NoIndoctrination.org - View Listing

[Help NoIndoctrination.org - Donate Now Through Network For Good]

Warning: Postings are only opinions. (See Terms of Service)

Note: Although the postings appear to be anonymous, NoIndoctrination.org knows the posters' names. We communicate with the posters before putting their comments online. We also research each posting and ask for corroborating material when appropriate.

Record for NoIndoctrination.org entry #247.

University of Texas at San Antonio (UTSA)

Aug. 12, 2003

http://www.utsa.edu

Course: History 2053: Texas History

Course Catalog Description: An overview of the development of Texas from the era of Spanish exploration and colonization to the modern period, with emphasis on major events in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Topics may vary, but generally will include cultural geography, contributions of ethnic minorities and women, the Republic of Texas, statehood, secession, Reconstruction, conservatism, reform, oil exploration, urbanization, and political, economic, and social change in the post-World War II era.

Professor: M. Carmen Reyes-Johnson

Required? Yes, for all students

Lecture Bias: Excessive

Comments: Professor Reyes-Johnson, for all my distaste of her personality and teaching, is quite smart and made it very clear the first day of class that no taperecording of her lectures would be allowed unless that person had a member of the Disabilities Department write a letter. This immediately set alarms off in my head. When a professor says this, they are protecting themselves from being chastized about their lectures. Professor Reyes-Johnson's political agenda and skewed lectures were the result of what she believes to be the racist, white, male dominated society. Professor Reyes-Johnson discussed the connection between oil and politics in Texas in the 1930s. However, she then said that this still occurs today in Texas and American politics and said: "Hint, Hint" and looked around the room, implying to many in the classroom that President Bush and others in the government are acting on oil-interests rather than American interests. She suggested that oil-interests in Texas have influenced politicians to the point of harming minorities. She mentioned how "White Settlers" brought a group of Indians into their town and then poisoned the food. She said that the U.S. Government sent troops into Oklahoma and Texas and other states and surrounded the Indian Reservations in order to "starve" the Indians to death. While such atrocities did happen to American Indians in the United States, the purpose of the soldiers being at the reservations was to protect them from settlers. Settlers would often encroach on the Indian's land causing many problems. But the professor was more interested in trying to prove that government conspired to kill all Indians, and failed to show or give any proof of her suggestions. We covered contributions of minorities and women, Republic of Texas, statehood, Reconstruction, oil exploration heavily. However, the Professor spent a number of classes talking about the following subjects which I do not think necessarily are in the course description: Massacres of Mexican Americans and Black Americans, deportation of Mexican-Americans, Civil Rights in Texas, Unions, NAACP, Segregation, Lynching, Segregation in Government Housing. In terms of tax dollars and my tuition money, I didn't learn anything except that Texas is about oil, greed, death, etc. The government did involve itself in terrible government policies involving not only Indians, but Blacks, Latinos, along with many others. However, the professor's personal bias did not allow her to accurately portray Texan or American society. Every culture, every society, has its bad leaders and bad policies, but Professor Reyes-Johnson's lack of fully explaining situations leads students to come away from the class with Half-Truths and Half-Stories to come to conclusions that she wishes one to come to.

Discussion Bias: Excessive

Comments: The Professor consistently did not provide an opportunity to rebut any of her lectures or comments. If someone did she often would say "Oh, yes" and move right on. The problem is that while she acknowledged the person's feedback she never allowed it to continue for more than a few seconds. I never felt that my conservative opinion was allowed, and felt that if I openly disagreed that I could lose points on my grade. Professor Reyes-Johnson required that every student present a 10-15 minute discussion on any town in Texas with exception to Houston, San Antonio, Dallas, Austin, or El Paso. 95% of the presentations included the obvious historical detail as required by the assingment sheet: Population, climate, how the city/town was founded, place of interests, etc. However, two students used this as an opportunity to opine on subjects unrelated to the assignment. One student researched Crystal City, Texas - a town south of San Antonio where one of several camps were created to detain German and Japanesse Americans during WWII after the attack on Pearl Harbor, HI. This student spoke for approximately 10 minutes on the "White-Protestant Capitalist racism in the town" and the proliferation of racism by the government against the people. His comments were militant, racist, and inappropriate for a classroom environment. Specifically, because no one was told that he/she could use the classroom as a political forum. This student used the opportunity to speak his own political agenda. The professor sat at the front of the classroom and simply nodded her head. The second student discussed Jasper, Texas - which, as many probably remember, was the site of the attrocities against a black man by two former white men from prison and a third man. The two men from prison had numerous tattoos of the KKK and White Supremacy/Neo-Nazism. Although, this did happen in Jasper, again this was the only information given on the town without regard to the requirments of the assignment.

Readings Bias: Excessive

Comments: The required text was "Texas Lone Star State" by Richardson. I purchased the book prior to the class, but was told on the first day we would not need it or read it. However, those who did read it found that Professor Reyes-Johnson said nearly the opposite of what the book said. Outside readings were required for the course. She had handouts in the library on reserve that we were required to read throughout the semester. All readings on issues were one-sided, except for one assignment that involved the Mexican-American war. The reading was required for all students, and was divided into 2 parts: The War as Imperialism, and the War as Not Imperialism. The reading was balanced in the view of you could read both and make a decision. When we entered the discussion groups the professor went from group to group and began to ask questions and generate discussion. However, when my group questioned the validity of the idea that it was Imperialism, she said that was incorrect. She reiterated that it was Imperialism. She simply replied that it was, there was no question. She did not allow anyone to try and think differently. When we took our exam she asked one essay question asking "Why the Mexican-American war was an act of American-Imperialism, and cite specific details as mentioned in the reading." Although, one may feel this way, others may not. History, in these terms, is a matter of opinion. The professor did not allow the students to choose Imperalism/Not Imperialism essay and explain why. But instead told to explain why it was an act of American Imperialism.

General Comments: The course is a basic History course. ALL Students are required to take 2 of 3 History classes. There is US History Revolutionary War to 1865. A second class that is US History 1865-Present; and a third class which is Texas History. I have already taken the two US Histories, and decided to take Texas History because of my love for history and hopefully to learn a little more about Texas. I have had other professors in the History Department, but this woman was the most militant I have ever encountered in 4 years of college, and I'm a Political Science major! The simple fact is that she is trying to convince everyone that the white-protestant-male is racist and greedy and out to bring people down. She associates, as I see it, all white males to KKK members. After this class you feel as though the only contribution Texas has made in the world is: Racism, hatred, death, destruction, arrogance and greed. I know all of these ideas exist in every society and every culture, and I know that this country and state was once a very racist and oppressive place. However, the professor did not give a real effort to speak of the good policies or ideas of Texan Culture, society or politics. This was a class taught by a professor with a tremendous amount of anger, resentment and racism. I left the class feeling as though as a White-Protestant-Male I am the downfall of all of humanity, specifically Mexican-Americans, African-Americans and Indians, along with other groups.

Rebuttal

When a course posting goes online, NoIndoctrination.org sends a notice to the professor inviting him/her to contest any specifics. (See Rebuttals.) If we receive a rebuttal, it will be posted here.