This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Do you have an job application I could fill out?That and their firing rate is absurbly low. Its near impossible to be dismissed.
And that is one reason why the government is full of A-level jobs with C-level (or worse) players.
Don't know why that matters if you've read where I'm coming from. A "teacher's" conviction for teaching the class doesn't really matter to me if I don't care what the department's belief. Just seems like an odd place to draw the line...that's all.Why don't you look up one of those courses and then show me where the school that teaches it espouses a belief in them? Where they have professors they employ that go to conferences and push the idea of zombies and vampires?Above, you said it was a school that is very comparable to other second tier schools. I tend to agree. I'm not comparing them to larger, better schools. Context matters. My overall point is if I'm not going there to learn science, I don't care what the science department is teachingI asked my question about the zombies and dracula because relatively respected schools DO have such classes, but I don't see people completely writing them off as possibilities. Those classes are, at least, as absurd as the 6000 year old earth classes.
Are they science classes? Sounds like classes like that belong in the humanities or creative writing departments.
Big difference between observational science and every day, invention science. Believe in a young earth doesn't preclude you from making the next big thing in electronics.
If it's a science class teaching students that the tooth fairy exists, then there's a problem. I'd take issue with any scientist in a teaching role that had this belief.
I never said it did. I said that if you believe in a young Earth, your common sense and judgement are very suspect IMO.
As the person who used the "toss a resume in the garbage" comment first, I suppose this is directed at me? Of course I wouldn't just toss out a resume from one of those universities. They're all good universities.
Those subjects are used as a way to look at what they truly represent within pop culture. They are not taught as if vampires or zombies are real.Don't know why that matters if you've read where I'm coming from. A "teacher's" conviction for teaching the class doesn't really matter to me if I don't care what the department's belief. Just seems like an odd place to draw the line...that's all.Why don't you look up one of those courses and then show me where the school that teaches it espouses a belief in them? Where they have professors they employ that go to conferences and push the idea of zombies and vampires?Above, you said it was a school that is very comparable to other second tier schools. I tend to agree. I'm not comparing them to larger, better schools. Context matters. My overall point is if I'm not going there to learn science, I don't care what the science department is teaching
No they likely wouldn't fit into our culture here. We have tried before and it doesn't go well. Bunch of heathens running this place.
I don't know about Duke, but ND and Creighton don't. I'm guessing Duke doesn't either. ND and Creighton are Catholic universities. As a good Jesuit boy (Creighton is a Jesuit school), I'd happily send my kids to those schools...if they weren't so expensive (and if I had kids)
:whoosh:
Their science professors teach young earth creationism and refuse to teach that the Earth is over 10,000 years old.
By that theory, believing that you're a brain in a vat is as valid a perspective as any other?
Of course. It goes to the philosophical heart of reason, learning, knowledge, and perception. I am unable to tell if all my senses are "real" as I perceive them to be, that is, inputs from actual outside stimuli, or, if such perceptions are falsely created by other means which produce the same input.
That fact that it cannot be disproved is not controversial. The suggestion that believing you are a brain in a vat is as valid a perception as not believing that you are a brain in a vat is somewhat controversial.
Maybe not as practical -- and when it comes to hiring practices, practicality of judgment probably should be a consideration -- but not any more easily refuted, I suppose.
I might take a guy who can talk reasonably about different aspects of solipsism and philosophy over a guy who just mindlessly parrots back whatever indoctrination he was programmed with.So they force the literal biblical view into the curriculum, but don't count it towards NatSci degrees. Seems kind of level-headed, almost.
I'd have no problem hiring someone who attended either BJU or on line. They just have to meet the requirements that most people don't.Interesting.
BJU actually has this class, which is mandatory:
So they force the literal biblical view into the curriculum, but don't count it towards NatSci degrees. Seems kind of level-headed, almost.
I think I'd listen to this applicant's story, anyway. Sounds from reputation as if the school actually has decent academics, and people go to the schools they go to for lots of reasons, not all of them of their own choosing. That's probably doubly true for kids who come from the sorts of family backgrounds that lead to Bob Jones educations in the first place.
I've hired for jobs in my agency for a bunch of years now, and while the only requirement might be a degree and a relevant major, of course the quality of the school plays a part in the decision process. If you interpret "meets the minimum" to mean there's zero distinction, don't know what else to tell you.That and their firing rate is absurbly low. Its near impossible to be dismissed.
And that is one reason why the government is full of A-level jobs with C-level (or worse) players.
When an entire science department teaches that science is wrong, it discredits the department.
Yes, but you don't see all the applicants, just the top 3 or whatever, as determined by the screening process, which gives no weight to school reputation.RUSF18 said:I've hired for jobs in my agency for a bunch of years now, and while the only requirement might be a degree and a relevant major, of course the quality of the school plays a part in the decision process. If you interpret "meets the minimum" to mean there's zero distinction, don't know what else to tell you.You're right on the lack of firings though. Most jobs will have a one year trial period where you can get rid of someone, and after that you basically need to steal to get fired.(HULK) said:That and their firing rate is absurbly low. Its near impossible to be dismissed.Whitetail Hunter said:(HULK) said:
And that is one reason why the government is full of A-level jobs with C-level (or worse) players.
But do they?
Screening processes don't get you from aYes, but you don't see all the applicants, just the top 3 or whatever, as determined by the screening process, which gives no weight to school reputation.RUSF18 said:I've hired for jobs in my agency for a bunch of years now, and while the only requirement might be a degree and a relevant major, of course the quality of the school plays a part in the decision process. If you interpret "meets the minimum" to mean there's zero distinction, don't know what else to tell you.You're right on the lack of firings though. Most jobs will have a one year trial period where you can get rid of someone, and after that you basically need to steal to get fired.(HULK) said:That and their firing rate is absurbly low. Its near impossible to be dismissed.Whitetail Hunter said:(HULK) said:
And that is one reason why the government is full of A-level jobs with C-level (or worse) players.
Department? Sure. Entire institution, not so much. This was my main point that I failed to get across before.
http://www.bju.edu/academics/college-and-schools/arts-and-science/natural-science/biology/Why study biology at BJU?But do they?It looks to me as if the young-earth/bible-science stuff is separate from the hard science majors. It seems to be taught under the umbrella of general ed, instead, and to the extent that they have core philosophical tenets that conflict with the current state of hard science, they mostly just don't offer programs of study. There's no anthropology, no astronomy, no geology, etc. No PhD astrophysicists or geologists in their science depts pretending to teach real science. Just PhD's from accredited unis. Lots of them with Bob Jones undergrad degrees. If trained admissions people feel a BJU degree is adequate prep for a Virginia Tech PhD program, who would I be to shrug it off?
I don't believe Jesus made the world out of clay in 1856, but if anyone did, I'm not sure it would affect his or her ability to program in C++ or balance a chem equation. They seem to genuinely attempt to focus their science department on granting degrees in areas where their literalist Christianity shtick won't cause any huge academic conflicts with the curriculum or the greater world. It almost looks to me like the head of the science department is a secret liberal spy.
Like NCC said above, I might well nudge a candidate like this down based on potential cultural conflict in some environments, but I don't think after reading a little about them that I'd automatically assume he was a poorly trained rube. And I'm more inclined to think their science dept is limited in scope, rather than medieval and backwards. The rest of the uni? Granted.
Sometimes it's 5, depends on the agency. HR does the bulk. And they don't weight school reputation in the slightest.Screening processes don't get you from a stack of applicants to a top 3.Yes, but you don't see all the applicants, just the top 3 or whatever, as determined by the screening process, which gives no weight to school reputation.RUSF18 said:I've hired for jobs in my agency for a bunch of years now, and while the only requirement might be a degree and a relevant major, of course the quality of the school plays a part in the decision process. If you interpret "meets the minimum" to mean there's zero distinction, don't know what else to tell you.You're right on the lack of firings though. Most jobs will have a one year trial period where you can get rid of someone, and after that you basically need to steal to get fired.(HULK) said:That and their firing rate is absurbly low. Its near impossible to be dismissed.Whitetail Hunter said:(HULK) said:
And that is one reason why the government is full of A-level jobs with C-level (or worse) players.
Yes. Stop this stupid line of argument, please.The Commish said:
Sure they do. Maybe whatever one you're thinking of doesn't.Sometimes it's 5, depends on the agency. HR does the bulk. And they don't weight school reputation in the slightest.Screening processes don't get you from a stack of applicants to a top 3.Yes, but you don't see all the applicants, just the top 3 or whatever, as determined by the screening process, which gives no weight to school reputation.RUSF18 said:I've hired for jobs in my agency for a bunch of years now, and while the only requirement might be a degree and a relevant major, of course the quality of the school plays a part in the decision process. If you interpret "meets the minimum" to mean there's zero distinction, don't know what else to tell you.You're right on the lack of firings though. Most jobs will have a one year trial period where you can get rid of someone, and after that you basically need to steal to get fired.(HULK) said:That and their firing rate is absurbly low. Its near impossible to be dismissed.Whitetail Hunter said:(HULK) said:
And that is one reason why the government is full of A-level jobs with C-level (or worse) players.
It's a question, not an argument. You can tell by the "?" at the end of the sentence
Were you not using a question to make an argument?It's a question, not an argument. You can tell by the "?" at the end of the sentence
No. Simply trying to figure out where folks are drawing their arbitrary line on this. To me, teaching classes like this regardless of whether they are in the science department or science fiction department are silly. Just like teaching classes on zombies or dracula or Michael Myers is silly. They are a waste of money IMO and I'd be pissed if my kid was taking classes like that and wasting the money I've given them for their education. What department it's in would not matter to me at all.Were you not using a question to make an argument?It's a question, not an argument. You can tell by the "?" at the end of the sentence
Isn't the bolded an illegal discriminatory practice?
If he flat out refused to hire someone because of his/her religion? The hell you say.Isn't the bolded an illegal discriminatory practice?
I won't hire anyone with a degree from Wisconsin because they have a class in Elvish language.No. Simply trying to figure out where folks are drawing their arbitrary line on this. To me, teaching classes like this regardless of whether they are in the science department or science fiction department are silly. Just like teaching classes on zombies or dracula or Michael Myers is silly. They are a waste of money IMO and I'd be pissed if my kid was taking classes like that and wasting the money I've given them for their education. What department it's in would not matter to me at all.Were you not using a question to make an argument?It's a question, not an argument. You can tell by the "?" at the end of the sentence
With all that said, I think it's absurd to negate ANY degree from a school that offers these classes. You want to mock the "science" degree at BJU, go for it. I get it. To suggest that because BJU has such classes in the science department an Accounting degree or Engineering degree is discredited is simpletonesque IMO.
