This is what they're teaching in college nowadays.


PDA






General Geoff
February 21, 2009, 01:44 AM
From a friend of mine who goes to Tallahassee Community College, this is an excerpt from an outline/synthesis of his American History class taught by Donald H. Barry.



http://i598.photobucket.com/albums/tt67/thunderbucket64/AMH2010page.jpg


Notice the tripe under the 2nd.

If you enjoyed reading about "This is what they're teaching in college nowadays." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
crazy-mp
February 21, 2009, 01:50 AM
Check out this thread http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=429513 That will give the instructor something to get upset about!!

phish
February 21, 2009, 01:51 AM
Not all colleges. I took several military history courses with profs. who were very pro gun.

It depends more on the Prof. than the actual institution.

2RCO
February 21, 2009, 01:56 AM
Sounds like this guy is a Bit anti 2A from the outline I see here. I would really like to know his qualifications and where he did his Grad work.

General Geoff
February 21, 2009, 01:57 AM
Just from that one page, I personally think he should be fired for such blatant opinionation. He's teaching history, not political theory.

phish
February 21, 2009, 02:00 AM
"Just from that one page, I personally think he should be fired for such blatant opinionation. He's teaching history, not political theory."

If every prof got fired for spewing their opinion, there would be no professors left.

ThrottleJockey
February 21, 2009, 02:12 AM
This guy should be drawn and quartered. At least that's what they would have done loooong ago. This is the way they lend future support to their cause. By teaching their opinion as if it were FACT. Sort of the way they justify the civil war(our last chance at actual liberty) by claiming it was fought to end slavery. When it was actually fought for the purpose of imposing the federal gov. upon the individual states. Thus not allowing them to really govern themselves.

QuietEarp
February 21, 2009, 02:15 AM
The outline is not even well constructed.
He only directly quotes one amendment, then he paraphrases all of the others.
When he goes into detail about the second amendment he starts using emotional and judgmental words and phrases like "vital, utter folly and ignorance, reckless, irresponsible, and critical."
He also describes the founding fathers as elitist to their core and then calls society in general "reckless, irresponsible, and thoughtless."
I am having serious difficulties that this was written by a professor. If this is the class outline then would I guess by the emphasis on one amendment over the others he must think himself an expert on the Second Amendment. Maybe he would welcome a good spirited debate. I doubt logic and faith in humans will come easy to him. He already showed his hand and it is weak.

nachosgrande
February 21, 2009, 02:21 AM
"Sounds like this guy is a Bit anti 2A from the outline I see here. I would really like to know his qualifications and where he did his Grad work."

He teaches at a community college. It is not a requirement to have attended graduate school.

It is shocking that at this academic level, he is teaching his own agenda vs what the college should have prepared for him.

I never had to worry about opinion overtaking fact with any of my professors. I studied engineering.

Hungry Seagull
February 21, 2009, 02:23 AM
I can smell the bull from way over here. Some of those words dont belong in that document. I cannot put finger on it precisely but think previous poster did best with examples of words.

I dont know anything about the Law, but supposing a document written in the time, this Nation was born, would be written in a matter of fact way that we all can understand.

Now I would like to see if there is a Bill of Rights as it existed when written in original form to compare that and this... this..... questionable material.

Im also thinking a true lesson will encourage the student to go over each and every single line of that page presented here, not just the cupcake icing pulling buttons.

ThrottleJockey
February 21, 2009, 02:24 AM
Here is his contact info from TCC website in case anyone wants to utilize it in any constructive manner. Notice he claims to have a Phd. LOL Also, notice how he put quotation marks around the 2a? I think this is incorrect use, as there appears to be at least one extra comma in there.

Dr. Donald Barry
FT Teaching Faculty
History & Social Sciences Faculty
BARRYD@tcc.fl.edu
(850) 201-8150

phish
February 21, 2009, 02:33 AM
"He teaches at a community college. It is not a requirement to have attended graduate school."

Serious? Every one of my instructors when I was in junior college had at least a masters.

Let's not rag on this guy for having a PhD.

Nobody in this thread could probably come close to completing a PhD. I bet none of you even completed graduate school.

And I'm sure he really wants his personal information broadcasted all over the internet. Especially to a bunch of heated up gun fanatics.

General Geoff
February 21, 2009, 02:40 AM
Not particularly personal information if it's already available online, now is it?

Hungry Seagull
February 21, 2009, 02:40 AM
Ive just enough college schooling to stop when enough is enough versus the debt piling up at the student loan. PHD's for fine and dandy, but.... you gotta have something up there to teach skool otherwise, what good is it?

phish
February 21, 2009, 02:42 AM
"Not particularly personal information if it's already available online, now is it?"

Look at my context again. It's being given out so a bunch of gun fanatics can send hate mail and give him a piece of their mind.

Wouldn't you find that a little unnerving if you were on the other end? Yeah it pisses me off too, but I'd feel a little violated if my information turned up on some gun site and people started giving me a piece of their mind. It'll probably(in his mind)just reinforce the idea that we're all ignorant and reckless.

General Geoff
February 21, 2009, 02:45 AM
No, not really. If I were teaching a course on HISTORY with my overt and obvious opinions slanting the material, I would probably expect hate mail.

phish
February 21, 2009, 02:51 AM
"No, not really. If I were teaching a course on HISTORY with my overt and obvious opinions slanting the material, I would probably expect hate mail."

Look, it makes me mad too,I just hope it's constructive criticism sent his way.

ThrottleJockey
February 21, 2009, 02:52 AM
I looked up and posted the info for the purpose of CONSTRUCTIVE contact, not hate mail. I cannot make myself write anything CONSTRUCTIVE to this idiot. I leave this up to the cooler prevailing minds at THR. Maybe he is actually pro-gun and uses this as a test to decide who is just a follower looking for a grade, and who will actually challenge him or call him out on it.

seale
February 21, 2009, 03:25 AM
I just emailed him asking for confirmation that he is the source of those historical lies. If I get a response (ha ha) I'll post it.

renegade1alpha
February 21, 2009, 03:32 AM
I have always said, "Education is no substitute for common sense."

Regardless of how much EDUCATION a person has, that does not preclude them from being an idiot on other matters. As as far as education goes, I served in the military for 22 years (Marines and Army) in different special operations units, and currently work as a deputy sheriff. I am a certified firearms instructor as well as an expert in WMD's. I don' have a PHD in any field, but I know a hell of a lot more on how to use a gun than the cardiac specialist at the local hospital or the math professor at the university! I wonder how many people with PHD's can tactically enter a building or find a point on a map with a 8-digit grid? Probably not very many at all.

Prince Yamato
February 21, 2009, 03:32 AM
Sick 'em boys!

akodo
February 21, 2009, 04:09 AM
If every prof got fired for spewing their opinion, there would be no professors left.

Opinion is one thing. Being factually wrong is another.

a. has been decided by SCOTUS to be the exact opposite

b. clear and unambigous statements to the contrary

c. one study, which was shown to have been fraudulent

dobrzemetal
February 21, 2009, 04:11 AM
Going to UF (university of florida), They always have been very liberal; however, for the most part they have been open to my objections and in some circumstances taken another view of firearm ownership.


BTW, National champs 2008 :)

owlhoot
February 21, 2009, 04:12 AM
Guys, the VAST majority of college/university faculty are ultra left wing, and a great many of them use their lecterns as bully pulpits to preach their views and opinions. Why do you thing college age kids voted so overwhelmingly for Obama?

There is a great deal of revisionist history being taught these days. For example, we were the bad guys in WWII for using the A bomb. We were the bad guys in Korea and Viet Nam which were "imperialist" wars. And when the history books are updated, we will be the bad guys in the middle east.

Classical literature has been chucked and students are now reading second rate socialist drivel and psycho-babble.

Hopefully the sciences are still relatively secure. But, all in all, college has become a damned poor place to get an education.

dobrzemetal
February 21, 2009, 04:24 AM
^^ It has not become a poor place to get an education if you voice your opinion and realize not everything they say is truth. You need to understand that a good portion of my class are PRO gun etc. Although I do understand where you are coming from because I have had teachers that are EXTREMELY liberal and I have had to fight my way through school defending my opinions, which in turn has made me a great defender of our rights. In retrospect I do think that most colleges are very inclined to liberal ideals but if you are strongheaded about your believes and voice your opinion to the class, you are more inclined to influence more people to your cause, which I have.

230RN
February 21, 2009, 04:28 AM
Wouldn't you find that a little unnerving if you were on the other end?

I certainly hope so.

It would give him pause to perhaps re-think his position. And I wonder about your characterization of THR members as "a bunch of gun fanatics [who will -ed:TAT) send hate mail and give him a piece of their minds."

Maybe he needs a piece of our minds.

His statements are way out of line --unless he's trying to attract the kind of students who pre-believe that nonsense.

There's a very, very slim chance that he might actually be a pro-2A prof who's trying to attract that kind of student in order to counter-propagandize them. But from the tone and tenor of the rest of the outline, I highly doubt it. (Just a thought that popped up in my mind when I tried to examine all the possibilities.)

Oh. Here's something else that might give him pause, if it gets publicized to the students of that school:

http://noindoctrination.org/

Browse that site and you'll see many examples of propagandization of our students.

ETA: It was amusing to see how many California institutions appear here:

http://noindoctrination.org/cgibin/view_listings.cgi?status=school

Terry, 230RN

Travis Bickle
February 21, 2009, 04:48 AM
Justices of the Supreme Court--unelected for life

Liberals had better think twice before complaining about this. Much of their agenda has been implemented against the will of the American people by activist judges who need never worry about facing the wrath of the voters.

Whoever wrote this screed sounds like he isn't too smart.

Double Naught Spy
February 21, 2009, 07:50 AM
C under 2 sounds like an excerpt from Bellisiles book, "Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture." As I recall, the book was eventually recalled and Bellisiles lost his job at Emory over it. Apparently, there are a goodly number of the books still in the general population and the instructor in the OP's abstract probably read it, likely without knowledge of the recall. FYI, the book had won awards before the discrepancies were discovered.

Travis Bickle
February 21, 2009, 07:56 AM
As I recall, the book was eventually recalled and Bellisiles lost his job at Emory over it.

That's true. He resigned in disgrace after much of his research was shown to be fraudulent.

qwert65
February 21, 2009, 08:14 AM
Reading it it looks like the entire class is suppossed to be about the 2nd with the others glossed over, Besides the fact that as already been pointed out the outline is written poorly.

Nobody in this thread could probably come close to completing a PhD. I bet none of you even completed graduate school.

That's a pretty elitist remark, also I think you over-value a PhD, they are not that difficult, more time consuming then anything. (FYI I have a DVM)
The beauty of the BOR is that anyone with 9th grade reading comprehension should be able to understand it.

Tom Servo
February 21, 2009, 08:36 AM
Let's not rag on this guy for having a PhD.
That's not what's happening here. His elitism, and his injection of "opinions" as fact are the problem.

Nobody in this thread could probably come close to completing a PhD. I bet none of you even completed graduate school.
Sorry I've only got two bachelor's degrees, but I don't think that counts me out of this debate. Having a PhD doesn't guarantee wisdom, which is one of the reasons I'm not in the academic field.

And I'm sure he really wants his personal information broadcasted all over the internet. Especially to a bunch of heated up gun fanatics.
We're not fanatics. If you want that, there ARE sites where you'll encounter them.

Whether or not he realizes it, he's already made his choice in this matter, and he's certainly left his actions open to criticism. If he doesn't want that, he shouldn't have chosen to turn his career as an educator into his own personal pulpit.

Girodin
February 21, 2009, 09:12 AM
Nobody in this thread could probably come close to completing a PhD. I bet none of you even completed graduate school.

I wouldn't be so sure about that and as was pointed out the main requirement to simply earn a post graduate degree is staying in school into your late twenties and early thirties and living off of loans and or someone elseís support. Simply having a degree means little. There are schools and programs that anyone can get into and Cs and Ds earn degrees as they say.

You'll forgive me I am not wowed by a community college professor. A good number of my friends and family have advanced degrees, often MBA JD or MD, not something as rigorous and useful as history or the like.

I don't yet have a post grad degree but am with all likely hood entering law school at Vanderbuilt this fall, so again you will forgive me if I am not in awe of some community college profs credentials nor his efforts to pull the wool over the eyes of a bunch of community college kids. This guy clearly isnít a leader in his field.

Lol at "a bunch of gun fanatics" and hate mail.

Dravur
February 21, 2009, 09:13 AM
Nobody in this thread could probably come close to completing a PhD. I bet none of you even completed graduate school.


Well, ME and Cletus were down by the Cement Pond lookin fer some geese to munch on like cavemen. Hyuck hyuck hyuck. Yeah, us gun owners are complete morons. Why, none of us could complete high school, let alone anything advanced...

Oh wait.....

some of us DO have Master's Degrees.... Although, by your line of reasoning, Regis gave me mine because I was cute or something...

I could have went for a PH.d.... but I chose not to.

If some prof wants to indoctrinate his students, he needs to be brought out of his hole and ridiculed. We need to know who he is and what college he teaches at. We need to write letters, make phone calls and raise a stink about each and every one of these losers.

So, publish his address for us neanderthal gun owners..... cuz we ain't smart enough to read it no how.

ThrottleJockey
February 21, 2009, 10:18 AM
Here is his contact info from TCC website in case anyone wants to utilize it in any constructive manner. Notice he claims to have a Phd. LOL Also, notice how he put quotation marks around the 2a? I think this is incorrect use, as there appears to be at least one extra comma in there.:fire::cuss::banghead:

Dr. Donald Barry
FT Teaching Faculty
History & Social Sciences Faculty
BARRYD@tcc.fl.edu
(850) 201-8150

divemedic
February 21, 2009, 10:52 AM
I have a degree in emergency medicine, one in fire science, and I am working on a third in emergency management. So what? None of them are Masters, but I make more than most MAs that I have met, anyway. What would a Master's do for me except make me indebted to the government?

I would be embarrassed to teach at a community college with a PhD. Several people that I am friends with teach at community colleges with AS and BS degrees.

I guess what you are trying to say is that gun owners are ignorant hicks, which I have noticed is what most people from the large northern cities think of southern and country people, anyway.

Glockman17366
February 21, 2009, 10:57 AM
I'd take that to the dean of the college and insist, as a taxpayer, this be corrected to reflect the intent of the Bill of Rights.

I'd also insist that professor be removed from the college. He has no business dealing with education.

cbrgator
February 21, 2009, 11:12 AM
General Geoff,

Do you have access to the text itself regarding the 2A and not just his outline. I'd be curious to see what kind of actual facts he uses as supporting evidence of his claims. Then we could REALLY take him apart.

230RN
February 21, 2009, 12:13 PM
^
Well, "c." had the flavor of a direct quote from Bellesiles, if that's a start.

From:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=692421

According to Bellesiles, in early America there were very few guns. Privately owned guns were mostly in poor working condition. By law, guns were not kept in the home but rather stored in central armories, and guns were too expensive for widespread private ownership. He even claims that men generally were unfamiliar with guns and that they did not want guns - preferring axes and knives instead, in part because guns were so inaccurate that they were of little use. He argues that axes made very good weapons in hunting, and in battle, people considered "the ax the equal of a gun." Bellesiles claims that states enacted laws that restricted gun ownership to white Protestants who owned property.

I can't speak with absolute authority here, since I never actually read Bellesiles' book, but the above (among other sources) certainly indicates a "lifting" from Bellesiles' ideas.

By the way, I think that indeed powder supplies were often kept in a central location, but I believe that was for general fire safety, not for "regulatory" purposes.

Terry, 230RN

Geronimo45
February 21, 2009, 12:20 PM
Interpretation of this controversial amendment by the vast majority of constitutional scholars as granting gun possession to state militias (today, national guards) & law-enforcement agencies and not to private individuals.
I guess the US Supreme Court doesn't count? :D

General Geoff
February 21, 2009, 12:22 PM
I don't have text, but I do have recordings of his lectures. They're definitely all hokum, but only a few bits and pieces of them are condemnations of the 2nd in particular.

cambeul41
February 21, 2009, 02:38 PM
This is what they're teaching in college nowadays.

"They"? Shouldn't Donald Barry be referred to as "he" instead of "they"? I really would not care to be tarred with the same brush even if inadvertently.

My students who request it are provided with RKBA and CCW information.

Those who choose to write on gun control are informed of my position on the subject and would be encouraged to choose another topic if they were planning to advocate gun grabbing. However this is Detroit, I meet almost no anti-gunners among the community college students. (Let's not talk bout the faculty.)

porterdog
February 21, 2009, 02:50 PM
While it's all well and good to vent at the actual perpetrator, seems like the more effective angle might be to deluge his boss....

fireman 9731
February 21, 2009, 03:24 PM
I agree, A well constructed letter to the dean could be very, very effective.

As a college student myself, it really doesn't surprise me, but it still sickens me.

Shung
February 21, 2009, 03:36 PM
in part because guns were so inaccurate that they were of little use. He argues that axes made very good weapons in hunting, and in battle, people considered "the ax the equal of a gun."

oh... guns were innacurate in 1791 ??? I'd love to take a rifle from that era, and put that guy in front of me, SAFE, at 50 yards...

beside that.. what kind of CRAP can you hunt with an ax ??? mickey mouse ?

other than that, that explanation of the 2nd amendment is just huge bull**** that goes AGAINST what was thought by the time, and what is still thought nowadays (heller..)

RP88
February 21, 2009, 03:45 PM
the point of education is to educate from a neutral perspective. Putting insulting and bigoted tidbits of personal thoughts as part of an outline is ridiculous. Notice how he only did it for the Second Amendment, too.

Neverwinter
February 21, 2009, 04:13 PM
the point of education is to educate from a neutral perspective. Putting insulting and bigoted tidbits of personal thoughts as part of an outline is ridiculous. Notice how he only did it for the Second Amendment, too.
When the neutral perspective is abandoned, it changes from education to proselytism. What arises from that is the excrement of things like this outline and conservapedia

Dienekes
February 21, 2009, 04:14 PM
Always liked this one: "The only purpose of an education is that it helps you tell when a man is talking nonsense."

Currently teaching a class of 12 year olds, and dropped that one on them. They caught on to it [I]INSTANTLY[I].

SamTuckerMTNMAN
February 21, 2009, 04:24 PM
I would follow up with a polite response at least to the prof, the university, and maybe even a local paper...
any info about where, who, when?
st

SCKimberFan
February 21, 2009, 04:28 PM
If every prof got fired for spewing their opinion, there would be no professors left.

Sounds like a good start to me.

azhunter122
February 21, 2009, 04:28 PM
That's insane.

cbrgator
February 21, 2009, 04:31 PM
General Geoff,

Can you tell us what he says to support his positions on 2A?

Leanwolf
February 21, 2009, 06:43 PM
PHISH - "If every prof got fired for spewing their opinion, there would be no professors left."


Couldn't be all bad. :)

L.W.

BunnyPuncher
February 21, 2009, 06:45 PM
And have been teaching at unis and colleges for several years...

I'll support the idiot prof described in the OP. The idiot has the right to teach his class in any fashion he chooses. It may not always result in quality education (and often does not) but it is the tradition of the institution (royal we there) to allow academic freedom. At least this guy advertises his blatant disregard for the 2a in the outline rather than being one of the pricks who says crap like "every opinion is valued" and then sinks folks with disparaging opinions ninja style.

The reason I support this idiot is that I *demand* to be able to teach my classes any way I see fit that do not break any laws of the gov or school. Heck I've even trod the latter pretty hard. And I would expect the support of the idiot in the OP if someone tried to get me fired. What makes me an even bigger idiot than the prof in the OP is to expect that this fellow would support me. I know he'd stab me in the back and side with the torches and pitchfork crowd at a moments notice rather than support a fellow academic on the other end of the political spectrum. I still have to support the idiot though. But then again, I've just admitted to being the bigger idiot.

Girodin
February 21, 2009, 07:17 PM
The reason I support this idiot is that I *demand* to be able to teach my classes any way I see fit

LOL this is why education and academia is a joke in some ways. I am all for academic freedom, which I would define as the ability to freely and openly explore various topics and ideas. Academic freedom is not a total lack of accountability for what you say or the ideas you put forth. The simple fact is the vast majority of professions will see people doing better when there is some accountability. With out accountability things go down the crapper in a hurry. Being held accountable for teaching unsound material is not akin to doing away with academic freedom, not even close. I personally don’t believe a prof ought to teach unsound things nor should a taxpayer funded institution defend his doing so, but to each his own.

One thing you learn quickly at a university is why most of academia outside of the hard sciences is a joke to working people outside of it. The aggrandizement of the academy that some have put forth on this thread only exists within its own walls.

Geno
February 21, 2009, 07:25 PM
I guess in some colleges. I'm in my 5th year as a graduate professor in Detroit. I speak my mind quite directly everywhere I go, especially to the tree-huggin'-critter-petters.

I challenge them to offer up supports for their position, other than their own "affirmation bias". Not one anti ever has been able to offer up an original letter penned by a Founding Father which would support their bias.

Fight them on their own terms...evidence...and there ain't none there.

Doc2005

BunnyPuncher
February 21, 2009, 07:44 PM
Academic freedom is not a total lack of accountability for what you say or the ideas you put forth. The simple fact is the vast majority of professions will see people doing better when there is some accountability.

The problem is of course who decides. While I'm sure you would be comfortable in setting what the bounds of appropriate discourse are, they would probable only be acceptable to you. In my faculty we have this lovely nugget of bureaucratic genius known as the AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business) that attempts to ensure that all programs meet certain requirements. Schools line up to grab this lovely accreditation, spend buttloads of money, waste hundreds of man hours of labor time, tweak their course schedule, pay their fees and it has no impact on how we teach our classes (except that we usually get a few more courses out of it. More courses, more faculty, more meetings, more admin, more fees, win win win.) Primary education is "accountable" out the gills and is a disaster. Teachers have set curricula, set texts, set lesson plans, set evaluations, set performance appraisals, set testing etc. Works wonders don't it? Are you satisfied with your public schools? Higher ed (in some faculties) is slowly creeping towards this.

I'll take the academy's "herd of cats" approach over the goose steppers in primary ed any day.

Girodin
February 21, 2009, 08:20 PM
I dont think I should decide nor do I want to. Although I can choose what I personaly object to and will personaly speak up about. If i was a Floridia tax payer I would take real issue with it and be well with in my place to speak up and call for this gentleman and his teaching to be checked. Pretending it is open end on one hand or over regulated on the other is false dichotomy and a logicaly flawed arguement. As you pointed out there are already measures in place at your insitution and in fact at every institution. So we are back to what academic freedom really is supposed to mean. It is not a total lack of acountability. Free rein is also not the solution to improved education, far from it.

Are you satisfied with your public schools?

I went to private schools and public schools. The private ones have real accountability, if teachers underpreformed they lost their jobs. Who determined underperformance? The school but of course parents payin 10k a year had a voice in whethter their expectations of a quality education were being met. The probablem with public schools was that horrible teachers couldn't be fired; they were very protected by their unions. This was a bigger problem than anything else I saw in my time spent in public school.

Girodin
February 21, 2009, 08:25 PM
Oh and I did some extensive studying on the determinents of success in primary education when I was intenring at my states legislature. None of the factors you listed were even on the radar for determining preformance. The biggest factor is a parents involvement in the childs schooling. Probably because they can help their student but also they are on top of what a teacher is doing.

alsaqr
February 21, 2009, 08:27 PM
Nobody in this thread could probably come close to completing a PhD. I bet none of you even completed graduate school.

WRONG!!!
Matter of fact I hold two graduate degrees. Am also close to a DBA.

alsaqr
February 21, 2009, 08:49 PM
2. a. b. and c are notions from professor Bellesiles dirty little book, Arming America. Bellesiles was criticized, investigated and was forced to resign from Emory University.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/28713.html

Geno
February 21, 2009, 08:59 PM
Fellas. Education ought never be used either as a weapon, or as a bragging right! If I hadn't received a full-ride for my Ph.D., I never could have afforded it!

Regarding the smarts needed, I can tell you all first hand, doctoral school isn't "difficult". Peggy Hawley nailed it: Ph.D.s have street savvy. It just takes time, and sustained effort.

Nearly every adult human I know if fully capable of completing doctoral school.

Let's keep this to the 2nd.

Geno

ThrottleJockey
February 21, 2009, 10:45 PM
So, has anyone written this sack of sh** yet? Post a copy here if you have!

Defense Minister
February 21, 2009, 11:05 PM
How many of you guys who are whinin' about this guy have sent him an email politely telling him what you think?

hso
February 22, 2009, 12:41 AM
It is unlikely that sending a polite email to the instructor will have any beneficial results.

What is more likely to have a worthwhile outcome is to use the information in the Reason article and the fact that out of 10 amendments in his outline only one has more than a line devoted to it to craft a brief note to his department head.

Everyone's entitled to develop their own opinion, but no one is entitled to make up their own "facts".

David904
February 22, 2009, 01:09 AM
Holy moley... I went to TCC and took a class from that very professor. He's a kook of the highest order and a control freak. Fidget at all in his class and he throws a fit. He definitely sees himself as "the sage on the stage." Don't even think of disagreeing with anything he says. His word is canon.

I get sewing machine leg if I don't run every day (not bad... just a little.) One day he jumped down my throat accusing me of being distracting and disrespectful because of this. I recognized him for the nut-job that he is and transferred to a different class.

ETA: I used to be a teacher so I understand the strains of the profession. However, this professor is ridiculous.

MarkDido
February 22, 2009, 01:22 AM
"Just from that one page, I personally think he should be fired for such blatant opinionation. He's teaching history, not political theory."

If every prof got fired for spewing their opinion, there would be no professors left.

You say that like it's a bad thing..... ;)

MarkDido
February 22, 2009, 01:27 AM
Originally posted by Phish

"He teaches at a community college. It is not a requirement to have attended graduate school."

Serious? Every one of my instructors when I was in junior college had at least a masters.

Let's not rag on this guy for having a PhD.

Nobody in this thread could probably come close to completing a PhD. I bet none of you even completed graduate school.

And I'm sure he really wants his personal information broadcasted all over the internet. Especially to a bunch of heated up gun fanatics.

Boy are YOU on the wrong message board.

Insert foot, chew vigorously, withdraw stump.....

David904
February 22, 2009, 01:43 AM
No Masters Degree... yet. I'm currently pursuing mine in Anesthesia (CRNA). And as for the statement that one would be embarrassed to teach at a CC with a PhD.... That's kind of short sighted.

Some folks don't want to exist under the dictum of "publish or perish" which is an intrinsic element of life as a prof. at a university. By and large, I encountered outstanding professors at TCC. They were concerned with doing nothing but teaching. We were not intrusions on their research time. We were their sine qua non.

Dr. Barry was just a real dick. Sorry. That was not very high road of me, but there it is. He came from Philadelphia (if I remember correctly) and claimed to have been a collegiate athlete (basketball.) He was arrogant and pedantic. A number of us in his class were just disgusted with the guy - and we were all in our late 20s to mid 30s. So we were not cocky kids. We had been around the world a bit and were not quite as malleable as he wished. I saw it cause some friction in the classroom. One guy who sat behind me, a former Army Ranger, was invited to leave his class because he politely voiced his disagreement on a topic. I wanted this professor's head on a stick, but I had bigger fish to fry and degree to pursue. I was just glad to get out of his class relatively unscathed.

Girodin
February 22, 2009, 05:09 AM
t is the tradition of the institution (royal we there) to allow academic freedom.

David904's tale of his experience in this mans class further underscores the fact that if true academic freedom is to exist there must be oversight of profs. This man bullying students and crushing dissenting views is in fact the very antithesis of academic freedom, the tradition of which you so vigorously argue must be preserved. Profs like this guy have undone that tradition and defending him by appealing to it is not only erroneous but highly ironic.

leadcounsel
February 22, 2009, 09:32 AM
Find out the professors name at the college and report him to the dean - he is teaching something that is inconsistent with the recent Heller decision.

Deanimator
February 22, 2009, 09:41 AM
Heller says he's wrong, and that's the end of it.

He might as well claim that the 13th Amendment protects the right to own slaves.

Deanimator
February 22, 2009, 09:46 AM
2. a. b. and c are notions from professor Bellesiles dirty little book, Arming America. Bellesiles was criticized, investigated and was forced to resign from Emory University.
It was an acquaintance from usenet, Clayton Cramer, who did the grunt work in showing Bellesiles up as the pathological liar and academic fraud that he truly is. We all owe Clayton a debt of gratitude.

Kansan
February 22, 2009, 09:57 AM
This is what they're teaching in college nowadays.

Not my college... At West Point, they issued every student an M14 to keep in our rooms and made us qualify on M16's every year. There was an active shooting club and they offered us the chance to buy a class pistol (1911) upon graduation. Most of the instructors were military and I never heard any drivel about the 2nd Amendment not being about individual rights.

Double Naught Spy
February 22, 2009, 09:58 AM
David904's tale of his experience in this mans class further underscores the fact that if true academic freedom is to exist there must be oversight of profs.

oversight = freedom? That is quite the oxymoron

armoredman
February 22, 2009, 10:33 AM
I do not have a degree, went to college for a few years, then went to work. Currently one of those knuckle dragging government employee thugs. So, I am SURE my opinion is quite worthless here.
...I *demand* to be able to teach my classes any way I see fit...
I'm paying for this class, I demand a quality education on the facts. Public schools are taxpayer funded. When I went to college, it was on my own dime. Opinions I can get in debate class. The professor in question needs to be retaught the basics. Any employee who drives customers away, (paying students), is in grave danger of costing the school money.

qwert65
February 22, 2009, 10:47 AM
Thats why I like the sciences, you can't just say "this is the way it oughta work" or you get called on it pretty quick. I had 2 english teachers in undergrad, one taught english, the other taught, "english and since you';re here I'll bitch about the current administration" One did her job, the other didn't

David904
February 22, 2009, 02:58 PM
Oversight does not necessarily negate freedom - if you never really had it to begin with. When you work for a company, you are beholden to their rules. Now they may be loosely applied, but when push comes to shove, you have to toe the party line. A university/college/school is a business that has employees. And all these employees be they professors or physical plant people must abide by the rules of their employer.

I agree that professors need to have a great degree of latitude in order to be able to teach effectively and imaginatively. However, they must be required (upon pain of termination) to teach THE TRUTH - not what they wish was the truth. Colleges are supposed to be institutions of higher learning, not indoctrination centers.

Cannonball888
February 22, 2009, 04:09 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v45/Cannonball888/tallahasseecc.jpg

green country shooter
February 22, 2009, 06:59 PM
I am a college history teacher. That's not how I teach the 2nd amendment, so it's not how "they" do it. It's one person.

Also, I was a little unclear whether the material posted is the teacher's outline or notes from a student.

General Geoff
February 22, 2009, 08:37 PM
It's the teacher's outline.

Girodin
February 23, 2009, 12:31 PM
oversight = freedom? That is quite the oxymoron

Only if you think of it very shallowly. Take any other freedom as an example. The freedom of speech wont really exist without government oversight of peoples actions. Otherwise someone can easily come and forcibly stop you from speaking writing etc.

Or better yet take your right to due process under the law. Are you going to tell me that it exists without oversight of law enforcement and the courts?

Oversight by some entity, and one with the power to command/coerce is need to preserve the existence of any freedom this is pretty much the reason we have a government.

At the end of the day you have your freedoms because there is someone there to prevent others from denying them to you. If there is no one to stop a professor from crushing dissenting opinions and from bullying students that question things (questioning things there is a novel idea in education) then academic freedom will not exist if a professor does so.

Travis Bickle
February 23, 2009, 12:54 PM
This kind of political proselytizing has been going on in "history" classes for decades. Back in the early 70's when I went to college I had an American History instructor tell us on the first day of class that no one would believe in God before they got through her class. This is the same kind of propaganda masquerading as history. However much of the history I learned was accurate in those days. It's gotten much worse since the 70's. I transferred to another college and I was a history major. I learned traditional, non-PC history there. And to be frank about it that dingbat that wrote this syllabus doesn't know anything about US history. Guns were considered essential to a free society by our founding fathers and I can prove that they thought that all day long. Take a look at the constitutions of the various states if you want concrete evidence. Our national bill of rights was put in to copy the way our rights were spelled out in the state constitutions. The idea that no one thought guns were for citizens is absurd.

I'm planning on going back to school, and this is the reason I'll be sticking to mathematics and hard sciences. There's not much commie propaganda you can shove into a class about physics. It's really a damn shame, because I would've loved to get a degree in history or literature.

Girodin
February 23, 2009, 12:54 PM
A further note about "the truth" being taught. Often times there is not "the truth" in many of the social sciences. There are a lot of theories. Many of them conflicting. At times the problem isn’t teaching “the truth” it is teaching that such a thing exists. For example there are arguments to be made that Heller was an erroneous decision. Presenting the arguments for and against is useful exercise.

I for example was able to engage in a stimulating debate at my university over whether Parker (which became Heller) was sound. In particularly we debated whether the ruling violated the precedent of the Miller case. Material from the Brady Brunch called “Mangling Miller” was even distributed but so was material presenting the other side. I was allowed to come before the class and present arguments to the contrary and engage in a formal debate with another student on the matter (the class consensus seemed to be that I won handedly BTW). Latter that was the topic of a test essay. Our professor had made very clear what his position was. I wrote an essay that refuted his position and received an A. What was important was the strength of the arguments and an understanding of the issues at hand not forcedly what conclusion one came to. I understood the BB’s arguments, be able to do so is important. Agreeing with them is not. I am a political opposite of that professor. We often interpret the same facts differently but I learned a great deal from him and came away from his class better for taking it.

As I said to begin with often there isn’t forcedly a truth or that truth may be widely disputed. A good professor will help his students particularly at a intro level like this understand the various sides to an issue. As opposed to indoctrinating them.

eye5600
February 23, 2009, 02:02 PM
Everyone in my family, including my children, has attended one of those gol-durned New England Liberal Arts Colleges, so I have some basis for saying that the problem here is not so much anti-gun craziness as plain bad scholarship. Professors with tenure are hard to get rid of, but every now and then we have the spectacle of some idiot getting thrown out of a university for spouting nonsense.

I'd like to point out that some of the "facts" offered in posts on this thread are also incorrect. For example, accuracy was pretty much non-existent in long arms until the rifled barrel became common in the 19th century, after the Constitution was written.

Deanimator
February 23, 2009, 02:07 PM
I'd like to point out that some of the "facts" offered in posts on this thread are also incorrect. For example, accuracy was pretty much non-existent in long arms until the rifled barrel became common in the 19th century, after the Constitution was written.
Perhaps you mean accuracy in MILITARY long arms. The Pennsylvania rifles used on the frontier were MORE than adequate in accuracy, as many British officers learned to their [momentary] regret.

Travis Bickle
February 23, 2009, 02:12 PM
I'd like to point out that some of the "facts" offered in posts on this thread are also incorrect. For example, accuracy was pretty much non-existent in long arms until the rifled barrel became common in the 19th century, after the Constitution was written.


IIRC, the continental army had rifles, and this was one of its major advantages over the British, who had smooth bore muskets.

Anyway, if the continental army was equipped with rifles, I'm sure they were not uncommon in colonial America.

Deanimator
February 23, 2009, 03:12 PM
IIRC, the continental army had rifles, and this was one of its major advantages over the British, who had smooth bore muskets.
No, the Continental Army mostly had muskets similar to those issued by the British; French Charleville and British Brown Bess types. Civilian militiamen on the other hand possessed significant quantities of rifles, many of which were used in the war. It would be the equivalent of National Guardsmen bringing commercial hunting rifles to war, not up to the abuse which a military rifle could take, but far more accurate and at far greater ranges.

Duke of Doubt
February 23, 2009, 04:53 PM
In college I took a course on nuclear warfare. Shoot, I thought it was going to be a practical, how-to thing, maybe with a laboratory portion.

But no; it was taught by a surprisingly very nice fellow somewhere to the left of Jane Fonda on the political spectrum. Now, at that particular stage in my intellectual development, my idea of foreign policy best could be summarized as "launch on warning." I was not at all hidden about my ideas. However, I presented them with humor and without confronting the professor personally. I immeditely gained "cred", as I was not then a survivor type -- when not at college I lived right in the heart of a major metropolitan area, and would, together with another student similarly situated, be among the first to vaporize in the event of a general exchange (the professor surveyed the class for this determination).

The class became a delight!

The professor and I became a campus hit. People audited the class just to watch. I actually learned quite a lot in that class, and altered my thinking about a few things. I wrote a brilliant final essay, and earned an A. That professor actually gave very few As, and most of those who aped his political ideas earned mediocre grades. I don't think I was a token, as the professor wrote a very flattering and touching personal note in my essay binder, which he knew I would not see until after graduation and my departure for home.

I guess what I'm saying is that while there are a lot of bad ideas in academe, and a lot of groupthink, the realities as I expereinced them at a small private liberal arts college aren't nearly so oppressive as a lot of insecure and narrow minded conservatives seem to think and frequently say that it is.

hso
February 23, 2009, 04:56 PM
Too much drift.

If you enjoyed reading about "This is what they're teaching in college nowadays." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!