Sunday, August 7, 2016

Campuses Set For More Riots





By Professor Doom


     I’ve mentioned a few times how identity politics is dementing our campuses, turning them into basket cases that no longer focus on education and research. I trust many of my readers have seen reports of campuses shut down due to student protests demanding certain skin colors or genders get even more special considerations than they already do.

     Such protests are the end-game of diversity, they happen once a critical mass of the campus is controlled by the part of the administrative caste that actually follows this ideology (as opposed to the part of the administrative caste that is just in it for the huge piles of plunder).

     Before these riots happen, the social justice warriors/SJWs/progressives/Leftists/Marxists, or whatever you want to call them, slowly tighten their grip. They test their strength first with small outrages, establishing control over what should be trivial and freely practiced things, then increase their oversight until rioting is inevitable. These little outrages rarely make the national news, barely make it past the campuses where they happen, but I want to highlight a few of them here, so that my gentle readers can be aware to the possibility of more ridiculous protests in the future.


     Civilized (and even primitive) societies have been having costume parties for, what, millennia? College students perhaps have more than most, and I certainly attended a toga party or two in my day.

      It never occurred to me (or any sane person, I suppose) that wearing a toga was offensive to Italy, the country which once held the heart of the Roman empire (where togas were the tuxedos of their time).

     Anyway, the students at the above campus had a tequila party (drinking being another common student pastime), and, being a party, there were other festive things involved:

Those “other things” included the miniature sombreros, several inches in diameter.


      That’s right, mini-sombreros, likely legitimately worn in Mexico today as often as togas are legitimately worn in modern Italy. Harmless enough silliness, one would think. But no, our campuses have huge administrative fiefdoms that really have nothing better to do than stick their noses into people wearing goofy mini-sombreros:

     And when photos of attendees wearing those mini-sombreros showed up on social media, students and administrators went ballistic.


      “Ballistic” is the word here, as students were banned and kicked out of the dorm for this “inappropriate” behavior. Naturally, student government (a reflection of the insane administration) sees the fake crisis as opportunity to grab more:

Within days, the Bowdoin Student Government unanimously adopted a “statement of solidarity” to “[stand] by all students who were injured and affected by the incident,” and recommend that administrators “create a space for those students who have been or feel specifically targeted.”


      Please understand this outrage is fictional, no actual harm was done here, and anyone who feels truly harmed by someone, somewhere, wearing a mini-sombrero should probably seek psychiatric help (as much as I’m loathe to subject a human to psychiatric pharmacology). I’m hardly alone in feeling this way:

One student of Guatemalan and Costa Rican heritage, freshman Brandon Lopez, pronounced the whole kerfuffle “mind-boggling” and called the disciplinary consequences a “travesty,” especially in light of the dining hall’s Mexican night a week later.

--the hypocrisy of things like Mexican night is what leads to rioting, as the ideology itself is fundamentally flawed by hypocrisy. No culture is without sin, particularly SJW culture, which nevertheless is very eager to throw stones.


      It is a travesty, although only a small one as yet. The important detail is that the SJWs on this campus have tested their power, and will want for more. Expect protests here soon.

     Let us consider another campus.

     Conferences are an important part of the college experience, especially for the motivated students. It gives them an opportunity to meet the movers-and-shakers in a field or industry, a chance to hear the latest developments.

      As an administrator, if industry leaders agree to come to your campus and help your students at a conference, you say “yes, thank you, you’re welcome to be here because we believe in helping out students.” 

     Well, that’s what you say if you’re a sane administrator. SJW administrators care nothing for helping students, ideology is everything. So, in response to an offer of help from industry leaders, a SJW leader says “Do you have the right kind of genitals?”
      Why is the complete madness of these people tolerated so? Perhaps the rocks in their hands have something to do with it?

     The gentle reader who thinks I’m simply exaggerating how insane these people are need only consider:

USC Cancelled an Awesome Video Game Panel for Including Too Many Men


     The title is a bit misleading, as the issue wasn’t too many men. The issue was there were no women on the panel:

The University of Southern California cancelled its planned "Legends of the Games" event after the lone female participant signaled that she wouldn't be able to attend. Administrators made the determination that an all-male panel was unacceptable, and killed the event—a mere four hours before it was supposed to start. 

      There was no concern for education here, this was a purely ideological. The panel would have included a representative from Blizzard (you know, the WarCraft company?), to give some idea of the student opportunity the administration threw away in the pursuit of their ideology.  The female who dropped out, incidentally, apparently did so for SJW concerns (she didn’t want to sit on a panel with men on it), but this is irrelevant next to the simple fact:

     Administration at USC doesn’t give a damn about the students, it’s all about the power. I promise, there will be protests here eventually.

     This ideology really is quite toxic, and the day will come when the ideologues will start to realize nobody is pure enough for it…when this day comes, these useless idiots will turn on each other. This will lead to even more rioting.

      Please understand, this sort of silliness goes on quite often on campus, sometimes the SJWs fail to seize power, but usually they win, and thereby get that much closer to destroying the campus.

      While I reckon the day where this type of madness ends can’t come soon enough, but as of now there are only hints that the rightful self-destruction of this ideology will occur:

Philadelphia was host to White Privilege Conference 2016 this weekend, where the attendees blamed the evils of society on everything from the “Christian hegemony,” to people not using Justice Sonia Sotomayor‘s name for their computer password. The Daily Caller provided extensive coverage of this PC minefield-of-a-conference, but what might have been the weirdest thing of all was when participants decided that the conference itself had become a bastion of white supremacy.


      This is rather the problem with self-hatred: you must also hate your own beliefs, making SJW a very problematic long term system of belief for any human being.

      The only question remaining here is: can our campuses outlast this toxic ideology? The prognosis is not good.









Thursday, August 4, 2016

MSU: Math OUT, Fakemath IN.





By Professor Doom

     It used to be the degradation of higher education required effort to see. It was incremental: a few pages taken out here and here, one less paper to write, one less book to read. If you weren’t working in higher ed, you could easily miss it.

      Now the degradation is in real-time, as we literally watch the meaning of a college degree change on a month to month basis.  A degree from 2016, already debased to the point that it means little more than a high school diploma from 2010, will still represent far more of an achievement than a degree from 2018.

       I’ve covered before how a school admitted their math courses were frauds, and simply removed them, replacing them with fake (instead of fraudulent) courses. One of the weird things about higher education is the “best practices” concept, which merely means “if someone else jumps off a bridge, then it’s reasonable for me to jump off a bridge, too.”

      So, with one state university abandoning the mission of higher education, others are following in short order:

Students at Michigan State University will no longer have to take college-level algebra, thanks to a revision of the general-education math requirement.


     We’ve gone from major news sites laughing that we teach algebra, a beginning high school topic, in college, to our colleges now not even aspiring to teach something so advanced as algebra.

     Now, readers of my blog know that “college-level algebra” is a lie, the algebra there is the same stuff the average high school graduate saw in the 10th or perhaps the 11th grade. The lies continue:

Michigan State University has revised its general-education math requirement so that algebra is no longer required of all students. The revision reflects an increasing view on college campuses that there is no one-size-fits-all math curriculum -- and that math is often best studied in connection with everyday life.


      The above is certainly pleasant sounding pabulum. A commenter flips things a bit to show how idiotic this line of thinking is:

Michigan State University has revised its general-education writing requirement so that writing is no longer required of all students. The revision reflects an increasing view on college campuses that there is no one-size-fits-all writing curriculum -- and that writing is often best studied in connection with everyday life. The new course - Life Tweeting 101 - will require students to compose one tweet of no more than 140 characters every week. The tweet must relate to an issue of social concern that has been discussed in class. A representative of Michigan State said that students connect to writing when it is presented as relevant to real life.


     Look, I agree “one size fits all” can be a problem, but, seriously, “1 + 1 = 2” is taught to everyone as well. The alphabet is taught as rote memorization to all. Should we remove these things because they’re “one size fits all”? Higher education isn’t about “one size fits all” anyway, it’s about pushing humanity to be better.

      It’s well documented that we’ve removed writing and reading from higher education. Mathematics has been pretty much the last standard bearer of higher education, but now that “best practices” will allow the removal of mathematics from an education, there won’t be much left to justify that diploma.

       MSU is abandoning that mission of higher education, under the spurious claim that pushing people is a “one size fits all” thing, and, instead, will remove mathematics, so that everyone is the same, at the same level of cognitive ability when they graduated the 9th grade. I’m starting to wonder if administrators take chainsaws to their brains…I just don’t see how else these levels of cognitive disconnects are possible.

      MSU wants to teach everyday knowledge instead of even high school level knowledge, further reducing the college diploma from “high school” to “middle school.” Why should people go deep into debt for this?

      With algebra gone, new courses will take their place:

Two quantitative-literacy courses -- Math 101 and Math 102 -- will be offered this fall, Melfi said. An estimated 1,000 students will enroll in these courses each year, he said.


      The gentle reader should understand that the long words of “quantitative literacy” are a smokescreen. These courses will simply be deeply watered down versions of the courses most students took around the 8th or 9th grade. While the claim is these courses will focus more on real world applications, I assure the gentle reader they will do no such thing.

      When I taught at a bogus community college, we had these quantitative literacy courses, and justified them as being “real world applicable.” Rubbish. Here’s the type of question that will be asked and discussed in these courses:

“Frankie is three years older than Johnny. If the sum of their ages is 13, how old is each?”

--does this question come up often in real life? This is what you’ll see in a quantitative literacy course.


     These courses will focus on questions you can just trial-and-error your way through, the hard part will be getting the students to indicate their answers in English (that’s what goes on now, the Math courses now cover the English).

      I’ve been teaching mathematics in higher education for decades. You know how much of that advanced math I use outside of the classroom? None, at least none I have to use. I don’t use calculus or statistics or differential equations or theoretical probability (much less algebra) to balance my checkbook, or determine that the cost of things I actually pay for is going up much faster than the government rate of inflation. Outside of the classroom, I mostly use the math I’ve learned for amusement purposes…I don’t suspect I’m typical in that regard (outside of math professors!).

      I knew how to handle my finances getting out of high school. I went into higher education to move higher than where I was before. MSU is getting rid of the fraud of “college algebra” and replacing it with an even bigger fraud.

     To be fair, I also don’t use the Marxism I learned in higher education either, or the history, or the physics, or the chemistry, at least not on an everyday basis. I didn’t go to college to learn everyday things, and higher education was never about everyday things. It’s stupid to annihilate a foundation of knowledge because you don’t use it to tie your shoes or take out the garbage or even pay your taxes. I again wonder why we should put our kids deep in debt to learn skills as common as the tying of shoelaces?

      There’s another problem with annihilating mathematics, however.

     STEM, STEM, STEM, we’re told over and over again how our taxes are used in education, how important it is to produce graduates in science, technology, engineering and math. Does the gentle reader suspect these courses will help with that? Of course not. Administration knows this as well:

Still, it’s important to remember that the quantitative-literacy courses will mainly have an impact on students in non-STEM majors…


        Since we won’t be accomplishing any of our goals in higher education by forcing students into fake math courses, what is the real purpose? Buried within the article is the true reason:

Bob Murphy, director of university relations and policy for the Michigan Association of State Universities. “It’s helpful…Ideally, it will lead to more successful graduation outcomes.”


     Again, we have long words here, but the true purpose is clear: more graduates. The university, bloated with growth through open admission and signing up everything with a pulse for student loans, is now under pressure to get actual graduates. Rather than focus on education, the administration has taken the cheeseball easy way out, and changed the definition of “college graduate” to “can perform at the 8th grade level.” Once again, this is why I keep saying we should have educators in charge of education, instead of the immense (and immensely  overpaid) legions of administrators we have now.

     Note also that once again I’ve produced an administrator whose title, “director of university relations and policy” is thrice as long as his name.  We really do have so many administrators that they’re running out of simple titles to award themselves. If we really want to help education, we need to trim back the shambling hordes of administrators that plague higher education. As I’ve mentioned before, we could probably start by just getting rid of administrators whose title is beyond a certain length.

      Until then, we’ll just watch higher educator degrade further and further, until “college graduate” simply means “can check a box qualifying for a loan to get a diploma.”


Monday, August 1, 2016

WIU: African and Women’s Studies OUT





By Professor Doom

     It’s so rare to see a glimmer of sanity in higher education, I feel the need to highlight it when it sparkles a little. Even within this little flash of light, there is darkness, however…but first the good news:

Administrators recommended that majors in African-American studies, philosophy, religious studies and women's studies all be cut from the curriculum…


     I want to address, a little, these majors, before talking about why they’re being removed.

     The two key ones are African-American studies and women’s studies. Both used to be sub-disciplines of academic fields of History and Psychology. Yes, these are both topics worthy of study, but the bottom line for me is we need to really reconsider the scholarly approach taken in these sub-disciplines. Right now, both of these majors are widely and rightly revered as a joke. The academic “work” you do in Women’s (I think it should be capitalized in this context) studies courses is laughable. I’ve seen students pass out lollipops for a letter grade, and even “do not shave” is considered so scholarly as to merit college credit. The paper courses at UNC were arranged through the African studies department, and, again, the people working in higher ed know those departments aren’t exactly rigorous. These departments were formed through the social justice movement, which has warped hiring practices throughout higher ed, jacking up tuition while doing nothing for education.

     On the other hand, philosophy and religious studies are curious things to eliminate. The former is a very challenging academic discipline, and the latter seems pretty relevant to today’s world. 

      The reason for removing the challenging disciplines is the same for removing the justifiably maligned disciplines, according to the admin in charge, Kathleen Neumann, interim provost and academic vice president:

Neumann said there simply is not enough interest in the four degree programs targeted for elimination.

Twenty-eight students committed to a philosophy or religious studies degree in the 2015-16 school year, compared to 34 in 2011. Three students received degrees this year, down from 10 in 2011. Overall enrollment in philosophy and religious studies has dropped 33 percent since 2011.

--the student loan scam has caused tuition to rise, meaning non-jobs training degrees are losing majors. Today’s fields aren’t the only ones that are losing enrollments.


     Naturally, faculty are protesting. For the maligned degrees (which much like the above have dropping enrollments), the primary reason for keeping them is, of course, social justice:

Committee members did not endorse dropping the concentration, in part because they felt potential layoffs would disproportionately affect black faculty members.

The group had similar concerns about the impact on minorities with cutting women's studies, even though just two students received a degree in that subject this year.


     I’m sorry, but social justice isn’t a good reason to bury our kids in debt, and, at some point, education should be part of a university’s mission. The head of the Philosophy and Religious studies department likewise tries to make a case, and does a far better job:

Gordon Pettit, chairman of philosophy and religious studies, said he felt that the figures overlook that there are only seven professors in his department. Pettit is petitioning the board to retain the philosophy major and had collected more than 1,500 signatures as of Tuesday.

"Philosophy is often misunderstood but is the foundational discipline for academic inquiry," Pettit wrote in an email. "There is a reason that the highest degree in most academic fields is the Doctor of Philosophy. 


     So Philosophy and Religions, one the foundation of all knowledge, the other part of the human experience since humanity began to exist, have already been whittled down to one combined department, with but a handful of professors. The Poo Bah at this place, only gets a bit over $270,000 a year in salary (plus double that in perks and benefits)…that’s about the money being spent on this department. I wonder if the students were asked “Poo Bah or Philosophy/Religious studies,” they would seriously ask for a Poo Bah.

      I really feel the need to point out how demented higher education is today. There’s still the show of faculty having some influence in higher education, but I assure the gentle reader such influence is a joke. Let’s take a quick look at how the decision to eliminate these departments was made:

      For a major decision, first a committee is formed:

Members of the Academic Program Elimination Review committee, comprised of faculty from the four undergraduate colleges and the library, submitted recommendations to Neumann in May.


     I’ve mentioned before that usually these committees are complete shams, intimidated by admin into “recommending” whatever the admin wants. That really is often the case, but, ultimately, the committee is completely irrelevant to higher education. So, the committee makes the investigation on what to do, and makes the recommendation.

       Did the committee recommend cutting these four programs?

Neumann's recommendation to cut the four programs does not align with the committee's recommendations.


      I’ve seen the like many a time. I’ve been on many committees where we were “asked” to make a decision, and then admin did what they had already decided to do, anyway. I grant that being on committees isn’t fun but I conjecture that if faculty actually had some power to do something via committee, there’d be more faculty involvement. When I was at a skeezy community college, I finished many committees annoyed at the waste of time, because the committee’s recommendations were always ignored by administration…the only time what we recommended matched what admin wanted was when they threatened us beforehand into making their desired recommendation.

      Anyway, the Poo Bah wants to eliminate these programs not for reasons of academic integrity. One reason and one reason alone guides the Poo Bah’s decision: money.

“"For several years now, we've seen a decline in fiscal support from the state….”


     When the Poo Bah speaks, one must parse the words very carefully. Yes, he’s probably telling the truth about declining fiscal support from the state. But a half-truth is really all you’re going to get, at best.

      Federal and loan support has blossomed in recent years. Pell Grants, available to most students, have gone from around $13 billion less than a decade ago to well over $40 billion today. That’s…not a decline. Student loan debt is up over $200 billion from last year, to past $1.2 trillion now. It’s hard to look at these numbers and then say money isn’t going into higher education. A hundred billion here, a hundred billion there, and you’re talking real money, right? Not enough for admin, apparently.

     Money is gushing into higher education in massive amounts, we really need to start asking where the money is going, rather than trust the people who are sucking it all up to suddenly start acting responsibly with it. With faculty completely out of the decision making process, that pretty much leaves admin as the plunderers here.

     Still, I’ll take some pleasure in a stopped clock being correct every once in a while, in this case coincidentally closing down a couple of programs that were doing nothing for the students.