ENEMY PROFESSOR (No. 23) - HELEN M. KRESS

no indoctrination dot org ^ | 4-2007 | student

[doug from upland]

Our colleges and universities are a hotbed of anti-Americanism. To many professors, this world would be better if there were no USA. Thanks to No Indotrination dot org for providing the website that outs the scumbags who earn a good living while bashing America and indoctrinating students in their classrooms.
===========================================================================

PREVIOUS ENEMIES -- 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

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

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

Note: Although the postings appear to be anonymous, NoIndoctrination.org knows the posters' names. We communicate with the posters before putting their comments online. We also research each posting and ask for corroborating material when appropriate.

Record for NoIndoctrination.org entry #452.

San Jose State University (SJSU)

Jan. 11, 2005

http://www.sjsu.edu

CA

  Course: EDSC 172A: Social, Philosophical & Multicultural Foundations of Secondary Education

  Course Catalog Description: Social, cultural, historical and philosophical concepts in secondary teacher education: Application to problems of curriculum and instruction in multilingual, multicultural classrooms.

Below are a few objectives listed in the course syllabus:

* "Foster in colleagues an appreciation for actively exploring various cultural constructions of knowledge and for developing the analytic tools to help high school students to compare and contrast different cultural experiences and perspectives."

* "Indicate an intellectual awareness of historical and current political, technological, economic, and global forces and organizations influencing educational priorities."

* "Express sensitivity to the diversity within and across populations that are served by public schools in CA; understand diversity as included but not limited to culture, race, ethnicity, social class, gender, sexual orientation, language, disability, religion, nat'l origin, and age."

* "Articulate rationales for and demonstrate excellence in integrating multicultural, multilingual, and feminist 'education' (quotes mine) throughout the secondary education curriculum."(IN SHORT, ACTIVELY INDOCTRINATE STUDENTS WITH RADICAL LEFTIST DOGMA AND PROMOTE SOCIAL RADICALISM UNDER THE GUISE OF OBJECTIVE STUDY, WITH NO PRETENSE WHATSOEVER OF REAL OBJECTIVITY OR A BALANCE OF SCHOLARLY VIEWS. NOTHING ABOUT ACADEMICS HERE!)

[Note: EDSC 172A is required for the secondary teaching credential.]

  Professor: Helen M. Kress

  Required? Yes, for all students

  Lecture Bias: Excessive

  Comments: Texts, lectures, and assignment requirements were one sided in support of multiculturalist goals. This professor actually said that "only Whites as a group are racist," based on "anthropological evidence." She reinforced the silly (racist) notion, per Jacqueline Jordan Irvine [see Text section below], that only teachers of color should teach students of color. She has made reference to those having Conservative views as being "unfit to teach". She has expressed a preference for socialism as a means to affect "social justice." She has expressed contempt solely for Western Culture -- and shown the class propagandistic videos that excoriate White Americans by attempting to present all Whites as racists, and a video that depicts "teachers" indoctrinating elementary-grade students to embrace "tolerance" for "alternative lifestyles." Prof. Kress did not treat multiculturalism, feminism, et al. in a scholarly fashion. I must say I am not impressed with this professor's scholarship, given the piddling nature of her lectures and her inability to back up her assertions with facts/rebuttal of criticisms of ideas she espouses. Her course objectives (and one-sided course texts) allowed no room for scholarly counter-arguments -- much less a truly objective study of multiculturalism and related topics, as I mentioned previously.

  Discussion Bias: Excessive

  Comments: Prof. Kress "allowed" me to voice my opinions in class. However, I insisted upon this right while demonstrating courteousness and respect at all times (albeit, at times, with light-hearted sarcasm). In all honesty, the hostility I experienced came mostly from fellow classmates who were very liberal. I was accused of "causing a 'hostile environment'" simply for having the "temerity" to calmly and rationally dispute certain aspects of multiculturalism, thereby exercising my First Amendment/ student rights, calling into question absurd socialist notions of "social justice theory" cloaked in deceptive terminology such as "tolerance," "diversity," and "inclusion." In fact, none of these attributes were evident or displayed by many of my fellow students -- much less the instructor. If anyone faced a "hostile environment," it was me. I was accused of causing a "hostile environment" because I challenged the wisdom of showing elementary-age children videos promoting "alternative lifestyles" acceptance and for debunking the Marxist nonsense "taught" in that class on a regular basis. The professor let this accusation stand in spite of my calm, respectful demeanor (which can be corroborated). My right to disagree or call into question the drivel presented in class was never defended, nor did this professor do anything to discourage (to the best of my knowledge) the obnoxious comments sometimes directed at me. Prof. Kress's reactions to my comments were NOT rude (I readily admit this, except when once she questioned my ability to teach because of MY "right-wing biases" -- despite the fact that I'd repeatedly stressed that no biases whatsoever should ideally influence class lectures. Highly ironic, given the heavily-biased nature of Prof. Kress's lectures!)--just befuddled, I believe, as a result of her lack of true scholarship (in my opinion). Her responses to me were subdued in that many of the points I raised were difficult to dispute, from both a logical and evidentiary standpoint. Faced with these difficulties, she often called on other students to attempt to defend indefensible positions -- due, no doubt, to Prof. Kress's inability to do so.

  Readings Bias: Excessive

  Comments: ALL texts slanted in one direction: that of far-left. All theories related to race, etc. were of a radical leftist nature. No objectivity in this "class" whatsoever -- hence, indoctrination. The texts were as follows: Educating Teachers for Diversity (by Jacqueline Jordan Irvine); Women Without Class: Girls, Race, and Identity (by Julie Bettie); White Women, Race Matters: The Social Construction of Whiteness (by Ruth Frankenberg); The Devil in Silicon Valley: Northern California, Race, and Mexican Americans (by Stephen Pitti)

  General Comments: Let me list some San José State University policies:

* "As teachers, faculty members encourage the free pursuit of learning."

* "As teachers, faculty encourage members students to make their own judgments and to express them when appropriate."

* "As teachers, faculty members allow students to take reasoned exception to or to reserve judgment about the data or views offered in a course of study."

* "As teachers, faculty members refuse to tolerate exploitation, harassment, or discrimination by students in an instructional setting."

* As members of an academic profession, faculty members: strive to foster a campus environment that i) supports a robust discussion of issues (including political and societal issues), ii) promotes respect for the opinions of others, and iii) encourages sensitivity to the possibility of multiple interpretations of speech and actions."

* "Students are free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in courses of study. They may be required to know the material set forth by the instructor, but they are free to reserve personal judgment as to the truth or falsity of what is presented."

* "As a community that values and respects diversity, inclusion, civility and individual uniqueness, San José State University is committed to encouraging students to act, listen and speak with open minds; to value individual experiences and perspectives, and to appreciate differing viewpoints, for the purpose of promoting the free exchange of ideas that fosters a healthy and productive society."

Every single one of the directives cited above were violated in this class. Without exception. Only during class discussions (mainly due to personal initiative on my part) was there any semblance of "balance." "Multiculturalism," as it is currently being taught, is not a valid topic of study for prospective teachers. If the goal of multiculturalism was merely to help ELLs (English Language Learners -- recent immigrants) to assimilate and acculturate and promote real tolerance, rather than promote a radical "oppressed/ oppressor" Marxist dichotomy, I wouldn't have a problem with it. As it stands, Prof. Kress stated to me that in my assignments, I was "required" to "promote" multiculturalism, feminism, "alternative lifestyles" in my assignments -- and that my grade in the class depended on it -- a clear abridgement of my 1st Amendment rights/student rights, and an imposition/ violation of conscience in my view. This is not a course conducive to broadening the skills of prospective teachers. Rather, this "course" represents an institutional attempt to indoctrinate. EDSC 172A cannot be called a legitimate education course. It is a semester's worth of "sensitivity training." Period.

[NoIndoctrination.org note: The policy statements cited in the post come from SJSU's Statement of Professional Responsibility (http://www2.sjsu.edu/senate/s99-8.htm), SJSU's Statement on Student Rights and Responsibilities (http://www2.sjsu.edu/senate/s90-5.htm), and SJSU's Campus Climate Policy (http://www2.sjsu.edu/senate/s01-13.htm).]

[joe fonebone]

OK.....a fund needs to be started, that would pay for us older conservatives, to take the classes offered by these teachers. since we do not really need the grade, we could speak our minds in class, write papers against the viewpoints, and then appeal the failing grade to the administration. this is how we could combat the left on campus...

[rbosque]

These “America-haters” are free to leave. I find it odd that committed marxists would want to live here. If they truely believed in their BS, they would be in N. Korea. SInce they are here, one can only conclude that they want to spread revolution here.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Is there a "ping" list for this... and, if so: might I be added to it, please?

Thanks!

[PGalt]

Outstanding post. Great idea. Internal. Enemy. Device. BUMP!

[doug from upland]

There wasn’t a ping list but perhaps there needs to be. Since I am overwhelmed, I would greatly appreciate it if you could be the pingmaster. Can you do it? I’ll put up a new one each week.

[doug from upland]

That’s a good idea, but I think we would get kicked out in week one.

[doug from upland]

Hey, I looked back. I did have a ping list. I guess I can do it after all.

[doug from upland]

Ping list. The ENEMY PROFESSOR series is back. I anticipate doing one a week. Maybe two. :)

[joe fonebone]

not necessarily....a case can be made to keep in the class, and we would not have to worry about gpa....it would be a blast!!!

[doug from upland]

It would be a great deal of fun.

[aspen64]

I’d love to be on this ping list.
Thanks Doug.

[asburygrad]

Thanks for posting this and introducing me to Noindoctrination.com - it’s a great website!