7 Dead in N. Illinois U. Hall Shooting

That might be the first post on which I've agreed with you.

I work in the Political Science Department at Virginia Tech. Nine of my students were killed on April 16--students I remember from class discussions, lectures, email correspondence, and many visits during office hours.

I resent your message. How dare you tell me that I am in some way to blame for Seung Hui Cho's decision to walk into Norris Hall and kill my students?

We don't know much about the tragedy at N. Illinois University but since you're so willing to paint all of academia with the brush of accusation and condemnation I'm sure you won't mind if I speak about what we DO know about--the tragic events of April 16 on the Virginia Tech campus.

Virginia Tech is appropriately classified as a research university but that doesn't mean that we don't care deeply about the quality of teaching that takes place on our campus. I work in large lecture courses that, yes, use PowerPoint slides to guide the students through the materials but that also employs a TA staff of 5 exceptional graduate students who are willing to work with undergraduates in recitation sections and office hours to ensure that they are clear on the assignments. The instructor of record for the course, an endowed chair who has had tenure for over two decades, has never let his commitment to teaching waver. Even after a full day of teaching he is willing to meet with students into the evenings in office hours and even though we've taught our spring course many times over we still spent more than a dozen hours this week revising lecture and PowerPoint slides, making them better so that our students receive the very best education we can offer.

We care. I don't think that you can possibly understand how much we care. We are dedicated to teaching students, to research that will, as trite as it sounds, make the world a better place, and service in our community, our country, and our world.

I taught as a TA in the classroom in Norris where Professor Librescu positioned himself between the gunman and his students to give the students time to escape through the windows. As a TA I have been threatened by students, not because I am a poor teacher or because I don't care about my students, but because I am called as a professional to evaluate students some of whom are not going to agree with the assessment I provide.

Since assessment was part of your disgusting rant, I'll give you a little background. Our students are given essay questions that are directly linked to the lectures, course discussions, and assigned readings as well to the "real world" as you put it. I read those essays thoroughly several times before assigning a grade. I write my students a page long, typed response detailing the things they did right, the things they did wrong, and, above all, the things they can do to improve on the next assignment. Is that the mark of an uncaring or sloppy teacher? And yet I have had students threaten me because the grade they EARNED was not the grade they thought they deserved. I have been threatened for doing my job.

I understand that there are problems in higher education. But if you can't understand that what you've just done is blame educators for the decisions of students to take the lives of fellow students, you're not part of the solution--you're part of the problem.

Whether you care about that or not, I would ask that you have at least some respect for the college faculty who are in mourning for lost students and colleagues who don't fit the stereotype you've so callously universalized.

worldcurmudgeon-193584 I'm going to have to back up Courts on this one with a great big WTF. Seriously? That's your take on this? The TAs and Professors who have stood between their students and an armed killer don't care about their students enough? They are unprofessional?

I can think of only a few other professions whose practitioners would literally take a bullet for those in their charge: soldiers and policemen. Those are individuals who are equipped with such danger in mind and who are trained to respond in kind if necessary.

Next to the heavily armed infantryman in his ballistic vest we have.... a holocaust survivor in tweed.

Yea... uncaring... unprofessional.

Imagine how much better the world would be if all of us were as sloppy or uncaring as Professor Librescu.

I agree with Courts and Killfile on this issue. I also think the problem is anytime anyone tries to boil down an issue into a cookie cutter "This is the one thing that did it" answer, you are going to offend everyone and not get one step closer to the problem.
I work in a university and have stayed with students until 2am working on projects. I have seen full professors come in and help students on weekends go the extra mile on projects. This is a common occurrence at my school and many others I have had the privilege of working with.
It sounds to me as if you may have had a bad experience in college. You should have gone somewhere else then. For you to insult an entire profession with a blanket insult is demeaning and calumniatory.

No thank you. The last thing I want is to think the student I just gave an F to because they didn't show up to class all semester is armed. Adding more guns to campus in my opinion will add to the number of fatalities. Many mental illness issues come out of nowhere in a person's early to mid 20's. They can be fine one day and mentally disturbed the next. Guess what age is the majority on college campuses? No thank you. Please keep your guns away from my work place. This is a dead horse that has been beaten to death.

I know it's pointless, but I just have to try...

Please keep your guns away from my work place.

You've got guns in your workplace now, but only with those who don't care about the law. What you don't have now are law-abiding folks ready, willing and able to defend you from them.

We have those too. They are called campus police. A state accredited agency of trained professionals that are more than happy to protect me. I'm fine with those guns. I like knowing who have them, who have been properly trained.

A state accredited agency of trained professionals that are more than happy to protect me.

Do yourself a favor and research that. You're talking about the people who taser children? The people who dump people from wheelchairs? The people who have, according to our courts, no responsibility whatsoever to protect you from anything? The people who, when they do get caught breaking the law, get a paid vacation to think about it?

Here's the difference between the two sides in this issue: I am perfectly happy to let you rely on them, if you like. I will not force you to carry a gun, or take responsibility for yourself or your protection. It's your life, and your decision.

Can you say the same?

I'm talking about police. We don't have a security firm. They are "University Police Department is a full-service, sworn, accredited law enforcement agency devoted to the welfare of the University community." (taken from their website). I'm not a fan of vigilantism. I personally don't want someone that has never spent time on a college campus (besides being a student) to make decisions for me based on situations they think would work. I know this argument is not going anywhere. You aren't going to change my mind, and I'm not going to change yours. However, I would ask for those of us that live and work on college campuses, that know all the factors involved be allowed to make the decisions based on our community and not a political arguing point.

So was I, Chris.

Sorry, but there has ZERO crimes related to concealed weapons holders on campus. So I fail to see a valid point regarding no CCW holders on campus.

I vote to have a gun in a situation, but in my situation I have to settle for my pocket knife.

Griff69 made some valid statements.

There are also zero crimes related to the individuals in possession of a nuclear weapon on campus. I think you're drawing a fallacious conclusion here.

Really? Carrying weapons legally is much more common than carrying nuclear weapons. Who is making a fallacious conclusion here?

On a broader aspect, there is a very, very low percentage of crimes committed by a CCW holder (with their weapon), with that, crimes committed by these persons result in the revocation of a CCW by legal authorities

On a side note, UC Irvine now allows CCW holders to carry their weapons on campus without expulsion or firing [of employees] as it was once before. A step in the right direction I must say...

Carrying weapons legally is much more common than carrying nuclear weapons.

With the exception of those carrying in the very few states that don't have weapons bans on campus, no one is carrying a concealed weapon legally on campus.

Come to think of it, all you're really saying is that the the overwhelming majority of the shootings have occured from the overwhelming majority of the population.

What. A. Shock.

I wonder how many gun related fatalities would Americans tolerate from stupid people doing stupid things with guns -- to say nothing of students who get angry about god-knows-what -- before they put those bans back into place?

So Utah, who has had a law allowing concealed carry on their 9 campuses for quite a few years now has what... ZERO incidents with weapons on campus, from both shootings and "crimes-of-passion" among CCW holders.

So Utah is an exception in your book? If anything, it proves that a system must be in place to make certain that a student with a gun is a competent one.

And I think you missed the point about University of California Irvine. Shows that even a liberal gun-shocked-afraid-fill-in-your-own-word like California can have some common sense. I know many people who carry concealed on campus [here in Southern California] (let me reemphasize concealed... meaning, hidden. A printed gun is not concealed and against every legal boundary that covers a CCW holder), both against school policy but within the legalities of the law. Why? Life to them is more important than an education and simply because there are too many 5150s who may potentially break.

If anything, it proves that a system must be in place to make certain that a student with a gun is a competent one.

There certainly should be. Very few states have real competency requirements for a CCW permit.

You want to go through rigorous training with high pressure target identification tests, accuracy, and the whole nine? Be my guest. When that's required for a CCW permit and has to be renewed with great frequency I'll support them.

But if you start putting guns into the hands of frightened, untrained students accidents are going to happen and people are going to die.

Killfile is right--In Virginia, a state that frequently touts its "competency" requirement for its concealed weapons permits, there is NO competency requirement.

An applicant must meet one of a variety of "qualifications" in order to get a conceal & carry permit. The first option is that the applicant have passed a hunter safety and education course approved by the VA Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. This is the most common qualification for applicants to report. And once "competency" is approved it is never re-evaluated or revoked.

I teach those courses and I am here to tell you with absolute certainty that these courses do NOT include a competency exam. The exam at the end of the course is a 50-question multiple choice examination. You can pass the test having never picked up a firearm much less without having to demonstrate competency.

So you can't use "competency" as an argument for arming students--I'm the one who has to stand in front of those students.

You want to go through rigorous training with high pressure target identification tests, accuracy, and the whole nine? Be my guest. When that's required for a CCW permit and has to be renewed with great frequency I'll support them.

And when can we start requiring that for the POLICE?!?

Immediately if you like and I'd support that legislation as well.

For what it's worth though, uniformed officers aren't really carrying "concealed" weapons. They're out in plain sight.

Killfile:
I agree with you 100% on the competency requirement. I do support stricter training and UPHOLDING those requirements to hold a valid CCW. But I still firmly believe in concealed carry on campuses by the definitions you and several others have made. Though a shooting like this or Virginia may never be stopped completely, it sure levels the playing field a wacko is going to create when shooting unarmed victims.

because the insane are ALL ABOUT following gun laws....

Your points are far more appropriate for a discussion on the challenges and problems facing higher education in contemporary society. And those are issues that as a faculty member I am glad to engage. But not here and not now because you are missing the point entirely. Worldcurmudgeon all but asserted that uncaring, unengaged, unprofessional professors were to blame for tragedies that have befallen Virginia Tech and NIU.

Nine of my students died two buildings away from me in classrooms where I often taught because Seung-Hui Cho walked into the building armed and determined to take the lives of students and faculty members before taking his own. Teaching, good or bad, had absolutely nothing to do with that.

You have done absolutely nothing to prove that the professors on my campus are uncaring or unengaged. You've done nothing to demonstrate that they are bad teachers. All you have done is throw around stereotypes that could be accurate in your experience but that you have no way to prove apply to my university, much less universally to its faculty. But more importantly you have done absolutely nothing to link bad teaching to campus shootings and I resent that you would attempt to justify assertions that the faculty on these campuses were responsible for these tragedies.

One of my colleagues stood in front of the gunman to give his students time to escape through windows. Another left the safety of his third floor office to offer his assistance only to be killed few minutes later. They were wonderful teachers, brilliant researchers, and heroes who cared enough about students to give their lives to do anything they could to protect them from harm.

You don't know me or anything about my background. Your arrogant suggestion that I should "take a few moments to look at" data that might "surprise me" is insulting because I am actually intimately familiar with the pedagogical literature to which you refer. I'll thank you to refrain from making assumptions regarding my teaching techniques, skills, or effectiveness in the future. You were correct when you said that your sidetrack into pedagogy had nothing to do with the NIU tragedy and I for one would ask that you stick to the topic at hand.

If you want to write an article about teaching in higher education, I will gladly contribute in the comments section. But what has been suggested in this column is that academia somehow brought these tragedies upon itself. Having lived through the tragedy at Virginia Tech and its aftermath I am telling you that no university deserves to have its students and faculty gunned down. No one deserves to watch rescue workers carry bleeding students from classrooms. I don't care if my university is home to the very worst professors in the history of the profession, it didn't deserve to see 33 members of its community die on a cold morning in April.

I guess you somehow missed that this article was about the shooting in N. Illinois University. Since nothing you have to say has anything to do with thread at hand I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.