Thursday, February 01, 2007

Rescuing K-12: But what about our universities? A look at Duke University.

Since my "rescue the schools" series has been limited to grades K-12, some might think I believe everything is hunky dory at our universities. I don't. Not by a long shot! But reforming higher education is beyond the scope of my undertaking. Besides, if we can straighten things out so that students will arrive at university prepared in reading, writing, and thinking, they'll force "academic" departments in the arts and humanities to return to seriously academic inquiry.

Today, however, things have reached such a sad point on most campuses that, in order to survive, universities must either offer tutorial courses in English (and other subjects, as students' SATs might indicate), or lower their academic standards.

Unfortunately, too many institutions (remember, they worry about attracting the necessary revenue to pay their bills) have chosen to lower their standards (for both students and professors) . They do so by offering courses that pander to politically correct trends that have been cast upon a generally uncaring society by disaffected social malcontents, radical feminists, and coddled flower children from the 1960s and 1970s. Once ensconced in a plush professorship, they created curricula around their maladaptive, New Age perspectives.

Nowhere is this better documented by Charlotte Allen in her timely article (January 29, 2007) in The Weekly Standard, entitled " Duke's Tenured Vigilantes." Ms. Allen takes a hard look at the strange behavior of 88 tenured professors at the preppy, expensive Duke University who signed and published an open letter condemning the three lacrosse players accused of the rape, sexual assault, and kidnapping (all of which charges are, this writing, about to be dropped due to the D.A. prosecutor's gross mishandling of the case).

Ms. Allen went to the Duke campus in Durham, North Carolina. What she discovered about these professors resulted in her expose of the mindset that, unfortunately, parallels what is taking place at most campuses in the U.S.A.

If you'd like to brush up on the Duke lacrosse students scandal, you can read Ms. Allen's entire article yourself in The Weekly Standard at this hyperlink, but the scandalous case is beyond the purpose of this essay. However, citing a few items from the article will give you a sense of what is happening to "higher education" throughout America.

Ms. Allen points discovered the obsession humanities professors have the themes "race, gender, and class"--which drive the curricula content and the "politically correct mindset" that pervades arts and humanities departments. These New Age professors have developed and bought into a trendy sociological theory that the three metas* of race, gender, and sexuality dominate human existence . Which of course can lead to some pretty questionable course titles: Critical Race Theory, Environmental Racism, and endless creative titles related to women's' studies, "diversity," "sexuality," and "multiculturalism"-- just pick your favorite university's website and surf course titles in the arts and humanities--you may be shocked to discover just how far "higher education" has departed from rigorous inquiry.


*Metas are "impressions" we are born with that pre-determine and color our every human motive-- a sort of updated psychology--the New Age collective consciousness, if you will.

Ms. Allen writes that Duke is known on the national university landscape as the absolute repository of "all that is trendy and hyper-politicized in today's ivy halls: angry feminism, ethnic victimology, dense, jargon-laden analyses of capitalism and 'patriarchy,' and "new historicism"-- [being] a kind of upgraded Marxism that analyzes art, literature, [and history, sociology, and psychology] in terms of efforts by powerful social elites to brainwash everybody else." She also comments on the university press that publishes such "scholarly" titles as, Appropriating Blackness: Performance and the Politics of Authenticity and An Archive of Feelings: Trauma, Sexuality and Lesbian Public Cultures. Duke University Press, she says, is the laughingstock of the publishing world.

I Googled Duke University to scan a few of their academic offerings for the Spring term 2007. The effort both amused and appalled me. Following are just a few examples to give you a feeling for Ms. Allen's analysis of Duke U.


A brief sample of course titles under "Cultural Anthropology":

African MBIRA Music
Marxism and Society
Social Activism Motivations
Gender in Language
Studies in Ethnomusicology


A brief sample of course descriptions in humanities:

IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE DEPARTMENT

English language variation in the United States considered from a current sociolinguistic perspective. Social, regional, ethnic, gender, and stylistic-related language variation, along with models for describing and applying knowledge about language variation. Language variation focused on vernacular varieties of American English in general and on North Carolina in particular.

IN THE GERMAN LANGUAGE (!) DEPARTMENT

Title: Philosophy
Synopsis of course content:
This seminar will be devoted to reading and discussing primary texts in early 20th century analytic philosophy. The readings will include works by Gottlob Frege (excerpts from the Begriffschrift, the essay "Thought", and other writings), Bertrand Russell (excerpts from The Philosophy of Logical Atomism and The Principles of Mathematics) and Ludwig Wittgenstein's
Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus.

Depending upon the interests of the seminar participants, we may also look briefly at movements and developments in art, architecture, music, biology, aerodynamics, and history and philosophy of physics about the time the Tractatus was written.
Theoretical approaches to the question of the interrelationship of gender and language including neurobiology, psychology, semiotics, feminist critical theory, philosophy of language, discourse analysis, and linguistic theory.
Assignments: Occasionally short written assignments in preparation for class discussions.
Exams : None. Grade to be based on: Class participation and paper(s).
Term Papers: Student's choice of either three (5-8 page) term papers or one long (20 page) paper.
Taught in English.

IN THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE DEPARTMENT (!)

Title: Gender and Language
Department: RUSSIAN
Permission required? No
Prerequisites: None
Synopsis of course content:This course will explore a broadly-based set of issues and theoretical approaches that deal with the question of the interrelationship of gender and language. The question of gender and language is conceived and developed within the context of those linguistic theories that necessarily require a definition role of speaker and addresses in models of speech acts and sign production. Readings will be taken from a variety of disciplines that grapple with linguistic issues, including neurobiology, psychology, semiotics, feminist critical theory, philosophy of language, discourse analysis and general linguistic theory. Linguistic data will include a representative selection of the world's languages. The question of natural and human language(s) will also be discussed.

Theoretical approaches to the question of the interrelationship of gender and language including neurobiology, psychology, semiotics, feminist critical theory, philosophy of language, discourse analysis, and linguistic theory.
Exams: None

Term Papers: None; Final essay/research paper (topic to be chosen in
conjunction with instructor.)
Taught in English.

IN THE ENGLISH LITERATURE DEPARTMENT

(Here's the "champ" of "academic, politically correct jargon, and just plain BS)

Title: Gender/Sexuality
Department: Literature
Permission required? No
Prerequisites: None.
Synopsis of course content: “Sexuality: You’re Making it Up; It’s Making You Up”

In a woefully under-remarked upon passage in Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality, Freud writes, “…The instinct for knowledge in children is attracted unexpectedly early and intensively to sexual problems and is in fact possibly first aroused by them." The instinct for knowledge here is explicitly linked to questions of sexuality. Moreover, “perverts,” Freud will more or less tell us in the first essay, are particularly adept at providing knowledge (for him) about psycho-sexual development, at historicizing, at leaving the psychical traces necessary for providing an account of Western culture, unlike their “normal” hetero-sexual counterparts. These claims by Freud serve as the general inspiration for this course. Not that we’ll rest peacefully on these assessments. Eventually, we’ll bring to bear on these claims the radical historiographic account by Michel Foucault in The History of Sexuality: Volume One that historicizes (as opposed to naturalizing) this very relationship between knowledge and sexuality. Designed mainly as an introduction to the field of “queer studies,” this course will mine the object, “sexuality” to compel questions like: What is sex? Is sex in the body, in the brain, on the body? What is sexuality? Why do we think sex is magic and that our sexualities speak to some special little secret about ourselves? How are sexualities racialized and “races” sexualized in historical and contemporary accounts of queer embodiment? These questions will be tracked through queer postmodern fiction (Dennis Cooper’s Closer & Frisk); psychoanalytic theory (Sigmund Freud); radical historiography (Michel Foucault); critiques of contemporary scientific research on sexuation and sexual orientation (Anne Fausto Sterling’s Sexing the Body); Marxist critiques of sexual identity in late capitalism (Rosemary Hennessey’s Profit and Pleasure). This course generally explores how humans in the West came to understand themselves—and continue to understand themselves—as properly “individualized” through sexual identity categories, that is, the “me” effect of sexual identity.

Requirements: Include one long research paper (12-15 pages), one oral presentation, 2 quizzes, spirited class participation, excellent attendance, an ability to still register and perform surprise and awe, a sixth sense attuned to the humorous and the morbid.

Well, the course offerings go on and on . . . afterall, Duke U. is a large campus with a "diverse" student body seeking wisdom. But this brief sample surely conveys an idea of how our kids are being brainwashed in some really strange material--all centered on gender, race, and sexuality. Those are the three metas the kids are learning for their life's journey. By the way, you'll notice the absence of prerequisite preparation or examinations for these courses--reflecting an old trend adopted years ago at the K-12 levels: Don't challenge the youngsters' self-esteem by judging their performance and comparing it with their peers.


If you've the stomach for it and believe Duke U. is a weird anamoly, just Google your favorite university by name and click on their undergraduate course offerings. After viewing a sample of them, you'll probably want to join the Gnuteacher's Revolutionary Vanguard the next day!


Finally, the 101 worst professors in America:


If you think Duke University is an exception rather than the rule, you've got to read David Horowitz's 2006 book, The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America. It is an thorough survey of the appalling landscape of "academic" inquiry on American campuses. Professor Horowitz describes, by name and university, a mere handful of the weirdos, malcontents, and charlatans who populate our campuses and are busy indoctrinating our kids-- those impressionable kids who are arriving at grade 13 without a developed critical ability they should have learned in their previous 12 years of education.

Names you're probably already familiar with (if you're old enough) pop up with regularity: Angela Davis, the black American Communist Party; her comrade, Black Panther Huey P. Newton, convicted rapist, murderer; the aging Tom Hayden (who holds only a B.A. degree) anti-American activist and Jane Fonda's pal during the Vietnam era; Noam Chomsky, the well-ripened professor of linguistics-turned-anti-American activist during the Vietnam era--he made a comeback splash after 9/11, when he dismissed the 3,000 deaths in the Twin Towers as pale when compared to Clinton's ill-advised cruise-missile attack on a Sudanese factory (in which no one was injured).





.

No comments: