Wheaton College is Becoming a New Focal Point of the Academic Diversity Debate

Wheaton College is Becoming a New Focal Point of the Academic Diversity Debate

 

As members of CUNY we know that one of the nice benefits of attending colleges are in fact the interactions that we make with the other students that are attending the school. The melting pot of information, discussion and an overall pursuit of knowledge helps individual students grow themselves but also integrate new ideas that arise into their own thoughts to develop more cohesive ideas. This feature of college isn’t indigenous to CUNY although it is a part of it’s identity as seen in the early years of CITY College[1]. The issue arises when numerous people are against the concepts of affirmative action[2], which serves to not only let the underprivileged of poor socioeconomic students achieve a higher education but to also allow the schools to achieve diversity among their students, and for the most part the public is backing the idea of making colleges more diverse[3]. The importance of diversity in colleges also allows students to begin to interact with people of different backgrounds as it is highly unlikely that in their life they will never interact with other people.

As prevalent as the benefits of making schools more diverse are there are some schools who are still not in favor of it and it is putting them behind both economically and socially. Wheaton College has recently sparked controversy when they have taken steps to fire Professor Larycia Hawkins. The issue with her firing is that is is not merit based but more so social based. Professor Hawkins in the midst of the rampant racism, decided to show her support for Muslims when she decided to wear a hijab by proclaiming that both Christianity and Islam are religions of the same G-d and the Book “Larycia Hawkins donned a hijab last December to show solidarity with Muslims during a rising tide of anti-Islamic sentiment following the terror attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, Calif. She posted on Facebook a photograph of herself in a hijab with the message, “I stand in religious solidarity with Muslims because they, like me, a Christian, are people of the book.”[4]. Wheaton College is a Christian flagship school who took offense to this statement and subsequently took steps to fire Professor Hawkins. While I respect the school’s vigor and objectivism to stick with their mission statement, I am completely appalled that the school would fire a professor due to her personal opinion that really doesn’t hurt anyone.

This controversy is only negative for Wheaton College, the resistance of seeing other views isn’t only seen in this regard but also in their sciences where the “cutting edge” sciences in the school should still expect students to understand that humans descended from Adam and Eve. This alone prevented the school from receiving money from a man who was at first willing to invest. “As the college president, the Rev. Philip Ryken, showed off the west suburban Chicago school’s cutting-edge science labs to Vanderveen, the former Wheaton student recalled Ryken saying that students were expected to accept the belief that mankind descended from Adam and Eve — one of the college’s core tenets found in its statement of faith. As a result of what he perceived to be the school’s conservative bent, Vanderveen never gave the college another dime.”[5]

Personally, I think this school which is feeling the wrath of remaining in the past and unaccepting of other groups of people within their institution is becoming a great point in why schools should begin to recreating themselves to the changing world and become more accepting of others.

[1] Dorman, Joseph. Arguing the World: The New York Intellectuals in Their Own Words. New York: Free, 2000. Print.

 

[2] Schmidt, Peter. “What the Supreme Court Will Be Asking as It Revisits Affirmative Action.” Chronicle of Higher Education (n.d.): n. pag. Web.

 

[3] Drake, Bruce. “Public Strongly Backs Affirmative Action Programs on Campus.” Pew Research Center RSS. N.p., 22 Apr. 2014. Web. 04 May 2016.

 

[4] Pashman, Manya. “Wheaton College Could Face Long-term Fallout over Professor Controversy.” Http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-wheaton-college-professor-fallout-met-20160222-story.html. N.p., n.d. Web.

 

[5] ibid

Hidden Jewel of the Education System: Community Colleges

Recently, a few other students and I got together to interview the President of LaGuardia Community College. In preparing for the interview, and in the interview itself, we all learned much about the role of community colleges in America. Undervalued yet invaluable to the populace, community colleges are often overlooked by most Americans.

In preparing for the interview, my group was to read a few chapters from Gail Mellow’s book, Minding the Dream: The Process and Practice of American Community Colleges. Her book is an in-depth account of community colleges in the United States.

Some interesting insights I gleaned are as follows:
1) The average stereotype of a college student is that of an 18-year old freshman living in a dorm at a four-year college. On the contrary, the average American student would be in community college. About half of college-going students in the United States go to a community college, the 1200 or so of which makes up the backbone of the educational system.
2) National expenditures by public community colleges are less than twenty percent of the amount done by four year colleges.
3) Our self-proclaimed “hair on fire” advocate of community college interviewee estimates that about ten times more is spent cultivating a Macaulay student than is spent on a community college student.
4) Community colleges are considerably better at enveloping the democratic spirit of the United States. There is a debate however, on whether or not community colleges should venture into being more selective as time goes by. For now however, everyone is welcome.

Other parts of the book include changes in pedagogy and a statistical background on financial aid. Insights I obtained during the interview also came from two community college students who attended. One was an immigrant from China who aspires to be a college professor, and another was a female civil engineer who spent a summer at Columbia. The diverse nature of these students and their capabilities attests to the sheer amount of untapped potential in community colleges. One must wonder what could happen if community colleges were treated similarly to their more prestigious counterparts. Investing in their growth would help make America more educated, informed, and foster democracy among its citizens. I look forward to discussing the issue further in class.

What I Want in the New Dean of Macaulay

Next week, I am going to meet one of the candidates for the new Dean of Macaulay. I’m really excited to hear about what this person can bring and what new things he/she plans to implement.

Earlier this week, along with a few of our classmates, I met with Ann Kirschner, former Dean of Macaulay, and spoke about a multitude of things with her. With the final question, I asked what qualities she thought the new dean should have. To me, her answer was basically this: we need someone who will uphold the student-centered structure and atmosphere of Macaulay (there was more to it, but this was most striking). I totally agree with her.

I think the new dean at Macaulay needs to understand that the students, their education, their extracurricular activities, and their opportunities should be at the top of the priority list. Macaulay is known for offering free tuition, campus advisement, the opportunities fund, and much more. Our new dean, rather than bring something new to the table, needs to improve what Macaulay already has on the table.

Next week when I meet our potential next dean, I am going to ask how he/she is going to improve our academics, the club activities on W 67th, and the opportunities fund – three of the things I find really important. Recently with the changes to the Macaulay tuition policy, a reduction in op fund approvals, and Governor Cuomo seemingly wanting to abandon CUNY in terms of state funding, getting money is also super important when it comes to hiring a new dean.

Next week, when I meet the candidate, I am going to consider multiple things. Most importantly, we need this person to understand what Macaulay is about: the students! In addition to that, we need someone who will be able to get funds for Macaulay so that our students can continue to get all of the benefits that it currently offers. Finally, this person must have the future in mind – long-term goals.

What are some specific things you guys want out of our new dean? I think it’s worth talking about!

Why a Degree Gap Does Not Mean Equality

http://www.aei.org/publication/prediction-no-commencement-speaker-will-mention-this-the-huge-gender-college-degree-gap-favoring-women/

As soon as a read a headline that included “favoring women” I had to click and read, because that is not a headline that comes up often in my day to day browsing. This article focuses on the data published by the US State Department that shows women are earning more degrees than men on a consistent basis from associates degrees to a doctoral degrees. Although hearing these numbers at first made me happy, the author goes further saying that it is possible that women have reached equality, at least in degree earning potential.

I see how at first glance that may be a reasonable conclusion. However, upon further inspection these numbers do not indicate equality. Looking through an intersectional lens, I ask, how many of these women are women of color? How many come from a low socio-economic status? So yes, perhaps a certain type of woman has reached some level of degree equality, but to surmise that universities should begin defunding their women’s success centers is naive. Women’s Centers can provide safe spaces, progressive programming and wonderful network opportunities that women are often informally barred from.

Stepping even further, I would like to ask why this gender gap is so large. Perhaps because of a wage gap that favors men, and disadvantages, women, and even further disadvantages women of color and queer women, women are forced to seek out more credentialing so that they can compete with men in the job market. By looking solely at this degree gender gap, we’re ignoring all the other factors at play, like why people seek accreditation in the first place. We cannot conflate all women into one statistic about higher learning because many voices are missing.

More Controversy in College Athletics

So as many of you know, I am a college athlete so this topic is very relevant to me, and I find it extremely interesting. Being a Brooklyn College athlete, we don’t face many of these dishonest practices where coaches, students, and administrators place athletics over academics. The closest we come is being allowed to leave a class early for a game/match, but even then, it’s not always the whole class period that we miss.

However, I am aware of, and am angered by, the continuous dishonesty and fraudulent practices connected to college athletics. Obviously for big Division 1 sports schools, it makes sense that athletes, especially top recruits, pay attention to their sport more than schoolwork, especially if they play the more popular sports. (I said it makes sense; I didn’t say I agree with it.) Often these top recruits are looking to make it into the professional leagues. This is only one of the problems.

Another issue, which was brought up with the readings from last week, was that of whether or not student-athletes should be paid. I, personally, don’t believe athletes should be paid. If anything, they could receive equipment and money for travel (many teams have games that require bus and/or plane). However, the primary purpose of college/university is to get an education, whether or not someone plans to go into a professional sport. I think this because there are no certainties in sports. An all-star player who is expected to be drafted in the first round can suffer a career-ending torn ACL injury. What team would take him/her then? For this reason, I believe that athletes should focus on their education. And I’d like to think this is the reason the NCAA doesn’t want athletes to be paid either. I give them the benefit of the doubt because there are some, such as Joe Nocera in his article “A Way to Start Paying College Athletes,” who believe the NCAA exploits athletes by considering them “amateurs.”

Whatever the reasons, there are rules saying NCAA athletes are not allowed to be paid. But cases keep coming up of athletes accepting payment! Most recently, a newly drafted NFL player Laremy Tunsil admitted to accepting money from his coach at Ole Miss. (article posted at bottom) The funds were apparently given so that his mother could pay utility fees. On the day he was drafted, Tunsil’s Instagram and Twitter accounts were hacked, and a screenshot of the text messages to his coach, John Miller, was posted on Instagram. Tunis was asked about accepting money at a press conference immediately following his being drafted and he responded, “I would have to say yeah.” Earlier on, Tunsil was investigated and suspended for accepting and using “improper benefits.” Namely cars and hotel rooms.

In Laremy Tusil’s case, I can overlook the most recent news concerning his accepting money for his mother’s utilities (if that is the real story; it has yet to be confirmed). But accepting the improper benefits is inexcusable. NCAA athletes of his caliber (he was expected to be drafted first round) and NCAA athletes in general should be aware that they are the public face of their school and should not violate the rules of the NCAA, if not for moral reasons.

Head Wrestling Coach at U of Chicago Supports Dennis Hastert

An article I read last week from Inside Higher ED explains how Leo Kocher, head wrestling coach of the University of Chicago supports and praises Dennis Hastert, the former speaker of the House of Representatives who was charged for molesting four boys as a high school wrestling coach. As part of a plea agreement, Hastert admitted to trying to hide large payments that would cover up his acts of sexual abuse. He couldn’t be charged for molesting the boys because of statutes of limitations. Leo Kocher was one of 41 people writing letters to Judge Durkin, asking for a lenient judgement for Hastert. In his letter, Kocher praised Hastert for fighting the U.S. Education Department on Title IX and intervening with colleges that were considering to eliminate wrestling programs. He agrees with Hastert’s stance on the policy of “proportionality,” that there should be roughly an equal proportion of male athletes to female athletes. To comply with “proportionality,” many colleges attempt to eliminate all male college athletic programs (which tend to not make much money), such as wrestling.  However Dennis Hastert, and Leo Kocher as well, encourage other ways to satisfy the proportionality policy that don’t involve the removal of these programs. In this case, I personally agree and think that the addition of more female athletic programs would be more beneficial than taking away students’ opportunities to participate in college athletics. Kocher doesn’t mention Hastert’s crimes, but ends his later by saying, “Denny Hastert is a good man — and is universally regarded as such by those who have gotten to know him.” An article in the New York Times stated that Hastert was sentenced to 15 months in federal prison. 

This article grabbed my attention because I remembered feeling outraged learning the actions of Dennis Hastert. It really upsets me that he couldn’t be charged for the inhumane things he did decades ago because of the statutes of limitations. Even though Hastert was a high school coach, it’s still important to pay close attention to the indecencies that can take place in higher education. Just as I highlighted in my post regarding Donnie Tyndall and the academic fraud brought out by college athletics, it’s scary not knowing how many unexposed crimes could still be hiding within higher education. 

Link to article: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/04/25/u-chicago-coach-tells-federal-judge-dennis-hastert-deserves-credit-fighting-title-ix

Free Speech

Our discussion last class was one that was particularly interesting to me. This is because of how prevalent it is in our own Brooklyn College among peers and faculty. With talk of Political correctness and micro-aggressions, it’s only appropriate that we talk of Free Speech. In the Article “The Hell you Say” by Kelefa Sanneh discusses contemporary issues involving political correctness and free speech on college campuses.   The article looks at free speech through a political lens by discussing its history and court rulings such as the one in 1919 of “Clear and Present danger” or the one in 1969 of being likely to incite “imminent lawless action.” Freedom of speech as manifested itself in various ways across college campuses in many different ways, and I’d like to point to some specific examples in the article of how it’s done so.

The first example I’d like to look at was the Dj at the bar example. For those who didn’t read the article (Which you most certainly should, its very good!) a Dj at a local Irish pub near the University of North Carolina played the song “Blurred lines.” Becoming a major hit and very popular the Dj saw nothing wrong with playing it until a student asked the Dj to cut the song short because some of the lyrics “evoked threats of sexual violence.” The student wanted to create a safe space in the bar, but the Dj didn’t oblige and was later denied playing there again after much complaining on social media and refusal to cut the song. I guess my question would be is this an example of “Creating Safe Spaces” for students gone to far? Of course creating safe spaces wouldn’t be a bad thing for the local bar, but then again, its not located on the campus itself. Do you think students have any reasonable argument for what types of songs to be played or what atmosphere should be created in a place not associated with the college itself? The only reason why I saw the issue was brought up was because it was a hot spot for the students, but I can’t see how this makes for a reasonable argument. More importantly, I want to point out that this situation helps show an even bigger issue concerning free speech as a whole, and that is, not only should we be asking what can we say? Or how we can say it? But where can someone say something? It seems that the censoring of speech or expression is reaching further than just the college campus. Do you think this is an issue?

I do think the article highlights an interesting idea in that “For many modern free-speech advocates, the First Amendment is irrelevant: their main target is not repressive laws but shifting norms and values.” I do think this is pretty accurate in that it doesn’t seem like there are people who are trying to oppress our first amendment right, but instead look to it in a way that understands the social-psychological affects pure freedom of speech has. Or the kind of moral obligations people may or may not have when concerned with their speech. Although, the counter argument brought up of the constant self-censorship and policing of others also should be taken very seriously. It should be taken very seriously because of issues like the “… stifling of intellectual diversity.” I don’t feel that some political correctness and censorship on college campuses would result in somehow less intellectual dialogue. It’s interesting, the censorship would actually allow for a more interesting conversation; it forces students to say what they want in different ways. Pure free speech to me would be like a sport with one goal, and no rules. Its not much fun, and would get pretty chaotic.

All in all, the article does a fantastic job at explaining the root of political correctness, free speech. I do think that understanding the history of it as well as its association with different political groups ad activism will help us understand where we are today and why we say the things we do. Hope you enjoyed the article! newyorker.com/…015/08/10/the-hell-you-say

Student Government

Hey everyone!

So I know we’ve talked a lot about college and university administrators and how much they do/don’t do for their respective institution. But have we thought about how big a say student governments have? I know that both Macaulay and Brooklyn have student governments, and we even have classmates in them (Chris Cali is on the Macaulay Scholars Council and I am in the BC student government assembly).

I’m just wondering if anyone knows how much power we have or would like to know what we can do? Personally, I am not 100% sure what the Macaulay Scholars Council does (though I am 100% sure that they do a lot). But I know that BC student government controls budgets, holds events, and much more.

So what I’m asking is, do you think student governments can help solve a lot of the problems we seem to be having with our schools? Obviously there are many things we can’t deal with as a student body (applications, building appearance, financial aid, etc.), but we can fix the wifi, build facilities for Access-a-Ride, and much more! So does anyone want to discuss what we, as students, can do?

Standardized Tests Determine Your Future

A recent higher ed article ( https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/04/28/new-book-based-interviews-law-deans-and-admissions-officers-details-impact-rankings ) discusses a book that was written that talks about the ranking systems in law schools. It discusses how the LSAT scores have become a main indicator of what a good lawyer or good law school student would be. It talks about how the LSATS are taken more into consideration than students’ GPAs are. Since LSATs are so important to law schools’ rankings, the deans of those schools seem to choose students based on those scores. This decreases the diversity in those schools, because minority groups tend to have lower LSAT scores than white and Asian groups.

I found this article interesting for two reasons. One reason is that I am a prelaw student who is soon going to be venturing into this world of the LSATs. I find it so frightening that four years of amazing grades could so easily be degraded by a day-long exam that requires only a few months’ study time. I agree that having the LSAT carry so much weight is wrong. One standardized test will not determine if someone will be a good lawyer/law student or not. Furthemore, a school that takes students with lower LSAT scores isn’t a worse school, even though the rankings portray it as so, because there is other criteria that can make a student worthy of acceptance.

The second reason this article attracted my attention is what it mentioned about diversity. This relates to what we’ve been discussing in class. Having standardized tests, such as LSATs, MCATs, SATs, and the ACTs, determine which student will progress in higher education creates an imbalance in enrollments. Students that are brought up in homes with higher incomes will be more likely to do well on these exams, because they’ll have the tools available to them that can lead them to success. They can afford tutors, prep courses, prep books, etc. , while the underprivileged cannot and will not have the same opportunities to prepare as they did. I agree that measures need to be taken to fix this issue and make it that diversity is just as much of a priority as high LSAT scores are. Furthermore, there should be more than one exam that can tell a students’ preparedness for law school. For example, when applying to undergraduate school, students have the option of taking the SATs or the ACTs. There should be an alternative to taking the LSAT that can allow students to have more leeway in how they study for such a significant exam.

Feminism and Greek Life

Something that we didn’t really get to in class is the social atmosphere on campus, primarily because (I think) we’ve been emphasizing that the average college student is no longer the 4-year residential student in Harvard-esque dorms and leafy green fields. And while we at a commuter campus may not feel the same atmosphere of “college” as some residential schools do, I think it’s an interesting topic nonetheless and speaks to the students of this generation.

This Times article from a few weeks ago, entitled “When a Feminist Pledges a Sorority,” talks about the seemingly contradictory values of feminism and Greek life. For some reason, over the last few years, sorority pledging has spiked significantly, much to the dismay of the feminists of the 70s and 80s. While many feminists (especially of generations past) see the sorority structure as an expression of white male dominance–many sororities have strict standards for dress and makeup, and national chapters still prohibit alcohol in their houses, for instance–today’s undergraduate feminists aim to redefine the role of the sorority. Many sororities have coordinated networking events for their members, held discussion forums on gender and sexuality, and act as a support system for young, ambitious women. And while the desire to be part of Greek life may seem like playing into male supremacy, many of these young women speak about today’s sororities as a way of destroying the patriarchy “from the inside.” After all, fraternity alumni make up a huge part of Fortune 500 CEOs, and many Silicon Valley success stories (Facebook, Snapchat, Instagram) had their base in a frat house. Undergraduate women see today’s sororities as their opportunity to build up lasting connections and advance their professional careers.

Before I read this article, I think I had a negative view of the whole pledging system and Greek life–who would want to stand in front of a bunch of judgmental women in heels and makeup, waiting for an evaluation? It feels so demeaning. But reading about these young feminists and the potential they view in sororities, I feel more inspired. Of course, sororities still have what to improve on, like broadening their inclusiveness and removing the ban on alcohol (which would give sororities control over parties, likely diminishing cases of sexual assault), but they could be heading there. Maybe there’s still a way to go until a college startup run by sorority women turns into the next Facebook, but I’d be very excited when it happens.