guy sajer wrote:I arrived at BYU in 1991 shortly before the Cecilia Farr and David Knowlton controversy erupted. Shortly after I arrived, John Beck resigned (ex-husband of, I forget her name duaghter of Hugh Nibley--we were in the same college, I met him a couple of times but never knew hiim). At the time, I thought Farr was a "feminazi" and that Knowlton was a radical liberal apostate. Needless to say that my views have changed a bit since.
Oh and by the way, things have gotten materially worse since you left. I think that Farr and Knowlton may have been catalysts for the imposition of what is now a fairly repressive intellectual environment IMHO.
That's too bad. My first exposure to Knowlton was his paper about Bolivian perceptions of Mormon missionaries. I thought it was spot on, having spent my mission in Bolivia, but that was the article that led to his not getting tenure at BYU. I never thought of Cecilia as a radical feminist and was shocked at the way she was demonized (not to mention the way that a single female professor who dared to defend her was suddenly rumored to be a lesbian). It was ugly then, and it sounds like it's worse now.
guy sajer wrote:I arrived at BYU in 1991 shortly before the Cecilia Farr and David Knowlton controversy erupted. Shortly after I arrived, John Beck resigned (ex-husband of, I forget her name duaghter of Hugh Nibley--we were in the same college, I met him a couple of times but never knew hiim). At the time, I thought Farr was a "feminazi" and that Knowlton was a radical liberal apostate. Needless to say that my views have changed a bit since.
Oh and by the way, things have gotten materially worse since you left. I think that Farr and Knowlton may have been catalysts for the imposition of what is now a fairly repressive intellectual environment IMHO.
That's too bad. My first exposure to Knowlton was his paper about Bolivian perceptions of Mormon missionaries. I thought it was spot on, having spent my mission in Bolivia, but that was the article that led to his not getting tenure at BYU. I never thought of Cecilia as a radical feminist and was shocked at the way she was demonized (not to mention the way that a single female professor who dared to defend her was suddenly rumored to be a lesbian). It was ugly then, and it sounds like it's worse now.
I should say that I saw at one point Knowlton's CV. It was not good enough, IMHO, to get him tenure, but it should've at least got him through the 3rd year review, which is when we was canned, Farr too (though I never saw her CV, so I cannot comment on it). The reason given for the terminations was that they did not have a strong enough publishing record, but in 1991-92, the 3rd year review was almost pro-forma, and almost nobody was terminated at that point, plus overall the research standards univesity wide were much lower than they are now (how else to explain that a publishing lightweight like DCP got tenure?). I've seen plenty of other people with publication records on par with or worse than Knowlton's who made it through the 3rd year review.
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."
guy sajer wrote:I should say that I saw at one point Knowlton's CV. It was not good enough, IMHO, to get him tenure, but it should've at least got him through the 3rd year review, which is when we was canned, Farr too (though I never saw her CV, so I cannot comment on it). The reason given for the terminations was that they did not have a strong enough publishing record, but in 1991-92, the 3rd year review was almost pro-forma, and almost nobody was terminated at that point, plus overall the research standards univesity wide were much lower than they are now (how else to explain that a publishing lightweight like DCP got tenure?). I've seen plenty of other people with publication records on par with or worse than Knowlton's who made it through the 3rd year review.
Sounds like the word "university" really doesn't apply to BYU, in some respects anymore.
guy sajer wrote:I should say that I saw at one point Knowlton's CV. It was not good enough, IMHO, to get him tenure, but it should've at least got him through the 3rd year review, which is when we was canned, Farr too (though I never saw her CV, so I cannot comment on it). The reason given for the terminations was that they did not have a strong enough publishing record, but in 1991-92, the 3rd year review was almost pro-forma, and almost nobody was terminated at that point, plus overall the research standards univesity wide were much lower than they are now (how else to explain that a publishing lightweight like DCP got tenure?). I've seen plenty of other people with publication records on par with or worse than Knowlton's who made it through the 3rd year review.
So, Guy, I'm curious...Where do you teach now, if you don't mind my asking?
harmony wrote:Assuming our leaders have an agenda shouldn't be so disheartening.
I'm reminded of a class I once took, called Sociology of Education. I was the only non-teacher in the class of 14. We were to read a book about a certain study done in an inner city neighborhood in Chicago, and critique the study. Every single one of the teachers read the book with the idea that no one ever misused a study and then published about it. They didn't catch that the researcher had gotten too close to her subjects and had lost her objectivity, which skewed her conclusions. I pinpointed the page where that happened. Our professor was appalled at the uncritical approach that the teachers had exhibited. She asked them if they had similiar uncritical approaches to things like text books and subject matter, world view or politics. They were astounded that she expected them to think critically. Surely anything that was published was okay and didn't require them to actually question the motives or agenda of the publisher!
I think many LDS view what's available in a church bookstore as unquestioningly as my former classmates did. They assume it's correct. And they assume that anything about the church written by someone outside the church is automatically incorrect. The innocence just waits to be abused. And we end up with those with an agenda sheltering those with a different agenda (because all sides have agendas; they just oppose each other). And that can't be good.
Critical thinking on the part of church members should not only be approved, it should be encouraged. I fear for the children of those uncritical teachers and I fear for the members who are simply time bombs waiting for the fuse to burn close enough to explode. As one of the fuse-less ones now, I can tell you it's impossible to put the genie back in the bottle.
This is a great illustration of lack of critical thinking, Harmony! Thanks for sharing this.
I completely agree with you about critical thinking being encouraged among members. It should be celebrated, not chastised.
guy sajer wrote:I should say that I saw at one point Knowlton's CV. It was not good enough, IMHO, to get him tenure, but it should've at least got him through the 3rd year review, which is when we was canned, Farr too (though I never saw her CV, so I cannot comment on it). The reason given for the terminations was that they did not have a strong enough publishing record, but in 1991-92, the 3rd year review was almost pro-forma, and almost nobody was terminated at that point, plus overall the research standards univesity wide were much lower than they are now (how else to explain that a publishing lightweight like DCP got tenure?). I've seen plenty of other people with publication records on par with or worse than Knowlton's who made it through the 3rd year review.
So, Guy, I'm curious...Where do you teach now, if you don't mind my asking?
I left academics. I started and now run my own International Development consulting firm. I live in Sandy, Ut. I would have most likely moved to another university, but my family is happily ensconsed here in Utay and my wife has a career she likes, and my children are very happy with their school and social situation. (My wife teaches at a very well endowed private school, Waterford School, where all our children attend.)
I miss academics at times, including the research and life style, but never BYU, although I make significantly more money now that I ever would as an academic, and I was paid B-School wages, which are among the highest at any university (although combining my academic and part-time consulting income, it is pretty much a draw at the moment, although my new dept. chair before I left told me I had to cut down on my consulting work, even though I continued to publish regularly--they didn't like all my travel).
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."
guy sajer wrote: I left academics. I started and now run my own International Development consulting firm.
That's cool! I'm going through the same decision process at the moment. The college I teach at in NC is very competetive, and unless I go for my PhD, I don't think I really have a chance of moving much beyond where I am.
guy sajer wrote: I left academics. I started and now run my own International Development consulting firm.
That's cool! I'm going through the same decision process at the moment. The college I teach at in NC is very competetive, and unless I go for my PhD, I don't think I really have a chance of moving much beyond where I am.
I'm way ahead of you both. I had originally planned on an academic career, but in grad school I did a paid internship and realized I enjoyed writing as much as teaching. So I skipped the PhD part and just went to work. Once upon a time I dreamed of teaching at BYU, and now I'm glad I didn't do that. I'm sure that several people here are quite glad I'm not there, as well.