson denies that WABC is a rightwing outlet. For those less ideologically committed, I recommend Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting’s web resources on ABC TV and Radio:

http://www.fair.org/media-outlets/disney-abc.html

Louis Proyect, Columbia University, at 10:05 am EDT on May 24, 2005

FAIR = front for M. Moore, ACLU, et al

” ..For those less ideologically committed, I recommend Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting’s web resources on ABC ..”

Oh, please, give us a break. Everyone knows where (alleged) FAIR gets its $$$ from (Ed Asner, Ralph Nader, Howard Dean, Dennis Kusinich, et al). FAIR is about as fair and even-handed with GWB as Jeff Gannon was with GWB. This is just an indication of how out-of-touch, the academy is, with reality. The average 12-year-old, made cynical by TV, could Google this, in 10 minutes. Please — try to do better, next time.

“.. The same is true for social sciences. US history is a disconsolate, lonely rest stop ..”

Yes, well, given how poorly U.S. students do, on recalling basic FACTS about U.S. history (e.g. Pearl Harbor), re-doing the basics is necessary. In the Sunday NYTimes, NYT pop-quizzed new U.S. Education Secretary on state capitals (she managed to get them correctly).

Art, Graduate Student at Midwest university (public), at 11:19 am EDT on May 24, 2005

“Please — try to do better, next time.”

Good advice. Why don’t you take it and show that FAIR is actually biased instead of relying on ad hominmem attacks on them as a result of their supposed funding sources?

Reality Check, at 1:30 pm EDT on May 25, 2005

Let’s look at the available data

Two reports released by the conservative American Enterprise Institute indicate that charges of left-leaning bias in schools of education have no merit: “Learning to Lead? What Gets Taught in Principal-Preparation Programs” and “Textbook Leadership? An Analysis of Leading Books Used in Principal Preparation.”

See http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/pepg/

Thanks for not being a zombie, at 7:55 am EDT on May 26, 2005

You’re a real charmer, Art

To quote, briefly, from the Chronicle of Higher Ed:

The report entitled “Learning to Lead” “analyzed a national cross section of 31 principal-preparation programs and reviewed more than 200 course syllabi, covering almost 2,500 weeks of courses. They found that only about 12 percent of the course weeks focused on exposing principal candidates to different educational and pedagogical philosophies, to debates about the nature and purpose of public schooling, and to examinations of the racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic context of education.”

http://chronicle.com/prm/daily/2005/05/2005052605n.htm

Thanks for not being a zombie, at 10:07 am EDT on May 26, 2005

Direct from Harvard site: the facts, vs. Chron of HE

Per Mr. Zombie:

“Let’s look at the available data

Two reports released by the conservative American Enterprise Institute indicate that charges of left-leaning bias in schools of education ..

See http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/pepg/”

From http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/pepg/

May 6, 2005

New PEPG Research Papers on Principal PreparationFrederick Hess and Andrew Kelly of the American Enterprise Institute have authored two new research papers on principal preparation for PEPG. In the first paper (PEPG 05-02: “Learning to Lead? What Gets Taught in Principal Preparation Programs"), they find little evidence that principal preparation programs are introducing students to a broad range of management, organizational, or administrative theory and practice. This paper also appears in the Summer 2005 issue of Education Next under the title, “The Accidental Principal.”

In the second paper (PEPG 05-03: “Textbook Leadership? An Analysis of Leading Books Used in Principal Preparation") they analyze widely adopted education administration textbooks and report that these texts paid little attention to accountability, efficiency, or how to make critical personnel decisions. Moreover, the books provided little guidance on how to use accountability as a management tool or use resources more efficiently.

Yes .. ed-mgt can be politics — if you’re totally clueless.

Art, at 12:07 pm EDT on May 26, 2005

For example...

The report “Learning to Lead” says...

“Education school critics assert that courses are often characterized by an ideological tilt that influences content (Steiner 2004). Does the evidence suggest such a bias in the case of principal preparation courses? The data in Table 1 suggests that only about 12% of course weeks explicitly focus on promoting particular norms or values.” (27)

http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/pepg/P...Kelly_Learning_to_Lead_PEPG05.02.pdf

Thanks for not being a zombie, at 12:47 pm EDT on May 26, 2005

The plural of “anecdote"...

...is not “evidence.”

The American Enterprise Institute report is based on a systematic analysis of a great deal of data concerning what happens in the classroom, not a series of quotes from department mission statements, which may or may not reflect actual practice.

If you know of a similar systematic analysis that would support your point of view, please let us know.

If you have evidence that there is a vast gulf between the ideological content of courses designed for future teachers and courses designed for future principals, please let us know.

Finally, if you have an explanation for what any of this has to do with why Kerry lost, please do let us know.

I’ll let you have the last word, and I’ll stop taking up so much of Inside Higher Ed’s bandwith.

Thanks for not being a zombie, at 2:09 pm EDT on May 26, 2005

How “Chron of H.E.” zombie’d Kerry-ites

From “Learning To Lead” exec-summary, page 1:

“In the 293 norms and values course weeks, however, there was strong evidence of normative bias in the topic descriptions and assigned readings — with 190 course weeks indentifiably left-leaning, 102 neutral, and one identifiably right-leaning.”

Darn .. 190 left-leaning, one right-leaning. Darn those Republicans — they are obvously trying to take over. Mr. Kerry, please save the USA .. tee, hee, hee ..

Art, at 6:36 am EDT on May 27, 2005

Why Kerry lost, Pt. VI

“Since you didn’t explain the connection between FAIR and the ACLU, I think that you made it up. It is very bad about to lie about these things, and I think that you lied.”

http://www.fair.org/activism/disney-moore-update.html

http://www.fair.org/counterspin/043004.html

Why, yes Lar-dy, FAIR is totally objective and unbiased, and eveyone should believe everything FAIR publishes about GWB.

And shame on me, for forgetting that the ACLU defended ol’ Rush Limbaugh and the American Nazi Party, in a minority of cases they handled. Why, I’m such a rotten doody.

And shame on me, for actually reading that Harvard report, and finding the quote that the Chronicle of Higher Education failed to notice. A gross error of judgment that would get some reporters fired.

Art, at 4:23 pm EDT on May 27, 2005

Why Kerry lost, Pt. VII

“Mr. Hess and Mr. Kelly did find...that instruction devoted to such topics was biased, with 65 percent of those course weeks qualifying as left-leaning, 35 percent as neutral, and less than 1 percent as right-leaning.”

Thank you, for providing the information, that some of us cannot afford. Quick points:

- Where do the authors work? What West Coast school?

- Which four-letter foundation funded report?

- In what schools (e.g., Ivy/blue state) is the data skewed to? Given that — what is the downstream effect to the land-grant schools?

- In the aforementioned — how many total K-12 students affected? That is, 12% of schools, but 80% of total K-12 student population? Like, there are more K-12 students on the coasts (blue states), vs. Middle America (red states)?

Art, at 5:34 pm EDT on May 27, 2005

Why Kerry lost, Pt. VIII

First, and foremost — this began, about the topic of teaching training/teacher education. These Harvard/KSG reports are about MANAGERS of teachers — principals. They are SEPARATE issues. This whole thing, started by “Zombie,” is so logically absurd and inane, it defies common sense and rationality. It makes Sean Hannity and Al Franken seem typical.

From “Leading To Lead:”

Page 30: “Table 10 suggests that there is a distinct left-leaning normative tilt in those weeks that address norms and values .. it was most marked at elite [e.g., Ivy-level] and large [e.g., land-grant mega-universities] programs, but even at typical programs, the majority of course weeks were left-leaning and none were right-leaning. In the end .. the imbalance of ideological perspectives does raise cautionary flags about instructor’s interest in entertaining competing schools of thought.”

“The American Enterprise Institute is a well-known conservative think tank.”

Conservative? Center-right? Which one? Are you sure? Is Brookings ‘liberal?’ Center-left?

How/why did AEI and KSG join forces? In any event — ain’t this a great country?

Art, at 9:27 pm EDT on May 27, 2005

Principals and Teachers

Principals and teachers are both products of the education programs that Johnson argues are biased. (Note that the language of “social justice” he cites is on the homepages of education colleges and divions, not individual departments within those colleges and divisions.)

Thomas, at 6:08 am EDT on May 28, 2005

Content analysis — Prof. Johnson’s viewpoint

“Note that the language of “social justice” he cites is on the homepages of education colleges and divions, not individual departments within those colleges and divisions.”

From Prof. Johnson’s viewpoint:

No. of mentions of “principal” — zero (0) No. of mentions of “administra*” — zero (0) No. of mentions of “manag*” — zero (0)No. of mentions of “homepage” — zero (0)

Mr. Thomas, if you think principals and teachers are one-and-the-same — why don’t you campaign to merge their programs, saving billions of dollars, that could be used to assist the poor? (Good luck — that’s at least a 50-year effort.)

Art, at 7:23 am EDT on May 28, 2005

So what?

So let’s just say that education programs do lean left?

So what?

Is anyone going to deny that MBA programs, for example, lean right? Different industries attract different demographic and ideological profiles of both students and educators. Education has typically been a hallmark of liberal platforms, so I, for one, am neither surprised nor unhappy that social justice is frequently a major component of their core values.

But I don’t see anyone bitching about the absence of social justice language in business school mission programs, either. . .

Cats and Dogma, Asst. Professor at George Washington University, at 2:56 pm EDT on May 28, 2005

Round and round he goes

“As for the zombies who see no difference between teacher education and educational administration...”

Not a single person in this thread has argued that there’s no difference, so it’s unclear why you keep harping on it. However, both programs are usually contained within the same colleges or divisions; it’s the language of those colleges or divisions that KC Johnson picks up on in his article above.

For example, the College of Education at Eastern Michigan, in which *both* the Teacher Preparation and Principal/Educational Administration programs to which you provide links are located, states that it wants its students to “become ethical, productive and contributing participants and leaders in a democratic and diverse society.” It seems that this language would set off alarm bells for Johnson. The college webpage does not say that these goals are pursued in one program but not the other. http://www.emich.edu/coe/home/guid_principals.html

“‘Table 10 suggests that there is a distinct left-leaning normative tilt in those weeks that address norms and values ..’”

Right. 12% of the course weeks covered what could be called political content. 65% of that 12% was left-leaning. Again, not a very high percentage of the total.

If you are a graduate student in education, I hope for your future students’ sake that you learn to engage with the ideas and opinions of others without resorting to attacking their character or intelligence. Please devote some serious thought to this.

Thomas, at 10:07 pm EDT on May 28, 2005

Healthy Criticism and Critical Disagreement

This article is targeting liberals and leftists, but the argument isn’t persuasive since it is highly opinion based and not factual. If leftist ideologies are incorrect, Prof. Johnson hasn’t showed how and why; nor as he suggested why right-wing ideologies are correct. As a Prof. I’m sure, if he’s targeting liberal professor and their influence on students, I’m sure as a right winger he also has influence on his students, since there is no such thing as objectivity. (Without doubt, many complain about him as well; and him imposing his views on students.) In fact, the closest view to objectivity is leftist views if anything, since leftists consider all people and their sufferings; not the “white agendas.” For this reason, I believe even if the Professor that Prof. Johnson is targeting claimed English a language of the oppressors, I don’t blame this professor, rather I give her props. Think about it, any immigrant that came to this country is and was forced to learn this language and adopt this country’s culture; all for conformity and promotion. Why can’t one keep his or her individuality and uniqueness in terms of culture and religion etc? English is the language of imperialists; in fact not even did the pioneers of this country speak English. Right-wingers with this shallow thinking will never understand the minorities that in fact are the majority. For this same reason minorities are constantly oppressed in this country. And for this Social Justice must be achieved. There is no better way to promote social justice than to start with schools, i.e. public schools. Furthermore, the “Language and Literacy” class and the professor that teaches this class at Brooklyn College that Prof. Johnson criticizes, shouldn’t be based on the views of five students! Take another view: I took this class, and enjoyed it!! As a minority (Muslim— a constant target in this country via news, politics etc,) I felt more empowered in this class than I have in any other. And I’m not the only one who feels this way! The professor of this “Language and Literacy” class is a humble professor; who wishes that her students become empowered and she wishes that these future teachers empower their students, the historically oppressed! If you think about it anti-Semitism was always around; Jews were always oppressed, and with US alliance with Israel (and alienation of Muslims and Arabs), they’ve (the Jews and Israelis) gained recognition. Other races, ethnicities and followers of other religions deserve the same recognition. If Professor Johnson is arguing that seeking the ideal (social justice) is a political thing; than the professor needs to wake up and realize that we live in a highly political world, today more so than ever. As for the professor requiring the students to watch 911 in her class, there is nothing whatsoever wrong with that. She is the professor and has the authority to have her students watch anything and read anything she likes. Also, from what I understand, the Professor asked the class if they would like to watch the movie, and the class unanimously agreed. Also, Professors constantly make students watch right-wing biased movies and read such authors; but than its not considered such a bad thing, as long as your homogenous. Well the world today and America is heterogeneous. Last but not least speaking of Israel and its “so called right to defend itself against suicide bombers;” raising such issue is a highly political issue. In addition, how do you think Israel became a state? Surprise Surprise: via terrorism! The Palestinian refugee in Jordan, aside from historical archives and history books are clear proof. Muslims and Palestinians have a right to defend themselves and free themselves from occupation and Israeli terrorism! One needs to see the other side and facts regarding Palestine. Just seeing Israeli side that Prof. Johnson recommends is wrong. Also, “Muslim Terrorism” is so popular today; yet if you look at other intelligences (Russia) they see this only as US propaganda for oil; and this in fact is not a real threat. Its only US and the current Bush administration’s leverage for his and the country’s greedy ambitions. Perhaps Bush and such politicians are ignorant of the negative effects that their foreign policies have on the countries they bombard; perhaps they don’t care, because they don’t believe in social justice, rather “white supremacy.” For Prof. Johnson and other right wingers, I liked to say wear my cover: my color, my dress, and my religion for a day, and walk into Wall Street trying to get a job. Trust me as a female Muslim who has more to offer from her brain than body, she will receive no recognition, until she lifts her veil. I ask, why must I?

Jay, Student at Brooklyn College, at 9:01 pm EDT on May 29, 2005

Stop The Discrimination

Muslim women are doing business today in the Middle East and other Muslim countries. Obviously you are ignorant of Muslim history as well; Islam was the first religion to give women rights in terms of property and ownership. Prophet Muhammad’s wife was a businesswoman. A friend of mine worked at Wall Street for many years before she became a practicing Muslim. She knew how to do business; they loved her. Now after covering her precious body from, she can’t work there anymore.

It’s unfortunate that people like you are America’s leaders today. How are you going to discriminate Muslims and Islam, and than go into their countries commit genocide against them and than steal their oil?

If “Muslim terrorism” is such a problem today, why do you think that is? It’s because of American foreign policy and its open discrimination against Islam and Muslims. Muslims have their own religion, and system of government, why must they follow the American democracy and culture? Trust me we are uncomfortable with interests, nudity and all other sorts of other corruption and immorality. Islam is a beautiful religion that we would like to preserve.

Also, why should the Jews be the only ones recognized? Why should we only see their side? Where is the justice there?

If you can understand the retaliation against some “suicide bombers,” understand the retaliation the Muslims have every time Jews and Americans commit genocide against Muslims; and take away the religion and rights of Muslims.

If you really want to stop the violence, change the foreign policy and think of Muslims with an open mind, just because we look different doesn’t mean we are any less than you. Wow, racism and discrimination in this country never fades. Martin Luther King Jr. would be so disappointed today.

Change America and its policy against the Middle East; don’t worry about changing the Middle East. Muslim their content; leave them and their oil alone.

Jay, Student at Brooklyn College, at 1:36 pm EDT on May 30, 2005

What about Propaganda?

Stealing is one thing they don’t think Muslims will do; Islam is based on certain principles. Stealing is a major sin in Islam, for which the punishment in this life is chopping off the hand that the person stole from. Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said, that if he found out that his daughter stole, he would even have her hands chopped off. And he loved her dearly. Again your ignorance of Islam and Muslims is the reason for your arrogance and belief that Muslims deserve to be discriminated. Furthermore, read some books on pop culture; you’ll understand that this fear doesn’t come from a real threat; it’s the media that’s making the public live in fear for capitalist agendas.

Jay, Student at Brooklyn College, at 5:06 am EDT on May 31, 2005

Minorities have Rights!

Not all Muslims cover there faces. Look at the statistics its less than maybe 1 % especially in America. If such is the case, a Muslim women dresses similarly to a Christian nun and a Jewish lady; why haven’t they become such targets of fear?? If you want to take the case with men.. Muslim men grew their beards the same way Jewish men do.. Why haven’t they become the targets? Why must one flee a country? Why can’t I be treated fairly in a country I was born in? Shouldn’t I attempt to fix the discrimination and racism here, and make this country a better place? Are you trying to say our leaders: Malcolm X and Martin Luther King were failures? That there cause was loss cause? If we all left the country, only whites will remain! Is that your ultimate goal? Are you trying to say the White Race is above all? Who decides who can reside in this country and who can’t? Who said God made America for European migrants to steal the land and rights from “Native Americans,” and to bring in African Americans as their slaves here; and after emancipating them, have them still suffer from racism! Many of those African Americans were Muslims and many now are converts or reverts of Islam. Trust me fear in this country of Muslims that the corporate America initiates isn’t of stealing! You are the first to make such an argument. Such stereotypes are really targeted towards Blacks and Hispanics; are you saying they should leave the country as well, since it’s so bad? Who makes you the sole owner? Your right you have your right to your views; just as the KKK (are granted in the American Constitution) regarding all other races especially the African Americans. I’ve been discriminated in this country and still am, to the extent of violence. Ever since I started covering, I’ve also been attacked by weaponry; having experienced this first hand as a teenager on a regular basis (and still am constantly,) I might walk in fear but I’m still not shallow like you. I don’t judge those attackers and generalize them in terms of their race or religion. I don’t think all Christians are fascist dictators because of Hitler. I don’t think all American kids are violent because of Columbine and other school shootings. I don’t think all White people are terrorists because of Timothy McViegh. I don’t think all Jews are crude heartless people because they murder my brothers and sisters in Palestine, displace them on a regular basis, take away their rights that Islam and the enlightenment thinking have offered them, and bombard their villages, steal more land, and dismantle their houses and stores etc; (because when I march a Palestinian Protest, I find some Zionists next to me, fighting and chanting for my cause.) Wake up, there’s terrorism in this country as well; challenge it here before you go elsewhere. Do you realize how America has destroyed other countries? If I were to go to another you think I would have a better chance there, with the US corporations paying me pennies to do hard labor? America has left all other races and followers of other religions helpless; even if I leave this country, the effects of the American foreign policies follow me. Again why must I runaway, I should live freely wherever I wish.

Jay, Student at Brooklyn College, at 11:26 am EDT on May 31, 2005

White student here

I am disappointed in Mr. Johnson’s assumptions about the unamed Brooklyn College professor who he insisted said “white English is the opprssors language". In defense of that professor, I have taken that course. A little research on his own part would prevent him from sounding so foolish. This professor teaches students not to believe what they are taught, but rather to critically analyze that which is imposed on them. She utilizes the language of Paulo Friere, a revolutionary writer from South America who challenges systems and languages of oppression. The professor in question taught me that the oppressor can be any one in any situation and that self awareness is critical when teaching a classroom full of students who are programmed to accept everything that is taught to them without arguing. Students need to feel that they have a voice. Showing students that professors and teachers bring their own agendas to the classroom unintentionally (or intentionally) is what her class is all about. The professor often plays devils advocate in order to elicit actual thinking from her students. I am sorry if those few students heard her say “white English is the langauge of the oppressor” and believed that this is the professors belief and that she wanted to impose this on them. They obviously didn’t read Paulo Friere’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed, a required reading which expands on the idea of language being utilized and manipulated by the oppressors and that minorites don’t really have a chance in a white world that expects them to be able to speak proper english, when proper english is forced onto them, rejecting their own coded laugauge system, rather than the teacher saying you have a certain way of communicating with your friends and family which is a culturally acceptable way of communicating, but you also have to be able to speak “white English", proper english in order to succeed financially. Of course, it is not universally true that this must happen but rather that childrens odds for success in the future depends on how well they were prepared. No wonder kids reject proper english, they are oppressed by this command and they retaliate against that feeling, not proper english, but proper english is the tool of retailiation that gives them the power to reject the oppressors opinion and reinforce their own behavior. Children need to be shown all sides of the stories we teach them. Unfortuantely most schools do not do this leaving colleges to clean up what secondary schools have an obligation to do. It is a shame that those student felt misunderstood, I feel sorry for them, they probably grew up with the teaching that educators know best, and when they couldn’t accept what the professor said, they should have stood up and defined the problem they had accepting her argument, which I suspect has been extremely manipulated by the press and those who it benefits. I defend that professor 100%, who has been under scrutiny for something that is hearsay, she is not teaching racism or her own beliefs, for shame, she is teaching us to think.

Joyce Larson, does anyone care to do some research at former brooklyn college, currently city college—CUNY, at 9:01 am EDT on June 10, 2005

Oh, really?

Joyce Larson Wrote:

“This professor teaches students not to believe what they are taught, but rather to critically analyze that which is imposed on them.”

It obviously didn’t take. Joyce swallowed this Friere garbage hook, line and sinker.

Grant, at 8:02 pm EDT on August 24, 2005

I lost respect for diversity when the black son of a Ph.D. (U Mich!), who also went to daddy’s private college in the same department, told me (son of school dropouts) that I had “white privilege.” I wasn’t teaching, but out of the goodness of my heart had a cross-cultural certificate in education. I went to the state board (California), and publicly demanded that it be revoked. I’ve been looking for a rationale why another state should revoke a credential that I don’t use. “I lack the disposition” sounds great!

Robert A., at 8:33 pm EST on November 12, 2005