Thursday, August 10, 2006
It seems folks are interested in the details of this case. I haven't been able to find any briefs or case numbers or anything like that, but I'm looking up some of the old stories. I'm also interested in the case, because I think the religious schools actually have a semi-valid point, especially in light of comprehensive review. If students from crappy schools which don't teach worth beans can get admitted based on their work at those schools (and based on their probable ability to succeed in a university environment), why not those from schools which teach from a Christian perspective?
I'm not entirely clear, but I think the issue is that the schools proposed new courses and asked UC to recognize them for credit, but UC refused. I don't think students are being rejected for courses they thought were fine.
Here's a story from last December. Some things worth noting:
It's not just science courses being rejected. English, history, and social studies courses are, too. I would suggest you read this article, because some of the defenses seem a bit weak.
The books, apparently, try to teach through a Christian perspective, which is what UC is objecting to. I think the schools make a good point that "UC would not dare to claim there was no constitutional violation if it rejected courses because of their African American, or Latino heritage, or feminist or environmentalist perspective." The English course, especially, hardly seems appropriate to reject, since every English course I've ever taken has looked at literature through some kind of themed perspective. The spokesperson's comment that "Unfortunately, this course, while it has an interesting reading list, does not offer a nonbiased approach to the subject matter," also seems kind of odd, considering the way English is often taught.
Unfortunately, we're sadly lacking in actual detail, which has been ignored in order to properly frame this as "Christianity vs. government."
. . .
. . .