Foreseeably, diversity stalls out

Ideal diversity, the quest for a prescribed rainbow of race and ethnicity, is making little headway at CU, the Denver Post reported on Aug. 17. Who's surprised? You can't make water run uphill. Despite President Hank Brown's diversity task force, a new vice-chancellor dedicated to the issue, and 80-plus diversity programs at a cost of $22 million, people are going to do what they're going to do about higher education (and many other life choices). Nor is that a bad thing. No less an acute social observer than Harvard's Robert Putnam -- hardly a conservative -- reports data that highlight the downside of diversity-by-design, according to a column last week by Daniel Henninger of the Wall Street Journal.

When that downside is pushed to an extreme by well-intended schemes that ignore groups' aversion to mixing, mass bloodshed can result, as military historian Ralph Peters bluntly reminds us in a not-for-the-squeamish National Review piece, "Better than Genocide: Ethnic Cleansing in Human Affairs." (See print edition 8/13/07, or this link; subscription required.)

The keynotes for a free and good society, all history teaches us, are individual liberty and individual responsibility, not engineered social mixing. America has largely lost sight of that truth, however. Our state and nation need leaders with the moral courage to say it and the political skills to enact it as policy.

We the people can take one step by petitioning to the 2008 ballot, and then adopting, the Colorado Civil Rights Initiative.

[Cross-posted at the Gang of Four blog on PoliticsWest.com]

Rot in academia

As a former university professor I readily agree with John Andrews about the intellectual rot at CU. Sadly, it is not just at CU, but everywhere. These angry leftist anti-American, anti-military, anti white-male, sanctimonious multicultural intellectual frauds have entrenched themselves in most universities. Don’t believe me? Just look at any liberal arts catalog today. You can not only major in “Women Studies” “Chicano Studies” “Black Studies” etc. but they are required courses for all liberal arts graduates. Of course if you want to take a break from leftist propaganda you can always get college credit for jogging, walking, bowling and square dancing. If you want something perhaps a little more “intellectual” you can always take “film” or “history of rock and roll”.

Wow. Forget about Aristotle, Beethoven or Shakespeare; let’s listen to every soundtrack of the Rolling Stones and get college credit! There has got to be a course on the benefits of pot smoking somewhere; and if not, I know that the course will be offered shortly. After all, they offer “history of pornography” and “your sexual self” for credit, so why not?

Yes, folks: these are your tax dollars going to support these loony tunes so our children and/or next generation can’t read, write or think. But you can be sure that they have been brainwashed to hate all the values that you hold dear. The patients have taken over the asylum and will go down kicking and screaming. The dumbing-down continues with a vengeance.

And if you don’t believe me, just ask any college student basic questions like, “who wrote the Declaration of Independence?” or “what is the chemical formula for table salt?” or “who invented the telephone?” or “when was the Korean War?” or “what is the Dow Jones industrial average?” They will just stare at you, if they can pay attention that long before turning on their iPod.

As Dennis Prager rephrased the famous quote from Winston (not Ward) Churchill: "Never have so many paid so much for so little."

Why do universities run down America?

Western Civ project at CU featured in Claremont briefing The Denver office of the Claremont Institute held another in its public policy luncheon series on May 23, drawing a capacity audience to hear the latest on a newly launched Center for Western Civilization that cuts against the grain of leftist multiculturalism at the University of Colorado. The discussion was all the more timely after recent news stories about indoctrination of CU freshmen and a possible reprieve for Prof. Ward Churchill. Below are the program invitation and two earlier news stories about the center. Notice two GOP regents' know-nothing comments at the very end.

--------------------------------------------------------------------- Invitation & Program

Dear Friend: The Claremont Institute believes in the goodness of America. We encourage leaders and institutions to value America as it was meant to be. But most American universities fall short of that standard. How did this happen, and what can be done about it? We’ll discuss the issue at the next Claremont luncheon. We urge you to attend.

Speakers: Classics Prof. Christian Kopff & CU Regent Tom Lucero Representing: Center for Western Civilization at CU-Boulder Discussion: A New Day at the University of Colorado? When: Wednesday, May 23, 12 noon – 130pm Where: University Club, 1673 Sherman Street, Denver Tickets: $25 per person

It’s not ordained that campuses have to be adversarial to the society that sponsors them. No society can long survive if educators and students take that stance. Regent Lucero and Prof. Kopff are doing something about it at CU. Please come, hear their report, raise your concerns, and learn what you can do.

Kopff (L) and Lucero fired up the luncheon attendees. Earlier milestones in the progress of their center are given in the following press accounts

---------------------------------------------------------------------- Western Civilization Center to Grow Story, Boulder Daily Camera 4/23/07

A University of Colorado center that focuses on Western civilization has plans to grow next year, bringing more prominent speakers to the campus, training educators across the state and awarding certificates — which are like minors — to students. The expansion of the center partly will be possible by an unprecedented funding decision made by the regents and support from top CU leaders.

Academic centers on CU's campus — and at higher-education institutions nationwide — are commonly paid for by donors or foundations that support their missions. CU's own Center for Western Civilization receives $5,000 a year from the College of Arts and Sciences where it is housed and has secured $23,000 in donations.

The regents, at their meeting last week in Colorado Springs, unanimously approved a measure that will direct an extra $22,000 in donated money to the center every year. On top of that, the Western civilization center will receive $86,000 in earnings already accumulated from the endowment, which does not have specific instructions from the donor as to how it should be spent. The unrestricted Thomas G. Corlett Memorial Fund was set up for "the best interest" of the university, according to CU.

Regent Michael Carrigan, D-Denver, briefly questioned whether the money for the center was going toward promoting conservative thought. "I don't know of any funds that are being dedicated to conservative thought," CU President Hank Brown said at the meeting. The study of classics, Brown said, is neither conservative nor liberal.

Carrigan added an amendment to the measure, which was unanimously supported by his colleagues on the board, that will require the university to review in five years whether the donated money should continue going to the center.

In its first years, the Center for Western Civilization has hosted speakers on the campus, including Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Gordon Wood, and ran a two-week institute for 25 junior faculty members on the principles of America's founding.

The center is planning a two-day symposium in the fall with the C.S. Lewis Foundation on the role of religion in academic life. It also wants to expand its work with public and private schools to strengthen the study of Western civilization, helping students and teachers to understand its core values. Eventually it hopes to sponsor a distinguished visiting professor to teach and give public lectures.

President Brown asked that developing the Western civilization certificate program be a priority on the Boulder campus this year. Developing it was among 14 clearly outlined goals that he set for Chancellor Bud Peterson.

The expansion of Western civilization studies, though, has sparked some controversy at CU this school year.Four Republican regents in December, two of whom were finishing their service, introduced a measure that sought to set up an even larger Western civilization department on the campus. Several faculty members said the regents stepped out of bounds by not first consulting with them about the proposed department.

The university, recognizing that curriculum issues should start at the faculty level, decided instead to look into whether money would be available for such a department.

School officials expressed piqued interest in civic literacy after a report released last fall gave CU students — and the average college senior nationwide — failing grades for even a basic understanding of American government, history and economics.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- CU to Consider Regents' Western Civ Proposal Story, Boulder Daily Camera 12/5/06

University of Colorado officials today will consider launching a new Western Civilization department, which some regents say would help the school strengthen its basic curriculum.

The measure was introduced Monday and is being carried by four Republican regents, two of whom are finishing their service on the board this month. The measure says that the new department will be adopted by campuses no later than fall 2008.

But, Regent Michael Carrigan, a Denver Democrat, said there should have been faculty and student discussion before the measure was introduced. He is asking his colleagues to hold off on setting a date and first have school-wide discussions about the proposed department.

"I believe that a great books and classics program is worth exploring," Carrigan said. "However, I think that it is a discussion that should involve everyone in the university community."

School officials have increased their focus on civic literacy after a report released this fall gave CU students — and the average college senior nationwide — failing grades for even a basic understanding of American government, history and economics.

The measure up for consideration loosely defines what would fall into the Western Civilization studies and says it would include "history, principles, achievements and shortcomings."

Tom Lucero, a Republican from Johnstown who is among the regents who brought the measure forward, said elected officials would leave it to the faculty to define what would be taught. Lucero has been a proponent of Western Civilization studies, but the university has not been able to make it a part of its core curriculum, he said.

"The faculty has said it would be too labor intensive," Lucero said. Other resolution sponsors include regents Jerry Rutledge, Pete Steinhauer and Steve Bosley.

Separately, CU President Hank Brown has asked Boulder Chancellor Bud Peterson to develop a new Center for Western Civilization program on the Boulder campus. It is among 14 clearly outlined goals that the president set for the chancellor this year. The program would allow CU students to earn a certificate, which is similar to a minor, in the field. -------------------------------------------------------------------- So what happened at the Dec. 5 meeting? According to a report in the Colorado Daily on 12/6/06, the board postponed discussion of the resolution “so other regents could study it further.” Opponents were quoted in the Daily as follows:

“Regent Cindy Carlisle (D) questioned if a core course, rather than a whole department, might be more effective at teaching a broad array of students. ‘I am sympathetic to the idea of teaching “civic literacy,” as it’s called, (but) this seems to be pretty far out there in terms of teaching literacy.’”

“Regent Paul Schauer (R) questioned what ‘western civilization’ even means. ‘Is it western hemisphere? Is it western hemisphere north of the equator?’”

“Regent Pat Hayes (R) said the resolution leaves too many open-ended questions. ‘I would like to see something that makes more sense, because this resolution makes no sense.’”

Denial a comfy refuge for educrats

By Krista Kafer (krista555@msn.com) A man left the doctor’s office in disgust after the doctor suggested he exercise, lose weight, eat right, and quit smoking. The man wanted a simple prescription that would enable him to feel better. The doctor, however, said medication would have limited impact if the man refused to change his lifestyle. Refuse he did. In search of a diagnosis that agreed with his lifestyle, the man made an appointment with another doctor. Sound familiar? Education special interests perennially seek a cure-all—usually more money—to solve the public system’s malaise.

They dismiss advice to do the very things that will make the system healthy such as opening the system to competition and parental choice. Only school choice can establish a framework for innovation, specialization, and the replication of successful strategies. Much like a healthy lifestyle, it is the foundation that enables other interventions to work as intended.

Solutions like research-based reading programs, site-based management, Core Knowledge programs, parental involvement, alternative certification, on-line education, post-secondary connections, etc. are much more likely to succeed in a choice environment. In Colorado, for example, a strong charter school law and high parent demand has encouraged the opening of numerous Core Knowledge schools, additional elementary schools with phonics-based reading programs, on-line schools, several early college high schools, and the creation of alternative certification programs to meet the demand for new talent.

True, these types of reforms can exist without choice but they are more likely to where there is 1) demand, and 2) a system that enables reformers to create opportunities to meet the demand. Public school open enrolment, charter school laws, state-funded vouchers, and tax credits allow parents to choose (demand) and give entrepreneurial individuals the opportunity to meet the demand (supply) by opening new schools, adding additional seats at high achieving schools, replicating successful designs, and revamping existing schools.

It doesn’t take a degree in economics to see how this works. I recently offered one of many logical applications for it in connection with the "boy crisis in classrooms -- see a summary here and the full text here.

Yet the left-of-center Education Sector insists in a misguided critique of my paper that choice supporters “persist in claiming that choice is some kind of magical panacea for every educational problem imaginable demonstrate their unseriousness and raise false expectations for choice initiatives in a way that ultimately undermines their case.”

Choice is no panacea. There are no panaceas. It is, however the essential component of a healthy system and that which enables other strategies to flourish.

With that in mind, check out the new report by the Institute for Justice and the American Legislative Exchange Council that analyzes on a state-by-state basis the state constitutionality of voucher and tax credit programs (the US Supreme Court has ruled both consistent with the US Constitution). All but two states (MI and MA) have constitutions that allow vouchers and/or tax credits.

So what’s stopping us from injecting a dose of healthy parental choice into education? Misinformation spread by well funded unions, other special interests, and the politicians they own leads many astray. We need to get the word out that parental choice is beneficial, constitutional, and essential to our way of life. Truth is the antidote to lies.

Parental choice can remedy 'boy crisis' in education

By Krista Kafer (krista555@msn.com) And now for a quick quiz:

Which gender is more engaged in school? A) Boys B) Girls

Which is more successful? A) Boys B) Girls

Which is more likely to graduate from high school and college? A) Boys B) Girls

Which is less likely to engage in self-destructive behavior? A) Boys B) Girls

The answer is B) Girls for all four questions. Girls outperform boys on most indicators of academic excellence. Boys are more likely to engage in self-destructive behavior than girls. Surprised? Probably not. High-profile articles in Newsweek and other media outlets have elevated the boy crisis to one of national attention.

Only hardcore feminists and politicians continue to perpetrate the myth of the shortchanged girl. Congress, ever the slow student, continues to fund the Women’s Educational Equity Act to help supposedly beleaguered girls. Feminists wring their hands over the fact that there are more male engineers. Meanwhile, a third of senior high school boys cannot read a newspaper with understanding.

Here are a few more interesting facts from a new paper about this issue, authored by yours truly and published by the Independent Women’s Forum, one of my favorite organizations.

Engagement: In general, girls are more engaged and ambitious in school. They are more likely to get good grades. Girls are more likely to be in gifted and talented classes and to take Advanced Placement exams. They are more likely to do their homework. Girls have higher hopes and ambitions for school. Boys, on the other hand, are more likely to get Ds and Fs, and the gap has widened since 1996. They are also more likely to repeat a grade. Boys account for roughly two-thirds of the students receiving special education services

Achievement: In terms of achievement, girls hold a significant advantage in reading and writing while boys hold a marginal advantage in math and science. A third of high school senior boys score below the basic level in reading meaning they cannot read a newspaper with understanding. While small contrasts between subgroups are inevitable annually, large disparities, particularly in the foundational skills of writing and reading, are reason for concern.

Graduation and College: In high school, young women are more likely aspire to go to college. They are also more likely to enroll in post-secondary education right after high school and to complete their post-secondary education. Altogether, women attain 58 percent of college degrees and outnumber men in the number of associate’s, bachelor’s and master’s degrees. Only among doctorate degree earners do men slightly outnumber women.

Risk Behavior: More boys than girls struggle academically and experience behavioral problems.

● Boys are more likely to do drugs, drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes. ● Boys are three times as likely as girls to be suspended or expelled. ● Boys aged 16 to 24 are more likely to be unemployed. ● Boys are more likely to be incarcerated. ● Boys are more likely to commit suicide or to be homicide victims. ● Boys are more likely to drop out of high school.

What’s the solution? I should make you read the whole paper, but here’s a taste: I propose more school choice because only school choice can establish a framework for innovation, specialization, and the replication of successful strategies. There are schools – both public and private – that excel in helping boys and girls achieve. School choice (through charter school laws, vouchers, and tax credits) enables parents to choose these schools. Without choice, students remain in environments where they struggle and the system has no incentive to change.