Who sets University standards?

[catsittingstill]

randwolf pointed me at an interesting article this morning.

Apparently Calvary Chapel Christian School is suing the University of California over what courses the UC will accept as meeting entrance requirements. For instance, Calvary has a biology course in which the textbook specifies that the bible is always right, and any scientific observations that conflict with it must be wrong.(?!) The UC will not accept that biology course as meeting minimum entry requirements. (I should hope to shout!)

Calvary is playing the persecuted victim and trying to get the courts to force UC to accept this course.

I don't understand why this case hasn't been tossed arse over teakettle down the courthouse steps to the accompaniment of hearty laughter.

Comments

[technoshaman.livejournal.com]

Maybe because the UC wants an actual decision rather than a settlement? If they get one they can simply cite precedent and tell anybody else to take a hike... if they settle they have to deal with each and every podunk academy that decides they have more lawyers fees than sense.

Same reason IBM hasn't settled with SCO - or bought them out. They want this business with the GPL settled once and for all, and they have the legal beagles on staff to see to it that it happens.

In both cases it *also* means that no one else has to go through the same kind of malarkey - if, for instance, Carson Newman decided it wanted some serious admissions standards, it wouldn't have to go hire some fat-cat Knoxville lawyer to defend itself, but could just write the offending school a letter saying, "See Cavalry vs. UC, you're not going to prevail, now, go 'way, ah say, go 'way, boy, you bother me (/foghorn_leghorn)." Saves *everybody* money in the long run.... it's just good karma to invest like that, something I think even the stodgy old Regents grok, being from California and all.

[catsittingstill.livejournal.com]

Maybe because the UC wants an actual decision rather than a settlement?

Oh, I *completely* understand why UC won't settle. The whole point is to have real admissions standards, after all. What I don't understand is why the judge hasn't thrown it out, with an admonition to quit wasting the court's precious time with such bullpucky.

[technoshaman.livejournal.com]

Because the judge understands what UC is trying to do? If you simply dismiss the case with prejudice, it doesn't make case law. It has to go to trial and be decided before it has any meaning for anyone else.

[catsittingstill.livejournal.com]

Oh, okay. That makes sense.