Kathy is correct that the other students were younger. Many just out  
of college. But I think how they were taught is part and parcel of  
"PC". As it is for any dogmatic approach to a subject. The idea that  
the teacher knows all the answers and you are there to listen and  
absorb. When I was in high school and especially as an undergraduate  
taking seminars at Penn we were encouraged to participate- we were  
expected to participate. It was a large part of our grade. I too had  
teachers who didn't want to hear anything but a regurgitation of the  
party line they were selling. I only took their classes when they  
were required courses that could not be avoided. Given my recent  
experience I fear they are more prevalent today.

I went to Wm & Mary after being out of anthropology for almost 20  
years. I would have been interested to have heard from the other  
students. They had just finished getting the latest and most up to  
date info on the field. But they were for the most part silent, and  
whatever they learned as undergrads remained with them and in them.  
They were unwilling, or unable, to share.

James Brothers, RPA
[log in to unmask]



On May 24, 2007, at 11:07, Katharine Harbury wrote:

> I remember these classes mentioned in James' message.  I don't  
> think it
> was so much "PC"- more on the lines of how these younger students were
> taught in their schools up to that point. A number of students in  
> these
> classes had not yet developed the maturity required to stand and speak
> up in front of what they perceived as intimidating.  Their experiences
> were certainly very different from my experiences growing up in  
> schools
> which greatly encouraged students to speak up one's ideas or opinions.
> There is a difference between what is perceived as intimidation and  
> what
> is perceived as encouragement to have a thought-provoking and creative
> dialogue. (Yes, real intimidation does exist in colleges, but that  
> is a
> different subject altogether for a separate discussion.) In my  
> freshman
> year, I was only one of two students in a philosophy class who never
> hesitated to speak up in spite of one European instructor's  
> tendency to
> scream if she didn't like the choice of words or concepts from any of
> us. It takes a mature student to understand that she did not  
> realize how
> "intimidating" she could be to some classmates, and that her teaching
> method was not exactly the best way to teach. We two spoke up anyway,
> and it made for lively discussions. She became enthusiastic and highly
> respected us for it - even if she did not agree with our views at  
> times.
> Passive students were not for her, and they soon realized that. It
> wasn't too long before they too began participating more actively  in
> class.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of James Brothers
> Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:36 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Should we regret "PC" history?
>
> I would like to add something from my own experience as a student at
> Penn, Duke and a grad student at Penn and Wm & Mary. There was a major
> shift from the free wheeling debates I experienced as a student at the
> University of Pennsylvania in the 70s and Duke University in the  
> 80s to
> what I saw more recently at Wm & Mary. If there was discussion in  
> class
> it tended to involve three people- the professor and the two old  
> guys in
> class (I was one). All of my fellow students had degrees from good
> universities, but apparently had little or nothing to say on a wide
> range of subjects, and they did very little but take notes. This made
> seminars a bit triangular, and not nearly as satisfying as they might
> have been. One day the two old guys agreed before one class that we
> would not make any comments. The professor stormed out of class  
> after 15
> minutes of deafening silence saying "If none of you did the reading  
> you
> could have told me!".
> After he left the rest of the class looked accusingly at we two, as if
> it was all our fault. There are many possible interpretations as to  
> why
> this occured. With what I have seen in other venues, I'm convinced  
> it is
> "PC". A free and open debate is virtually impossible when most of the
> potential participants are unwilling to say anything that might  
> possibly
> be interpreted in way that might offend.
>
> James Brothers, RPA
> [log in to unmask]