Persuasive Peer Evaluation Form: Fill & Download for Free

Peer Evaluation of Persuasive Speech Use this form to evaluate the speech of one of your peers. You will probably be asked to provide feedback for a particular student in your class. Your name: Person you are evaluating:

Having taught at ten different universities and colleges in a field that is notoriously “liberal,” I find the charge of “fiercely liberal” and “extremely unwelcoming” baffling.It is extremely easy, however, to cherry-pick anecdotes, find dramatic instances, employ composition fallacies, etc. to speciously support overblown and self-serving charges that universities are bastions of liberal indoctrination.People who do this, I suspect, mostly do for purpose of avoiding cognitive dissonance (of scientific findings, for example), maintaining some sort of right-wing self-righteousness, and insulating oneself from feeling devalued in a culture that places a high value (perhaps unjustifiably) on higher education credentials, where such insulation tactic is based on a sort of “ressentiment”. Even worse, so do it for naked political gain.I also suspect that some students use a largely fabricated excuse of “conservative plight” for being mediocre or even lazy students (don’t worry, Liberal students no doubt find other ways to do the same).A few established or proposed facts:University professors as a whole lean left. This is well documented and has been for a long time. Amazon.com: Divided Academy (9780393008371): Everett C. Ladd, Seymore M. Lipset: Bookshttp://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=97806740590922. Universities are places where diverse forms of thought are expected and are even encouraged. It should not be surprising if an economics, sociology, political science, department has at least one Marxist. That should be thought of as a good thing. But, someone inclined to cry foul and reduce academia to a leftest den, can always find that person as support. At my beloved University of Chicago, we have an entire department “The Committee on Social Thought,” that was in part set aside as a host for more “conservative” (i.e., classical liberal) scholars. I, like virtually everyone else I know, am glad its there and have taken every opportunity to have some affiliation with it.3. With 2, many forms of what many conservatives like to call “liberal” beliefs, philosophies, lines of inquiry, etc. are parts of many departments in humanities and social sciences. Someone should be doing research on things like “identity,” “oppression,” “racial injustice,” etc. You can always find it if you want to claim universities enforce political correctness.4. Universities are places set aside for alternative ways of thinking and social criticism, including that which many conservatives decry as leftist (Kudos to those Universities that make place for more conservative perspectives where it isn’t already represented). Again, someone needs to be entertaining or even trying to live out these ideas. Glad they do it instead of me. But, again, conservatives can find them to support the charge.I think one could argue that at some point Universities rightfully took up more left-leaning perspectives where there had been a deficit of them. They still need to be there even if there might be a minor excess of them now.Students, by the way, are far more critical than many people foolishly claim otherwise. They are going to examine alternative perspectives critically and they are going to be encouraged by professors to do so by and large.5. Unfortunately, those in 3 and 4 are often the most vocal and vociferous (even obnoxious). The larger majority of faculty that are more moderate and disinclined to be politically engaged in the classroom (I include myself here), are eclipsed by these folks. Conservatives can refer to the former to reduce the latter (me) to rabid “leftists.”6. Especially since the 1960s, universities have been attractive places for people with a more left-leaning orientation. Many people who were or would have been student activists and/or engaged in more left-leaning politics became professors (this was also partly purely demographic, due to baby-boomer generation and explosion of college attendence). This somewhat “disobedient generation” has been strongest in university (especially in social sciences and humanities) since. Because of it, there is some credence to the argument that there is a leftward tendency among faculties, and some left-tending dominant doctrine, albeit one that is far weaker than conservatives like to charge.There have been times when conservative doctrine dominated. I don’t hear many conservatives decrying it. I have strong suspicions if the shoe were on the other foot, many conservatives would staunchly defend their hold and anything they do that is equivalent to what the most vocal doctrinaire left-leaning academics do.7. Even if professors as a whole tend to lean left, their highest commitments are to values of free inquiry, truth, free speech and expression, the development of critical skills in students first and foremost regardless of political ideologies. There is a good argument to make that a minor majority of academic research in social science and liberal arts is driven by left-tending values in terms of the problems researched, theoretical perspectives embraced, and research programs pursued, but the research methods themselves are sufficiently value neutral. Even when researchers ask questions that have political or ideological significance, they want the truth regardless of the political/ideological implications. Their adherence to rational methods keeps them honest and politics out or at least in perspective, and most importantly, shows what they did to get the findings they got, so others can scrutinize the findings, for any potential bias.When people claim that researchers can’t help but bring in at least some bias, they are spouting off a common place that should earn the response — no shit Sherlock! That is why scientific research has to rationally show what it did to come up with findings and why there is peer review. If there is some bias political or otherwise (in my field it probably has more to do with theoretical and methodological commitments that have little to nothing to do with ideology), it is there to be picked out and properly weighed in evaluating the findings. Many conservatives use a no shit common place as an excuse for dismissing academic research.8. Where scholarly findings might imply support for a particular political/ideological narrative, they do not necessarily entail any particular policy prescription, or even support for one and only one ideological narrative. Too many people on any ideological side make hasty logical leaps from empirical research findings to particular policy or ideological implications. If there is a finding that suggests there is widespread discrimination against blacks in a significant proportion of employers’ decisions to grant a job interview, many a conservative person might jump to the conclusion that the researchers believe the finding automatically suggests government intervention (a leap leftleaning people might erroneously make), when in fact it need not, and more importantly, is only an empirical finding, not a policy suggestion. Instead of taking it as an empirical fact, or better yet, scrutinizing how the research was done and what its limits are, or taking it as a fact and thinking what sort of more free-market, non-government interventions might be, it is easier to dismiss the finding as the biased research of rabid liberal communists. I suspect this happens a lot. The intellectually lazy can readily charge liberal bias and indoctrination to get off the hook for critical heavy lifting that real engagement and criticism would entail. The “leftist” charge makes a convenient excuse.9. As a teacher, I know I absolutely love having good conservative perspectives challenge me, empirical findings and research I present in my classes, criticize liberal bias, blindspots, and excesses where they really do exist. When there aren’t enough of such students, I try to play the role myself or get an astute student to do so. No one gets out of my classes without being exposed to classical liberal perspectives (and conservatives’ heroes) like Adam Smith, Hayek, Friedman, etc. I’ll play the role of advocating their perspectives if I have to. I believe there are plenty of teachers that believe in the same thing, and try to do the same.10. While I will encourage and embrace conservative perspectives that are well-established, well-reasoned, and presented in a civil respectful way (as they are the vast majority of the time), I will only tolerate particular students’ political ideological ipsedixits one time. After that, they need to make arguments, present evidence, criticize arguments and evidence based on logic and evidence, or shut the heck up and quit wasting class time with their public masturbation episodes and crusades to prove liberal bias. That goes for anyone regardless of ideological persuasion. Leftwing crap is just much a waste of time as rightwing crap. Students can go argue there stuff outside of my class. If they do so, good for them.11. There are notorious examples of leftwing excesses in academia. Conservative speakers should not only be allowed to speak, and respected while doing so, but their speaking should also be valued and cherished regardless of political/ideological perspective. I bristle at the thought of Charles Murray being heckled and canceled from a speaking engagement. Why conservative students would want such asshats as Milo, Coulter, etc. to speak at a universities is beyond baffling. While I don’t condone protesters that got them ousted from speaking, I’m not surprised since these people are little more than trolls whose only merit is to piss off left-leaning people. But, there you go… perfect instances for many conservatives to cherry-pick to argue that universities are leftwing.Now, as a researcher and teacher, my job is to seek truth and to teach critical skills, liberal virtues (as in the liberal arts in the original sense of free and open inquiry directed to the truth and development of good character, neither liberal or conservative in the contemporary senses), and to use those skills to analyze social and political phenomena (my discipline of sociology), and pose arguments. I would never claim what I have presented is empirical evidence to support any claim about the university’s supposed left-ness. I am a sample of one. While I have experience at more schools than most people probably do, these too are only a small and biased sample. I teach in a field that is strongly left-leaning, and likely are unrepresentatively exposed to a biased sample of students (who are more left-leaning).I am thus rightfully skeptical and uncommitted empirically—as a professional not as a citizen—to what I have presented. Anecdotes ain’t evidence, to put it another way. I suspect I might be right. But, I recognize it is only a hypothesis yet to be proven.What I can say with a good bit of confidence is that those conservatives who make the charge of strong left-leaning bias and indoctrination, are basing the claim on logic that violates every key logical principal I’ve alluded to above as grounds for tempering my own committments to my empirical claims.Inasmuch as there is some degree of liberal bias—and I believe there is and there is plenty of circumstantial evidence to back up the premise—it is probably far milder and controlled than many conservatives believe and/or admit. If they were so concerned about it, they would critically engage it, point it out, and be ready to receive a more accurate assessment of it and its effects. I think they would find most left-tending academics to be receptive, eager to address it, and change where necessary.However, it is much easier to use exaggerated and poorly (based on cherry-picked evidence) founded claims as an excuse not to engage—with the risks of cognitive dissonance, being proven wrong on many counts, etc., having to adjust beliefs… that engaging could bring—and to dismiss and derogate an entire long-established venerable institution that is admired by the rest of the world. Its even easier when the people hearing and embracing such claims have never set foot in a university. Its also perverse comfort for people so inclined to hear that when loved ones and acquintances go off to college, and come back more politically moderate or god forbid, liberal, tha they were indoctrinated instead of given opportunities to grow and consider different perspectives, get exposure to findings that contradict the community’s common sense. Admitting the latter instead of believing they were indoctrinated, insulates you from having to entertain the thought that your way of seeing things might not be the only way or even the best way.The charge is probably more self-serving bullshit based on self-serving partial truths than it is an accurate claim. And, despite the probable fact that the university does have a slight left-leaning bias in terms of faculties’ own personal persuasions, in terms of “received wisdom,” in terms of research emphases, and in terms of overall research findings, and in terms of policy advocacy. Finding out how much that is, and what might be done to correct for it, is harder work than claiming leftist indoctrination and then conveniently dismissing, or worse, weaponizing a false charge that has strong emotional appeal but high institutional costs.

Be kind to other developers (and yourself). This is a general philosophy for life too.On a technical level:Comment your code as-you-go. Comments are an art-form because too many become a maintenance nightmare and too few leave people puzzling over how the code is intended to work. However in general you should pay most attention to the API interfaces: documenting function, dependencies, state, performance and any other issues your colleagues might need.Confine the scope of your variables as much as possible and adopt a consistent naming convention. Global variables, or their equivalent, are a maintenance nightmare and reflect poorly on the developer. For naming there are several conventions; learn them!Continue to learn, expand your knowledge. Good developers are always on the look-out for better techniques, in coding, in design, analysis and the use of tools. Beyond this, software development is a field that advances (or at least changes) faster than any other profession I know. If you don’t embrace change, learning new languages, frameworks and development methodologies, then you are going to be left in the dirt.On a personal level:Learn good time management. I cannot over-emphasize this enough. There are many books on the subject - I started with the “7 habits” approach (which includes derivatives such as the “7 habits of highly effective developers”). As an addendum to this point, stay aware of the goals set for you by your company - or you will pay the price at evaluation time.Share your knowledge, mentor your peers where needed, accept mentoring and listen to opinions (even if you don’t ultimately agree with them). I see far too many developers who guard their code and personal intellectual knowledge rather like Smeagol covets his ring (a LOTR reference). Perhaps this is a question of job security in the minds of perpetrators, but honestly it is counterproductive and ultimately leaves you vulnerable. Sharers are the people who make teams work - good companies know that.Learn to master your ego. Developers are honestly an egotistic bunch - this isn’t a virtue. Ego also leads to entrenched positions and can make you a high maintenance member-of-staff. As a former manager I can tell that high maintenance individuals, no matter how good they are technically, become tedious. Try to imagine how your manager, your peers, see you.Always be considerate - use persuasion instead of confrontation, especially if you wish people to come-around to your point of view. Super-bright people often get impatient with those who don’t immediately “get it”. Well, you need to learn to deal with that! The art of diplomacy should really be taught as a mandatory University course.