- This topic has 3 voices and 5 replies.
-
Posts
-
What does Bowdoin Teach? is an interesting report commissioned by an Ivy League grad about the trends in liberal academia at Bowdoin College since the 1960's. The Preface/executive summary is pretty good reading if you don't have time to read all 360 pages. The bottom line is that Bowdoin at least, has gotten more liberal and less inclusive over time.
Read an article about this yesterday. I am not one to defend left-wing academia but I also won't defend right-wing activism. There should be no activism at all. (which is why I'm not really a fan of Victor D. Hansen) I don't want to be educated in "right-wing" ideology, I just want to be educated.The main complaint seems to be lack of diversity in the liberal arts courses and this study suggests that the courses offered are useless and have a progressive agenda and that they don't teach or offer comprehensive Western Civ. courses. such as philosophy or European history. While there are classes like "queer gardens" and "native american stereotypes" that are offered (but not required), in looking at their requirements and course offerings for history it seems pretty solid and just like any other school, including AMU. LINK. The report claims there is a lack of math and science requirements. I only had to take one of each in my degree program so I don't really understand what the complaint is. It also states that environmental courses focus on AGW. I'm pretty certain you'll find that anywhere, including the #1 science school in the world MIT.It's up to the student to choose his or her education. If I want to learn more science, then I'll just take another science course as an elective. That's up to me. If one wants to
spendwaste their money on Queer Studies or Women Studies that's up to them. If a student is serious and realistic about his education and future, and doesn't consider his professor's teaching as the Word of God, and doesn't fill his course load with useless topics then Bowdoin is like any other school. If Bowdoin is truly silencing Conservative opinion, then that's a problem. But I'm willing to bet this is nothing more than just Right-wing whining.Bowdoin, for example, does not require a student to take any courses in English, philosophy, foreign languages, European history, American history, world history, government, religion, psychology, or sociology. Most students probably do touch bases in at least several of these departments but it is telling that a student could, if he chose to, graduate from Bowdoin without taking a course in any of them.
(pg. 84)Except for the 6 credits of history needed to fulfill Gen Ed requirements, neither does my school. And besides, if someone is majoring in Chemical Engineering, why would he need history or sociology classes?
The point is that a typical liberal arts school requires the first two years of school to be general ed type stuff that make a person well rounded. The point is not that they do not teach enough “conservative” course but that they do not require any balanced courses. As I have said before, a liberal arts education is to teach you how to think, not what to think. It is pretty obvious from the degree requirements for most schools that they are more interested in teaching kids what instead of how to think. AMU is an exception and not the rule and their degree requirements reflect the fact that their target student body is the military, which is traditionally more classically liberal than society as a whole.
From my experience, I don't think AMU is an exception. When I looked into transferring to URI and Providence College, they both would have accepted all but the science in my Gen Ed courses and I would have fulfilled (and then some) their Gen Ed requirements. They only require one math, one science, and one sociology course as well. I chose to stay with AMU because they require more credit hours in my area of study (60 as opposed to 40).
but that they do not require any balanced courses
Which is where you and I apparently disagree. For sociology requirements, I chose an intro anthropology course. I could just as easily have taken a woman's study course. It's up to the individual student, not the school, what courses he or she takes. Bowdoin is no different than anywhere else. OK, so they don't require a languge. Then take one as an elective. It's your choice. I think Greek or Latin should be required of a history major, especially if your area of concentration is early European/Ancient history, but it's not required at AMU. I chose to learn Greek on my own. Freedom to choose your courses - doesn't get more Conservative or Libertarian than that!
I am not one to defend left-wing academia but I also won't defend right-wing activism. There should be no activism at all. (which is why I'm not really a fan of Victor D. Hansen) I don't want to be educated in "right-wing" ideology, I just want to be educated.
What is "right-wing activism" in the world of academia?
The same thing as left-wing activism which is rampant on campuses. I just don't think the proper way to deal with this is by becoming “activist” ourselves, we should just be objective..in other words, neither Left nor Right.
I guess I'm not as familiar with it happening on campuses. This is in part because I interpret what might be considered “right wing” views to often times be equated with “truthful” views, and schools should really be teaching truthful views. Being an “activist for the truth” is something which I would hope educators are engaged in, though “activism” now has a partisan connotation to it.
