Silence is Violence?

   Over the past few weeks, I have see the following statement show up across social media:  Silence is Violence.  I had to step back and really think about it because my initial reaction was one of irritation and dismissal.  Whenever that happens it becomes necessary to reflect on why I would have such a reaction to something. To assist in my reflections I decided to think historically and find out how silence has become violence in the past or if it is just another platitude on a sign.

    My first thought was one of the Holocaust and how many stood by and watched as people were transported on trains to "work" camps. Due to the horror of accepting that people were really being sent to their deaths, some chose to ignore this reality and not step up to stop it. In such a case, I truly do believe that silence and inaction contributed to this devastation as it led to the deaths of millions of people. Some do not do anything because it is happening to some outsider or "other" and by the time they realize that they are next, it is too late. On the flip side, many people did stand up, suit up and fight to defeat Hitler's fascist regime and prevent the deaths of many others across the globe.

     To me, it was action that made the difference in this fight rather than just words, yelling, and carrying signs with slogans in the streets. This is not to say that we don't need to have discussions on various issues but yelling and protesting does very little to make a constructive change in our society, or in the world at large. In my opinion one reason it does very little is because it takes very little commitment to walk and yell with a sign whereas it takes a great deal of commitment to work in an area that needs change. For example, I can yell about poor educational opportunities in our poorest communities and then go home and feel good about myself in a very superficial way or I can get trained and teach in a poor community and have a real reason to feel good about my work. Which one of those options takes the most time, commitment, energy and dedication (and also has the best chance of making a difference)? You decide.

   So it closing, I don't think that it is silence that is violence, I think that it is a lack of constructive action that is violence. Being quiet or yelling from the rooftops does nothing but give you a sore throat, but putting in time and constructive action can make a real difference on a daily basis.

 

 

Socialism and the Ivory Tower

     In my doctoral program, all doctoral students were required to have a cognate area of study (known as a minor in undergraduate studies). This cognate needed to be in a different college and thus I selected Sociology as my additional area of study. Because I have a BA in Psychology and a minor in Sociology, it seemed like a good fit. Also I was excited to learn that the department had classes that studied the sociology of education and that sounded relevant and fascinating.

    As I progressed through my sociology coursework, I was introduced to the works of Marx and Lenin as well as the theory of social reproduction. As I was the only education major in the classes, I was often queried as to my views on these theories and how they related to K-12 education. At times I was a bit taken aback by the negative views of education and how many viewed socialism and Marxism as the answer to the class system in America.

   While I do see the value of the theory of social reproduction in as much as it shows how our institutions can reproduce social inequities (something for a longer discussion), what perplexed me was how socialism was seen as the means of equalizing society for the greater good. Not once did we look at socialist failures (Cuba, Venezuela, etc) but instead stayed in an idea state. By this I mean that practical applications were not as valued as the theories underlying them. This allowed my classmates (or comrades) to still fantasize that they could "do socialism right". Did they not think that Castro thought the same thing?

   Fast forward to today, July 1, 2020, and you are probably looking at my former classmates as the professors who are espousing socialism to the next generation of college students. In fact, many have been force feeding it to students for two decades. Is it any wonder that such chaos in taking place in the streets today? We (my academic peers, not me) have been waiting for this moment for a long time and because students do not know or understand history, and if fact devalue history, we may soon have our own Castro in the U.S. Something to ponder and to think about just how much higher education impacts the values our young people hold.

The Construct of White Privilege

       I have been reading and researching the construct of "White Privilege" from the beginning of my doctoral program in 1997. This is not a new idea but one that has been promoted in academia for decades.  Academia has a way of pushing belief systems in all content areas through the use of textbooks, lectures, media and pressure. By pressure I am referring to the power held over students by professors as they grade and evaluate students but also through their public shaming in class and by closing the doors on educational and career opportunities. Professors (aka academics) often solicit students to pursue further education, write letters of recommendation, nominate students for awards and scholarships and inform them of job opportunities in their particular fields of study. In other words, professors can make or break students' careers in many subtle ways that are often not discussed in public.

      So how does this relate to White Privilege you might ask? Well, think about it. If you are a White student who does not repent or take a knee when asked to do so, you might find yourself cancelled in the job market. If you are a student who applies for a doctoral program or MA program and you do not strongly adhere to the notion of becoming a SJW (social justice warrior) in your graduate program, you will most likely find yourself not being invited to go to graduate school. While no one would tell you why you weren't accepted, I can guarantee you that a discussion has taken place behind your back about your privilege, your lack of SJW commitment or your race. The desire to hire particular races, genders, sexual orientations, and viewpoints regularly take place in faculty meetings. While you may not see meeting minutes containing exactly what was said, you will find some innocuous agenda item like "student recruitment or faculty recruitment" with no further elaboration.

     As a person who loved school beginning as far back as kindergarten and extending until I completed my doctoral program, I find that constructs such as White Privilege are really just an academic's way of making bigotry and racism against a particular group sound valid and even admirable. I will end by saying that the biggest group of bigots I have ever met reside in the Ivory Tower. There are some good ones there for sure but they are slowly (or maybe rapidly) being relegated to the dungeon.

The Road to the Ivory Tower

     Prior to becoming a university professor, I spent 11 years working as a public school teacher. It was a time I enjoyed immensely and it provided me with a frame of reference for what it was like to be a part of an educational community. While I can't say that it was all fun and games, it was good work and I was proud to be a teacher. I do realize that there are many issues with public schools, but for the most part it was a rewarding career filled with like-minded professionals.

     Because of my joy of learning, I decided that it would be a good idea to continue my education and earned a master's degree and then a PhD in education. I must admit that my doctoral program was one of the most challenging yet stimulating periods of my life. No regrets there! In fact, just before I defended my dissertation one of my professors said that the road to earning a PhD was windy and contained many hoops, most of which were on fire. He wasn't kidding- so I donned my Kevlar suit and jumped through the final hoop in August of 2001. My first day of work as a professor was on September 11, 2001 and looking back on this I believe it foretold how life in the Ivory Tower would unfold. I do not make light of this date, because I sat in my new employee orientation meeting in Los Angeles as a television set played non-stop news reports of the terror attacks. Again, this is an experience for another post.

     Moving forward to life in the tower, I was quite naive when it came to academia. I was so... excited to be in a place of continuous learning and academic discourse that I couldn't wait to begin this new chapter in life. I expected to go to department meetings to discuss relevant educational issues, how to improve teaching pedagogy, and to look at how our work can help to develop effective teachers. Boy was I wrong there. Our meetings were filled with negativity and a level of self-centeredness that would shock even the most ardent of narcissists. For many years, I just sat back and took it all in- afraid to voice an opinion for fear of being smashed like a bug. (As one of my doctoral committee members used to say: "Hey, did you sing Kumbaya" today, soon-to-be-doctor-B?" Yes, they loved to call me "soon-to-be-doctor-B" and also mused at the fact that I had a very cheery, optimist outlook on life. Reflecting back on this, I believe they saw what the future would hold for me in academia.) 

What does it mean to embrace diversity and inclusion in the ivory tower?

     Our department spent many a meeting reading, writing, discussing and arguing about the creation of a mission statement to define who we were as a department and as a faculty.  In the end, the following mission statement was developed and stands front and center on our department web page:

"The Department of Teacher Education and Foundations engages with graduates and undergraduates at "unnamed California State College" as well as with community members to transform education to achieve equal opportunity for academic achievement; promotion of social justice and human rights; honor and respect for diversity; and creativity and joy in learning."

     I personally believe it is quite well written and reflects my own personal beliefs about my role as an educator. The only problem I have is the disconnect I have seen when we (the department) have been discussing and implementing various policies and procedures in the department as well as when it comes to the treatment of some faculty members and students who do not tow the party line.

      A clear example happened at a faculty meeting in the spring of 2016 when we were discussing how to recruit more students into our various teaching credential programs. The discussion began about the mission statement and our need to recruit students who firmly backed our vision of social justice. It was at this time that an administrator and superior of mine joined the conversation by stating that we really needed to find a way to ensure that "people who listen to country music are screened out of our programs" and more importantly we needed to find a way to make sure that they weren't admitted in the first place. One might think this was a joke but it was not- this particular administrator frequently made such comments.

    As I sat and let the comment soak in, I then raised my hand and interjected that I was a country music fan and then sat quietly. We both looked at each other, and ignoring my comment he continued on with his views about the types of students we should be actively recruiting. While the comment may seem quite innocuous at first glance, it was a very telling statement about how he (and others) view a particular group of people. It is a statement filled with condescension and does little to support or promote "social justice and human rights; honor and respect diversity". In fact, it seeks to limit the opportunities of those with differing points of view and to ensure that one person's worldview is the prominent one in our public schools.

   The insidiousness of such a comment was evident in the tragedy that took place in Las Vegas on October 1, 2017 when some of the first mouthpieces to speak on the mass shooting spewed venom towards the very people hurt in the shooting. Again we have evidence of the hatred of some based on skewed stereotypes and bigoted worldviews. The irony in this situation is that these types of mean-spirited comments often come from those who espouse inclusivity and social justice. I have to say that should cause us all to question these notions once we have seen who is actually behind the curtain supporting these causes. I, for one, would like the truth to be heard and that truth is that these folks only believe in including certain people who they have deemed worthy of honor and social justice. In no way does this support true diversity and inclusion.

Social Justice: Sounds Good but here's what it REALLY means to Academics

                

     It is not unusual to hear about the social justice movement on college campuses and in our society at-large. On the surface one would ask the following question: "Who could ever be against social justice?"  Just addressing the question would leave you to believe that the only people who are against social justice are those whose desire it is to oppress marginalized people, right? Well, that is a very tricky question and one I will try to address here.

    To begin with it would seem important to define the term social justice. You would think that there would be a commonly accepted definition but they do vary in quite interesting ways. Here are just a few of the definitions I located:

"Social justice is the virtue which guides us in creating those organized human interactions we call institutions. In turn, social institutions, when justly organized, provide us with access to what is good for the person, both individually and in our associations with others" (retrieved from http://www.cesj.org/learn/definitions/defining-economic-justice-and-social-justice/).

Social justice is the "view that everyone deserves equal political, social and economic rights and opportunities" (retrieved from https://www.socialworkers.org/).

"Social justice is the equal distribution of resources and opportunities, in which outside factors that categorize people are irrelevant" (retrieved from https://www.pachamama.org/social-justice/what-is-social-justice).

     While each definition seems to address some type of virtuous concept, I am still unsure of the deeper meanings behind them. One definition seeks to equally distribute resources and opportunities while others want "justly organized institutions" to define what is best for us all- in other words to benefit the greater good. What none of these definitions address is: who is the arbiter of what it means to be "just" and who determines what the greater good actually looks like?  It is because of these vague definitions that many take it upon themselves to fill in the blanks and decide how social justice should be handed out.

     I will give an example of the social justice conversation that took place during a fairly recent department meeting. A discussion was taking place surrounding the mission statement (again) and how it should be used to guide our class instruction and course syllabi. An unnamed administrator  spoke up and said that we needed to ensure that everyone was teaching social justice regardless of the actual content of our courses (IE: math methods, literacy methods, STEM, etc). He went on to say that if people didn't tow the line here, they needed to be bullied into it. Yes, he said bullied. He then went on to say, "You guys all know what I mean- bully them  just like when you were a kid in school." I think my mouth fell open and the irony of bullying someone into teaching social justice became crystal clear to me. The particular person (and he was a person in power) had just told us all that we had damn well better teach his social agenda or he would unleash his inner bully on all of us. 

     I think I will end with this for now and try to reconcile the concept of bullying people as a means of ensuring social justice.  Hmmm........

Welcome to the Dungeon!

     As a full time professor since the fall of 2001, an adjunct professor from 1998-2001, and now a Professor Emeritus from a California public university, I have had the "privilege" of being part of the Ivory Tower. As you can see, the word privilege has been placed in quotation marks to highlight the irony of the statement as it has been one of the least rewarding yet most eye-opening experiences of my lifetime. I do understand that those of us who reside in the tower are quite privileged, especially because of the ridiculous practice of tenure. I will speak to the double-edged sword of tenure in a later post but for now I will say it is a practice that serves to provide power to some and to ensure that junior professors follow the party line of those senior faculty members who sit in judgment of them. Archaic- yes; being abolished anytime soon- no.

    To provide a frame of reference for this blog, I will introduce myself, and as you read the upcoming entries you will begin to see what brought me to putting fingers to the keyboard to document my journey. I have to begin by saying that I did earn tenure and have had the wonderful "t" word for many years. (That is a whole story for a later time.) My field of expertise is education, and more specifically, literacy education. In this role I have spent much of my time preparing new teachers to enter the classroom while also working with children who struggle to learn to read. My students and my professional field are truly my passion and they are the reward I get for working at the university level. Make no mistake, I have no regrets there! They ARE the reason I have lasted as long as I have in the tower.

    Over the past few years, and most certainly since November of 2016, the world has been provided with a more public glimpse behind the walls of the Ivory Tower. This has come in the form of obnoxious tweets from various professors on topics such as race relations, presidential elections and other political topics, white privilege, social justice, hurricanes, and even country music. Why we professor-types think we hold the keys to "enlightenment" is beyond me, especially because I have had the privilege of sitting through years of faculty meetings that were anything but enlightened. (Again, that is a fun topic for another posting.). I think it is time for the marginalized (yes, great Ivory Tower word) professors such as myself to begin to speak up. Those of us who listen to country music, go hiking across this beautiful country, stand for the National Anthem and love families and children, need to put our voices out there. Many of us have been afraid to do so because the mighty sword of Ivory Tower leaves quite a mark when it smacks you across the skull; and boy do some of us get smacked!

  Well..... that is my introduction to the blog. In upcoming posts I will tackle topics such as social justice, tenure, country music, campus harassment of free thinkers, and other easy listening hits. Right now I think I'll go and put on some Rascal Flats music as I get ready to pull up the curtains and open the windows of the tower.