I am astounded that The Chronicle would feature on its cover a graphic headlined “The Million Dollar Club” that features four university presidents who earn astronomical salaries—one close to $3-million, one $2.5-million, and the other two close to $2-million (“4 Public-College Presidents Pass $1-Million Mark in Pay,” May 12). How can you show this on your cover when so many students graduate today with enormous debts and university personnel are often earning only minimum wages? This situation is extremely unjust. Education in the U.S. has become, like everything else, big business/big bucks. I guess that it’s the way you are going too. My esteem for your publication has dropped very low.

Jane Rather Thiebaud
Vancouver, Wash.

I teach at Bard College and gave a talk, based on a published article, at last year’s conference on science and religion (“‘The Strangest Conference I Ever Attended,’” The Chronicle, May 15). I also participated in many other academic conferences. Leaving aside the issues of funding and motivation for this conference, I want to say that the overall theme of the conference was certainly interesting and legitimate. There were also some interesting presentations and discussions. The conference was devoted to the theme, which interests David Birnbaum, not to David Birnbaum himself (in fact, some participants expressed strong criticisms of his views). The conference, indeed, was poorly attended, which is not uncommon at Bard with numerous events going on at the same time. It was also the end of the semester—probably not the best time to attract broadly students and faculty. I am not sure what your reporter is trying to make out of this conference. I am not sure whether he is blissfully ignorant or simply puts on a pretense. It is hardly a secret that many academic institutions and functions receive private donations. George Soros, for one, gives a lot of money for institutions and conferences (including Bard) that often prominently feature either him personally or his work. As it turns out, it is a small price to pay. Many legitimate academics benefit from his generosity. I do not necessarily endorse this practice but this is how it is throughout the academic community, not just at Bard.

The issue of objectivity is in itself a very complex issue. Taking money either from private donors or from the government may or may not have effect on objectivity. But if your reporter wants to claim that professional academic circles are absolutely objective and completely devoid of special interests and concerns that affect academic matters (publications, grants, appointments, etc.), I would suggest that he is either an angel or a hypocrite. It is no secret that the academic world is often highly politicized and controlled by factions that represent dominant paradigms. As Thomas Kuhn has pointed out, these factions are not necessarily open minded and are often very exclusive. Your reporter cannot be oblivious to this fact.  As one reads through this piece, it increasingly appears as an attack on David Birnbaum. I would more than welcome an objective piece that would criticize the politics of our knowledge establishment. A personal attack on Mr. Birnbaum and the conference he funded strikes me, more than anything else, as hypocritical.

Gennady Shkliarevsky
History Department
Bard College
Annandale-on-Hudson, N.Y.

The waning chalk-and-talk days of teaching result in the loss of teaching moments. Teachers relish these moments that arise spontaneously during lectures. Professors’ increasing use of PowerPoint presentations reduces or eliminates opportunities for these precious moments.

Professors reading from books or newspapers during class time are not teaching. Professors extensively projecting PowerPoints on the screen that are also in the textbook during class time are not teaching. Students know how to read. They risk losing the interest of their students. Many students try to copy everything on the screen and seldom look up. Others are bored, daydreaming, or surreptitiously using their smartphones to text friends, visit social sites, and so forth.

Professors might consider using only PowerPoints not in the text. They may also consider limiting the use of PowerPoints that are in the textbook to complex materials. This may result in more teaching moments.

C. Kevin Synnott
Lecturer
Department of Business Administration
Eastern Connecticut State University
Willimantic, Conn.

The tragic situation at the Boston Marathon will cause various changes in society, for sure, and it brings to light another series of changes marked by the mass analysis of the crime scene through publicly available images and video.

Analysis of online material has always happened, of course. But with the advent of smart phones and other means of collecting information, and the means to disseminate that information, never before has the general populace had access to vast quantities of information, the tools to analyze it, the ability to collaborate with large numbers of other individuals, to do this quickly and efficiently, and to distribute results of these analyses rapidly and broadly.

Humans are great thinkers. Our brains determine patterns and look for changes, all of this done rapidly and (mostly) subconsciously, in an attempt to understand the world around us. Because for most of human history understanding the world around us meant understanding the threats around us, humans need to know answers right away. And we dislike uncertainty (being uncertain whether there is a threat or not, what it is, and from where it comes, isn’t good!) These fundamental survival aspects of human cognition mean, however, that we don’t naturally solve problems and conduct analyses in an optimum way: Because we are biased, we rely on shaky assumptions, we jump to conclusions, and a myriad of other things.

Now, more than ever, we require some way to make sure we are not falling into the trap of “normal” human cognition to solve increasingly complex problems—because to survive in the modern world, we can’t just rely on our instinctive ways of thinking. We need something to provide “quality assurance” to our thought processes, our problem solving. That something is critical thinking.

There are many ways to employ critical thinking, but I think it is fundamentally about asking questions. Questions about everything:  What is the source of my information? Is the source biased? Am I biased? Am I jumping to conclusions? Have I generated multiple explanations (hypotheses)? Not only is critical thinking what causes us to ask questions, critical thinking helps us be aware of the limitations of our “normal” cognitive processes. Couple that with a structured, explicit approach to problem solving and we are better enabled to determine answers objectively, unencumbered by our cognitive limitations.

Critical thinking is difficult because it is not a normal way for humans to think. It’s difficult because it is a set of skills (like a foreign language), not just a state of mind, and as such requires constant practice and exposure. But it is something each and every one of us must practice and employ; all day, every day. We must do our part to foster and employ critical thinking, to be able to confront the challenges ahead, to be able to better analyze and understand the world around us, a world of “big data” and ever-more complex problems.

Joe Pesce
McLean, Va.

Some time ago while at a meeting in New York, a professor mentioned that at his institution, they were cutting many foreign-language courses because students were finding them difficult. That led students to think that they might be struggling and not end up being successful. So the result implies that if the university wants to present an image of graduating successful students, it should drop those courses that students feel are daunting.

When my daughter went to visit Texas A&M University, the dean of her college came out to address the parents. She stated that “This is not Job Corps.” I was impressed with that statement as it implied that the university was there to educate students, not train them for a specific job. Jobs would come as a result of a good education, but the education was the first priority.

I believe we should teach more foreign languages so we can better understand the world in which we live. For example, one of the better economies in Europe is Germany’s, and many of us have German roots. Yet German seems hard, so why bother learning the language?

Universities have non-science-major versions of various science courses because science is just “too darn hard.” I do not see any non-history-major history courses, or non-German-major German courses. Yet students who can speak more than one language are quite valuable.

It seems that our goal of producing “successful” students is misplaced. A colleague of mine once said that students cannot appreciate being successful if they have never struggled with anything. I tend to agree with him, but universities appear to want the reputation of producing successful students without making them struggle because they might give up and quit. Although many universities have extensive tutoring programs, many students opt out of tutoring sessions as they do not fit into  their busy schedules.

I find it interesting to look at the lives of Nobel Prize-winning  chemists and the struggles they had to overcome. When Fritz Haber tried to find a catalyst make ammonia from hydrogen and nitrogen, he was successful after 4,000 attempts! Where would we be if he had given up because it was too hard?

Rick White
Professor of Chemistry
Sam Houston State University
Huntsville, Tex.

For an entire academic year, two international students from Nigeria have been in hiding to avoid deportation in Canada. The reason for their deportation orders was the honest mistake of working at Walmart for two weeks without the correct work permit. This type of mistake is now being addressed by the Canadian government through changes to the International Student Program, yet these two students remain under deportation orders and Canada-wide arrest warrants.

Although the students, Victoria Ordu and Favour Amadi, had work permits for campus, they did not realize they were required to apply for a separate permit to work off campus at Walmart. Soon they were embroiled in a long and arduous journey with the Canadian Border Service Agency. These two women were both studying at the University of Regina on full scholarships from their own government and had no prior contact with police or the CBSA.

On June 19, Ms. Ordu and Ms. Amadi sought sanctuary in a local church here in Regina, Saskatchewan. Since then the two women and their supporters have been appealing to Jason Kenney, the Federal Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, and Vic Toews, the Federal Minister of Public Safety, to overturn the deportation orders and Canada-wide arrest warrants to allow them to return to classes. We are calling on our colleagues in Canada and the international community to join us in asking these ministers to intervene to assist these students. The case extends well beyond our university and has implications for all international students who might make an honest mistake.

In December 2012, Minister Kenney proposed changes to the International Student Program that speak directly to the mistake made by Ms. Ordu and Ms. Amadi. The proposed changes include a provision that allows eligible students to work on and off campus with the same permit. This is an important change and will avoid further mistakes like those of Ms. Ordu and Ms. Amadi. But in the spirit of these proposed changes we are calling upon Minister Kenney and Minister Toews to halt all pending deportations of students who would not be in violation of their student visas under the new provisions.

Please join us in asking Minister Kenney and Minister Toews to intervene and allow these two students to return to classes. Tens of thousands of international students choose to study in Canada. We welcome these students and understand that, just like any other student, from time to time they make mistakes. But the punishment must fit the crime. It remains unclear if Walmart was ever reprimanded for hiring these students. But what is clear is that deporting Ms. Ordu and Ms. Amadi in their final year of study is an unnecessarily harsh penalty which will have life-long implications. For more information about this case and what you can do to help please visit stopurdeportations.com.

Claire Carter
Women’s and Gender Studies
Annette Desmarais
International Studies
Emily Eaton
Department of Geography
Hirsch Greenberg
Department of Justice Studies
Kathleen Irwin
Theatre Department
Darlene Juschka
Women’s and Gender Studies and Religious Studies
Vanessa Mathews
Department of Geography
Joseph Mburu
Department of Political Science/International Studies
Deborah Simpson
International Studies
Marc Spooner
Faculty of Education
Michelle Stewart
Department of Justice Studies
Sean Tucker
Faculty of Business Administration
University of Regina
Regina, Saskatchewan

After mulling over Robert J. Sternberg’s “Self-Sabotage in the Academic Career” (The Chronicle, April 29), I feel inclined to respond. The article reads like a Cosmo piece: “15 Ways to Get (and Keep!) a Man!” Be confident, but not pushy; talk about yourself, but don’t be boring; be interested in what he has to say but don’t monopolize the conversation; be a tigress in the bedroom, but don’t be loose; learn about his likes and dislikes! But above all else, remember ladies, if you’re single, its all your fault.

In today’s dismal academic job market, Mr. Sternberg appears out of touch and irrelevant, at best, and condescending and indifferent at worst. He advises aspiring academics to strive for an elusive professional and personal life balance without acknowledging the difficult conditions under which so many are toiling, namely, high academic and personal debt, low wages, and even less time. It’s convenient for him to point out the flaws in others, but he doesn’t share the secrets to his own success. What he leaves the reader with is, in the end, if you don’t succeed professionally, its all your fault!

Christina Ruffino
Graduate Student
City University of New York—Graduate Center
New York

Two recent Chronicle articles (“Found in Translation: A Professor Searches for a Public Voice,” April 22, and “Actor Is Honored for Using Improv to Help Scientists Communicate,” April 20) draw attention to the critical need for scientists to learn to communicate their research to the lay public. We note an important addition: Scientists also need to build skills and networks to effectively engage in the policy-making process at all levels of government.

Effective translation of research can contribute to successful, evidence-based policy outcomes. But scientists and policymakers generally operate within different frameworks. They communicate in different ways in terms of both type and extent of information required for drawing conclusions. They work under different time frames. And they have different constituencies. Delivering a scientific research paper to an audience of peers is a very different exercise than providing usable, understandable information to policymakers. These differences mean that public policy discussions are not as rich as they should be, and much scientific expertise remains untapped. The advent of state science-advocacy groups and a growing student movement point to a widespread interest in policy engagement. Our initial research and other indicators further suggest an increasing desire, on the part of scientists and policymakers, to build better “translation bridges.”

We and others have launched a new ad hoc organization that is working to ensure that every scientist or engineer who wishes to engage in the science-policy interface is aware of opportunities and empowered to do so effectively.

Abigail Abrash Walton
Director
Center for Academic Innovation
Antioch University New England
Keene, N.H.

Tobin L. Smith
Vice President for Policy
Association of American Universities
Washington

Most information regarding college students’ alcohol consumption in surrounding areas of the college community is negative. However, research shows that the major part of the college population abstains or drinks moderately and responsibly.

College students’ misperceptions regarding their peers’ consumption of alcohol is well known. Students inaccurately perceive that their peers drink more alcohol than they do themselves. Students may drink more to fit in. They already fit in, but do not realize it. Colleges and universities using models designed to clarify these misperceptions for decades may buttress the chances for success by involving parents and community members. It is likely that parents and community members have misperceptions also.

Alcohol-prevention specialists charged with the responsibility of clarifying students’ misperceptions related to their peers’ consumption of alcohol may employ activities designed to clarify parents’ and community members’ misperceptions regarding students’ consumption of alcohol. Typical clarification programs consist of administering surveys to students to determine their consumption of alcohol and their perceptions of their peers’ consumption of alcoholic beverages. Surveys can be administered to parents and community members to determine their perceptions of college students’ consumption. Publishing the results in local newspapers and college publications—including what students actually consume, students’ misperceptions regarding their peers’ drinking, parents’ misperceptions, and community members’ misperceptions—will encourage positive discussions. These discussions will reinforce the information students receive regarding their misperceptions.

C. Kevin Synnott
Lecturer
Department of Business Administration
Eastern Connecticut State University
Willimantic, Conn.

One year ago, President Obama stood before the Army’s 3rd Division at Fort Stewart, in Georgia, and promised to “have the backs” of America’s veterans and service members seeking higher education. He signed an executive order to better protect veterans and service members from unscrupulous for-profit education companies, who have relentlessly pursued veterans and service members for their GI Bill education benefits, but fail to give those students an education.

The executive order was designed to provide information, support, and protection to veterans to ensure they are aware of the full cost and quality of the education offered by these institutions—to help them make an informed choice. The executive order also gave the federal government stronger oversight and enforcement tools, which are critical to preventing abuses by predatory for-profit education companies and to holding those companies accountable for existing abuses.

We greatly appreciate the president’s much-needed action, and various government departments have made progress implementing various parts of the executive order. But critically important elements have yet to be implemented and the for-profits are mounting an aggressive public-relations and lobbying campaign to whitewash their tactics and relieve the pressure they’ve been under to clean up their act.

As tens of thousands of American soldiers return from active duty in Afghanistan, it is incumbent upon the administration and the Congress to protect them from false promises being made by the for-profit colleges and to prosecute companies for existing abuses. Since the passage of the Post 9/11 GI Bill in 2008, many for-profit education companies have pursued veterans, promising a high-quality education and “guaranteed jobs,” neither of which is delivered. Instead, student vets exhaust their GI Bill education benefits and build mountains of student-loan debt, while receiving non-transferable credits, worthless degrees or no degrees at all—as the Senate revealed in a two-year investigation.

As the first anniversary of the president’s executive order passes, Congress needs to hold oversight hearings to assess how much progress has been made protecting our veterans. We hope Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent representing Vermont, will convene hearings soon.

Veterans seeking more information on this issue should visit http://knowbeforeyouenroll.org/. Those who feel they have been scammed, can apply for loan relief through a recently establish fund at http://bit.ly/ReliefFundGuidelines.

Matthew Boulay
Director
Veterans’ Student Loan Relief Fund
Saint Peter, Minn.