Try the political quiz
@ISIDEWITHQuestionsEducationStates: OhioStarted 3mos agoActive 1mo ago

Should Ohio public universities be prohibited from requiring diversity training and endorsing controversial beliefs?

This question refers to the controversial Senate Bill 83, also known as the Ohio Higher Education Enhancement Act. If fully enacted, it would ban mandatory diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) training at public colleges, prohibit university staff from striking, and mandate that classrooms be free from political 'indoctrination' on specified concepts. Supporters see it as a necessary correction to liberal bias in academia, while opponents view it as a direct attack on academic freedom and labor rights.

+
Expand

Knowledge quiz

How much do you know about Education?

See if you know more than the average American.

Test your knowledge!

25 Replies

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...3mos3MO

No

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...3mos3MO

Yes

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...3mos3MO

No, this is state-sponsored censorship of academic freedom.

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...3mos3MO

Yes, pass Senate Bill 83 to stop woke indoctrination.

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...3mos3MO

No, it destroys tenure and micromanages the classroom.

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...3mos3MO

Yes, ban faculty strikes and prioritize intellectual diversity over DEI.

 @BDGLM75Independent from Ohio  answered…1mo1MO

Higher education is a place for freedom- unless it tramples the rights of others - but do not allow terroristic views

 @BD423NHLibertarian from Ohio  answered…2mos2MO

Everyone is evryone it doesnt matter

 @BCZ5T6N from Ohio  answered…2mos2MO

No, but classrooms shouldn't indoctrinate people on specified concepts. A class room shouldn't tell people how to think, it should give people the ability to think for themselves.

 @BCY6Z27 from Ohio  answered…2mos2MO

Yes, it should not be required, but also not prohibited

 @BCRGWKC from Ohio  answered…2mos2MO

The university should be allowed to make this decision, and parents and students can decide what universities to send their kids to depending on their past decisions. I also do think intellectual diversity should be preserved, and more debate should be held.

 @BCQFKCM from Ohio  answered…2mos2MO

Yes, but not ban faculty strikes, unless they get out of hand. I think it's important that universities become breading grounds for intellectual debate, not echo chambers.

 @BCNLCM6 from Ohio  answered…2mos2MO

20 piece chicken nuggets

 @BCHWZYG from Ohio  answered…3mos3MO

I don't think they should be prohibited but there should be some restrictions

 @BCHW7P7 from Ohio  answered…3mos3MO

I think that every kid should have the same fairness when it comes to being chosen to attend a college. Colleges/Universities should only be allowed to look at a kid's test scores/resume to allow them in, and they could take data on someone's race afterwards. All kids should have the same chance.

 @BCHT4RHProgressive from Ohio  answered…3mos3MO

I think they should encourage diversity training but not be required by state.

 @BCHNGSG from Ohio  answered…3mos3MO

I believe in class-based affirmative action, but the universities should choose for themselves.

 @BCBSCP3Democrat from Ohio  answered…3mos3MO

I don't think there should be quotas they have to reach and I think they should be punished if they discriminate against any races.

 @BC9TQL2 from Ohio  answered…3mos3MO

Public universities should be allowed to teach what they want as long as it's not harmful information to the student(if it is then the student could also leave the college).

 @BC6RQZT from Ohio  answered…3mos3MO

Yes, but people shouldn't be banned in saying what they believe

 @BC5XWRXProgressive from Ohio  answered…3mos3MO

I don't believe the two must be mutually exclusive, we should have diversity training, but public universities should have the ability to choose their curriculum.

 @BC5XC98 from Ohio  answered…3mos3MO

No, but do not allow indoctrination of political beliefs

 @BC44W5F from Ohio  answered…3mos3MO

It should only be set in place if there are racial, sexist, homophobic, or transphobic restrictions in place.

 @BC2CRN2Democrat from Ohio  answered…3mos3MO

DEI programs should come back and the government should NOT put laws out there taking away diversity in companies.

 @BCPM4TP from Ohio  answered…2mos2MO

Make it optional

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

Israeli Bombings Kill 2,300 In Lebanon in 3 weeks

Lebanese authorities say Israeli bombing has killed more than 2,300 people and injured almost 11,000, mostly in the past three weeks, with Israeli attacks reaching areas far beyond Hizbollah’s traditional bastions of support in the south.The Israeli military has ordered people living in more than a quarter of Lebanon to flee, according to a UN calculation, as its fight with the Iran-backed Shia militant group Hizbollah threatens to engulf the Mediterranean country.Lebanese authorities say Israeli bombing has killed more than 2,300 people and injured almost 11,000, mostly in the past three weeks, with Israeli attacks reaching areas far beyond Hizbollah’s traditional bastions of support in the south.More than 1mn people have fled their homes in Lebanon in under a month, according to its government, a dramatic forced movement of the population in a country of only about 5mn inhabitants with a land mass smaller than the US state of Connecticut. Israeli forces began a ground offensive in south Lebanon two weeks ago, in their fourth invasion of the country in under five decades. They had already destroyed large parts of the densely populated southern Beirut suburb where Hizbollah had its headquarters, and killed many top militant commanders in air strikes, including former leader Hassan Nasrallah.Rema Jamous Imseis, Middle East director of UNHCR, told journalists in Geneva that “over 25 per cent of [Lebanon is] under a direct Israeli military evacuation order”. “People are heeding these calls to evacuate and they’re fleeing with almost nothing,” she added, saying that 80 per cent of the shelters opened by the Lebanese government — mostly in schools — were now full.

▲  1012 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

A Moment of Darkness': Washington Post's No-Endorsement Decision Ignites Media Firestorm

Even though the presidential race between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris is neck and neck, The Washington Post has decided not to make a presidential endorsement for the first time in 36 years, the publisher and CEO announced Friday."We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates," Will Lewis wrote in an opinion piece published on the paper's website. He referenced the paper's policy in the decades prior to 1976, when, following the Watergate scandal that the Post broke, it endorsed Democratic nominee Jimmy Carter. The last time the Post did not endorse a presidential candidate in the general election was 1988, according to a search of its archives.Colleagues learned the news from the editorial page editor, David Shipley, at a tense meeting shortly before Lewis' announcement. The meeting was characterized by someone with direct knowledge of discussions on condition of anonymity to speak about internal matters.Shipley said that he told other editorial board leaders Thursday by management that there would be no endorsement, though he has known for weeks. He added that he "owns" this decision. The reason he cited was to create "independent space" where the newspaper does not tell people for whom to vote.Colleagues were said to be "shocked" and uniformly negative. Post corporate spokespeople have not responded to multiple messages left by NPR on the subject.Former Washington Post Executive Editor Martin Baron, who led the newsroom to acclaim during Trump's presidency, denounced the decision starkly."This is cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty," Baron said in a statement to NPR. "Donald Trump will celebrate this as an invitation to further intimidate The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos (and other media owners). History will mark a disturbing chapter of spinelessness at an institution famed for courage."A similar decision by Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong led this week to the resignations of the paper's editorials editor and two editorial board members. Soon-Shiong said that he had asked the editorial board to draft a "factual analysis" of Trump and Harris' policies and plans. In her resignation letter, editorials editor Mariel Garza said the decision made the paper look “craven and hypocritical,” given its past reporting and editorials on Trump.

▲  1013 replies