k wrote:
Is that, in fact, the criteria, or are you simply stating that it ought to be? I don't disagree, but I'm curious.

I'm shooting from the hip. IANAL.

The example you found of the UC rejecting the course on the basis of the text being an anthology vs. a full novel sounds like a fairly arbitrary one.

I thought so at first but anthologies are usually used in elementary school. In high school they expect you to read actual books. Its possible that the complete text of all of the books you ought to read is in the anthology, but its unlikely.

In fact, it calls into question the entire concept of what standards *are* reasonable, which is the greater prize in this battle, I think. For me, I think, that comes down to two things. The first is if the Christian perspective is the *only* one taught.

Your discussion of the fine line here is very good...

RE: Here's the Problem With Emily Dickinson - New York Times