University of Delaware Requires Students to Undergo Ideological Reeducation

[BoogyMan]

A treatment for students' incorrect attitudes and beliefs? Egads!


Source: Link (http://thefire.org/index.php/article/8555.html)

NEWARK, Del., October 30, 2007—The University of Delaware subjects students in its residence halls to a shocking program of ideological reeducation that is referred to in the university’s own materials as a “treatment” for students’ incorrect attitudes and beliefs. The Orwellian program requires the approximately 7,000 students in Delaware’s residence halls to adopt highly specific university-approved views on issues ranging from politics to race, sexuality, sociology, moral philosophy, and environmentalism. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is calling for the total dismantling of the program, which is a flagrant violation of students’ rights to freedom of conscience and freedom from compelled speech.

“The University of Delaware’s residence life education program is a grave intrusion into students’ private beliefs,” FIRE President Greg Lukianoff said. “The university has decided that it is not enough to expose its students to the values it considers important; instead, it must coerce its students into accepting those values as their own. At a public university like Delaware, this is both unconscionable and unconstitutional.”

The university’s views are forced on students through a comprehensive manipulation of the residence hall environment, from mandatory training sessions to “sustainability” door decorations. Students living in the university’s eight housing complexes are required to attend training sessions, floor meetings, and one-on-one meetings with their Resident Assistants (RAs). The RAs who facilitate these meetings have received their own intensive training from the university, including a “diversity facilitation training” session at which RAs were taught, among other things, that “[a] racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality.”

The university suggests that at one-on-one sessions with students, RAs should ask intrusive personal questions such as “When did you discover your sexual identity?” Students who express discomfort with this type of questioning often meet with disapproval from their RAs, who write reports on these one-on-one sessions and deliver these reports to their superiors. One student identified in a write-up as an RA’s “worst” one-on-one session was a young woman who stated that she was tired of having “diversity shoved down her throat.”

According to the program’s materials, the goal of the residence life education program is for students in the university’s residence halls to achieve certain “competencies” that the university has decreed its students must develop in order to achieve the overall educational goal of “citizenship.” These competencies include: “Students will recognize that systemic oppression exists in our society,” “Students will recognize the benefits of dismantling systems of oppression,” and “Students will be able to utilize their knowledge of sustainability to change their daily habits and consumer mentality.”

At various points in the program, students are also pressured or even required to take actions that outwardly indicate their agreement with the university’s ideology, regardless of their personal beliefs. Such actions include displaying specific door decorations, committing to reduce their ecological footprint by at least 20%, taking action by advocating for an “oppressed” social group, and taking action by advocating for a “sustainable world.”

In the Office of Residence Life’s internal materials, these programs are described using the harrowing language of ideological reeducation. In documents relating to the assessment of student learning, for example, the residence hall lesson plans are referred to as “treatments.”

In a letter sent yesterday to University of Delaware President Patrick Harker, FIRE pointed out the stark contradiction between the residence life education program and the values of a free society. FIRE’s letter to President Harker also underscored the University of Delaware’s legal obligation to abide by the First Amendment. FIRE reminded Harker of the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943), a case decided during World War II that remains the law of the land. Justice Robert H. Jackson, writing for the Court, declared, “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.”

“The fact that the university views its students as patients in need of treatment for some sort of moral sickness betrays a total lack of respect not only for students’ basic rights, but for students themselves,” Lukianoff said. “The University of Delaware has both a legal and a moral obligation to immediately dismantle this program, and FIRE will not rest until it has.”

FIRE is a nonprofit educational foundation that unites civil rights and civil liberties leaders, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals across the political and ideological spectrum on behalf of individual rights, due process rights, freedom of expression, and rights of conscience on our campuses. FIRE would like to thank the Delaware Association of Scholars (DAS) for its invaluable assistance in this case. FIRE’s efforts to preserve liberty at the University of Delaware and elsewhere can be seen by visiting www.thefire.org.

[JohnnyAwake]

Unbelievable! It's hard to imagine that any academic institution would ever think to stoop to something this low.

[AnnEsthesia]

Ok, now link to a non-biased source please. I would like to read exactly what the university is doing from something other than FIRE.

[BoogyMan]

Ok, now link to a non-biased source please. I would like to read exactly what the university is doing from something other than FIRE.


You do know that FIRE represents all comers with regard to collegiate liberties right AnnE?

You could go directly to the University of Delaware Residence Life website AnnE.

Some of the commentary can be found at the links below.
http://www.udel.edu/reslife/about/narratives/narrative1.htm
http://www.udel.edu/reslife/about/narratives/narrative2.htm
http://www.udel.edu/reslife/complex/gilbert_curricular_summary.htm
http://www.udel.edu/reslife/complex/towers_curricular_summary.htm
http://www.udel.edu/reslife/about/competencies.htm

Interesting reading.

[AnnEsthesia]

So asking that all students go out of their comfort zones and try and see things from other viewpoints is now a bad thing?

I guess I do not see why this is some horrible thing. How dare a school address issues that cause problems! How dare they have courses that require students to expand their viewpoints.

Just because you sit through a lesson, does not mean you have to believe what they tell you.

But then again, they did this sort of thing when I was in school and I never heard of someone being hurt by it. It is community building.

[BoogyMan]

It is a bad thing when they begin to legislate belief AnnE. I may disagree with your beliefs completely but I will fight to allow you to have those beliefs freely. This program is completely outside of the realm of a residence hall system for a University, and is eerily Orwellian.

[Alonzo]

They're trying to ensure that kids respect each other and are socially aware. I see this as no different than what private religious schools do. I remember having to go on religious retreats (they were mandatory, no exceptions) and having tests where you had to have a certain belief, or engage in a certain activity, or at least state you did, to get them correct.

[AnnEsthesia]

It is a bad thing when they begin to legislate belief AnnE. I may disagree with your beliefs completely but I will fight to allow you to have those beliefs freely. This program is completely outside of the realm of a residence hall system for a University, and is eerily Orwellian.


I can sit in on a Republican National Convention and I doubt my opinions would change. Are you that afraid of learning about other people and seeing from other people's perspectives? No one can change your beliefs. No one can legislate beliefs. However I see no harm and I fully support programs that offer differing viewpoints and that allow people the opportunity to perhaps change their minds on things by being exposed to other people/views/ideas.

[underdawg]

I feel a bit torn on this one. I think that there should be rules in place at colleges and universities so that no one has to be subjected to harrassment of any kind. I don't particulary like the idea of having an RA subject someone to manditory one on one sessions trying to pry into their personal affairs. It is one thing to have manditory classes on civics, interpersonal communication, but to subject someone to interrogation in the dorms that they live in seems way over the top. This is not a religious institution nor is it a military school where I would expect such treatment.

[ViolaLee]

OMG they are teaching students not to be racist and to live sustainably?

Oh the horror, the horror!!!!!!

[lily]

Um........correct me if I'm wrong...........but wouldn't students know about this before signing up to go to this school?

[Elrathin]

It is a bad thing when they begin to legislate belief AnnE. I may disagree with your beliefs completely but I will fight to allow you to have those beliefs freely. This program is completely outside of the realm of a residence hall system for a University, and is eerily Orwellian.


Boogy, I can actually understand what you are feeling, but I don't know what SPECIFICALLY you are protesting against. What aspects of this program are you protesting the college informing students of? It would help to know what you are actually against in this matter.

I may actually agree with you on some things, but I have to know what you are actually against.

[BoogyMan]

Boogy, I can actually understand what you are feeling, but I don't know what SPECIFICALLY you are protesting against. What aspects of this program are you protesting the college informing students of? It would help to know what you are actually against in this matter.

I may actually agree with you on some things, but I have to know what you are actually against.


Good questions El.

See the .pdf file of the "training" here. Link (http://www.thefire.org/pdfs/3d0208922083e5d59664be8371ab5f0f.pdf)

Read the definition of racism on page 3.
“A RACIST: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality. By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, because as peoples within the U.S. system, they do not have the power to back up their prejudices, hostilities, or acts of discrimination. (This does not deny the existence of such prejudices, hostilities, acts of rage or discrimination.)"

Read the definition of reverse-racism on page 3.
"REVERSE RACISM: A term created and used by white people to deny their white privilege. Those in denial use the term reverse racism to refer to hostile behavior by people of color toward whites, and to affirmative action policies, which allegedly give 'preferential treatment' to people of color over whites. In the U.S., there is no such thing as 'reverse racism."

Read the definition of a non-racist on page 3.
“A NON-RACIST: A non-term. The term was created by whites to deny responsibility for systemic racism, to maintain an aura of innocence in the face of racial oppression, and to shift responsibility for that oppression from whites to people of color (called "blaming the victim"). Responsibility for perpetuating and legitimizing a racist system rests both on those who actively maintain it, and on those who refuse to challenge it. Silence is consent."

Read the .pdf file in the link at your leisure, it is mind boggling.

[Deadshot]

Isn't the fact that they refer to whites specifically racist?

Without question if they were to single out blacks, this would read like a KKK tract

[gemosological]

Unbelievable! It's hard to imagine that any academic institution would ever think to stoop to something this low.


Stooping this low?

Judging by what's happening in America- the housing situation, the war in Iraq and soldiers who aren't getting the medical help they need, the fact that the Middle Class is shrinking while the poor get poorer while others become obscenely rich off the labor of others and all the other stuff that happens when self-centered, self-serving and selfish attitudes have become the order of the day I would say it's time that such attitudes and the consequences that result from such defects of character start being addressed. We've become a nation of excesses, of thinking that our nation just has to be the greatest nation on Earth and that all others should kow-tow to our way of life.
There are way too many people in this country that act like they think the world should revolve around them and think that they have the right to whatever they want whenever they want it regardless of the consequences to others. They want, they want, they want. They have more of everything than they'll ever need yet they bitch about paying taxes and helping others less fortunate than themselves. That is selfish and self-centered behavior in the extreme. I think it's time that this country starts getting in the face of folks who believe the world exists solely for their own benefit and start knocking them off their high horses and one of the best places to start that process is in the educational system. No one died and made them God after all.

RRD
:fight:

[Anti-Racism]

Ok, now link to a non-biased source please. I would like to read exactly what the university is doing from something other than FIRE.


They're quoting from the original announcement from Delaware U.

Sounds like Stalinism.

[BoogyMan]

Well, today (11-1-2007) the president of the University of Delaware has, while using very wishy washy language, halted the student re-education program.


Source: Link (http://www.udel.edu/PR/UDaily/2008/nov/letter110107.html)

Nov. 1, 2007

The University of Delaware strives for an environment in which all people feel welcome to learn, and which supports intellectual curiosity, critical thinking, free inquiry and respect for the views and values of an increasingly diverse population. The University is committed to the education of students as citizens, scholars and professionals and their preparation to contribute creatively and with integrity to a global society. The purpose of the residence life educational program is to support these commitments.

While I believe that recent press accounts misrepresent the purpose of the residential life program at the University of Delaware, there are questions about its practices that must be addressed and there are reasons for concern that the actual purpose is not being fulfilled. It is not feasible to evaluate these issues without a full and broad-based review.

Upon the recommendation of Vice President for Student Life Michael Gilbert and Director of Residence Life Kathleen Kerr, I have directed that the program be stopped immediately. No further activities under the current framework will be conducted.

Vice President Gilbert will work with the University Faculty Senate and others to determine the proper means by which residence life programs may support the intellectual, cultural and ethical development of our students.


Patrick Harker
President

[Elrathin]

Good questions El.

See the .pdf file of the "training" here. Link (http://www.thefire.org/pdfs/3d0208922083e5d59664be8371ab5f0f.pdf)

Read the definition of racism on page 3.
“A RACIST: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality. By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, because as peoples within the U.S. system, they do not have the power to back up their prejudices, hostilities, or acts of discrimination. (This does not deny the existence of such prejudices, hostilities, acts of rage or discrimination.)"

Read the definition of reverse-racism on page 3.
"REVERSE RACISM: A term created and used by white people to deny their white privilege. Those in denial use the term reverse racism to refer to hostile behavior by people of color toward whites, and to affirmative action policies, which allegedly give 'preferential treatment' to people of color over whites. In the U.S., there is no such thing as 'reverse racism."

Read the definition of a non-racist on page 3.
“A NON-RACIST: A non-term. The term was created by whites to deny responsibility for systemic racism, to maintain an aura of innocence in the face of racial oppression, and to shift responsibility for that oppression from whites to people of color (called "blaming the victim"). Responsibility for perpetuating and legitimizing a racist system rests both on those who actively maintain it, and on those who refuse to challenge it. Silence is consent."

Read the .pdf file in the link at your leisure, it is mind boggling.


Yeah gotta agree with you that it is pretty screwed up.

On one hand they are saying they is no such thing as reverse discrimination, but then on the other they are saying that racists are only whites, thus saying that only whites commit acts of racism which is BS according to their OWN definition of racism LOL . Good catch there.

[gemosological]

Good questions El.

See the .pdf file of the "training" here. Link (http://www.thefire.org/pdfs/3d0208922083e5d59664be8371ab5f0f.pdf)

Read the definition of racism on page 3.
“A RACIST: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality. By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, because as peoples within the U.S. system, they do not have the power to back up their prejudices, hostilities, or acts of discrimination. (This does not deny the existence of such prejudices, hostilities, acts of rage or discrimination.)"

Read the definition of reverse-racism on page 3.
"REVERSE RACISM: A term created and used by white people to deny their white privilege. Those in denial use the term reverse racism to refer to hostile behavior by people of color toward whites, and to affirmative action policies, which allegedly give 'preferential treatment' to people of color over whites. In the U.S., there is no such thing as 'reverse racism."

Read the definition of a non-racist on page 3.
“A NON-RACIST: A non-term. The term was created by whites to deny responsibility for systemic racism, to maintain an aura of innocence in the face of racial oppression, and to shift responsibility for that oppression from whites to people of color (called "blaming the victim"). Responsibility for perpetuating and legitimizing a racist system rests both on those who actively maintain it, and on those who refuse to challenge it. Silence is consent."

Read the .pdf file in the link at your leisure, it is mind boggling.


Yeah gotta agree with you that it is pretty screwed up.

On one hand they are saying they is no such thing as reverse discrimination, but then on the other they are saying that racists are only whites, thus saying that only whites commit acts of racism which is BS according to their OWN definition of racism LOL . Good catch there.


I think both of you are forgetting that, in this country, the predominant racists were Whites, which is why I believe the definition was written the way it was. Whites in this country, historically, have been the predominant racists- not Blacks, not Indians, not any people of color as a whole. Just Whites.

RRD
:)

[Elrathin]

I think both of you are forgetting that, in this country, the predominant racists were Whites, which is why I believe the definition was written the way it was. Whites in this country, historically, have been the predominant racists- not Blacks, not Indians, not any people of color as a whole. Just Whites.

RRD
:)


I'm not forgetting it, but it is ridiculous to say that other races cannot be racist. And remember we are living in 2007 not 1957 lol.

and considering that the document was obviously updated into .PDF format it should have been updated with the terminology too hehe.

[gemosological]

I think both of you are forgetting that, in this country, the predominant racists were Whites, which is why I believe the definition was written the way it was. Whites in this country, historically, have been the predominant racists- not Blacks, not Indians, not any people of color as a whole. Just Whites.

RRD
:)


I'm not forgetting it, but it is ridiculous to say that other races cannot be racist. And remember we are living in 2007 not 1957 lol.

and considering that the document was obviously updated into .PDF format it should have been updated with the terminology too hehe.


No one said that members of other races cannot be racist. But it is a historical fact that Whites in this country have been the predominant racists. As to living in 1957 I'd like to remind you that White racism was alive and well well into 1970- when my hometown in Wisconsin still had "Sundown laws" specifically directed at Blacks and other people of color. And racism is alive and well, and rearing its ugly head again, as can be witnessed by the use of the term "Sandnigger" by so many White conservatives on various boards. I think it would be wiser to put less emphasis on semantics and more on what's actually being addressed. The semantics is nothing but a smokescreen, IMO.

RRD
:)

[HumanBeast]

Wow! What a waste of tax dollars!

[micfranklin]

Oh I had no idea there was already a thread on this. Anyway, it should piss everyone off that such a program would be installed in a university in the first place. Respect for that school is now waning.

[BoogyMan]

Hi Mic, check out the actual training materials is post number 13.

http://www.democracyforums.com/showthread.php?tid=8949&pid=109356#pid109356

It is disturbing stuff.

[micfranklin]

What the course outline could've been like:

RACE 101: "A study on racism, it's history, it's anatomy and how to combat it in the real world."