ENEMY PROFESSOR (No 9) - Thaddeus Russell

no indoctrination dot org ^ | 2-2005

[doug from upland]

I guess it is time to renew this series. Noindoctrination.org has provided a great service that gives students a chance to out their biased professors.

PREVIOUS ENEMY PROFESSORS:
8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

====================================================

Warning: Postings are only opinions. (See Terms of Service)

Record for NoIndoctrination.org entry #416.

Barnard College

Aug. 30, 2004

http://www.barnard.edu

NY

  Course: AMST 3401: Colloquium in American Studies: Cultural Approaches to the Past

  Course Catalog Description: An introduction to the theoretical approaches of American Studies, as well as the methods and materials used in the interdisciplinary study of American society. Through close reading of a variety of texts (e.g. novels, films, essays), we will analyze the creation, maintenance, and transmission of cultural meaning within American society.

  Professor: Thaddeus Russell

  Required? Yes, for my major or minor

  Lecture Bias: Excessive

  Comments: Professor Russell clearly has a political agenda behind his "teaching" and consistently presented aggressive one-sided arguments in which only radical students were given due attention. A typical class started out with a brief recap of the (entirely) leftist readings. Professor Russell then encouraged discussion, which was often filled with remarks about his and other students’ hatred of this administration and their belief in the racist, imperial nature of our country. Classes were once a week and lasted one hour and fifty minutes. He constantly went on and on about how the American government creates a society in which anyone who is not a white male is a horribly oppressed individual. He bashed Lynn Cheney for an entire class because he believes that eight-year-olds who cannot listen to Eminem and other such violent entertainers are suffering a breach of their First Amendment rights. Even worse, the class was split in two and forced to debate the legalization of child porn/boy love for two hours. (He wanted us to prove why forcing children to have sex was any different than forcing them to clean their room.) While both debating sides were allowed to speak, he gave those arguing against a tougher time. It was obvious Professor Russell sided with the pro child porn/boy love side because he let them voice their arguments with few challenges; with the other side, he always thought of some issue to negate their arguments. This was one of the most disturbing experiences of my life. Professor Russell never explained why he chose to debate this topic rather than one that would not make students so uncomfortable. There are a myriad of other examples as well, with one of my favorites being when Russell stated that the Bible tells people to expect little from life.

  Discussion Bias: Excessive

  Comments: As I said before, Russell was only interested in hearing other like-minded students echo his extreme views. The "discussions" were all fiery political rhetoric and no substance. Students did not generally voice differing opinions. Dissenting students felt so outnumbered that they kept quiet. He was always so sarcastic and self-righteous. During the child porn/boy love debate, a student stated that children's bodies are not physically prepared to have sex because they have not entered puberty, and he said something along the lines that this student needed a real argument.

  Readings Bias: Excessive

  Comments: All tried to paint a portrait of working-class and minority Americans as victims. Logically, the class started out with Marx and Gramsci. Some of the readings included IF HE HOLLERS LET HIM GO (Chester Himes), RACE REBELS: CULTURE, POLITICS, AND THE BLACK WORKING CLASS (Robin D. G. Kelley), and FEAR OF A QUEER PLANET: QUEER POLITICS AND SOCIAL THEORY (Michael Warner). [Spring 2004 online syllabus: http://web.archive.org/web/20040316055450/http://www.barnard.edu/history/faculty/russell/3401/3401y_2004.html.]

  General Comments: Barnard's Code of Academic Freedom (http://www.barnard.columbia.edu/provost/code/codeb1.htm) states, "As members of the learned professions and officers of an educational institution they [faculty] should remember that they have a special obligation at all times to be accurate, to exercise appropriate restraint, to show respect for the opinions of others...." I feel this Barnard statement was definitely violated. Unlike other professors who just assign leftist material, Russell talked about his personal political beliefs every class and created a classroom environment in which those with differing ideas were highly uncomfortable. Another Barnard statement was also violated: "A Barnard education seeks to provide women with the tools and techniques needed to think critically ..." (http://www.barnard.edu/catalog.pdf). I learned no new ways to critically analyze historical material. Instead of being taught how to think, I was being taught what to think. I learned nothing about American history or how to better approach the study of history. I am so mad when I remember this class. I am mad that the school would hire someone like this and that my parents had to shell out their hard-earned money so that I could listen to a hostile political diatribe every week. Most of all I am sad I was too scared to say anything while Professor Russell and the other students offended my convictions and values.

Rebuttal

  When a course posting goes online, NoIndoctrination.org sends a notice to the professor inviting him/her to contest any specifics. (See Rebuttals.) If we receive a rebuttal, it will be posted here.

The opinions expressed within NoIndoctrination.org are not necessarily those held by NoIndoctrination.org
Copyright © 2002-04, NoIndoctrination.org

[LS]

Sounds like this guy could use a dose of THIS!:

[steelyourfaith]

Thanks for the link.

[SpinyNorman]

"Even worse, the class was split in two and forced to debate the legalization of child porn/boy love for two hours. (He wanted us to prove why forcing children to have sex was any different than forcing them to clean their room.) While both debating sides were allowed to speak, he gave those arguing against a tougher time. It was obvious Professor Russell sided with the pro child porn/boy love side because he let them voice their arguments with few challenges; with the other side, he always thought of some issue to negate their arguments."

Clearly, his teaching pedagogy has become teaching pedophilia.

[crackademic]

Thaddeus Russell’s website:

www.thaddeusrussell.com