October 5, 2005

The "professional disposition evaluation."

From today's Badger Herald:
Just before the start of the fall semester, Edward Swan, a student in the College of Education at Washington State University, was informed he was in jeopardy of being removed from his program.

The college is bound by state law to evaluate the character of each student at graduation. Since 2001, the college has used a system where each semester, faculty members fill out a “professional disposition evaluation” for each student they have in class. The forms ask for marks on, among other things, students’ commitments to such politically charged concepts as “social justice” and “diversity.”

Mr. Swan, a self-professed conservative with strong opinions on the Bible and the role of men and women in a family, failed four of his evaluations.

According to the Moscow-Pullman Daily News, one faculty member flunked Mr. Swan for writing “diversity is perversity” on his copy of a textbook, while another claimed that he was a “white supremacist” and that he often sported a camouflage hunting cap and spoke of his love of hunting, both of which alarmed her.

Swan readily admits to being an avid hunter, but rejects the idea that he is a racist.

“I have four biracial children,” he told the Daily News.

The case at Washington State University is only the tip of the iceberg of so-called “dispositions theory.” Colleges and universities across the country have begun changing their admission and evaluation standards to add ideological criteria into the mix. Increasingly, institutions of higher learning are allying themselves with the proponents of social justice, blurring the line between knowledge and belief, education and indoctrination.
Read the whole thing. This is a complicated matter:
[College of Education Dean Judy] Mitchell disputed the idea that Swan's working-class background was one of the elements that led him to fail his PDE evaluations while other more sophisticated or educated conservatives might pass.

"I think our faculty are fair to people of all backgrounds," she said.

Mitchell emphasized the College of Education is trying to find and train teachers for the public schools who will be committed to be as useful as possible to all students in their classrooms, regardless of varied backgrounds and culture.

That goal is a legitimate one, said two WSU faculty members who teach about constitutional law and civil liberties in the political science department.

"There's no right to a state job, like being a public school teacher," said faculty member Cornell Clayton. "It's a benefit, not a privilege.

"The state can impose a character test - and beliefs can be part of that test. But you can't keep people from state jobs because their beliefs may not be what you'd like," Clayton said.

Mitchell Pickerill thinks the language in the PDE forms may be problematic. "The question on the form is written in such a way that it reflects faculty biases," Pickerill said.

Pickerill sees the PDE's language as one expression of the culture of "political correctness" within the university.
(Mitchell Pickerill is the author of the message quoted in the previous post. He sent along the links for this story.)

I don't have a opinion to express about this particular incident -- which seems to depend a lot on disputed facts.

Comments?

18 comments:

Unknown said...

From the article:

"The state can impose a character test - and beliefs can be part of that test. But you can't keep people from state jobs because their beliefs may not be what you'd like," Clayton said.

So, I'm confused here, Mr. Clayton.

You say that you can't keep people from state jobs because you don't like their beliefs. BUT! You say that it's okay to impose a character test, with beliefs being part of the test.

Is it my puny little mind that just doesn't understand? Or is it that you are totally contradicting yourself?

Robert said...

Once things are controlled by a political process, they will become intrinsically political. Education does not have an exemption to this rule.

Another argument for ending the public school system.

Erik Opsal said...

I think that writing "diversity is perversity" is rather disturbing and Swan should be required to go through diversity training. However, there are no legal grounds to remove him.

Also, kudos to linking to the Badger Herald. I go to Madison and only recently discovered this blog. The Daily Cardinal is far superior in my opinion though.

ShadyCharacter said...

Erik writes:
"Swan should be required to go through diversity training."

I agree totally. Wrongthink is not to be tolerated and needs to be purged. Only goodthink should be allowed, especially when it comes to choosing people who will indoctrinate the next generation with goodthink in the public school students.

Retrograde wrongthink like opposition to affirmative action, hunting or any other such obscene inclinations pose such a danger to commongood we have a moral duty to re-educate the cretins found to be engaging in it. Maybe a system of camps can be set up. I hear the North Koreans have just such a system :)

jeff said...

Thank you Shady... that was perfect.

The way that "diversity" is celebrated at modern universities often does reach levels that could honestly be called perversity.

The Vagina Monologues anyone?

The Drill SGT said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
The Drill SGT said...

I'm not either a lawyer (married to one) nor a professional teacher (though I have taught math in the military and come from a family of teachers).

Several Observations:

1. Isn't the State requirement of "good character" somewhat analogous to the Bar requirement?

2. Even considering that Washington has a fairly liberal legislature, my gut feeling was that the intent here was on character, as in criminal behavior, drug use, child molesters, etc. I doubt that they put in place a law to measure belief in "Social Justice".

3. Methinks the education establishment would not want to try to evaluate or gather info on: "criminal behavior, drug use, child molesters", but loved the idea of putting Guild restrictions on those who didn't match the belief system.

Jasmina Boulanger said...

Long, long ago, when I was at UW, I had a poster of a man wrapped in barbed wire with the caption: you have not converted a man because you have silenced him. This was a reflection on what communism had done to free speech.

This is bad news. Stifling free speech is not consistent with the 1st Amendment even if the limitations are clothed in the language of "character" or other au courrant PS-criteria.

May be, like in the old Soviet Union, the BS PC censorship will give rise to poetry and literature that tells it like it is in elegant code expressions.

ShadyCharacter said...

mark, it's a known fact that the set of hunters (aka "Wearers of the Camo Hats") and the set of white supremacists are perfectly congruent. If one were to represent the population of hunters and the population of white supremacists as a Venn diagram the circles would overlap exactly.

Interestingly, aside from a small number of ironic hipsters, this holds true for Camo Hat Wearers as well.

SippicanCottage said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
JSU said...

So, you think he would've been failed if he'd written that "The white race is the cancer of human history"?

Bruce Hayden said...

I am not the expert that our esteemed hostess is here, but I would think that the WSU actions would seriously impact the 1st Amdt (made applicable to the states via the 14th). If this isn't forced speech and a lack of free speech, I don't know what is.

I should note that the difference between this and the character test for law admission is that the latter is now days a lot more objective, for example, have you been convicted of a crime of dishonesty? Saying something like "Diversity is Perversity" just won't keep someone out of the practive of law any more.

Gina said...

aidan maconachy , I guess its a crime to be a traditionalist , I shudder to think where this world will be in a few hundred yrs ..

Bruce Hayden said...

Note that there are really two standards here. State schools face a much stricter standard than do private schools, due to the applicability of the 1st Amdt. to their actions. In other words, the 1st Amdt. does apply to state schools (and state teacher licensing) but not to private schools.

ShadyCharacter said...

Kathy, I may have misread your posts taking issue with what I have written. It may be that you are operating on a super-deep level of sarcasm, in that you are pretending to have missed the clear sarcasm of my posts. Either that or you must be a real genius (/sarcasm/ - just in case, I'll clarify that I'm writing "genius" but I mean "idiot"). Was the reference to North Korea not enough of a giveaway?

Again, however, in responding this way, I'm afraid that I may simply be missing your deeply subtle sarcasm, in which case I'd be very embarrased and have to apologize. I'm afraid I'm not equipped to cope with Sarcasm turned up to 11 :)

ShadyCharacter said...

Aargh! Kathy! I just re-read all the relevant posts (mine and yours) and realized that no one could possibly have thought my two comments were serious. I mean that guy from Rain Man would have caught on! Therefore I must apologize. I am in the presence of a master whose sarcasm is as subtle as it is sublime!

The Drill SGT said...

Bruce Hayden said...

"I should note that the difference between this and the character test for law admission is that the latter is now days a lot more objective..."
----------------------

Bruce,

I assume you were responding to my post. I think we are in violent agreement. My point was that I think the legislative intent was an objective good character test. what they got was a very subjective biased implementation.

Scotty said...

I interviewed Ed on my radio show. I also talked with David French who is Ed's representative from FIRE. Ed is a soft spoken guy and nothing would seem outwardly to be worried about him.

I was a WSU college of Education student in the early 90's. I also ran into trouble due to my political beliefs. I was calling into a meeting with the head of the department because they feared that I was not sensitive enough. They did not have the disposition reports when I was there, but it would be interesting to see what they would say about me.

I have the audio from the interview with Ed online if anyone would like to listen to it. I don't have it on my website yet, but e-mail me and I will send you a link for it. coug1973@gmail.com