• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

My Criticisms of Academe

Peter Grimm

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Messages
10,348
Reaction score
2,426
Location
The anals of history
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
There are many, many things wrong with the way universities are run. Below are a few thoughts I had earlier, please feel free to chime in with an opinion.


1. Tenure - Lifetime job security is the antithesis of competition. Competition leads to productivity and higher job performance.

Example: The University of Colorado professor who taught his students that the United States provoked the 9/11 attacks. CU refused to fire him, citing tenure, until the public scrutiny just got to be too much for them to bear. Ward Churchill September 11 attacks essay controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

University presidents have no power - all the major decisions are made by faculty. Collective decision-making by hundreds of prima donnas, none of whom can be fired or even demoted for being wrong, is not a system that any other institution has adopted anywhere else in the world. It is like Congress without elections -- a formula for total irresponsibility and self-indulgence.


2. College Athletics - If you want to see slave labor in action in 2012, look no further than college football. These student athletes bring in billions of dollars of revenue to the schools, to the television networks, yet they are entirely unpaid. Why? So that college athletics can keep its tax-exempt status. Unlike baseball, the NFL does not want to run a minor league. So they farm the work out to the universities, and everybody makes money. Everybody except, of course, the kids doing the actual labor.

Example: O'Bannon v. NCAA could impact more than video games - Michael McCann - SI.com


3. Scandals in College Athletics - The last point reminds me of this point. College athletes are not subjected to the same academic standards as other students. The University of North Carolina was recently found to have been giving out free "A's" to football players in an African American Studies course. Too bad the players never actually attended the courses.

But what really takes the cake is the Penn State scandal. Here you had nearly a decade of disgusting child abuse, which was knowingly covered up by the university. The Freeh Report on Pennsylvania State University | Judge Louis Freeh investigation on PSU

I know of only two elitist, closed societies capable of such a coverup.... academia and the catholic church.


4. Other coverups - It doesn't begin and end with athletes. A study conducted in 2009 found that many colleges were covering up the number of rapes on campus in order to make their campus appear safer and more attractive to parents. This is, in fact, a pattern: Campus Rape Victims: A Struggle For Justice : NPR


5. Grad Students - But let's get off the topic of coverups, and get back on the topic of slave labor. Big-name universities will lavish six-figure salaries on deconstructionist professors whose chief claim to fame is that other deconstructionist professors like them, while freshmen are being taught by low-budget graduate students, many of whom are from foreign countries and do not speak intelligible English.

That is why hundreds of students can be packed like sardines into a huge lecture hall for Economics 1, taught by some junior faculty member without enough clout to get out of teaching anything so elementary.

Meanwhile, some senior professor in the same department may hold a little boutique seminar for six in his pet sub-specialty, far off the beaten track from anything that undergraduates need to know.

When budget-crunch time comes, two classes of Economics 1 with 400 students each may be more likely to be combined into one class with 800 students than is the big-name professor's seminar to be touched.


6. University Admissions - They are just plain unfair, and do not reward achievement. For example, why do universities have legacy admissions? Who cares if your uncle attended Harvard, or if your mother attended Princeton? That should have nothing at all to do with whether you are admitted.

Then you have race and gender quotas. Rather than being admitted purely on academic merit, students are admitted due to the melanin count in their skin or their genitalia.

I haven't even mentioned the number of foreign students. Why should American taxpayers subsidize the education of a student from India or Korea?

Next, you have people with money. If you have money, you can get in anywhere, regardless of how dumb you are.


7. University Tuition - College tuition is just ridiculous. It is the most expensive thing most families will ever pay for aside from their home. It's the number one reason young people will go in to debt when they're starting out. In the past year alone, tuition for four-year public universities rose 8.3 percent for in-state students and 5.7 percent for out-of-state students. Why is that? Because they are run so inefficiently.

Ronald Ehrenberg, a labor economist at Cornell, cited “the shared system of governance between trustees, administrators, and faculty” at many universities, which “guarantees that ... institutions will be slow to react to cost pressures.”

http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffp0005s.pdf


8. Research Grant Funding - Research grant funding is a must to keep a scientific projects advancing. It costs money for materials and equipment in addition to personnel to undertake a research project.

Now, private money is private money, and I'm not really concerned about that.

Who gets the public money and why? As a taxpayer, I feel this process should be transparent and that I should have some input, along with other taxpayers. Instead, this process is farmed out to various government agencies who clearly have political agendas.

Funding of science - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


9. Wasteful Spending - This goofy grand funding process leads to a lot of studies being done that are simply a waste of money. But don't worry, Americans aren't the only ones. A group of Japanese scientists, led by a professor Yuki Sugiyama of Nagoya University, recently determined the reason commuters are occasionally caught in traffic jams is because there are too many cars on the road.

Groundbreaking stuff.

10. Left-wing Politics - Universities are the nerve center for liberal thought and liberal politics. The vastly disproportionate presence of leftist professors on university campuses across the United States has been well documented. One of the more significant studies on this subject was conducted in 2003 by the Center for the Study of Popular Culture (CSPC), which examined the ratio of registered Democrats to registered Republicans on the faculties of 32 elite colleges and universities nationwide.

In its examinations of more than 150 departments and upper-level administrations at the 32 elite colleges and universities, the CSPC found that the overall ratio of registered Democrats to registered Republicans was more than 10 to 1 (1397 Democrats, 134 Republicans).
 
There are many, many things wrong with the way universities are run. Below are a few thoughts I had earlier, please feel free to chime in with an opinion.
I disagree and agree with many of your points in this


1. Tenure - Lifetime job security is the antithesis of competition. Competition leads to productivity and higher job performance.
I view tenure in a "mixed bag" sort of view. I view academia as not a place of "competition" but as a point of mixed views, and part of the academic point of view. I understand tenure being implemented for several reasons. One of the main reasons tenure was introduced was because of major donors could remove professors at free will because they did not expose a point of view the donors agreed with and i view that as wrong. I see that as a major problem. Professors have every right to share their knowledge no matter what and their teaching habits at their will. After all they are professors. But saying that i also view that professors (and from my experiences being a current college student professors once reached that tenure, often times "slack off" and really dont care anymore because of that tenure they have ultimate job security, and often times dont care about student performance.

Example: The University of Colorado professor who taught his students that the United States provoked the 9/11 attacks. CU refused to fire him, citing tenure, until the public scrutiny just got to be too much for them to bear. Ward Churchill September 11 attacks essay controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I have no problem with an academic professor exposing his believes. Was it harsh? Yes. Was it justified essay? Maybe. Was it his view? Yes. Its freedom of speech. He has every right to express these believes.
Later to note this professor was also fired, many believes because of this essay.

2. College Athletics - If you want to see slave labor in action in 2012, look no further than college football. These student athletes bring in billions of dollars of revenue to the schools, to the television networks, yet they are entirely unpaid. Why? So that college athletics can keep its tax-exempt status. Unlike baseball, the NFL does not want to run a minor league. So they farm the work out to the universities, and everybody makes money. Everybody except, of course, the kids doing the actual labor.

Example: O'Bannon v. NCAA could impact more than video games - Michael McCann - SI.com
I agree. College football has become a major money point for universities, and sport companies alike. Its ridiculous.

7. University Tuition - College tuition is just ridiculous. It is the most expensive thing most families will ever pay for aside from their home. It's the number one reason young people will go in to debt when they're starting out. In the past year alone, tuition for four-year public universities rose 8.3 percent for in-state students and 5.7 percent for out-of-state students. Why is that? Because they are run so inefficiently.

Ronald Ehrenberg, a labor economist at Cornell, cited “the shared system of governance between trustees, administrators, and faculty” at many universities, which “guarantees that ... institutions will be slow to react to cost pressures.”

http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffp0005s.pdf
I agree with this point.



10. Left-wing Politics - Universities are the nerve center for liberal thought and liberal politics. The vastly disproportionate presence of leftist professors on university campuses across the United States has been well documented. One of the more significant studies on this subject was conducted in 2003 by the Center for the Study of Popular Culture (CSPC), which examined the ratio of registered Democrats to registered Republicans on the faculties of 32 elite colleges and universities nationwide.

In its examinations of more than 150 departments and upper-level administrations at the 32 elite colleges and universities, the CSPC found that the overall ratio of registered Democrats to registered Republicans was more than 10 to 1 (1397 Democrats, 134 Republicans).

I mean honestly what can we do about this?
Most people who become professors are liberal or "leftists"? OK?
Whats the solution?
 
Also if the lecturer does not has job security or tenure then his contribution to science in the realm of research, studies, books, may be in question. Why produce books for the university if they may kick the lecturer out on the very next semester?
 
There are many, many things wrong with the way universities are run. Below are a few thoughts I had earlier, please feel free to chime in with an opinion.


1. Tenure - Lifetime job security is the antithesis of competition. Competition leads to productivity and higher job performance.

Example: The University of Colorado professor who taught his students that the United States provoked the 9/11 attacks. CU refused to fire him, citing tenure, until the public scrutiny just got to be too much for them to bear. Ward Churchill September 11 attacks essay controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

University presidents have no power - all the major decisions are made by faculty. Collective decision-making by hundreds of prima donnas, none of whom can be fired or even demoted for being wrong, is not a system that any other institution has adopted anywhere else in the world. It is like Congress without elections -- a formula for total irresponsibility and self-indulgence.


2. College Athletics - If you want to see slave labor in action in 2012, look no further than college football. These student athletes bring in billions of dollars of revenue to the schools, to the television networks, yet they are entirely unpaid. Why? So that college athletics can keep its tax-exempt status. Unlike baseball, the NFL does not want to run a minor league. So they farm the work out to the universities, and everybody makes money. Everybody except, of course, the kids doing the actual labor.

Example: O'Bannon v. NCAA could impact more than video games - Michael McCann - SI.com


3. Scandals in College Athletics - The last point reminds me of this point. College athletes are not subjected to the same academic standards as other students. The University of North Carolina was recently found to have been giving out free "A's" to football players in an African American Studies course. Too bad the players never actually attended the courses.

But what really takes the cake is the Penn State scandal. Here you had nearly a decade of disgusting child abuse, which was knowingly covered up by the university. The Freeh Report on Pennsylvania State University | Judge Louis Freeh investigation on PSU

I know of only two elitist, closed societies capable of such a coverup.... academia and the catholic church.


4. Other coverups - It doesn't begin and end with athletes. A study conducted in 2009 found that many colleges were covering up the number of rapes on campus in order to make their campus appear safer and more attractive to parents. This is, in fact, a pattern: Campus Rape Victims: A Struggle For Justice : NPR


5. Grad Students - But let's get off the topic of coverups, and get back on the topic of slave labor. Big-name universities will lavish six-figure salaries on deconstructionist professors whose chief claim to fame is that other deconstructionist professors like them, while freshmen are being taught by low-budget graduate students, many of whom are from foreign countries and do not speak intelligible English.

That is why hundreds of students can be packed like sardines into a huge lecture hall for Economics 1, taught by some junior faculty member without enough clout to get out of teaching anything so elementary.

Meanwhile, some senior professor in the same department may hold a little boutique seminar for six in his pet sub-specialty, far off the beaten track from anything that undergraduates need to know.

When budget-crunch time comes, two classes of Economics 1 with 400 students each may be more likely to be combined into one class with 800 students than is the big-name professor's seminar to be touched.


6. University Admissions - They are just plain unfair, and do not reward achievement. For example, why do universities have legacy admissions? Who cares if your uncle attended Harvard, or if your mother attended Princeton? That should have nothing at all to do with whether you are admitted.

Then you have race and gender quotas. Rather than being admitted purely on academic merit, students are admitted due to the melanin count in their skin or their genitalia.

I haven't even mentioned the number of foreign students. Why should American taxpayers subsidize the education of a student from India or Korea?

Next, you have people with money. If you have money, you can get in anywhere, regardless of how dumb you are.


7. University Tuition - College tuition is just ridiculous. It is the most expensive thing most families will ever pay for aside from their home. It's the number one reason young people will go in to debt when they're starting out. In the past year alone, tuition for four-year public universities rose 8.3 percent for in-state students and 5.7 percent for out-of-state students. Why is that? Because they are run so inefficiently.

Ronald Ehrenberg, a labor economist at Cornell, cited “the shared system of governance between trustees, administrators, and faculty” at many universities, which “guarantees that ... institutions will be slow to react to cost pressures.”

http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffp0005s.pdf


8. Research Grant Funding - Research grant funding is a must to keep a scientific projects advancing. It costs money for materials and equipment in addition to personnel to undertake a research project.

Now, private money is private money, and I'm not really concerned about that.

Who gets the public money and why? As a taxpayer, I feel this process should be transparent and that I should have some input, along with other taxpayers. Instead, this process is farmed out to various government agencies who clearly have political agendas.

Funding of science - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


9. Wasteful Spending - This goofy grand funding process leads to a lot of studies being done that are simply a waste of money. But don't worry, Americans aren't the only ones. A group of Japanese scientists, led by a professor Yuki Sugiyama of Nagoya University, recently determined the reason commuters are occasionally caught in traffic jams is because there are too many cars on the road.

Groundbreaking stuff.

10. Left-wing Politics - Universities are the nerve center for liberal thought and liberal politics. The vastly disproportionate presence of leftist professors on university campuses across the United States has been well documented. One of the more significant studies on this subject was conducted in 2003 by the Center for the Study of Popular Culture (CSPC), which examined the ratio of registered Democrats to registered Republicans on the faculties of 32 elite colleges and universities nationwide.

In its examinations of more than 150 departments and upper-level administrations at the 32 elite colleges and universities, the CSPC found that the overall ratio of registered Democrats to registered Republicans was more than 10 to 1 (1397 Democrats, 134 Republicans).

So, universities are bad because there are too much liberals? Amazing
 
The only thing I care to comment on is the tenure aspect. I disagree that the competition model is useful in all markets. Academia thrives on the shared efforts of many people. One person's success positively affects the whole community. Academics may be competing for prestige but the practical knowledge is a shared asset.

You have to realize that most professors have tenure with universities because they are doing research there. Their teaching gigs are mainly a requirement of the school in exchange for using institutional resources. How each individual professor decides to teach is a mixture of their preference and the school's guidelines. An academic would not necessarily be fired for being a bad teacher if their research is proving valuable to the institution.

Most of your other complaints are variable based on which specific school you're talking about.
 
Okay, why is being a left-winger so bad? Why can't the people of the universities have political opinions? What you're advocating here is to pretty much crackdown on people for having different political views from you.

While I do see the admissions as really stupid, the problem lies in the tuition system. (Which the conservatives want to preserve, mind you. Unless you advocate for free, public universities.)

In fact, most of the problems that you complain about when it comes to universities are just the effects of having the institutions run on "free-market capitalism". (Being privately owned businesses.)

So, please shut up on the financial issues, unless you are willing to have the government spend more money on universities.
 
Please show evidence of race and gender quotas. There are none.
 
The only thing I care to comment on is the tenure aspect. I disagree that the competition model is useful in all markets. Academia thrives on the shared efforts of many people. One person's success positively affects the whole community. Academics may be competing for prestige but the practical knowledge is a shared asset.

You have to realize that most professors have tenure with universities because they are doing research there. Their teaching gigs are mainly a requirement of the school in exchange for using institutional resources. How each individual professor decides to teach is a mixture of their preference and the school's guidelines. An academic would not necessarily be fired for being a bad teacher if their research is proving valuable to the institution.

Most of your other complaints are variable based on which specific school you're talking about.

Academia isn't a market, it's a sector. That aside, if competition were of no use in the academic sector, why, then, do we have a committee in Stockholm that awards something called the "Nobel Prize?"

Competition and rivalry are incentives that elicit the best efforts of the competitors. Go for a run on your own and you will leisurely plod along. Race a friend and you will do what you can to win.

That academia should be so high-brow as to be above the inherently human effects of competition on job performance is an unsubstantiated notion.
 
Last edited:
We have the greatest university in the world. And Grimm wants to "fix" it.

Another conservative pseudoproblem prentending to be an argument.
 
Okay, why is being a left-winger so bad? Why can't the people of the universities have political opinions? What you're advocating here is to pretty much crackdown on people for having different political views from you.

While I do see the admissions as really stupid, the problem lies in the tuition system. (Which the conservatives want to preserve, mind you. Unless you advocate for free, public universities.)

In fact, most of the problems that you complain about when it comes to universities are just the effects of having the institutions run on "free-market capitalism". (Being privately owned businesses.)

So, please shut up on the financial issues, unless you are willing to have the government spend more money on universities.

I'm not in favor of a "crackdown," however I do believe students would benefit from more balance in the viewpoints to which they are exposed. If one of the primary objectives of a university is to prepare students for the real world, then a faculty unrepresentative of what the real world actually looks like is doing students a disservice.
 
"Great" is a subjective descriptor.

The US has the finest most advanced university system in the world. Period.

Stop trying to "fix" it with talking points about tenure and liberals. Tenure makes our research excellence possible, and educated people tend never to be conservative. One study showed hardly any Ph.Ds ever vote Republican.

So your beef really seems to be against higher education, which is a common motif of knownothing tea partiers
 
The US has the finest most advanced university system in the world. Period.

Yeah, it's not close. I took my MSc in Europe, largely because of the subject (Intl. Env. Sci.) but I wouldn't take my PhD there regardless of subject (Interdisc. Eco.).
 
The US has the finest most advanced university system in the world. Period.

Stop trying to "fix" it with talking points about tenure and liberals. Tenure makes our research excellence possible, and educated people tend never to be conservative. One study showed hardly any Ph.Ds ever vote Republican.

So your beef really seems to be against higher education, which is a common motif of knownothing tea partiers

By what metric do you define the "finest and most advanced?"
 
I'm not in favor of a "crackdown," however I do believe students would benefit from more balance in the viewpoints to which they are exposed. If one of the primary objectives of a university is to prepare students for the real world, then a faculty unrepresentative of what the real world actually looks like is doing students a disservice.

Where are you going to school?
 
Academia isn't a market, it's a sector. That aside, if competition were of no use in the academic sector, why, then, do we have a committee in Stockholm that awards something called the "Nobel Prize?"

Competition and rivalry are incentives that elicit the best efforts of the competitors. Go for a run on your own and you will leisurely plod along. Race a friend and you will do what you can to win.

That academia should be so high-brow as to be above the inherently human effects of competition on job performance is an unsubstantiated notion.

Northern Light said:
Academics may be competing for prestige but the practical knowledge is a shared asset.

From my own post. Not sure what you are arguing against as we generally agree there is competition in academia.
 
Where are you going to school?

I attended public school in Colorado until high school.

I attended an American high school in South America for my freshman and sophomore years.

I attended a boarding school in Europe for my junior and senior years.

I got a full ride to the University of Miami, where I went on to get a degree in Engineering.

I received my MBA from Duke.

Then I entered the world of the working stiffs. Hurrah.
 
From my own post. Not sure what you are arguing against as we generally agree there is competition in academia.

If competition works so well to incentivize university professors to do the best research, why couldn't it work to incentivize university professors to do the best teaching?
 
Too many liberals.

Your university should have taught you that.

So too many liberals are the problem? Gotcha. No tolerance for political affiliations. I suppose political quotas for conservatives at universities should also be set
 
Preference is given to those of a given race, or with a given set of genitals, or to those whose daddies have the fattest wallets.

Please show evidence that there are race and gender quotas. You have yet to do that.
 
Tuition is an issue, but the rest is not so much an issue as preference and experience. I went to two universities and at both the only time I had grad students teaching was in a couple throw-away prerequisites by students who were working on becoming professors. I likewise had some 120 student classes being taught by professors whose face grace TV screens from time to time. Most of my classes in my majors were relatively small and offered a lot of face time with the profs. There were only a few profs who were off limits to students and they were either chairs or deans or personalities being paid a fortune to come "teach" a class that was always about how wonderful and connected they were.
 
Back
Top Bottom