For what it's worth, some additional context about a survey that the viewpoint diversity crowd is crapping themselves over this evening. Took me all of 10 minutes to look a little harder at the data and see how, as always, things are more complicated than they 1st appear.
First, this survey is produced by a NDSU university center that's funded largely by Koch money. There's dozens of these around the country. It's not nefarious, but they have a clear agenda behind their work. ndsu.edu/news/view/deta…
Second regarding that question about how students would respond to "offensive" speech, it's designed to be as vague as possible. There's no definition of what "offensive" is. It's purely in the eye of the beholder. An intentionally bad question.
If the survey were truly interested in understanding what's behind these attitudes, it would ask a simple open ended question of those who would report a professor for offensive speech. "Can you give an example of offensive speech that should be reported?"
But the survey doesn't ask that question, so we'll never know what students are thinking when they answer yes or no to reporting offensive speech. Lost opportunity there. Lost on purpose because it wouldn't be useful to the narrative.
There's all kinds of findings even in this dubious survey that tell a different story. For ex. the vast majority of students say "uncomfortable" material is fine.
An overwhelming majority of students support including readings they disagree with.
Vast majority of students don't think invited speakers should be withdrawn if students disagree with the speaker's views.
Here's a really interesting wrinkle. Students who believe that professors create a climate open to diverse views are MORE likely to say that offensive speech by a fellow student should be reported. Not sure how to interpret this, but it cuts against the snowflake narrative.
Another interesting tidbit. Liberal and Conservative students are nearly identical in believing things have gotten better over the last 50 years. I gets the libs haven't been taught to hate the country.
Liberal and Conservative students are nearly identical in the effect college has on their view of the future.
Major source of student optimism is their professors. Little difference by political affiliation.
Liberal students are more enthusiastic about the role of entrepreneurs than conservative students.
This should have the Kochs quaking in their boots. A full 1/3 of conservative students don't think capitalism can solve major societal problems.
Lastly, the sample is not particularly representative. White students are overrepresented (60% should be about 50%), as are private school students (38%, should be about 25%).
It's a shame this survey was written by bought and sold hacks because with a little more curiosity and care, they really could've told us something interesting. As is, it still is worth puzzling over, rather than jerking our knees to a single question/answer.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with John Warner

John Warner Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @biblioracle

17 Jun
Revealing story on what's up at Penn St. with Black professors whose proportions have not budged in over 20 years. These dynamics are at play most everywhere. washingtonpost.com/education/2021…
An administrator straight up tells a Black faculty member that he believes minority candidates are less likely to be qualified for positions. This is not a pipeline problem. It's a failure to to recognize varieties of excellence problem. insidehighered.com/blogs/just-vis…
If you have a structure that is fundamentally hostile to certain groups, you must undo that hostility if you expect to attract more people from that group. Black faculty have been sharing stories of the hostility for years yet the entrenched powers do not listen.
Read 4 tweets
16 Jun
Says the man that works for the organization that actively lobbies against any policies that might arrest or even delay the killing of the planet.
“Above all, it’s about the futures of the kids, and also the rights of corporations to pump as much CO2 into the atmosphere as they want.” @rpondiscio (probably)
I mean, imagine taking your checks from AEI and asking people to believe you care at all about the future of anyone.
Read 4 tweets
16 Jun
Notice the invention of "neo-racist" so as to have a side to push against when even mildly critiquing the moral panic coming from his preferred side. "The American sense of reality is dictated by what Americans are trying to avoid." - James Baldwin
Pondisco proudly serves as a fellow member of the Board of Advisors for fairforall.org with Chris Rufo who is the chief propagator of the moral panic which has directly led to people declaring that a book about Ruby Bridges is CRT. Will you see Pondisco criticize Rufo?
No, you will not see Pondisco criticize Rufo because they sup from the same funding trough for their daily bread and internal solidarity trumps intellectual honesty or even clarity every time.
Read 5 tweets
14 Jun
It's interesting to think about the structures of the so-called meritocracy that people like me critique and how they apply to @rpondiscio, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. (AEI).
AEI is considered the most powerful conservative think tank in the country. It is funded by an array of right wing conservatives, most notably David Koch. sourcewatch.org/index.php/Amer…
Among other things AEI advocates against raising the minimum wage, for the tobacco industry, for voter suppression, and most importantly against any efforts to address global warming.
Read 11 tweets
14 Jun
The meritocracy as constructed in this country is already aristocratic. That’s the point of the critique. You’re smart enough to know that, but too beholden to your finders to be honest about it.
*funders. No one is against the idea of "merit," but the whole point of the critique of the meritocracy is that it rewards things other than merit because its structured by those already advantaged by the system.
For example, landing a sweet gig at a conservative think tank, and then jumping to another conservative think tank could be viewed as meritorious, or it could be a consequence of a simple willingness to spew opinions that the funders approve of and further their aims.
Read 5 tweets
12 Jun
Ungrading isn't just a shift in pedagogical practice, it's about bringing a different mindset and set of values to the activity of learning values which are by no means new. Vital perspective here from @Jessifer jessestommel.com/ungrading-an-i…
Seeing work like @Jessifer's here makes me so hopeful that we can make progress in these areas. The vision and promise is so clear and when enacted, it's transformative. There's no going back to the old mindset because it just seems lacking, un-vital.
I can testify that adopting the mindset that underpins ungrading transformed my work and the work of my students and the removal of traditional grading came last in the process!
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(