Who Manufactured the Scandal of Sexual Abuse in the Public Schools?
June 17, 2015 at 6:42 pm
(This post was last modified: June 17, 2015 at 6:43 pm by Whateverist.)
Please note that this report came out soon after the report cited in the "What is good" thread started by our much beloved Catholic Lady. But that was more than ten years ago. Either there is merit to the allegations in the Shakeshaft report and all sorts of government agencies are complicit in a massive cover up, or, this is just one more example of the Catholic church's attempting to defuse its sex abuse scandal and confuse the public. If our Catholic lady can be taken in, we can be sure that many others have been as well. False equivocation is what we have here.
No Panic Over School Child Abuse
By | Posted: Wed. July 21, 2004Also published in IFeminists.com
A report claiming that close to 10 percent of children in public schools—more than 4.5 million—endure sexual abuse or misconduct by school employees has recently touched off a media-fueled panic.
However, by Carol Shakeshaft of Hofstra University, is seriously flawed, both in its methodology and in the way researchers defined sexual abuse and misconduct.
Rather than critically evaluating the report, the media have instead been its frightening figures of abuse.
.
.
To their credit, some voices in the media have noted the fact that the AAUW data is the sole source of Shakeshaft’s conclusions. But few questions have been asked about the validity of the data itself or the appropriateness of Shakeshaft’s use.
The AAUW has been widely accused of using biased studies to further a gender feminist agenda. Controversy has specifically swirled around the AAUW’s 1992 study “How Schools Shortchange Girls,” which was pivotal in creating nationwide policies that give preference to girls in public school. This study was eviscerated by Christina Hoff Sommers’ 1992 book; academic articles such as “The Myth That Schools Shortchange Girls: Social Science in the Service of Deception” have brought the methodology, honesty and intent of that study into further question.
At this point, studies from the AAUW merit critical scrutiny. Before participating in what might be politically motivated , the media should actually read the report. Strangely enough, this seems to be a rare practice.
Wendy McElroy is a Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. Her books include the Independent Institute volumes, Liberty for Women: Freedom and Feminism in the 21st Century, and .
No Panic Over School Child Abuse
By | Posted: Wed. July 21, 2004Also published in IFeminists.com
A report claiming that close to 10 percent of children in public schools—more than 4.5 million—endure sexual abuse or misconduct by school employees has recently touched off a media-fueled panic.
However, by Carol Shakeshaft of Hofstra University, is seriously flawed, both in its methodology and in the way researchers defined sexual abuse and misconduct.
Rather than critically evaluating the report, the media have instead been its frightening figures of abuse.
.
.
To their credit, some voices in the media have noted the fact that the AAUW data is the sole source of Shakeshaft’s conclusions. But few questions have been asked about the validity of the data itself or the appropriateness of Shakeshaft’s use.
The AAUW has been widely accused of using biased studies to further a gender feminist agenda. Controversy has specifically swirled around the AAUW’s 1992 study “How Schools Shortchange Girls,” which was pivotal in creating nationwide policies that give preference to girls in public school. This study was eviscerated by Christina Hoff Sommers’ 1992 book; academic articles such as “The Myth That Schools Shortchange Girls: Social Science in the Service of Deception” have brought the methodology, honesty and intent of that study into further question.
At this point, studies from the AAUW merit critical scrutiny. Before participating in what might be politically motivated , the media should actually read the report. Strangely enough, this seems to be a rare practice.
Wendy McElroy is a Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. Her books include the Independent Institute volumes, Liberty for Women: Freedom and Feminism in the 21st Century, and .