Story Re: Assignment from BYU Professor

[Scott Lloyd]

10 hours ago, The Nehor said:

White….

…Fragility

Wokist racism. 

[Tacenda]

13 minutes ago, bluebell said:

That was a good professor, and the kind of professors that college's need, especially in the Arts degrees.  We need teachers that can teach students how to think but not demand that they think certain things.

My husband took an freshman level english class from a very liberal Sierra Club type of professor.  He wrote an essay on fair land use and wilderness areas in national forests that did not support the Sierra Club's position and had to remind her that if she failed him for his conclusions he would take it to the Dean. She was known for giving bad grades to students that didn't support her politics.

 

Years ago my neighbor across the street's daughter and boyfriend at the time took a class together at Weber State College, and according to this neighbor the professor talked them into not overpopulating the earth. They later married and are child free by choice now because as my neighbor told me, they didn't want to over populate. They were even married in the temple, but not sure what their situation is as far as belief, and probably no recommend since this neighbor visited them on a commune making peanut butter and they were also nudists which was a huge surprise to happen upon during her visit, lo and behold.

I always thought that was sad to have a professor to have had so much influence on his/her students, and not always for the good. Not saying someone can't have a choice on having children, but as a practicing LDS at the time, I thought it sad. And I wish I had more grandchildren, but it's not looking good right now. My married son and his wife have been married a while and no children yet, and I believe they could if they wanted. They might think they should adopt the children in need of parents, which would be excellent, but hasn't happened so far. 

[bluebell]

9 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Years ago my neighbor across the street's daughter and boyfriend at the time took a class together at Weber State College, and according to this neighbor the professor talked them into not overpopulating the earth. They later married and are child free by choice now because as my neighbor told me, they didn't want to over populate. They were even married in the temple, but not sure what their situation is as far as belief, and probably no recommend since this neighbor visited them on a commune making peanut butter and they were also nudists which was a huge surprise to happen upon during her visit, lo and behold.

I always thought that was sad to have a professor to have had so much influence on his/her students, and not always for the good. Not saying someone can't have a choice on having children, but as a practicing LDS at the time, I thought it sad. And I wish I had more grandchildren, but it's not looking good right now. My married son and his wife have been married a while and no children yet, and I believe they could if they wanted. They might think they should adopt the children in need of parents, which would be excellent, but hasn't happened so far. 

My favorite philosophy teacher in college refused to tell us what her personal beliefs were about different things.   She did not want to influence us but wanted us to come to our own decisions.  That's why she was my favorite.

[Scott Lloyd]

13 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

The 1619 project?

Controversial to you? Obviously it’s controversial to you. To Fox News viewers? Obviously. To whoever reads the outrage porn sites linked to in the OP? Obviously controversial.
 

But, can you verify that the views actually expressed in the assignment are controversial in the field of sociology though? 

Yeah, it’s controversial, as anyone with a modicum of awareness of current events can tell. 
 

Have you been following the Ketanji Brown Jackson hearing? Sen. Ted Kruz asked her about it in reference to a speech she had given. Rather than embrace the 1619 project on the spot, Jackson, whose appointment to SCOTUS is at stake, was pretty clear in indicating she was doing nothing of the sort. 
 

Of course, you’ll probably just broad-brush and marginalize Kruz the way you did others in this intellectually sophomoric post. 

Edited March 24, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[smac97]

42 minutes ago, Analytics said:

Regarding the OP, we're talking about a college class assignment. This isn't newsworthy.

I dunno.  I think Prof. Bybee's response made the story newsworthy.

42 minutes ago, Analytics said:

I'm disappointed that students would publicly attack this professor/course/university in their political zeal to be culture warriors.

I don't think the students "attacked" BYU at all.

I'm not even sure "attack" is appropriate as to the professor or her course.

42 minutes ago, Analytics said:

They should be ignored. I commend the Deseret News ant the Salt Lake Tribune for ignoring this non-event.

Other Honor Code-related and "protest"-related stories about BYU have received media attention.  I was wondering why this one has not.  I saw this online: "Note that local Utah media *still* has not covered this. The leftwing media here (e.g., The Salt Lake Tribune) won’t cover it because it makes leftists look bad. The Mormon-owned media (KSL, Deseret News) won’t cover it because it makes the LDS Church look bad and because it would cause Church members to realize how insane the Church has become."

Newsworthiness can often be a judgment call.  As a BYU graduate and a member of the Church, I was interested in the story, mostly due to Prof. Bybee's conduct.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

6 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Yeah, it’s controversial, as anyone with a modicum of awareness of current events can tell. 
 

Have you been following the Ketanji Brown Jackson hearing? Sen. Ted Kruz asked her about it in reference to a speech she had given. Rather than embrace the 1619 project on the spot, Jackson, whose appointment to SCOTUS is a stake, was pretty clear in indicating she was doing nothing of the sort. 
 

Of course, you’ll probably just broad-brush and marginalize Kruz the way you did others in this intellectually sophomoric post. 

I’m sorry but how exactly is the 1619 project related to the homework assignment? 
 

And is Ted Cruz a sociologist? Why are you citing him to determine whether the views expressed in the assignment are controversial WITHIN the field of sociology? That’s like citing Ken Ham to show evolution is controversial in the field of biology. 

[longview]

11 hours ago, helix said:

I first got wind of it from Bybee himself.  I read his dozens of tweets combined:  Thread by @ericbybee on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App

I formed my opinion from that.  He's trying to weaponize the Honor Code to stop academic thought critical of his position, he wants to silence students, he's reducing the opposition to into  one-dimensional simplistic view of conservatives, and he took 61 tweets to do this (I've personally never seen a tweet chain that long).  This is embarrassing behavior for a BYU professor. 

Proponents of CRT have their narrative and are desperate to maintain control.  It is very interesting to see many videos of minority ethnic parents at school board meetings make strong objections to the divisive nature of CRT with its denial of positive accomplishments made by the American Republic.  Here are two more middle of the road reviews of the arguments -  - -

https://www.prageru.com/video/what-is-critical-race-theory

[Scott Lloyd]

10 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Newsworthiness can often be a judgment call. 

Yes, newsworthiness is nothing if not a judgment call, and one that is influenced by an array of factors, including management bias and market niche of the news outlet. I say this as a former insider. 
 

[smac97]

6 hours ago, bluebell said:

My favorite philosophy teacher in college refused to tell us what her personal beliefs were about different things.   She did not want to influence us but wanted us to come to our own decisions.  That's why she was my favorite.

I taught legal courses at UVU for five years.  While I frequently used my experiences as a lawyer to provide insights and illustrations as to legal concepts and principles, I worked to not inject my personal beliefs and opinions into assignments or classroom discussions.  It was usually not that hard, TBH.  I was there to provide instruction and information, and to cultivate skill sets that did not really have an overtly ideological component.

One exception was the Second Amendment (in discussions abou the Bill of Rights) , which was often a bone of contention.  Plenty of students were stridently anti-gun, while plenty of others were equally emphatic in their desire to be able to arm themselves.  The faultline was broadly, but certainly not completely, along gender lines.  I think the more telling basis for differentiation of opinions was political philosophy.  Fortunately, this topic only arose here and there, and I was more likely to suppress efforts to divert classroom time into discussing it for very long.  I was pleasantly surprised to find that most students were able to have spirited, but still civil, discussions about these issues.  At the time I felt that this was facilitated by my generalized tendency of keeping to myself my opinions about controversial / political / ideological topics.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited March 24, 2022 by smac97

[Scott Lloyd]

21 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I’m sorry but how exactly is the 1619 project related to the homework assignment? 
 

And is Ted Cruz a sociologist? Why are you citing him to determine whether the views expressed in the assignment are controversial WITHIN the field of sociology? That’s like citing Ken Ham to show evolution is controversial in the field of biology. 

Sociology is not an insular field. Few if any academic disciplines are. They interrelate in their impact on society. 
 

I thought I had read that “The 1619 Project” was included in the course curriculum. Perhaps my memory is failing me, but in any case, critical race theory, the discredited “1619 Project” and the flawed notion of “White Fragility” are all intertwined in the public discourse and are together the subject of contentious debate, notwithstanding your odd denial that they are controversial. 
 

And when I said they are controversial, I wasn’t limiting my frame of reference to the field of sociology; it’s you who are endeavoring to do that. 

Edited March 24, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[SeekingUnderstanding]

13 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Sociology is not an insular field. Few if any academic disciplines are. They interrelate in their impact on society. 
 

I thought I had read that “The 1619 Project” was included in the course curriculum. Perhaps my memory is failing me, but in any case, critical race theory, the discredited “1619 Project” and the flawed notion of “White Fragility” are all intertwined in the public discourse and are together the subject of contentious debate, notwithstanding your odd denial that they are controversial. 
 

And when I said they are controversial, I wasn’t limiting my frame of reference to the field of sociology; it’s you who are endeavoring to do that. 

I merely asked a question that I didn't know the answer to. No one said you had to respond.  The question was: "Is it a controversial view in the field of sociology? I honestly don’t know. " I'm sorry it seems to have spun you up so. The answer to that question seems relevant when we are evaluating a homework assignment in a college sociology class.

Edited March 24, 2022 by SeekingUnderstanding

[Analytics]

59 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I dunno.  I think Prof. Bybee's response made the story newsworthy.

Perhaps. I wish he would have ignored it, too.

[smac97]

1 hour ago, Analytics said:

Quote

I dunno.  I think Prof. Bybee's response made the story newsworthy.

Perhaps. I wish he would have ignored it, too.

Let's consider what he said:

 

Boy, that's . . . pretty aggressive.  He's naming names.  He's accusing them of "antagonistic behavior" and says he is "going to respond accordingly."

And here (from his Twitter thread) :

Quote

But being a BYU prof means that I also help students put concepts into conversation w/ their faith. I invite them to consider the significance of whiteness in LDS scriptures and leader calls to root out racism, nationalism, and resist white supremacy. /16

This seems like a fairly clear accusation that the students were advocating or otherwise advancing "white supremacist attitudes."

Either Prof. Bybee's quoting of the Church's statement ("White supremacist attitudes are morally wrong...") is a huge non-sequitur, or else he seems to be accusing these students of, well, having/advocating such attitudes.  And he accused them publicly.  On Twitter.  One comment responding to his Twitter thread seems apt: "No one should be subjected to harassing emails or voicemails. But you're also way out of line here. A professor bullying students who dared to criticize another professor by falsely claiming that their criticism is illegal and against the Honor Code is a terrible look."

Yep.

My sense is that much of this rhetoric is being construed as hostility/racism against white people, and that this is ironic given that the context is about fighting racism.

I also see a lot of irony in that both sides are A) decrying racism, and B) accusing the other side of racism.

I also sense that there is a fair amount of taunting and ridicule of people who voice concerns or objections about this.  

We certainly need to strive for civility when discussing these things.  I think Prof. Bybee handled things very poorly, as did those whom he quoted in his Twitter thread.

Thanks,

-Smac

[sunstoned]

11 hours ago, longview said:

Proponents of CRT have their narrative and are desperate to maintain control.  It is very interesting to see many videos of minority ethnic parents at school board meetings make strong objections to the divisive nature of CRT with its denial of positive accomplishments made by the American Republic.  Here are two more middle of the road reviews of the arguments -  - -

https://www.prageru.com/video/what-is-critical-race-theory

Critical Race Theory has nothing to do with this home work assignment.  It seems CRT has become a dog whistle alt-right alarmists that live in the Fox/Qanom bubble.

[Tacenda]

9 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

Critical Race Theory has nothing to do with this home work assignment.  It seems CRT has become a dog whistle alt-right alarmists that live in the Fox/Qanom bubble.

Yes siree!

[bluebell]

12 hours ago, sunstoned said:

Critical Race Theory has nothing to do with this home work assignment.  It seems CRT has become a dog whistle alt-right alarmists that live in the Fox/Qanom bubble.

CRT is for a lot of conservatives what gaslighting is for a lot of liberals.  

[LoudmouthMormon]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

15 hours ago, sunstoned said:

Critical Race Theory has nothing to do with this home work assignment.  It seems CRT has become a dog whistle alt-right alarmists that live in the Fox/Qanom bubble.

CRT is for a lot of conservatives what gaslighting is for a lot of liberals.  

Intellectual honesty demands that I admire the concise accuracy of bluebell's statement.  That said, here's a flurry of things that are also worthy of consideration:

- "dog whistle" is the new "homophobia",  i.e. just another term to apply to an argument the left disagrees with. 
- "alt-right" is the same, except it makes it easier to draw analogies to nazis.  The hyper-divisiveness and hyper-outrage-inflation of our language will eventually destroy us, as a single nazi will eventually show up and nobody from any side will recognize him until it's too late.
- both real harmful gaslighting, and real harmful misapplications of CRT, exist.  In, like, troubling amounts.
 

Edited March 25, 2022 by LoudmouthMormon

[smac97]

Looks like Prof. Bybee is big into Critical Race Theory:

Quote

But what is critical race theory? As a scholar who had used CRT and related critical theories in my work for about a decade, let me help clarify.

Critical race theory is part of a group of legal theories developed starting in the late 1970s which asserts (among other things) that racism is widespread in America; that civil rights laws and victories have not fulfilled their promises; that law and educational policies and institutions are not “colorblind;” and that law, policy, and scholarship should center the stories of the marginalized.

Critical race theory is a form of analysis primarily taught in law schools and graduate schools of education. It is not being taught to middle schoolers. Let me repeat: critical race theory is not being taught to K-12 students. It is likely not even being taught to K-12 teachers in a meaningful way unless they are enrolled in a specific kind of graduate course that uses this type of analysis. I say this as someone who has taught middle schoolers, graduate students, and hundreds of undergraduate future teachers both in public schools and in universities.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Looks like Prof. Bybee is big into Critical Race Theory:

Thanks,

-Smac

Which seems to indicate the assignment given was not CRT according to someone very familiar with it. 

Quote

Critical race theory is a form of analysis primarily taught in law schools and graduate schools of education. It is not being taught to middle schoolers. Let me repeat: critical race theory is not being taught to K-12 students. It is likely not even being taught to K-12 teachers in a meaningful way unless they are enrolled in a specific kind of graduate course that uses this type of analysis.

 

[smac97]

Just now, Calm said:

Which seems to indicate the assignment given was not CRT according to someone very familiar with it. 

 

I wonder if Prof. Bybee is soft-pedaling CRT because it is being taught in K-12 schools, because it is racially divisive, and so on.  See, e.g., here:

And here:

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

58 minutes ago, smac97 said:

1 hour ago, Calm said:

 

I wonder if Prof. Bybee is soft-pedaling CRT because it is being taught in K-12 schools, because it is racially divisive, and so on

Who is more likely to be familiar with accurate definitions?  The experts who work in the field or the amateurs, many of whom are getting their info not from experts in the field but other amateurs. 
 

This reminds me of the misuse of many psychological labels, especially names of substantial disorders/dysfunctions being applied to everyday behaviour like phobia or panic attacks.  Then there is the misuse of cognitive dissonance. 
 

No doubt you as a lawyer are aware of legal terms with precise meanings that are misunderstood and therefore misused by the general public.

Edited March 26, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

Smac, what would your reaction be if a nonmember ‘corrected’ your explanation of proxy temple ordinances and claimed you were softpedaling what it actually was to make the Church look less offensive or heretical?

Edited March 26, 2022 by Calm

[smac97]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Who is more likely to be familiar with accurate definitions?  

Who is more likely to soft-pedal a divisive and controversial pedagogy?  

1 hour ago, Calm said:

The experts who work in the field or the amateurs, many of whom are getting their info not from experts in the field but other amateurs. 

CRT is not a scientific or mathematical concept.  It doesn't require specialized knowledge to understand.

1 hour ago, Calm said:

This reminds me of the misuse of many psychological labels, especially names of substantial disorders/dysfunctions being applied to everyday behaviour like phobia or panic attacks.  Then there is the misuse of cognitive dissonance. 

The very fact that CRT has such malleable meanings is rather indicative of its problems.  

1 hour ago, Calm said:

No doubt you as a lawyer are aware of legal terms with precise meanings that are misunderstood and therefore misused by the general public.

Sure.  But a lot of those terms can, with a wee bit of effort, understood by a layman.

So it is, I think, with CRT.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Calm]

24 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Who is more likely to soft-pedal a divisive and controversial pedagogy? 

 

24 minutes ago, smac97 said:

2 hours ago, Calm said:

 

CRT is not a scientific or mathematical concept.  It doesn't require specialized knowledge to understand

So no one needs legal training to be able to discourse on somewhat obscure legal topics? Read a newspaper commentary and you are go to go?

Quote

The very fact that CRT has such malleable meanings is rather indicative of its problems. 

Psychological terms in my experience have precise meanings, but that has not stopped misuse by those who don’t understand them, like cognitive dissonance. 
 

Just because someone is misusing terms does not mean they were that malleable.

You appear to be assuming is something is frequently misused, that it is poorly made. I use knives all the time as screwdrivers, but that is no indication that they are not well made precisely for the purpose originally intended. 
 

Quote

o it is, I think, with CRT

When you claim Bybee is softpedaling CRT, I have my doubts that you understand how experts intended it to be technically used. 

Edited March 26, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

Quote

Who is more likely to soft-pedal a divisive and controversial pedagogy?  

How many times have you heard how you can’t trust Mormons to tell the full truth about their faith?  How is the above different?