@Shane Hilde: Hi Shane, As I suspected, I found my name …

Comment on LSU student petition criticizes curriculum by David Kendall, PhD.

@Shane Hilde:

Hi Shane,

As I suspected, I found my name on the petition. I can tell you that I had very little idea of what the petition was about at the time; at the least I had no particular dissatisfaction with the CORE curriculum (I thoroughly enjoyed the parallel honors curriculum). The concerns with secularism and pluralism that I mentioned earlier were prejudices I brought with me to the University; these were generally based on conversations I had with fellow students and friends who were disgruntled, rather than personal experiences of my own. This does not invalidate (or validate) the feelings of my friends and colleagues. However, feelings of a creeping secularism/pluralism/etc. are at all times highly subjective, being subject to times, places and changes in interpersonal relationships, worldviews and encounters with diverse populations (LSU is such a diverse population). Witness the progression of my own attitude through the intervening dozen years. I am as committed an Adventist as I was then; now I am just much better informed, educated and experienced. Keep in mind that the immaturity that many ascribe to our young students (due to the fact that there is a fear in allowing them to be exposed to “divergent” views) must exist in equal measure between those who are conservative and those who are progressive or liberal. Looking back on myself as an 18-year-old strongly conservative freshman at LSU, I freely admit my immaturity and impressionability. Remember, that knife cuts both ways.

Regarding your specific question about the CORE curriculum:

8. The total unwillingness of administration to evaluate the program or survey student opinion, and the suppression of dissenting views relating to C.O.R.E.

I strongly respect the writers of this petition, some of who were good friends. However, we have no particular evidence for or against the assertion that the administration was unwilling to evaluate CORE, survey student opinion, or suppress dissenting views. As is certainly the case regarding the current controversy, there are many who conflate a lack of immediate action with an unwillingness to change or revise based on valid criticisms. As I have discussed elsewhere, I or any of my colleagues would never immediately change our curricula if it became controversial; to do so would be irresponsible. Rather, we weigh the concerns (and there will always be competing concerns from many quarters), seeking the best balance and the best educational outcomes for the students in our care. Lots of students may dislike a class or general educational program for a number of reasons valid or invalid, and we educators will make the best, most thoughtful decisions possible. Precipitous or “knee-jerk” reactions are more appropriate in politics, and not in education.

So my response to your statement that this has been going on at LSU for a long time is that “this” (students expressing dislike or distaste for a course, a degree program, a professor or the administration) has probably been going ever since there was a University. I am sure I complained about any number of realities on campus, whether I understood them or not. I have had students complain about my own courses; generally that they are too difficult or include too much work. This is part and parcel of the university experience. I would strongly disagree that this “sentiment” is one that has not changed over the past 11 or 12 years at LSU, as I have spent all but one of those years on campus as either student or faculty. A number of sentiments have come and gone and different issues have come up. This is the way of all organizations, religious and otherwise.

Pax,

David Kendall, PhD
Adjunct Professor of Music
La Sierra University

David Kendall, PhD Also Commented

LSU student petition criticizes curriculum

With your “inside information” you should be able to list dozens of faculty, staff, and administrators who supportive of our efforts to confront this problem, right?

My question to you is why these faithful supporters at LSU, if they exist, have not stepped forward to confront the problems we are addressing here? Too busy? Don’t care? No backbone? Don’t “know” anything about it?

Hi Dr. Stone,

As in courts of law, the accuser is responsible for proving the guilt of the defending party. The defending party, in contrast, is not necessarily required to produce evidence to prove his or her innocence. They may choose to do so, but being accused, either directly or through association with an institution, does not require one to “step forward” to address “the problem we are addressing here.” It reminds me a of speech by former President George W. Bush in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, in which he stated that “you are either with us, or you are with the terrorists.” I was teaching in Taiwan at the time, and my attitude was that I was not with him, and neither was I a terrorist. I had the unfortunate experience of seeing the invasion on my 23rd birthday; not a celebratory event. I am using this anecdote to illustrate that a lack of response from “dozens” of faculty and staff on either side of the issue does not prove anything.

While it is oft implied that perceived silence in the face of accusation or opposition is an admission of guilt (from LSU administrators, to criminal defendants, to the entire world Muslim population), there may be many reasons not to respond. One is ignorance or unawareness of the issue. Another could be the sense that the issue is not important, or does not speak to pertinent topics. Still another may be an unwillingness to enter a debate in which some or all of the arguments do not possess intellectual coherence. Yet another reason, which is my reason for not entering into the substance of the debate (note that I have only posted on issues of fact, tone or fairness and not on the central argument), is that scholars may refuse to enter into a dialogue in which there is an arbitrary limitation on the terms of the debate.

In this case, by reading and dialoguing with a number of posters, I am led to believe that in this issue there are only two choices. I am unwilling to enter the quagmire of a forced binary opposition, when there may in fact be other alternatives and options. To enter into such a rigged system makes it impossible to remain intellectually and morally consistent. In the months before the Iraq War, I refused to enter a forced binary system: to be either pro-war or a terrorist. Neither label applied to me, and so I could not in good conscience enter a debate that would force me to choose one of them. This is just one example, and a personal one, not intended to speak for any other LSU faculty member, or administrator.

Pax,

David Kendall, PhD
Adjunct Professor of Music
La Sierra University


LSU student petition criticizes curriculum

Yes, the LSU faculty and administration are, in general, very liberal compared to most other SDA institutions. Regarding your “who knows what else” I wonder myself! Anyone have any “inside” information?

Hi again Dr. Stone,

On what in particular do you base your statement that the LSU faculty and administration are very liberal compared to other SDA institutions? A reading of the faculty positions papers and published research? Personal conversations with faculty members? Broad-based surveys of the student population? If these or other options have been pursued, I might place value on the assessment. But if the statement is based on assumptions, innuendo, or the projection of the impressions of a small percentage onto the whole, then it has less value. Regarding “inside information”, as I have stated elsewhere, I have been consistently on campus from 1998 (minus one year). However, I suspect that my “inside information” is not the kind of information you are looking for.

Pax,

David Kendall, PhD
Adjunct Professor of Music
La Sierra University


LSU student petition criticizes curriculum
@Ron Stone M.D.:

Dr. Stone,

Regarding intimidation, would you care to give some examples? And regarding the “conference office”, pastors are generally managed by their local conferences (i.e. Nevada-Utah, Arizona, Southern California) and not directly by the Union, unless someone can inform me of situations in which this is not the case.

Finally, regarding the conference “coming down” on pastors, would we not agree that it is the work of the conferences to regulate and control the messages put forth by pastors who are employed by them? After all, this is what we insist the conference should do with the faculty and curriculum at La Sierra University.

Pax,

David Kendall, PhD
Adjunct Professor of Music
La Sierra University