[zozbot234]

> "The addition of an indigenous land acknowledgement to the syllabus."

That's one nutty request amid a bunch of more-or-less-reasonable ones. (The requested reduction in pursuing cheating cases was just as nutty, TBH.) It tells you a lot about how politicized this whole thing is, but it's not like we didn't know that already. Overall, the article author seems a bit too emotionally involved himself, in a way that's pretty hard to make sense of as just caring about good CS 101 teaching.

[thomaskcr]

I do think he's being stubborn and some of the stuff (like keeping the BMI problem when there's so many problems that are exactly the same) I think he was doing just as a middle finger.

I was an RA years ago when this stuff was being incubated by residence life. A lot of it is really reasonable but I just remember everything being punctuated with insanity and it being so difficult to even get through to people pushing it.

We had to do one on one's with our residents, in our rooms (I forget the phrasing but it was "safe-space"esque) and some of the questions we had to ask were about sexuality. These were due within the first month, so imagine being a freshman, and your RA pulls you into your room for a scheduled meeting and then starts asking you questions about your sexuality. I was just like, maybe as an optional meeting after we actually know these people but this is so unprofessional and uncomfortable. I ended up just reading the questions I wasn't explicitly going to ask at an all hands meeting and saying "I'd love to discuss these things with you one on one but I am not going to force you to talk to me about them" and even that when I turned in my one on one reports with those questions blank for basically everyone was a huge issue (I can't remember what happened to me but I remember meeting with some director, my manager and the person above my manager).

So yeah, he explicitly said "I'm not even trying to compromise" - so we already know his mind space. Can't really defend that. But I at least know why he's so angry about the whole process because I know how those discussions go.

[Spooky23]

At my university, the cheating thing was introduced as an ethnic justice issue. Iirc, the claim was that some groups of people had to collaborate on things like exams (aka cheat) so that they could overcome of cultural inertia of whatever things they were worried about.

It came to a head in a 400-level class, and the professor handled it by making the midterm and final extra credit, and giving everyone an A who showed up to every class, deducting a letter grade per absence, unless the student demonstrated that they were observing some religious or cultural observance in the university’s list of approved things. (Which included everything from major holidays to observances of Norse religious events)

That professor was able to get away with that because she had tenure and followed the letter of the law with respect to grading. Whatever the content of the argument, lecturers are serfs in the academic hierarchy and have agency or freedom. They get abused and fired every few years anyway, so if you’re in that position STFU or get drummed out.

[blaser-waffle]

> ethnic justice issue. Iirc, the claim was that some groups of people had to collaborate on things like exams (aka cheat) so that they could overcome of cultural inertia of whatever things they were worried about

Why would I hire a group who only got through their qualifications by cheating? Sounds like it may lead to more discrimination than it solves...

[dcole2929]

The cheating one is actually not as unreasonable as you might think. I would love to see more context around that specific request. Is this a case where people of being accused of cheating because they did well when the professor didn't expect it (due to being from a specific background)? Are people of specific demographics being singled out for increased scrutiny.

Additionally, combined with the request for more group work it may be a case where people are working in groups on individual work which isn't in and of itself cheating, but may have been treated as such. At my university it was encouraged for people to work in groups on those type of assignments so that people could help each other and remove some of the burden from professors and ta's

[hug]

In Australia, indigenous land acknowledgements are commonplace, and I cannot think of a single instance where they have caused any inconvenience.

I see absolutely no reason why the addition of a sentence to the header of the syllabus would be onerous.

[zozbot234]

It's not about having them on the header of a syllabus, it's why have them on a CS 101 syllabus, of all things - and just about every other syllabus in the curriculum, apparently. Do people care that much about reading: "This course is taking place on traditional X!tribe land." or whatever? How does this make any sense?

[hug]

> Do people care that much about reading: "This course is taking place on traditional X!tribe land." or whatever?

Demonstrably: Yes, or they wouldn't be asking for it.

> How does this make any sense?

It costs you nothing, or so close to nothing that there's no effective difference, and a whole heap of people appreciate it. And, in this instance, it also allows you to keep your job. It's a net positive for all involved.

Do you have a particularly good argument for anyone not doing it? (Slippery slopes need not apply.)

[DuskStar]

> Demonstrably: Yes, or they wouldn't be asking for it.

Obviously, people never ask for things they don't actually care about.

IMO this is intended as something that is both unreasonable to include AND hard to object to on any grounds but reasonableness and practicality. "Don't you care about indigenous peoples, or are you some kind of racist?" And so it provides the ability to continue objecting to someone's behavior even if they make all the other requested changes.

[zozbot234]

The best response to that is malicious compliance: make the changes, but in a way that's as reasonable as possible, and as obnoxious as possible to the people who have actually requested the change. Like, have the acknowledgment line on the syllabus be: "ᴅɪsᴄʟᴀɪᴍᴇʀ: ᴛʜɪs ᴄᴏᴜʀsᴇ ɪs ᴛᴀᴋɪɴɢ ᴘʟᴀᴄᴇ ᴏɴ ᴛʀᴀᴅɪᴛɪᴏɴᴀʟ x-ᴛʀɪʙᴇ ʟᴀɴᴅ." or something like that. If the other side objects, you can stand your ground and point out that they are being unreasonable.

[DuskStar]

Nah, you need to add some attribution there - "DISCLAIMER: THIS COURSE IS TAKING PLACE ON TRADITIONAL X-TRIBE LAND. THIS DISCLAIMER BROUGHT TO YOU BY YOUR STUDENT UNION FEES"

[hug]

That's the worst possible response! The way you want think this man should cleverly manoeuvre out of people thinking he's behaving badly is by being deliberately malicious?

You think the solution is being obnoxious and doing that in such a way that is literally exact same amount of effort as just being nice?

Then, your imaginative response when someone points out that everything you are suggesting is shitty behaviour, the answer is to point back at them and say "no you"?!

[hug]

While it's evident that some people are spiteful and ask for things they don't actually want just to be an inconvenience, I find it hard to believe that you actually think this is why every single indigenous person is asking for the acknowledgement. If you do believe that's the case, the only response I can make is that your belief runs counter to everything I've heard from indigenous people myself.

If we operate under the assumption that not every single person asking for a statement of acknowledgement is acting under bad faith, it's important to note that you haven't actually presented any reason about why it would be unreasonable to include.

Without a cogent argument against the inclusion of the statement, it's very sensible to point to the refusal to include the acknowledgement, and say "this person is refusing to do this simple kindness we have asked for, which makes him a bit of a jerk".

[DuskStar]

> I find it hard to believe that you actually think this is why every single indigenous person is asking for the acknowledgement.

A large part of it is that in the US (which is where this professor is located), the preferred nomenclature is "American Indian" or "Native American". (According to CGP Grey [0], the closer you get to a reservation, the more likely it is that "American Indian" or just "Indian" is the preferred term) Either way, "Indigenous Peoples" seems to be more of a Canadian or Australian thing, and I've never seen it used to refer to people in the states. This would imply that the request isn't actually coming from the tribes in question.

And IMO it would be unreasonable to include for the same reason that a discussion of set theory would be inappropriate in a history course covering the "New World" in the 1400s, even ignoring the fact that the term is wrong.

0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kh88fVP2FWQ

[manigandham]

I guarantee far more people care about not wasting time with such trivial matters. Nothing is ever 0 cost. These demands are already causing chaos and decreasing the time spent on actual learning by paying students. Where's the accounting for that?

[hug]

To waste time on objecting to something that is trivial to do and then complaining about all the time that has been wasted by your own complaining is the height of cognitive dissonance.

[manigandham]

It's already wasting time, as I stated, for something that has absolutely nothing to do with the class. If it's so trivial then it's just as trivial to ignore it. What difference does it make to your education to have this?

[apostacy]

If an indigenous land acknowledgement is so commonplace, then the institution should simply make the decision for its teachers and require its inclusion in their documents.

Being compelled to include something you may not actually agree with is onerous.

And it opens the door for other things to included as well. What if two different groups of student activists demand that you include contradictory statements?

I can understand why an instructor would opt to not include ANY political statements.