Uni academics and bias

[brendan]

http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/academic-freedom-exit-far-left/2008/10/20/1224351149797.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

[Eriny]

All academics are biased. Whether this comes across in their marking or even in the content of their lectures is the issue. But at university, a good essay will be seen as such, regardless of the viewpoint it expresses. Further, I've only had one lecturer who I've been able to guess their political inclinations, I have no idea where the others sit on the right/left continuum.

That article is talking absolute shit by suggesting that there is no debate on topics like WorkChoices, the environment, and etc. I think the writer fails to understand what academic inquiry is all about, and there is little leeway for "bizarre" opinions.

"Nigel Freitas is a Young Liberal and the director of the Make Education Fair Campaign." says it all, really.

[bubble sunglasses]

   

   Writers of opinion pieces and writing the same thing
  http://vcenotes.com/forum/index.php/topic,3384.0.html

[Collin Li]

There was a student who laughed off those who thought global warming might not be caused by man. I thought it was ironic, because that viewpoint is probably as presumptuous as how he perceived those he disagreed with.

[brendan]

I think the writer fails to understand what academic inquiry is all about,

How?

"Nigel Freitas is a Young Liberal and the director of the Make Education Fair Campaign." says it all, really.

I think it says more that you focus more on who's saying it, rather than the substance of what is actually being said.

[Eriny]

What substance might that be?

[Collin Li]

Hey, I don't think there's need to be defensive about this. There are some disturbing anecdotes in that article that no one can really agree with.

It might not be rampant (I wouldn't have a clue, I am taught by economists and politically apathetic engineering professors), but it's there, and you shouldn't dismiss it.

[brendan]

What substance might that be?

What I meant was that: It says more that you focus on who is saying it, rather than what is actually being said.

[enwiabe]

This is a big issue in the Jewish community. A number of arts lecturers in Australia have been found to give some very... shall we say colourful interpretations of the Palestine/Israel situation. Nobody in the Jewish community expects lecturers to say 'OMGZ ISRAEL IS 100% RIGHT IN EVERYTHING IT DOES AND WE SHOULD ALL LOVE ISRAEL' - but there have been some very offensive things said about the situation, with some even going as far as blatant anti-semitism.

In that case, because these professors hold such high positions of intellectual power, such viewpoints are destructive and not permissible in an objective learning environment.

[orsel]

Just to point out one thing:

Nobody in the Jewish community expects lecturers to say 'OMGZ ISRAEL IS 100% RIGHT IN EVERYTHING IT DOES AND WE SHOULD ALL LOVE ISRAEL'

Anti-Israel =/= Antisemitic
Nothing wrong with being against Israel itself.

[Eriny]

This is a big issue in the Jewish community. A number of arts lecturers in Australia have been found to give some very... shall we say colourful interpretations of the Palestine/Israel situation. Nobody in the Jewish community expects lecturers to say 'OMGZ ISRAEL IS 100% RIGHT IN EVERYTHING IT DOES AND WE SHOULD ALL LOVE ISRAEL' - but there have been some very offensive things said about the situation, with some even going as far as blatant anti-semitism.

In that case, because these professors hold such high positions of intellectual power, such viewpoints are destructive and not permissible in an objective learning environment.

The nature of academia, though, as far as I can see, is that all views, at some point, get critiqued. That we know that there are anti-Israel academics and that people express concern about it challenges the opinions that these academics have. You cannot ask them not to have opinions, but you can be sure that in the discourse, there are opinions that differ from theirs and expose what may be wrong with those opinions.

Academic discourse is far from perfect. It's difficult to understand, it goes through trends, etc. But one thing that I think is awesome about it, and makes me want to contribute to it, is that it is a collaboration of knowledge, it is a constant debate. If their are claims of 'bias', that claim makes up part of the debate and people are able to read this 'biased' work through the lens that others argue one should view it in. That we are aware of any bias that may exist, makes the bias obsolete and makes it possible to come up with new or different ways of thinking about the world in general.

If it were more accessible to the layman, academic discourse is my vision of truly free speech.

[Collin Li]

I agree that it is an expression of free speech, but universities, who employ these academics also have the right to fire them. Anyone has a right to speak about whatever opinions they have, but in doing so, if it hurts their reputation or employability, they ought to suffer the consequences of it (others exercising their freedom of expression in response to yours).

That said, however, it is upto the universities whether they wish to teach politically neutral courses or not. I am sure there are some arts colleges in the States that have strong left-wing reputations, and on the other hand, business schools may have a strong right-wing streak - and if they are renowned for it, it may actually be a desirable reputation! In Australia, such specialisation and diversity of tertiary education doesn't exist, so the political bias in a university is either a neutralised by a tug-of-war or diluted by the apathetic departments.

[brendan]

Academic discourse is far from perfect.