Posted on 10/14/2007 3:05:46 PM PDT by jdm
George Will takes a look at the requirements for today's students of social work -- and discovers a political commissariat worthy of the Soviet Union. Universities have required pledges of loyalty to liberal political thought as a requisite for success in their social-work programs, failing students who object to being told what to think (via CapQ reader Sandeep Dath):
In 1997, the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) adopted a surreptitious political agenda in the form of a new code of ethics, enjoining social workers to advocate for social justice "from local to global levels." A widely used textbook -- "Direct Social Work Practice: Theory and Skill" -- declares that promoting "social and economic justice" is especially imperative as a response to "the conservative trends of the past three decades." Clearly, in the social work profession's catechism, whatever social and economic justice are, they are the opposite of conservatism.
The Council on Social Work Education (CSWE), the national accreditor of social work education programs, encourages -- not that encouragement is required -- the ideological permeation of the curricula, including mandatory student advocacy. The CSWE says students must demonstrate an ability to "understand the forms and mechanisms of oppression and discrimination."
At Arizona State University, social work students must "demonstrate compliance with the NASW Code of Ethics." Berkeley requires compliance as proof of "suitability for the profession." Students at the University of Central Florida "must comply" with the NASW code. At the University of Houston, students must sign a pledge of adherence. At the University of Michigan, failure to comply with the code may be deemed "academic misconduct."
Schools' mission statements, student manuals and course descriptions are clotted with the vocabulary of "progressive" cant -- "diversity," "inclusion," "classism," "ethnocentrism," "racism," "sexism," "heterosexism," "ageism," "white privilege," "ableism," "contextualizes subjects," "cultural imperialism," "social identities and positionalities," "biopsychosocial" problems, "a just share of society's resources," and on and on. What goes on under the cover of this miasma of jargon? Just what the American Association of University Professors warned against in its 1915 "Declaration of Principles" -- teachers "indoctrinating" students.
In one sense, many will not find this a large hurdle to clear. While nothing about conservatism objects to social work, many of the employment opportunities come from government agencies or government funding. Traditionally, conservatives have tried to keep funding limited for these bureaucracies, which has generated a great deal of enmity among the scholars of these professions.
However, they should keep their lobbying efforts focused on their lawmakers and not their students. This goes beyond the normal in-class diatribes that many college professors use to boost their political agenda. They are now requiring pledges, signed contracts, and other explicit agreement from their students with those agendas, without which they cannot pass their classes. They also assign liberal political action projects to the students as required class projects, threatening failure if they do not comply.
Will descibes two cases from the study. In one, Missouri State required students to sign a letter to the state legislature advocating gay adoptions. When she objected, the university took administrative action against her for violating professional standards, and refused to allow her parents to attend her hearing. Only after the family sued the university did the school drop the charges and pay her financial restitution. In another, a student left the program when the professor made clear that she could not expect to pass unless the student supported abortion.
One has to wonder not at the arrogance behind these indoctrination efforts, but at the panic that drives them. The academics apparently understand that they have a losing argument, and so have stopped allowing debate on these issues. Instead, they abuse their positions of trust and authority to become a thought police, demanding unthinking loyalty to diktats rather than allowing for intellectual diversity.
It's interesting to see how totalitarianism develops, and from which sources.
“ableism” ?
Is that like giving the job to best qualified person?
Yep, the Left works its way surreptitiously through all our institutions. They’ve even got a stealth candidate for President. And a whole bunch of out-of-the-closet candidates.
Leftist rubbish permeates the culture.
Weren’t there two instances in the article where students stood up to these fascists and the schools lost? These articles should go a long way towards dismantling their empires. And then there is Senator Grassley who is wondering why the universities can have huge endowments and still raise tuitions. Someday things might become rational.
You have to love the ‘hire for diversity’ types.. with a straight face, they can make an arguement to hire a black female with a GED and minimal work experience over a white male with a masters degree and work solid experience.. I have seen it happen before.
The most qualified person should get hired.. race should have no impact on a candidates consideration.
Well, now I see the reason social services are in such disarray across the country. Liberals, as a whole are lazy do nothings who expect others to do for them. No wonder people relying on social service workers are in such trouble—there is no one to do the workers work for them.
parasites good. achievers evil
bump
I would rather have a job picking fly sh*t out of pepper boxes all day, then be a Social Worker.
LOL! Lucky for you, I hear they are hiring!
This stuff just gets nuttier and nuttier.
Magooey
Welcome to the USSA, comrade. Leave your brain at the door.
Welcome to the USSA, comrade. Leave your brain at the door....................
And welcome to our universities, young fools, where we know how to nurture your hatred of your mean daddies who constantly “oppressed” you.
You can now act out your revenge on his world.
We will teach you how!
Interesting read. I hope to throw this in the face of some lib friends of mine.
Ableism is the preference for people who are ablebodied.
Heaven forbid, they’re working, too.
What a deal! Spend 20K a year, to have your kids tought to hate everything you believe in.....................
Ah, but there should be some solace in knowing that that price was one that was paid out of a concept of love that they may (unfortunately) never understand.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.