Intolerance in education...

[Vulcan]

Requirement implies there are no alternatives. They should be judging texts based solely on academic criteria and not religious perspective. Their dogma is showing and it's pretty ugly from here.

Tell me what portions of say physics, maths, biology, or chemistry require the mention/discussion of christian beliefs?

[Vulcan]

sure, but if they choose another method of learning why do you care? We've already agreed that what matters is the proficiency. I don't care whether they studied or perhaps bought their knowledge on amazon.com. If they are qualified you can't deny them entry, just because you do not like the learning process.

Read the article, if they proven to be qualified/proficient then their background learning process is irrelevant:

Under the admissions guidelines to University of California colleges, in-state students must either score in the top two to three percent on standardized tests or complete a core curriculum of approved preparatory classes (called "a-g" classes) to be deemed eligible for entrance into the state university system.

If they can score well enough then they must have studied a under a curriculum approved by the university. I don't think that is a big ask at all, if you open the doors to any old curriculum then where does it end? Is wican witchcraft going to be OK to get you into chemistry perhaps? Is that where you'd like this to go?

[Elfie]

The only things that UC are "bigoted" against in the a-g approval process are poor textbooks and poor courses.

Thats not accurate.

From the original article linked by the thread starter.

Burt Carney, an executive with the Association of Christian Schools International, said he's met with officials for the university system, and was told that there was no problem with the actual facts in a BJU physics textbook that was disallowed.

In fact, an ACSI report said, UC officials confirmed "that if the Scripture verses that begin each chapter were removed the textbook would likely be approved …"

In the case of the physics textbook at least, the actual material that is being taught about physics was apparently just fine. It was the Bible verses at the beginning of each chapter that caused this particular textbook to be rejected. In a private school, having Bible verses at the beginning of the textbook should be none of UC's business or concern.

[Elfie]

Actually top 3 if you go by Academic Ranking of World Universities but I'm not going to nitpick.

From your own link, only one of several University of California colleges made the top 3, and that was Berkeley. Rather misleading to claim UC is a top 3 school world wide considering the figures below.

University of California, Berkeley    4    4    4    4    3
University of California, Davis    36    42    42    42    43
University of California, Irvine    44    55    55    44    45
University of California, Los Angeles    15    16    16    14    13
University of California, San Diego    14    13    13    13    14
University of California, San Francisco    13    17    17    18    18
University of California, Santa Barbara    26    35    35    35    35
University of California, Riverside

[Elfie]

Read the article, if they proven to be qualified/proficient then their background learning process is irrelevant:

According to the article, that's not entirely accurate either.

Under the admissions guidelines to University of California colleges, in-state students must either score in the top two to three percent on standardized tests or complete a core curriculum of approved preparatory classes (called "a-g" classes) to be deemed eligible for entrance into the state university system.

The students have to score in the top 2 to 3 percent not just show qualification/proficient on their SAT's or complete a core curriculum of approved a-g classes. Classes aren't being approved for something as minor as Bible verses at the beginning of a chapter.

[lasersailor184]

Easy with the pansy stuff, don't want go get a ban now do we?  Anyways I'm a top not a bottom.

If you don't like ARWU (which is widely regarded as the best international ranking system) you can check out Times Higher Education.  UC doesn't do as well there, but it's still on top as far as public education, and certainly far above your earlier remarks.

Regarded by whom?  Your own link clearly states that the results given by ARWU can't be duplicated using the raw numbers.

Your own link says that the ARWU is full of toejam.  I didn't provide that link.  You did.

[SkyRock]

Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhh, a liberal state has the best education......wahhhhhhhhhh!


 

[AKIron]

Thats not accurate.

From the original article linked by the thread starter.

In the case of the physics textbook at least, the actual material that is being taught about physics was apparently just fine. It was the Bible verses at the beginning of each chapter that caused this particular textbook to be rejected. In a private school, having Bible verses at the beginning of the textbook should be none of UC's business or concern.

"None so blind as they who would not see"

Good effort Elfie but they just do not want to see the bigotry here. I give up.

[Elfie]

Regarded by whom?  Your own link clearly states that the results given by ARWU can't be duplicated using the raw numbers.

Your own link says that the ARWU is full of poop.  I didn't provide that link.  You did.

 

[Elfie]

Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhh, a liberal state has the best education......wahhhhhhhhhh!


 

Says who? No sources provided in this thread confirm that. 

[wrag]

"None so blind as they who would not see"

Good effort Elfie but they just do not want to see the bigotry here. I give up.

Why give up?


The article is pretty clear that the material within the text books intended to teach is CORRECT and acceptable to the university and that the text book WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE IF it did NOT contain references to Christianity........ or "In fact, an ACSI report said, UC officials confirmed "that if the Scripture verses that begin each chapter were removed the textbook would likely be approved …" "

That is BIGOTRY.........

"Under the disputed policy, however, a-g classes based on books that mention God or the Bible don't count, effectively making a secular education a prerequisite for admission."

Right HERE.........

"Here's the very university that talks about academic freedom," Carney said. "It's very discriminating. They don't rule against Muslim or Hindu or Jewish (themes) or so forth, only those with a definite Christian theme."


IMHO there is no way around it, and those nattering away that the article doesn't say what it says are pretty much displaying IMHO their own bigotry............  OR they didn't actually bother to READ the article?

[AKIron]

Why give up?

It's like beating my head against a brick wall, it just feels good when I stop. 

[SkyRock]

Says who? No sources provided in this thread confirm that. 

look it up yourself!   Matter of fact, maybe you could research the history of conservatism and liberalism in education and see what you find.  Let me know.

 

[midnight Target]

Why give up?


The article is pretty clear that the material within the text books intended to teach is CORRECT and acceptable to the university and that the text book WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE IF it did NOT contain references to Christianity........ or "In fact, an ACSI report said, UC officials confirmed "that if the Scripture verses that begin each chapter were removed the textbook would likely be approved …" "

So why not remove the scripture?

I know... because the textbooks have a religious agenda that has NOTHING to do with the subject matter.

[wrag]

So why not remove the scripture?

I know... because the textbooks have a religious agenda that has NOTHING to do with the subject matter.

Why do they HAVE to remove the scripture?  How exactly are those scripture PREVENTING a student from learning what they need to learn?

I take it you are from New Zealand?

It's a 1st Amendment issue here!  We consider it a FREEDOM that MUST not be messed with !

Is that something you don't have in New Zealand?  A 1st Amendment?

So are you arguing about something you do not understand?