Search This Blog

Friday, May 6, 2011

Blowin' Smoke


Have you noticed that the "educational model" that now informs administrative thinking at the University is the old 1930s-40s public health model? Everybody stands in line and gets a shot from the same hypodermic. Very advanced!

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

"The key finding of Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa’s Academically Adrift (2011), that a lot of kids aren’t learning much in college, comes as no surprise to me. The system is no longer set up to challenge them. If we’re going to make college an intellectually rigorous experience for the students who already go—still more, for all the ones we want to go if we’re going to reach the oft-repeated goal of universal postsecondary education, an objective that would double enrollments—we’re going to need a lot more teachers: well paid, institutionally supported, socially valued. As of 2003 there were about 400,000 tenure-track professors in the United States (as compared with about 6 million primary- and secondary-school teachers). Between reducing class sizes, reversing the shift to contingent labor and beefing up our college-completion rates, we’re going to need at least five times as many.

So where’s the money supposed to come from? It’s the same question we ask about the federal budget, and the answer is the same. We’re still a very wealthy country. There’s plenty of money, if we spend it on the right things. Just as we need to wrestle with the $700 billion gorilla of defense, so do universities need to take on administrative edema and extracurricular spending. We can start with presidential salaries. Universities, like corporations, claim they need to pay the going rate for top talent. The argument is not only dubious—whom exactly are they competing with for the services of these managerial titans, aside from one another?—it is beside the point. Academia is not supposed to be a place to get rich. If your ego can’t survive on less than $200,000 a year (on top of the prestige of a university presidency), you need to find another line of work. Once, there were academic leaders who put themselves forward as champions of social progress: people like Woodrow Wilson at Princeton in the 1900s; James Conant at Harvard in the 1940s; and Kingman Brewster at Yale, Clark Kerr at the University of California and Theodore Hesburgh at Notre Dame in the 1960s. What a statement it would make if the Ivy League presidents got together and announced that they were going to take an immediate 75 percent pay cut. What a way to restore academia’s moral prestige and demonstrate some leadership again.

But leadership will have to come from somewhere else, as well. Just as in society as a whole, the academic upper middle class needs to rethink its alliances. Its dignity will not survive forever if it doesn’t fight for that of everyone below it in the academic hierarchy. (“First they came for the graduate students, and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a graduate student…”) For all its pretensions to public importance (every professor secretly thinks he’s a public intellectual), the professoriate is awfully quiet, essentially nonexistent as a collective voice. If academia is going to once again become a decent place to work, if our best young minds are going to be attracted back to the profession, if higher education is going to be reclaimed as part of the American promise, if teaching and research are going to make the country strong again, then professors need to get off their backsides and organize: department by department, institution to institution, state by state and across the nation as a whole. Tenured professors enjoy the strongest speech protections in society. It’s time they started using them." - Faulty Towers: The Crisis in Higher Education, http://www.thenation.com/article/160410/faulty-towers-crisis-higher-education?page=full

Anonymous said...

See this wonderful essay "Faulty Towers: The Crisis in Higher Education" by William Deresiewicz in The Nation (http://www.thenation.com/article/160410/faulty-towers-crisis-higher-education?page=full).

Anonymous said...

This paragraph says it all,

"
But leadership will have to come from somewhere else, as well. Just as in society as a whole, the academic upper middle class needs to rethink its alliances. Its dignity will not survive forever if it doesn’t fight for that of everyone below it in the academic hierarchy. (“First they came for the graduate students, and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a graduate student…”) For all its pretensions to public importance (every professor secretly thinks he’s a public intellectual), the professoriate is awfully quiet, essentially nonexistent as a collective voice. If academia is going to once again become a decent place to work, if our best young minds are going to be attracted back to the profession, if higher education is going to be reclaimed as part of the American promise, if teaching and research are going to make the country strong again, then professors need to get off their backsides and organize: department by department, institution to institution, state by state and across the nation as a whole. Tenured professors enjoy the strongest speech protections in society. It’s time they started using them."

William Deresiewicz, "Faulty Towers: The Crisis in Higher Education" by William Deresiewicz in The Nation (http://www.thenation.com/article/160410/faulty-towers-crisis-higher-education?page=full).

We, the professorate who have had the strongest protected voice, are quiet when we need to be vocal. We are the ones that need to show leadership... the few bloggers here and there and the courageous group at UT-AAUP are not enough.

And we are to blame if we allow or support the destruction of the famed American University System at the hands of tyrants, petty administrators and political hacks.

Erebus said...

Anonymous May 7 4:04. Thanks for the tip. I've just read the excellent Deresiewicz article and highly recommend it to all of our students, faculty and administrators for discussion purposes and as a call to action. It should be mandatory reading and it seems a shame that it is published just as summer break invites and enables the UT administration to unsheath its long knives in the name of "efficiencies" against a demoralized and disorganized resistance.

Anonymous said...

Deresiewicz observes that Robert Zemsky’s Making Reform Work(2009), proposes variously visionary schemes: "Nearly all involve technology to drive efficiency. Online courses, distance learning, do-it-yourself instruction: this is the future we’re being offered. Why teach a required art history course to twenty students at a time when you can march them through a self-guided online textbook followed by a multiple-choice exam? Why have professors or even graduate students grade papers when you can outsource them to BAs around the country, even the world? Why waste time with office hours when students can interact with their professors via e-mail?"

Lordy! When will the stink of Zemskythink that has inspired and promoted this Neoliberal administration's "soft Fascism" and technophilia for the past six years be exposed, challenged and abandoned around here? Now we are in bed with Petro! Charter University here we come!

Anonymous said...

Re Anon 4:03 et al.

Astute observation(s) about far too many professors secretly being Noam Chomsky wannabes and considering themselves important public intellectuals (as opposed to just doing their actual job of mastering and teaching rigorous academic disciplines).

You read a couple of David Foster Wallace or Jonathan Franzen novels and maybe a smattering of Marx, Heidegger or Foucault – and suddenly you are a world expert and all-knowing sage prepared to hold court and pontificate at length on geo-politics and global economic policy (not to mention theoretical physics and string theory) to all who will listen.

Pryor is a perfect local example of a pin-headed prof who considers himself a big time countercultural rebel and intellectual revolutionary.

But these “rebels” with their obligatory “Bush lied, people died” bumper stickers never seem to mind living their comfortable petty bourgeoisie academic existences on the back of the common serf (taxpayer).

And whenever the opportunity for further personal aggrandizement or enrichment presents itself, it’s always the pseudo-Marxists who are first in line to suck-up to “The Man.”.