Quick Takes: Anti-Science Bias Seen in Political Science Textbook, How Yale Was Duped, Business Officers Back Cell Phone Tax Reform, Double Dipping in Florida, House Panel to Consider Loan Legislation

dereliction of duty at Houghton Mifflin?

Where were Houghton Mifflin editors when this slanted textbook was being prepared for publication?

Peter, at 9:30 am EDT on April 9, 2008

Anti-Science Bias

“Tolerance” is a term used all too liberally, until those who embrace it are confronted with conservative, main-sream, Christian values. Then, it seems, that INtolerance is the status quo.

Why the harsh action to the authors presenting both sides of the argument? Is it fear?

If publishers begin to respond to the opinions of high school students on topics they most likely have “researched” through the liberal media, we might as well have each individual teach themselves what they “feel” most comfortable knowing. Then they won’t have to deal with the bad feelings they get reading about historical events such as the Holocaust, WWII, or 9/11.

Dave, at 11:30 am EDT on April 9, 2008

Double Dipping in Florida

The K12 system in Florida routinely rehires experienced retired teachers. They put in so many years to earn their pension, then they are rehired and can earn a second pension if they stay on long enough.

John B., at 2:05 pm EDT on April 9, 2008

“Bias” is in the headline

If you’re interested in the “anti-science bias” charge, follow the link in the article to the CFI site, which lets you read a PDF version of their criticism of the textbook—and their demand that the publisher withdraw or “correct” it. From that document, one gathers that the text authors used global warming as an example of “entrepreneurial politics,” a much-studied phenomenon in political science. CFI, which is itself an example of political entrepreneurialism, takes umbrage at any remark that fails to live up to their high standards for the (i.e., their) truth. The authors even disparage the text for “not understanding” the Supreme Court, as though we should accept their authority over James Q. Wilson, a professor at Harvard for over 20 years, a professor emeritus at UCLA, and a professor at Pepperdine (aha! Probably a conservative!). How did they get there from an “anti-science” bias? By acting pretty much the way the textbook authors say that political entrepreneurs typically act: Making overblown charges from an ideological stance, hoping to draw others into, and on their side of, a controversy of their own making. The textbook authors reportedly didn’t respond to CFI, but Inside Higher Ed and Houghton Mifflin did, so I guess it’s a small win for the folks who make their livings being CFI.

Rod Bell, Adjunct Professor at College of DuPage, at 6:05 pm EDT on April 9, 2008

What double dipping?

I agree with Jim. What’s the problem?

There’s a lot of innuendo in the article that’s cited but not much substance. I don’t pretend to know how Florida’s pension system works but where’ I’m at you put your money into the pension fund, the employer contributes to it (as part of what would otherwise be available for wages), the money earns a return on the investment, and you get your pension out of that. It usually takes years before you get your own money (plus the return on investment) back.

Rehiring the employee also benefits the employer if the retirement system rather than the employer pays for the health benefits. So what’s the problem?

AYY, at 5:15 am EDT on April 10, 2008

Teachers over publishers?

Peter (another one),

You have obviously never been a K-12 teacher. Teachers don’t dictate to publishers. Publishers dictate to districts through slick salesmen and colorful presentations. Your comment is WAY off base.

Nunn, at 5:10 am EDT on April 11, 2008