BYU requires new hires to waive their right to clergy confidentiality

[HappyJackWagon]

1 hour ago, Amulek said:

Well, it isn't exactly without merit. I mean, I think it's a pretty good argument even when we are talking about the choices made by students who decide to attend BYU.

I think it's an excellent argument when we are talking about full blown professors though.

I mean, honestly, if you hold an advanced degree, are applying to teach at BYU, and don't know what you are getting into then you maybe ought not to be in the business of teaching for a living.

If you value privacy, stronger speech protections, etc. then go teach at a state school where the government, acting as employer, will keep it's nose out of your business (for the most part).

 

I tend to think that having some diversity is a good thing. But if the only people who apply to work at BYU don't care about privacy or speech protection as a rule, then it doesn't really bode well for academic rigor, IMO.

IF BYU only wants lemmings who will let the employer do whatever it wants to them, then I think they will get just that.

[bluebell]

10 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I tend to think that having some diversity is a good thing. But if the only people who apply to work at BYU don't care about privacy or speech protection as a rule, then it doesn't really bode well for academic rigor, IMO.

Can you explain why you believe that one automatically leads to the other?  I'm not seeing the connection.

[The Nehor]

I am hoping that they no longer have to call Bishops and ask if they have a current temple recommend. It should be the easiest thing in the world to have someone in Salt Lake press a few buttons and generate a report on all current employees now that Temple Recommends are electronically tracked.

They probably do call if the recommend has expired or been turned off or whatever.

[HappyJackWagon]

6 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Can you explain why you believe that one automatically leads to the other?  I'm not seeing the connection.

I think people who will willingly conform themselves into a very deliberate box with increasing controls are less likely to be independent and free thinkers. Pushing limits to places outside the box lead to greater understanding in science, math, and really any academic subject. Without an expansion of ideas things will be come stale and repetitive. IMO increased control over a person makes them less likely to venture to new discoveries. They will be rewarded for being IN the box, not for seeking more. 

I see this move by BYU as just another effort to control staff and students into church defined conformity. BYU already does that in spades but this is yet another step farther down that path. If people don't like it, they won't attend or teach at BYU leaving only a certain type remaining at BYU. That is less diversity in favor of more control by the church.

The truth is, this move doesn't really make any huge or meaningful change to what already occurs in practice, but it is a strong message

[katherine the great]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I think people who will willingly conform themselves into a very deliberate box with increasing controls are less likely to be independent and free thinkers.

I don’t think they want independent and free thinkers. Their anthropology department is a joke. Biological anthropology, my subfield, is a staple of any decent anthropology department. It’s by far the most scientific of the sub fields, and it isn’t  even required for anthropology majors at BYU. It’s outrageous. I have no doubt it’s because they don’t want to deal with more than a passing mention of human evolution.

[Calm]

I think one’s paradigm matters. If one sees it as a matter of self control rather than conformity, one isn’t agreeing to be ruled by anyone but oneself when choosing to live by gospel standards. 

[jkwilliams]

8 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

I don’t think they want independent and free thinkers. Their anthropology department is a joke. Biological anthropology, my subfield, is a staple of any decent anthropology department. It’s by far the most scientific of the sub fields, and it isn’t  even required for anthropology majors at BYU. It’s outrageous. I have no doubt it’s because they don’t want to deal with more than a passing mention of human evolution.

A university is supposed to challenge students’ preconceptions by presenting new information. BYU seems designed to reinforce those preconceptions. 

[MiserereNobis]

Could a bishop refuse to give the information to BYU when BYU asks?

[bluebell]

26 minutes ago, MiserereNobis said:

Could a bishop refuse to give the information to BYU when BYU asks?

Theoretically yes, but then the person would probably lose their job. 

[Teancum]

4 hours ago, jkwilliams said:

Funny that it was never mentioned to me. 

Well when I was a bishop I did not mention it to the ward member unless there was an issue as there was one time.

[CV75]

46 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

A university is supposed to challenge students’ preconceptions by presenting new information. BYU seems designed to reinforce those preconceptions. 

I think it depends on what the preconceptions are. I would advocate approaching academics, as with any of life's endeavors, with a spiritual as well as intellectual foundation,  and I would advocate helping college-age (and younger students) develop such an approach.

I guess it depends on what kind of "new information" you want to give students (are you an academic?), but how do you find BYU students’ religious belief and practice, on the whole, serving as a barrier to obtaining higher education? Or, how do you find the trustees’ attitude toward the Church, on the whole, to be a barrier to presenting new information? What kind of preconceptions and new information are you finding problematic? 

[CV75]

1 hour ago, katherine the great said:

I don’t think they want independent and free thinkers. Their anthropology department is a joke. Biological anthropology, my subfield, is a staple of any decent anthropology department. It’s by far the most scientific of the sub fields, and it isn’t  even required for anthropology majors at BYU. It’s outrageous. I have no doubt it’s because they don’t want to deal with more than a passing mention of human evolution.

What is your experience with the anthropology department, and this class in particular https://catalog.byu.edu/family-home-and-social-sciences/anthropology/biological-anthropology? Of course some universities are better at it than others (of course you will stand by your own Alma Mater), but does making such a course mandatory/required for majors really foster more intellectual independence and freedom than not requiring it?

[Calm]

50 minutes ago, CV75 said:

What is your experience with the anthropology department, and this class in particular https://catalog.byu.edu/family-home-and-social-sciences/anthropology/biological-anthropology? Of course some universities are better at it than others (of course you will stand by your own Alma Mater), but does making such a course mandatory/required for majors really foster more intellectual independence and freedom than not requiring it?

Making such a course not required is likely to result in some graduates having holes in their expected knowledge and thus it is likely for those looking to hire anthropology graduates to look elsewhere besides at BYU anthro grads in general.

The function for college imo should include not only career training, but a massive dose of critical thinking training.  Flexible thinking can also help prevent faith crises when presented with information that looks like it contradicts one’s beliefs by allowing one to examine oneself and one’s ideas without defensiveness.

Edited August 30, 2022 by Calm

[jkwilliams]

27 minutes ago, CV75 said:

I think it depends on what the preconceptions are. I would advocate approaching academics, as with any of life's endeavors, with a spiritual as well as intellectual foundation,  and I would advocate helping college-age (and younger students) develop such an approach.

I guess it depends on what kind of "new information" you want to give students (are you an academic?), but how do you find BYU students’ religious belief and practice, on the whole, serving as a barrier to obtaining higher education? Or, how do you find the trustees’ attitude toward the Church, on the whole, to be a barrier to presenting new information? What kind of preconceptions and new information are you finding problematic? 

I guess I don’t see a need for “spiritual foundations” in subjects other than religion. I do think the religious control does constrain what is taught. A good friend of mine, for example, published a paper on why missionaries were targets of terrorism in Latin America and what the church could do to mitigate the risk. He was accused of endangering missionaries and was denied tenure. I’ve spoken of professors I had having to issue disclaimers about Book of Mormon evidence and organic evolution, which to me suggests having to tiptoe around certain subjects. 

[CV75]

41 minutes ago, Calm said:

Making such a course not required is likely to result in some graduates having holes in their knowledge and thus is likely for those looking to hire anthropology graduates to look elsewhere besides at BYU anthro grads in general.

The function for college imo should include not only career training, but a massive dose of critical thinking training.  Flexible thinking can also help prevent faith crises when presented with information that looks like it contradicts one’s beliefs by allowing one to examine oneself and one’s ideas without defensiveness.

“Likely”? I guess it’s “academic”.!  I was interested in the poser's experience.

But, I would think a student / parents would make that assessment as part of deciding which college to attend based on the quality of the curriculum, just like employees making the same decision over hiring policies. I wouldn’t paint students as avoiding critical or flexible thinking, whether they are required to take the course of not (it could work both ways),  or BYU as catering to students/parents who would like to avoid developing their thinking skills by making a course optional. The content looked OK to me.

[JustAnAustralian]

1 hour ago, katherine the great said:

I have no doubt it’s because they don’t want to deal with more than a passing mention of human evolution.

Evolutionary biology is mandatory in their biology degree https://catalog.byu.edu/life-sciences/biology/biology-bs so I'm pretty sure they are comfortable with discussing evolution, even if it's not in an anthropology degree stream.

[Calm]

https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/brigham-young-university-provo/academic-life/academic-majors/social-sciences/anthropology/

I need to find out what the total number of schools is.

Looks like we are cheapest though for our quality, lol.

149 for Master’s Degree, so about a 1/3 down from the top.  403 BS degrees, so 1/4.  Not popular for Master’s, middling for Bachelor’s.  Way down for most focused.  Not labeled as best or noteworthy (top 15%).

BYU Anthropology Rankings

The bachelor's program at BYU was ranked #108 on College Factual's Best Schools for anthropology list. It is also ranked #1 in Utah.  

Ranking Type	Rank
Best Value Bachelor’s Degree Colleges for Anthropology	1
Best Value Master’s Degree Colleges for Anthropology	1
Best Anthropology Master’s Degree Schools	53
Best Anthropology Bachelor’s Degree Schools	100
Most Popular Master’s Degree Colleges for Anthropology	123
Most Focused Master’s Degree Colleges for Anthropology	129
Most Popular Bachelor’s Degree Colleges for Anthropology	173
Most Focused Bachelor’s Degree Colleges for Anthropology	375

 

 

Edited August 30, 2022 by Calm

[CV75]

24 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I guess I don’t see a need for “spiritual foundations” in subjects other than religion. I do think the religious control does constrain what is taught. A good friend of mine, for example, published a paper on why missionaries were targets of terrorism in Latin America and what the church could do to mitigate the risk. He was accused of endangering missionaries and was denied tenure. I’ve spoken of professors I had having to issue disclaimers about Book of Mormon evidence and organic evolution, which to me suggests having to tiptoe around certain subjects. 

Creating a split between spirituality and science is not exactly the product of critical thinking, and suggests preconceptions in action should a college/university build its mission or curriculum around such an assumption.

Those must have been interesting conversations your acquaintances had; I would like to see the paper and the disclaimers.  Are they available?

[Calm]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

“Likely”? I guess it’s “academic”.!  I was interested in the poser's experience.

But, I would think a student / parents would make that assessment as part of deciding which college to attend based on the quality of the curriculum, just like employees making the same decision over hiring policies. I wouldn’t paint students as avoiding critical or flexible thinking, whether they are required to take the course of not (it could work both ways),  or BYU as catering to students/parents who would like to avoid developing their thinking skills by making a course optional. The content looked OK to me.

It would be interesting to see who has the most faith crises per capita and break it further down to those who stop believing vs those who are able to adjust their faith paradigm to fit the new info and stay believers, college graduates who attend BYU and college graduates who don’t.

It would be only correlation as the reason for the difference might not have anything to do with what they learned at BYU, including how to effectively appraise their own religious beliefs and instead be about why they chose BYU in the first place or something else, but perhaps there might be a way to control for those variables I am too spaced to see.

Edited August 31, 2022 by Calm

[jkwilliams]

5 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Creating a split between spirituality and science is not exactly the product of critical thinking, and suggests preconceptions in action should a college/university build its mission or curriculum around such an assumption.

Those must have been interesting conversations your acquaintances had; I would like to see the paper and the disclaimers.  Are they available?

Critical thinking has always been a struggle for me. Just ask Mark. 

As for the disclaimers, I’ve mentioned my professors before. David’s paper is here:

https://www.academia.edu/1972109/Mormonism_and_Guerrillas_in_Bolivia

[OGHoosier]

 

3 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I think people who will willingly conform themselves into a very deliberate box with increasing controls are less likely to be independent and free thinkers. Pushing limits to places outside the box lead to greater understanding in science, math, and really any academic subject. Without an expansion of ideas things will be come stale and repetitive. IMO increased control over a person makes them less likely to venture to new discoveries. They will be rewarded for being IN the box, not for seeking more. 

Category error. A person's being willing to conform themselves to a code of conduct or institutional requirements does not translate to an unwillingness to expand the boundaries of discovery in their academic field. I see no merit in the argument that "the kind of people who conform" are not "the kind of people who innovate": conformity and innovation are sphere-dependent, and those who pattern their lives after authority in one sphere are perfectly at liberty to innovate in another sphere. Thank heavens, or society would land in chaos. 

But then again, I'm something of an academic enfant terrible as I believe the modern conception of "academic freedom" - ie unbounded value-neutral inquiry - is frankly fraudulent. I must admit, it gives me a certain joy to start challenging my professor's assumptions right after they gleefully announce that they will challenge all of mine - as is par for the course in the department which I attend. Medice, cura te ipsum.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, jkwilliams said:

Critical thinking has always been a struggle for me. Just ask Mark. 

As for the disclaimers, I’ve mentioned my professors before. David’s paper is here:

https://www.academia.edu/1972109/Mormonism_and_Guerrillas_in_Bolivia

Oh, who knows... I was talking about the attitude toward critical thinking of the university that overtly avoids spirituality in its mission.

Thank you for the link but I cannot access it. I won't jump to conclusions about David's dismissal based on other accessible articles he's written on the same topic, not knowing the relative timeframes, circumstances and what he did on campus.

It would be nice to see the actual disclaimers also, but, oh well, such is life.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

It would be interesting to see who has the most faith crises per capita and break it further down to those who stop believing vs those who are able to adjust their faith paradigm to fit the new info and stay believers, college graduates who attend BYU and college graduates who don’t.

It would be only correlation as the reason for the difference might not have anything to do with what they learned at BYU, including how to effectively appraise their own religious beliefs and instead be about why they chose BYU in the first place or something else, but perhaps there might be a way to control for those variables I am too spaced to see.

That would be an interesting study!

[katherine the great]

1 hour ago, JustAnAustralian said:

Evolutionary biology is mandatory in their biology degree https://catalog.byu.edu/life-sciences/biology/biology-bs so I'm pretty sure they are comfortable with discussing evolution, even if it's not in an anthropology degree stream.

Good to know. The class description sounds almost exactly like the middle third of my course material. Biological anthropology is generally always a prerequisite for osteology, paleoanthropology and forensic anthropology. It boggles my mind that it would not be required at any university with an anthropology department. 

[katherine the great]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

https://www.collegefactual.com/colleges/brigham-young-university-provo/academic-life/academic-majors/social-sciences/anthropology/

I need to find out what the total number of schools is.

Looks like we are cheapest though for our quality, lol.

149 for Master’s Degree, so about a 1/3 down from the top.  403 BS degrees, so 1/4.  Not popular for Master’s, middling for Bachelor’s.  Way down for most focused.  Not labeled as best or noteworthy (top 15%).

BYU Anthropology Rankings

The bachelor's program at BYU was ranked #108 on College Factual's Best Schools for anthropology list. It is also ranked #1 in Utah.  

Ranking Type	Rank
Best Value Bachelor’s Degree Colleges for Anthropology	1
Best Value Master’s Degree Colleges for Anthropology	1
Best Anthropology Master’s Degree Schools	53
Best Anthropology Bachelor’s Degree Schools	100
Most Popular Master’s Degree Colleges for Anthropology	123
Most Focused Master’s Degree Colleges for Anthropology	129
Most Popular Bachelor’s Degree Colleges for Anthropology	173
Most Focused Bachelor’s Degree Colleges for Anthropology	375

 

 

Okay. This has absolutely nothing to do with the importance of biological anthropology to anthropology in general. I’m sure all those cultural anthropologists and archaeologists at BYU think it’s just great. I strongly disagree. 🤷‍♀️