The assignment, of course, has nothing to do with personal religious beliefs. It asks the students to analyze the emergence of some major world religions in their historical contexts.
This year I've had to read the following.
MIRANDA MORALITY: I don't understand how people can have a sense of morality if they don't believe in Jesus.
LUNAR LINDA: Muslims are pagan moon-worshippers, and thier religion has no connection at all to Christianity or Judaism.
RESPONDING REBECCA: [Before I saw Linda's stupid post] Thanks for your interesting post! I had no idea about the moon-worshipping. I don't really know anything about allah or all of that Islam stuff.
THIS FREAKIN' GUY: I don't know much about religion. All I know is that Jesus is the son of God and my personal savior. The only book you need to read on religion is the Bible.
I'm an adjunct of course, so can I correct any of this shit? Fuck no, I'm not about to lose my job by critiquing my students' personal religious beliefs. And no matter what I say or how gently, factually, or tactfully I say it, they will see my comments as personal attacks. I just don't get how sentient people with access to the internet and cable tv can be so provincial about religion. Many of them have honestly never encountered a discussion of religion in anything but a faith-based context. When you present religion as a human construct with a specific historical context, some of the students just completely short-circuit.They literally cannot compute what you're saying.
Does the widespread exploitation of adjuncts mean that college is no longer a place to broaden your worldview, because contingent instructors can't afford to challenge the accepted notions of their students?
If you need me, I'll be curled up under the couch, weeping.
UGH! I get something similar-- I teach European, Islamic, and Asian cultural history stuff in various semesters, and everything's all hunky dory until I try to deal with Christianity in historical context, and then how much "I disrespect religion" shows up on student evals because I'm not coddling their particular individual pet evangelical guitar playing rubber bracelet WWJD fad of a sect as some universal transhistorical truth that emerged in midwestern American dialect straight from Jesus'and Paul's mouths. UGH! (meanwhile, though, the other half of the class winds up sure that I'm Catholic and trying to convert them. Or Buddhist, the next semester)
ReplyDeleteI read a commentary by a professor of military history who decided she would no longer teach military history because her class kept turning into a 'personal experiences/personal theory/rant against the enemy/' class. She was tired to having to constantly redirect students. In my classes (English), I was always careful to avoid religion (and not let my atheism show) to avoid the kind of dogmatic BS that Surly described. Yes, I chickened out. Yes, adjunct. Surly, do your students ever get past their fixed ideas?
ReplyDeleteA book on teaching critical thinking I read a few years ago suggested that students' most dearly-held beliefs are *not* the place to start. Frustrating as students' ignorance on the subject is (and alarming as it is, given that they're part of an electorate that may still have a modicum of influence over whom we go to war with, and why), I tend to agree. Given your precarious job status, it's certainly not worth risking becoming the target of a crusade.
ReplyDeleteTo my mind, this calls for a grading rubric focused on factual accuracy and depth of response, and number-only grades taken straight from the rubric. You can only do so much, especially online.
A slightly braver stance: maybe you could send a whole-class email correcting some "factual errors that came up in multiple posts" -- even if they didn't (the students will probably only read as many posts as they have to to get credit, so you're safe there). Maybe even include a few links to reputable online sources about Islam? You could even link to passages in a good translation of the Koran that retell some of the common stories of the three Abrahamic faiths, and perhaps to some expressions of shared/similar moral codes. At the very least, you could take care of the moon-worshiping thing (which I'm assuming has something to do with the crescent?). Not sure how much you can do about the rest, but maybe if you go easy on the grading but/and pass on a few facts not directed at anybody in particular you could make just a little bit of headway.
I am an adjunct. I am forced to talk about religion. I have become rather good over the years at not letting my own atheism show. Thank Jeebus it's not a religious studies class, but rather one talking about theories of human nature, so I can sidestep most of the controversial debates.
ReplyDeleteBut I hereby swear this. On the Fabled Ring of RYS, on Strel's Kalishnikov, on the Duck itself.
When - yes, "when," damn it - I get tenure, I'm teaching a religious studies class.
And I'm going to make everyone in the room cry at least once.
And I will laugh.
In class.
At them.
Oh, I can't wait.
(I am open to the charge that this makes me a bad person and/or teacher. Even though I'm not certain whether I'm kidding or not, I still don't fucking care.)
^ Best. Reply. Ever.
DeleteIt doesn't make you a bad teacher, no more than it makes Don Rickles a bad comedian.
DeleteFrod, that is a subtle and many-layered reply. Well-played, sir.
DeleteThere is this common misconception that tenure means "they can't fire you if you're doing your job". Yes they can, it just takes more work--a lot more--but the mechanisms are all there in the faculty handbook, and all it takes are sufficiently dedicated administrators acting in concert. It is possible to defend oneself, but even short of legal action it will be extremely time-consuming (like teaching two extra classes) and the admins eventually win anyway, unless you're lucky enough to find another tenured position (how would you feel about no raises or sabbaticals, and only crappy classes for the rest of your career?)
DeleteIn the example given here, a group of students would act outraged and march to the dean's office, maybe with parents, lawyers and a written complaint. The dean and dept head would order the faculty member to recant ("apologize"). Not following a reasonable order is grounds for dismissal of tenured faculty "for cause". Or, short of that, disgruntled students would give you poor evaluations, and tell other students to avoid your classes. Regardless of how good a teacher (and researcher) you are, poor evaluations are currently grounds to launch a series of unpleasant administrative reprisals, and you can bet adminiflakes are proactive about this (that's how they justify their ridiculous salaries). So no, if you think tenure would give you license to speak your mind on unpopular/controversial topics, think again.
When I was an undergrad, I took a required philosophy class. The professor was very pleased to explain to us how Kant tried to prove the existence of God and failed. He was obviously an atheist and wanted those of us in the class who were religious to have a crisis of faith. He kept saying it, that's why I remember it even after 100s of years. He was disappointed that some of us were so obtuse as to think Kant not being able to prove it was a big deal. Wylodmayer, I know you'll do a better job than that guy!
Delete...was not a big deal.
DeleteGotta love double negatives.
Thanks for the vote of confidence, B! I'll be honest - I was inspired by my undergrad advisor, an AME minister who taught a religious studies class that he opened by saying, "Class! I am gonna take your Jesus away from you! And someone will cry! Someone always cries! But don't worry! I will give him back! And he will be better than ever!"
DeleteI loved that man.
Excellent, Wylodmayer! Looking forward to hearing about it (and I like the "when" tenure part).
ReplyDeleteNow you know why, whenever discussing Galileo in my intro-astronomy-for-non-majors general-ed class, I am always careful to say, "The Inquisition," and never, "The Church." But then, I do include a quote from Martin Luther of all people, to show how Copernicanism got a chilly reception: "People give ear to an upstart [Copernicus]...this fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy."
ReplyDeleteI am tenured, but I just don't need the aggravation. Indeed, it imposes itself often enough. Whenever a student asks what my religion is, depending on how flippant I'm feeling, I say either "Lutheran," my Dad's religion, or "Sun worshiper," since unlike some deities, I can actually see the Sun.
I do have a critical thinking exercise in my class. Most of the examples are logical fallacies taken from the fringes of astronomy, mathematics, academia, and everyday life, there being no shortage of them. Here's half of it:
(1) Suppose someone says, "I must be right, because I have academic degrees." Which fallacy is this?
(A) argument from authority
(B) ad crumenam
(C) ad lazarum
(D) ad novitatem
(E) ad antiquitatem
(2) Suppose someone says, "Because I’m bigger than you, that’s why." Which fallacy is this?
(A) post hoc
(B) a circular argument
(C) ad ignorantiam
(D) ad baculum
(E) the gambler’s fallacy
(3) Suppose someone says, "My book must be true because it was on the famous bestseller list for many weeks." Which fallacy is this?
(A) poisoning the well
(B) ad crumenam
(C) ad lazarum
(D) ad novitatem
(E) ad antiquitatem
(4) Suppose a student says, "You can’t give me a C, because I paid my tuition." Which fallacy is this?
(A) poisoning the well
(B) ad crumenam
(C) ad lazarum
(D) ad novitatem
(E) ad antiquitatem
(5) Suppose someone says, "Scientists are just a bunch of weirdos who only care about research funding, so we don’t need to take what they say seriously." Which fallacy is this?
(A) ad hominem
(B) ad misericordiam
(C) a circular argument
(D) ad novitatem
(E) ad antiquitatem
(6) Suppose someone says, "Only a lout would not want to read the Great Books of Western Civilization." Which fallacy is this?
(A) poisoning the well
(B) ad crumenam
(C) ad lazarum
(D) ad novitatem
(E) ad antiquitatem
(7) Suppose someone says, "I spent 45 minutes trying to figure this out and I couldn’t, so it must be impossible." Which fallacy is this?
(A) ad misericordiam
(B) tu quoque
(C) ad ignorantiam
(D) the gambler’s fallacy
(E) ad crumenam
(8) Suppose someone says, "Why does mathematics describe and explain the Universe? Because if it didn’t, we wouldn’t use it to describe and explain the Universe." Which fallacy is this?
(A) a false choice
(B) A tautology
(C) crumenam
(D) personal validation
(E) ad baculum
Here's the rest of it:
Delete(9) Suppose someone says, "This slot machine must pay off soon, because I have put so many quarters into it." Which fallacy is this?
(A) ad misericordiam
(B) tu quoque
(C) ad ignorantiam
(D) the gambler’s fallacy
(E) ad crumenam
(10) Suppose a student says, "You can’t give me a C, because I’m an A student." Which fallacy is this?
(A) weasel words
(B) ad misericordiam
(C) tu quoque
(D) ad crumenam
(E) post hoc
(11) Suppose someone says, "Scientists don’t know everything, so they must be wrong about X." Which fallacy is this?
(A) false choice
(B) ad antiquitatem
(C) ad novitatem
(D) tu quoque
(E) ad lazarum
(12) Suppose someone says, "I just bought all new clothes, so it will be easy for me to lose weight." Which fallacy is this?
(A) post hoc
(B) a circular argument
(C) ad ignorantiam
(D) ad baculum
(E) magical thinking
(13) Suppose someone says, "All alcoholics start by drinking water, so don’t drink water, or you will become an alcoholic." Which fallacy is this?
(A) post hoc
(B) personal validation
(C) tu quoque
(D) ad novitatem
(E) ad antiquitatem
(14) Suppose someone says, “If you do not agree with the latest educational fad, you must hate kids.” What kind of fallacy is this?
(A) a tautology
(B) ad crumenam
(C) the gambler’s fallacy
(D) non-sequitur
(E) magical thinking
(15) Suppose someone says, "I saw something in the sky that I cannot identify, so it must be an alien spacecraft." What fallacy is this?
(A) ad baculum
(B) ad novitatem
(C) ad antiquitatem
(D) non-sequitur
(E) ad crumenam
(16) The Phantom Gasser of Mattoon was an example of what phenomenon?
(A) a quasar
(B) parhelia
(C) mass hysteria
(D) phosphorescence
(E) diffraction
Sorry about the multiple choice, but I get 100 students per class.
I am stealing this test, at least partially because you mention the Phantom Gasser of Mattoon. That makes me happy.
DeleteIt doesn't take much, as evidenced by my choice of careers.
It's surprisingly difficult to come up with a non-sequitur that is only a non-sequitur, and not one of the other kinds of fallacies. This is because they're all non-sequiturs, in one way or another.
DeleteThis illustrates a point Cassandra mentions: it's easy to use the Phantom Gasser to teach critical thinking. This is because Mattoon, IL is still a small town, and there are no universities there. (The closest is UIUC, and they no doubt regard Mattoon in much the same way that we undergraduates in Chicago regarded Peoria.) With the Mad Gasser, you won't be starting on students' most dearly-held beliefs, which can be difficult to shake loose even in the most sophisticated people: recall the Moral Argument of Immanuel Kant, which he no doubt learned at his mother's knee.
Delete"Does the widespread exploitation of adjuncts mean that college is no longer a place to broaden your worldview, because contingent instructors can't afford to challenge the accepted notions of their students?"
ReplyDeleteYes.
"I don't understand how people can have a sense of morality if they don't believe in Jesus."
ReplyDeleteI don't understand how people can have a sense of Jesus if they don't believe in morality.
Along that same point, they're not really understanding that morality is a "Law thing" not a "Gospel thing" in that there is a Natural Law aspect that is imprinted on us w/out any exposure to religion (or if you've ever even heard of Jesus, much less believe in Him...).
DeleteMorality is neither the sole property, nor the goal/measure of Christians, and for anyone to think so is to belie their ignorance re: their own faith...
If you want to provoke a violent reaction, say that human evolution explains morality perfectly well by itself.
DeleteI was a student in an advanced theology class where a fellow student began to claim loudly that it wasn't right to make him use BCE in place of BC. At one point he asked: "We're all Christians here, right? I mean, who here isn't a Christian?"
ReplyDeleteAt that point, every single person in the room raised a hand.
Really, I don't see the point. British atheists use "BC" without embarrassment.
DeleteOn the other hand, it's not a ditch I'd die in. Pretty petty all 'round.
I teach at a Christian SLAC and I have encountered way less resistance to hearing historical fact about the Christian religion than when I taught at state institutions. I think that because most of these kids grow up in church-run schools, they're not as pent up about defending their faith (they assume everyone believes as they do) and are also used to criticizing their religion (wanting to get out of the "Christian bubble").
ReplyDeleteIf I were you, I'd grade solely on what the textbook and materials say so that it's not an attack on their faith (although they'll perceive it that way). So simply indicate that Muslims do not worship the moon (despite their flag's lovely star and moon design; oh, good grief!) because nowhere does it state that in the materials that you assigned.
I've never hidden my agnosticism from my students, even as an adjunct (I teach a range of lit courses, and in the western canon, the bible functions as a touchstone for a lot of what we teach). I talk about the bible as another text explaining how the world came to be--no different than any of the other mythologies (except that it outlasted most of the other explanations). I have taken some heat for it (called a heathen in evals) but one of my staunchest defenders in a course where we read The Unbearable Lightness of Being (in which, among other things, Milan Kundera ponders whether or not god shits) was a kid who went through seminary school.
ReplyDeleteHe told the student who was haranguing me that if he could not take questions regarding his faith, how strong was his faith to begin with?
The silence was deafening. And strangely gratifying.
If they want to go through wrapped in bubble wrap, they should go to a Christian College. Otherwise, it's a public school (is it?) and they have to accept that a true college education means that they will run into ideas that may run counter to what they've been taught. Because if we're not doing that, what are we doing?
And clearly, from your experience with the theology student, going to a Christian college (i.e. the Seminary) doesn't produce only singled-minded defenders of the faith.
DeleteJeebus, Abba, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, I feel your pain Surly, but please don't leave with the impression that this is solely the province of a comparative religion class.
ReplyDeleteHere in the world of Care & Feeding of Wombats, we get our fill of:
1) Addiction is a made up illness; if you had the will power you'd be clean;
2) Mental illness is a sign that you do not have a close enough relationship with J/A/FSM;
3)Sexuality - Just. Don't. Speak. Of. It.
4)Evolution - need I say more?
Oh, and just for giggles, I've been openly challenged by students declaring I must be an atheist because people who believe in science obviously don't believe in a higher power.
So much for open minds and eager exploration ...
"...I've been openly challenged by students declaring I must be an atheist because people who believe in science obviously don't believe in a higher power. "
DeleteWhenever I get this, I point out that science gave us airplanes, computers, and antibiotics, which work for anyone whether you "believe" in them or not. So, do you need to be an atheist to fly in an airplane?
Live long and MORG!
ReplyDeleteAm I the only person that thinks of the tag team of Brother Nacho and Esqueleto in "Nacho Libre" when religious discussions come up? "I don't believe in God, I believe in science."
ReplyDelete