At the present time, journalism departments of American universities do not understand the importance of a truly competitive news media. Many news outlets are dominated by a centralized ownership that imposes its agenda upon the news reported. Fair and balanced news reporting requires that ownership of news sources be fragmented. It will take communication among massive numbers of people to accomplish that result. The only communication medium that will allow that is the Internet, which must remain a pure source of communication to accomplish these reforms. In addition to your other efforts, we recommend you support the “save the internet” project. Go to this link for more information.
William S. Scott, J.D.
William S. Scott, director of JEFound, presented at the accreditation hearings for the Association for Biblical Higher Education and the Association for Clinical Patoral Education, Inc. held on December 5-6, 2006 before the U. S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education, National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity.
Click here for his Biblical presentation. Click here for the complete transcript.
Click here for his Clinical presentation. Click here for the complete transcript.
Comments to below article:
Its a separation of Church from State Issue
The problem Americans who care about safety of all people World wide have with Middle Eastern Studies programs is the lack of criticism by the programs of the control Islam has over the region.
For example, Americans are asked to go Afghanistan and Iraq to die while the Constitutions of those Countries name Islam as their official religion.
Not one Middle Eastern Studies program leader has been quoted in the press as either opposed to the control Islam has or the fact that our troops are in harms way without any intent to separate Church from State. The American Government will participate in hanging their former leaders without any possibility of making Americans safer at night.
Neither the Middle Eastern Studies nor the Journalism Departments focus on this issue so Americans can have tangible reasons to oppose the use of violence to change Middle Eastern ideology.
The Great Decision Maker has free reign because academia lead by the U. S. Department of Education does nothing to force the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity to set tangible standards by which to judge formal education in general and Middle Eastern Studies departments in particular.
Democracy is more than the election of the leader. Hitler was elected. If we value our way of life, we must educate our future leaders on how to protect us from harm.
War with a religion can work, but the extent of the bloodshed by use of nuclear energy makes that method risky. Albert Einstein said it best: “I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”
If the Middle Eastern scholars want to avoid criticism from Horowitz and others, they must begin to be fair and balanced in their teaching. That begins with advocacy of separation of Islam from the governments of Middle Eastern Countries. Otherwise, the Middle Eastern departments are nothing more than a threat to the American way of life.
William Sumner Scott, J.D.
Judicial Equality Foundation, Inc.
From the Inside Higher Education website:
Jan. 15
Strategies on Academic Freedom
Post-9/11, many of the most intense debates about academic freedom have involved Middle Eastern studies. There have been numerous cases in which candidates for jobs or tenure have been opposed at least in part because of their views on the Middle East, with recent flare-ups at Barnard College and Wayne State University. At least 15 of the professors named by David Horowitz in his book last year on “the 101 most dangerous academics” study the Middle East — a proportion that is notable when considering that Middle Eastern studies programs are relatively small, and most students never take a course in the subject.
Related stories
In this environment, the Task Force on Middle Eastern Anthropology has issued a new handbook, “Academic Freedom and Professional Responsibility After 9/11.” Most of the handbook would apply well beyond anthropology and the project was endorsed by leading scholars of the Middle East from a range of disciplines — many of them professors whose work has been criticized by pro-Israel and conservative groups.
“In the post-September 11 context, untrammeled and free public debate about the relationship between the United States and the Middle East should be a key component of a concerted effort to prevent the reoccurrence of the horrific tragedies on U.S. soil, and to understand related cultural and political trends,” the report says. “Yet an open atmosphere in which scholars and students can analyze the events and repercussions of 2001 have come into the cross-hairs of ideologues who argue that everything has changed or ought to change since September 11, including traditional bedrock American values upholding freedom of speech and public debate.”
In recent years, the handbooks adds, there have been “escalating attempts to silence and marginalize university teachers who resist or challenge narrow black and white teaching.”
Much of the handbook consists of basic information and suggestions, with explanations of policies issued by the American Association of University Professors and others on faculty rights. Professors are encouraged to learn their institutions’ relevant policies, for example, so they have basic information before a controversy erupts.
Some of the most interesting material concerns the classroom — how to prevent and deal with interruptions from those making unfair statements or denigrating the ideas of the instructor or others. The handbook repeatedly states that professors must be willing to be challenged on their ideas, and to welcome a range of views in their courses, but distinguishes between those kinds of challenges and personal attacks.
Many suggestions focus on preventive strategies. For example, the handbook suggests that professors consider guidelines for classroom instruction. “Reminding students of what constitutes proper and productive classroom participation goes a long way towards avoiding unconstructive behavior later on,” the handbook says. Such information may also be included — with other policies — on a course syllabus, the handbook suggests.
Many classroom confrontations can be used for educational purposes, the handbook says. For example, if a student challenges the use of “occupation” by a professor, the professor might talk with the class about why that term is or isn’t appropriate, and the “political claims” that might be associated with alternative terms, such as “disputed territories.”
Technology is presented as a double-edged sword. Professors are advised that they might want to tape lectures that they know will be particularly controversial, so that they don’t find their words later distorted. But professors are also advised that some students secretly and selectively tape lectures of professors they may wish to attack or to share with groups that may wish to draw attention to a professor’s views. A good general rule, the handbook advises, is to have a policy on taping, announcing it at the beginning of a course, and making sure it is consistent with campus or state regulations.
At least one leader of a group that has been highly critical of Middle Eastern studies programs praised the handbook. “This handbook demonstrates the effectiveness of Campus Watch’s efforts to
restore intellectual balance to Middle East studies. Surely, absent the work over the years of Campus Watch and critics of higher education, this new document would never have been written, and the abuses it attempts to correct would continue unchecked,” said Winfield Myers, director of Campus Watch.
He added: “If professors heed the handbook’s calls to create a classroom environment in which civil disagreement is welcome, inflammatory language is eschewed, and topics outside the purview of the subject being taught are avoided, we will witness a revolution in higher education; that is precisely what we have been working for.”
— Scott Jaschik
Comments to below article:
Little Boxes
People will find ways to prove they are elite. The ones that count are total net worth and how one spends their free time. The average banker and average trucker make the same amount of money. The former rub with facts and people who help them make more money while the later are isolated with interests that are counter productive. They come together to keep people in the minority from achievement. They use the law to further their position. George Wallace had the local law on his side. If race is to be neutralized as a factor, we must have an educated public first — then laws to provide justice.
Lyndon Johnson did a good job of leadership with the 1964 Civil Rights Act. It cost the Democrats the South. Bigotry still exists in the United States.
Michigan voters proved that. The first step is to determine how long it will take to overcome the 150 years of denial of an adequate education to Blacks in this country. The voters are not qualified to answer that question. I would trust the leaders of the University of Michigan to know what they need to do. As well as the leaders who set admissions policy at other higher ed institutions. Their needs will be different, as witnessed by the Wayne State example. And, some will need to be forced to do right by minorities.
We also need more efforts like this one to create better public awareness of our history and similarities.
Bill
William Sumner Scott, J.D.
Judicial Equality Foundation, Inc.
From the Inside Higher Education website:
Jan. 11
Teaching America About Race
One thing is certain: Americans have strong perceptions — and misperceptions — about the meaning and significance of race. Attempting to poke holes in prejudices and provide the latest scientific and scholarly understanding of the issue, the American Anthropological Association has created an interactive educational program called RACE: Are We So Different? Also featured is a traveling museum exhibition, and project organizers are developing educational materials for teachers and organizing future conferences.
Related stories
“We have taken a comprehensive look at race in America and have spent five and a half years pulling this together,” said Peggy Overbey, the program’s project director.
The project’s Web site presents quizzes, timelines and other interactive activities designed to consider questions on the history of race in America, human variation across the planet, and race as a “lived experience.”
The interactive timeline is especially helpful, as it allows students to track race in America as it evolved in government, science and society. For instance, clicking on “Government: 1830s-1850s,” opens a page that explains how the U.S. and Mexican governments handled race differently after the Mexican American War.
In another section, titled “Lived Experience,” users can test their knowledge of facts and stereotypes concerning race and sports. While the anthropologists generally emphasized race as a cultural construct, they acknowledged that physical variations can be found in different groups. One question and answer read: “Blacks dominate basketball because they are taller and can jump higher.” “Partly True.” It went on to explain that some studies have found that black athletes have relatively leaner bodies with more muscle mass, broader shoulders and larger quadriceps compared to whites. However, it is not known if this pattern found in elite athletes can be applied to the white and black populations in general.
The museum exhibit recently opened at the Science Museum of Minnesota, and Overbey said that more than a dozen other museums have expressed interest and have already signed letters to host the exhibit through the middle of 2011.
Janis Hutchinson, professor of anthropology at the University of Houston, said that the exhibit brought back personal memories of segregation and hit on several issues of race that continue to dominate American discourse. “This exhibit gets at the impact of how we live our life every day,” she said.
Both the exhibit and the Web site underscore three key themes:
* How we define race has changed over time, and its very concept is of recent human invention and shaped by groups that hold power.
* Race is a cultural phenomenon that places people into groups according to arbitrary biological and cultural characteristics. Race does not accurately describe human variation.
* Race and racism are embedded in our culture and shape our understanding of ourselves and those around us. Racism is less overt than in the past, yet discrimination continues and racism holds sway over many of our daily choices.
At a news conference Wednesday, several advisers to the program weighed in on the issue. “We can conflate the idea of race as a lived experience, with race as genetics,” said Alan Goodman, president of the anthropology group and professor of anthropology at Hampshire College.
Jeff Long, a professor of human genetics at the University of Michigan Medical School, said that, because of recent advances in genetic sequencing, scientists have learned a great deal about patterns that can be found in the human genome. “These patterns are not captured well by our classic definition of race,” he said.
Those who avoided science in college need not fear getting lost in a sea of unfamiliar terminology. The Web site carries a list of terms from genetics and biology to carry you through the tough parts.
Arlene Torres, associate professor of anthropology at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, said that she feels the project will give students a better grasp of race, the history of racism, and how people can discriminate without really knowing it. “My hope is that this exhibit and Web site are a new beginning for a discussion about race in America,” she said.
— Paul D. Thacker
Comments to below article:
Ignorance is Not Bliss
The Electoral College was established, in part, to be certain the United States never became a Theocracy. The diminishment of the effectiveness of the College has left us with a religiously motivated decision maker in the White House.
Because God is on his side, he can look Michael J. Fox in the face as he vetoes Federal funding for embryonic stem cell research without a search for facts to justify his decision.
We must develop a litmus test to keep religiously motivated decision makers from public office.
At least Harriet Miers has resigned as the President’s legal counsel effective January 31, 2007, so she cannot be blamed for this insanity any longer.
William Sumner Scott, J.D.
Judicial Equality Foundation, Inc.
From the Inside Higher Education website:
Jan. 12, 2007
A Vote for Embryonic Stem Cell Research
As expected, a large majority in the House of Representatives voted Thursday to lift restrictions on federal funding for embryonic stem cell research. But with President Bush promising to veto the measure as he did last year, and with House leaders acknowledging that they lack the votes to override such a veto, the national outlook for the research remains unsettled.
The final vote was 253 to 174, which would leave Democrats several dozen votes short of the two-thirds majority needed to override a presidential veto in the House.
Senate leaders plan to discuss the bill in coming weeks. “We will be seeing some action on this bill within a few weeks,” said Tom Reynolds, press secretary to Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa). Reynolds said that he expects the Senate to gather enough votes to override a veto threat.
Debate over the issue has united Democrats while dividing Republicans, some of whom complained about the president’s veto only months before the fall elections. Even solidly conservative (and strongly anti-abortion) Republicans, such as Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.), crossed party lines to vote for the bill. During Thursday’s debate, he mentioned family members who could be helped by medical advances.
Thousands of embryos are thrown away as medical waste every year, and Barton said that they should be used to alleviate human suffering. “The choice is medical research or medical waste,” he said.
“When we find these cures, we will say, ‘We did the right thing today,’ ” said Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), a sponsor of the bill.
The National Institutes of Health currently funds research for 21 embryonic cell lines. These are lines that were derived for research before President Bush’s ban in 2001.
Experts have voiced concerns that banning access to embryonic stem cells will drive U.S. researchers to institutions overseas in countries such as Britain. In response, several states have started their own efforts to finance stem cell researchers, with an eye to keeping researchers in the United States. Aaron Levine, a graduate student at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, has studied stem cell policy for several years. Last summer, he published a study in Nature Biotechnology that found that many stem cell scientists are considering relocating to California, which passed an initiative to provide $3 billion for stem cell research.
Still, Levine said that even as other states begin to fund stem cell research, scientists support federal funding because they are more comfortable with the grant approval process at federal agencies than with state procedures that are new and unfamiliar. He added that lifting the federal ban would reduce the uncertainty for job prospects and funding in the stem cell field — an uncertainty that Levine said might be causing some graduate students and post-docs to consider careers in other lines of research.
Carrie D. Wolinetz, director of communications for the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, said that if the bill ultimately becomes law it will erase the need for researchers to keep separate labs for embryonic stem cell research. To ensure that monies from federal grants do not accidentally help support research on banned cell lines, scientists perform such research in separate labs and sometimes separate buildings.
But after following the stem cell debate for the last five years, Wolinetz declined to opine on how stem cell legislation might advance. “I gave up long ago on making predictions,” she said. “Embryo stem cells rise above easily predictable political and ideological lines.”
— Paul D. Thacker
Comments to below article:
The problem with law school education is the lack of preparedness by all law students. Because there are no requirements prior to entry to any law school course, the professor must begin with the most rudimentary explanation of the subject matter. Good moral conduct must begin at birth - the danger of religious bigotry must also begin at birth. Neither of these subjects is addressed either before or after law school. The public suffers William Jefferson’s $80,000 in the freezer and wars in Afghanistan and Iraq without the removal of Islam as the appointed religion in their Constitutions. John F. Kennedy is assassinated and over 3,000 people murdered on 9/11 without proper investigation. The reason the problems go unresolved is because the legal profession is not held accountable for the Country’s morals. Those interested should begin with the posting of the American Bar Proceedings before the Department of Labor - National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity that was held on December 4, 2006 on our website. The first step is to remove the ABA from the accreditation of American law school process. The ABA is a labor union for lawyers that has no business in the education process other than to be an advisor. Now they totally control the process.
William Sumner Scott, J.D.
Judicial Equality Foundation, Inc.
From the Inside Higher Education website:
More Moral and Practical Law Schools
By Elizabeth Redden
Law schools need to do a better job integrating the teaching of legal doctrine with a much stronger focus on helping students develop practical “lawyering” skills and understandings of ethical and moral considerations, according to a new study from the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
“The gap between learning to think like a lawyer and being capable of acting like a lawyer, both clinically and morally, is, if anything, greater than it’s ever been before,” said Lee S. Shulman, president of the foundation, which released “Educating Lawyers: Preparation for the Profession of Law,” one of a series of Carnegie reports on professional education, on Thursday.
The study comes at a time when numerous law schools from across the country (including Harvard and Stanford) have initiated reviews of their curriculums, and the Association of American Law Schools and American Bar Association both have active committees examining the law school curriculum, Shulman said. Several institutions are praised in the report as already moving in the direction the Carnegie Foundation is proposing, including Southwestern Law School and the law schools at the City University of New York and Yale and New York Universities.
The two-year study, based on field work at 16 institutions in the U.S. and Canada, found that law schools have proven themselves to be exceptionally successful at quickly training their students to master “a distinctive habit of thinking.” Within months of arriving, the report found, law students “demonstrate new capacities for understanding legal processes, for seeing both sides of legal arguments, for sifting through facts and precedents in search of the more plausible account, for using precise language, and for understanding the applications and conflicts of legal rules.”
But the report also found that the “remarkably uniform” approach to the instruction of these legal thinking skills — the “case-dialogue method” — encourages students to focus on abstractions in reaching conclusions, to consider “as ‘facts’ only those details that contribute to someone’s staking a legal claim on the basis of precedent.”
“By contrast,” the report’s summary reads, “the task of connecting these conclusions with the rich complexity of actual situations that involve full-dimensional people, let alone the job of thinking through the social consequences or ethical aspects of the conclusions, remains outside the case-dialogue method. Issues such as the social needs or matters of justice involved in cases do get attention in some case-dialogue classrooms, but these issues are almost always treated as addenda.”
“In theory, Americans have always recognized that lawyers must serve two interests: the interest of justice and the interest of their clients,” said William M. Sullivan, a senior scholar at Carnegie and the primary author of the study. “Learning to think like a lawyer … is insufficient as a basis for becoming a competent legal professional.”
The report lays out a number of recommendations to counteract Sullivan’s observation that instruction of legal thinking tends to overwhelm the teaching of practical lawyering skills and the role of ethical and moral considerations in today’s law schools. Among the recommendations are to offer a more integrated three-part curriculum and to encourage faculty to do work across that curriculum. Law schools need to revisit their traditional hierarchies that value the teaching of legal scholarship over more costly clinical instruction, Shulman added, in determining how best to reallocate resources.
The report also recommends that law schools should make better use of the second and third years by offering “capstone” opportunities for students to develop their specialties, complete advanced clinical training and work closely with faculty. “In many law schools, there are clinical opportunities for students, externships and different kinds of skill courses that students may choose to take, mostly electives in either the second or third year. But our hope is that there could be more of these, more places for more students,” said Judith Welch Wegner, who led the study. Wegner is a professor of law at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a past president of the Association of American Law Schools.
The executive director of the association was unavailable for comment Thursday afternoon, due to the AALS’s annual meeting in Washington.
Excerpt from the Inside Higher Education website:
The Modern Language Association’s Delegate Assembly (the “MLA”) passed a resolution calling for the replacement of the term “illegal aliens” with “undocumented workers” (and a guarantee of in-state tuition for those fitting under the label).
The MLA meeting is a must-attend event for thousands of English and foreign language professors each year.
The Delegate Assembly approved every motion and resolution that came before it Friday by a fairly large margin, with the closest vote being on a resolution that the MLA should urge the replacement of the term “illegal aliens” with “undocumented workers,” and that undocumented workers should be eligible for in-state tuition in the states where they reside. That resolution, which will go to the Executive Council for approval and, if approved in February, will then be submitted to the entire membership for ratification this fall, was approved 73 to 30, but, although the closest vote, stimulated no open discussion. (On New Year’s Day, however, Lake Superior State University released its annual list of misused words and phrases, criticizing the use of phrases like the “undocumented workers” for “illegal aliens” — and comparing it to calling a “drug dealer” an “undocumented pharmacist.”)
Comments:
Not All Illegal Aliens Work.
Political correctness has run amuck with the MLA. Undocumented worker is a separate class from illegal alien.
Will this definition change the mindset of the majority of the public who believe that those who are in this country illegally should be forced out as quickly as possible?
We have citizens who need jobs. Our goal must be to match the work with the people who are legally in this country.
Bill
William Sumner Scott, J.D.
Judicial Equality Foundation, Inc.