In another fine way the conservatives try to
silence people who they oppose, a group
is trying to get UCLA students to tape “left wing”
professors in an attempt to “get balance” in schools.
This attempt to tape professors violates several
different laws, but of course violating laws really doesn’t
bother conservatives, because they feel they are above
that sort of thing, kinda like bush lite.
link.
news/yahool.com/s/nm/20060120/us … rsity.dc/1
lets see if I got that right?
Kropotkin
You mean like the ‘liberals’ who refused to let anything except Evolutionary theory be taught in schools (with regard to the origins of life)? The difference being that the conservatives are smart enough to do it under the guise of balance, the liberals just admitted that they were willing to censor something that threatened their way of thinking…
Again, I see each side as being as bad as the other but the Republicans as being somewhat less hypocritical…
ugh… id isn’t science so it shouldn’t be thought it science class
→ put it in philosophy, with the rest of the trash 
(j/k)
i can’t follow the link, peter, it just takes me to the main page… maybe you should check it again…
Explaining the origins of life with the theory of evolution (not adaptation but the info on which adaptation works) isn’t scientific, and so doesn’t belong in the science class…
How about directed panspermia?
lol, i read over it where you said ‘origins of life’… that’s irrelevant where it comes to evolution theory… but that’s ok, this is the wrong thread for that debate anyway 
Sure, this may not be the place, but while evolution explains adaptation, selective breeding, inheritance and so on it does not explain where the heck all this stuff came from in the first place. But I was always taught that evolution does explain the origins of life, I can only assume that the same is true in the US where the liberals are censoring the classroom (and the conservatives, it seems)…
S: You mean like the ‘liberals’ who refused to let anything except Evolutionary theory be taught in schools (with regard to the origins of life)?
W: ugh… id isn’t science so it shouldn’t be thought it science class
→ put it in philosophy, with the rest of the trash
i can’t follow the link, peter, it just takes me to the main page… maybe you should check it again…
K: UM, sorry about that. I am not too functional with these things.
try this
uclaprofs.com/studentshelp.html
Kropotkin
I also did this I googled ucla professors and it came up.
Maybe that will work also .
Kropotkin
Yes, I have been screaming about this for years. Too many professors do not teach, they are trying to indoctrinate. Albeit, neo con talk radio is trying to do the same with insults, lies and total distortions. Talk radio is not the same as the listener can just switch channels, but how do you switch of a professor who grades on attendance as well as performance???
No
The reality of Universities (here in the states at least) is that they aid in one’s quest to secure a better paying job. I am sure there are plenty of jobs related to various biblical stories (Sunday school teacher immediately springs to mind)… but a Theology major can send you on that career path. Reading Genesis isn’t going to get you hired over some Pakistani when it comes to jobs people actually want.
As for taping anything in a classroom… it can inhibit discussion. You can sell this as playing Watchman over some Liberal profs, but what it really is, is added pressure on students to guard what they think.
As for the idea of balance, I pay college tuition to to listen to people who have supposedly spent some time and effort studying a particular field. If the entire idea is to monitor classes to influence what is being taught, and if this is done by some ‘dood’ with a camcorder who doesn’t know shit… no thank you. I am not paying tuition to hear what Jerry Falwell thinks I should hear.
Yes, the problem appears when a math professor goes on a 20 minute antiBush rant, what a waste of money. Not only is the prof. talking outside her or his discipline, he or she is attempting to brainwash the students who pay bucks to learn math. Many students have complained regarding this. I told them to create a paper trail and report it to the college’s president.
This is unacceptable. I have been in many classes when this has occured, and I ticked off more than one professor for this. An instructor should not bring her or his politics or religion into the classroom. If students like the professor this may sway them to agree with the position; if they dislike the prof. this may sway them to the opposite position. Neither of which promotes critical thinking skills.
PK,
What laws precisely would taping a professor’s lecture violate? It is done all the time around here… is it illegal to tape it without the professor’s consent?
PK,
What laws precisely would taping a professor’s lecture violate? It is done all the time around here… is it illegal to tape it without the professor’s consent?"
K: Obviously I am not expert, but my understanding is
taping violates copyright laws as well as quite often
individual states (don’t know about California) have laws
prohibiting taping people without their permission.
Now let us go back in our way back machine,
two example come to mind , Linda tripp taping
monica lewensky almost led tripp to be indicted for taping and
the Bill O’Reilly and that producer who taped him, she
couldn’t release the tapes because taping O’Reilly without
his permission violated N.Y. state law.
Kropotkin
Of course copyright law is not only about the act of copying something, but also the purpose for which the copyrighted material is used. If these guys were going to distribute the tapes in full they would certainly be in violation of copyright law. However, watching the tapes for review purposes is arguably a fair use which would not violate copyright.
If Cali has a law against taping people without their permission, I suppose they’re screwed and will have to try and do it covertly… and if they ever go public with the information they couldn’t cite the tapes because they would be illegal, so they’d have to go with testimony gleaned from the tapes, which would then defeat the purpose of taping in the first place…
Hello F(r)iends,
Most tape recording laws are geared towards telephone conversations. California law prohibits the recording of conversations by phone if the parties do not give expressed consent or implied consent. It is not illegal to record class lectures unless the tape is used for distribution. The only way to keep tape recorders out of the classroom is if the school has a policy that prohibits the use of tape recorders; however, it is only enforceable within that particular school. I am about 95% certain this is entirely accurate.
So, what would lecturing professors have to hide?
-Thirst
thirst4metal:Hello F(r)iends,
Most tape recording laws are geared towards telephone conversations. California law prohibits the recording of conversations by phone if the parties do not give expressed consent or implied consent. It is not illegal to record class lectures unless the tape is used for distribution. The only way to keep tape recorders out of the classroom is if the school has a policy that prohibits the use of tape recorders; however, it is only enforceable within that particular school. I am about 95% certain this is entirely accurate.
So, what would lecturing professors have to hide?
K: Ok, thank you for the information, I really didn’t know.
I think the second part of your question needs answering.
Taping someone with the intent of finding out if they are
“Ideological pure” must have a damaging effect in the classroom.
The witch hunt is professors today, but what about tomorrow?
Why not have a witch hunt to find “ideological pure” students?
A classroom is a place to have discussion, taping and otherwise
tracking the conversation has a damping effect on the discussion.
Free discussion can only be free without monitoring.
One tends to hold back if conversation taping may used
to damage your reputation and/or career.
Kropotkin
Hello F(r)iends,
Come on Kropotkin, you’re from Cali, didn’t you attend a UC school?
I remember my admissions procedure: It’s all meant to screen for the “right” kind of student. Who decides who the “right” kind of student is? Admissions Personnel. And are these decision makers basing their decisions on school policy? Yes. And is that school policy subject to political pressure? Yes.
Do you imagine that admissions isn’t screening out “undesirables”? Do you imagine that politics doesn’t come into play on which students are selected? How so?
On the matter of conversations:
b[/b] Anything a professor states to students can come back to bite them on the ass because students (aka witnesses) can testify. b[/b] Why would anything that a professor states be damaging to his/her reputation or career? b[/b] And if it is damaging, wouldn’t it be better to have the whole thing recorded for proper context?
-Thirst
Hey, I’m all for the ID line being taught in our schools. When the parents of the high schools graduates that have been fed this crap can’t find a serious university that will accept their precious graduate into a science program, the ID shit will come to a screeching halt.
We’re already seeing that the restrictions on stem cell research is killing our R&D in the field as other countries sail right on by us.
For whatever science isn’t, there is no room for religious POV restrictions into inquiry.
How can these people not see the lessons learned from Copernicus and Gallileo? By all means, let’s stick our heads in the sand…
JT
I often taped lectures, transcribed them and sold them to fellow students. It helps to remember the exact words. Tripp etc, is a different ball game. My profs knew I was taping their lectures. Made more than a few coins doing this. Hum, I boycotted one prof, had a friend tape the class, transcribed the notes for her for free. The prof. didn’t do attendance nor grade on it, really disliked the arrogant little prick, showed up for the mid term and final and had others turn in my essay. Still earned an A-.