The Dumbing Down of College Curriculums

Let’s concede at the outset that many students find their college years enlightening and enriching. But something is rotten in the state of academia, and it is increasingly hard not to notice.

There once was a time when employers could be reasonably certain that college graduates had a basic sense of the world and, as a minimum, could write a coherent business letter. That is simply no longer the case, as some academic leaders appear ready to admit.

Harvard’s former president, Derek Bok, mildly broke ranks with the academic cheerleaders when he noted that, for all their many benefits, colleges and universities “accomplish far less for their students than they should.” Too many graduates, he admitted, leave school with the coveted and expensive credential “without being able to write well enough to satisfy employers … [or] reason clearly or perform competently in analyzing complex, nontechnical problems.”

Bok noted that few undergraduates can understand or speak a foreign language; most never take courses in quantitative reasoning or acquire “the knowledge needed to be a reasonably informed citizen in a democracy.” Despite the massive spending on the infrastructure of higher education, he conceded, it was not at all clear that students actually learned any more than they did 50 years ago.

Indeed, a recent survey of the nation’s top-ranked public universities by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni found that only nine of them required an economics course for graduation; just five required a survey course in American history; and only 10 required that students take a literature course. Despite the lip service given to “multiculturalism” on campus, the study found that: “Fewer than half required even intermediate study of a foreign language.”

This knowledge deficit has been a long time coming.

By 1990, the cost of four years at an elite private college had passed the median price of a house in the United States. But a survey sponsored by the National Endowment for the Humanities in 1989 found that a majority of college seniors would flunk even a basic test on Western cultural and historical literacy: 25 percent could not distinguish between the thoughts of Karl Marx and the United States Constitution (or between the words of Winston Churchill and those of Joseph Stalin), 58 percent did not know Shakespeare wrote “The Tempest,” and 42 percent could not place the Civil War in the correct half-century.

Most seniors were unable to identify the Magna Carta, Reconstruction, or the Missouri Compromise; they were “clearly unfamiliar” with Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice,” Fyodor Dostoevsky’s “Crime and Punishment,” and Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter From a Birmingham Jail.”

These concerns now seem almost—quaint. The fact that college students had huge gaps in their knowledge was old news by the early 1990s. But today the question is no longer whether students have learned specific bodies of knowledge; it is whether they are learning anything at all.

In their widely cited book “Academically Adrift,” Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa concluded that 45 percent of students “did not demonstrate any significant improvement in learning” during their first two years of college. More than a third (36 percent) “did not demonstrate any significant improvement in learning over four years of college.”

Traditionally, the authors wrote, “teaching students to think critically and communicate effectively” have been claimed as the “principal goals” of higher education. But “commitment to these skills appears more a matter of principle than practice,” Arum and Roksa found.

“An astounding proportion of students are progressing through higher education today without measurable gains in general skills,” they wrote. “While they may be acquiring subject-specific knowledge, or greater self-awareness on their journeys through college, many students are not improving their skills in critical thinking, complex reasoning, and writing.”

But those are precisely the skills that employers increasingly expect from college graduates. A 2013 survey of employers on behalf of the Association of American Colleges and Universities found that 93 percent of employers say that a demonstrated capacity to think critically, communicate clearly, and solve complex problems is more important than a candidate’s undergraduate major.

More than three-quarters of the prospective employers of new college graduates said they wanted colleges to put more emphasis on such basic skills as “critical thinking, complex problem solving, written and oral communication, and applied knowledge.”

Trashing the Curriculum

So how could we spend so much for so little? The most obvious answer is that colleges and universities frankly don’t care whether students learn much of anything.

Once again, Harvard’s Bok is willing to admit that administrators have few incentives to worry about something as irrelevant as student achievement because student learning can’t be monetized and doesn’t do anything to advance academic careers. “After all,” he writes, “success in increasing student learning is seldom rewarded, and its benefits are usually hard to demonstrate, far more so than success in lifting the SAT scores of the entering class or in raising the money to build new laboratories or libraries.”

There are, of course, other factors at work. The dumbing down of elementary and secondary education has made its way to the collegiate level; too many unprepared students are admitted despite their inability to do college-level work. Nearly four out of 10 college faculty now agree with the statement “Most of the students I teach lack the basic skills for college-level work.” This inevitably contributes to the flight from teaching (few professors want to teach remedial courses) and the overall lowering of standards.

This general indifference to what, if anything, students learn is embodied in the modern curriculum that enables students to study just about anything, without necessarily learning much at all. (For more from the author of “The Dumbing Down of College Curriculums” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Patriotic NFL Players Show Colin Kaepernick How to Properly Honor America

San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick has welcomed the overwhelming criticism he has received in the wake of his refusal to stand for the playing of the national anthem before NFL games.

“I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color,” Kaepernick told NFL Media Friday night following the 49ers’ preseason loss to the Green Bay Packers. “To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.”

But there are many in the league who have condemned Kaepernick’s decision to use his First Amendment rights to disrespect the anthem, which many Americans regard as a national symbol of true American values — the sort of values Kaepernick claims to want upheld for blacks. Apparently they saw it as hypocritical. Imagine that.

The day after Colin Kaepernick’s pregame demonstration, New York Giants players and staff decided to show the quarterback how true Americans conduct themselves, standing in rigid formation ahead of their game against the New York Jets.

This photo, posted on Twitter by The Record’s Tara Sullivan, captures the team’s “pretty deliberate” act of reverence:

Giants wide receiver Victor Cruz told USA Today Saturday night why he disagreed with Kaepernick’s decision to exercise his freedom of expression by spitting in the face of the country that grants him that freedom:

“I think, personally, the flag is the flag. Regardless of how you feel about the things that are going on in America today and the things that are going on across the world with gun violence and things like that. You’ve got to respect the flag and stand up with your teammates. It’s bigger than just you, in my opinion. I think you go up there. You’re with your team, and you pledge your allegiance to the flag and the national anthem as a team, and then you go about your business, whatever your beliefs are. Colin is his own man. He decided to sit down and sit out and that’s his prerogative. But from a personal standpoint, I think you have to stand out there with your team and understand that this is a game and understand that what’s going on in the country.”

Kaepernick’s former teammate, Minnesota Vikings guard Alex Boone, was also explicit in his criticism of the quarterback.

“It’s hard for me, because my brother was a Marine, and he lost a lot of friends over there,” Boone, who played with Kaepernick for five seasons, told USA Today Sunday. “That flag obviously gives (Kaepernick) the right to do whatever he wants. I understand it. At the same time, you should have some (expletive) respect for people who served, especially people that lost their life to protect our freedom.”

Boone called his former teammate’s actions “shameful.”

Kaepernick defended his decision again Sunday, saying that “a lot of things need to change” before he feels like he can stand by his country. Perhaps he could start by changing his attitude.

(For more from the author of “Patriotic NFL Players Show Colin Kaepernick How to Properly Honor America” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

50% of Americans Are Skipping Church, but Not Because They Don’t Believe in God

Most Americans know that 50 percent of the population doesn’t go to church on Sunday. Most probably think that people who don’t go to church are staying away because they don’t believe in God.

But, a large majority of Americans — 89 percent — still believe in God, and a new Pew Research Center study released this week found that a significant portion of people who don’t go to church are actually staying away for practical or social reasons, while others admit they are simply too lazy to make the effort.

Pew found that among Americans who hardly ever go to church, one-in-five claim they are too busy, and one-in-ten claim they are “too lazy” and have “gotten out of the habit.” Another 17 percent claim social concerns as the reason to stay away from church, including that they used to go to church with a friend or family member but don’t anymore.

There is good news though: Pew found that among people who go to church at least semi-frequently, 27 percent are actually going more regularly than they used to. One-in-five of those people told Pew that they have become more religious, while “Others found themselves desiring God or religion in their life or realized religion was important as they got older or grew more mature.”

The common liberal narrative on shifts in American church attendance attributes the decline in worship on unbelief — in the eyes of liberals, a good move toward a secular, post-religious America. But these new Pew numbers show the liberal narrative is wrong. And what’s even more reassuring is that the belief in God and desire for religion in some Americans is getting even stronger. (For more from the author of “50% of Americans Are Skipping Church, but Not Because They Don’t Believe in God” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

How Confused Is Our Society? Some People Now Throw ‘Divorce Parties’

If you’re curious to know just how bad the state of marriage is in this country, we now have what can accurately be referred to as “divorce season.”

Last weekend, the University of Washington published a study that captures patterns in divorces filed based on the time of year. Associate sociology professor Julie Brines and doctoral candidate Brian Serafini presented what they believe to be “the first quantitative evidence of a seasonal, biannual pattern of filings for divorce” at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association in Seattle on Aug. 21.

Divorce Season

By tracking divorce filings in the state of Washington between 2001 and 2015, the researchers found that couples are most likely to split in either August or March — after the summer and winter holiday seasons. So there are, in fact, two divorce seasons.

“People tend to face the holidays with rising expectations, despite what disappointments they might have had in years past,” Brines said in a statement. “They represent periods in the year when there’s the anticipation or the opportunity for a new beginning, a new start, something different, a transition into a new period of life. It’s like an optimism cycle, in a sense.”

The researchers concluded that the consistent pattern they observed reflects “the disillusionment unhappy spouses feel when the holidays don’t live up to expectations.”

“It was very robust from year to year, and very robust across counties,” Brines said.

The pattern persisted even after other seasonal factors, such as unemployment and the housing market, were taken into account.

Divorce Culture

This is disheartening for at least two reasons.

For one, divorce signifies the end of something that was once understood to be eternal. A covenant, if you will. But even if you don’t believe that, a civil marriage is still a considerably binding legal process. So if it’s not devastating from a moral and relational standpoint, divorce at least means financial stress and mounds of paperwork. It’s inconvenient, and therefore not ideal.

Aside from the rise in emotional and financial stress a phenomenon like “divorce season” signifies, this spike points to the normalization of divorce in American society. The consequence is even more tragic than the former.

It’s fatalistic and abhorrent to normalize divorce. Like abortion — another form of family breakdown that has become more socially accepted since the Sexual Revolution — divorce is a type of death. Namely, it is the death of a marriage, something originally and ideally conceived of as eternally binding. Also like abortion, divorce is something that has largely lost its stigma and instead has become a symbol of feminism, freedom, and independence.

Divorce Parties

The culture of divorce in America has gotten so bad that it’s actually treated as an occasion for celebration among some circles. Today, people cope with marital dissolution by throwing “divorce parties.”

Some will say that this was never really a trend, but rather a fringe fad that the media blew out of proportion (HuffPo will do what HuffPo does). Nonetheless, and I hate that this is a criterion, but “divorce party” has its own Wikipedia page. So if it’s out there, it’s definable. And if it’s definable, we can discuss it.

The very concept of a divorce party is so disgustingly objectionable that it can be rightly called subhuman. Sound too extreme? Consider this: Grief is a human practice. There used to be a way to characterize those who do not lament what is truly lamentable: barbarians. Why don’t people laugh at funerals, or when a friend is fired from a job? Because these are not occasions for celebration.

“Divorce season” and “divorce parties” are symptomatic of a culture that has become so comfortable with the suboptimal that it has embraced it.

Divorce is something to be avoided. If it can’t be avoided, then it is to be survived — never celebrated. The normalization of death — in any of its forms — is chaos. (For more from the author of “How Confused Is Our Society? Some People Now Throw ‘Divorce Parties'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump’s Campaign Begins Selling LGBT Apparel on Website

Only in the 2016 campaign, in a race full of both irony and the unexpected, could you ever hope to see a Republican candidate selling merchandise uniquely targeted to the LGBTQ community — and Donald Trump’s campaign is doing just that.

The GOP presidential nominee recently has tried to reach out to African-American voters.

“Tonight, I’m asking for the vote of every single African-American … who wants to see a better future,” Trump said Aug. 19 during a rally in Michigan. “Look how much African-American communities have suffered under Democratic rule. To those I say the following: What do you have to lose by trying something new like Trump? What do you have to lose?”

Now it seems that he is also looking to gain votes with the gay, lesbian and transgender communities.

The Trump campaign recently began selling “LGBTQ for Trump” shirts on its website.

LGBT Republicans appreciated the gesture. Some took to Twitter to express their approval.

The real estate mogul has said on numerous occasions that he is the best candidate for the LGBT community.

However, not everyone is convinced that Trump’s statements are anything more than empty words.

One of Trump’s biggest critics in the gay community is Michelangelo Signorile, The Huffington Post’s “queer voices editor-at-large.”

In a recent story, Signorile wrote that “there is absolutely no evidence anywhere of Donald Trump promoting gay ‘rights’ or talking openly about them — except to take them away.”

Trump, however, did make an effort to reach out to LGBT voters at the Republican National Convention.

The GOP nominee invited Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel, who is gay, to speak in Cleveland.

“I am proud to be gay. I am proud to be a Republican. But most of all I am proud to be an American,” Thiel said.

In his own speech, Trump said, “As your president I will do everything in my power to protect our LGBTQ citizens from a hateful foreign ideology … believe me.”

When his remark was met with applause, he said, “And I have to say, as a Republican, it is so nice to hear you cheering for what I just said. Thank you.” (For more from the author of “Trump’s Campaign Begins Selling LGBT Apparel on Website” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

American Hostage Kayla Mueller Remembered for Defending Her Faith Before ISIS

An American hostage held by ISIS for 18 months who died in captivity is being remembered as a woman of courage and compassion who even defended her Christian faith to the executioner known as “Jihadi John” . . .

“My name is Kayla Mueller. I need your help,” an exhausted Mueller said in a “proof of life” video. “I’ve been here too long, and I’ve been very sick, and it’s very terrifying here.”

The 25-year-old endured torture, rape, verbal abuse, and slave labor at the hands of ISIS, but her fellow hostages tell ABC News she never gave up hope and put the needs of other hostages above her own . . .

A former hostage from Denmark, Daniel Rye, told ABC News how Mueller stood up to one of her captors.

“One of the Beatles started to say, ‘Oh, this is Kayla and she has been held all by herself. And she is much stronger than you guys. And she’s much smarter. She converted to Islam.’ And then she was like, ‘No, I didn’t,'” Rye said. (Read more from “American Hostage Kayla Mueller Remembered for Defending Her Faith Before ISIS” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Transitioning Kids to Another Gender ‘Too Risky,’ Say Obama’s Own Experts

On Tuesday, lawyers with the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty filed a lawsuit on behalf of faith-based hospital and medical networks, and five states, against a federal regulation

that would force doctors to ignore science and their medical judgment and perform gender transition procedures on children.

Yes, on children. Now read this next part slowly:

The government does not even require Medicare and Medicaid to cover these same gender transition procedures because the Health & Human Services’ (HHS) medical experts found the risks were often too high and benefits too unclear. But any doctor citing the same evidence and their judgment in an individual case would be in violation of the new mandate and face potential lawsuits or job loss.

Correct. It’s hypocritical and agenda-laden. It’s the “other shoe dropping” in yet another HHS mandate, after the contraceptive one led to years of litigation with the Little Sisters of the Poor (for crying out loud) having to go through court hearing after court hearing on different levels of the legal system just to be able to continue to serve and care for the elderly sick and poor, without having to violate their consciences by letting their health care provider provide for contraceptives already provided for by other government programs. (Yes, it’s that simply insane.) (Read more from “Transitioning Kids to Another Gender ‘Too Risky,’ Say Obama’s Own Experts” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Soros Group Sent $1.5 Million to Help Planned Parenthood’s Fetal Harvesting PR Campaign

Liberal billionaire George Soros is one of the left’s biggest funders. And according to new documents provided by the group DCLeaks, one of his foundations sent $1.5 million to help Planned Parenthood fight allegations it was illegally profiting from harvesting fetal body parts from abortions.

Last July, The Center for Medical Progress began releasing undercover videos that exposed Planned Parenthood’s activities. The abortion mill launched a budget-blowing PR frenzy, and they needed funds to continue their pushback.

As originally reported by The Washington Free Beacon, Soros’ Open Society Policy Center (OSPC) requested $1.5 million to help Planned Parenthood’s “Fight Back Campaign.” According to the request, “in the several weeks” since the undercover videos exposing the harvesting were released in July of last week, Planned Parenthood used up nearly all of its lobbying resources…”

…[I]ts greatest need for the campaign outlined above is an immediate infusion of c4 funding. Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood, has recently secured a commitment for $2 million in c3 funds, with strong prospects for more on the c3 side. Funding for lobbying activities, however, is much harder to come by, so OSPC is uniquely situated to provide a critical resources PP will have a hard time finding anywhere else.

501(c)3 organizations are nonprofits that are not allowed to engage in officially political work. 501(c)4 organizations are allowed to endorse candidates, lobby for legislation and otherwise engage politically. Like many organizations, Planned Parenthood has both.

Media Research Center reporter Katie Yoder confirmed that OSPC received its requested funding. She reported that “[i]n a Sept. 23, 2015 memo to Soros’ U.S. Programs (USP) Advisory Board (also under the umbrella of OSF), Ken Zimmerman (USP Director) and Andrea Batista Schlesinger (USP Deputy Director)” said that OSPC “’supported’ Planned Parenthood” with the requested funds.

OSPC also funded efforts to convince U.S. Catholic Bishops to highlight looser immigration policies and environmental priorities instead of marriage and abortion during Pope Francis’s 2015 visit to America. As reported by LifeSiteNews’s John-Henry Westen, documents revealed in the DCLeaks hack showed $650,000 was given to two liberal social justice groups, PICO and Faith in Public Life.

The money was used to “[f]orm partnerships with the AFL, SEIU, and 11 faith groups during the September events in order to mobilize 10,000 people to public action and train 3,500 others as messengers of Pope Francis’ economic and racial justice agenda,” among other efforts. One of those other goals was to gain “[b]uy-in of individual bishops to more publicly voice support of economic and racial justice messages in order to begin to create a critical mass of bishops who are aligned with the Pope.”

The group is also trying to undermine and overturn pro-life laws internationally, according to more documents. The pro-life country of Ireland is a top target. (For more from the author of “Soros Group Sent $1.5 Million to Help Planned Parenthood’s Fetal Harvesting PR Campaign” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Newborn Baby Girl Named After Officer Who Saved Her Life

A newborn baby girl in Texas now shares a name with the police officer that saved her life.

Officer Natisha Lucas of the Pearland Police Department responded to a medical call from a pregnant mother on Tuesday. When Lucas arrived at the scene she found the mother in shock with the newborn baby suffering from an unknown medical complication. What Officer Lucas did next saved a life. Per the police department’s Facebook post:

The mother (still in shock) directed Officer Lucas’ attention to the newly born baby who was experiencing an unknown medical complication. Officer Lucas responded by administering first aid which led to the baby responding by moving and crying. The Pearland EMS arrived on scene and assumed care for both mother and child and transported the two to Memorial Herman for medical evaluation.

When Officer Lucas later visited the mother and baby at the hospital, the mother told Lucas she had named her baby girl A’Miracle Natisha.

Mother and baby are both fine and “resting comfortably,” according to KPRC-TV.

(For more from the author of “Newborn Baby Girl Named After Officer Who Saved Her Life” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Pro-Life Clinic Sues City to Get Next to Abortion Business

On July 5, pro-life pregnancy care center Hand of Hope was ready to become the pro-life neighbor of A Preferred Women’s Health Center in Raleigh, North Carolina — an abortion facility with thousands in regulatory fines under its belt.

Now, it’s suing the City Council for discrimination for not rezoning the lot next to the facility. The non-profit center paid $309,000 for the property, according to the lawsuit, and is suing on behalf of itself and the women and children its services would help.

“The City Council claimed that though it was the City’s plan to rezone the property just as Hand of Hope’s requested, it was premature to do so and that the City did not want to rezone their property,” Noel Sterett, an attorney for Hand of Hope, told The Stream.

“According to councilwoman Kay Crowder … the Council preferred to rezone Hand of Hope’s property at a later date as part of a larger commercial project rather than in a piecemeal fashion with small lots,” continued Sterett in an e-mail. “The City Council’s statement is belied by the fact that the City apparently and separately approved the rezoning of 4 one-to-two acre properties close by Hand of Hope’s property in a piecemeal fashion.”

Approved and Then Denied

Three city agencies approved Hand of Hope request for a rezoning that would allow it to be situated next to the abortion center, Sterett said — the Citizen Advisory Council, the city’s Zoning Staff and the city’s Planning Commission. The latter agency unanimously approved the rezoning after holding a hearing and finding that Hand of Hope’s use “was entirely consistent with the City’s comprehensive plan and the surrounding uses and fit into all of the City’s other land use policies or goals.”

The city’s attorney declined to comment to The Stream about the City Council’s decision, saying the city had not yet been served with the suit. But according to the minutes of the July 5, 2016 meeting where the Council’s decision was made, the council voted 7-0 against Hand of Hope because it did not want “lot by lot piecemeal nonresidential development.” The council wanted, in Crowder’s words, a “coordinated approach would produce a more efficient use of the land” producing higher tax value,” and the “Council believes that this dead-end street should be rezoned for such uses when all the properties along Woodsdale Road are rezoned.”

The city did not respond to The Stream’s question about why the abortion business was allowed on the street but Hand of Hope was not.

A Preferred Women’s Health Clinic is one of four facilities in a chain that has two locations in North Carolina and two in Georgia. According to Operation Rescue’s Cheryl Sullenger, “A Preferred Women’s Health Center has been cited by OSHA 13 times for violations categorized as ‘serious’ ones related to health. Fines levied were in excess of $12,000, indicating just how severe the violations actually were.” She told The Stream that the documents don’t give the details of the violations.

Sterett said that the abortion business “actively opposed Hand of Hope’s use,” and that “We are still investigating the relationships or known positions of the City Council members on the issue of abortion.” The abortion center did not respond to The Stream’s request for comment about its involvement in the debate over Hand of Hope’s request.

City Favoritism?

It appears a different city agency — the Raleigh Board of Adjustments — gave a different abortion facility a variance letting them put up a fence higher than the city regulations allowed. The center, according to pro-life testimony, asked for the variance after installing the fence at an illegal height.

According to the minutes of the Board’s May 9, 2016 meeting, approval was granted 4-1, thanks to employees and a volunteer for A Woman’s Choice of Raleigh Inc., who claimed the higher fence provided more privacy and other benefits for women getting abortions, as well as for employees. An opponent of the variance said the height would prevent him from recording legal violations at the facility, and another said he and his wife would be prevented from effectively offering adoption services to women going to and from it.

According to the Board of Adjustments, “The variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of the ordinance such that public safety is secured, and substantial justice is achieved.” The Board did say its “decision is subject to review for fraud, material misrepresentation, or other misconduct at the proceeding or for violations on the subject property,” and that “if such a determination is made by the Board, its prior decision may be reversed, modified, or affirmed.” (For more from the author of “Pro-Life Clinic Sues City to Get Next to Abortion Business” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.