By Professor Doom
“I am altering the deal. Pray that I
don’t alter it any further.”
--Darth Vader, though I
knew a deanling that took pride in her power to alter “agreements” any way she
chose.
Tenure, the
supposed “job for life” that is met with so much disdain in the mainstream
media, is basically dead. The only thing keeping it on life support is the law,
a law that is all too casually ignored by both our lawmakers, and our rulers in
higher education today.
Yes, I admit
there’s great potential for abuse in the idea of tenure…but the eradication of
tenure, of the respect for tenure, is a big factor in why science is
now basically broken, why education
on many campuses is an open joke, and why our higher
education system is now just a system of plunder.
Seeing just how
much money can be stolen by getting rid of tenured faculty, admin has been
pretty aggressive in silencing faculty and other defenders of tenure. Still,
those pesky rules and contracts and such have slowed down the plundering, to
the point that something like 7% of higher education funding is NOT going into
administrative pockets (7% is the amount of higher education costs that
actually go to education).
After years of
taking down tenured faculty one by one, admin is looking to annihilate tenure
wholesale:
U of
Wisconsin System Board of Regents approves new tenure policies, rejecting a
series of proposals that professors said would have protected some of their
rights.
What, rights?
Scholars want to be treated with respect? “That’s ridiculous,” says admin,
“being educated is a sign of weakness, and is not deserving of respect. Don’t
you see all the suckers on campus going deep into debt for rubbish now?”
I rather see
administration’s point, as it does seem like there’s an endless stream of students
willing to go tens of thousands of dollars into debt for the most ridiculous of
coursework.
Dept Head:
“We’d like to remove the foreign language requirement for our graduate degrees
in mathematics.”
Faculty: “We’ve
had those requirements for years. Why change?”
“Dept Head:
“Because the most common foreign language our students speak nowadays is
English.”
Still, a system
where the educators had rights led to the US higher education system being the
most respected in the world. It’s one of the reasons our graduate schools
(still a little insulated from the corruption, as the most advanced faculty yet
have tenure) are filled with foreign students studying actual subjects…even as
our undergraduate, native born American, students are loading up on
indoctrination-type coursework and heavily watered down material, at best.
Repeatedly
during the meeting, Millner and other regents cited the need, in an era of
tight budgets, for "flexibility" to close programs -- and eliminate
faculty jobs in the process.
I really feel the
need to highlight what’s happening here. Instead of scholars saying “an
educated person should know something of history, of foreign language, of
science, of politics, “ and so on, that’s all going to be removed, to be
replaced with courses filled with what administrators believe is important.
With the new
administrative plan, the education our kids are going deep into debt for will
be determined by administrators…people who all too often have no education
themselves. I’ve pointed out bogus coursework
where “don’t shave” is worth a full letter grade (and you
can do this for three courses), where knowing the
details of Game of Thrones is more important than knowing about anything going
on in the real world, where straight up
indoctrination and nothing more need be learned.
Taking educators
out of education will only make this trend worse. In the near future, a college
degree will simply mean the student learned that white
people are evil, communism
is the best thing ever, and females are
better than males in every way.
(I’m sorry if I’m heavy on the links today, but I feel the need to link
things that a reasonable person in a sane world would find hard to believe).
Administrators are
couching the annihilation of worker rights as a financial decision, but this is
rubbish on the face of it. Administratively
controlled campuses are already boiler rooms, and the reason our higher
education system is running out of money (no matter how much we pour into it)
isn’t nearly so much because taxpayer support is dwindling as because
administrators are plundering rapaciously and there’s no way to stop them (I’d
provide a link, but nigh every other post in my blog documents such theft).
In short, this
change in the rules is to facilitate even faster plundering, even more
debasement of our higher education system.
The comments
section of course is primarily outrage as the groundwork for future plundering
of the system is laid down. One comment does bear response as it hits all the
old canards against tenure:
Tenure
should not exist in any form. It was originally established as a
decentralization of power away from European monarchs, where it was indeed an
advance for liberty. When professors are employed by private colleges tenure is
a transfer of liberty from one private entity to another in an inefficient way
that is destructive to productivity, especially as seen by the employer. Gee,
why doesn't any other industry offer lifetime employment regardless of
performance?
This is
something of a train wreck of a post, and I want to take it apart line by line:
“Tenure should not
exist in any form”
What does this
even mean? The current “form” of tenure in most schools means the professor can
be suspended
without pay indefinitely for little reason at all. Does this sound like much
of a job guarantee? This form of tenure is basically meaningless, but still the
poster fears it.
I’ll just call
this line puzzling hyperbole and move on:
It was
originally established as a decentralization of power away from European
monarchs, where it was indeed an advance for liberty.
Have we truly
reached the end of history? Is liberty truly at 100% now, with no chance of
further advance? How is decentralization of power away from plundering sociopaths
a bad thing? Like I said, this post is a train wreck.
When
professors are employed by private colleges tenure is a transfer of liberty
from one private entity to another in an inefficient way that is destructive to
productivity, especially as seen by the employer.
Uh, private colleges aren’t forced
to offer tenure, all contracts there are voluntary, so this is a non-issue. And
most private colleges are for-profits that don’t have tenure in any event.
Please understand, our accredited for-profit school system, which has no
tenure, is openly predatory, with billion-dollar
frauds being exposed in for-profit (i.e., private) accredited schools almost
every month. This is one ugly train wreck to watch, but let’s continue:
Gee, why
doesn't any other industry offer lifetime employment regardless of performance?
Now this is almost
an excellent question. There are some
issues, however, as there are false assumptions buried in the question.
First, the
assumption of “lifetime employment” is invalid—anyone with actual familiarity
with tenure will happily tell you there is a review process, and tenure can be
lost legitimately by non-performing faculty….performance is very much a factor
in tenure.
Second, the
assumption of “industry” is invalid. Should education be an “industry,” with
human beings being manufactured on the same level as cans of beans? We
certainly have self-proclaimed “titans of industry” running our institutions of
education now, but, I promise the gentle reader, if we got rid of these guys,
in no way would any student’s education be harmed, and the freeing up of funds
would probably help education (at the very least, firing one
million-dollar-a-year Poo Bah would provide full scholarships to a hundred
students a year in our overpriced schools, or a thousand students a year in a fairly priced
university).
I honestly don’t
know for certain that having tenure is a good thing for higher education…but
the annihilation of tenure has turned even our “non-profit”
schools into ripoffs and our students
into prostitutes. This didn’t happen when educators had some influence
over education, and it’s fair to consider that reducing educators’ influence
further will not improve the situation.
No comments:
Post a Comment