Do Fundamentalist Colleges Deserve a "Weary Eye [sic]" in Science Education?

[Smalls]

Grove City College has a highly regarded engineering program, and I know several graduates who had no problem securing excellent offers. Likewise, their graduates in Biology have no problem securing admission to med school with good MCAT scores.

You make this point within the article, proving that there is no merit to this discussion.

This whole discussion was sparked from the opinion of ONE person on a PHYSICS forum. Unless that person is in a position of admissions at a University, it does not matter what he believes regarding a University and it's foundational beliefs.

Is everyone that goes to Notre Dame Catholic? What about Baylor or SMU and their respective religious views?

To discriminate against a student solely on the grounds of perceived beliefs because of the University they chose to attend is short-sighted and, according to you, not occurring.

There is no reason for this discussion. Most people in their right minds would not even consider such information in admissions. And, even if they did, you could not, in good faith, turn a person down solely because of where they went. The question would have to be posed to the person.

If we just start assuming beliefs, then why even bother having them.

One might assume that I, as a Catholic, believe the 6 day creation to be FACT. This is, in fact, incorrect. I believe it to be symbolic, because we have fossil records that prove otherwise. So, unless 6 days became significantly shorter sometime between the creation and today, it is symbolism.

I also believe in evolution, but as a mechanism that was established by God.

Believing in God and science are not seperate ideologies. One can believe in both. Most refuse to.

It does not matter what science does, it will never disprove religion, because religion is about belief. While it should not matter whether one "believes" in science or not (after all, it is, or should be, based on fact), many do not "believe" in science. So, unless "belief" in science replaces belief in religion, religion will always have it's place in society.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Smalls

You make this point within the article, proving that there is no merit to this discussion.

This whole discussion was sparked from the opinion of ONE person on a PHYSICS forum. Unless that person is in a position of admissions at a University, it does not matter what he believes regarding a University and it's foundational beliefs.

Good question. When I first began discussing the topic three weeks ago, my view was that discrimination against creationists was still about at the level portrayed in the Ben Stein movie, "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed." My view was that discrimination did occasionally occur, but that it was relatively rare. I know of a few faculty who it has happened to personally, but my impression was that other forms of discrimination were much more common.

However, the feedback from various parties over the past weeks suggests that conditions are strong for a rapid rise in discrimination based on religious beliefs, particularly those identified as "fundamentalist." The support for discrimination against college credit in the Physics Forums discussion was running strongly in favor of discrimination, with the general consensus being that discrimination against a Christian college was unlikely, as long as it was not fundamentalist.

But discrimination against a fundamentalist college (course credit or degree) is viewed as justified by a number of people. One contributor even suggested I might not want to make a public answer to whether I am a fundamentalist. Another contributor singled out Bob Jones University and Liberty University as worthy of discrimination. Most contributors to the Physics Forums discussion are faculty in various Physics departments. And it is the Physics faculty (not the admissions office) who make decisions regarding whether physics course credit transfers to the school and whether applicants are admitted to their graduate programs.

Since my original comments a few weeks ago, I have heard from various sources tending to support the notion that there may be a rapid rise in discrimination against fundamentalist institutions and individuals.

Originally Posted by Smalls

There is no reason for this discussion. Most people in their right minds would not even consider such information in admissions. And, even if they did, you could not, in good faith, turn a person down solely because of where they went.

Well, let me ask you, would an applicant with a science degree from a fundamentalist school (Liberty U, Oral Roberts, Bob Jones, Bryan, etc.) be treated any differently at agencies and companies you are familiar with?

Have you ever heard the word "fundamentalist" used to disparage a scientist or job candidate?

Have you ever heard the word "fundamentalist" used as an insult, like the N-word is used negatively toward blacks?

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Duck Butter

Great question. What is the point of this discussion MG? Did you get turned down for a job or know someone who did because of this?

I know of a few cases. I haven't personally applied for any faculty positions for years. More commonly, faculty get heat after they are hired. If they do not yet have tenure, they may be in trouble.

Let me ask you, would an applicant with a science degree from a fundamentalist school (Liberty U, Oral Roberts, Bob Jones, Bryan, etc.) be treated any differently at agencies and companies you are familiar with?

Have you ever heard the word "fundamentalist" used to disparage a scientist or job candidate?

Have you ever heard the word "fundamentalist" used as an insult, like the N-word is used negatively toward blacks?

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Well, let me ask you, would an applicant with a science degree from a fundamentalist school (Liberty U, Oral Roberts, Bob Jones, Bryan, etc.) be treated any differently at agencies and companies you are familiar with?

Have you ever heard the word "fundamentalist" used to disparage a scientist or job candidate?

Have you ever heard the word "fundamentalist" used as an insult, like the N-word is used negatively toward blacks?

No to all of these, and I have worked for multiple agencies and in the private sector. The funny thing about MOST private sector people I've dealt with is that they want the best person for the job, regardless of where they went or what they believe. The funny thing about the government is you have more of a chance to be discriminated* against because you are a white male than you do anything else.

(*By discriminated I mean you will have to be head and shoulders better than everyone else because of preferences given to veterans, minorities, and women if you are a white male)

The fact is, it is discrimination based on someone's religious beliefs, even if it is only perceived because of where they attended school, and is illegal. Someone might argue that it only has to do with the school, but see if that stands up in court. I bet if you sued a company for religuous discrimination in such a case, you would win. If there is no difference in the two candidates degrees, other than that one school was viewed as a fundamentalist college, I would out money on the company losing that lawsuit.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

[redchaserron]

Originally Posted by Smalls

You make this point within the article, proving that there is no merit to this discussion.

This whole discussion was sparked from the opinion of ONE person on a PHYSICS forum. Unless that person is in a position of admissions at a University, it does not matter what he believes regarding a University and it's foundational beliefs.

Is everyone that goes to Notre Dame Catholic? What about Baylor or SMU and their respective religious views?

To discriminate against a student solely on the grounds of perceived beliefs because of the University they chose to attend is short-sighted and, according to you, not occurring.

There is no reason for this discussion. Most people in their right minds would not even consider such information in admissions. And, even if they did, you could not, in good faith, turn a person down solely because of where they went. The question would have to be posed to the person.

If we just start assuming beliefs, then why even bother having them.

One might assume that I, as a Catholic, believe the 6 day creation to be FACT. This is, in fact, incorrect. I believe it to be symbolic, because we have fossil records that prove otherwise. So, unless 6 days became significantly shorter sometime between the creation and today, it is symbolism.

I also believe in evolution, but as a mechanism that was established by God.

Believing in God and science are not seperate ideologies. One can believe in both. Most refuse to.

It does not matter what science does, it will never disprove religion, because religion is about belief. While it should not matter whether one "believes" in science or not (after all, it is, or should be, based on fact), many do not "believe" in science. So, unless "belief" in science replaces belief in religion, religion will always have it's place in society.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

Smalls, your belief and outlook is very similar to mine. Scientific discovery doesn't shake my faith, it usually deapens it.

[Smalls]

Originally Posted by redchaserron

Smalls, your belief and outlook is very similar to mine. Scientific discovery doesn't shake my faith, it usually deapens it.

That is exactly how I feel. When the Bible was written, they believed the world was flat. We know, FOR A FACT, that this is not true.

We also know that dinosaurs existed, but they are not mentioned in the Bible. We also know that the earth is much older than the Bible would lead one to believe, if taken literally.

It is not implausible to believe that there is a higher being that drives the mechanisms we discover.

There is a book I started reading a few months ago titled "Thank God for Evolution". I stopped reading it due to a lot of changes personally, but I need to go back and pick it up. It is a very insightful and thought-provoking discussion of why evolution and science can co-exist with the idea that there is a God/Allah/Higher Being/Intelligent Designer or whatever other name you choose to use.

Does my belief in God make me less of a scientist? I think not. Does my career challenge that? Not typically, but it has.

Like I said, religion is a belief system. Science is fact-based. I don't let my beliefs get in the way of facts, but it is rare that a fact challenges my belief.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Smalls

No to all of these, and I have worked for multiple agencies and in the private sector. The funny thing about MOST private sector people I've dealt with is that they want the best person for the job, regardless of where they went or what they believe. The funny thing about the government is you have more of a chance to be discriminated* against because you are a white male than you do anything else.

This is my experience also. Private sector folks want the best person for the job.

In government hiring, white males have the highest chance of being discriminated against.

But in academia, I see discrimination based on political correctness growing, including not only discrimination against white males, but against conservatives and conservative Christians, even more so against fundamentalists.

For example some things recently called to my attention:

A cash award promised to schools denied a fundamentalist school by Science for Society and the Public (SSP). All the other schools meeting the criteria received the award, and the fundamentalist school was promised the award in writing until SSP reneged.

A national recognition promised to all teachers meeting a certain criteria denied to a fundamentalist Christian at the last minute (after the teacher had been notified in writing). All the other teachers (representing various public and private schools) received the award. Only the fundamentalist was excluded.

A well-known scientist backing out of a written agreement to collaborate on a project with another scientist, after learning the other scientist is a fundamentalist Christian.

Students making negative reports in their end of course student evaluations about fundamentalist university science teachers, even though they only learned the teacher was a fundamentalist through outside means and nothing the teacher had said or done in the classroom or on campus. Administrators insisting that these student evaluations be included in faculty tenure and promotion applications.

Of course, anecdotal things like this are suggestive, but not positive proof that such discrimination is on the rise. When one publishes an article like mine, it has the effect of casting a wide net that will tend to turn up corroborating accounts. But it does seem like a lot of corroboration given the relatively small readership of the article.

Still, my overall impression (and personal experience) is that teachers are more likely to experience negative employment outcomes for refusing to gift grades than for any other factor (religion, race, etc.) Teachers have a better chance to sleep with students and remain employed than to refuse to gift grades.

[Pat Babaz]

@ MathGeek


What is a "gift grade"?

[MathGeek]

Originally Posted by Pat Babaz

@ MathGeek


What is a "gift grade"?

A grade that is given by a teacher that is higher than the student actually earned:

Earn an F, receive a C. The C is a gift grade.

[Pat Babaz]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

A grade that is given by a teacher that is higher than the student actually earned:

Earn an F, receive a C. The C is a gift grade.

I kinda thought that's what it was, guess I just didn't want to believe that it actually happens on a regular basis. Its sad that hard work, honor and integrity are passe in this modern cesspool we live in