The status quo system of higher education in the country is diseased. Requiring institutions to compete with each other in order to enroll students to capture their tuition dollars is fundamentally destructive. wsj.com/articles/biden…
Four-year schools lobby against free community college because it may hurt 4-yr schools' revenue. This is rotten stuff, but it's primarily a problem of a system that makes chasing revenue paramount.
Carol Christ, current chancellor of Cal-Berkeley put it plainly: "Colleges and universities are fundamentally in the business of enrolling students for tuition dollars." This is an operations mindset and it dominates higher ed because under the current structure, it has to.
Our current system literally doesn't make any sense. It is ass-backwards if the mission is to provide access to opportunity. Killing the Biden free-CC plan will make sure that nothing fundamental changes. insidehighered.com/blogs/just-vis…
I got a whole book that reimagines what public higher ed could be if it could move away from a chase for revenue and towards a mission-orientation. It isn't hard to imagine at all, but there's lots of powerful forces in the way. beltpublishing.com/products/susta…
I dearly wish that public higher ed institutions would do the "right" thing on issues like adjunct labor, student loans, racial equity (for both students and faculty), and all kinds of other things, but until the incentives change, those right things won't happen.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
What's striking about the analysis is how the bullshit flows freely among the various levels, from an anti-semitic grifter, to a right wing activist huckster, and even a NYTimes columnist. Honestly can't see a way out of this. Depressing.
Like in an example @donmoyn discusses in the post, when Marc Lamont Hill demolishes the anti-semitic grifter in a televised segment, the response from the grifter is, "See he DOES know so much about this, just like I said." B.S. on top of B.S.
Holy smokes! This just broke my irony meter. Imagine this guy cautioning against monomania when he's been writing the same stuff for the last 6 years. Professor, heal thyself!
Not to mention publishing your caution against monomania in the publication that runs the same article over and over again.
Concerned at how the Times allows a strawman argument to be so central to this piece. No one who has read anything about redlining would define Redlining 101 as McWhorter does here. This is pure apologetics. nytimes.com/2021/09/28/opi…
In the very same piece he zeroes in on the fact, that while many whites lived redlined neighborhoods, virtually every Black citizen did, and for Black residents, unlike the white ones, there was no escape.
The man's own evidence cuts against the thesis he puts forward! How is this allowed to get past an editor? He invents a standard that allows him to dismiss the role of systemic racism in the disparate treatment of Black and white Americans. (As is his pattern and purpose.)
This is not the biggest problem around, but it's just irritating to see "wokeness" and "wokeism" framed as something that people explicitly argue in favor of. This is not my experience. Progressive people advocate for particular policies and frameworks, not an ideology of wokeism
That these specific policies and frameworks are gathered by the opponents of those frameworks under the name "wokeism" does not mean that those who advocate for them are advocating for wokeism. The policies can be looked at independently.
Like I suppose you an lump my stances on education policy/practice/structures under some kind of woke umbrella because I'm generally progressive, but I have very specific things that I'm championing and that they may be woke has nothing to do with that championing.
Heterodox Academy has a new president, one of Charles Koch's "pet professors" who has also received 7-figure funding from the same foundation pushing the anti-CRT movement. Viewpoint diversity! insidehighered.com/blogs/just-vis…
I snark because I've sort of given up on trying to engage the HxA figures on mutual productive exchange. This was my most recent attempt. insidehighered.com/blogs/just-vis…
HxA has every right to exist and can choose whomever they want to lead them and advocate for whatever they want, but I am frustrated by the refusal to categorize them where they belong. They are funded by the same people as The Federalist, Daily Caller, Turning Point, etc...
Gotta say, that the reading list for the course on "The University" from the new director of Heterodox Academy doesn't seem all that diverse from a viewpoint perspective, that is. heterodoxacademy.org/hxannouncement…
I have a suggestion for the course on "The University" if the new head of Heterodox Academy can handle part of a chapter that criticizes the effect of Heterodox Academy on institutions and discourse. beltpublishing.com/products/susta…
I'd also be happy to do a Zoom with the class so they might hear a little different perspective on "The University" than that pretty intellectually cramped (when it comes to viewpoint diversity) reading list.