Dak
mentat
Depends on what the definition of discrimination is, and it depends on the department, and the university, and it depends on how expressive the conservative is. All those troublesome "contingencies."
If Mort Divine ruled the world
- Thread starter Zephyrus
- Start date
Einherjar86
Active Member
I think discrimination is defined primarily by grades. Significant expressivity is implied by the study; otherwise it wouldn't be possible to tell whether a student is conservative or progressive. Basically, the study found that expressive conservative students didn't suffer grade-wise at a significantly higher rate than progressive students.
Dak
mentat
STEM majors are less liberal. Non-STEM majors are both more liberal and subjectively graded. We are also talking about undergrad vs grad-students. Lots of factors not considered as far as I saw at a scan.
CiG
Room with a View
I understand that grading is the most tangible way to measure discrimination, I also think it's a tad limited in scope. This definition of discrimination would probably be laughed out of any serious discussion about discrimination. It implies that it doesn't matter how you get from point A to point B, so long as you eventually get to point B, but I would argue that discrimination is just as much about what occurs between the two points.
rms
Active Member
It's just a ridiculous attempt to prove anything. How does one assert themselves as a MAGA fan while writing basic lit and history papers? 
Einherjar86
Active Member
In some defense of my discipline and others, students aren't "subjectively graded." I know what you're trying to say, which is that humanities classes typically don't administer multiple choice exams with correct and incorrect answers.
First, grading essays isn't subjective. There are identifiable rhetorical/stylistic qualities that make an essay good or bad. There are also identifiable conceptual qualities that make an essay good or bad.
This is a fair point; there's no way the data can account for strategies taken along the way, whether they be something unfair that occurs between teacher and student, or something unfair on the student's part (e.g. cheating).
I do think it's suggestive, to say the least, that students who identify as conservative and whose work exhibited perspectives we would likely classify as conservative (which, it seems to me, is what the study looked for) didn't suffer overwhelmingly from worse grades than did their liberal/progressive classmates.
The article also pointed out that there are some likely reasons for occasional differences in grading between liberal and conservative students, namely the kinds of thinking they bring to the table. Taking my field as an example: it's true that liberal-minded students tend to be good at finding contradictions and conflicting perspectives in texts, and discussing those perspectives in an analytical way. Less liberal-minded student tend to look for "messages" in texts, or "arguments"; in fact, this is most freshman undergrads. I can't count the number of times I've had to remind students that works of literature don't contain arguments. Or rather, they don't contain/promote just one argument. It's a matter of education and maturity to be able to sift through confusion and contradiction and articulate a focused point that isn't a proclamation about a text's "message."
It's just a ridiculous attempt to prove anything. How does one assert themselves as a MAGA fan while writing basic lit and history papers?
For what it's worth, "MAGA" doesn't necessarily equal "conservative."
And students love to express their political beliefs in undergraduate writing. They find ways.
rms
Active Member
What are you referencing when you're talking about contradictions and conflicting perspectives?
Einherjar86
Active Member
I'm talking about conflicting ideologies and social forms that, a Marxist would say, novels work to reconcile via some kind of imaginary resolution. So for example, Elizabeth Gaskell's North and South presents its readers with a series of narrative conflicts involving, among other things, domesticity and industry (i.e. typically female and male spheres of influence), industrial and agricultural lifestyles, and working class manufacturing and aristocratic leisure. These various spheres are represented by characters in the novels, and their disagreements are worked through via narrative development. This is one of the reasons so many nineteenth-century novels end with episodes of marriage, the discovery of one's identity (usually as a member of a wealthy family, e.g. from orphan to inheritor), or the revelation of another's identity. These kinds of developments were necessary in order to explain away otherwise contradictory social situations.
I'm not a Marxist critic (which describes a methodology, not a political affiliation), so I read these conflicting perspectives as embodying the complexity of modern (industrial and post-industrial) social systems, rather than constitutively contradicting factors of capitalist development (capitalism is only one part of modern society). Novels aren't promoting any one particular element of society or culture over another, but exploring the dynamics that emerge among multiple competing social entities (be these classes, genders, races, religions, educations, species, politics, etc.). I teach students how to write about those dynamics, rather than picking the entity/theme they happen to agree with and arguing how the novel either does or doesn't support it. Novels don't support anything; that's not their job.
I'm not a Marxist critic (which describes a methodology, not a political affiliation), so I read these conflicting perspectives as embodying the complexity of modern (industrial and post-industrial) social systems, rather than constitutively contradicting factors of capitalist development (capitalism is only one part of modern society). Novels aren't promoting any one particular element of society or culture over another, but exploring the dynamics that emerge among multiple competing social entities (be these classes, genders, races, religions, educations, species, politics, etc.). I teach students how to write about those dynamics, rather than picking the entity/theme they happen to agree with and arguing how the novel either does or doesn't support it. Novels don't support anything; that's not their job.
Dak
mentat
I've seen and experienced subjective grading for others and myself based on not affirming the professors' opinion on what was a good character or opinion. Having also won a few (super minor) writing awards, it clearly wasn't based on the quality of the writing. Just because you may not be petty, doesn't mean other professors aren't. Furthermore, just because BC may not have petty professors (not going there), doesn't mean there aren't many petty professors across the country.
Atlas Shrugged would like a word with you.
Dak
mentat
Einherjar86
Active Member
Quality of writing can be excellent, but the argument can still be simplistic and underdeveloped.
Novels =/= authors. Insofar as Atlas Shrugged is a novel, it's not preaching anything. Insofar as it is preaching a specific and identifiable central message traceable to its author, it's not a novel.
CiG
Room with a View
Dak
mentat
True. Also not applicable in these cases.
Schrödinger's novel. Novel concept.
Einherjar86
Active Member
Dak
mentat
Are you saying I'm not capable of distinguishing between petty professors and bad arguments? Ok, suit yourself.
Well if you can't answer the question as to whether it's a novel or it isn't, it should be a straightforward connection.
Einherjar86
Active Member
Dak
mentat
If your "answer" to my challenge of Atlas Shrugged is well suited for lit classes, it justifies my disdain for lit classes and related "arguments" aside from all my own personal bonefides.
CiG
Room with a View
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
CiG
Room with a View
Similar threads
