I remember how it was -- JR
Art professor SUES Hamline University for defamation and RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION after she was fired and branded Islamophobic for showing a painting of Muhammad
Professor Erika López Prater, 42, has announced she's suing Hamline College in St Paul for dismissing her for showing a class a painting of Muhammad
An art professor has sued a college for defamation and religious discrimination after she was ousted for showing students a painting of the Prophet Muhammad and branded Islamophobic.
Erika Lopez Prater announced the suit against Hamline University in Minnesota Tuesday evening, the Star Tribune reported.
Hamline - which initially defended its authoritarian behavior - said its decision to accuse Prater of discrimination against Muslims was 'flawed,' as the suit was announced.
Prater's lawsuit highlights how she repeatedly warned students before October's class about the image she planned to show, which was painted by a Muslim.
Many Muslims say it is forbidden to display images of the Prophet Muhammad, although America's largest Muslim rights organization has defended Prater, and agrees her behavior was not Islamophobic.
Despite the warnings, one student named Arem Wedatalla complained, starting a chain of events which culminated in Prater's dismissal.
Her suit says: 'Students viewing the online class had ample warning about the paintings.
'Students viewing the online class also had ample opportunity to turn away from their computer screens, turn their screens away from them, turn off their screens, or even leave their rooms before the paintings were displayed.'
Prater's attorney David Redden further alleges that she was told by a department leader that it sounded as if she'd 'done everything right.'
But in November, Prater was told her class was being canceled from spring, with the woke college's Office of Inclusive Excellence sending around an email branding Prater's class 'undeniably inconsiderate, disrespectful and Islamophobic.'
Redden alleges this was defamatory, and says Hamline staff turned his client into a 'pariah,' while crushing anyone who tried to support her.
He said she was further defamed in a student newspaper 'discussion' about her behavior, and alleges Prater herself was the victim of religious discrimination.
Redden says this is because Prater 'is not Muslim, because she did not conform her conduct to the specific beliefs of a Muslim sect, and because she did not conform her conduct to the religion-based preferences of Hamline that images of Muhammad not be shown to any Hamline student.'
The lawsuit came hours after a top Muslim rights group panned accusations of Islamophobia surrounding a college professor who was fired for showing a painting of the prophet Muhammad to her students.
Conscious that in some branches of Islam it is blasphemous to look at any image of the Prophet, Prater warned student in writing the class would feature pictures of the 14th-century religious figure.
Despite allowing students to leave the room during the lesson, several complained - and Prater, 42, lost her job. Afterwards, the students, led by 23-year-old Wedatalla, touted the dismissal as a victory.
The incident has since spawned responses from civil rights groups who have condemned the firing - with the National Executive Director of the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) now the latest to contest the decision.
In a press release Friday, the Washington DC- based advocacy group offered its official stance on the controversy, asserting that academics should not be condemned as 'bigots' without the proper justification.
The response comes after an executive of the civil right's group's Minnesota chapter celebrated the firing, condemning the Muhammad depiction as 'blasphemy' and an infringement on students' rights.
The CAIR, the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights group, joins organizations like The American Civil Liberties Union ACLU, PEN America, The New York Times and Fox News in condemning the decision.
'Academics should not be condemned as bigots without evidence or lose their positions without justification,' an excerpt from the statement read.
'Although we strongly discourage showing visual depictions of the Prophet, we recognize that professors who analyze ancient paintings for an academic purpose are not the same as Islamophobes who show such images to cause offense,' it continued.
'Based on what we know up to this point, we see no evidence that Professor Erika López Prater acted with Islamophobic intent or engaged in conduct that meets our definition of Islamophobia.'
The statement did not mention how the firing was earlier celebrated by CAIR-MN's Jaylani Hussein, executive director of its Minnesota sect.
Hussein, like several others who have supported Prater's firing in recent months, slammed the academic's decision to show the art piece offensive and 'an act of Islamophobia.'
A day after the CAIR slammed the firing, Prater made her first public appearance, appearing in open forum discussing her firing presided over by Islam and global affairs Muqtedar Khan.
Khan, a professor of Political Science and International Relations at the University of Delaware where he heads its Islamic Studies Program, was joined by scholars Dr. Christiane Gruber, Salam Al-Marayati, and Dr. Hyder Khan in a pointed talk about the repercussions of the university's decision.
During the discussion, Prater - who plans to teach at Macalester College in the spring - revealed that she had had a discussion with at least one of the students who her spurred her firing, who she said 'had some pretty strong feelings' on the matter.
'We did have a conversation with one of the students who was objecting to it after the class, right - like, what were her principal objections besides saying that this is forbidden in Islam. She had some pretty strong feelings that she expressed to me.
'One of them that perhaps gets to the heart of the matter,' she continued, 'was that she thought that the warnings that I had provided to the class didn't even matter.
'She believed that images of the Prophet Muhammad should never be shown full stop - even if those are pedagogically relevant images.'
Lopez Prater said that while she may disagree with the university's decision, she respected the student's stance - despite giving multiple written and verbal warnings that the art history course would touch on religious iconography, including the famed 14th-century painting of Muhammad, which DailyMail.com has chosen not to publish.
The saga started October 6, when Lopez Prater was teaching the online class about Islamic art that was part of a wider curriculum on pieces from all over the world. That day, she chose to analyze a 14th-century depiction of the angel Gabriel delivering the Prophet's first revelation.
Conscious that in some branches of Islam it is blasphemous to look at any image of the Prophet, Professor Lopez Prater gave students two minutes to look away from the screen or log out before she projected the image onto her presentation.
Wedatalla, the president of the university's Muslim association who spearheaded the campaigning to get Lopez Prater fired, chose to remain online in the class.
Afterwards, she and others promptly complained to school officials that the image 'blindsided' her and made her feel marginalized.
Lopez Prater was fired after more students - including some who were not in the class - complained.
****************************************************
NYC special needs school is filled with rats and filth
A New York City school for special needs children is a filth hole where roaches climb on children, rats roam the halls and “good-old-boy” staff members engage in sexual harassment, a lawsuit filed by a former employee this week alleges.
The International Institute for the Brain (iBRAIN)’s building on East 91st Street was “extremely filthy” and crawling with vermin– all while receiving up to $350,000 in taxpayer funding per student, ex-worker Katelyn Newman claims in the New York Supreme Court suit filed Jan. 16.
“Leaks in the plumbing were stuffed up with Dorito bags or whatever else was readily available,” when Newman began working at the facility, the complaint reads.
“The carcass of a rat could be seen for an extended time period before it was finally removed, and the ceiling over the entryway where the children entered the building was falling down.”
Despite allegedly receiving $1 million in PPP money in 2020 and $800,000 in 2021, the school also struggled with a “severe lack of equipment,” and students were reportedly forced to sleep on dirty mats.
According to the lawsuit, first reported by The Daily Beast, one student was hospitalized after an incompetent staffer botched a medical procedure, blocking his circulation and causing his legs to swell.
The troubling picture Newman paints of the floundering institution is a far-cry from its advertising.
Founded in 2018, iBRAIN professes to be a “highly specialized educational opportunity” for students ages five through 21 with severe brain injuries or neurological disorders.
Newman worked at the school as a publicity associate beginning in Aug. 2022. She quit in mid-December after what she describes as a prolonged campaign of gender discrimination and sexual harassment.
The suit’s most concerning allegations come against Dr. Victor Pedro, who she claims falsified his credentials as a “Board Certified Chiropractic Neurologist” made “sexually suggestive” remarks to female staff.
She says Pedro, the school’s Chief Innovation Officer (CIO), pushed an unfounded treatment called Cortical Integrated Therapy (CIT) — which in Newman’s view, used children as “human guinea pigs.”
Although the lawsuit did not describe what CIT entails, Pedro’s website hawks PEDROCIT®, which he claims is a non-invasive system that “accurately pinpoints and identifies the injured or under-performing areas of the brain.”
The lawsuit notes that the United States Department of Health and Human Services rejected Pedro’s application to have CIT covered by Medicare in 2017.
Two years later, The Providence Journal reported that Rhode Island yanked $1 million in state budget funding for the treatment.
Students were also allegedly exposed to bogus treatments by Rodney Robinson, who is now facing federal charges over a years-long con during which he posed as “Dr. Alim Shariff,” a Harvard-educated behavioral psychologist, the suit said.
Newman also cites inappropriate behavior by Patrick Donohue, iBRAIN’s founder and chairman, whom she says fostered a “‘good old boy’ fraternity” environment among staffers.
Neither Pedro, school officials nor Donohue replied to The Post’s request for comments. Robinson could not immediately be reached for comment.
The stressful environment at iBRAIN, Newman alleges, was further exacerbated by Arthur Mielnik, the Deputy Director of Strategic Planning, and Suzanne Wallach, Director of Strategic Planning.
Wallach’s alleged constant pestering after work hours, in particular, left Newman “depressed, stressed and exhausted,” and she was “compelled to seek professional therapeutic assistance.”
Both Mielnik and Wallach are named in the lawsuit, and did not reply to The Post’s request for comments.
After first attempting resign in Nov. 2022, Newman formally tendered her resignation on Dec. 13.
At this point, the lawsuit states, iBRAIN’s administrators sent letters to her parents, her fiancée, and several professional contacts. The letter accused Newman of violating “‘the New York State Child Abuse and Neglect statues,’” as well as spreading “false, inaccurate and unfounded information” about the school.
“Upon information and belief, defendants clear intent in sending these false written accusations against her to her family members and business contacts was to destroy her personal and professional reputation,” the suit reads.
Speaking to The Daily Beast this week, Newman described her experience as “psychological torture.” She did not immediately respond to The Post’s request for a comment.
The lawsuit seeks a jury trial, with damages to be determined in court. When reached by phone, Newman’s lawyer, Kenneth F. McCallion, declined to comment on the case.
https://nypost.com/2023/01/18/nyc-special-needs-school-filthy-run-by-quack-chiropractor-lawsuit/
**************************************************Harvard Medical School withdraws from leading ranking system over dean's 'philosophical concerns'
Harvard University Medical School is withdrawing from an annual rankings of top medical schools in the country amid claims it discourages support for low-income students.
Citing 'philosophical' issues with US News & World Report's long-running list, Dean George Daley aired the decision Tuesday in a message to members of the medical school community .
The list ranks the best medical schools in the nation, and is often used by prospective students and parents when determining which colleges to apply to.
Opponents are now calling the yearly compilation 'flawed', alleging it can unfairly influence students' chances when applying for jobs, graduate school, and PHD programs.
Previously, Harvard's medical school was ranked the best in the country in terms of research, and ninth for primary care.
Announcing the school's decision to abstain from sending information to to media company for its tabulations, Dean Daley said he was inspired by recent decisions from Harvard and Yale's law schools to pull out from its list of top law institutions over concerns involving equity.
'Rankings cannot meaningfully reflect the high aspirations for educational excellence, graduate preparedness, and compassionate and equitable patient care that we strive to foster in our medical education program,' said Daley, a longtime member of the HMS faculty who assumed deanship of the school in 2017.
The dean cited issues educational leaders have had with the methodology used by US News & World Report for its lists, which had been dominated by Yale and Harvard since the 1980s.
Daley, a recognized leader in stem cell science and cancer biology, argued that the rankings create 'perverse' incentives for institutions to report misleading or inaccurate data to garner a better rating.
The biologist added that instead of aiding those with a financial need, school set policies designed to raise their rankings, thus diverting financial aid only toward high-performing students, and not the ones who may actually need it.
'Ultimately, the suitability of any particular medical school for any given student is too complex, nuanced, and individualized to be served by a rigid ranked list, no matter the methodology,' Daley said.
The U.S. News medical-school ranking relies on peer assessment surveys, with 15 percent of a school's score based on reviews from deans, admissions directors and other academics.
Another 15 percent is based on reviews from residency program directors. Also taken into account are median scores on the Medical College Admission Test, or MCAT, and candidates undergraduate grade-point averages.
Research activity and the production of primary-care doctors are also factored in, for each of the two medical school lists.
Daley said that while not intentional, the rankings encourages schools to fudge numbers to earn a better spot, diverting aid from students with need to those with the high test scores in the process.
Instead, Daley insisted that his priority is not to receive a top ranking, but to focus on the 'quality and richness of the educational experience' for students at the Massachusetts medical school, while creating an environment optimal for students' personal growth and 'lifelong learning.'
The school official then pivoted to the recent decisions from the deans from both Yale and Harvard law, commending them as 'bold and courageous'.
Both school caused a stir in November, when they recused themselves from US report's law-school version of the list in November.
Daley said the school's maneuvers - which have since faced criticism - set the blueprint for his decision.
Announcing their intent to stop providing information to US Report to be tapulated, the school's criticized the rankings’ methodology as fundamentally flawed, saying it discourages support for low-income students.
The dean of Yale Law, Heather Gerken, argued that the system incentivizes schools to give aid to those who get high scores rather than for the low-income applicants who need it more.
Gerken said the current list devalues programs aimed at providing aid for low-income students and programs that encourage low-paying public interest jobs.
'The U.S. News rankings are profoundly flawed,' Gerken said in a statement. 'They disincentivize programs that support public interest careers, champion need-based aid, and welcome working-class students into the profession.
'Its approach not only fails to advance the legal profession, but stands squarely in the way of progress.'
The dean ultimately said the system undermines altruistic efforts to give students opportunities as colleges focus on rankings for prestige.
'In fact, in recent years, we have invested significant energy and capital in important initiatives that make our law school a better place but perversely work to lower our scores,' she said of the university's work.
She also criticized the rankings preference over schools that give scholarships to the students with the best scores, not for those who need the financial aid.
'This heavily weighted metric imposes tremendous pressure on schools to overlook promising students, especially those who cannot afford expensive test preparation courses,' Gerken said.
'At a moment when concerns about economic equity stand at the center of our national dialogue, only two law schools in the country continue to give aid based entirely on need — Harvard and Yale.'
The dean added that graduates appeared to be classified as unemployed in the US News ranking if they took school-funded fellowship for public interest jobs, or if they went on to enroll for higher education.
U.S. News & World Report - which began these lists in the 80s - has since faced criticism in the ensuing months, with several academic institutions, including Harvard Law, cutting ties with the company.
Several other law schools have joined Yale and Harvard - two of the top performing schools in the country - in withdrawing from the rankings.
***********************************
My other blogs: Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
*******************************
No comments:
Post a Comment