Speaking of falls, Monday I linked to an article worrying about the future of universities.
My point at the time was snide and it still is. That the people who once thought "Question authority" was deep wisdom now have tenure and are upset that no one takes them seriously is richly comic.
The language in that Benton article I linked to is also deeply revealing. The headline "Why do they hate Us?" appears to be Benton's own. Criticism of universities from the right from the 1980s are referred to as "attacks". Professors are said to be "under siege". This is pretty powerful language for what remains a pretty darned cushy job. It's not the nature of the criticism—as anyone who has been to university knows, professors themselves say far worse about people whose ideas they don't like—but that they are criticized at all that bothers Benton.
I should not be too hard on him as Benton does a good job of identifying some reasons why this criticism is happening and I could add to them here but I have a simpler point to make to Benton: the problem is not that professors are hated but that they are not hated nearly enough. As Wittgenstein once put it:
A bad philosopher is like a slum landlord. It is my job to put him out of business.
Professor Benton, your business is full of slum landlords, do something about it!
And, remember, we don't need universities. Everything that can be done inside a university can be done elsewhere. The institution will either fail or succeed. If it fails it will get replaced.
One more thought. One of the reasons the academy is failing right now is that insiders have conspired to protect universities from competitive market pressure. This would be a good time to get rid of a lot of that anti-competitive nonsense beginning with tenure.
Absolutely right. The cost of higher education has increased at a faster rate than the cost of health care, and parents and students who are shelling out mucho denaros or getting into six-figure debt have every right to question what they are getting in return. Several years ago at Yale, parents were successful in limiting the use of graduate teaching assistants in undergraduate courses. The parents essentially accused Yale of false advertising in their admissions brochure, and said that they were willing to invest all this money in their childrens' educations under the assumption that they would be taught by the Pulitzer-prize winning author or other illustrious faculty member, not a graduate student. Sensing a growing movement and fearing more bad press, Yale relented.
ReplyDeleteThese were sent to me today on one of the professional list-serves I subscribe to. I was familiar with some of the research they cite, and I think they have some relevance here. I also found them very inspiring on a personal level.
http://www.odemagazine.com/doc/71/in-praise-of-dissent
http://www.odemagazine.com/doc/71/the-dissent-of-man/
FASHION & STYLE | June 17, 2010
ReplyDeleteA Best Friend? You Must Be Kidding
By HILARY STOUT
School officials intent on discouraging anything that hints of exclusivity seek to sever traditional best-friend bonds.
I just saw this, from the NY TIMES back in June. This must be what is being taught in the graduate schools of Education. So what would happen to any student brave enough to challenge this garbage, and ask aren't we supposed to be teaching kids how to read and write?