SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Professors worried students will share lectures with 'right wing sites'
Jon Street
Managing Editor
@JonStreet
on Mar 19, 2020 at 12:42 PM EDTProfessors across the country are expressing concern over courses being moved online as a result of the coronavirus pandemic.
One professor expressed concern that "right wing sites" could expose what is being taught in college courses.Professors across the country are taking to social media to express their concern over being forced to deliver their course lectures online amid the coronavirus outbreak, sharing with each other tips on how to limit the number of people who are able to see what they're teaching students, and criticizing "right wing sites" and even Campus Reform, specifically.
Texas Christian University Associate Professor of Political Science Emily Farris tweeted Thursday, "if you are recording a lecture on anything controversial, be prepared for right wing sites to ask students to share it." Campus Reform reached out to Farris via Twitter Direct Messaging to allow her the opportunity to further explain her comments or to clarify. She later blocked the author of this article on Twitter.
LaSalle University Assistant Professor of Public Health Christen Rexing replied to Farris' tweet, asking why others could find topics such as "gun safety, women's health, elections, etc." to be "controversial, as they are "evidence-based."
"Seems like the flood gates could open," Rexing commented in response to courses moving online.
University of North Carolina political science graduate student Stephanie Shady also weighed in, saying, "Annnnd I just realized that the second half of my course focuses on public opinion towards and politicization of immigration. This will be interesting." Another user with the Twitter name "Prof CWO" replied "Sigh, I teach about white nationalism and this has been my biggest fear since we began transitioning to online instruction."
Columbia University political science professor Jeffrey Lax said he has been "thinking about" how students would be able to record classes.
Trinity College Associate Professor of Political Science Isaac Kamola who, as Campus Reform previously reported sought to hire a "Campus Reform Early Responder," specifically mentioned Campus Reform in his reply to Farris.
"If Campus Reform harasses you or someone you know, the best response is to 'follow the money.' Campus Reform receives $1.4 million from the Leadership Institute, a Koch-funded organization designed to delegitimize academics they consider too left. They are not a new [sic] source," Kamola tweeted.
A user whose website says they are a history professor at a "community college in North Texas" wrote, "I'm taking steps to limit this but nothing is foolproof."
Farris asked how Gunter was working to ensure her lectures are not made public, to which Gunter responded with one tip for her colleague.
"Instead of posting videos direct to LMS (which would then own them) I'm posting links to the videos on youtube. The videos themselves are 'unlisted' meaning you can't find them in a search or if you go to my page-only if you have the direct link. Doesn't stop link sharing though," Gunter said.
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=14563
So, here I am, trying to wrap my head around the fact that liberals FEAR the possibility of the public learning what they are teaching. Does that make any sense at all? If I want to shape the world, wouldn't I WANT more people to hear the word, to understand my thoughts and goals, and hopefully to get on board with my agenda?
Instead, we have liberals who FEAR the idea that their thoughts might go viral.
Imagine that. We might suspect that liberal college professors are actually just propaganda indoctrination technicians. Brainwash the kids while they are young, before they develop critical thinking skills, right?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 22 2020, @10:34PM (12 children)
I hope most people realize that the lead in to the "what is sex" question is an explanation is the reiteration of mothers have babies and then that babies come from sex. So the natural next question is what is sex, hence the excerpt. And the reason why CSE uses a broad definition is because the research shows that using a broad definition of sex reduces all sexual behaviors in children and reduces incidents of sexual abuse by adults. But yes, pass around small excerpts of whole lessons that are part of a comprehensive curricula to take out of context, just as the educators are warning you would.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Monday March 23 2020, @07:55AM (11 children)
The literal fuck are you talking about?
- Equating sexual intercourse to fellatio and anal is wrong, not from a religious point of view (not for my religion at least, which is not concerned on what is done but on who does it to whom), it is wrong from a scientific POV;
- paragraphs should summarize content;
- general warning about the dangers of sex are not explained, especially in the relation between promiscuity and danger, in fact the focus is on the type of activity
- my body my choice is subliminally planted outside the context of abortion, or am I mistaken?
You didn't realize all of these problem, prof? truly, leftists are just a bunch of cells.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Monday March 23 2020, @07:58AM
> paragraphs
I meant headings, you should desume it from the context ofc
Account abandoned.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 23 2020, @08:31PM (1 child)
I see what you are saying. You want two paragraphs of a single page of a single chapter of a book of a larger curriculum to have the entire nuance of the curriculum jammed into them. The only way for people to learn things is to take them step-by-step and attach new knowledge to things they already know. Doing what you suggest would just leave kids confused and uninformed. And they wonder why teachers are worried about people taking what they say out of context.
But it is not wrong to say that sexual activity includes those things. Or are you one of those who say gay men and lesbian women can't really have sex or that as long as you don't stick the penis in the vagina there is no risk of pregnancy or that getting raped in your anus or mouth is less of a violation than in a vagina?
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday March 26 2020, @02:08PM
You want two paragraphs of a single page of a single chapter of a book of a larger curriculum to have the entire nuance of the curriculum jammed into them.
when you sample two burgers from a pub and they taste poor, do you go on sampling everything to be sure?
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Thursday March 26 2020, @12:32AM (3 children)
You have *zero* standing to be complaining about sex and children, Opus Dei. Remember that passage about attending to the beam in your own eye before you point out the mote in your neighbor's? Start trying to clean your demonic, blasphemous Church out and get rid of all those sadistic paederasts.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday March 26 2020, @02:06PM (2 children)
If I am responsible for antichristian pedos guess hou you fare for orthodox leftist pedos. Meanwhile boy scouts seem to do very poorly and nobody bats an eye.
All of this being OT wrt the comment you replied to.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 26 2020, @02:53PM (1 child)
Damn yer dumb, and a fair bit evil too. Or is the evil just compounding stupidity gone wrong?
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday March 30 2020, @07:15AM
Abstinence makes the Church grow fondlers, as the Bot here is good and well aware, in a sort Milo Suckapriestalot sort of way. Never got this about religion, always seemed to be front for sexual perversion of one sort or another, beginning with those darn Pythagoreans, what with their prohibition on beans, and the Knights Templar, what with their "love that cannot be spoken" nearer to god and buggery. I still don't get it. If your religion involves orgasms, perhaps you auto auto-ass-sphincterate sooner, that later, so you can be reincarnated as a homosexual donkey or zebra, of Republican Senator.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday April 05 2020, @03:46AM (3 children)
Not seeing the equating myself. They're instead stating that there's this big category, "having sex" that includes all three. It's like saying that a doctor, fire fighter, and astronaut are all professions. They aren't being equated by that observation.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Sunday April 05 2020, @10:09AM (2 children)
LOL way to miss the point. Let's sidestep the cultural brainwashing, one that currently makes the bigots appear, well, BE, the more rational ones.
There is another big category, chewing. Chewing gum, and chewing food. If a basic textbook taught stuff like this, I'd burn it. Not because of some sacred religion that says only food is sacred and chewing gum sends you to hell, but because it FAILS TO TEACH. What the fuck are you chewing for? YOU TELL THAT FIRST.
Another less basic textbook SHOULD consider the problems that chewing and not eating MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT cause to the organism. Because it is OBVIOUSLY not functional activity in a system which takes function very seriously. The question is like, what if I keep a car in first gear? Can I, for how long?
Account abandoned.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday April 05 2020, @04:58PM (1 child)
Because? You already run into problems because chewing food has a different reason than chewing gum does. Same for sex. So you handwave for a paragraph about the multiple reasons for having sex: boyfriend pressured you into it, having fun, or trying to make a kid. Better go into the reasons for not having sex or you're going to create problems right there.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday April 07 2020, @12:13PM
>Because? You already run into problems because chewing food has a different reason than chewing gum does. Same for sex.
That is my point.
>So you handwave for a paragraph about the multiple reasons for having sex
Yes, that's called teaching vs. indoctrinating. Indoctrinating tells you what to do and what not, teaching gives you a framework for you to understand what's going on.
Account abandoned.