Universities will take the cash, even if it’s "dirty" cash

Right now, MIT, Tufts, and other local universities are grappling with important questions: Is it OK to accept tainted money when it funds a just cause? Is it ever right to accept donations that help deplorable people launder their reputations?

MIT answered both more or less in the affirmative on Wednesday, announcing that it would not sever its financial and research ties with Saudi Arabia. This, despite the kingdom’s heartless role in the civil war that has brought Yemenis to their knees, and the growing certainty that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi.

There’s no question MIT’s ties with the kingdom have legitimized its autocratic ruler: When Salman visited MIT (and Harvard) in March, university president L. Rafael Reif spoke of his country’s “promising new future.” A photograph showed Reif warmly holding the ruler’s hand in both of his.

On Wednesday, Reif sought to undo that disastrous PR by condemning Saudi Arabia’s “brutal human rights violations, discrimination and suppression of dissent, including the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.” But he stopped short of terminating relationships between MIT and institutions controlled by the Saudi government, arguing that the partnerships involved “worthy Saudi people who share our principles and are doing good work.” He said it would be up to individual researchers to decide whether to continue their connections with the kingdom.

Reif didn’t go nearly far enough. Surely there’s a way to avoid entanglements with a brutal regime without severing working partnerships with, and scholarships for, its unfortunate subjects. Saudi money represents just 0.2 percent of the university’s operating budget, officials told the Globe. MIT should replace that tainted money from its own hefty coffers. Because as long as MIT continues to accept funds from the kingdom, its denunciations ring hollow, and its own reputation suffers. The same goes for Harvard, Babson, and other universities with ties to Saudi Arabia.

The question of questionable partnerships, this time with big business, is more clear-cut — and more damning — at Tufts University. There, officials are grappling with troubling revelations in Attorney General Maura Healey’s lawsuit against Purdue Pharma. The company has been accused of pressuring and misleading doctors and the public about its blockbuster opioid OxyContin, deceptions that helped fuel an epidemic of addictions.

At Tufts, Purdue’s donations didn’t just launder the company’s image: Purdue, owned by the Sackler family, turned Tufts into a marketing arm for its dangerous opioids. And, according to the complaint, faculty at the Tufts Sackler Graduate School of Biomedical Science were all too willing to help.

A 1999 Purdue donation established a Master’s of Science in Pain Research, Education and Policy at Tufts. There was an annual Sackler lecture on pain medicine — no conflict there! The program “bought Purdue name recognition, goodwill in the local and medical communities, and access to doctors at Massachusetts hospitals,” the complaint says.

According to e-mails and other internal documents obtained by the AG, Purdue staff taught a Tufts seminar about opioids, and influenced the curriculum — and doctors connected to the school — in other ways.

In the wake of these astounding revelations, Tufts has vowed to review its connections to the Sacklers for possible conflicts of interest. That ought to take about five minutes. Tufts has been compromised to the point where the only way back is to cut off Purdue and the Sacklers, no matter the cost.

Reasonable people can disagree over whether museums should sever connections with compromised donors like Saudi Arabia or the Sacklers. There’s not nearly as much moral wiggle room at colleges and universities, which are in the business of shaping young minds, and urging students to try to do good in the world.

Time to practice what they preach, and not what pays.

SOURCE 






British school is forced to cancel its play based on Charles Darwin after parents complain about sexually suggestive dance move and the representation of Christian views

A British school has cancelled a performance of a musical about Charles Darwin after parents complained about the representation of Christian views.

Students from the Hartford Manor Primary School in Cheshire were due to perform the 'Darwin Rocks!' musical next month but it has been scrapped after six parents raised concerns over lyrics that 'refer to bump and grind' - a sexually-suggestive dance move.

The headteacher of the school, Simon Kidwell, said a handful of parents believed a bishop in the play was 'mocked' in a scene.

Musicline, the musical's publishers, said it was written by a Christian and said they were unaware of the performance having 'courted controversy before'.

The production is meant to be a 'light-hearted look' at the work of Darwin's theory of evolution, according to Musicline's website.

One concerned parents said they did not want their daughter to think her ambition to be an engineer went against Christian values, Mr Kidwell told the BBC.

The school board was not involved in the decision to drop the muscial, Mr Kidwell added, and denied suggestions made in a local newspaper that a local vicar influenced the decision.

Mr Kidwell said the school teaches evolution as part of its syllabus.

Mike Smith, managing director at Musicline, said the play had been performed in schools around the world since 2017.

He said: 'You can't please all the people all the time, but having been in the school musical business for over 25 years, we can't ever recall having courted controversy before.'

SOURCE 






Australia: Thousands back call for minister to reinstate principal dragging defiant child

If the principal cannot enforce discipline, who can?

Parents have rallied behind a Melbourne principal accused of dragging a primary school-aged pupil through a playground.

Steve Warner, the principal of Manor Lakes P-12 College in Wyndham Vale, was stood down after video footage of the incident emerged last month.

Almost 15,000 people had signed a petition calling on Victorian Education Minister James Merlino to reinstate Mr Warner by midday on Monday.

Parent Mark England said the school community had written to federal and state ministers but the principal's fate remained uncertain.

The footage is being investigated by both the Department of Education and Victoria Police.

The petition, started by Mr England on change.org, said Mr Warner had been an "amazing influence" on the school and its students since his appointment two years ago.

It said he had "turned the school around" with renewed focus on learning and improved discipline.

"The worst outcome of this situation would be for the school to lose him as the principal and leader," Mr England wrote.

"His work has only just started to take effect and there are only good things that could come from him continuing in his role.

"We are asking that his dedicated work at the school not be in vain due to this one isolated incident."

Mr England said he had collected 200 comments from the school community speaking of their positive experiences with the principal to forward to state and federal politicians.

Mr England said he would withdraw his two children from the school if Mr Warner was not reinstated. He had heard of other parents considering the same.

It is understood the footage was captured on Snapchat by another student on January 31 and then shared on social media. The circumstances leading up to the incident are unclear and are being investigated.

Shortly after the footage emerged, Mr Merlino said it was "appalling and concerning".

The minister has been contacted for comment. A police spokesman said its investigation was ongoing.

SOURCE