Category Archives: Students

The Lie of Critical Thought

While a graduate student, I wrote a paper entitled A Marxist Synthesis to Educational Analysis. In this paper, I addressed a shift promulgated by neo-Marxists vis-à-vis culturalist theory. Aspects of cultural theory shaped my educational and pedagogical premise that students must be free thinkers. Furthermore, if they are to become free thinkers, they must construct their own synthesis toward ideas and ideals… not a mere synthesis of their academic environment. Much of my conclusion is shared by Stanley Fish, a wonderful leftist academic who always looked to empower the well prepared student through Socratic discussions. His post-modern analysis toward radical theory, queer theory, and deconstruction has continued to revolutionize education.

As a student, I recall on a number of occasions challenging the status of my campus. Often frustrated by the same white protestant male espousing the same political, ideological, and religious beliefs. From class to class, I watched my anger grow as I sought to understand my own learning and identity from the likes of Richard Wright and W.E.B. Du Bois. I knew they would not sing the same old company lesson plan articulated by one-dimensional institutions. I asked more than once: Why the preachy lessons on moral abstract construct espoused by ONE ideological thought? or, What does the black teacher think? or Where are the black, Asian, American Indian teachers? How about ONE Jewish teacher? Maybe a pro-Palestinian professor?  Creating institutions that inculcate the same values and norms does not allow students to become critical thinkers. It is a lie. We (including myself) recycle the same language but, each time we do, we ask students to think critically. Here is what Fish has to say:

…the Academic Bill of Rights, the Student Bill of Rights and the Princeton Student Bill of Rights all speak of the importance of promoting and protecting the academic freedom of students. What could this possibly mean? The only freedom students rightly have is the freedom to vote with their feet if they do not like the syllabus in a particular course. They are not free to demand on the basis of an intellectual diversity or balance or pluralism or some other specious abstraction that the syllabus be changed to suit their personal or ideological inclinations. Nor are students free to introduce into a classroom issues or perspectives that are judged by an instructor to be beside the point he or she wishes to explore. Instructors are free to say to a student, that may be an interesting question, but it is not one we shall be asking here.

The rhetoric of academic freedom for students is a subset of the rhetoric of student rights. But students have no rights, except the right to competent and responsible instruction. They certainly do not have any right to be instructed by a conservative teacher or a liberal teacher or a religious teacher or a white teacher or a black teacher or a teacher of any color. The idea that students have rights often accompanies the idea that students are customers and teachers, providers. Students are not customers and if we survey their preferences and alter our product accordingly, we will not only have betrayed our professional responsibility; we will have betrayed them

3 Comments

Filed under Education, Free Speech, Ideology, Students, Teaching

Academic Changes: Good & Bad

photo1157

One of the many academic journals I receive is the Intercollegiate Review. It is published by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. I believe they have been publishing this journal since 1953 — but I could be wrong. The institute is pretty conservative. Case in point: The above issue that just arrived on my campus desk ran a piece on the changing tide of academic studies. The author noted that schools — particularly universities — once served as the model for academic excellence. Students sought to be more well-rounded. They had a greater investment in their education and were intellectually curious. Thus, it was not unheard of for a business major to study the American Revolution; psychology majors took courses in the studies of Shakespeare and Milton; future politicians thumbed through the King James Bible. I will admit, I agree with the author in that a tide has shifted students away from being seekers to just being done. A few years ago, I was asked to be the keynote speaker at Houston Christian’s National Honor Society Induction Ceremony. In my speech, I stated that W.E.B. Du Bois used the term “the talented tenth” to describe the likelihood of one in ten blacks becoming leaders of their race in the world, through methods such as continuing their education, writing books, or becoming directly involved in social change. He believed they needed an education to reach their true destiny as what would in the 20th century be called public intellectuals. Du Bois stated:

We shall have only as we make manhood the object of the work of the schools — intelligence, broad sympathy, knowledge of the world that was and is, and of the relation of men to it — this is the curriculum of that Education which must underlie true life. On this foundation we may build bread winning, skill of hand and quickness of brain, with never a fear lest the child and man mistake the means of living for the object of life.

I do sense that society has shifted away from training people to be thinkers; in truth, it appears that we are training people to make money. And, I suspect that is the direction of the modern economy. Here is where I disagree with the premise of the article: It blamed the radicalism of the 1960s for destroying the traditional cannon of knowledge taught on campuses across the country. It ridiculed the notion that single-sex schools vanished. Now, in this new age, schools are teaching courses on gender and sexuality. Race and culture courses now dominate history, English, and political science departments. I suspect the author feels that the academy should reflect the white man theory on education. Forget about changing demographics and pluralism. Though the author makes a number of great points…as I noted above, I feel the attack on changing group dynamics as reflected in academic curricula is silly.

Here are a few courses being taught at various universities that the author took aim at:

Yale University — Humanities and Arts Requirement: US Lesbian and Gay History          

University of Texas — Science Requirement: Animal Sexuality

College of Holy Cross — Religion Requirement: Gardens and World Religions

I must point out that I do not know if the above courses are really required; I am simply stating what I read in this journal piece. I would not be shocked to learn that this is all for shock value.

I would love to get your thoughts on this.

10 Comments

Filed under College Life, Conservative Institutions, Courses, Cultural Wars, Political Correctness, Students

Finals Week

Crazy week with exams, reviews, and marking papers. I think I will get it all down by the end of today. Department Christmas party tomorrow before the break. Students have been spoiling me. And yes, I have enjoyed every bit of it. JP Hennessey took this picture below last night while in one of our campus’ library seminar rooms; I was still on campus around 6ish when I got this; it made me smile.

312645_2745196525168_400186420_n

1 Comment

Filed under Finals, History, Students

The Election Count

It is election time on my campus and I have created a board to tally students’ electoral counts via here. Now, I will admit that I believe this is an easy election to call. I did struggle with two states: Ohio and Virgina; in the end, I awarded both to Obama.. I did not do so blindly or from an ideological perspective. There are numbers that have sold me on my conclusion.

Thus far, students in my AP US History and AP US & Politics course have placed their numbers on our “working” board. Once my other AP US History and AP European History sections have confirmed their call, I will repost.

Here is a picture of my prediction; I am willing to admit that my count might be off due to Virginia and only Virginia.

6 Comments

Filed under Elections, Obama, Students

Politics, Pictures, and Homecoming I Guess

So, look at what happened when I arrived to the office today. I suspect folks assumed I took a turn toward the “R” side. Nope. It was a John Rasplicka invasion.

Homecoming week is in place here at HC and I am doing my best to participate. Well, I am doing my best in terms  of spirit I guess. Yesterday, John Rasplicka and I participated in twin day. Here were my thoughts going into it: Sherie Pierce took the picture below of John and myself on twin day; I told John I would dress like a White conservative Republican; in return, he stated that he would dress like a Black leftist intellectual. Who knew we would wear the same attire!

It is all a matter of point of view.

2 Comments

Filed under About Carson, Politics, Students

Albrecht Durer Represents the Renaissance

I opened my AP European History class today with a visual of the greatest German Renaissance painter of the early 16th century, Albrecht Durer. He has been described by many as one of the greatest of great humanist. According to the reading I handed students, Durer transcended the period by ushering in the spirit of the “self.” He represents the achievements of all but does not represent all people. His Christ-like appeal in many of his self-portraits captures his sense of “self”. Note the image below:

While studying his provocative Christ-like position, students could not help but note how Maddy Copello resembles Durer; in many ways, it is almost like she is a descendent from the German’s bloodline.

Above: During our discussion, Maddy poses for the class beside the image of Durer.

2 Comments

Filed under European Art, History, Students

2012 AP US History Exam Day

Some students who gathered for early snacks and conversations just before they took the 2012 AP US History exam. I am sure they performed well. This was a great group of students to teach. I enjoyed it!

1 Comment

Filed under Advanced Placement, Courses, Houston Christian High School, Students

Students

I get to teach great students. Here is an exchange between myself and one of those students that I like — a great deal.

Conversation between Carson and Student:

Student: You are one of the best teachers here.
Me: Thank you!
Student: I really mean it. You are the best black teacher here.
Me: I am the only black teacher here.
Student: See I am right. You are the best.

That was last week. Here is the other day from the same student.

Student: I do not get why some people think you are cocky. I don’t.
Me: Thank you.
Student: You are just too dorky and nerdy to be arrogant.
Me: Gee thanks again. Gotta love my students.

2 Comments

Filed under Students

Declining Student Empathy: Another “Kids these Days” Phenomenon or a Serious Deficiency? by Lenore Holditch

This guest contribution was submitted by Lenore Holditch, who specializes in writing about top online colleges. Questions and comments can be sent to: holditch.lenore @ gmail.com.

Last year, the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research published findings in a widely publicized study that demonstrated that today’s college students are significantly less empathetic than were college students who attended school in the 80s and 90s. According to Sara Konrath, a research at the Institute, students are 40% less empathetic after the year 2000 as compared to students who attended school two or three decades ago. The study essentially compounded the results of 72 different studies of American college students, ranging from 1979 to 2009.

Konrath, who is also associated with the University of Rochester Department of Psychiatry, surmises that the decline of empathy—the ability to put oneself in another’s shoes, as it were—is directly related to the increased narcissism of the generation dubbed by the media “Generation Me.”

But the actual causes for this increasing retreat into the self, in which understanding other people, their plights, their different points of view, has become all but impossible, are anyone’s guess. Recently, associate professor of American culture and African-American studies Paul Anderson and Konrath penned an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education in which they hazarded a guess at several of the causes that may be underpinning student narcissism and what should be done about it.

Of course, culture and behavior are closely intertwined, and there is no doubt that a cultural climate in which “reality” shows, celebrity worship, and online friendships, can promote narcissism, especially among the young and impressionable. Konrath and Anderson suggest other sources as well:

“Those who lean left politically might reflexively focus on a rising tide of libertarian individualism, market fundamentalism, and the celebration of the “virtue of selfishness” by Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman, and their think-tank popularizers. Those who lean right might blame other forms of individualism, including feminism, social liberalism, and rights-based social movements since the 1960s. But a general concern over the empathy deficit seems to be one thing that people from both political parties share, although they may remain worlds apart when considering the problem’s causes and how to fix it.”

Indeed, how are we to fix this problem? Although the authors make references to “empathy workshops,” to me this reeks of the very “market fundamentalism” that the authors decry. Empathy cannot be examined, measured, and taught in a “workshop” setting, which is yet another product of “self-help”, an industry rooted in the neo-liberal market mentality. Empathy can be learned in various ways, but I think the most important thing is to subject students to failure and discomfort. Narcissism grows from never experiencing challenges or difficulties. When you are in an environment in which you cannot fail, you begin to think you are infallible, and as such, the center of the universe.

Another way, I believe, in which empathy can be encouraged is by reading widely. Although the connection between reading literature specifically and developing empathy is vague at best, most good books aren’t about an infallible hero. Characters are hopelessly flawed, but the best writers are able to make readers empathize with any character, even the most despicable.

Of course, these are just a few scattered thoughts, and it is also possible that there is no substantial, across-the-board decrease in empathy. After all, the study was based on self-reported data. Perhaps the young have always been self-involved ala Holden Caulfield, a narcissistic character created over 50 years ago? What are your thoughts? Is there a lack of empathy among teens and twenty-somethings? If so, how do educators address the problem?

2 Comments

Filed under Education, Students

Family Guy and Jesus in Popular Culture by Turner Batdorf

      http://www.microsoft-watch.com/FamilyGuyFamilyPromo.png

Turner Batdorf was one of my top American Studies students for the 2010-2011 year; he is a student in my AP European History course. One of the themes discussed in this course was that of religion and popular culture. Turner reviewed a number of academic articles on the dynamics of the American family and religion, while analyzing countless episodes of Family Guy in constructing this essay

The way the American family works and the typical values that are associated with various members of the family define not only what pop cultural portrays and mocks, but also the values influenced by Puritanism. But how does one possibly summarize the American family into simple roles for each individual and a set of specific values for the family to follow as a whole? Scholars of the typical American family, a middle class white family, have tried to define it, yet have always discovered that no family is the perfect model because every family is dysfunctional. While Puritanism describes the work ethic the father should possess to provide for his family and put a moral code into place for the family, not everyone is going to be able to follow that code. The Cosby Show, which portrays the “ideal family” consisting of smart, studious kids, a hard working father, a caring mother, and little to no problems involving drugs, alcohol, or violence is unrealistic. No family in America is like the Cosby’s because every family is dysfunctional. In his creation of Family Guy, Seth McFarlane “uses ‘uncomfortable humor’… by taking advantage of generalizations with stereotypes, race, and sex” (Employing Comedy: Family Guy). McFarlane is not afraid to show the flaws of the typical family, although sometimes he does in exaggeration. Ultimately, McFarlane tries to show how the family is, not how it should be, thus making the show directed toward the mockery of not only the typical middle class man, but also what he believes in.

One of Family Guy’s biggest targets is American Protestantism and the values that the average American calls American values, despite its Puritan origin. Family Guy’s approach to Protestantism is simple: They want to make God and Jesus look as silly and ridiculous as possible. Some people might say that this would drive away a large American audience, but in no way is that the case. Family Guy allows them to look at their own views and laugh at them from another perspective. While one person may have his own beliefs that define the way he lives his life, the show invokes humor by making the guy laugh and say, “Wow, that is horrible.” Though it may be looked at as “a light-hearted, yet potentially hurtful strategy” (Employing comedy: Family Guy), the show allows the viewer to not be offended by a lot of the humor because the characters are animated. While Peter may represent the average, stupid American, he is not real, and thus, his comments or actions cannot be taken personally, despite one not agreeing with what the show is saying.

American values obviously had to have an origin, as it is very improbable that the laws of our country do not originate around some random Moral Law. Therefore, when one looks at the most important documents of the United States, such as The Declaration or The Constitution, one sees that these documents make reference to a God, mainly because the majority of the nation’s founding fathers were wealthy Puritans. Therefore, the United States naturally adopted a Protestant value system. In their article, “American Moral Exceptionalism,” Uhlmann, Poehlman, and Bargh argue that, “one does not have to be an American Protestant to exhibit implicit responses consistent with traditional Puritan- Protestant values. One may only have to be an American” (Uhlmann, Poehlman, and Bargh). Because American values relate back to Puritanism, God and Jesus become easy targets for Family Guy.

On a consistent basis, Family Guy portrays God as a womanizer, a drunk, and someone not able to control his powers. For example, in “Blind Ambition,” God approaches a girl and lights her cigarette with his finger, to which he says, “Yeah. I got the magic fingers.” Then, God points and winks, setting her on fire. In response, God screams, “Jesus Christ!” and Jesus appears; God then says, “Quick, get in the Escalade; we’re out of here!” In another episode, “Death has a Shadow,” God is shown the audience at church. When the priest reads the story of Job, God responds by sighing and saying, “Oh crap, I hate when they tell this story.” While comments on You Tube would show that even Christians admit to their humor, a few parent organizations disagree. For example, “The Parents Television Council, a watchdog group founded by L. Brent Bozell III of the Media Research Center, has been outspoken in his opposition to the portrayal of God and other religious figures on Family Guy. Several times, the PTC has deemed the show ‘The Worst Show of the Week’ specifically due to the portrayal of God in a gag or longer sequence” (God). While they were upset namely by the episode, “The Courtship of Stewie’s Father,” where God is shown in bed, about to have sex with a girl (God), the portrayal of God is very similar to the rest of the episodes.

Jesus, on the other hand, is portrayed as a magician. In “I Dream of Jesus,” Peter buddies up with Jesus, who is on Earth because he “visits every once in a while.” Upon first having dinner with the Griffins, Jesus says, “I’m actually glad you are all here tonight. I want to tell you that one of you will betray me… ha! Just kidding!” Peter then replies, “Haha, he is doing that thing he did in the storybook,” obviously showing Peter’s lack of religion. Throughout the episode Jesus walks on water, snaps his fingers to make ice cream sundaes appear, and, upon the request of Peter, makes his wife Lois’, breasts much bigger. He then reveals himself to be truly the Messiah, and goes off without Peter, to party and be a celebrity. While it is true that Peter is definitely not shown to be religious by his “storybook” remark, Jesus is a target for Family Guy because, as Stephen Prothero would argue, he is present in every American’s life, no matter what his or her religion is.

A theistic creation is also mocked in “Airport 07.” In the episode, Peter Griffin attempts to explain the origin of the Earth to his family. The show depicts a logical transition from lizard to dinosaur, to show evolution, and then proceeds to show a genie, emerge from the same water that the lizard came out of, and nod her head to create the rest of life, to show creationism. This is only after God creates the universe by lighting a fart, thus the “Big Bang”.

So what does this show about pop culture and our society as a whole? Although he claims that Seth McFarlane is an atheist, James Snare, from Hillis Bible Church, states in his article, “What should a Christian’s Response be to Pop Culture” that, “The irony is that their [Family Guy’s] mockery and satire has probably done more to bring Jesus and Christianity into the minds of Generation Y than most preachers in the world (Jesus has appeared in Family Guy in 19 episodes and that doesn’t include appearances made by God or other biblical characters). Generation Y is a generation that is deeply interested in spirituality yet many of its members have almost no experience with the Church, let alone any conception of who the biblical Jesus Christ is… If we as Christians remove ourselves from the pop culture discussion by only condemning portrayals of Christ like those mentioned above then the only conception of Christ that many members of Generation Y have are those which the likes of Family Guy shows them… if we fail to recognize the awesome opportunity that pop-culture depictions of Christ and Christianity are giving us to engage with a culture that ordinarily shirks at the name of Jesus, then we ignore Paul’s lesson at the Areopagus to engage a culture in a language they understand in order to preach to them a message they desperately need to hear” (Snare). While Snare may offer a good point on the positives that the humor has for Christianity and does agree that McFarlane “is not out to destroy Christianity” (Snare), it does not explain why Christians find the jokes humorous. One could argue, that for starters, Christians laughing at these jokes show that the public is generally accepting of jokes that target the beliefs of a large audience. While there may be a few groups that are very upset by the mockery of God, Jesus, or Christianity on Family Guy, there has been no effort to remove the show, nor has there been any shortage of the amount of puns intended toward God.

That being said, does this make America more or less Protestant? On one hand, one could agree with Uhlmann, Poehlman, and Bargh that “popular media designed to shock and titillate may not always reflect the average American’s explicit moral values” (Uhlmann, Poehlman, and Bargh 29). But one could easily argue that Family Guy shows America to be more Protestant, as jokes towards other religions are definitively used less frequently, mainly because people are nervous or uncomfortable about laughing at a group that they are not a part of because they do not want to offend someone. This relates a lot to the use of the word “Nigger.” A lot of times, it is white people who are against using the “N-word” in the classroom and the Blacks more for it, just like a the average Protestant American is okay about laughing at himself, but uneasy about laughing at jokes that target someone else of a different group. Therefore, the constant mockery of God displays that Family Guy is continuing its strategy of allowing people to laugh at themselves, and, thus, shows America to be truly Protestant.

Along with the element of religion, Family Guy depicts the societal norms and values of the typical middle-class man in Peter Griffin. As Family Guy takes on a different approach in portraying the family, one must question why so many people find it humorous. Do people laugh at the show’s constant mockery of minorities and social misfits, such as homosexuals, minority races, especially Blacks and Hispanics, and the mentally disabled, or is there a broader approach to what Family Guy is trying to appeal to in popular culture? More specifically, could it be that by making fun of minorities and social misfits, Family Guy is mocking the common man’s stereotypes and viewpoints of these groups? It is exactly through the creation of Peter Griffin that his stupidity allows us to laugh at the common man. For example, in the episode “Family Gay”, Peter is short on money, and thus signs up for experimental drugs. He receives the “gay gene” and ends up changing his clothes, the way he talks and walks, and in the process, invokes every stereotype that society has of the homosexual, White male. But, what is to be noted is that Family Guy is not making fun of gay people, but of Christians, who oppose the idea that there is a gay gene and believe that being homosexual is immoral. This precisely demonstrates that “Family Guy’s spontaneous and sometimes foolish attitude is effective because it targets a general audience to either laugh at themselves or laugh at another specific audience” (Employing Comedy: Family Guy). But this all generates around McFarlane’s idea to not portray the ideal American family but show how the common, White American thinks, and, more importantly, his faults.

There is no doubt that Peter is ignorant, socially unacceptable, and often, acts in ways that would peg him as a bad father. In fact, he is either rude or acts inappropriately to all of his children. For example, in “And the Weiner is,” Peter becomes very self-conscious and basically disowns his oldest son, Chris, because Chris has a larger penis than Peter. On another occasion (“Blind Ambition”), Peter becomes temporarily blind and waltzes into Chris’ bedroom, thinking it his own, climbs into bed with Chris, and mutters, “That’s right Lois, I’m your daddy. Shush, shush. Don’t talk Lois. Don’t talk. Just let me do all the work. Feel my warm breath on the nape of your neck, my hands on your big, soft boobs, running down your man-like chest… Holy crap, it’s Chris!” Peter, embarrassed, leaves the room, and is heard in the next room, saying “Honey, are you awake?” and is responded to by his other son, Stewie, an infant, yelling, “What the Deuce?”

This is also not the only time Peter mistreats Stewie. While wishing he was a mother, fat Peter caresses Stewie in his arms and breast-feeds him until Stewie realizes that there is one of Peter’s chest hairs in his mouth (“I am Peter, Here me Roar”). But, Chris and Stewie do not even get the worst of Peter’s immature behavior towards his kids. Meg, his daughter is constantly the receiver of the harshest puns. Primarily, one of Peter’s catchphrases on the show is, “Shut Up, Meg!” Also, Peter ravages Meg with disgusting behavior, like in “The Tan Aquatic with Steve Zissou”, where Peter runs around the kitchen after Meg farting in her face and laughing, until she falls on the floor and vomits, to which Peter replies, “Oh, not in the kitchen, Meg!”

But, when looking at the character of Peter Griffin, it is important to note that he has good intentions, and, while stupid, attempts to do the right thing on a daily basis. In all the examples sited, Peter has no intention of harming his children. He lacks basic common sense and maturity, and thus, finds humor in things like farts, wants to be a loving mother, and only “molests” his children as a result of his blindness. He feels threatened by Chris’ larger penis because he wants to feel like the man of the house, the provider just like middle class family ideology would dictate that the man is supposed to be the provider. But, while viewers find Peter’s worst moments to be the most humorous, and thus, the writers exaggerate the flaws of Peter and make them seen by the view more regularly, Peter still displays qualities that society would find admirable.  A great example is seen in the first episode of the series, “Death Has a Shadow”. The episode begins with Peter wanting to go to a stag party that his wife, Lois, is opposed to because of his irresponsibility when there is drinking taking place. She reminds him of the time he got drunk of the communion wine and said, “Whoa, is this really the blood of Christ? He must have been wasted twenty-four hours a day, huh?”, the time he got drunk off of butter-rum ice cream and passed out, and the time he got drunk at the movie Philadelphia and said, “I got it, that’s is the guy from Big. Tom Hanks, I love this guy. Everything he says is a stitch. (Tom Hanks: I have Aids) Haha!”. But Peter persists, saying authoritatively, “As the father of this household, I demand you to give me permission to go to the stag party.” “The oxymoronic nature of this statement is the “demand for permission” between two mutually accepting married people (Employing Comedy: Family Guy), and shows that while being the man of the house, Peter still has respect for his wife (In fact, the only time Peter ever cheats on Lois is after everyone thinks she is dead). But, Peter ends up going to the stag party, promising not to drink, and then under the poor influence of his friends, drinks “twenty-six beers, a new family record, thus raising the bar for his son, Chris.” Peter loses his job as a result and begins to worry about how he will tell his wife. He does this because Peter, being a good father and husband, wants to provide for his family. He invokes his welfare and begins to receive an inordinate amount of money from the government, an obvious mistake. But, he remains mute on the subject, buying excessive material gifts for his family until his wife becomes extremely angry with him. After realizing his mistake, Peter attempts to receive forgiveness from the both government and his wife, and states, “I cheated the government, and worst of all, I lied to my wife, and she deserves better”, showing that Peter does possess genuinely good qualities and intentions, despite his incompetence.

Peter is not a racist, as seen in his friendship with Cleveland, a Black man and does not discriminate against the handicapped, as seen in his friendship with Joe. He is against adultery and does not have any resentment towards upper class people despite his desire to be one. This is seen in his numerous attempts to befriend Lois’s rich father. Despite his lack of intelligence and bad decision-making, it is next to impossible for someone to find Peter Griffin, the exaggerated depiction of the flawed, middle class American, to be completely immoral.

That being said, how does Peter fit into the role of the father according to the scholars of the family? Eggebeen and Knoester claim in their article, “Does Fatherhood Matter to Men”, that men who are fathers are not only more dedicated to the work place, but also spend less hours working (Eggebeen and Knoester 384). If this is true of the typical middle class father, it is much easier to place Peter Griffin in the category of good fathers. There is no question that Peter wants to be a provider; after getting fired in “Death has a Shadow”, Peter tries numerous jobs, although failing in a lot of them. But, does that make him a bad father? No, it only displays his inabilities. In at least one episode, Peter attempts to bond with each of his children, including Meg, a child who a lot of viewers assume he hates. Additionally, upon becoming rich, he buys whatever his children want, all as a way of Peter trying to show his love. There may not be a great example of the Protestant work ethic in Peter, but he does attempt to provide for his family. He also revolves his goals around consumerism, just Family Guy is trying to depict of the typical American. But Peter fails is in his lack of control and minimal change upon becoming a father. Eggebeen and Knoester hypothesize that fatherhood should make a man reduce his risky behavior, such as a drinking, drug use, and smoking. As seen in the example from “Death has a Shadow”, Peter drinks a lot (twenty-six beers), and Peter could be setting a bad influence for his children, especially his sons. Stewie, is shown to have gotten drunk on occasion and there is an episode devoted to Chris doing a new drug the kids are using called “toad.” But, again, what rationalizes Peter is that he does try to think about his family, except that it comes after he has done something stupid. In “Death has a Shadow”, Peter sleeps on the kitchen table after the stag party, to avoid waking up his wife. And in the instance of Chris, Peter works hard to stop the use of “toad,” not only within his household, but also in the school itself. While his lack of social skills may get the best of him and determine how he treats his children, Peter’s fatherly work ethic, his will to provide for his family, and his respect for doing the right thing display that he is a good replication of the American value driven father.

For me, Family Guy, simply put, is humorous; I watch Family Guy because I find it funny. While I do agree that sentiment behind the humor is sometimes inappropriate, and I do often wonder why I am laughing at puns that are degrading to not only other people, but also me, I applaud what Seth McFarlane has attempted to put forward in the making of his show. Family Guy makes fun of me, the average American in many ways. As a Christian, I am targeted with the God and Jesus puns; my favorite music has been targeted, like when a character gave a Maroon 5 record to Meg and told her that “she would like it because he knew that she liked terrible music”; and above all else, I can find myself relating to the characters, especially Peter, even though he is simple-minded, to say the least. While Peter is immature, he makes up for his mistakes with a genuine care for his family, proving him to actually be a “Family Guy”. While the theme song is ironic, singing, “What ever happened to those good old fashioned values on which we used to rely?” and, yet, still displays excessive amounts of violence and sex, there is definitely a sense of values underlying in the Griffin family, namely those that actually do relate back to Protestantism. While the show is inappropriate, I must give credit to McFarlane, as he succeeded in creating the perfectly dysfunctional and highly immoral, Protestant value driven family.     

5 Comments

Filed under Courses, Great Students, Political Correctness, Religion, Students, Teaching, tv

The Corporate Student

Last year, I gave a speech on campus to students about the threat of careerism. That is, seeking an education for the purpose of acquiring a job in a single and narrow fashion. I warned students against this. I advised them to pursue their passions, but do so for the sake of learning. In return, the skills acquired by way of seeking knowledge will reward them for their commitment toward understanding ideas. In a recent article published by Inside Higher Education, the author notes that too many teachers and universities have become too corporate. My public school colleagues believe that private schools are the most corporate entities around. They contend that private schools cave too often to misinformed parents, donors, and unmotivated affluent students. They blame the matter on a sense of false prestige by lower-tirer schools, and a system of legacy by upper-tier schools. In this Q & A, the author notes the problem and sense of entitlement of corporate students here:

Q: Why do you link this trend to the disengagement of students?

A: The corporate model treats students like customers, and as customers they expect services and products for their tuition fees. The services include high grades in return for little effort. The products include guaranteed credentials with a guaranteed value. With this sense of entitlement, most will not prepare for classes, and expect all material to be told to them in simple terms in entertaining classes. What is lost here is the implicit bilateral contract of higher education for students to meet their teachers “halfway.” When students put out the effort to partner with professors in the teaching/learning process, classes assume their proper place as the “tip of the iceberg” of learning rather than the “iceberg.” Programs that require students to learn only in classes — thereby misleading students that classes are the “iceberg of learning” — are little more than (pseudo-) vocational high schools. We now have many universities where a “culture of disengagement” prevails and students in this culture have a sense of “entitled disengagement” never found before in institutions of higher learning (i.e., while grade inflation and disengagement can be found in the past, never have both simultaneously occurred in such proportions and been condoned by universities).

But it is not just the students who are disengaged. Many faculty members are also, and following recent savage cuts to budgets, so too are many university staff members. In Ivory Tower Blues, we tied disengagement to the wider culture of entitlement and empowerment. Now in Lowering Higher Education, we can more clearly see the disengagement on the professors’ side as the corporate culture has come to eclipse what was formerly a quite special “job.”

You can read the entirety of this piece here.

1 Comment

Filed under Education, Independent Schools, Students

4 Things I Wish I Knew Before Going to College by Guest Author Katheryn Rivas

The post below offers some great insight for many high school students making the shift to college. This guest contribution was submitted by Katheryn Rivas, who specializes in writing about online universities. Questions and comments can be sent to: katherynrivas87@gmail.com.

As anyone who has attended college knows, it’s a completely different experience when compared to high school classes. This is so for several reasons, not least of which if having an enormous amount of freedom after having virtually none. But more than just managing this newfound personal freedom, something many freshly matriculated college students struggle with, there’s getting used to a completely different classroom experience. Of course, classes and schools vary, but looking back on my college years, I wish I was more prepared for the transition. Here’s a few things I wish I knew before going to college.

1. Many professors will have an axe to grind.

http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/thumblarge_415/12467345289yUA4D.jpg

Whether or not professors should voice their opinions on various topics, it’s common practice in the college classroom. Of course, no professor can pretend to be completely disinterested in teaching, and many professors will more objectively treat several modes of thought in tandem with their own. Still, it came as a surprise coming from high school, where a teacher can say what he thinks only to a certain degree.

2. Learning and growing intellectually is completely your responsibility. You can still get good grades without learning anything.

http://ecarson.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/diploma.gif?w=200&h=200

One of the biggest myths that I had bought into before going to college was that it was somehow some bastion of the Mind, where intellectual pursuits were vigorously pursued by students, professors, and the administration alike. Call me cynical, but my experience was far removed from this Elysian ideal. Still, that doesn’t mean that you won’t learn anything or you won’t develop your ability to critically analyze, think for yourself, etc. It does mean, however, that you have to make this an object of pursuit yourself. And this pursuit is not to be confused with earning high grades. I received many as in classes in which I learned absolutely nothing, and this was both my failing and the failing of a system that encourages grade inflation.

3. Visiting professors during office hours is always a good idea.

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/ato/lowres/aton858l.jpg

One aspect of the college classroom experience that differs from the high school one is that the college class can be extended through what’s known as office hours. Of course, good high school teachers will be open to talking to students outside the classroom, but in college, it’s a requirement that professors make themselves available. More than answering students questions about course material, professors can serve as counselors about professional pursuits after college as well as advisors who help you unravel wider intellectual inquiry. Although I eventually took advantage of office hours, I did so much later in my college career only because I didn’t know initially, based on my high school experience, what a wonderfully enriching opportunity it could be.

4. Going to class is important for several reasons, even if there’s no attendance requirement.

http://rfid.thingmagic.com/Portals/42741/images/empty-university-lecture-hall-resized-600.jpg

Unlike high school classes, many college classes will have no attendance requirement. Some students can take this as free license to skip class when they can’t wake up in the morning, or when they have other activities that grab their attention. Going to class regularly, even if it isn’t required, will save you a lifetime’s worth of trouble and worry. For one, attending class will indicate to the professor that you have interest, something that does count in the professor’s sometimes subjective grading criteria. Another reason to attend each and every class is that if you don’t, you’ll miss out on things that can’t be replicated by merely doing makeup work, like interesting classroom discussion.

They say that college is an experience of a lifetime. After graduating and moving on to the working world, I’ve found this to be completely true. But it’s the student who decides what constitutes that experience. And being prepared to take advantage of everything that academic institutions of higher education have to offer is important in enhancing that experience.

1 Comment

Filed under Campus Life, College Life, Students

Marxist Courses

Below is an exchange between myself and a former student on a Marxist Theory course she is taking at UT Austin. After our exchange, I started thinking about how many schools offer such courses. I know most courses subscribe to a broader topic, such as 19th Century German Philosophy. I get to teach a great deal of this stuff in most of my courses, but especially in my AP European History class. I came across this exchange via a message forum regarding courses on Marxism. Though I have a point of view, and one from being well read, I am a bit suspicious of anyone who might place Marx in the same category as Hitler. I mean, Marx’s ideas were transformative, but in the end, they did not live up to his expectations. And how could they. You are talking about a concept that works against the human will and desire; I will say that his model has been used in an academic setting to promote some discourse, in matters regarding societal inequalities: racism, sexism, jingoism, etc. I suspect Warner Todd Huston has confused Marx’s ideas with that of Marxist-Leninism. It seems that misinformed people do that. You can read his post in its entirety regarding colleges teaching Marx here. Just to be clear, he is not wholly inaccurate in all of his claims. I find the topic too narrow; however, if you throw in how it has impacted post-modernism and religion, then I would be interested.

Warner Todd Huston states that Marxism is problematic in his column Amherst College:Should Marxism be Given Another Look….

Marx has proven an utter failure through every manner of implementation of his ideas on both large and small-scale and does not behoove the time spent on him as a legitimate course of study unless it is as an adjunct to political science or history, and then only as a negative example therein.

Marx deserves nothing but the contempt of everyone. And our universities don’t deserve much better for their slavish love for this murderous, beast at this rate.

Yes, he should be taught. But he deserves to be placed as the worst human being in human history. Worse than Hitler, worse then Stalin, even worse then Torquemada.

Exchange with former student:

From former student:

So I’m taking a class on Marxist philosophical/social theory this semester. It made me think of you and the amazing times that took place sophomore year. I miss you lots, hope everything is going well :)

From Carson:

You need to swing by campus and visit with me about your course on Marxist Theory. I have read so much about him, but little of what he actually wrote. Maybe Houston Christian will let me teach a course on Marxist Theory. And think, folks still think he based his entire theory on the emergence of the Soviet Union. Yes, I laugh at folks everyday. Come see me.

From former student:

Haha yes, my professor said something along the same lines about the lack of anything Russian in this course, whether it be the Revolution or the Soviet Union, so I’m pretty excited to delve into his writings. Next time I’m in Houston I’ll stop by, but seeing as it will probably be on a weekend, we might have to get coffee or lunch somewhere :)

8 Comments

Filed under communism, Karl Marx, Students

Interesting Class

I have been working with my department chair’s Global Affairs course most of this year; it is an independently driven course by students who discuss, write, and study global issues. Next week we are in Austin at the University of Texas serving as delegates to the United Nation as part of Model UN. In truth, I do very little here; I focus my efforts on trying to help students understand political and historical phenomena that might be of some importance to the 21st century. Students put together the video below of this class; we all take turns introducing ourselves to our partner school in Africa. This is part of another project known as the 20/20 Challenge.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Education, History, Houston Christian High School, Students, Teaching

HCHS Hosts Young Bright Stars

Yesterday afternoon, I participated in a gathering at HCHS that honored many of the areas top middle school students. The event focused on the many accomplishments of young leaders. Moreover, our Associate Director of Admissions, Chip Neuenschwander, did an outstanding job. His communication skills and energy level are highly impressive. Many of our visiting students will also benefit from a merit scholarship in the amount of $2000 per year if they elect to attend HCHS. In part, this is an excellent way to continue HCHS outreach to highly accomplished academic students. This also allows HCHS to focus on its development of future leaders via its Passport to Lead Program.

Two HCHS students spoke to perspective parents and students at last night’s meeting. (Pictured L to R:  Students Andrea Ferguson and Chris Tutunjian with Chip Neuenschwander). Both students pointed to the diversity of venues found at HCHS. Such venues can be found in academics, spiritual life, and extracurricular endeavors. I was impressed with their anecdotes and leadership. One matter that has emerged of late among independent schools is the topic regarding scholarships: need vs. merit; I addressed this topic some here on an earlier post.

The endowment of Phillips Exeter Academy in New Hampshire last year surpassed $1 billion, making it one of the richest educational institutions in the United States – richer than many universities.

Exeter’s 619-acre campus has two swimming pools, two hockey rinks and the largest secondary-school library in the world.

In a shift that reflects the moves of some universities, Exeter now promises to pay the full cost of attendance for students whose families earn less than $75,000 a year.

Tyler C. Tingley, Exeter’s principal, says schools like his compete to enroll the best students.

4 Comments

Filed under Houston Christian High School, Independent Schools, Students

Exciting Event, Great Parents

It is true, being the academic that I am, I believe it is important for me to hear the point of view of others. Thus, this is why I teach my classes in a Socratic fashion. With that said, the parents of one of my very bright students sent me an invitation to join them for a dinner sponsored by the Liberty Institute.

Eddie:
_____ and I would love for you and your wife to join us on September 21st at 7:00 pm for a banquet we are helping host to familiarize people with the Liberty Institute.  The banquet, which will be held at the Hilton Houston Post Oak, will be a great opportunity to hear about the Liberty Institute. Guided by principles that limit government and promote Judeo-Christian values, Liberty Institute was founded in 1972 as a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization to protect freedoms and strengthen families by impacting the legislature, media, grassroots, and the courts with the truth.
Again, we would enjoy spending the evening with you and your wife, and you never know, there may even be a Cohiba in it for you.  Please let me know if you have any questions.
Regards,
________

It is clear that the Liberty Institute is in ideological opposition to me; however, I think it will be fun to hear what they have to say. And, I get to associate with parents who value those of us such as I who do not teach to their ideological persuasions. I will omit their names, but I am excited to have been invited. The last time I was around them, my wife and I got a bottle of wine from them at the gala.

About the Institute:

Concerned about the direction of the country? Please join us at the Advancing Liberty Tour to learn how Liberty Institute and everyday citizens are standing up to protect America’s founding principles. Kelly Shackelford, constitutional scholar and President of Liberty Institute, will take you behind the scenes in today’s battle for freedom.

You will hear about significant courtroom victories and important legislative action that will impact you and your family; as well as about new American heroes like Hannah Giles, who exposed the corruption of ACORN; and Anne Clutterbuck, Houston City Council member who stood up to atheists when sued for praying, and many more.

This event is completely free of charge. There will be an opportunity to partner with Liberty Institute by making a donation to help further our work of protecting freedoms and strengthening families.

Liberty Institute was founded in 1972 as a 501c3 non-profit organization to protect freedoms and strengthen families by impacting the courts, legislature, grassroots and media with the truth.

7 Comments

Filed under Ideology, Students

Old Post on Taking my Courses

I got an email a couple of years ago from a student who heard great things about my courses and wanted to take my AP US History course. She stated she is a bit nervous about it, though she contends that she would really like to try the Carson experience. So, I got to thinking about the “whole” Carson experience and re-pulled this post. After reading years of old letters, notes, e-mails, and teaching evaluations from various HCHS and CAC students, I noticed a pattern. Below are the 12 most commented things from students through my first 10 years of teaching. I decided to omit the wonderful things such as student autonomy, great class topics, teaching, annual cookouts, coffee, etc.,

Top 12

Dear student, according to students you get to…

12. listen to the same bad jokes all year — all four of them.
11. hear about his Atlantic Market research and work on race and independent schools.
10. hear Carson say “moreover, furthermore, case in point, and thus” throughout a class discussion.
9. ask Carson how Karl Marx fits into every equation, discussion, and assignment.
8. learn about Carson’s children: Sam and Denver (his cats).
7. follow all of his arrows from alphabet A to alphabet B.
6. take an exam or a quiz in which he scored a 100% on; Carson of course wrote the thing.
5. use terms such as nation-state, actor or actors, polity, and idiot frequently.
4. make up words such as commonsensical and historiography (which is a word).
3. study the French Revolution six months before (and after)it is scheduled to be taught.
2. hear him say, “according to Carson” or “give your soul to Carson”
1. ask him about his cool ties.

Funny, and I am not sure how to take this email I got from a student who has made it clear that my class scares him to death, but he wrote this after I served as a guest lecturer in an Economics course a week ago. My classes are not that difficult, you just have to open the book and read. I do like it when a student takes the time to send an email such as this.

I just wanted to personally thank you for coming and talking with our class. I don’t necessarily agree with all of your viewpoints, but it was very interesting to hear everything you had to say. I know I used to always tell you that I take summer school so I don’t have to have you as a teacher, but being able to hear you lecture our class was very awesome. Thank you so much for taking time to do that. I appreciate what you do here at this school Mr. Carson, and I hope you realize how much people appreciate you even if they don’t always show it. You are a bit of a giant here. People are scared of your tough courses and amazing mind. You are different. That is what is so great about you, besides the fact that you are smart.

In Christian love,

5 Comments

Filed under Students, Teaching

Professor Carson, not Professor Wikipedia

I have students that live and die by what Wikipedia says. I will say that I too read Wikipedia for a hint of knowledge; however, it is not the place I derive much of my scholarship for authoring that conference paper or guiding that class discussion. I have taught my students to challenge me at all times on information I deliver that sounds biased or just incorrect. Thus, I get a great laugh when at times I see students reaching for their laptops to fact check me. Of course, they always go directly to Wikipedia. This year I have the king of Wikipedia in two of my courses: Chris Tutunjian; Chris is in both my AP European History course and my AP US Government & Politics course; I also had him last year in AP US History. He has a big reputation for not only being frighteningly smart, but for keeping Wikipedia close. Seeing that he will be the valedictorian this year, I cannot complain too much. His buddy, Parker Malone, is not too far from hitting that button on the Internet that launches this encyclopedia source.

As for me, I just try to get my facts right. I do a pretty good job here; I mean, I must maintain my credibility with a room full of frighteningly smart students. My AP European History class is made up of students I had in AP US History last year. All of them not only passed the AP US History exam, but I believe most of them got a 5…the highest score one can earn. And if I can get that Lexi Peterson girl in that course come next week — the overall intellect will grow.

I do not fear being replaced by Wikipedia anytime soon. However, if my classes starts to resemble Professor Wikipedia anytime soon, the end could be near. Check this video clip out here.

Above: Professor Wikipedia

4 Comments

Filed under Courses, Students, Stupid People, Teaching

Great Lunch

I was almost convinced that today was Friday, especially after being invited to lunch by three of my favorite students: Zach Dotson, Trevor Johnson, and Reid Bishop. Virgie’s Bar-B-Que was great. Plus, anytime I can join a group of students I like and respect, I am going to do it. I have so many great students. These guys are good for a great political discussion, too. We do not always agree, but there is enough respect among us to at least listen and engage in a healthy discussion. Hey, there is no fun in always agreeing with people. But, you learn a lot from disagreements. I do all of the time. This is one reason I teach.

4 Comments

Filed under Great Students, Students

American Knowledge

We completed day 1 here at Houston Christian for the 2010-2011 academic year; I met with sections of American Studies, European History, and US Government & Politics. Today I have my other section of US Government & Politics. I will have them, as I did yesterday, complete a quiz that was conducted to see how much (or little) students know about the historical and political nature of the United States. I will admit that not all of the questions were great. Better yet, I am not sure all were relevant in that if you did not know something, it would hamper your academic or professional growth in life. Here is what was noted about this survey:

  • 71% of Americans failed the civics knowledge test;
  • 51% of Americans could not name the three branches of government;
  • The average score for college seniors on the civics knowledge test was 54.2% (an “F” by any standard);
  • The average student’s test score improved only 3.8 points from freshman to senior year;
  • Freshmen at Cornell, Yale, Princeton, and Duke scored better than seniors on the civics knowledge test.
  • 79% of elected officials that took the civics knowledge quiz did not know the Bill of Rights expressly prohibits the government from establishing a religion.
  • 30% of office holders did not know that “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” are the inalienable rights referred to in the Declaration of Independence.
  • 27% of politicians could not name even one right or freedom guaranteed by the First Amendment.
  • 43% did not know the purpose of the Electoral College.
  • 39% of lawmakers believe the power of declaring war belongs to the president.
  • The average score for college professors who took the civics knowledge quiz was 55%.

You can find this particular quiz here.

9 Comments

Filed under Courts, History, Students