let me fix this for you, college dad:
“Here is an [opinion piece] from the Huffington Post…”
The public and journalistic hand-wringing about it certainly accomplishes that quite nicely.
That said, I’m not really sure divisiveness can be increased; we’re incontrovertibly divided–that’s the nature of a pluralistic society.
Hear, hear. “Shell-shocked” soldiers coming back from the WWs and 'Nam vets would probably have welcomed a more supportive environment. Not to mention minorities and women, for whom “the good old days” decidedly weren’t.
@Hanna - your parents may want to rethink their contributions in light of @runswimyoga 's [url=<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/discussion/comment/19898492/#Comment_19898492%5Dcomment%5B/url”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/discussion/comment/19898492/#Comment_19898492]comment[/url] 
Hanna - with donations to colleges down due to alumni disapproval of the schools’ indulgence of students’ various modern demands (see link), perhaps the converse is also true - that standing up to the modern campus trends (or at least appearing to) will result increased donations, with your parents as a case in point.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/us/college-protests-alumni-donations.html
@collegedad13 said:
Yep, that must be why they have one of the highest numbers of Nobel prizes and National Merit Scholars, one of the highest yield rates (despite having non-restrictive EA), and one of the lowest admit rates. Everyone is a fool except you.
That article is speculative and includes very, very little data, relying instead on a bunch of anecdotes and trivial differences (seriously: is “participation dropped 1.9 percentage points” newsworthy?).
The meme is obviously incorrect. However, in the argument about racially exclusive “safe spaces” (the necessity of which can be a dubious concept, but let’s assume for the sake of discussion that some find such things necessary), it is worth noting that most white college students are more likely to be able to find racially exclusive “safe spaces” than most non-white students, without having to openly say that that is what they are looking for.
Indeed, the history of imposed racial segregation is indicative of this perceived need among many white people for a racially exclusive “safe space” back then. These days, it appears that there is still substantial support for that idea among white people in some places, as evidenced by self-segregated sororities and fraternities at many colleges (of course non-white people often do the same thing here). Then there is the rise of the “alt right” white nationalists these days.
So when someone asks “why are all of the [some non-white group] people sitting together in the dining hall?”, perhaps the counterpart of white people sitting together in the dining hall is not as noticeable at campuses which are majority white, because even randomly chosen groups of people at such campuses commonly result in some all-white groups.
"The dean also references “safe spaces” in his ‘welcome’ letter, saying that the school does not “condone” their creation. "
The letter referred specifically to INTELLECTUAL safe spaces.
NOT actual PHYSICAL “safe spaces”.
Ye Gods, people! Read the letter! Surely I am not the only one who actually saw the COMPLETE phrase “Intellectual safe spaces”? And understands the difference?
'“Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called trigger warnings, we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual ‘safe spaces’ where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own,” John Ellison, dean of students, wrote to members of the class of 2020, who will arrive next month."
Chicago has ALWAYS been an educational institution that sees as part of its mission challenging its students to learn how to THINK. To Reason. To open one’s mind. To learn from the experience of being challenged by others . To learn how to support one’s own opinion in the face of such challenges.
And that can only happen when ideas are freely discussed.
Giving students an INTELLECTUAL “out” is contrary to what the College of the U of Chicago is all about.
There are plenty of other colleges where students dont have to listen to ideas that challenge or offend them.
"That article is speculative and includes very, very little data, relying instead on a bunch of anecdotes and trivial differences (seriously: is “participation dropped 1.9 percentage points” newsworthy?). "
The number of givers dropped 1.9 percent but the number of dollars given dropped 6.6% That’s not a disaster, but if your salary suddenly dropped six and half percent that would probably get your attention.
Again, @Scipio , that’s one trivial bit of data that’s meaningless outside of context of typical giving fluctuations, among other things. And it’s not about the University of Chicago.
What does that even mean, though? If I’m at a dining hall table and an intellectual (sorry, I can’t do all caps. Just can’t do it.) argument breaks out that requires emotional or psychological energy I don’t have at the moment, does the dean not respect my right to leave the table and go somewhere else to avoid that “intellectual” challenge?
The dean is grandstanding; no policies are changing and UChi absolutely recognizes content warnings and safe spaces; parse his words how you wish, as it makes no difference.
@menloparkmom First off LGBTQ official safe space ally network like the U Chicago subscribes to is inclusive of intellectual safe spaces…You can’t separate the physical safe space with an intellectual safe space because both are extremely important for mental health and suicide prevention … for one thing it has to do w lgbt students coming out and not receiving negative reactions from allies they are discussing their identities with …
so for theDean to be trained and listed on U Chicago’s own Safe Space Ally Network website as an official trained Ally then go and issue a statement that the university won’t tolerate intellectual safe spaces … is contrary to what the Safe Space Ally Network is all about w regards to LGBT students
Its hypocritical grandstanding and IMO, he is scapegoating this on “coddling students” while he is really “coddling donors”
“Again, @Scipio , that’s one trivial bit of data that’s meaningless outside of context of typical giving fluctuations, among other things. And it’s not about the University of Chicago.”
You right that the article doesn’t mention the University of Chicago, but it does talk about a trend beyond the school (Amherst) that is the focus of the article (see quote below). And my point is that Chicago with its letter, either wittingly or unwittingly, may have hit on way to to counteract that trend, whether Chicago’s donations are currently down or not. I bet Hanna’s parents are not the only alumni who are thrilled with the letter and are planning to increase their donations to the Univ. of Chicago because if it.
From the NY Times article:
“Among about 35 small, selective liberal arts colleges belonging to the fund-raising organization Staff, or Sharing the Annual Fund Fundamentals, that recently reported their initial annual fund results for the 2016 fiscal year, 29 percent were behind 2015 in dollars, and 64 percent were behind in donors, according to a steering committee member, Scott Kleinheksel of Claremont McKenna College in California.”
There’s no evidence that it’s a trend. Even the article we’re discussing frames it as an open question and admits that only 29% of a narrow range of colleges are even down at all.
Yeah ok buddy… :-?
" does the dean not respect my right to leave the table and go somewhere else to avoid that “intellectual”
challenge?"
Oh for Gods sake! A student at the dining hall can simply stand up, say "F*** you to another student who is pissing him off and leave! Who will be there to stop him? the Dean? Get real!
Do you REALLY think he needs the “respect” of the Dean to do that??
This letter is about what will and wont happen in the classrooms.
From what I know of Chicago, it has LONG been a "safe college"for LGBT students.
Who ARE physically different from heterosexuals, correct?. LGBT students cant do anything to physically change who they are anymore than a black or latino student can change the color of his skin. And I believe that Chicago does not support any form of prejudice or bigotry toward any students by other students because of how they look.
I think the LBGT community at Chicago may be misconstruing what the Dean meant . As they have the right to do. After all, free expression of INTELLECTUAL ideas is what this letter is all about.
Yeah, classrooms have never been “safe spaces” anywhere, and nobody here has called for them to become safe spaces, so if this is just about classrooms, then, once again: grandstanding.
@menloparkmom With all due respect, I think the Dean may be misconstruing what safe spaces and trigger warnings ACTUALLY do mean and using them in an “altered way” if you will, to spin rhetoric to fit a paradigm of (anti)political correctness and the culture wars…
and he isn’t showing consideration for the words true meanings and how they really effect marginalized groups… but hey if thats what you like then… champion him… but don’t pretend this is intellectual honesty or integrity here.
“There’s no evidence that it’s a trend.”
Not sure what your definition of a “trend” is, but if 29% of this group of colleges:
http://www.staffschools.org/index.cfm/members
…report a drop in money donated this year and 69% of them report a drop in the number of donors, that can’t be a welcome development for them, nor for peer schools such as the University of Chicago.
If 29% of the employees in your department who do work similar to yours had their pay cut, would that be a disquieting “trend” or would you dismiss it as meaningless?
That’s a poor analogy. If 29% of employees in some small segment of the job market had a temporary decrease in commissions (the data after all is “year to date”), would it be fair to say it’s a trend in the larger job market? And is there any evidence other than a few interviewed alums that the data has anything at all to do with social justice issues? Nope.
But either way, I don’t actually care if some old SQWs are donating less. The same thing happened when colleges went co-ed, when they de-segregated, and when some (including my alma mater) barred fraternities, and in the long run, those choices were categorically for the good and the colleges weathered the temporary petulance of their alums and came out smelling like roses. Roses made of money and prestige.