Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

The Telegraph opens up black Cambridge student for barrage of online abuse Watch

    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by RoyalBeams)
    Am sorry, I must have missed that. What two connotations did you explain?

    Can you please summarise them.

    Don't worry, I am keeping note of your other questions, and I promise to do you the honour of going back to answer every single one of them after I clear up what I see as a strawman.
    "A taste of her own medicine" without specific context could have meant a) she gave out racial abuse and was getting it back or b) she misled people with her title, that the Telegraph then did to her. You've now explained the connotation you meant, so this is really a non-argument at this stage.

    Personally I'm not vested in keeping this going further unless you do start tackling the other points, as there is no reason we can't address them in parallel, and it prevents this from being a productive debate if you don't address the key points.
    • Very Important Poster
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Notorious_B.I.G.)
    Well, if you did read the letter, it calls for consultation with students about what should be on the curriculum.
    "A consultation between course conveners and groups of students about how the faculty can be more inclusive"

    That's not the same as calling for consultation about the curriculum

    The faculty took the letter on board at their teaching forum https://www.varsity.co.uk/news/13798 and came up with some suggestions of their own.

    The idea that universities aren't actually SEEKING criticism and comment from students on the curriculum is again misunderstanding how course design and development works. http://www.qaa.ac.uk/assuring-standa...ty-code-part-b B5 Student engagement states:

    "Higher education providers take deliberate steps to engage all students, individually and collectively, as partners in the assurance and enhancement of their educational experience."

    Indicator 1:
    "Higher education providers, in partnership with their student body, define and promote the range of opportunities for any student to engage in educational enhancement and quality assurance."

    Indicator 2:
    "Higher education providers create and maintain an environment within which students and staff engage in discussions that aim to bring about demonstrable enhancement of the educational experience."

    Indicator 3:
    "Arrangements exist for the effective representation of the collective student voice at all organisational levels, and these arrangements provide opportunities for all students to be heard."

    This is basic course design and improvement stuff. It's not newsworthy or controversial.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dez)
    I have literally no idea what you're raving about now. :eyeball:
    I don't believe you. I think you are well educated not to utilise a strawman again by now.

    You need to thank me.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RoyalBeams)
    And so?



    Yep. I reasoned intelligently and logically.

    That is required for subjective isues.

    A top university should focus on materials that mostly intellectually develop its student body, not the ones that make them politically correct.



    So you were strawmanning?

    And so nothing, just correcting your grammar.

    You don’t seem to understand what a subjective issue is. When something is subjective, that means it’s up to the individual to decide whether they consider it right or wrong/agree disagree/etc. You can’t hold a monopoly on being right about a subjective issue, otherwise it would be an objective issue.

    I did not want to malign your precious TSR reputation with a strawman, I made a mistake by typing “ask” instead of “suggest”. It’s pretty telling that you consistently (both with me and with others) choose to argue over the most minor technicalities to avoid actually responding to the points we’re making.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shadowdweller)
    "A taste of her own medicine" without specific context could have meant a) she gave out racial abuse and was getting it back or b) she misled people with her title, that the Telegraph then did to her. You've now explained the connotation you meant, so this is really a non-argument at this stage.

    Personally I'm not vested in keeping this going further unless you do start tackling the other points, as there is no reason we can't address them in parallel, and it prevents this from being a productive debate if you don't address the key points.
    When we are discussing a newspapers reporting as "unfair" and "misleading", and I state she is getting "A taste of her own medicine", I think the context is pretty clear.

    My aim is that you clearly understand the ground rules of any debate with me is that I would not tolerate any strawman that is attributing statements I did not make to me. Only after that is when I can continue a debate on other things.

    Utilising strawmans are not grounds of a productive debate.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by RoyalBeams)
    When we are discussing a newspapers reporting as "unfair" and "misleading", and I state she is getting "A taste of her own medicine", I think the context is pretty clear.

    My aim is that you clearly understand the ground rules of any debate with me is that I would not tolerate any strawman that is attributing statements I did not make to me. Only after that is when I can continue a debate on other things.

    Utilising strawmans are not grounds of a productive debate.
    It is not fair to mislead people as to her statements, regardless of what you think of her actions. The heading was misleading at best and a blatant lie at worst, so even with the context it's still an inaccurate statement to say it's a taste of her own medicine in my view.

    Now, you've had your say about the strawman, and that point has been cleared up. If we can't move on to an actual debate at this point, then I don't think there's anything to be gained from a continued circular argument, I'm afraid. You've yet to counter the actual crux of the post, and there's little value in continuing if you continue to refuse to do so.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PQ)
    "A consultation between course conveners and groups of students about how the faculty can be more inclusive"

    That's not the same as calling for consultation about the curriculum

    x

    This is basic course design and improvement stuff. It's not newsworthy or controversial.
    It was in a paragraph about the curriculum, and it seemed like a simple request. The more sociotropic "children are the future" stuff was later on. Either way, she was criticising the academic staff. I am incredibly impressed you know all that stuff about how courses are designed and stuff, almost suggests you're an academic or something, but it is beside the point.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tian1Sky)
    And so nothing, just correcting your grammar.
    Then you wasted you time then.


    (Original post by Tian1Sky)
    You don’t seem to understand what a subjective issue is. When something is subjective, that means it’s up to the individual to decide whether they consider it right or wrong/agree disagree/etc. You can’t hold a monopoly on being right about a subjective issue, otherwise it would be an objective issue.
    Don't get your point. I think you are the one that does not understand.

    Because individuals have a right to decide means their decision cannot be wrong on some subjective cases?


    (Original post by Tian1Sky)
    I did not want to malign your precious TSR reputation with a strawman, I made a mistake by typing “ask” instead of “suggest”. It’s pretty telling that you consistently (both with me and with others) choose to argue over the most minor technicalities to avoid actually responding to the points we’re making.
    Suggest?

    You actually think that makes your position better?

    Why would you suggest "I am asking her to go back to Africa" when I listed UK universities if your aim is not to strawman and malign me?
    • Very Important Poster
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Notorious_B.I.G.)
    It was in a paragraph about the curriculum, and it seemed like a simple request. The more sociotropic "children are the future" stuff was later on. Either way, she was criticising the academic staff. I am incredibly impressed you know all that stuff about how courses are designed and stuff, almost suggests you're an academic or something, but it is beside the point.
    The staff who it was directed to weren't offended. They welcomed it and used it for a discussion (because this sort of input is basic course development stuff).

    Why are you so worried about academic staff or curricula being criticised?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shadowdweller)
    It is not fair to mislead people as to her statements, regardless of what you think of her actions. The heading was misleading at best and a blatant lie at worst, so even with the context it's still an inaccurate statement to say it's a taste of her own medicine in my view.
    So was the heading of her letter.

    She got a taste of her own medicine.

    (Original post by Tian1Sky)
    Now, you've had your say about the strawman, and that point has been cleared up. If we can't move on to an actual debate at this point, then I don't think there's anything to be gained from a continued circular argument, I'm afraid. You've yet to counter the actual crux of the post, and there's little value in continuing if you continue to refuse to do so.
    Something tells me YOU get it by now.

    I shall now go back and pick your point one by one.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by RoyalBeams)
    So was the heading of her letter.

    She got a taste of her own medicine.
    Which is still not the crux or the argument here, nor particularly important even if true, given one is a national newspaper and one is a letter to a university,
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shadowdweller)
    I'm not sure why you seem to think that people on the course wish to study mainly English history, or wouldn't want to read works of other authors within their course? The course is hinged on reading works in the English language, not on works penned by English authors.
    It is not about what people want to study.

    Cambridge should select material they feel is the most challenging and best at developing people intellectually.

    Anyone that does not like what they come up with has the liberty to go to another university that have what they want to study.

    Maybe even take an online course with the Open University, where they can pick and mix as they wish as if they are in the University of Woolworth.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by RoyalBeams)
    It is not about what people want to study.

    Cambridge should select material they feel is the most challenging and best at developing people intellectually.

    Anyone that does not like what they come up with has the liberty to go to another university that have what they want to study.

    Maybe even take an online course with the Open University, where they can pick and mix as they wish as if they are in the University of Woolworth.
    They can select the challenging material that develops people intellectually and still have it from a more diverse range of authors, or at least investigate further that possibility. There is not a lack of books or resources for them to choose from, and there are plenty they don't currently use that would be of equal challenge to their students.

    It's not a case that every student should be able to pick and choose exactly what they study, but your point about it being a university in England doesn't seem wholly relevant given a curriculum in terms of authors should not be based on the country it's in?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shadowdweller)
    I'm not sure, however, how much point there is on this discussion going further if you refuse to address the crux of the issue, namely, what the actual issue is with having more diversity in the syllabus. At this point it starts to suggest you don't have a point to combat this, though I would be interested in what you do have to say on the matter.
    Diversity should only be included at Cambridge as long as it would increase the intellectual challenge and development.

    Not because it makes some people feel inclusive, represented or warm and cuddly.

    I am not saying no to diversity, I am saying no to diversity for the sake of diversity.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by RoyalBeams)
    Diversity should only be included at Cambridge as long as it would increase the intellectual challenge and development.

    Not because it makes some people feel inclusive, represented or warm and cuddly.

    I am not saying no to diversity, I am saying no to diversity for the sake of diversity.
    However there is no reason to believe, currently, that more diversity would have a negative impact on intellectual challenge and development. It could, in fact, increase the level of difficulty. Diversity for the sake of diversity is an arguable concept, granted, but it stands to reason that given the number of potential books to study, there would be more than enough to increase diversity and also have a positive impact on challenge and development.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PQ)
    The staff who it was directed to weren't offended. They welcomed it and used it for a discussion (because this sort of input is basic course development stuff).

    Why are you so worried about academic staff or curricula being criticised?
    Oh, I am not worried. I think they should be criticised all day long; but not only by BME students who bring up colonialism as if it's still relevant to today's society and want Chaucer to be read from a post-colonial perspective. If she can have a voice, in an open letter to the world at large, then I don't see why posters on TSR shouldn't.

    In light of all the publicity, the academic staff are now jumping on board with the suggestions. Now the catchword "colonialism" has been invoked, it is only right that the person who invoked it should be agreed with notwithstanding the merit of their argument.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shadowdweller)
    Which is still not the crux or the argument here, nor particularly important even if true, given one is a national newspaper and one is a letter to a university,
    The latter is part of the sick SJW movement which is aimed at maligning white males.

    It is called crybullying.

    First step: Cry about being a victim of some oppressor.

    Second step: Use the platform of "victim" as a bullying mechanism of getting your way by shaming the Whites, mostly th male ones.

    "White privilege", "Cultural Appropraition", "Micro-aggression" etc.

    It is what gave us Trump, so it is very important if you think outside the box.
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by RoyalBeams)
    The latter is part of the sick SJW movement which is aimed at maligning white males.

    It is called crybullying.

    First step: Cry about being a victim of some oppressor.

    Second step: Use the platform of "victim" as a bullying mechanism of getting your way by shaming the Whites, mostly th male ones.

    "White privilege", "Cultural Appropraition", "Micro-aggression" etc.

    It is what gave us Trump, so it is very important if you think outside the box.
    Sorry, where did gender come into this? And why do you think white males are being maligned here?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shadowdweller)
    They can select the challenging material that develops people intellectually and still have it from a more diverse range of authors, or at least investigate further that possibility. There is not a lack of books or resources for them to choose from, and there are plenty they don't currently use that would be of equal challenge to their students.

    It's not a case that every student should be able to pick and choose exactly what they study, but your point about it being a university in England doesn't seem wholly relevant given a curriculum in terms of authors should not be based on the country it's in?
    That is what the "request" should be, not a "demand" through racist and SJW shaming and malignment of educators as "Colonialists".

    I am sure you have not done any research to back up this statement: "There is not a lack of books or resources for them to choose from, and there are plenty they don't currently use that would be of equal challenge to their students."

    As for my point about a university in England, reality on the ground is that any university in any country would do its best to mainly study the history of its country especially if it is publicly funded.

    If you go to any sane, well-run country, that is what you would get.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shadowdweller)
    However there is no reason to believe, currently, that more diversity would have a negative impact on intellectual challenge and development. It could, in fact, increase the level of difficulty. Diversity for the sake of diversity is an arguable concept, granted, but it stands to reason that given the number of potential books to study, there would be more than enough to increase diversity and also have a positive impact on challenge and development.
    I am not against the introduction of diversity as long as it meets thoe aforementioned criteria. Nor am I saying introducing diversity would fail those criteria.

    I am against the nonsense, racist, victimhood, SJW-crap approach employed in getting the change.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources
    Uni match

    Applying to uni?

    Our tool will help you find the perfect course

    Articles:

    Debate and current affairs guidelinesDebate and current affairs wiki

    Quick link:

    Educational debate unanswered threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.