MU CINO (Catholic in name only)?

[jficke13]

Yeah, not like law school, which, as we all know, produces nothing but useful members of society.

Touche. I've been advocating for the closing of all but about 50 law schools nationwide (unfortunately MU would be one of them) for a while now. Nothing positive comes out of law schools.

[cj111]

As a former GA/TA at Marquette, I can tell you that my interactions with professors were always collegial.  I wasn't a "student" to them, I was an assistant (the "A" in GA and TA), and ignoring the usual pejorative nature of that word, I was treated as such.  Even when I would work with other professors to whom I was neither assigned for work nor class, the rapport was always more along the lines of equals than that of a typical student-instructor relationship.  

At the risk of repeating a cliche twice in one thread (on one page, no less), it's a two-way street.  It is my understanding that McAdams was not being critical of a "student," he was being critical of the student's decision(s)/elections(s) in her role as a TA.  How many times have we as parents told our children (or had our parents tell us), "if you want to be treated like an adult, you need to act like an adult."  If the student wants to be treated like a TA, she needs to act like a TA, and acting like a TA means that you are not a "student" when you're fulfilling your role as a TA.  I know that human nature is to paint victims in the most sympathetic light possible, but a "student" is not the protagonist here.  The TA is the protagonist.

Apply this to a different situation... what if one of the cops at the subject of recent controversies volunteered for terminally-ill children at the hospital?  Would the protesters have just let it go?  Of course not, because people were upset with what the cop did in his role as a uniformed police officer, not as a hospital volunteer.

I'm not saying what McAdams did was right; I am also not defending McAdams by any stretch.  But if you're upset that McAdams acted unprofessionally toward a student, let me ask whether you'd be equally upset if McAdams acted in the same manner towards another professor or contemporary, be it at Marquette, Notre Dame or MATC?

If you can't make the argument without having to spin what is otherwise a material distinction in someone's role, then your argument itself is going to get rolled.

As someone who has both been a TA and has supervised dozens of them, I can say that no matter how we think of them (some of my graduate assistants I've considered as equals because of the quality of their work and their maturity; others, not so much), the administration of the university very much thinks of them as students, regardless of their teaching responsibilities.  There is a significant power differential between faculty and students, and so no, I wouldn't be as upset if McAdams acted that way towards a colleague.  He would be an uncollegial asshat, most likely, but there are thousands of them in academia, so whatever-- it's perfectly within his rights to be one.  But the distinction between faculty and graduate students who teach is more than just semantics; other faculty have resources to fight back that graduate students simply do not have, and McAdams used his position of power as a tenured faculty member to go after a student publicly.  

This power differential is also why most universities have policies in place about faculty sleeping with their students.  The same protections are not in place for faculty sleeping with colleagues because they aren't needed.  

McAdams did nothing illegal; if the university chooses to punish him, it will be because he violated the expectations for professional behavior adopted by the university.  I don't think the university will do anything.

[brandx]

 

At the risk of repeating a cliche twice in one thread (on one page, no less), it's a two-way street.  It is my understanding that McAdams was not being critical of a "student," he was being critical of the student's decision(s)/elections(s) in her role as a TA.  How many times have we as parents told our children (or had our parents tell us), "if you want to be treated like an adult, you need to act like an adult."  If the student wants to be treated like a TA, she needs to act like a TA, and acting like a TA means that you are not a "student" when you're fulfilling your role as a TA.  I know that human nature is to paint victims in the most sympathetic light possible, but a "student" is not the protagonist here.  The TA is the protagonist.

You've got it all wrong here, Benny. I don't think anyone here (maybe I'm wrong) is critical of McAdams for disagreeing with a TA's teaching methods. He is a tenured professor and should speak up if he thinks mistakes are made.

What we are all saying is that it is his method that is wrong. If he had followed the normal protocol, there would have been no issue - we would probably not even have known about it - but he didn't.  

Instead, clamoring for attention for his political views, he went to his blog and put a TA's name out there. In my mind, that, and that alone, is grounds for severe censure or termination.

[mikekinsellaMVP]

As a former GA/TA at Marquette, I can tell you that my interactions with professors were always collegial.  I wasn't a "student" to them, I was an assistant (the "A" in GA and TA), and ignoring the usual pejorative nature of that word, I was treated as such.  Even when I would work with other professors to whom I was neither assigned for work nor class, the rapport was always more along the lines of equals than that of a typical student-instructor relationship.  

At the risk of repeating a cliche twice in one thread (on one page, no less), it's a two-way street.  It is my understanding that McAdams was not being critical of a "student," he was being critical of the student's decision(s)/elections(s) in her role as a TA.  How many times have we as parents told our children (or had our parents tell us), "if you want to be treated like an adult, you need to act like an adult."  If the student wants to be treated like a TA, she needs to act like a TA, and acting like a TA means that you are not a "student" when you're fulfilling your role as a TA.  I know that human nature is to paint victims in the most sympathetic light possible, but a "student" is not the protagonist here.  The TA is the protagonist.

Apply this to a different situation... what if one of the cops at the subject of recent controversies volunteered for terminally-ill children at the hospital?  Would the protesters have just let it go?  Of course not, because people were upset with what the cop did in his role as a uniformed police officer, not as a hospital volunteer.

I'm not saying what McAdams did was right; I am also not defending McAdams by any stretch.  But if you're upset that McAdams acted unprofessionally toward a student, let me ask whether you'd be equally upset if McAdams acted in the same manner towards another professor or contemporary, be it at Marquette, Notre Dame or MATC?

If you can't make the argument without having to spin what is otherwise a material distinction in someone's role, then your argument itself is going to get rolled.

Thanks for the insight, Benny.  In this case, I'd argue it's not a material distinction.  They have their feet firmly in both worlds.  Professors treating them as peers is necessary in developing their professional acumen, but they still need the protections offered to those seeking a degree.  By comparison, if we applied the standard you're setting to medicine, I'd be amazed if any physician made it past their residency.

[keefe]

As a former GA/TA at Marquette, I can tell you that my interactions with professors were always collegial.  I wasn't a "student" to them, I was an assistant (the "A" in GA and TA), and ignoring the usual pejorative nature of that word, I was treated as such.  Even when I would work with other professors to whom I was neither assigned for work nor class, the rapport was always more along the lines of equals than that of a typical student-instructor relationship.  

At the risk of repeating a cliche twice in one thread (on one page, no less), it's a two-way street.  It is my understanding that McAdams was not being critical of a "student," he was being critical of the student's decision(s)/elections(s) in her role as a TA.  How many times have we as parents told our children (or had our parents tell us), "if you want to be treated like an adult, you need to act like an adult."  If the student wants to be treated like a TA, she needs to act like a TA, and acting like a TA means that you are not a "student" when you're fulfilling your role as a TA.  I know that human nature is to paint victims in the most sympathetic light possible, but a "student" is not the protagonist here.  The TA is the protagonist.

Apply this to a different situation... what if one of the cops at the subject of recent controversies volunteered for terminally-ill children at the hospital?  Would the protesters have just let it go?  Of course not, because people were upset with what the cop did in his role as a uniformed police officer, not as a hospital volunteer.

I'm not saying what McAdams did was right; I am also not defending McAdams by any stretch.  But if you're upset that McAdams acted unprofessionally toward a student, let me ask whether you'd be equally upset if McAdams acted in the same manner towards another professor or contemporary, be it at Marquette, Notre Dame or MATC?

If you can't make the argument without having to spin what is otherwise a material distinction in someone's role, then your argument itself is going to get rolled.

Well said, Benny

[Coleman]

As someone who has both been a TA and has supervised dozens of them, I can say that no matter how we think of them (some of my graduate assistants I've considered as equals because of the quality of their work and their maturity; others, not so much), the administration of the university very much thinks of them as students, regardless of their teaching responsibilities.  There is a significant power differential between faculty and students, and so no, I wouldn't be as upset if McAdams acted that way towards a colleague.  He would be an uncollegial asshat, most likely, but there are thousands of them in academia, so whatever-- it's perfectly within his rights to be one.  But the distinction between faculty and graduate students who teach is more than just semantics; other faculty have resources to fight back that graduate students simply do not have, and McAdams used his position of power as a tenured faculty member to go after a student publicly.  

This power differential is also why most universities have policies in place about faculty sleeping with their students.  The same protections are not in place for faculty sleeping with colleagues because they aren't needed.  

McAdams did nothing illegal; if the university chooses to punish him, it will be because he violated the expectations for professional behavior adopted by the university.  I don't think the university will do anything.

You have summarized my views far more eloquently than I could have.

[mu03eng]

You've got it all wrong here, Benny. I don't think anyone here (maybe I'm wrong) is critical of McAdams for disagreeing with a TA's teaching methods. He is a tenured professor and should speak up if he thinks mistakes are made.

What we are all saying is that it is his method that is wrong. If he had followed the normal protocol, there would have been no issue - we would probably not even have known about it - but he didn't.  

Instead, clamoring for attention for his political views, he went to his blog and put a TA's name out there. In my mind, that, and that alone, is grounds for severe censure or termination.

Do we know if McAdams sought redress prior to his blog post?

[Coleman]

Do we know if McAdams sought redress prior to his blog post?

It sounded to me like he was in a hurry to publish it. He gave Abbate exactly one day to respond to an email he sent (on a Sunday) asking permission to use her name. When she did not respond, he went ahead and did it anyway.

Whether he tried to go through university channels, I don't know, but given his haste to get his blog post out there it makes you wonder...

[GGGG]

I would think that if he went through proper channels to address it, that would have been brought up by McAdams himself.  I mean, if the department chair ignored it that would be more fuel for the fire right?

[brandx]

Do we know if McAdams sought redress prior to his blog post?

See Bleuteaux & Sultan's answer.

[mu03eng]

Having never read McAdams blog before, does he always refer to himself in the plural third person?

[mu03eng]

I went back and re-read the original blog post that started this whole thing, and I'm more convinced than ever that this is a bunch of people on all sides getting their backs up over nothing.

I think if McAdams didn't use the TA's name, this would have been nothing.  McAdam's shouldn't have identified her, but I don't think he's attacking her and he is using this scenario to attack a broader point (which may or may not be legitimate but is something worth discussion).  He spends almost as much time attacking the college leadership as he does conveying the events in the classroom itself.

Maybe I'm being insensitive but I think this is a series of minor errors that added up to an unnecessary black eye.  TA shouldn't have said what she said.  Student shouldn't have been so reactionary/gotcha.  McAdams shouldn't have used the TA's name and he used the blog to influence the leadership decision(IMHO).

[rocket surgeon]

i think what mcadams has been trying to do since 2005(?) is provide some balance to the notion held by many that our educational system is fraught with indoctrination and liberalism.  having said that, it remains to be seen if he hurt or helped his cause.  this may not be his shining moment, i am not sure as will depend on "conventional wisdom" moving forward.  but it sure is creating dialogue.  in other countries, they just take you out back and...

[jficke13]

Having never read McAdams blog before, does he always refer to himself in the plural third person?

Yep. I think it stems from the concept of editorial boards writing using the same plural third person construction.

[jficke13]

I went back and re-read the original blog post that started this whole thing, and I'm more convinced than ever that this is a bunch of people on all sides getting their backs up over nothing.

I think if McAdams didn't use the TA's name, this would have been nothing.  McAdam's shouldn't have identified her, but I don't think he's attacking her and he is using this scenario to attack a broader point (which may or may not be legitimate but is something worth discussion).  He spends almost as much time attacking the college leadership as he does conveying the events in the classroom itself.

Maybe I'm being insensitive but I think this is a series of minor errors that added up to an unnecessary black eye.  TA shouldn't have said what she said.  Student shouldn't have been so reactionary/gotcha.  McAdams shouldn't have used the TA's name and he used the blog to influence the leadership decision(IMHO).

Many of McAdams' problems come from his blunt delivery and unapologetic methods. His demeanor doesn't help his cause.

[GGGG]

i think what mcadams has been trying to do since 2005(?) is provide some balance to the notion held by many that our educational system is fraught with indoctrination and liberalism.  

Two thoughts:

1.  I think you are right about McAdams intentions and about the effectiveness about his intentions.  He uses a lot of language that labels people and ideas..."liberal" and "politically correct" for instance.  My rule of thumb is that when anyone starts using labels on either side, it means that the fundamentals of their arguments are flawed.  Then you are resorting to preaching to a choir - not actually trying to change anything.  As lawwwarrior12 points out, that blunt delivery isn't effective as being an agent of change.

2. My anecdotal experience is that higher education isn't "fraught with indoctrination and liberalism."  I think it is obvious that most professors are liberal.  But I would argue that relatively few are overtly so, and even less try to "indoctrinate."  

[Aughnanure]

i think what mcadams has been trying to do since 2005(?) is provide some balance to the notion held by many that our educational system is fraught with indoctrination and liberalism.  having said that, it remains to be seen if he hurt or helped his cause.  this may not be his shining moment, i am not sure as will depend on "conventional wisdom" moving forward.  but it sure is creating dialogue.  in other countries, they just take you out back and...

Most all of western society's intellectual development and expansion is because of liberalism expanding conversation beyond what was allowed, so not sure why this is always surprising. Some conservative ideas/arguments are generally rejected because they are not based in any fact or reality and thus have no place in what we call "education". Think transexualism and climate change as issues that some conservatives believe they are "censored" on.

[Galway Eagle]

i think what mcadams has been trying to do since 2005(?) is provide some balance to the notion held by many that our educational system is fraught with indoctrination and liberalism.  having said that, it remains to be seen if he hurt or helped his cause.  this may not be his shining moment, i am not sure as will depend on "conventional wisdom" moving forward.  but it sure is creating dialogue.  in other countries, they just take you out back and...

Are you saying Marquette is liberal?  When I went onto that campus I was blown away with how conservative it was and nearly transferred my freshman year. I think professors tend to be more progressive because they are dedicated to the expansion of knowledge and discussing new ideas.  Which is more of a liberal thing which is why there may be a perception that most professors are liberal but personally that's not the vibe I got at all.

[cj111]

Two thoughts:

1.  I think you are right about McAdams intentions and about the effectiveness about his intentions.  He uses a lot of language that labels people and ideas..."liberal" and "politically correct" for instance.  My rule of thumb is that when anyone starts using labels on either side, it means that the fundamentals of their arguments are flawed.  Then you are resorting to preaching to a choir - not actually trying to change anything.  As lawwwarrior12 points out, that blunt delivery isn't effective as being an agent of change.

2. My anecdotal experience is that higher education isn't "fraught with indoctrination and liberalism."  I think it is obvious that most professors are liberal.  But I would argue that relatively few are overtly so, and even less try to "indoctrinate."  

I tend to agree with you here.  The classroom is not a free public forum; it is, rather, a limited public forum, and the instructor is the moderator.  My classroom is not the students' soapbox, nor is it mine.  I do not let students say racist, offensive, or homophobic remarks in my classroom not because I'm a liberal who wants to suppress any opinion but my own, but because such remarks create an ineffective learning environment (and because they are usually not arguments but rather ad hominem attacks with virtually no evidence to support them).  I also don't allow students to make ad hominem arguments against conservatives.  

Having taught for many years,  I will say that nothing incites the dudgeon of a student more than being told, "we're not talking about that now.  We're moving on to another topic."  But without the power to do that as a professor, every class would degenerate into a shapeless mass of expressed opinions where the mere fact of expressing an opinion becomes more important than careful analysis of claims and evidence.

[Coleman]

Are you saying Marquette is liberal?  When I went onto that campus I was blown away with how conservative it was and nearly transferred my freshman year. I think professors tend to be more progressive because they are dedicated to the expansion of knowledge and discussing new ideas.  Which is more of a liberal thing which is why there may be a perception that most professors are liberal but personally that's not the vibe I got at all.

The liberal/conservative thing is relative. I honestly think as far as academia goes MU is right in the middle.

Yes, its more conservative than a state school.

But it is far more progressive or liberal then a lot of Christian/Catholic colleges.

Of course, this completely depends on your opinion, but I think MU is the Goldilocks college. Just right. The fact that we are even having this discussion, with opinions from both sides, in a civil manner, tells me that.

[rocket surgeon]

Are you saying Marquette is liberal?  When I went onto that campus I was blown away with how conservative it was and nearly transferred my freshman year. I think professors tend to be more progressive because they are dedicated to the expansion of knowledge and discussing new ideas.  Which is more of a liberal thing which is why there may be a perception that most professors are liberal but personally that's not the vibe I got at all.

i'll choose to take the 5th and allow some of the more "tenured" members of this board take that one on if they so choose.  i will say however, my experience at mu could probably be summed up with the squeaky wheel theory

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

I tend to agree with you here.  The classroom is not a free public forum; it is, rather, a limited public forum, and the instructor is the moderator.  My classroom is not the students' soapbox, nor is it mine.  I do not let students say racist, offensive, or homophobic remarks in my classroom not because I'm a liberal who wants to suppress any opinion but my own, but because such remarks create an ineffective learning environment (and because they are usually not arguments but rather ad hominem attacks with virtually no evidence to support them).  I also don't allow students to make ad hominem arguments against conservatives.  

Having taught for many years,  I will say that nothing incites the dudgeon of a student more than being told, "we're not talking about that now.  We're moving on to another topic."  But without the power to do that as a professor, every class would degenerate into a shapeless mass of expressed opinions where the mere fact of expressing an opinion becomes more important than careful analysis of claims and evidence.

Beautifully stated.

[jficke13]

Are you saying Marquette is liberal?  When I went onto that campus I was blown away with how conservative it was and nearly transferred my freshman year. I think professors tend to be more progressive because they are dedicated to the expansion of knowledge and discussing new ideas.  Which is more of a liberal thing which is why there may be a perception that most professors are liberal but personally that's not the vibe I got at all.

If you don't mind me asking, when were you a student at MU, and what was your major?

I did not have the experience that it was very conservative and am wondering if it was a departmental or different time period thing.

[Lennys Tap]

 I do not let students say racist, offensive, or homophobic remarks in my classroom not because I'm a liberal who wants to suppress any opinion but my own, but because such remarks create an ineffective learning environment (and because they are usually not arguments but rather ad hominem attacks with virtually no evidence to support them).  I also don't allow students to make ad hominem arguments against conservatives.  

The problem is that the teacher's politics, religion, etc. can alter what he or she considers racist, offensive, homophobic, etc. I side with social liberals on gay marriage and most other "rights" issues but am still uncomfortable with the labels (homophobic, racist, offensive) they reflexively assign to any who take an opposing viewpoint.

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

i think what mcadams has been trying to do since 2005(?) is provide some balance to the notion held by many that our educational system is fraught with indoctrination and liberalism.  having said that, it remains to be seen if he hurt or helped his cause.  this may not be his shining moment, i am not sure as will depend on "conventional wisdom" moving forward.  but it sure is creating dialogue.  in other countries, they just take you out back and...

I like the idea of a guy like McAdams... but the actual guy may have jumped the shark (for me personally).

I can think of several times where I really wanted to agree with him, but he often ramps up the "conservationism" to a point that's almost absurd.

I like a well stated conservative point of view, but I'm afraid McAdams isn't providing that. He's created a soapbox, and he's looking for reasons to get jump up on it. It ruins his credibility with me.