• Monday, May 28, 2012

Previous

Next

A Midsemester Night’s Dream at Harvey Mudd College

April 12, 2011, 11:58 am

From last year’s "Twelfth Night": from left, Matthew Richman as Sir Toby Belch, Rachel-Mikel ArceJaeger as Sir Andrew Aguecheek, and Olivia Beckwith as Fabian ("Tweflth Night" photos by Kevin Mapp, Harvey Mudd College)

By Miriam Chernick

It’s no surprise that Matt Richman, a joint computer-science and math major at Harvey Mudd College, is enrolled in courses such as “Graph Theory” and “Real Analysis.” But a course that performs Shakespeare?

Yes. Richman is busy learning his lines for the role of Nick Bottom in A Midsummer Night’s Dream which he and 21 classmates will perform as part of “Literature 110: Shakespeare,” taught by Jeff Groves.

For more than 20 years, Groves’s consistently oversubscribed course has become something of an institution at HMC, one of the five Claremont Colleges in Southern California, because of the course’s focus on performing Shakespeare. Through performance, Groves says, “the students learn to understand the language more deeply. It’s a way of rendering a literary text in terms of its original material conditions and practices.”

Though Harvey Mudd offers majors in only engineering, science, and mathematics, students are required to take one third of their courses in the humanities, social sciences, or the arts so that, as the school’s Web site puts it, they “can have the occasional conversation with a civilian.” Consistent with that goal, Groves strives to “contribute to the breadth of the students’ education by challenging them to create something out of Shakespeare’s texts, to be memorable.”

The class was certainly memorable for Grant Shreve, (HMC 06) who, of his role as Sir Andrew Aguecheek in Twelfth Night, says: “I played a self-indulgent fool who fancied himself a witty and adept knight during a time when I myself was a self-indulgent fool suffering under similar delusions. My memories of that time are inextricably bound to the role I was cast in.”

From last year’s "Twelfth Night": Michelle Hansen as Olivia (left), and Sonja Bohr as Viola/Cesario

Married alums, Kurt (02) and Kendra (03) Dresner also have lasting impressions of Groves’s class. From trekking to Home Depot and trying to fit extra-long PVC pipes for sets into a small car, to keeping a straight face during repeated flubbed lines at rehearsals, Kurt Dresner welcomed the opportunity “to get away from the many strictly left-brained courses that made up the bulk of my HMC education.” Kendra Dresner says the class was one of the highlights of her experience at Mudd.

As for Richman, this spring marks the second time he’s taking the class.  He says it “helps bring out your artistic side, exposing you to a different approach.  It makes you think about how things fit together.” Sophomore Olivia Beckwith agrees. “Getting to experience what I’m learning about makes me understand it better. It’s fun to have a class that’s ‘hands on,’ where I’m not just sitting and listening to lectures.”

But if the class is fun, it’s not easy.  While some students are comfortable performing, others suffer from stage fright. “Seeing nervous students later become comfortable on stage is what makes all the effort worthwhile,” Groves says.  And the time commitment is a huge challenge. “Besides the Friday classes,” Richman says, “the students direct, rehearse scenes, and make sets and costumes, which can take up to 15 hours a week.”

Nonetheless, it was worth the time, Shreve says, because, “Professor Groves has a humility about him that allows the course and the performance to take on the life and character the students give it.” Kurt Dresner says Groves’s “passion for the material rubs off on even the most reserved and skeptical students. He’s a damn good teacher.”

Jeffrey Groves (photo by Kevin Mapp from Groves's HMC Web page)

But why would Groves, trained in literature and pursuing scholarly work in the history of the book, opt to teach at a science and math-oriented school? “First,” he says, “the students bring intellectual firepower to their classes. You can push them hard and they’ll respond.  That’s pretty special. Second, working at an interdisciplinary institution, I can develop myself as a teacher and scholar. The intellectual vitality here challenges me to keep reinventing myself.”

Early on, Groves noticed that the Thomas-Garrett building where he teaches, with its open courtyard, second-story walkway, and stage-framing pair of olive trees, resembles an Elizabethan amphitheater. “By performing in this space,” Groves explains, “we replicate Shakespeare’s original playing conditions, so students can understand why he is constantly giving his audience cues about time of day, lighting, and the weather.”

“After performing there, I never looked at the courtyard of Thomas-Garrett Hall quite the same way,” Dresner says. And Richman likes the trees because “they’re fun. Every year, some part of blocking involves climbing up into those trees.”

This spring, performances are scheduled for April 29 and 30 for students, families, faculty, and alumni participating in HMC’s annual alumni weekend. A regular attendee, Peter Saeta, a professor of physics, says sometimes he sees a student who in physics class is quiet, but is “an absolute cut-up in one of the comedic roles. It is great fun to see another facet of their personality.”

Beginning this summer, Thomas-Garrett Hall will be torn down. According to Groves, the new building is being designed with a courtyard for future performances. That will be a relief to students waiting to enroll in the class. After all, Dresner says, this is one of the few opportunities to “really ‘show off’ in front of everyone.”

“I really enjoy comic acting,” Richman says, “and this is a pretty good moment.”

His character Nick Bottom speaks to the fun, scary adventure of bringing the Globe to a courtyard in Claremont.

I see their knavery: this is to make an ass of me;
to fright me, if they could. But I will not stir
from this place, do what they can: I will walk up
and down here, and I will sing, that they shall hear
I am not afraid.

Miriam Chernick is a journalist and author in Bethesda, Maryland.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • lutoslawski

    Affirmative action by economic rather than racial criteria seems fairer all around. But we shouldn’t be quibbling about this; the big scandal is undoubtedly legacy admissions, something that most schools would prefer just not to mention at all.

  • 22079340

    I seem to recall that it was Andrew Hacker (“Two Nations…”) who asked white folks what they would need to be compensated if they were “discovered” to be black. The sum was in the millions of dollars. The illusion of “minority advantage,” or “women advantage” for that matter, is rooted in the fundamental white male belief that they are always deserving, always qualified, and that competition is only valid so long as they “win…”

  • minnesotan

    Way to essentialize. What else do all white males think? Are all Asian men cowardly? Are Mexicans lazy? Why not put a little race tag on everyone so we no longer have to communicate with them: “Oh, it says here you’re a Swedish female. I know what you think about the abortion debate!”

    *sigh*

  • 11144703

    “American Educational Research Association next week finds that Americans “see minority students as having much greater advantages in seeking access to college than is actually the case.”

    Don’t minorities include Asian Americans along with Asians? They are overrepresented in math, physics, chemistry, computer science, etc….Wouldn’t that qualify as having pretty good access to college?

    Oh wait…Asian Americans and Asians apparently don’t count–as usual in these academic studies which are bent upon seeing pervasive invidious institutional racism inflicted on “minorities,” rather than recognizing that it’s far more about class than race. (Certainly race among certain UNDERREPRESENTED minority groups such as the poorer descendants of African slaves should be acknowledged as a secondary factor. This group should NOT include groups such as Jamaicans or Africans, the latter the ancestors of President Obama on his father’s side.)

    And no matter how exceedingly well Asian Americans along with Asians perform in the U.S. academic world, let’s wring our hands and talk about how poorly a tiny percentage of certain Asians perform (e.g., the Hmong) as if somehow that justifies the view that underlying racism pervades colleges in the U.S. Too many academics love to make such a distinction among Asians, but apparently hate to make any such distinctions among those of African heritage, preferring to see all blacks as an oppressed monolithic group.

  • betterschool

    The important point here is not that groups tend to invite like individuals into their membership. The point is that when these natural human tendencies play out in academic settings they affect what gets studied, how the inquiry is framed (including methodological and statistical decisions), how subtleties in findings are interpreted, and how reporting emphases play out. While these effects, and others, may be unavoidable, I would hope that no one will defend them as a good thing. I also hope we recognize the many historical occasions where they have produced flawed findings and slowed intellectual and scientific progress.

    Detail: As a specialist in design and methodology, I see strong correlations between what one might call “political world view” and choices in method and statistics. Even more troubling are the correlations I see between one’s political leanings — which I admit may themselves be co-variants of more fundamental psychological properties — and how investigative questions are framed. I no longer hold to my younger self’s view that these conditions can or even should be ameliorated but I do believe that we can and perhaps should attempt to balance them.

    If Peter is suggesting that a department that consistently leans excessively one way or the other in any important cognitive or affective dimension will, over time, produce less valid knowledge and may teach with less objectivity and impartiality, I agree. The question is how should we respond to this situation, or should we?

  • geescott

    Academia is wonderful in its willingness to self-examine to keep things intellectually free. I wonder if fundamentalists are the same way. My bias is that they are not (an admitedly broad generalization). Take evolution for example. Evolution is observed as a process among cancer cells and pathogens adapting to attacks from their hosts. Would a fundamentalist make a good cancer biologist? It’s not the open-mindedness of the academy that is the problem here.

  • _perplexed_

    Yancy’s results as portrayed here are indeed disturbing and deserve the careful attention of all in academe, but Mr. Wood appears to press their interpretation much too far:

    “As Yancey notes, “more than two-thirds of the respondents indicated that knowing that a candidate was a fundamentalist would negatively influence whether they would hire that candidate.” That’s an astonishing degree of animus. It means that an anthropologist, no matter where he went to graduate school, the quality of his scholarship, his knowledge of the field, the merits of his current research, or his ability as a teacher, would—if he was known to be, say, a Seventh Day Adventist—have virtually no chance of academic appointment in the United States…”

    Did Yancy in fact measure the impact on these legitimate evaluative criteria, and engage in an analysis that shows fundamentalism to have a much larger effect than the total effect of these legitimate criteria? Because that’s the kind of evidence needed to draw the “no chance of appointment” conclusion provided here. And if that evidence is not provided in Yancy, but is Mr. Wood’s unsubstantiated addition to the discussion, his voice does not deserve much attention.

  • nordicexpat

    Ok, so I misremembered the upper end of the scale (and 1-7 makes more sense), but my saying 4 was “neutral” is the same as saying “does not make a difference.”

    In answer to your question, yes, I would like bloggers in the Chronicle to do more than simply throw red meat. The kind of overt partisan blogging that fills much of the Chronicle already exist in spades in the blogosphere, and I don’t see the need for it here. I think the Chronicle would do a service to its readers if it enlisted bloggers who try to explain the details behind academic studies rather than trumpet the sensational headlines (“Study Shows Racism in Tea Party!! “Study Shows Conservatives Discriminated Against in Academia!) that would be just as likely to be found in periodicals that are not ostensibly about Higher Education. Most people don’t have the expertise to understand how the conclusions were arrived at in fields outside their area of expertise without some assistance, and newspapers do a lousy job of even accurately conveying what the studies show, let alone how warranted the conclusions are. So yes, I think it is generally a good principle to ignore general conclusions about complicated topics until you have a good grasp of how the study was designed and what sorts of assumptions went into that design (And I made this same point about the study that purported to show racism in the Tea Party, for very much the same reason).

    This isn’t my field, I am unlikely to read the book, and, even if I were, I wouldn’t be able to see the finer details that could such lead a study astray (or, to put it more positively, the decisions someone made to avoid those kind of subtle mistakes that are easy to make). Being an academic, however, I appreciate when someone explains these methodological decisions to me in a non-partisan way (and I can learn and sometimes adopt them). I know of blogs in my field that do this for a general audience, so I don’t know why you ask this question with such incredulity.

  • chuckkle

    Behold! I agree with Peter Wood on some matters:

    “Candidates for academic positions should be evaluated on their merits as scholars and as teachers, not on the basis of their private beliefs or attributional characteristics.”

    But clearly he, and his colleagues at the National Association of Scholars, judging from their website, do actively judge “merit” as a scholar by ideological position: they are prejudiced against Marxists and feminists, for example.

    I have no expertise in evaluating the kind of survey that underpins Yancey’s book, but a couple of things that perhaps someone can explain. Can we really conflate religious membership with political orientation so easily as Wood seems to conclude here and elsewhere? It seems I agree with dank48 on this question. Further, I raised the question with the range of Roman Catholics—from extremely conservative to very liberal—the category Jew shows a similar range, from extremely Orthodox to very liberal and reformist (and how would we handle secular Jews? Or lapsed Catholics?—and why do we never talk about lapsed Protestants?). The range of political views in the survey strikes me as conceptually limited from the get-go: “Democrat, Republican, Green Party member, Libertarian, Communist Party member.” Communist Party or Green Party membership hardly covers everyone who would self-identify as left of the Democratic Party. And many of those people, if/when they vote, would choose a Democrat rather than a third party candidate (if one was available).

    But since Wood orients this matter around faculty hiring, let me point out a few things he doesn’t consider. First of all, this may depend on one’s field and discipline and professional organizations, but it seems to me that most of the time on the departmental level people really do know more than the CV and official interview information. It is rather common, at least in my experience, to gather some additional information by phoning or emailing some candidate’s references, or other faculty at the school where the candidate is now located for more information. For a tenured position the grapevine seems even more important in a search. I’ve certainly received calls of this kind. Some of them seemed to just be seeking further information (could the candidate teach a certain topic?) while others seemed like ideological fishing expeditions by someone who was looking to accumulate reasons to argue against a candidate.

    Second, I agree with Wood (!) that bias and prejudice should not operate in hiring decisions, but at the same time I’ve certainly witnessed that they do. An example: in a relatively small department on the first round of looking over the applicants, a senior professor simply blackballs one of the best (on paper) candidates, with what amounts to an “over my dead body” statement. How would Wood (experienced administrator that he is) deal with that? Should the untenured faculty present object? How and in what way? Should the entire department get riled up about this? Or do you just accept it as the local rules of the playing field?

    Or, a candidate is given a clear and winning majority vote for hiring, but three tenured faculty object (on political orientation grounds) and go to the Dean privately, who then decides to not allow the hire to go forward, saying that he couldn’t possibly hire someone under such circumstances.

    Perhaps Wood could address these kindof questions in a future column.

    Chuck Kleinhans

  • betterschool

    “Academia is wonderful in its willingness to self-examine to keep things intellectually free.”

    I wonder. I would be a tad more inclined to agree had you referred to scientists and not to all academics. I see in the latter a great deal of entrenched bias and unwillingness to self-examine, much as the evidence in this article may suggest. You are aware that higher education typically comes in last in the rate at which it diffuses innovation; i.e., it is the most conservative among major institutions.

  • mhick255

    schultzjc,

    You can determine a candidate’s understanding of a subject, her education, and how she will interact with colleagues from nothing more than a vague religious label? Could you explain how your approach isn’t the textbook definition of bias?

  • tsb2010

    Fantastic article, thank you!

    Interesting to ponder why the author needs to say “There are plenty of smart, well-educated, culturally sophisticated conservative Christians”

    Now let’s see what the reaction would be if one replaced “conservative Christians” above with “African Americans”, “Hispanics”, “homosexuals”, etc, etc. You get the idea, and can probably almost hear the outcry that somebody dared to even imply that this would not be the case…

  • tsb2010

    PS. and is this book any news to us (closeted) conservative professors? While people are coming out of the closet left and right, we are shoved right in…

  • tsb2010

    The simple fact that you feel so free to say “My bias is that they are not (an admitedly broad generalization)” about conservatives/”fundamentalists” makes you one (a fundamentalist, that is). Of a different kind, but not a better one.

    Would you dare to say that with any other group (ethnic, for instance)??

  • tsb2010

    How are you not a fundamentalist yourself? With views like “president’s office on campus until our imperialist warmongering government gets out of name-your-conflict-zone”. Wow.

  • tsb2010

    This seems to be the general rule of academia and of “liberals” in general:
    “Do not discriminate (unless you discriminate against people who don’t think like you)”

    There are groups that we can’t discriminate against (rightly so), but then there are groups that we are encouraged to discriminate against (the ones mentioned in the above review).

    And for anyone to claim that there isn’t a strong liberal bias in academia – I’m sorry, but you probably live under a rock in the dark and have your eyes and ears wide shut. Anytime I talk to somebody in my university about anything going on in the “real world”, they automatically (and wrongly) assume that I will have the same opinions as they have. Oh well, long live “diversity”…

  • http://whytheology.wordpress.com/ Trey Medley

    I agree, but the fact of the matter is that some individuals do pursue advanced degrees from fundamentally flawed programs (or simply learn the material to get a degree while personally disagreeing with it and planning on discreditting it later) were their particular religious interpretation is at odds with the accepted manner of doing research. Specifically, the only thing that I can think of off the cuff that fits this category with little ambiguity, is the fundamentalist applying for a position in biology. It is fairly well established that fundamentalist Christians do not accept Darwinian evolution, most are “young earth Creationists” though a few may cave to “Intelligent Design” (still a pseudo-science). Some of those who advance such ideas actually have excellent qualifications, publication records, and respectable degrees (isn’t Michael Behe one of the foremost authorities on single cell propulsion via a flagella?). Here is a case where there is a bias, but a bias is not necessarily something wrong.

    Biases, while often misused and inappropriate, can be useful. And the fact of the matter is that everyone has biases, some positive some negative. People have a bias against certain types of food. People have a bias about the water in certain parts of the world. While it may be culturally insensitive to turn down a drink of water in sub-Saharan Africa because you assume, via a bias, it might not be safe, it is still an acceptable (and potentially life saving) bias. And there are some biases against people that are not necessarily incorrect (though usually they are it is not a de facto reality). For instance, I have a bias against repeat or habitual sex offenders. And research seems to suggest that I am fully justified in assuming they will never change. While I agree with the general thrust of the argument (that biases should not generally enter into hiring or many other decisions, even though the reality is that they do), I do reject the argument that all biases are by their nature wrong and ill advised. I will maintain that a fundamentalist Christian should not be hired for a biology position unless s/he can demonstrate how this does not adversely influence his/her teaching (and research). I think this is an appropriate bias (and I doubt you will convince me otherwise). That said, if I were to discover that a biology candidate (though it is not my field so this would probably never occur) was a fundamentalist, I would need to address their view of Darwinian evolution, but it is a question I would not feel compelled to address if they were not fundamentalist. This is an instance were a bias would lead me to see if the candidate violates the bias, which is an appropriate response. If, however, I was unconvinced, I could not, in good conscience, recommend such a candidate. Likewise, I would have serious doubts about hiring a proponent of the “new atheism” for a religion position (again a bias, but one with good reason).

    Again, I agree that most biases should not enter into hiring decisions, but sometimes they should hold sway, and I find the position that all biases are evil and that we can somehow overcome all of our biases in such hiring decisions incredibly naive. Everyone has biases, the question is whether you recognize them and distinguish which ones are appropriate, which are not, and which warrant futher investigation.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_7MHPIFOJRACNS3RBRTZOKTBUMU DavidT

    I was remembering the late 1960s…. Some readers have no sense of humor I guess!

  • quidditas

    “In answer to your question, yes, I would like bloggers in the Chronicle to do more than simply throw red meat. The kind of overt partisan blogging that fills much of the Chronicle already exist in spades in the blogosphere, and I don’t see the need for it here.”

    I’ve been known to sling some of that, but I think you make a good point about raising the level of discourse in what is allegedly the professional publication of scholars and educators.

  • tsb2010

    Oh, the hypocrisy. Where to even start with such an “argument”…

  • jkytle

    The for-profit sector is quite diverse ranging from mega stores like U/Phoenix to small, family-run career schools and everything in between. I’ve been on evaluation teams from NEASC and New York State that looked at both examples above and I have no problem whatsoever with the small for profits who serve students well in local communities. The megastore from Arizona, on the other hand, when we looked at their application to get into the Commonwealth of Massachusetts a decade or more ago was based on a convenience-consumer model that went too far. Ten years ago, anyway, this giant did some things well (marketing, recruiting materials, student services, clean well located facilities, training of teachers), but the academic program was deficient in nearly every respect (thin syllabi, underqualified professors, reading and writing expectations, support for basic skills). The two sites we visited at no academic culture whatsoever. Some years ago Traub published a prescient article in The New Yorker that the behemoths offered fast food — high fat, less nutrition, not good for you.

  • kvandam

    As Dean of the School of General Education and Chair of the Department of Humanities at Kaplan University, we have long championed the humanities. We are very proud of our exceptional faculty and curriculum. All our faculty in the humanities hold at minimum a master’s in the field or a related master’s with eighteen graduate credit hours in the field. All bachelor’s degree students are required at minimum to take one course in the humanities—many take more either as required or elective courses—and a quarter of all elective courses at the university have an embedded humanities outcome which ensures students are learning about the value of humanities throughout their program of study, not solely in humanities courses. Our Humanities Committee—one of eight such general education committees—is comprised of humanities faculty who not only write the embedded outcomes and their rubrics, they review all humanities assignments embedded in non-humanities courses to ensure the humanities are being taught robustly and rigorously.

    Here is a small sample of our humanities curriculum:

    HU201 Voices of Western Culture: Art and Ideas; HU245 Ethics; HU261 Global Civilization; HU280 Bioethics; HU300 Art and Humanities: 20th Century and Beyond; HU310 Culture, Society, and Advanced Technology; HU345 Critical Thinking; SS235 20th Century African-American Leadership

    We are also proud to be further expanding our humanities curriculum in 2011.

    I agree that we could do a better job on our public website sharing the wonderful work we are doing in the humanities and many other liberal arts disciplines, and we will work to provide a greater place of prominence; we do highlight these, however, on our Center for General Education website: http://generaleducation.kaplan.edu/default.html and I hope those wishing to learn more about us, our faculty, and our curriculum will visit this site.

    Kara VanDam, PhD
    Dean, School of General Education
    Kaplan University

    Michele Hinton-Riley, PhD
    Chair, Department of Humanities
    Kaplan University

  • betterschool

    “I then checked the homepages of an assortment of for-profit colleges, some national, publicly traded and well known (Strayer, Kaplan, ITT) . . . What I found was incredibly disappointing . . . but found that only the University of Phoenix makes that kind of information fairly easily available . . .”

    How about it Mr. Donoghue?

    - I went to Strayer’s website. In 10 seconds I was able to access a complete University catalog for each separate campus, including detail on faculty and administration credentials.

    - Do you have enough character to admit that you were wrong about this simple empirical claim, either through ineptitude or willful misrepresentation? Or, will you now change the subject as you did last time?

    And if you were so provably wrong about your simple empirical claims, what does this say about the merit of your petty “suspicions?”

  • steiny

    It is obvious The Chronicle is bias toward online education. I wonder if they are paid off to write bias unethical stories like this? When online education takes over traditional education stuff like this just might end!

  • nugatory

    The otherwise sensible and balanced language of your post suggests that you are engaged in creative fiction to reinforce your beliefs. Read on.

    Since its inception, the University of Phoenix has employed a large and still growing number of Instructional Design and Learning & Technology graduates from major institutions to deploy and continuously update its curriculum in accordance with modern learning and assessment sciences. All curriculum is fully formed in terms of scalable learning objects.

    Your reference to “thin syllabi” was a dead giveaway of your lie. That University has never had syllabi. Never. Before curriculum moved to the web, the “syllabi” of which you speak averaged 50-60 pages of detailed specifications of learning objectives, activities (group & individual, horizontal and vertical), assessment rubrics and metrics, and performance standards, along with customized faculty and student notes developed by the SME’s. I am not aware of any non-profit institution that developed and manages curriculum with such precision as the University of Phoenix and, now, a few other for-profits as well.

    I can understand that you have a point to make but you discredit yourself and your profession when you lie to make it.

  • seniorprofessor

    I second this call.

    How about it Sir? Do you have the ethics to admit you are wrong and, more to the point, that you are an embarrassment to your profession for going off half-cocked?

  • ruritania

    If you look at his previous articles, his reply to criticism is “Get your own blog. Until you do, you can’t reply to me with any authority or legitimacy. ” (!!!!!!) Because, you know, having a blog immediately confers legitimacy.

  • seniorprofessor

    nugatory — Lying is something ardent sycophants do in service of their “just cause.” You recall Nixon don’t you?

  • seniorprofessor

    To borrow a term from my son, this guy is a real “moron.”

  • cajed

    The obvious lack of research rigor and effort, sweeping generalizations and inflammatory claims appear a bit too extreme to be genuine. They sure do increase page views, however. The advertisers must love this author.

  • Guest

    They do have a “too extreme to be real” tone, don’t they? I wonder if this fellow is getting ready to promote another book?

  • instructormary

    Hello Frank:

    I realize you are generalizing, but when you focused your discussion on the humanities, you caught my interest. I currently teach humanities and fine arts at four different institutions – online courses at a community college, Kaplan Univ.-Online, and two 4-yr private universities (non-profit). I teach a variety of courses (studio art courses, art history, history, humanities, etc.), and I am held to a certain standard at all institutions. I am evaluated each term by students and faculty members (i.e., the dept. chair or dean), and the results of these evaluations have granted me more opportunities (teaching more classes, writing the curriculum, presenting at workshops, etc.). In fact, I recently returned from a juried show yesterday evening, and three of my students won awards (only five were given out). I don’t teach for myself. I teach for my students. I can guarantee you that a part-time instructor barely makes enough (dollars) to rise above the poverty level (if they do, then I need to seek out that position…). This is one of the reasons why I have to teach at four different institutions.

    I am a professional artist, I have my MA in art history, and I am currently earning my PhD in art history at a highly-ranked institution (if you take the NRC ratings seriously).

    But I’m getting off track…

    Since you focus you discussion on for-profit institutions, I want to point out that Kaplan (out of all the institutions I discussed above) holds me to the highest professional standard. I must fulfill a certain number of professional hrs, am expected to complete training regularly, am expected to constantly check in on students throughout each term (regardless of whether or not they are completing the work), teach seminars weekly, etc. If you are wondering what professional hrs might include, allow me to provide some examples – I exhibit my work at faculty and private shows, I present at workshops and conferences, I attend workshops and conferences, complete training, publish articles and book reviews, and the list goes on. Sleep is sometimes arbitrary.

    Reading your article makes me a bit frustrated, because I spend a great deal of time and effort to do the best job I can in teaching the subjects relevant to my field. I hold myself to a high standard, and I hold my students to a high standard. I may not be able to speak for everybody, but let me assure you that Kaplan doesn’t adjust its requirements for each faculty member. The instructor’s teaching quality is determined by his/her practice in the classroom (or the online classroom in this case), which is why faculty are evaluated by the students and faculty/administration.

    I hope that you explore the topic of your next post a bit more (all I ask for is a bit). Thank you.

  • Guest

    Like two others have said, I found Strayer in a matter of seconds.

    So I went looking for smaller schools.

    I found National American University’s in about 10 seconds (each is in a separate area): http://www.national.edu/Programs/graduate/Pages/default.aspx

    Then Capella University in 5 seconds: http://search2.capella.edu/?submit=Search&sp_cs=UTF-8&q=catalog

    OK. That’s enough. Frank: you are either incompetent or dissembling.

  • khar9448

    I applied to teach electronics technology at one of these schools. I asked about the requirements for teaching some of the other courses. I could have taught English Composition, Psychology, and Economics. Why was I qualified? I had at least one undergraduate course in these subjects.

  • betterschool

    What school was this?

  • khar9448

    Let’s just say it was one of the schools mentioned in the article. It was several years ago and in all fairness they ran a disclaimer in their advertising. There was a tag that said credits may not transfer.

  • peterwwood

    I had no idea that this book review would prompt such vivid displays of the forms of bias (shading over to outright bigotry). The most arresting aspect of these displays is the element of pride and self-righteousness mixed into the rationalizations for some pretty shabby behavior.

    I referred in my review to a report published by the Institute for Jewish and Community Research which drew attention to bias against Evangelical Christians. Why would a Jewish group concern itself with this phenomenon? Not because of ideological alignment. An academic world that indulges in demonizing one group on the basis of religion is fully capable–and even likely–to carry the practice to other groups when it feels like it.

    The several comments here that evoke the idea that people who uphold a religion that posits an active Creator or which dissents from some views of evolution ought thereby be appropriately screened out of any academic position in biology (and perhaps some other fields) strike me as indulging a fantasy especially constructed for cosseting a prejudice. A biologist can be judged perfectly well on the quality of his or her scientific work with no reference whatsoever to his her theology. Short of evidence that theological propositions have motivated an individual to commit scientific misconduct, the theological question is irrelevant. Why go in search of an extreme example except to give oneself a feeling of “justified after all?”

    Peter Wood

  • nordicexpat

    (I hope this shows up in the right place).

    You still skirt around the issue of what answering a 3 or a 5 on this questionnare means in terms of behavior. Because, at the end of the day, that’s what you have to determine from this survey. So, again, tell me, how do you translate one mean score of 4.114 against another mean score of 3.574 in terms of behavior? Would you say that a mean score of 3.574 meant that that group was discriminated against in actual job searches? Or the group that received a 4.114 received favorable treatment?

    As to how people are ultimately hired. I am extremely skeptical that answers on a questionnare would be a completely reliable indicator of how search committees (or employers) actually hire people. For all I know, the people who answered the questions on this survey haven’t even served on search committees. But, as I said, it’s not my field, so I’m quite willing to grant that I could be wrong on this score.

  • unemployedacademic

    “An academic world that indulges in demonizing…”

    So, reporting that one is “cool/unfavorable” toward a religious group is the same as demonizing them now? That’s a stretch. The terms used in the study are decidedly mild.

    “The several comments here that evoke the idea that people who uphold a religion that posits an active Creator or which dissents from some views of evolution ought thereby be appropriately screened out of any academic position in biology…”

    I do not understand your objection. According to your review of the book, the author has failed to prove that academics screen out otherwise qualified candidates because of extraneous beliefs. How is that bigotry?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Robert-Speed/100002022088026 Robert Speed

    The academic community tends to shed self labeling conservatives as a matter principle even after they have been admitted. This due the the fact that college age students have to read materials that conservatives often find offensive and unsupported of their ossified views.

  • hmchrony

    All good points, and good moral logic for the conclusion. Still, I would tweak it for myself thus:

    - as one who brings a lot of outside creds and experience to the job, I haven’t been restricted to the canned curriculum you mention. The textbooks for my humanities courses are as good as anywhere else for first-year college, and the writing courses are structured with conventional exercises too; and while I am given a fixed curriculum of work, I’m free to add to it and flex it around to suit my additions, which I do. It’s always felt like a platform saving me from doing basic grunt work I’d have done much the same anyway, and supporting the more unique dishes I bring to the table;

    - in 5 years of teaching for U of Phx’s Axia online (the 2-year AA equivalent) I’ve never had the experience of being controlled or ominously supervised; indeed, the experience has been more of deference and respect, even when I’ve had clashes with students about plagiarism, reasons for poor performance, etc. Good support;

    - the “minimal rigor” and “level of student ability” you mention may not apply to my courses in the same way as to professional programs where the kinds of basic skills I teach are presumed. I taught similar first-year writing and comp courses at Rutgers, which has both an excellent such program and open admissions, being a State-run school; the latter feature meant that I had a cross section of students much like I get now online, ranging from rubber-stamp A to impossible F levels, with every possible degree in between.

    Part of how I “teach” the latter group includes doing exactly what you say you can’t do, and so must walk away from: telling them in no uncertain terms just how dire their deficiencies in basic skills are, and what they must do about that if they are to have any hope of getting anywhere as students at all. Again, same as I did at Rutgers, which routinely failed a quarter to a third of their Writing Program students in their first run at their classes, forcing them to take retake them one or more times before they could go on, which is also common at U of Phx.

    Bottom line for me is that the exchange possible between me and my students is not a guarantee of a job, or of respect they do or don’t get from potential employers for whatever grades or degrees they get; it’s a chance to acquire the skills and knowledge themselves, in the midst of a less-than-perfect context, as cards they can then play as best they can, wherever they can get to. That’s how I got myself beyond my own less-than-humble beginnings to my more-than-exalted current state in, again, this robber-baron’s den of an American nightmare, and that’s what’s possible for some–not all, but for which ones is up for grabs, from where I sit; you just can’t tell.

    Solzhenitsyn wrote in one of his books (I forget which) about his experience teaching young Russians how to read and write in some poverty-bound school, back in the Soviet times, after his lionization for his books and while he was still working and living as a dissident under the oppressive suspicion of the state. Different world, different characters…I find myself recalling the sense and feel of his words about all that, if not the details, regularly in my job. He gave them neither false hope nor despair about their situation, just truth, care, love, respect, and whatever he had to offer such youth as the elder he was in the boat they were all in.

  • lizziec

    I’d love to have been able to tell my students the truth. Unfortunately, in the environment that I was in, that was tantamount to signing your letter of resignation. Here’s another reality about the place in which I experienced the for-profits, up close and personal.

    About 6 months after joining, I had a class where over 1/2 of the students regularly copied and pasted their “assignments” from other sources. While talking LOUDLY about taking academic integrity very seriously, behind the scenes faculty are encouraged to “work with the students”. When a students turns in repetitive assignments that are copied from other sources, I’m done working with them. In that “semester”, I ended up failing more than 1/2 the class. My “reward” for “taking academic honesty very seriously”? I went 2 more teaching phases without being assigned a class, and I KNOW there were available classes, as my colleagues were being asked if they wanted additional classes. This was a very subtle message to me that I was not towing the company line.

    Now, as someone with a full time position, this was an annoyance, but there are plenty (PLENTY!) of people doing the serial adjunct shuffle, just to pay their rent and bills. For these people, that kind of punishment has dire consequences, so what do you think their response to copied work is?

    You wax euphoric about “…truth, care, love, respect, and whatever [we might have] to offer such youth…” and I have but 1 comment for you on that statement. When it comes to the for-profits, you’re delusional.

  • lizziec

    You forgot to mention that the faculty are managed by people who could moonlight as beat cops, or private investigators, not academics. The system is extraordinarily flawed in that for someone who is poorly prepared, but wants badly to do a good job, they are still stuck in a system where collaboration is discouraged, their superiors are often LESS prepared academically and the students need the most support.

    This is easy to hide from accreditors, though. Only the show horses are brought out when they come, and the rest of the crowd hides in the barn.

  • lizziec

    I would just like to thank you for the article you shared (link), and say that the allegations made there by the union track with what I saw at the institution I worked with, which was NOT an EDMC affiliate (separate company altogether).

    “Also of note are the issues that union organizers are stressing. There is little talk of wages and benefits. Rather, the campaign is being built around allegations that faculty members are not being permitted to uphold academic quality. Union organizers say that they are pressured to give (undeserved) high grades and to pass some students who should fail.”

    This tells me that the practices I observed for more than 3 years are more commonplace than not, given that they are being reported at institutions that are not affiliated in any way. This points to (although certainly does not PROVE, in a research sense) widespread issues that have permeated the industry. For the taxpayers, yes, but more so for the students, these practices must be stopped and the perpetrators of these practices should be shut down and prevented from opening another “store” across town.

  • http://twitter.com/#!/ProprietaryEd ForProfitEd

    Jim Fleckenstein, a former Kaplan Program Director at the Modesto, CA campus reports otherwise:

    http://www.modestocj.com/

  • instructormary

    Hello lizziec –

    I respect your opinion, because you are speaking from experience. I have different experiences where I teach (at a for-profit institution), where my chair (humanities dept.) and dean encourage us to hold our students to a high academic standard. Plagiarism is something that I never (I wish there was an option to bold my text) allow. And, I have never been punished for this. In fact, I have nothing but support from my dept. chair (even when a student challenges the charge). I mentioned in a previous post that I teach at two private 4-yr universities, and to be honest, I have seen more students get away with plagiarism there. I have discussed this with colleagues (full-time professors), who allow students to get away with this. I have been pressured not to report these professors to administration, since I am a part-time instructor (my contract is renewed each term). However, I went ahead and informed my dept. chair. Nothing happened, which is quite disappointing. During my first semester teaching at a highly ranked private institution, I had a student who plagiarized on their final (it was a take-home). This student received a zero for it, and when I discussed taking actions (turning this student in for academic dishonesty), I was advised not to (pressured more like it).

    Again, I am not arguing that you have different experiences. I am only indicating that my experiences are different.

  • instructormary

    That’s fine. I have different experiences than Jim. But, thanks for the different perspective.

  • instructormary

    forprofited – I agree that tuition costs are incredible (I have student loans myself). The institution I attended was ridiculously expensive (I was awarded fellowships, but our dept. was only allotted a certain amount for scholarships/fellowships/assistantships)! For me personally, I find this injustice more at private universities. Last semester, a student wanted to enroll in an independent study with me as their instructor, and the institution would only offer 250 dollars for the entire semester. I had to decline (for financial reasons of course), and the student decided to enroll with one of the full-time professors. I know that this isn’t necessarily the norm across the board, but I am speaking from experience.

  • instructormary

    I apologize forprofited. It appears that my last reply was posted as a new post (instead of a reply).

  • http://twitter.com/#!/ProprietaryEd ForProfitEd

    Great news! Just in from HigherEdWatch:

    News Flash: Last-Minute Budget Deal Delivers Blow to Career College Lobbyists

    By: Stephen Burd

    Published: April 9, 2011

    Higher Ed Watch has learned that the last-minute budget deal that the White House and Congress reached late last night does not include a controversial provision that would have blocked the U.S. Department of Education from issuing a regulation that aims to prevent for-profit colleges from overloading financially needy students with unmanageable levels of debt. Assuming that this tentative agreement sticks, the Education Department will be free to finalize its proposed “Gainful Employment” rule.

    While this news is not entirely surprising, given the fact that the White House and key Senate Democrats strongly opposed the provision, this does represent a major blow to the for-profit higher education industry, which has spent millions of dollars lobbying Congress to stop the Department from moving forward with this regulation.

    [Editor's Note: This post will be updated this weekend]

    http://higheredwatch.newamerica.net/blogposts/2011/news_flash_last_minute_budget_deal_delivers_blow_to_for_profit_colleges-48177

  • Who_Profits

    Most reputable institutions limit the number of their own graduates hired to teach at said institutions but this is not so in the for-profits, especially on the doctoral level. This information is typically hidden from the public however.

  • Who_Profits

    Me too!

  • Who_Profits

    Thank you Student_Advocate2. This party is far from over!!!!!!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_NHZO25JZG6AONOHE65YWZ62I3I HeXt

    It wasn’t fabricated. It was real and I know first hand that 2 different for-profit schools I attended did the same thing.

  • Who_Profits

    “I have seen too many “UoP” grads teaching in the “UoP” programs, without requisite career experience to supplement, and this is what I would classify as a major issue/problem.”

    Thank you for this comment lizziec. This is true not just on the undergraduate level but also at the graduate, professional level where the impact on the work performed by graduates can be very serious, even dangerous.

    Take a look at http://tampastudents.net, Imagine page. These experiences are said be those expressed by students to the web creator. I can’t imagine the impact of poor training and assessment by doctor of psychology faculty in this field. Graduates of this school will eventually treat mentally ill patients!

    The sad thing here is that these ‘facts’ have been personally verified but I am not at liberty to divulge my sources. Imagine traing and evuating child psychologists by someone not trained him/herself in this specialty. I woudn’t send my child to such a graduate clinical psychologist!

  • Who_Profits

    If only more of those on the inside would muster the courage to come forward and speak out. Lizziec’s words are very powerful, even painful. I know of one individual from the inside who actually wrote a book on business ethics! The irony is almost frightening. At what point does one’s brain separate reality from fantasy?

  • hmchrony

    You know, lizziec, commentary threads like this–any conversation, really–are an acquired taste. It’s a game of “I’ll see your anecdote and point with mine and raise it an insult.” You win, I’m delusional…nicely played.

  • betterschool

    Finally, in a single corporeal entity, I find in ‘north_platte a perfect exemplification of the reason why reason can no longer advance solutions in a growing number of higher education’s communities.

    Says North_Platte in response to my call for broad and impartial expertise in teasing out the issues:

    ==> “I’m not an essentialist, but I am not an anti-essentialist, either – I think that my opinion is just as valid and well-informed as someone who has not been involved with either type of institution (which would presumably mean someone who completely lacks a college education, since anyone with the bona fides to make the kind of analysis you’re suggesting would surely have academically and intellectually invested themselves in an education at some institution of higher learning). In fact, I’d say that I’m better qualified than a disinterested party to make that kind of judgment . . .”

    Perfect irrationality, expressed perfectly.

  • hmchrony

    True enough. The whole thread’s got me feeling, as one of the “good cops,” two ways about my position: 1) like a pawn in a corrupt regime who might be found guilty of collusion when it is toppled and brought to justice, and 2) like an idealistic Democrat who inherited a mess the Republicans made of an already-messy situation and is trying to put out the fires rather than let the house burn down. Or how about Oskar Schindler? People have been burned, are being burned as we speak…what to do? And why am I leaning toward #2 rather than #1? Dull conscience? Self-interest? Cowardice?

    I’ve seen the sharks eat up plenty of hapless fish like corporations do; I myself have arguably done that every time I’ve failed a student for lacking college-level skills. I could have walked away and found a situation where such students would not be allowed to get so far as to be in over their heads intellectually and financially. Or I could tell them, as I do, “Look, you need to learn the basics of reading comprehension and language mechanics before we can go further together here. That means you need to wake up to the fact that you lack them, do some work on the side to get them–we have tutoring available, and many extra Student Workshops and resources in our library for you to do that; I can work with you a little bit on those things, in my feedback on your work, but since this isn’t a grammar class most of it will be on you to catch up with. Your call.”

    Payday loansharks who are the only way to keep off the streets for another week, corporations that bring sweatshops to poor countries and are embraced by the people there as godsends bringing employment…a country of haves hoarding way too much and have-nots living whole lives on the edge and worse…what the hell have I gotten myself into?

  • betterschool

    You know, goxewu, perhaps I got up on the wrong side of the bed but I wonder what the hell happened to traditional higher education in the last 20 years. Judging from too many who post here, it seems that it was hijacked by a bunch of post-rational whiners who have no interest in the facts when their uninformed opinions or embellished solitary experience serves their emotionally suffused mental processes perfectly well. Even that might be tolerable were it not for the mean-spiritedness. Over the years, I have lectured at elite British institutions, derived all of my income from NSF grants for a decade, and done a decent share of teaching traditional students, albeit more graduate that undergraduate. These “experiential biases,” if you will, seem to trouble no one. However, the fact that I was instrumental in building a successful for-profit institution, even though the financial side of the venture was of little interest to me (I was a theoretical guy, really excited at the challenge of building a model to educate and evaluate impact for working adult practitioners), is taken by some of these modern academics as sufficiently bad behavior as to justify rude, hypercritical, and dismissive responses. When I lived in the traditional academy, the greatest insult one could level (it was almost never done) was to accuse someone of unexamined and unadjusted bias. Every scholar I knew put forth great effort to accommodate biases in their judgments. Now, the mere fact that a fellow academic has worked somewhere that they don’t like, seems to justify shout-downs predicated on a presumed bias, even though the facts don’t support it. There was a time when my reason for spending time here was based on my belief that it was possible to create an open and level playing field for impartial inquiry, diagnosis, and remediation. I was sure of it. I believed that these pages would create solutions to the problems that face higher education as it continues its march from a small set of niche markets to a family-resemblance mega-market. I can see now that I was attempting to communicate with culture that no longer exists, at least on these pages. In the course of these efforts, I have corrupted myself. After nearly a year’s hacking around with individuals in the trenches on all sides (the folks who in my mind should have a voice in shaping the future, even leading, reform in higher education), I can see why virtually all decisions are and must be made in the back room, of of sight from individuals such as many who post here. In the words of Nicholson, “They can’t handle the truth.” I can see that forums such as these are placating devices of no importance to anyone other than the participants. For you, this is a retirement past-time, a source of amusement, I am sure. That’s a good thing. For others, I can only guess. It is clear that they do not seek knowledge or solutions. Being hypercritical and defending a fictitious reality seem to satisfy.

  • betterschool

    Even if your husband had found a program at a community college, admissions is by no means assured. The average community college has a waiting list of nearly three years for ADN (RN license) programs and similar delays for other popular (e.g., high employability) programs. (They may or not maintain an actual list but if your divide the number of qualified applicants turned away each term by the number of seats, you come up with a 2-3 year figure.) This situation is based on last year’s data. It will be much worse going forward. Almost all community colleges have taken major funding hits the past two years. Some are so severe that classes are being cut back as much as 40%. Thus, even if the community college offers a program along side the for-profit, if you have to wait a year or more for the community college, the financial scale tips to favor the for-profit (opportunity cost of time-to-degree delay; it’s one of the metrics we’re trying to get ED to incorporate).

    BTW: To the person who offered his advice, the rationale for Pell grants is to secure an educated citizenry and workforce, not to influence the decision to choose one course of study over another. Also, while experts believe it will return, there is no shortage of nurses in the U.S. at present. Most hospitals report several applicants fo reach position and are, in fact, moving up the scale from ADN to BSN in hiring. A primary cause of the temporary oversupply is the recession’s effects on retirement plans for nurses who were at or near retirement when they and/or their spouse lost 40% of their 401K. A great deal of ignorance is disseminated in these posts.

  • sherrysmarshall

    It is not just minorities and one is beginning to wonder what a minority is anymore.

    I live in Northern Virginia. We had several very good public colleges: UVA, Wm. & Mary and Va Tech. A male student with over a 4.0 GPA cannot always be admitted. I always wondered about a GPA over 4.0 put that is another issue.

    So we have in Virginia a regional discrimination. How’s that? If you live in a rural county you have a much better chance of admission.

    The rub is 25% of students are ‘out-of-state.’ The states like that as they get more money.

    If I ran the zoo I could have 10% out-of-state and 10% ‘diversity preference.’ The rest would be ‘best qualified.’ These are state schools.

    Now an interesting aside. I applied to Va Tech in 1965 as an Engineering student. They could not reject me as I was very qualified but all students had to live in student housing. The only student housing was for a girl was for nursing students. Years later I received a graduate degree from Va Tech School of Engineering Phi Kappa Phi. That has always amused me.

  • 99911292

    Rock said whites would say that even as he’srich, “I’m gone try this white thing a while longer.” Funny, but wrong. Certainly wrong for me. If I could live large like Rock and look like Denzel, I’d be a happy camper.

  • mikpap

    I attended Argosy/Sarasota. My professors had attended U of Florida, Pepperdine, Harvard, Temple, Penn State, Vanderbilt, Georgia Tech, U of Florida— those are the ones I recall. They talked very freely about their alma maters and this information was listed freely in the course catalog and on the website. It could be that now, since there is more of a proliferation of adjuncts in academia (both for and non-profit) that this information is less accessible.

  • lafi2050

    The Nov. 10 GAO report you cite is actually a substantial revision to the original report released in August. The revisions are so significant that they call into question the veracity of the entire report. The person at the GAO who led that report was reassigned. Does that tell you anything? The recruiter’s comment is true…some for-profit institutions are regionally accredited, just like elitist Ivy League schools and other traditional institutions.

  • mathgrace

    Hi Lizzie,

    I just have to disagree (but thank you for the comment and further analysis). I have taught onsite and online, and taken classes onsite and online. Our online discussions at Walden are incredibly insightful. And I mentioned other tools than just discussion boards. SKYPE and chat rooms provide an interactive Face to Face environment as do residencies (attended in-person). With discussion boards, students have the options of researching topics and providing references which doesn’t typically happen in class.

    Also, with discussion boards, the conversation can go in many different directions because it’s not limited to a 1 hour (or whatever time period) class time. Once your students leave the classroom, how many are still thinking about the discussion? Now, I’ll have to say that at lower levels, discussion boards can be tedious processes (I teach developmental mathematics) of drawing students out and getting them to respond with more than just an “I agree”. But at the doctoral level our discussions are over 2-3 weeks and include multiple threads with references, video links, and other resources.

    I don’t think it’s fair to lump everyone together. Are all schools like mine? No, I’m sure there are plenty of schools out there with bland and boring discussion boards, for-profts AND non-profits. But not ALL. And that’s why I have a problem with this blog. It dismisses all for-profits with one wave of the hand based on casual research of several un-named schools.

    Grace

  • pittsburghtec

    I think that you are missing the point. Most of the students who come to our intuitions are primarily concerned with a career. More important than the academic credentials of our faculty they are concerned with the potential employers we work with and the applicability of the training that receive to the requirements of the job to which they aspire. If they are interested in network security, they would much rather be instructed by someone with a masters from ABC University who has had 10-20 years of experience as security administrator for Master Card then they would a PHD in information science from Harvard who has never been responsible for network security in a real world environment. We take on the challenge of educating those who need a much higher degree of personal attention by faculty and student support services than those students who are successful at a traditional 4 year public or private not for profit. To reach the President’s goal of a more educated work force there has to be a place for all forms of education to serve their niche. Come and visit most for profit institutions and I think you will be impressed with the quality and dedication of our faculty

  • haohtt

    Unfortunately, both you and Dr. Donoghue appear to unaware of the fact that, according to the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the GAO had to make “major changes” to well over 1/2 of its report’s “investigative scenarios.” The result was that of the 65 anti for-profit “findings,” only 14 were supported by the actual audio evidence collected by the GAO. The fact that they had so many “findings” and that all 15 institutions were guilty, was precisely the justification for Harkin’s declaration of war against private sector education. Then the GAO says “oops,” and it turns out that the vast majority of the “findings” are false and that not all the colleges are guilty. If this investigation had been done against Ohio State, would Dr. Donoghue still try to justify falsified research?

  • haohtt

    The scenario that you describe (same lecture outlines, class activities, exams) is also commonly found at non-profit private and state universities–both for face-to-face and online courses. In fact, having “master” online courses is commonly portrayed by accrediting bodies and professional associations as a “best practice.”

  • haohtt

    Although Dr. Donoghue based this article on the feedback that he received from his recent blog, the fact that he has merely restated the previous blog demonstrates that he either did not read the comments, did not understand them, or has chosen to act as if they did not exist. Dr. Donoghue stated that he looked at Strayer’s website and could not find faculty credentials. I and others found them in seconds from where one would expect to find them (the college catalog) which, by the way, was access from the WEBSITE. So Dr. Donoghue’s claim that they were not on the website (the entire premise of his blog) was proven false. Does he address this? Of course not. Also his comments regarding face-to-face versus online learning does nothing but manifest an ignorance of thousands of studies comparing “traditional” to mediated instruction, going back to the 1920s, showing no significant difference in learner achievement. In addition, the latest meta analyses on online versus traditional instruction show advantages to those who learn in online and hybrid environments. There is no body of empirical research demonstrating the inferiority of online learning–only the opinions (and opinion polls) of those who “cannot imagine” that people could learn online. With all due respect, Dr. Donoghue, your blog should be about Book-Reviewing and Eighteenth-Century Literary Careers, where you have demonstrated genuine expertise.

  • lizziec

    @mathgrace: I think that someone like yourself, obviously educated and capable of evaluating your options and making a choice that best meets your needs is a non-issue. Different institutions meet different needs, and the state college degree may fall short of the ivy league degree for seeking/attaining certain positions just as a for-profit degree may fall short as compared to a non-profit state college degree for other positions and circumstances. These are decisions that we make, each of us, based on what we want. Sometimes we just need the “M”, or the “D” and it matters little WHERE we get it as long as it’s a legitimate (accredited) institution with more good press than bad because our work history is solid and speaks for itself.

    I mention good press vs. bad because right or wrong, the perception by a hiring committee that a degree is from a diploma mill-type school will not open any doors for you, whether it is an accurate perception or not. However, this is still a matter for the savvy consumer to weigh and evaluate based on their needs.

    The problems in the for-profit sector that creates the “bad press” I mentioned above are those that talk unsavvy, clueless and incapable (illiterate) people into borrowing tens of thousands of dollars to enroll in a program through fast-talking promises of great jobs and good salaries, down-playing the amount of work required and the level of academic abiity needed to be successful.

    Someone, somewhere needs to start speaking truth to these victims. Whether this is in public-service announcements that run right after the “college in your pajamas” ads, or curricular supplements distributed to target school districts where the majority of students are going to graduate still functionally illiterate, and vulnerable to these scams schools.

    I fully support – without much reservation – the for-profit sector that teaches mechanics, cosmetology, and other vocational skills. They are often better at this than other educational institutions.

    I object heartily to the for-profits who promise ill-prepared, illiterate and clueless people a “degree”. The degree – like home onwership – has become a status symbol. It represents making it into the middle class (what’s left of it, anyway) and this is a powerful aphrodesiac to people who have been on the bottom rungs of society for generations. This too often translates into untenable debt, more hopelessness, and no job on the other end of the nightmare.

    Until the so-called “good actors” of the for-profit industry close ranks and clean out their own house, this perception, and the stench that follows it, will remain.

  • lizziec

    Rubrics were used religiously… but as Forrest Gump is famous for saying, “stupid is as stupid does”.

    If you don’t know the materials, the rubric isn’t going to help you.

  • lizziec

    No George, I’m not giving you names. You’re going to have to take my word for it, OR get a teaching gig at one of these places and see for yourself.

    The only thing I see going on at these places that is “extensive” is the rape and pillage of Pell Grant and student loan monies, as well as the students’ futures.

    The only people with the “extensive teaching backgrounds” are the adjuncts from the other side of the tracks (i.e. traditional higher ed institutions)

  • mathgrace

    I think we’re agreeing here. The “bad-press” for-profits give a bad name to the schools that are accomplishing good things at the for-profit level. However, we never get to hear about the “good” non-profits. But I suppose we can blame this on the sensationalistic quality that news has taken on these days. Who wants to hear about the community service or service derived programs developed by students at my school? They’re much more interested in default rates at schools with television commercials of students in their pjs.

  • hchibb

    Jeffrey I can relate your teaching methodology to Howard Gardner’s multiple intelliegence theory. It surely develops one’s own transdisciplinary skills, at the same time becomes an inspiration to your students. As rightly told by the Physics teacher- teachers get the opportunity to see other facets of students personality, which does help him/her in giving impetus to their learning.

  • hollyann

    As an alum (class of ’82) I am pleased that the Shakespeare course continues to be popular. However, I would like to point out that the tradition predates Professor Groves. It was started by Professor William Davenport, one of the founding faculty members of HMC and was a well established tradition when I took the course in 1981.

  • peterwwood

    Dear dank48. I trust this thread has run its course. It is a pleasure to see it so aptly summarized.

    Peter Wood

  • http://assistantvillageidiot.blogspot.com Assistant Village idiot

    I am hoping that someone has the ready numbers. When I looked into the matter for other purposes in 2006, about one-third of all graduate degrees were in education. As that group is different in two areas – their GRE’s are lower and the course work is less rigorous – that large a percentage could color the data for all graduate studies. Was the data broken down by field?

    I don’t know if the differences apply to faculty as well, though that would be the initial assumption.

  • mathgrace

    Hi Angela,

    Actually, my PhD has been paid for by the last three employers I’ve worked for and it will be accepted by my current company (and many others) once I graduate. I haven’t been anywhere yet that hasn’t respected the school once they’ve done some research. What program are you in? It could be that the programs differ in difficulty.

    Grace

  • 11196496

    My spouse and I are both academics and we were hired by the same university at the same time. How great, we thought!! We planned to move early to avoid problems. We easily sold out house at point A and then the problems began at point B. One of the contractors on our new (being built) house was called to national guard duty and the wrong trusses were installed, setting back our move-in date by nearly a month. Meanwhile our faculty offices were both occupied by grad assistants teaching summer school. We were told that they had just been installed and could not be budged until right before school started in the Fall–not one or the other of them–and there was not one single vacant office where we could temporarily set up shop to order books, copy syllabuses, etc. So not only could we not move our household goods into our house, we could not move our books into our offices. We and our child spent three weeks living in a single room in a motel, eating out of a cooler, and paying daily charges on a U-Haul truck full of our belongings. Moving early can be good–or not.

  • smilintoday

    In spite of 11196496′s experience, I recommend moving sooner rather than later.   For my administrative appointment, I moved to another state in one week and started work the following Monday in late July.  Big mistake.  There were many, many last-minute household details that needed tending, and I learned (too late) that my school did not offer personal days; sick days required a doctor note.   So I literally used up all my vacation days before the end of August.  Crazy way to start the year at a new institution!

  • singfasola

    Moving at the last minute should be avoided, no matter what.  There are always setbacks and always surprises.  What if the house you just bought or your apartment building suffers weather damage and repairs must be made? What if 11196496 had moved later, and all those problems happened the week before the term began?
     
    If the search committee really wanted to finish its job on a high note, it would tell the new hire, as soon as the offer is accepted, or certainly before the summer:
     1)  what facilities (offices, telephones, etc.) will be available during the transition 2)  when the HR paperwork needs to be completed so that the first paycheck arrives on schedule and benefits kick in at the right time 3) when the new hire will be granted a university IT account, and whether that account can be accessed off-campus (through a VPN, for instance), since book-ordering is often done online. 4) a list of painters, plumbers, child care providers, pediatricians, and other service providers who are known to and well-regarded by faculty and staff (you cannot depend on a realtor!) and 5) HR policies with respect to time reporting, time off, etc.

    A good search committee has done its best to present the best realistic picture of the institution.  It can validate that picture, and help cement the university’s relationship with the new faculty member, by anticipating a new hire’s needs, and answering the questions the new hire didn’t know had to be asked.  This works much better than cutting a new hire loose and letting him or her fall over the administrative cliff.

  • recalcitrant

    Amen with arriving early, there are too many potential hassles to deal with on short notice and there are a number of tasks which just require a little free time to pull off successfully like finding an M.D., establishing a banking presence, signing up for utilities for your home.  Add a spouse, children, or an elderly relative to the mix and there are even more considerations.  Arrive a month or so early and headaches diminish….

  • 11182967

    This is a no-brainer: the sooner the better.  An early move is valuable for practical reasons since it permits individuals and families to settle in to both the institutional and the broader community, on campus to settle in to an office, scrounge extra furniture, learn where classrooms are before the first day of class, find the shortest route to good coffee; in the neighborhood, to find a physician and a mechanic before the first emergency, to let both kids and adults make acquaintances and connections, to know which days the grabage is picked up and to find the nearest ATM.

    But there are psychological reasons as well.  When someone moves, it’s important to begin to create a a sense of belonging to the new place rather than the old one, to learn the ways of the new community and the “way” of the new institution.  This is especially important for those making the transition from grad student to full-time faculty member, a transition no less fraught than moving from local high school to far-off college.  The more you know about the routine layout and workings of your new institution before that first big faculty meeting, the more you will feel part of the new place–and the less likely you will be to make gaffes on the order of thinking a similarly initialed dean’s husband is the dean or being late to a first day class because the A building is the Administration Building (never mind that its name is Wilson Hall) and not Ashforth Hall (which turns out to be the B Building because it was built later than the A Building).

    Even more important than the knowledge of place which reinforces a sense of belonging is the new faculty member’s commitment to the future rather than the past, to becoming the Professor you are now beginning to be called (“The title was mine, before I became the title”).  We’ve all known new people who spend too much time talking about how much better things were done at the old place, or even how much worse–we don’t care about the old place one way or another so shut up about it (and please don’t tell us again about your dissertation).  For many it takes real care and effort to stop thinking and acting like a grad student and to start being professorial, whatever one’s professorial manner.  At this point you’re an apprentice professor, as your new freshman are apprentice adults.  It pays to start learning from your more experienced colleagues as soon as possible.   

  • koufax33

    Many visiting professor positions are posting now with start dates next month, so there will be quite a lot of folks arriving days before orientation to new cities. Hopefully their new department colleagues will be mindful of this and perhaps even lend a hand.

  • tgroleau

    My situation wasn’t quite this bad.  When I took a new position, we got an offer on our house within a few days of listing it so we had to get out fast.  Since the real estate market was hot we had a very hard time buying a new house (we made offers on five houses before we got one).  Even so, we manged to move into our new community on August 2nd.  

    As we moved our household goods the new home we piled my office boxes up in the garage because I couldn’t get an office at my new school for two weeks – and they rushed to find a place for me.

    I like the idea of moving early but make sure that your new employer is ready for you.  Most schools I’ve dealt with seem to expect you to show up no sooner than the first day specified in your contract.

  • i_am_moving

    I don’t have a choice. I’ll be moving late. :(
    I’m hoping to be able to sign up for internet as soon as possible as for me that’s the most important thing (I’m renting a house so other utilities are okay) to communicate with my “old place” which is on the other side of the world. 

  • impendia

    I’m starting a new tenure-track job, and I’m going to arrive there a little under two weeks before the start of classes.

    I could regret moving so late, but I doubt it. I am a single guy and so have fewer practical concerns than many. I am leaving a very exciting place and don’t terribly want to show up to my institution when it is quiet. By showing up later I will be showing up to a buzz of activity and excitement, and really set things off on a positive note. (At least I anticipate.)

    I will have a lot of practical hassles and be unpacking boxes on the weekends, sure, but I’m leaving a full social life behind, so I anticipate being grateful for the distraction.

    I suppose the author’s advice is on target for most, but I will cheerfully stand out and be the exception.

  • wolf359

    I would add that it’s helpful to visit the town you are moving to as often as possible.  If you live within a 4 hour drive, it’s worth it to be able to get your bearings, find the grocery stores and gas stations, know the campus layout, understand what neighboring communities are like, and so on.  Some senior faculty may be more than willing to open their homes to you during these visits so as to save on hotels.

  • bookwormz

    I get so frustrated when faculty at my school return from 1) summer breaks, 2) spring breaks, or 3) Christmas break and ask me “How was your break?”  As a librarian on a 12 month contract, who gets two weeks of vacation a year (4 days of which must be used if I want to take time off between Christmas and the New Year because my school doesn’t close), I get annoyed when I see a tanned, rested, happy faculty member return for orientation at the end of August.  Yes, I have faculty ranking, but no, I don’t have a “faculty” contract.  So faculty,  just say, “Hi!” after breaks, and don’t ask me how mine was.  I was walking your students through the maze of your syllabi in your absence.

  • summers_off

    I am a tenure track faculty member, so I don’t have summers_off (yes, my Chronicle name is toungue-in-cheek).  But I do get to slow down to about 35 – 40 hours per week, rather than the 50 – 60+ I put in during the school year).  And I do get to do some of my work outside or on my porch.
     
    Note to non-faculty staff:  when I say “How was your break?” I am fully aware that you were here working, as specified by your employeement terms.  However, many of my staff colleagues agree that Spring Break, Winter Break, etc. ARE breaks from students & faculty.  They say they love that time because they can actually get some work done without interruptions.  Also, many faculty are referring to the time period (similar to “How was your weekend”).  In fact, I do not get offended when my staff colleagues ask me “How was your weekend” when I spent that time grading papers, answering student emails & preparing for next week’s classes.

  • juliewhite

    I hope you could tell by my tone that I was being somewhat lighthearted.  I don’t really get personally offended when people ask me how my summer/break was; but I do think a lack of understanding about each others’ roles (faculty/staff) is not helpful to the overall working relationship, so I was attempting to shed some light on that. 

    Personally, students are my work, and even though I have tons of paperwork, I feel like I want to bang my head against the computer after a whole day of nothing but.  I prefer having the students here!  :-)

  • moderator

    “That should be who ‘whoever,’ the subject of “was reading.”  It’s a common error, but one that an English teacher should catch.”

    Good catch. That was my error, not Isaac’s.

    Gabriela Montell
    Web Producer

  • rogue_academic

    - deleted by author -

  • jbfjbf

    Hi Isaac:

    Congratulations.  I’ve been reading your work for years.  “I told you so.”  Don’t consider those stupid adjunct positions where they snuff the life out of you.  I may be wrong, but I think they hired you for your persistence and your willingness to keep on trying no matter what.  Good for you.

    PS:  RBC:  You take good care of this guy.

  • jbfjbf

    I really hate it when people correct one’s grammar and spelling.  It is not a frickin dissertation.  It is a hastily written blog. 

  • mbelvadi

    Hasty or not, correct grammar ought to come “naturally” to an English prof (and as we know now, it did – the CHE editor made the error).  I find this idea that some people have that English is so unnatural and difficult that it should be assumed that everyone, including native speakers who teach English grammar for a living, will get it wrong on the first try, and thus accuracy is only a matter of editing, very troubling. If it’s that bad, it’s time to change the “rules” of English, not our standards of what kinds of “errors” are acceptable in what written contexts. Would you find it acceptable if it were a math prof who write that 2+2 = 5 (as a real error, not a typo) because they were being “hasty”?

  • http://hiresteve.com/ Steve Foerster

    You may be troubled by the idea that even native speakers find English grammar challenging, but wouldn’t the evidence suggest this is exactly the case?

  • anonytrans

    Yes, the pronoun is the subject of “read” (whoever was reading). But it’s also the object of “lead” (Isaac leads whomever).  It’s grammatically ambiguous. While you may have stylistic preferences on the matter, there isn’t much of a case to be made that one option is “wrong” and the other is “right.”

  • jffoster

    English is not mathematics, mbelvadi.  Recommend you take a course in or do some reading in Linguistics.  You’ll find the old grammaire, she ain’t what she used to be.

  • bleckb

    Having just served on yet another hiring committee, I can tell you this letter would have fallen flat. A more likely way to succeed, except maybe in exceptional circumstances, is to address all of the criteria listed in both the required and preferred qualifications. I would hope that we are not alone in having particular criteria attached to a new position, and those criteria are scored by the hiring committee. If a particular criteria is not addressed, then it receives no score, and the more of those qualifications that are not addressed make it so the applicant is unlikely to receive an interview offer.

    The above letter does nothing that most other letters do in expressing a commitment to students. That’s a given at a two-year college where teaching is the focus. But there are other concerns a department, division or college needs help with, and those are listed in the preferred and required qualifications. Be sure to touch on as many of those as you can. Hiring committees have no time for the superfluous. 

    I apologize for perhaps being overly critical of the above letter, but in my experience, it just wouldn’t do much to help an applicant for our openings.

  • cjinstructor

    I have to thank you for writing, and perhaps this was the point:
    I am sending each of my bachelors and associates students this article as an example of what will make you the center of attention at the faculty/administration lunch table for at least a week: “You have got to be kidding ”

    Did you want them to feel sorry for you? “I want to desperately reveal”…; “As an adjunct since 2007, I have demonstrated this. I’ve been up against it, dealing with the pitfalls of adjunctery, but I have always been able to find sanctuary with students. I just want to be able to do more, in a full-time position that would present me the opportunity to research more, serve the institution, advise students, help with the creative publication, and perform other outside-the-classroom duties. All of this for the students.”

    “I find sactuary with the students”: does RBC provide a nice therapy benefit? What exactly do the students get from you?

    I have no problem with creativity. However, where is the professionalism? Are you suggesting that this CV shows respect for the Search or Review Committee; for the Division Chair?
    What kind of self-respect do you show by writing such ‘pronouncements’?

    Many of us are looking to find full-time positions. Certainly, there are “creative” ways to stand out from the competition while maintaining a professional and respectful appearance.

    We must start holding the faculty and the student accountable to high standards, particularly while instructing the foundational and core courses. Once students have mastered these basics, then we can help them explore their critical thinking and creative abilites.

    Obviously, I have taken some creative license in my posting. It is not meant to offend, but rather to refine the importance of the Cover Letter.
    There are many people who are detail oriented and I woudl hope they make it to review committees. Being Savvy is one thing, but when the CV comes across as pathetic, well, remember the old saying: “word of mouth will get you”. Faculty, Program Chairs, Deans, Directors, their support staff, and the institute Presidents talk.

    I am glad that you ultimately got past the interview process and the position for which you applied full-time.

  • 11274135

     A couple of observations.

    I’d like to see the CV that went with this letter. The letter is nice, but it would only stand out if the CV made it clear that the candidate met or exceeded the stated minimum qualifications for the job. Without that, the whole package would go in the “no” pile.

    This letter might also stand out if it were read in the context of 200 letters from freshly minted PhDs in English Lit  trying desperately to fake an interest in a community college career teaching writing. Ike has some street cred, at least.

      

    By the way, I can hardly believe this discussion, at one point, broke down into some snarky comments about a technical usage error that is just about to be kicked out of the error club.

    Anyway, way to go Isaac!

  • teprusa

    As someone who often serves on English and Foreign Language hiring committees, I think it is important for candidates to understand as one poster said that you try to match your qualifications as much as you can with what the position announcement is asking for. After that it all depends on who is on the hiring committee. As we can see, people are not agreeing on whether they would like the example cover letter or not. Some people like the creativity; some people find it a little much. Also if you are applying for a language teaching job, you will be expected to have excellent skills in that language. But I can also assure you that language hiring committees will sit around and argue over grammar points too. Unless you know the people on the hiring committee, the only thing you can be sure of is your education and experience match the position.

  • manoflamancha

    Shill!

  • Socratease2

    Yawn…Oh, sorry, did you say something? I understand actually thinking  through complex issues is hard for people like you so sorry if I don’t jump on the “righteous know-it-all” bandwagon. What else are you sure you know without any direct experience or knowledge? And if you are resorting to juvenile and laughable one word replies, you are starting to lose it my friend. I suggest regular yoga classes.

  • Socratease2

    Sorry, didn’t have time previously to finish my final thoughts. It seems you are having some debate PTSD symptoms and are reacting a bit jumpily and without focus. Breathe. Ah, yes, feels good doesn’t it? I think I made a point to agree with many critiques of athletics and have advocated for reforms as well. How does make me a “shill” because I don’t agree with you?  I am not blind to reality, I just don’t agree with uniformed, blanket statements, no one should. Why? Because absolute judgments are always absolutely wrong. As legendary football coach, Bear Bryant once said,”There is more to heaven and earth than ever dreamt of in your philosophy.” You don’t know me but to call me a “shill” for athletics is the most absurd label you could try to pin on me but, please, do whatever makes you feel good. I would focus on structuring your arguments with a bit more ethos and logos, leave the unsightly pathos at home. And…since I know many of you are hyper-literal out there, I know who actually penned the quote above.

  • jackie5643

    The graduation data as a whole was positive, yes.  However, an important detail was that football and men’s basketball had graduation rates that either stayed level or increased only slightly.  These are the student-athletes who receive the most public attention, and they are also the student-athletes who tend to enter college as the most unprepared of the student-athletes.  (And yes, I speak from direct and substantive personal experience working with student-athletes)  Until these under prepared student athletes have higher graduation rates as a result of academic reform, the NCAA should and will continue to seek ways to improve the GSR of student-athletes.

  • Socratease2

    I agree completely, It is true that the many of the key “impact” players in men’s basketball and football are either under-prepared, African-American or both. Averages hide some of the continued disparities in graduation rates. With new NCAA legislation, Athletic Depts will need to hire more learning specialists not less. These reforms announced yesterday barely change anything for the better and on the flip side will exclude more minority students from entering college. The NCAA in its infinite self-serving cynicism does not mention the fact these reforms are going to hit the most disadvantaged and vulnerable students. Just watch diversity rates drop on D-I campuses as the NCAA not only profits off the backs of young black males but now will increasingly keep them out of college altogether. Way to go Mark Emmert! But look behind you Mr. Emmert, the anti-trust train is barreling down the tracks and is going to make life a living hell for you  and your friends in Indiannapolis. I would prefer to see the NCAA disbanded, they are a shadow government with no real authority and appear to make a living off off enforcing an incomprehensible rule book and the use of threats and intimidation. So many of their rules actually hurt the hardest working and most academically ambitious of student-athletes. Conferences don’t need the NCAA to make media contracts and nor do they need the NCAA to deregulate the bloated carcass that is the current rule book, they can do that on their own.  I don’t know how this will shake out eventually, paying college athlees will destroy what is good about college sports, continuing the status quo will only mean more money for the greedy adults currently lapping at the financial salt lick of televised college sports. We could go back to the days of the college “game of the week” and instead of having 60 games on every weekend only allow one. I could also ride a pogo stick to Mars, same chance of working.

  • 12082153

    Ron Suskind’s recently published book, Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington, and the Education of a President, as well as earlier documentaries about America’s financial crises point to another looming crisis in higher education that mirrors the economic meltdowns. Here’s the story.
     
    Suskind, a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist,  provides deep insights into the principal players in a calamitous affair—how Wall Street strayed from long-standing principles of transparency, accountability, and fair dealing to generate stunning profits but only to fail just prior to the 2008 election to the presidency of a woefully inexperienced manager.
     
    Suskind’s revelations should come as no surprise to those who have viewed the documentaries “Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room” that provides a behind-the-scenes look at the powerful energy company whose downfall forever changed the landscape of the business world and “Inside Job” that reveals the true architects of the economic meltdown that hit America starting in 2008—exposing most of the same players named by Suskind.
     
    Taken together, Suskind’s book and the documentaries provide a telling lesson in the potential trappings of arrogance, dishonesty, incompetence (inexperience), greed, and unethical behavior plaguing, to varying degrees,  not only corporate America, but our government as well. We see that a decade after the 9/11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center’s twin towers,  grievous harm to the U. S. and world economies has been achieved by Americans—such harm was one of the key objectives of the 9/11 attack that failed in this regard. Devastating economic harm was not accomplished by a memorable catastrophic event, but over time via a combination of greed and arrogance, as well as a profound lack of appropriate regulation and oversight by U. S. governments led by ill-advised presidents who, in turn, exercised poor judgment. 
     
    Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda were held accountable for the 9/11 attack and duly punished. However, no one has been sent to jail or otherwise held accountable for the economic crisis orchestrated by the confidence men who served on Wall Street and in the federal government.

    Unfortunately, another unheralded crisis is brewing—mirroring the economic debacles in many ways.  It involves one of America’s biggest business sectors—higher education. Many of America’s colleges and universities are experiencing serious financial problems as well as troubles with proliferating scandals in their professional sports entertainment businesses that are led by their own brand of confidence men—officials at the NCAA cartel (NCAA and its member institutions) and conferences, as well as wealthy boosters and trustees.
     
    The schools have become academically adrift in a sea of sports—with graduates that have not developed the skills and knowledge they need to become our next generation of leaders and good citizens. Their graduates lack foundational knowledge in core subjects such as math, science & technology, economics, communications (written and verbal), civics, and history.
     
    The schools’ crowd-pleasing sports-entertainment businesses exhibit undisguised contempt of academic integrity and are not only accompanied by injustices to college athletes, but massive corruption as well. Corruption has, over time, warped academic missions as athletics have been prioritized over academics with dire unintended consequences, to wit: the loss of economic competitiveness, deterioration of America’s well being, as well as the erosion of its leadership position on the world stage.
     
    Today, there is no meaningful oversight of the NCAA cartel as it is not only self-reporting and self-regulating, but self-enforcing as well. Furthermore, the cheating and corruption that enables the cartel to maintain its tax-exempt status—while fielding professional teams with their conferences serving as the minor leagues for the NFL and NBA—are rooted in the same types of cronyism and cozy relationships that were instrumental in bringing about today’s financial crises 
     
    Notwithstanding the NCAA Board’s recent approval of tougher academic rules and announcements such as reported by Sander and others, serious questions remain about the willingness and ability of the NCAA cartel and conference officials to reform their operations. The reason is simply that these officials have conflicting interests as promoters of their professional sports businesses and enforcers of rules that can curtail the viability of these businesses.
     
    Nonetheless, as with AIG and the big banks, government officials consider these businesses too big to fail and too popular with constituents (a political ‘third rail’). As a consequence, they are reluctant to require corrective action, such as imposing requirements for transparency, accountability and oversight that would not only assure compliance with federal conditions for the cartel’s tax-exempt status, but expose its secretive operations to disinfecting sunshine as well. Recent calls for congressional action by Congressmen Bobby Rush (D, IL) and John Conyers (D, MI) to address the proliferation of scandals in collegiate athletics may lead to an exception to this general rule.

    Sadly, the nation stands in denial.  There is no one to blame but ourselves with our addiction to 24/7 sports entertainment and tolerance of a political class that seemingly prioritizes re-election above all else. When will we ever earn?
     
    Perhaps much of this will be the subject of a future Suskind book and truth-telling documentaries, possibly co-authored with fellow Pulitzer-Prize-winner Taylor Branch, author of the cover story, “The Shame of College Sports,” in the October 2011, issue of The Atlantic Monthly. Hopefully, the book and documentaries will not be histories of another calamitous affair, but rather a story about how we are going about resolving related problems to come back as the world leader we once were.

    Frank G. Splitt is a former McCormick Faculty Fellow at Northwestern University’s McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science.

  • 12082153

    Ron Suskind’s recently published book, Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington, and the Education of a President, as well as earlier documentaries about America’s financial crises point to another looming crisis in higher education that mirrors the economic meltdowns. Here’s the story.  

    Suskind, a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist,  provides deep insights into the principal players in a calamitous affair—how Wall Street strayed from long-standing principles of transparency, accountability, and fair dealing to generate stunning profits but only to fail just prior to the 2008 election to the presidency of a woefully inexperienced manager.  

    Suskind’s revelations should come as no surprise to those who have viewed the documentaries “Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room” that provides a behind-the-scenes look at the powerful energy company whose downfall forever changed the landscape of the business world and “Inside Job” that reveals the true architects of the economic meltdown that hit America starting in 2008—exposing most of the same players named by Suskind.  

    Taken together, Suskind’s book and the documentaries provide a telling lesson in the potential trappings of arrogance, dishonesty, incompetence (inexperience), greed, and unethical behavior plaguing, to varying degrees,  not only corporate America, but our government as well. We see that a decade after the 9/11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center’s twin towers,  grievous harm to the U. S. and world economies has been achieved by Americans—such harm was one of the key objectives of the 9/11 attack that failed in this regard. Devastating economic harm was not accomplished by a memorable catastrophic event, but over time via a combination of greed and arrogance, as well as a profound lack of appropriate regulation and oversight by U. S. governments led by ill-advised presidents who, in turn, exercised poor judgment.  

    Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda were held accountable for the 9/11 attack and duly punished. However, no one has been sent to jail or otherwise held accountable for the economic crisis orchestrated by the confidence men who served on Wall Street and in the federal government.

    Unfortunately, another unheralded crisis is brewing—mirroring the economic debacles in many ways.  It involves one of America’s biggest business sectors—higher education. Many of America’s colleges and universities are experiencing serious financial problems as well as troubles with proliferating scandals in their professional sports entertainment businesses that are led by their own brand of confidence men—officials at the NCAA cartel (NCAA and its member institutions) and conferences, as well as wealthy boosters and trustees.  

    The schools have become academically adrift in a sea of sports—with graduates that have not developed the skills and knowledge they need to become our next generation of leaders and good citizens. Their graduates lack foundational knowledge in core subjects such as math, science & technology, economics, communications (written and verbal), civics, and history.  

    The schools’ crowd-pleasing sports-entertainment businesses exhibit undisguised contempt of academic integrity and are not only accompanied by injustices to college athletes, but massive corruption as well. Corruption has, over time, warped academic missions as athletics have been prioritized over academics with dire unintended consequences, to wit: the loss of economic competitiveness, deterioration of America’s well being, as well as the erosion of its leadership position on the world stage.  

    Today, there is no meaningful oversight of the NCAA cartel as it is not only self-reporting and self-regulating, but self-enforcing as well. Furthermore, the cheating and corruption that enables the cartel to maintain its tax-exempt status—while fielding professional teams with their conferences serving as the minor leagues for the NFL and NBA—are rooted in the same types of cronyism and cozy relationships that were instrumental in bringing about today’s financial crises   

    Notwithstanding the NCAA Board’s recent approval of tougher academic rules and announcements such as reported by Sander and others, serious questions remain about the willingness and ability of the NCAA cartel and conference officials to reform their operations. The reason is simply that these officials have conflicting interests as promoters of their professional sports businesses and enforcers of rules that can curtail the viability of these businesses.  

    Nonetheless, as with AIG and the big banks, government officials consider these businesses too big to fail and too popular with constituents (a political ‘third rail’). As a consequence, they are reluctant to require corrective action, such as imposing requirements for transparency, accountability and oversight that would not only assure compliance with federal conditions for the cartel’s tax-exempt status, but expose its secretive operations to disinfecting sunshine as well.

    Recent calls for congressional action by Congressmen Bobby Rush (D, IL) and John Conyers (D, MI) to address the proliferation of scandals in collegiate athletics may lead to an exception to this general rule.

    Sadly, the nation stands in denial.  There is no one to blame but ourselves with our addiction to 24/7 sports entertainment and tolerance of a political class that seemingly prioritizes re-election above all else. When will we ever earn?  

    Perhaps much of this will be the subject of a future Suskind book and truth-telling documentaries, possibly co-authored with fellow Pulitzer-Prize-winner Taylor Branch, author of the cover story, “The Shame of College Sports,” in the October 2011, issue of The Atlantic Monthly. Hopefully, the book and documentaries will not be histories of another calamitous affair, but rather a story about how we are going about resolving related problems to come back as the world leader we once were.

    Frank G. Splitt is a former McCormick Faculty Fellow at Northwestern University’s McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science.

  • shar9019

    My concern with the increase is it may allow for athletes who full cost of attendance is covered pocket more money (Pell Grants, etc.), when those funds could be utilized by other students who need the money in order to attend.