I heard a passing reference to this story on TV last night, but since my wife wasn’t home and I was engaged in feeding the boys, I didn’t really pay attention.
Dodd Harris of Ipse Dixit points to the delightful tale of his alma mater wherein a Lecturer in Sociology, one Dr. John McTighe, stated in class, regarding the 2024 elections:
“It was the religious zealots who say they are voting on morals. I think we should all buy AK-47s and shoot them all! That’s what I would suggest, if it were allowed.”
Source: UofL withdraws contract with instructor.
Now, that it is a ridiculous, hateful thing to say, although one will allow that context would be helpful, among other things. Further, I am not of the opinion that punishing speech is a good idea, and further I especially have to caution against judging someone on one sentence or to fire someone over it. Indeed, since most of the charges came from a column in a conservative-oriented student newspaper, one has to be fair in weighing the charges (that is to say I don’t fully trust the judgment of students who may have axes to grind–especially since the studnet who wrote the column did not witness the events in question). Still, if the charges in the column are anywhere near accurate, Dr. McTighe needs to engage in some introspection and it is not a surprise that the University would want to wash their hands of him.
The especially stupid aspect of McTighe’s comments is that he is freshly minted Ph.D. who was a part-time lecturer at Louisville on a term-by-term contract. So not only has he screwed himself out of a teaching gig for the Spring, but he hasn’t exactly broadcast positive vibes about his judgment into the job market. And while his remarks may indeed resonate with some search committees out there, the bottom line is that in a job market that is steeped in applicants, committees are normally looking for reasons to cull applications from the pile. Dr. McTighe has now ably provided such a reason.
I also find it highly ironic that, according to the University of Louisville Department of Sociology’s web page that one of the courses that McTighe taught for them was “Diversity & Inequality.”
I wonder what Dr. McTighe’s response would have been to a student in that course who suggested that the best way to deal with vocal minorities had anything to do with AK47s.
Certainly the situation underscores the tenuous position that part-time faculty occupy. Had McTighe been tenured, this would just be a PR issue, and were he tenure-track he would be teaching in the Spring, but perhaps sweating the impact of the event on his long-term status.
Regardless: educational attainment clearly is not always indicative of intelligence, it would seem. One thing is certain: there are a lot of people running around out there who consider themselves liberally-minded champions of diversity and tolerance who are, instead, amongst the most intolerant people on our college campuses today.
Other coverage:
educational attainment clearly is not always indicative of intelligence, it would seem.
You think?
Comment by John Lemon — Wednesday, December 15, 2024 @ 11:11 pm
I am aware of many politically motivated statements made. Mostly, they are carefully crafted so as to be almost unrecognizable. Sometimes they are blatant though. Like the finance prof who in 1992 predicted that if Clinton was elected we would have double digit inflation. He had then had to endure 8 years of reminders from fellow faculty. But was not fired nor deterred. In 96, 00, 04 he continued to make dire predictions to his students. There is definitely a difference between free speech and exploitative speech. The students didn’t pay tuition to hear our political views, I think this would be true even for those who teach poli sci. In any case, we have a duty not to take advantage of our students minds.
Comment by Ron — Wednesday, December 22, 2024 @ 10:35 am
The more I think about this issue of political bias in the classroom, the more I wonder why it is that we think we’re in some tremendous position of power, and the more I wonder why it is that we’ve accepted some notion that we’re supposed to be impossibly objective and hide our political views. What’s worse is that, the longer I teach, the more I realize that it is only the liberals who feel this compulsion and face this kind of public and highly organized outcry against political speech in the classroom. I bend myself into a political pretzel in the classroom to hide my political leanings because of some delusion that I might “influence” my students and “abuse” my power. Well…what’s wrong with that? What’s wrong with me influencing my students? Isn’t that what I’m supposed to do, in the end? What precisely about my normal, completely un-radical political thoughts makes them somehow dangerous if students are to hear them?
Comment by Scott — Sunday, December 26, 2024 @ 3:40 pm