Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Tuesday December 20 2016, @01:36PM   Printer-friendly
from the foolproof-like-all-other-watchlists dept.

The latest manifestation of the conservative targetting of academia is the Professor Watchlist, created by the "activist organization" Turning Point USA, founded by rising star Charlie Kirk. It's stated purpose is to "watch" professors "who discriminate against conservative students and advance leftist propaganda in the classroom"

Of course, this is not new. David Horowitz has written a book called The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America . HeterodoxAcademy.org has rational articles discussing the liberal slant to modern college campuses. Nicholas Kristoff writes an interesting piece on the same topic. However, with the election of President Trump, the stakes may have been raised. A professor in California has gone incognitio after criticizing Trump in the classroom and receiving death threats.

But more important is how the attempt to blacklist liberal academics has actually backfired. George Yancy [not the George Yancey from the Kristoff piece above] published a response, "I Am a Dangerous Professor" in the New York Times, and since then it seems to have become de rigueur for all academics to get their name on the Professor Watchlist in order to cement their tenure. An entire hashtag on Twitter has taken form: #trollprofwatchlist! People have taken to mocking the list by suggesting candidates such as Thomas Jefferson, Gandhi, and Jesus, not to mention Socrates, who obviously belongs.

Charlie Kirk may not be dangerous, but he did start this list. I am watching him now.


[Editor note - This story was substantially rewritten for balance. As always, the original submission is available at the link below.]

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 20 2016, @03:47PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 20 2016, @03:47PM (#443833)

    still required attendance

    It disgusts me when I hear of colleges that require attendance for lectures.

    How can an institution promote learning when they treat adults like irresponsible children who have no ownership over their education? Of course, promoting learning is not what brings in money.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 1) by Francis on Tuesday December 20 2016, @06:45PM

    by Francis (5544) on Tuesday December 20 2016, @06:45PM (#443959)

    What are you talking about? If they don't require attendance, that would increase profit margins as they'd be able to cut down on the in person student services and there'd be less need for things like parking.

    But, by the same token, you're talking about students that are coming in from the K-12 system typically and are needing to take breadth requirement classes so that the school isn't turning out people that are completely unqualified for anything. We've got enough dumbasses out there with college degrees, but no actual history of thinking as it is.

    But, as far as attendance goes, that's mostly shitty colleges that do that, I'm not aware of any colleges in this part of the country that force people to come in other than on days with exams or projects due.