Originally posted by Ushgarak
Because teachers are in a position of professional responsibility and it is unethical to try and put across your personal political views to those you are in such a position with.And despite what you say about them therefore having to be stupid, which is not so, people are affected by that kind of thing.
It's also not just university, it is all over education.
People at university are not children, and compolury education of people under 18 is complitely and utterly a different thing.
People at university were supposed to be academics - if they are persuaded easely by someone elses opinion, then what kind of academics are they?
Besides, writing a report of any kind with an one sided argument, anyone at university will tell you is an automatic fail, therefore, in order for them to get anywhere with education, they are all going to have to do the ''indipendent study'' which what University is all about. Indipendent research and study, with the both side of the fence.
I had a functionalist sociology lecturer for 2 years, and I am still not convinced that any functionalst ideas can explain society properly.
Originally posted by Draco69
Wish we could...but they have tenure. I REALLLLLLY hate tenure.
to forsake curriculum and base the grading system on political ideals as opposed to the subject, and providing written proof of such in the form of a test is proof of a direct violation of teacher's ethics. tenure protects dysfunctional professors unfortunately, but in the case of such a violation as this i doubt it would.
Originally posted by PVS
professors cant force you to learn their opinion and adhere to it,
and if such bias unrelated questions showed up on a test, you should grab that
test, walk out the door and head to the deans office. that professor will lose their job.
I doubt that would happen. The questions have to aquire certain standard. Seniors monitor junior professors, who are also monitored. For most part, no questions would ever ask you to describe a theory of any kind - it will most probably ask you to apply certain theory to something, or to make an arguement. You can't make an argument with only one side of the argument.
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
People at university are not children, and compolury education of people under 18 is complitely and utterly a different thing.People at university were supposed to be academics - if they are persuaded easely by someone elses opinion, then what kind of academics are they?
Besides, writing a report of any kind with an one sided argument, anyone at university will tell you is an automatic fail, therefore, in order for them to get anywhere with education, they are all going to have to do the ''indipendent study'' which what University is all about. Indipendent research and study, with the both side of the fence.
I had a functionalist sociology lecturer for 2 years, and I am still not convinced that any functionalst ideas can explain society properly.
I am well aware they are not children. However, it is still a breach of professional ethics to bring any of your own political views into your teaching- yet this still happens.
And why point out that under 18 (though you mean under 16) is a different thing? I know that too, and my point is that it happens there as well.
And people get influenced by people they see in authority- at any age. This is much of the point. That is why professional standards exist so such things are not abused.
And just because level 4 educational standards require a critical approach to argument, that makes absolutely no damn difference at all as to whether people get influenced or not. Most people do it just to hoop jump anyway.
End of the day- teachers are told not to do this, yet many do. It is a problem. Not an epidemic, but it happens enough to be annoying. Instead of seeing their job as a service to be delivered, they see classes as a canvas to paint their views on.
It should stop.
I actually never have had any problems with teachers only talking about one side of an issue. My one government teacher was very much anti-Bush (he called himself jokingly a communist) but during class would present both sides of everything. In my philosophy class I took last semester, my teacher would present information for both sides of the issue and argue them as if she equally believed in both; she wouldn't even tell us where she stood on it until the lecture was over (and this was very important, to present it unbiased, because it was an ethics class). In my other classes politics has never really come up.
If it's something that bothers you, then you should talk to the professor or the dean...but frankly that's easier said than done, because first of all you have the problem of finding a time when you CAN talk to them, and telling a teacher that you don't like their methods can be troublesome. I've known other people who've had teachers who would take off points simply because the student disagreed with them (over something completely irrelevant).
students and universities have historically been a bastion of left wing political ideas and expressions...
this wont change... personally my being a student and a right wing one it makes certain parts of university life a little bit irrelevant but i will support the NUS(national union of students) in matters that i believe regardless of their overall political bias
as for lecturers and tutors expressing their own political agenda...i see nothing wrong with it if it makes the learning experience more profound for the learner... as some people have already mentioned in this thread...if you dont agree with a political viewpoint then you can challenge it
even though the point isn't particularly valid in the course i now do which is forensic science...as science is much less political and more fact based until we start debating certain aspects of morals in science such as genetic modification and the like
I don't really see the problem, I agree with my teachers on tons of things and always end up going into long debates with them. Its fun it makes you learn some stuff and its actually challenging. If a teacher can get you to debate something then you are learning a lot more then if you are just listening. Maybe its because my teachers are all willing to listen to my opinion or maybe its a whole different attitude here. But I really do not see the problem.
I'm with Ush professors and teachers should refrain from giving their own political opinions to their students, unless specifically asked (and even then they have to be careful). Cause even if most students are not affected by this, chances are that some will be and that shouldn't happen.
Now if people are interested in political opinions they should take some political classes. My professor of politology never gave us his political opinions (and in Belgium everyone has political opinions).
But he still managed to keep the class very interesting, he always gave us all the facts on each ideology without demonizing one or excluding another. If someone had a problem with something he said or something in the text book they were encouraged to start a debate about it.
Tho it rarely happens in a room with 400 students
Professor and a teacher are complitely different and it is rather ridiculous to put them in the same category - a lecturer is a researcher on a particualr topic - he has his own field and his own theory which he argues and it is absolutely logical that during the lecture where he is presenting something that he is researching about to present his or her opinion.
University is not a compulsary education. People CHOOSE to be there. Under 16s or even 18s have a compulsary education which should not be influenced with random political thought of teacher. University is NOT compulsary.
People are at university under the assumption that they have the ability to THINK with their OWN heads. If they can't, they certainly are not fit enough to be at university.
(My bad I didn't know there was a difference heck I don't even care)
University is indeed not compulsary but it is not because ppl think they have the ability to think with their own heads that they effectively have that ability.
Now indeed they shouldn't be at uni if they can't think for themselves, however they are there (and unless some law expells them) Professors will have to take them into consideration.
It ain't cause they aren't supposed to be there that the professor has the right to ignore the consequences of his actions against them
And another thing about this whole College Professor issue. What really friggin annoys the hell outta me are those idiotic teachers pets. All they do is kiss ass and accept anything these clowns throw at them. You have an objection and those morons attack you and reply with their typical comments "But I agree with what Professor blah, blah, blah, and blah has to say..." Bah! They should all burn in hell.
Originally posted by WindDancer
And another thing about this whole College Professor issue. What really friggin annoys the hell outta me are those idiotic teachers pets. All they do is kiss ass and accept anything these clowns throw at them. You have an objection and those morons attack you and reply with their typical comments "But I agree with what Professor blah, blah, blah, and blah has to say..." Bah! They should all burn in hell.
I can very much imagine those people....they deserve some mayor beating.
I just happen to be sitting in class. thus far, I've not encountered too many problems with any college professors I've had. However, I had a huge problem with a high school teacher I had. In my senior year, the theology dept got a new head. She was the teacher of senior world religions...a required class in my catholic school. Now, there is a matter of fact regarding religions. You can ask a question on a test that deals with a fact about religion, like what does a hindu believe about cows. But, when you ask a question...multiple questions...that involve your opinion about a religion, then there is no right or wrong answer. However, this particular teacher wanted a catholic spin on every answer. She expected you to recall what comments she had made about a particular aspect of a religion in regards to catholicism and then repeat her beliefs on the test. Long story short, she wanted us to be good little catholic puppets and spew HER beliefs all over the page. It was really just her need to feel justified, to feel like she'd made a positive impact on the world. stupid *****.