Interesting People mailing list archives

Re: end the university


From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 16:37:46 -0400



Begin forwarded message:

From: Charles Brown <cbrown () flyingcircuit com>
Date: May 1, 2009 2:55:45 PM EDT
To: kateryndraper () yahoo com
Cc: Brown Charles <cbrown () flyingcircuit com>, David Farber <dave () farber net >, dboyes () sinenomine net
Subject: Re: [Politics] end the university

Hello Karen,

I'm not an academic or associated with academia, but did study philosophy and literature in addition to business/finance some years ago. I have since evolved into a self-taught geek of sorts with abiding interests in wireless, Internet, and applying technology for the general good and the longevity of the Republic.

Having some familiarity with both sides of the street (I have continued to read since University days), I will state, unequivocally, that this country will rue the day it adopts a Wall Street meme, ethic, system or management structure for educating our people. This is laughable and the proposition displays a monumental ignorance of its own; a naive ignorance. Is this idea being taken seriously in academia?

I recently heard a review of a collection of essays by George Scialabba's, "What Are Intellectuals Good For?", by Maureen Corrigan on NPR. I think you will enjoy it. I never heard of Scialabba and the book had a small printing and is already back-ordered at Amazon. I particularly enjoyed the last paragraph of her review which is quoted below.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103567148

"If you're one of the fit-though-few whose brain doesn't go into automatic snooze mode at the mention of the word "intellectual," his pieces here are a pleasure to read — supple, accessible and wide- ranging. Writing enthusiastically about the work of journalists Alexander Cockburn and I.F. Stone, Scialabba says that, while they didn't "create monuments of unaging intellect ... they hemmed in everyday barbarism a little." That's a fine way to sum up Scialabba's own achievement: He's not a household name, his essays and reviews won't rock the world, and I doubt that they're making him a whole lot of money, but to those of us who follow his lonely patrols around the perimeter, his work hems in the everyday barbarism of mental laziness and moral evasion, just a little."

Hemming-in the everyday barbarism, indeed.

Charlie



Begin forwarded message:
From: David Boyes <dboyes () sinenomine net>
Date: April 29, 2009 11:49:42 AM EDT
To: "dave () farber net" <dave () farber net>
Subject: FW: [Politics] end the university

Another interesting item from our discussion of this article. For IP if you like.

-- db
------ Forwarded Message
From: Karen Dollinger <kateryndraper () yahoo com>
Reply-To: Politics <politics () lists 4th com>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:03:51 -0400
To: <politics () lists 4th com>
Subject: Re: [Politics] end the university




I had strong - and mixed - reactions to this article. First, I should explain my background. I have a Bachelor of Philosophy in Interdisciplinary Studies, and a Doctorate in Spanish (specifically, Indigenous and Colonial Latin American Literatures and Cultures.) I am currently finishing up a one year non-tenure-track position as a Spanish professor of undergrads at a public university, and looking for work, so far unsuccessfully.

I disagree with Taylor's central premise that the university as we know it should be ended. The purpose of education is not to produce a product (job candidates), but to expand our minds, learn how to think, function in a democracy, understand our world, serve society, and many other things I've forgotten. Education should be (and frequently is) valued by an employer because a graduate theoretically is better equipped to think originally and to solve problems.

I also disagree that departments foster "limited knowledge that all too often is irrelevant for genuinely important problems." The topic for my dissertation, the Mexican Inquisition (specifically looking at its influence on several Mexican authors from the 16th and 17th century), is certainly obscure. However, the Inquisition is frequently invoked in the American Neo-Pagan community, usually incorrectly. Non-pagans would be surprised just how important the trope of the Inquisition as demon is to modern Neo-Pagans. Unfortunately, the Inquisition is not properly understood, and creates real-world problems in a 21st century religious movement. I can go into more detail if anyone wishes, but it's outside the scope of this post.

And that's just one example. Another - Nahuatl (Aztec) is an obscure language. One would think it's not important. Yet a California warden posted a request to an academic Nahuatl listserv for translators. While many American guards speak Spanish, gang members from Mexico are frequently bilingual in Spanish and Nahuatl, and use the latter to communicate in prison.

Notice both these examples come from an obscure subcategory (16th century Mexican language and literature) in a non-profitable discipline (Spanish.) And yet this sort of thing occurs in most subcategories in all disciplines, even the non-business disciplines.

Taylor is dead-on about the use the graduate teaching associates. Now I do think it's very important to let graduate students teach - one learns to teach by doing. But there is a move in universities to eliminate full-time teachers, and rely on cheap graduate labor and large numbers of part-time adjuncts who would not qualify for health insurance. That's the problem I face now in my job search. Universities are only hiring adjuncts.

Unlike Taylor, I support departments operating independently. It's one way to ensure academic freedom and intellectual honesty. If universities were to go to a Wall Street model, as Taylor advocates, the business-minded president as CEO would be able to dictate what could and could not be taught.

Interdisciplinary studies are near and dear to my heart. More should be done to encourage this. I'd love to see an interdisciplinary program or department at every university.

On the other hand, interdisciplinary implies multiple disciplines. Taylor's suggestion to abolish departments makes no sense. There's nothing wrong with having courses built around interdisciplinary zones of inquiry; it should be encouraged. But that shouldn't be the only sort of education going on.

I do agree that there should be increased collaboration among institutions. But as a luddite, I'm not convinced that foreign languages, to use Taylor's example, can be effectively taught through the Internet. That could just be me, though.

Taylor's proposal to transform the dissertation is intriguing. On the one hand, working on a dissertation honed both my writing and editing skills, and led me to learn a lot more about the Inquisition and Mexican ideological debates than I would have otherwise. On the other hand, there might well have been a way to channel my work to better help people.

Taylor is right when he talks about expanding the range of professional options for graduate students. We are mostly prepared to be professors, and there are more graduates than there are teaching jobs. I seem to recall one unit in one course that dealt with non- academic jobs for PhDs. Universities can do much better with career placement.

Tenure, however, needs to stay. Right now, the only college instructors whose health benefits are safe are tenured professors. If tenure goes, teaching could easily become a part-time profession. Tenure also protects researchers who champion unpopular or "unpatriotic" views.

I could go on, but need to get to bed so I can teach class tomorrow. :-)

Karen







_______________________________________________
Politics mailing list
Politics () lists 4th com
http://lists.4th.com/listinfo/politics




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Current thread: