By Professor
Doom
Thank
goodness for online news. There, it’s easy to find a major disconnect between
what mainstream media presents, and reality: you just have to read the
comments.
“a tall white guy wearing a ski mask
and a skull cap”
--a line from a news article discussing the attackers at mall.
For example, the above snippet is from a
mainstream article about a swarm of teenagers that attacked a mall en masse.
Reading the article, you’d get no idea there’s anything racial going on; there
is one, and only one, reference to race, and I’ve quoted it, above…somehow the
witness determined the race of this one attacker through a ski mask. It’s possible.
You have to read the comments to find out
the actual story:
“No mention that the howling mob was a pack of feral black teenagers. Yet,
when some woman mentioned she saw a "white" it get immediately
reported. I don't trust her version…”
There are plenty of comments indicating
the race of most of the attackers. Why doesn’t the article tell the whole
story? Instead, the article insists that it was merely teenagers, and nothing
else. Maybe it was all white teenagers, and this is a random, wrong,
comment…but since the article has no problem mentioning one of the attackers
was white, it’s curious to omit the other attackers. The comments reveal a
disconnect between the article and reality. Another quick one, and then off to
education:
The founder and CEO of American Title Services in Centennial was found dead in his home this week…from seven or eight self-inflicted wounds from a nail gun fired into his torso and head.
--from The
Denver Post.
The above
article doesn’t even question the possibility that this was NOT a suicide. Most
folks don’t commit suicide via a very slow, very painful, very bloody, very
unreliable method like this, and it just seems like a few details explaining
why suicide is the only possibility should be given. Only in the comments
section is the disconnect between what the article says, and reality,
addressed.
Now, to
education: consider the fundamental disconnect in an article by a Chief
Innovation Officer in the University of Texas system, Marti Stein. A title of
“Chief Innovation Officer” indicates “administrator”, as they love spiffy
titles to go with monstrous salaries. The author is in the Institute for Transformational
Learning—that sure sounds important, but it is just yet another administrative
fiefdom. Much of the money in higher education gets soaked up by these
fiefdoms, which do little beyond employing administrators who slurp up vast
sums of money in make-work projects. I’ve
written of the like before. Shut down these fiefdoms which do nothing but
waste massive sums of money, and I bet institutions of higher education will
have an easier time with their finances.
The article
is Ready
or Not, Change is Coming, and it’s filled with the edubabble that dominates
administration in higher education. The title may as well be the whole article,
as content is light. Instead of real discussion, the article is littered with
lines and keywords like:
“…Not resigned to the passive receipt
of knowledge, many are eager to interact with and utilize the world of content
and experience around them. They have a firm belief in their own power to
leverage networks of peers…”
--“utilize” and “peers” are important keywords, words
that ever spew from bureaucratic mouths.
and
“…For these learners, the value
proposition of traditional education…”
--“learners” is the blood-soaked upside-down flag, a
sign that an educationist is speaking.
and
“…Inevitably, someone will implement
the solutions that will pilot our next generation of learners...”
---if it’s inevitable, we sure don’t need to read this
article, right?
Reading the article, it looks like a piece on something-or-other in Higher Education, and with all the big words, it’s easy to miss that not much is said here beyond “change is coming.” It’s only in the comments that, again, you see the disconnect between administration in higher education and that folks that actually know what’s going on:
“Old wine in new casks-the author should define "we". Are they
college presidents who have shown little or no leadership in leading these
recommended changes?”
--faculty and administrators read this article, and you
can really tell which respondent is from the serf caste, or the ruling caste.
Hear, hear! [Author], you make
excellent points, thank you!
--it isn’t just that administrators are all supportive
in their comments. It’s that administrators can use their real names. Faculty
must post under pseudonyms (much like me), because the penalty for not
supporting admin is fast termination, without due process. The supportive
comments say nothing (no surprise considering where they’re coming from), so
I’ll focus on the many more negative comments:
“…higher ed as an industry? - right
there i stop reading . . .”
---this is the big disconnect between admin and reality.
An administrator, using his name and picture, quickly responds to this comment
to assert that yes, higher education is an industry, implying it needs titanic
administrators.
“…Is it me, or are articles about the
coming ed-tech rapture looking more and more like algorithm generated
boilerplate?”
--the article really is written that poorly, and I must
include a parody from the comments:
“…But have you considered that the
metrics from institutional dashboards help to define the change agents who will
propel student lifecycle management into a new platform to leverage the 21st
century learner into a student centered space where they will flourish in the
global knowledge economy through exposure to multiple instructional
contexts?...”
--faculty are exposed to this gobbledygook nonstop, and
so we often parody it…behind administrative backs, of course. This could easily
have been an excerpt from the article, or from any of the last dozen
administrative missives.
“…Methinks [the author is] part oft
he problem.”
--The big
disconnect reveal here. Faculty all know that administration is the issue. It’s
like having pedophiles run day cares and operate ice cream trucks.
I certainly understand sites that don’t have comments—in my
blog I have to delete comments from spammers regularly. That said, the comments
on a story, especially unmoderated comments, give a much clearer picture of the
reality of the situation.
I know, I tend to rant and rave about how bad things are, but
I encourage the reader to see
with his own eyes what administrators have to say, at least a few lines…much
more than that might give eye cancer.
Edubabble is simply a technique used by administrators to elevate themselves. By using such jargon and idioms, they portray themselves as not just erudite but possessors of some secret knowledge.
ReplyDeleteThe reality is that it's simply nothing but another form of air pudding and usually a sign that the object of such puffery is pure balderdash.
I'm reminded of something Shakespeare wrote. I forget which play it's from, but a certain character describes another by these words: "He would lie with such volubility, one would think truth were a fool."
But the thing is, we all *know* the edubabble is meaningless. That's the disconnect, the rulers are spewing out irrelevant verbiage in a childish imitation of the actual jargon of the vastly more educated serfs.
ReplyDeleteHere's my solution: Every college that hires adjunct faculty should hire a proportional number of adjunct administrators.
ReplyDeleteGive the adjunct administrators one-third the pay and an overload, a cubicle office shared with three others, a shared phone (or none), no computer, no health insurance, no retirement, no job security.
Lay them off when they aren't needed, give them 24 hours' notice when to come back, and give them work to take home for nights and weekends. Require them to come to meetings on unpaid time.
Find which work the senior administrators least like doing and give that to the adjuncts. Demand that adjunct work meet assessment standards and accreditation requirements.
Hiring adjunct administrators might bring colleges to reconsider their treatment of adjunct faculty.
It's funny you would mention that. I'm reviewing another 8000 level administration course, run by a former Poo-bah. He says to the effect that some adjuncts actually like the working conditions you describe. I'll be giving a quote in my essay on that.
ReplyDeleteIn my travels and adventures in research (with Google as my faithful companion), I have on multiple occasions come across your blogs, and have enjoyed them immeasurably. I was wondering, given what you had to say about administrators (within the context of higher education) do you have an opinion on online education? How about the administrators connected to said online education? I'd be tickled to read THAT blogpost.
ReplyDeleteMy post "An Obvious Question About Online Education" addresses that one. In short, it's quite obvious that much of online education is a total fraud, and the dots aren't all that hard to connect. I've got a few other posts on online education here, but that one sums up the main issue clearly.
Deletei tried to say the same thing. Being a Professor I am not, so i wasn't taken seriously. Then again, she didn't ask me.
ReplyDelete!
ReplyDelete