Nass goes national against wholistic admissions

The Chronicle of Higher Education ran a story this week (reg. required) about Steve Nass's crusade against wholistic admissions. The article claims that UW has picked a fight with "Republican" lawmakers, but could only find Nass to talk to.

Does anyone know why Nass continues his assault on the UWs? Did he fail out and has held it against us ever since? Does he want a school in his district? Is he going to run for governor on an anti-UW platform?

The voters dumped Krebeich, with his UW-hating ways, this fall, but Nass seems to think that all this UW bashing is good politics.

How much power does he have as head of the legislative committee on higher ed?

What do your students call you?

Terry Caesar writes about how students address their college teachers over at insidehighered.com.

He discusses the various permutations over the years, institutions, individuals and job titles.

There are clearly issues of power at hand here. There are also important issues of gender in this as well.

I am ambivalent about the whole title thing myself. I avoid telling the students anything and leave them hanging. Thus, I get the whole gamut of responses, from first name, to Mr., to Prof. I think I present a very formal face to my classes and don't think much about my authority. At the same time, would a less formal introduction make the students more likely to speak up?

Do you encourage students to call you by an honorific or by your first name? What do student readers think?

$500 million from UWO to Oshkosh

The Northwestern ran a story on the consultant's report from last week about the positive financial impact that we have on Oshkosh.

Is it me, or has the Northwestern turned over a new leaf lately? It seems like the paper has consistently been running positive stories about the university in the last few months.

I am still holding a grudge over Stew's description of professors as equivalents of Jeffery Dahmers, but the editorial spirit has changed. Has Gannett changed its corporate policy?

Learn More about the COLS Dean

The schedule and CV for the first candidate are posted. I don't know if I'll have time to go, but feel free to post comments here.

Whiny Students Wanted the Day Off

I noticed that the AT complained this week that the university should have been closed on that cold Monday, February 5.

The editorial argued that it was too cold for the poor, little students. Some people, for god's sake, might have to walk outside to get to class. Others might have trouble getting their cars started. It almost made my heart break to think of the hardship.

I didn't know our students were so fragile and tender. I guess that if you are an adult and go to school you are weaker than those who had to go to work on Monday.

I have to get back to work, but first I'll wipe away my tears. . .

My opinion is better than yours!

The Chronicle is running a first-person essay this week bemoans the rise of the belief that all opinions are equal. The author begins with a story of a student who announces that he doesn't agree with Foucault before having read any of his work. The story really rings true for me in my teaching. It is always difficult to get students to come up with a reasoned "why" to justify their opinions.

The article goes on to connect this to appeals of tenure decisions and other faculty member complaints about administration.

His general argument is that reasoned and informed opinions are better than knee-jerk ones. I can't really argue with that point, but the paternalistic "I know better than you" demand that poeple just accept a greater wisdom from above seems problematic.

How can we balance the need for free-flowing discussion and engagement with the demand that opinion be grounded in logic and evidence?

Phoenix U under pressure for low quality

The NY Times ran a story today (Reg req.) about the problems faced by Phoenix University. They note that under relentless pressure to produce profits, they are busy reducing quality instruction and instructors.

This is an important story for us, in that the administration argued that we needed the Bachelors of Applied Studies in order to compete with this kind of shoddy educational experience. As the article points out, Phoenix is not accredited by the major accreditation organizations and has never even tried. They put profits before education, which suggests to me that copying them means that we would be headed down the wrong path.

As you also remember, the BAS hit so much faculty resistance for low standards that they went back to the drawing board.

This article reminds us why it is so important to resist using the for-profit model or trying to compete with Phoenix on price!

Regents set to approve 'wholistic admissions.'

The Journal-Sentinal reports today that the regents will probably be approving wholistic admissions at their meeting today. The article notes two interest facts: First, wisconsin law already prohibits making admissions decisions based on race.

Second, UW-hater Steve Nass is asking his Republican buddy, the AG, to investigate the policy. He also says he plans to sue.

As I have written before, it is hard to see how taking a broad range of factors into admissions decisions is a bad thing for us. It has been proven time and time again that success in college is not solely determined by grades and tests, so why should our admissions proceedures?

Dangerous Anonymity

A Professor at Bowling Green State U writes about his experience with IT after using an anonymity program called Tor. Someone came to his door to tell him that he was not allowed to use the program that is designed to shield his identity on line.

As an anonymous blogger, and I suppose a bit of a paranoid, I have thought about how easy it would truly be to track me down if someone really wanted to. Apparently, the network people at BGSU assumed that only a criminal would want to protect his identity through this software.

As the author is, I am troubled by the lack of real privacy there is for the internet. He insisted that it was within the purvey of academic freedom to surf the web anonymously and the IT person finally left him alone.

I wonder what the situation is like on our campus.

How closely does IT monitor our comings and goings on the internet?

How much history do they keep on web activities?

Can the chancellor just call someone up and have me outed?

Another Anonymous Academic Blogger in WI

I followed a link off of insidehighered.com this morning and came across Bardiac. As I looked at the thread about the policy toward faculty members accused of crimes, it seems likely that she is a fellow Wisconsinite.

She also criticized the background check policy.

What other state could she be in?

Although she writes on more general topics than I, it is good to find a compatriot in the dairy state.

COLS Dean Candidates

The search and screen committee announced the candidates for Dean of COLS. I was surprised to see John Koker on the list. He has often said that he was not interested in pursuing the position permanently. We'll have to see after the other candidates appear, but John seems to be doing a great job at the moment.

Any comments?

Dr. John Koker, Interim Dean, College of Letters and Science, University of Wisconsin Oshkosh. Ph.D. in Mathematics, University of Wisconsin Milwaukee. Campus interview: Feb. 26-27.

Dr. Ann Marie Legreid, Interim Associate Dean, College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences, University of Central Missouri. Ph.D. in Geography, University of Wisconsin Madison. Campus interview: Feb. 19-20.

Dr. James Moy, Dean, School of Creative Media, City University of Hong Kong. Ph.D. in Theatre History, University of Illinois Urbana. Campus interview: March 7-8.

Dr. Jill Trainer, Associate Vice President, Office of Sponsored Programs, University of Northern Iowa. Ph.D. in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan. Campus interview: March 1-2.

Our Own Kevin McGee on Affirmative Action

The Northwestern Editorial page carried an article about affirmative action on Thursday. (I imagine it is part of their 'get community members to write editorials for free initiative).

In it, he argues that race is too blunt an instrument to deal with the problems of access to higher education. Instead, that category should be superceded by poverty.

He is makes a good argument, but I wonder if he is too facile in dismissing the discrimination that people of color face, no matter what their economic level. I am thinking about recent studies that have shown that women at elite colleges perform worse on tests when they are given negative cues like being told that women are worse at the project at hand.

It is these subtler means of discrimination that we need to be aware of. An economist has a desire to reduce all problems to simple economics, but discrimination goes much deeper.

Getting Rid of Textbooks

Yesterday, the Northwestern picked up on a discussion that had a short life on our list about using textbooks. The article leads with Michael Buryadi describing how he no longer uses a textbook in his classes.

The discussion on the list and in the paper mentions several others who do this. I was struck by the massive amount of effort that Buryadi put into it. I wonder if he got anything else done over break.

Textbooks are horribly overpriced, but I am not sure that converting to articles is going to solve the problem for most of my classes. Basic information is made nicely accessible in textbooks and is often not available in article format. Doing it myself seems a bit like reinventing the wheel. It is also a big investment in time that can be better spent doing research.

Chancellor Wells on the Good Budget News

Chancellor Wells sent out this message, expressing his happiness with the news stories this weekend. He adds a few details of specifics for our campus--perhaps an increase of 350 students in "high demand" majors. And, even better, no overall cut in support levels!

To: UW Oshkosh Community
From: Richard H. Wells, Chancellor
Date: January 29, 2007

Re: Governor's Budget Proposal


I have good news for you today regarding the growth agenda. In news accounts that appeared yesterday, Governor Doyle announced that his budget will provide $225 million of additional funding over the next two years for Higher Education and financial aid. The vast majority of that additional funding will be for the University of Wisconsin institutions. The additional funding will provide a significant portion of the money requested for the Wisconsin growth agenda that includes institutional initiatives to increase the number of baccalaureate degrees, workforce development, teacher training, nursing, and increased student enrollment. This represents a very positive step in the State budget process.

We in northeastern Wisconsin greatly appreciate the fact that Governor Doyle has listened to business and community leaders about the need to fund the Wisconsin growth agenda. President Reilly and the Board of Regents under the leadership of David Walsh are also to be commended for working with the Governor to highlight the need to reinvest in the UW institutions. I am also pleased to report positive initial reaction to the need for the growth agenda that I obtained in earlier conversations with members of our local and regional legislative delegation, including Senator Carol Roessler and Representative Gordon Hintz. I am quite optimistic that this part of the Governor’s budget can become a bi-partisan priority for the citizens of Wisconsin.

We at UW Oshkosh and other campuses across the System need to continue to seek the support of the broader public including community and business leaders, as well as legislators, in order to see this funding through the legislative process. Governor Doyle will provide more details of his proposal during his State of the State speech tomorrow and on February 13 during his State Budget address.

What we know so far is that there will be full funding for cost-to-continue dollars for the UW System and all UW campuses. In other words, there will be no cut in State budget support. As mentioned above, it also means substantial funding for the campus growth agendas and student financial aid. For UW Oshkosh, depending on the level of state support, this means funding additional faculty to support the growth of about 350 students over the next two years in existing high demand programs and new programs.

As a reminder, the existing funding of our growth agenda is less than what we proposed in March of last year (see my memo of March 29, 2006 http://www.uwosh.edu/chancellor/documents/growthagenda2attach_000.doc, and the related power point http://www.uwosh.edu/chancellor/documents/NEWIgrowthagendaBOR.ppt), but should be a substantial portion of the 62% of the March total that was approved by the Board of Regents in August (see August 2006 press release in the UW Oshkosh University Relations news archives http://www.uwosh.edu/news_bureau_/releases/aug06/budget.html.

I will continue to supply you with more information as it becomes available. Again, while the budget process is not complete, we are off to a good start, and there is considerable hope that support of the northeastern Wisconsin growth agenda and financial aid is forthcoming.

Cc: Governor Jim Doyle
Senator Carol Roessler
Representative Gordon Hintz
Board of Regents
UWS Administration
Foundation Board
Oshkosh Council of Advisors
Milwaukee Council of Advisors
New North Board
NEW ERA Board
Regional Media Leaders

Doyle Suggests More Money for us!

Everyone reports today that Doyle has put the "growth agenda" on his list of priorities for the new state budget.

This is good news! Instead of talking about how big the cuts will be, we can talk about how a new infusion of resources can help us recover from the past few years. Even if we don't get all the money (which seems likely) at least it will be a better conversation!

Wholistic Admissions on a national scale

The NYTimes is running a story today (reg required) about the ways universities are dealing with the bans on affirmative action that are being passed in many state.

They are doing exactly what we are doing. They remove race as official factor and replace it with socio-economic level, personal achievements, etc.

The article goes on to note that the Ward Connerlys of the world are challenging those factors as well, claiming they are just a cover for racial preferences.

I have blogged about this before, but it is an issue that will be with us for some time.

Is it really unreasonable to use something beyond grades and (biased) standardized tests to determine college admissions? I don't think so.

How Christianists try to Rewrite History

Harpers magazine has posted a long article describing the way that Christianists envision American history.

It is a scary description of the certainty of the radical fringe who want to create a theocracy here. The reporter details the bizarro history of Christianist heroes, that demonstrate that America is god's country, chosen to dominate the world and lead to the rapture.

Check it out!

The latest on bias among faculty members

The AFT commissioned a study to refute/discuss other studies that claimed left-wing bias among university faculties. It is an old, repetitive story, but it is something to post today.

Do we have a problem with 'knowledge deficits'?

It would seem that conservatives are dominating the public discussion of educational reform. I found a review of E.D. Hirsch's new book (you remember him--Cultural Literacy, etc. from a few years ago.) He argues that problems in reading are really problems in knowledge.

Students' weak reading skills are because they have no context to help dig out the meanings of texts. They can sound out all the words, but they have little understanding.

His solution would be stronger core curriculum, heavily based on facts -- the standard E.D. Hirsch argument.

This thesis would grate against a freshman "toolbox" course. If the problem is based on lack of knowledge, providing more training on 'how' to read or study won't do much good.

I am sympathetic to the argument that the knowledge that students bring to campus is incredibly thin, and they often seem uninterested in going into detail.

Think of how easy it is to get kids to pontificate on current events, based on very little information--ask them to discuss something that requires some knowledge acquistion and see how far you get!

Quality and the Annual Report

I was perusing the colorful annual report that was sent to everyone last week. I am struck by the real contradictions in what the administration says and what they are actually doing.

In particular, if you read the Provost's letter, one would get the impression that academic quality was important. He stresses four new administrative efforts to raise quality.

If you look at the statistics in the back, the situation is much bleaker. How can you have a quality institution that has 8.5% percent fewer faculty, who are being replaced by academic staff (up almost 16%)? Even this doesn't seem to cover the needs of our campus, as student faculty ratio has gotten worse by 15.8%, teaching loads have increased, sections offered have decreased while tuition and enrollment has grown.

Student quality has basically remained constant over the time period, but it is hard to see how that can continue as we drop in all the relevant teaching statistics.

Why is there no worry about the basic function of our institution in the statements from the administration? Why are we worrying about administrative initiatives when we should be filling the myriad of vacant positions and increasing the size of our faculty?

The brochure is glossy and well-produced, but the data within paints a bleak picture for the direction of our institution.

Creationist "museum" opening soon

This is off the topic for normal blog posts, but I was taken with this story. The creationists have raised $30 million to build a monument to their own refusal to accept modern science.

I imagine Sandra Gade is probably already planning her trip!

Should First Year Experience Address Gender Gap?

Insidehigher.ed has been reporting on the latest survey of student attitudes. Today, they emphasize the gender gap in the ways students perceive education. Women come to college as more serious students who are more interested in reading and learning.

The article suggests that this may partly account for the increasing percentage and success of women in college. That is an interesting conclusion in itself. It also raises the question of whether we need to work on providing different kinds of orientation based on gender. Men apparently need more handholding. Should we take heed?

Do we need a stronger core curriculum?

I just read this article by a Hoover Institute Scholar who proposes that a liberal arts education needs to be premised on a very strict core curriculum. He argues that the academy needs to recover J.S. Mill's concept of "many-sidedness" needs to be restored to the curriculum. Mill is quoted as saying the goal of university should be:

that which it is the chief of all the ends of intellectual education to qualify us for — the exercise of thought on the great interests of mankind as moral and social beings — ethics and politics, in the largest sense.

The article then presents a very conservative vision of what a core should look like, focused heavily on western history and foreign language. He blames everyone for compromising their standards, but particularly picks up the old stereotype of liberal professors indotrinating their students.

I don't necesssarily agree with his conclusions, but it does raise some very important issues.

Professor jailed for jaywalking

I like this story that showed up on insidehighered.com (the link is to the Atlanta Journal). A Tufts professor was knocked to the ground and arrested for jaywalking outside his conference. He spent 8 hours in a cell before he made bail.

You can read all the serious commentary if you like, but all I'll say is that this was an amusing news story!

Problems when a CEO runs your university

The NYTimes this morning is running a story (reg. required) about the strife at Pace University in Manhattan. He has instituted all sorts of changes that have not helped and convinced the trustees to pay him almost $700,000/year.

The theme for the article is how university presidents are becoming increasingly estranged from the faculties.

It is an interesting read, and reminds of the increasing tensions between our own chancellor and the faculty here. I shouldn't have to remind everyone about the issues that we have faced since I started this blog, but Chancellor Wells has demonstrated quite an imperial tendency himself.

The vision of the head of the university operating like a business CEO has caused great tension for academia in many ways, but most importantly, in the structure of governance. Administrations, including our own, seem to be convinced that they don't need to follow the rules of governance and should have somethign akin to absolute power over the universities.

It is a problematic trend that reaches beyond our own discussions.

How to be a 'wired' campus

I just spotted this article from PCMagazine about the top 20 wired college campuses across the country. They only polled a few schools, but you can get an idea about what the computer people think is important.

Is it really important that students are given a laptop every 2 years? Does there need to be a computer lab in every building on campus? How wireless should a campus be?

I am not sure any of it is very important. It seems to me to often be,a distraction from the real purposes of education.

Is Free Tuition Plan Dead?

The Journal Sentinal reported yesterday that our good friend Steve Nass has declared Free Tuition dead on arrival. Does this signal the death knell of the plan? As the article points out, it is not much more than a clever idea at the moment.

Insidehighered.com ran an article as well, discussing both our and Indiana's plan. They interview a few people who claim that it won't help. The most substantial criticism is that only 25% of grads leave. Thus, most of the money goes to students who would stay anyway.

I like this as the basis of conversation, however. Instead of contemplating new ways to cut, people can talk about ways to increase access and quality.

College students claim they want novelty and risk

Happy New Year everyone!

My first post of the new year is a link to a Washington Post story today (reg required) about College students' definitions of fun.


It starts with a survey from a website, where students rate their definitions of fun in a pretty standard way -- booze and sex. They then interview a philosophy professor, who describes the "sophisticated" distinctions college students make.

In the end, the author makes her own conclusions that novelty and risk are the most "fun" for students.

The Semester Has Come to an End

It seems a good time to reflect on what I have been posting about over the past few months, as so many others are going as the year comes to a close.

The big story of the semester was, of course, the visit of Kevin Barrett to campus. We had a lively exchange of views in many different forums about both his views and the appropriateness of the invitation. I was even called a McCarthyite, which was a first for me.

The Barrett Brouhaha raised many important questions, but the most signifant was the question of academic freedom. I am left with more questions than answers. Tony Palmeri and Miles Maguire insisted that academic freedom must encompass all aspects of our activities at the university. I am inclined to see it as more limited, in that it should apply to our research agendas.

The other major theme running through the semester was our student experience. The furor generated by the adminstration's announcement of a new course for first-year students led to a broad discussion. If you include our sub-par scores on NSSE and the on-going question of grade inflation, these posts dominated the semester.

Again, big questions remain. How can we transform our institution from UW-zero to one where students focus on education? Is it even possible as our classes get larger and tuition increases? Can we overcome the societal pressures that see only the diploma and an appropriate job as what we stand for?

These are both issues that we need to discuss as a campus community. I hope that this blog has helped some in that respect. My counter suggests that about 60 people a day stop by.

I enjoy the blog, so I'll keep doing it next year. Everyone enjoy their break!

State Universities Price out Poor

The New York Times today reports (reg required) on the trend among flagship public universities to attempt to raise their national stature. Unfortunately, this comes at the expense of the poor. To do it, many are raising tuition and focusing on the rich kids.

UWO doesn't fit the profile, but the entire state of Wisconsin is moving in that direction. The state legislature and governor don't seem to believe that education above 12th grade is a public good that needs public support.

Read on . . .

Next Big Controversy: Affirmative Action?

The Journal-Sentinal is running a story today about the brewing battle between the UW and legislators over affirmative action.

UW system is moving toward something called "wholistic" admissions that will take into account many different features of a persons situation during admissions decisions.

Ward Connerly, a Californian opposed to any differential policies toward admissions, will testify in Madison against the policy.

My own feeling is that it would be nice if society were race and class blind and we didn't have to worry about these things. The fact is that we are not. Racism and discrimination is deeply embedded in our society and history. To pretend that is does not exist will make it worse. In order to make sure everyone has a chance, a student's circumstances must be taken into account.

On top of that, standardized testing is a piece of junk. It has been shown time and time again that it is deeply biased in favor of rich, white kids. To base admissions decisions only on numbers is to create a highly distorted student body that will not serve the public interest.

I probably should say more on this controversial topic, but it is back to grading. . . .

Tenure is almost gone

The AAUP reported this week that the percentage of tenure track faculty in the U.S. is dropping like a rock.

Here at UWO, we already have lowest ratio of tenure-track to non-tenure track teaching faculty in the system. We are leading the way toward a system of education where over paid professional administrators make the decisions to be carried out by a large number of underpaid, temporary adjuncts.

It sounds like the Walmart model!

College professors still respected by public

College Professors are not losing public respect, according to a recent gallup poll. I was surprised to see that we did so well. The results show that we are given ratings for honesty and ethics on par with the clergy (though I have to admit there is some irony in that).

The figures show that 58% of those polled rate us very high or high for our ethics. Only 7% rated us low or very low. The charts also give a bit of historical breakdown, showing that these numbers are slightly better than they were in the early 1990s.

I would have expected that with all of the bad press that we have been getting from Horowitz, Nass, and others that our ratings wouldn't have held up.

This is definitely good news for our profession and higher education in general!

Faculty Advocacy Committee criticizes Northwestern editorial

This morning's Northwestern contained a letter signed by five faculty members, who call themselves the faculty advocacy Committee. In their letter, they make a very nice argument as to why the claim that the university's sick leave policy is not at all extravagant.

I looked in my email and discovered that the Faculty Senate created this committee and is looking for more people to join in its work. Their mandate:

1. to react to criticisms that are lodged against the state University or its faculty
2. to publicize the good things that faculty do.

This sounds like a very important job for our community. We have little public voice, so this committee can only help.

Anyway, here is the letter:

UW health benefits earned, not out of line

On Dec. 1 the Northwestern ran an editorial asking state legislators to stop their unfair attacks on the University of Wisconsin. We agree that this would be a positive step.

Unfortunately, this editorial also contained its own unfair attack.

You not only suggested that the UW's sick leave program was "overly generous" but you also stated that it amounts to us having our "hand caught in the cookie jar." Sadly, this language portrays all of us at the University, from maintenance people to professors, as cheats.

We wish the paper would tone down its rhetoric too.

If University employees get decent health care coverage, it shouldn't be used to stoke public resentment against them. And it shouldn't be used as an excuse to suggest that our benefits be scaled back. If anything it should be used as a model for what hard working people should be able to expect from their jobs. These are the kind of benefits that we hope our students can get with a good college education.

There are good reasons to be allowed to convert unused sick days to health care benefits. This is why many corporations offer this very policy. They recognize that it discourages absenteeism.

The "use it or lose it" policy the paper endorsed would encourage more frequent absences. So beware of what you wish for if you really think that we are cheaters.

There are no substitute teachers at the University. When we take sick days we have to make up the work on our own time and we lose a portion of our retirement benefits. That doesn't seem like an overly generous policy to us.

James Chaudoir, Don Hones, Tom Lammers, Al Lareau, David Siemers, Stephanie Stewart UW Oshkosh Faculty Advocacy Committee

Republicans will continue to attack UW system

Steve Nass, second to none in his venom toward the UW system, was chosen by state Republicans to chair the assembly committee that oversees colleges and universities.

This is an obvious signal that Republicans will continue to try to use attacks on higher education to further their election campaigns. Nass has been one of the most irrational UW haters in the state and has been given a prominent seat to continue his nonsense.

The Republican leader of the assembly says the appointment is because UW officials "gloated" over the loss of the other UW hater, Rob Kreibich. It is good to see that there is no pettiness among the losers.

The article then has the speaker of the house say that "suggestions that one party was better for the System were ill-advised."

How could any rational person come to any other decision? Instead of seeking to work with us to improve higher education by choosing some one who is less of an anti-intellectual, he picked the most outspoken crank in Madison.

Now instead of being able to ignore this crackpot, we are all going to have to deal with his ridiculous assertions for years to come!

Free tuition for 10 years in Wisconsin

The Journal Sentinel reports this morning that a state commission is considering a proposal that would offer free tuition to UW schools in exchange for a commitment to stay in WI for 10 years after graduating.

The argument is that Ireland instituted this kind of policy and has now become the most dynamic economy in the EU.

This does seem like a fun, radical way to help higher education here, but practically I can't see it happening. Would a large number of college graduates who have promised not to leave bring us additional high quality jobs? Or would we instead be caught with a large number of underemployed, bitter young people?

I think it might be a great way to reinvigorate our state before all the manufacturing jobs slip away. What does everyone else think?

Chancellor sympathizes with LGBTQ, calls for more study

After the demonstration on campus this week, where Petra Roter (unexcitedly, I hear) joined the protesters by holding a sign, the Chancellor has issued another campus announcement. In it, he discusses possible changes on campus to address the problem and then promises starting a study to be carried out next year.

Apparently, having a professor and others roughed up on campus doesn't add up to a real problem. We need to do a survey, which will take a year or so, before a new policy can be discussed. Here is the message:

Last Wednesday night, we, along with other key administrators, met with members of our campus LGBTQ community and allies. This listening session, organized in part by the LGBTQ Council and the Rainbow Alliance for HOPE, examined issues of harassment and identified ways to ensure a safer and more respectful and inclusive campus environment.

We heard from students, staff and faculty how members of our campus LGBTQ community are targets of harassment and physical and emotional abuse. Individuals described the day-to-day bigotry and harassment that they have experienced or observed because of their sexual orientation. Students described how they did not feel comfortable going to class and how some are seriously considering leaving UW Oshkosh. There was a feeling by many of those in attendance that they were not welcome on this campus.

We discussed suggestions as to how our campus could become a safer and more welcoming place for LGBTQ students, faculty and staff. Suggestions included a range of actions, such as: training campus leaders, faculty and staff; developing a bias incident reporting mechanism; streamlining and improving reporting and grievance processes to increase reporting and better response time; enhancing and recharging the campus Diversity Alliance to address issues of campus climate; and developing a LGBTQ Resource Center.

We have already begun to review these suggestions and action steps and will work with the LGBTQ Council to move these and other recommendations forward. We have also recommended the development and implementation of a University-wide campus climate study. UW Oshkosh, with the assistance and support of the UW System, has committed to be one of the first institutions in the System to conduct a comprehensive climate study during the 2007-08 academic year.

Initially, key campus leaders will participate in SAFE (Students Staff and Faculty for Equality) training. This training educates participants regarding the challenges and issues facing LGBTQ faculty, students and staff, as well as advocates for a safe environment for all its members regardless of sexual and gender identities. A plan will be put in place to expand the availability of this program to all members of the campus community.

We are a campus whose core values embrace diversity and inclusivity. We support an atmosphere in which civility, tolerance and respect should be afforded to all. Whenever one member of our community is a victim of harassment or hate, it has an effect on all the members of our community.

Mahatma Gandhi said, �Once one assumes an attitude of intolerance, there is no knowing where it will take one. Intolerance is violence to the intellect and hatred is violence to the heart.� As a campus, we want once again to reiterate that actions of intolerance and hate, or elements that create an unsafe or inhospitable environment for LGBTQ and other members of our community, will not be tolerated. We ask that each of you re-affirm your commitment to the University�s core value of diversity and inclusivity and act accordingly.

Richard H. Wells Lane Earns Petra Roter
Chancellor Provost Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs

Oshkosh Fails Again for Student Engagement

The Advance-Titan reported today that student ratings on the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) were below the averages for the rest of the UW system again this year.

We have done poorly everytime this survey has been given. The administration is touting the fact that results improved a bit from earlier years, but it still sounds pretty dismal.

Art Rathjen, the new development guy, has been telling everyone who will listen that our graduates often express deep dissatisfaction with their experience here and could not imagine sending their own children to us.

NSSE shows that we are creating a new generation that will not think any better of us.

Petra Roter seems to think (in the article) that all we need is a freshmen experience course to solve this problem. If only it were that simple!

Junior Faculty Grievances

As I glanced at my calendar this afternoon, I realize there was a meeting discussing a survey given to young faculty earlier this semester.

Unfortunately, I didn't go. Did anyone? What do the younger faculty members think about this institution?

As one of those who hasn't been here very long, I would have to say I am fairly satisfied with UWO. I have great colleagues and a supportive environment.

My biggest grievance would have to be the finances, which are only partly in our hands. We have significantly lower salaries than other institutions and are unable to fill the dozens of open positions on campus.

Now if I could only get the students to talk in class . . .

Any grievances out there? On what should we be focusing our attention?

Horowitz and Berube have lunch

Here is a story from the Chronicle of Higher Education about inviting David Horowitz and Michael Berube to have lunch together.

As I read the article, I have trouble deciding whether it is real or a work of imagination. I enjoyed it anyway!

Academic Indoctrination: Does intro Econ push students to the right?

This article raises the question as to whether the way economics is taught today is inherently biased. The economic model of the Chicago school emphasizes efficiency over fairness. Survey courses teach students that this is the highest value and should triumph over any other thoughts.

This debate has been all over the blogosphere for a while now, and generally asks whether economics has become ideologically driven. Should one accept this model as the best for society?

Practically, the free-market model is being rejected all over the world--yesterday's resounding reelection of Hugo Chavez demonstrates that.

In the academy, is economics our answer to those right-wing critics. Every student gets their free-market propaganda in Econ 101? Does it balance out the claimed biases in English or History?

Editorial full of faint praise

The Northwestern ran an editorial today, supposedly happy that legislators didn't take too many ridiculous shots at the UW system at a committee meeting yesterday.

The editorial equates faculty members "failure" to use sick leave with that of the legislators, when it is clearly not true (if you read the article in the Journal-Sentinel last week.)

However, most disturbingly, they talk of returning to "middle ground." I have no idea what that means. The UW haters down in Madison falsely accuse us of all sorts of things. We have made no such accusations against them. They slice our budget year after year. We adapt as best we can to keep providing a quality educational experience to our students. Now, we are supposed to change??

A sensible legislature and government should be willing to undertake a civil discussion with system administrators and the various campuses. Reilly and the others have bent over backwards not to descend to the level of the attackers.

With the new shape of politics in Madison, the elected officials will hopefully listen carefully to our arguments, instead of dismissing them out of hand. Instead of looking to see how they can gain easy publicity attacking higher education, perhaps they will pay attention to the data that makes it clear that we are key to the state's future.

How is that meeting in the middle? The Northwestern should call for the legislature to leave its inflammatory irrationalism behind and return to being reasonable.

Academic Blogging

The Chronicle of higher education has a story about a few sites that are trying to catalogue the academic bloggers out there.

The new site is a wiki, organized by Crooked Timber. The article also makes reference to blogscholar.com.

I think I'll go register and see if I can get on the lists. . . .

Legislatures fail across the country

An astute reader submitted this brief story from the Washington Post.

It reports that a bipartisan panel argues that legislatures across the country have failed in their responsibility to provide high-quality college education for all citizens.

We know that this is true here in Wisconsin. The legislature and our "education" governor have used the UW system and tuition dollars to balance the state budget. I am afraid that it will happen again. I have noted often how poorly our state is doing.

It is good to see others making the same argument.

Here are some other stories, courtesy of UW system in the news site:

Insidehighered.com
Chronicle of Higher Ed.com
Christian Science Monitor

Civility in the Classroom

CNN has posted the story of a management professor at Drake U. who is selling lessons on how professors can create a better classroom atmosphere.

The work apparently focuses on technological issues--what to do with cell phones, laptops, etc.--but also provides a few guidelines:

Establish credibility by telling students how they will benefit from taking the class.

Decide how formal or informal the class will be.

Set clear expectations and enforce them.

On the first day of class, emphasize its importance by giving an assignment that students must turn in at the next class.

Handle discipline problems immediately.

Are there those among us who do not do these things? It strikes me as simple common sense, but it sounds as though the author is making big bucks leading campus seminars.

Scientists get serious in fight with religious zealots

The New York Times reports (reg. required) on a forum in California where prominent non-religious scientists gathered to discuss why we are losing the war with the Christianists, who insist that much of what science has uncovered in the last century violates the teachings of the bible.

We have our own local crackpot still at work, though I haven't seen her in front of the library lately, so we know that the zealots are on our own campus. . . .

What happened to faculty governance?

Insidehighered.com interviews Mary Burgan, the author of a new book about the faculty's role in running the universities. She argues that it has all but disappeared. The interview is interesting and very relevant to us here. She touches upon the negative stereotypes that have caused us to become such a target in popular culture. She also argues that if we want to overcome this, we need to rededicate ourselves to guiding our institutions.

UWO is a poster-child institution for loss (did we ever have any power?) of faculty involvement in the direction of the university. We have seen countless examples of the administration proposing policies and then expecting us to approve them.

While it seems that the first-year course momentum has slowed, and the committee members insist that it is off the table, it is only a small part of the larger accretion of power by the non-academic bureaucracy over in Dempsey.

Has anyone ever counted the number of people who work over there and shuffle the papers that (they think) make the world go round?

WI drives away LGBQT scholars

The AP ran a story today about how the constitutional ban on non-traditional marriage is causing people to think about leaving the state and UW system. UW Madison Chancellor Wiley held a listening session where he heard the concerns of those affected by the amendment.

This amendment is a real black eye for WI, and will make it even more difficult to convince the best scholars to come here. Below average pay and overt discrimination (and assault) always creates an inviting atmosphere!

Legislature in PA finds no prof. bias

In the continuing saga of David Horowitz's assault on higher ed, a legislative committee in Pennsylvania has been holding hearings about the "mistreatment" of conservative students on their university campuses.

The committee could not find any problems. Here is the AP story.

I wonder if PA state politics swung back to the middle, as here in WI. The committee sure dumped this albatross in a hurry after the election.

Administration issues statement about campus harrassment

The administration today sent out this statement about the attack on Sibelman and others on campus before the Nov. 7 election.

It is a nice gesture, but it seems not to address the depth of anger within the LGBTQ community that has been expressed in comments. As the Northwestern reported, the investigation into the crimes reported here earlier have reached an impasse.

It seems to me that we should be taking more signficant, affirmative action to make it clear that we do not share the bigoted attitudes of a majority of the voters in our state. We should make it clear that we are not going to allow either violent or casual harrassment occur on our campus.

I have posted the letter below:

November 14, 2006

Colleagues,

The passage by Wisconsin voters on November 7th of a constitutional amendment defining marriage and banning civil unions has had a significant impact on the lives of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) individuals, and it could potentially create tensions and problems that would have a negative effect on our campus climate.

Preceding the recent election, some incidents were reported of inappropriate conduct, including harassment, toward LGBTQ members of our campus community and their allies. Even if only a few individuals are to blame for the regrettable actions and conduct, we all share responsibility for addressing the harm inflicted and for seeking to prevent its recurrence. Any actions that create an inhospitable or hostile environment for LGBTQ people will not be tolerated.

Our University’s anti-discrimination policies and complaint procedures provide an avenue for the investigation of allegations of inappropriate conduct. (www.uwosh.edu/affirm-act/aaoffice.html#IX ). We urge all individuals who have concerns about how they have been treated to file a report with the University. The University’s administration will vigorously act to address all allegations that are presented through these means.

At this time, members of our LGBTQ community are concerned that they are being targeted and that they are an invisible minority whose concerns are not being addressed. We want to assure LGBTQ people that their security and safety is, in fact, a campus priority. Toward this goal, harassment or actions that create an unwelcoming environment for LGBTQ people will be promptly investigated. Disciplinary action will be taken when deemed necessary.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer people contribute positively to the life of our university. They are our colleagues, professors, instructors, staff members, and students. We ask the entire University community to affirm that one of our core values is the support of diversity and inclusivity.

Richard H. Wells Lane Earns Petra Roter
Chancellor Provost Vice Chancellor, Student Affairs

2006 NSSE results

NSSE released their summary results of the 2006 survey today. I want to mention two of the most troubling:

• Students average only about 13-14 hours a week preparation for class
• Students study far less than they expect during their first year

As I perused my old email, I missed a meeting at the provost's summit about our own NSSE results, so hopefully we know specifically about how these general numbers relate to our own.

These two strike me as suggestive that we are missing a huge opportunity with our first-year students. (And it is a pattern that those of us who teach them have seen). They come to school with a vision of hard work and challenge. That is lost by the end of the first semester, when they have become jaded by lack of challenge and a culture of drunkenness.

Susan McFadden and gang are supposedly studying this option, but it is in the context of the administration-approved course.

I don't think that a First year experience course will do it. Instead, we need to raise our standards and expectations across the board. If students learn that they need to work hard to get through college, we might see a wave of improvement here on campus. Do to this, however, demands more than a band-aid of a new "training course" on top of huge pit classes.

Background checks coming to UWO?

I was browsing Frank Church's email this morning and I noticed that the UW Madison faculty senate had voted against a new policy ordering background checks of employees. As the article notes, the regents are hell-bent on checking every new employee, after the "scandal" of last spring when 40 ex-cons were found on the payroll.

Outside of the due-process issues raised by the UW fac. senate (which makes sense to me), it strikes me as a hugely wasteful initiative. At this time of very scarce resources, the money and personnel needed to check the thousands of UW employees is not money well spent.

After the "audit" last spring, they turned up NOT ONE PERSON who was a problem or who would fit this vaguely defined criteria of this proposal. Thus, system administrators are creating more paperwork and cost to solve a problem that does not exist.

Bureaucracy has a momentum all its own. After the orders came down, this steamroller was set in motion and will soon suck up more of our valuable assets.

Perhaps now that the political situation has changed slightly in Madison, some more sensible minds can rethink this unnecessary policy.

Election 2006: Good news for UWO

Yesterday's elections will surely be a good thing for UWO and the UW system for the next few years. There are two particularly good results for us:

1: One of our own, Gordon Hintze, was elected to the State Assembly. Instead of having a representative like Underheim who condescendingly attacked us on campus last year, we have someone who knows how the university operates. I hope that he will become a strong voice in favor of protecting spending on higher education when those highway guys show up asking for hundreds of millions!

2: Rob Kreibich, a Republican from Eau Claire, lost. He was one of the most vocal anti-UW legislators in the assembly who never missed an opportunity to bash us for political gain. I don't know what circumstances led to his defeat, but we can be very glad it happened.

Let us hope that a more balanced assembly and senate will lead to more reasoned discussions about higher education in Wisconsin and not the kind of anti-college diatribes that dominated the last five years!

A lighter note: Bigfoot and Academic Freedom

CNN is running a story today about a researcher at Idaho state who is studying bigfoot.

As you can read in the article, he is something of an embarrassment to others on that campus.

Maybe the campus greens can invite him to speak, and start a series.

Professor assaulted on campus!

A letter to the editor by Simon Sibelman in the Northwestern revealed that he was 'physically assaulted' on campus by three men who objected to the fact that he was wearing a Vote No on the constitutional amendment button.

I hope that there will be an investigation. Who were these thugs? Where were the campus police? If he reported this crime, why haven't we heard about it before? If not, what sort of climate reigns on campus that he didn't feel it would do any good?

A campus republican gets a story in the Northwestern for a spurious death threat, but a professor gets assaulted and there is nothing?

What is wrong here?

BTW, Simon's letter is the second one down.

Profs to be photographed in action!

I have to post this story from insidehighered.com. Rate my professors is going to add photos to their reviews of professors!

It is going to encourage students to take photos of their professors with their camera phones and post them on-line. Now we'll get to see who really deserves those chili peppers!

Apparently, it has already happened to someone here. Judith Thorpe, identified as a recent retireee, had some part of her lecture posted on youtube. Insidehighered mentions her story in a link.

Grade Inflation

Yesterday afternoon, some number of faculty members met to discuss grade inflation. It is yet another interesting campus discussion in which I couldn't participate. That teaching really gets in the way of my other interests!!

In any case, the Northwestern decided to cover the meeting. The story is quite bland, so I hope that the discussion was more substantive than reported.

We need to think about how to fix this problem. How can we make a decision to make A's and B's mean something. For me, it is a given that they should.

First, we need to have an administration that is clearly in favor of academic standards, and willing to take the heat in having students who can't do college work fail out. This is perhaps the most important, unfortunately.

I think the second step would be to have more publicity for grades. If we all knew each others average gradepoints, it would help balance things. Faculty would then have to be encouraged and cajoled to keep their gradepoints down.

College has been transformed into a mass phenomenon in the second half of the 20th century. We need to acknowledge that the character has been transformed, but insist that quality is crucial to make the degree worth something. If many more people have a degree that is worth less, has society really gained?

Funding cuts for Higher education

Insidehighered.com is reporting a new study which shows patterns of funding for higher education over the last twenty years. It shows that most states refunded their universities after economic downturns of 1980-2 and 1991-3. This has not yet happened for the recession of 2001-3. Wisconsin bucked the trend in the early 90s, when they increased spending on higher ed. Wisconsin didn't have quite as egregious cuts in 2001 as other states, but there is very little hope of having a reinvestment.

As the report points out, spending on higher ed from 1979-2004 has not kept up with economic growth in any state.

For the importance of higher education, you can read the document from the fed, posted on the listserv by Michael Watkins. It is oddly shallow text, only stressing the immediate benefits of higher ed for regional businesses. There is very little thought about long-term implications of higher education and none about creating an educated populace.


We are watching the slow suffocation of higher education in Wisconsin and the United States. Where will we be in a decade or two?

Barrett Comes and Goes

Last night was the big Barrett event. I wasn't there, because I didn't get tickets in time. Actually, I am not sure I would have gone anyway, but I did want to see the spectacle.

The coverage in the media so far has been interesting.

The Northwestern ran three stories about it today.

First, the talk
Second, the anti-Barrett rally
Third, an editorial

The coverage didn't make any reference to the academic freedom part of his talk, so I wonder what he had to say about that. He did get on the TV news with a few of his sensational claims including that the U.S. was now a totalitarian state. If that were true, wouldn't he be in jail??

I was struck by the report that the College Republicans had to import students from Marquette to man the picket line. I also wondered why the head of the college republicans showed up unshaven and wearing a dirty t-shirt. He must be a new kind of conservative!

I also caught the segments on the local news last night. All three local networks had a piece on the visit last night at 10PM. I imagine Fox11 did too, but I didn't wait until the end of the ball game to see.

The news coverage was very similar. They each showed Barrett, interviewed Andy Sabai and Nate Nelson. The most sensationalist channel, NBC 26 annoyed me by continually referring incorrectly to "Professor" Barrett. He is only a lecturer, as professor connotes a specific kind of job. It links him more closely to us than is true.

In some ways, I am glad the republicans set up a protest. It did a good job offsetting the media focus on Barrett. The protesters were more interesting to photograph than Barrett. It provided a good counter image to Barrett's passionate, irrational attack on the government.

Everyone had their say. Perhaps we can start focusing on the good work that occurs on our campus, like the big grant received by the college of business this week.

As a final note, Tony is still referring to me as a McCarthyite in his post this morning.

News coverage of death threats for campus republican

I want to repost a very interesting anonymous comment that was posted in response to the events surrounding the death threat to the head of the campus republicans, Nate Nelson. I added the news story to my comments about the College Republican story

It almost completely refutes the details provided in the news story, which makes it seem like the journalist did a half-assed job of reporting.

Does anyone else want to chime in? I don't know whether I can trust the details laid out here, but the comment is well written and quite persuasive.

Just to clarify a few points in that story:

1) The "gay pride rally" was actually a "Civil Rights Rally" organized by the Winnebago Peace and Justice Center (WPJC) which invited representatives from WisPIRG, People of Faith for Fairness, & Students for a Fair Wisconsin to speak.

2) Nate Nelson didn't "call" University Police to the scene - they were already there. The rally was legal, the use of a megaphone (apparently) was not. Nate may have asked UP to end the rally due to the use of a megaphone, but UP was already on site. I was there, I know.

3) This happened over a month ago, September 26 to be exact. The death threat was reported to have happened the next day, September 27. The "news" of this death threat just came out four weeks later in a press release issued by the "Leadership Institute", the agency that funds "Life and Liberty News", the conservative student newspaper that Nate Nelson writes for (latest edition issued today).

4) The implication in both the press release and the news reports is that someone "opposed to the Amendment" made a death threat on Nate Nelson because of his actions and/or views. But Nate Nelson has been a solid 'opponent' of the Amendment himself - at least until last week. If there was a threat sent to Nate Nelson, it would not have come from anyone from the gay and lesbian groups on campus who knew very well where he stood on this issue. He has been considered a 'distant' or 'silent ally' by the GLBT community until very recently.

5) Nate Nelson was walking around campus today carrying a megaphone and passing out "Dump Doyle" stickers before the Doyle event on campus. I guess the threats to his life are really getting to him.

And now you know ... the rest of the story.

College Republicans planning on sabotaging Barrett?

I heard a rumor today from a student that the College Republicans took a number of tickets to the Barrett presentation. Their plan, supposedly, is not to use them, so that there will be empty seats in the auditorium.

If this is true, it strikes me as quite a reprehensible act. I hope someone else has heard about this and is going to make sure that people who want to go are not thwarted by this crap.

As much as I think that Barrett is a problematic speaker, trying to keep people out is worse!

Extra Credit for Barrett?

Apparently, some teachers on campus are offering extra credit for going to hear Barrett speak. The presentation is scheduled in a space that only holds 160 people, so student have not been able to get in.

Barrett has "sold out" reeve auditorium, so some students have been left out. Earns and Roter just sent out a memo, asking whoever might be giving extra credit to make sure that students can get credit for going to other activities that bracket the Barrett show.

Lets hope that whoever is encouraging their students to go will do so with a critical eye. The proponents of Barrett's visit have yet to acknowledge that there might be anything wrong with his ideas, and I have to imagine that those are the people who are giving credit for this.



Here is the memo:

October 23, 2006


To: Faculty and Staff


From: Lane Earns, Provost and Vice Chancellor
Petra Roter, Vice Chancellor, Student Affairs


Re: Student Extra Credit for Attendance at Barrett Presentation



It has come to our attention that some faculty members have required student attendance at Kevin Barrett's presentation on Wednesday, August 26th. Since all of the available tickets for the Reeve Theatre presentation have been distributed, as of today, it will be impossible for any student not already in possession of a ticket to attend.


The Campus Greens, who invited Mr. Barrett to campus, chose the Reeve Theatre venue and all subsequent plans have been made accordingly. It is impossible at this late date to change the location of the presentation.


May I suggest that you offer your students the opportunity to attend not only the Barrett presentation, but one or more of the many other fine events and presentations that the campus will host over the remainder of the semester.


We appreciate your efforts to encourage student attendance at campus presentations, but we hope that you will be flexible in terms of extra-credit assignments, given the fact that seating will be limited at the Barrett event.


Thank you for your cooperation regarding this matter.

Academic Freedom at Columbia

The NY Times ran an article (reg. required) about the troubles balancing academic freedom with angry constituencies in Sunday's paper.

The issues,of which Columbia has had 4 in the last few months, are similar to our own. Our own discussion of religion on campus fits. Barrett, of course, is the most divisive issue at the moment. It seems to me that Palmeri and crew might claim that my anti-Barrett comments are similar in spirit to those who caused a brawl during a speaking engagement there.

The article dwells on the political aspects of the controversies at Columbia, noting its attempt to raise its profile in admission.

It also discusses the president's complaints that nuance is being ignored for belligerency.

Any meeting reports?

There were several interesting meetings on campus this week, all of which I missed.

The two that I should have gone to, in particular, were the academic freedom panel on Tuesday and the all-COLs meeting on Thursday.

Are there any readers out there who might post a report?

As I write this post, I stikes me that we should do this as a regular feature of campus life. Someone at these meetings should volunteer to take notes and post a small summary and commentary on the web. Anyone want to sign up for that duty?

**Tony Palmeri has done part of this by posting Miles McGuire's comments on his website.

**Update # 2, The A-T also has a brief story about the meeting. Tom Lammers pointed this out in his comments. I really should consistantly look at the paper.

How did other panelists and audience members respond? Were there many people there?

The Crisis of the Modern University

The New Yorker is running a long book review on this history of universities. It is a thought provoking piece about the divided nature of our occupation. With one foot in the medieval world and one in the modern, universities have always struggled with defining themselves.

The ending suggests that we face a new junction, when we are being faced with a new choice of redefining ourselves as purely profit driven institutions in order to survive. The medieval roots are falling away.

It does make me want to read the book . . .

Adjuncts lower graduation rates

Did you see this story over at Insidehighered.com? A study shows that graduation rates at community colleges decline as percentage of adjunct faculty increases.

The author argues that this is because adjuncts are not paid for time outside the class room.

It makes you wonder if our graduation rates will get worse as we increase our own reliance on adjuncts and part-timers. It would hardly serve our goals if this were the case!

Professors accused of dishonesty on sick-leave

The state legislative audit bureau released its report on UW sick leave policy on Friday. You can read the AP report here.

It has already become another 'reason' for the UW-haters to attack us. We can, of course, add Mark Green to that number, as he seems to think running against the universities will bring him additional votes.

In any case, I think the audit bureau report demonstrates another fundamental misunderstanding of the world of academia. Most of us see flexibility as one of the most important parts of our job. We are not clock-punchers. However, you are more than likely to find us sitting at home on the couch grading or reading that latest journal in our field. Our work does not stop at the office door--instead it is our passion and our life.

Sick-leave is something that is tangential to our work. For example, I have not cancelled a class since I have been here because I was sick. I have, however, spent the rest of one of those days miserable in bed (usually reading material related to my position). Technically, I should have taken a sick-leave day, according to the standards proclaimed by the audit bureau. But then that should also mean that I shouldn't finish that grading or make another revision to that journal submission in the evening or on the weekend. We don't worry about sick-leave because we never really leave our work behind.

The other aspect to this is that unused sick-leave works out as a retirement suppliment to counteract our below-average pay. UW pay has slipped and is getting worse in relation to other academic positions across the country. Providing a boost at retirement is a way to make up for some of the salary loss during our years of service.

In the end, however, since we have no strong advocates in Wisconsin, we will continued to be pummelled by politicians looking only for political points. Administration in Madison will sit meekly by and apologize. Riley and crew will probably be proposing some sort of new, wasteful and onerous reporting requirements. I wish they would spend their energy making people understand why the work we and the UW system do is crucial to the future of our state and our citizens.

A response to Tony's "dialectic" claims from last week

I wanted to respond to Tony's poorly thought-out post about dialectic nature of Kevin Barrett's position, but didn't have the energy. Diamond Dave from Madison did it very well.

I couldn't have said it better myself. . .

Barrett working hard for his 15 minutes of fame

Mostly so that he can keep his name in the press, news has come out that Barrett is assigning a book of essays in his class, which includes one written by himself that compares Bush and Hitler, making an analogy between the Reichstag fire of 1933 and 9/11.

I looked it up and the Reichstag burned, it was used as an excuse to suppress the communists, but the building wasn't actually destroyed. Bad analogy, but then Barrett isn't an expert in anything that we have ever heard him talk about. . .

Regardless, you can read what Madison Law Prof Ann Althouse and her readers have to say about.

The Northwestern did publish a letter from him last week, but I didn't think it was worthy of mention. Tony blogged about it as well.

The whole thing is just a waste of energy--Barrett is such a distraction to the important activities at our institution--but he is good at demanding our attention.

Grade Inflation Discussion sizzles list

SoTL is organizing a forum on Grade Inflation for Halloween. Here is the announcement:

Grades: Tricks or Treats?
Tuesday, October 31, 12 to 2 p.m., Reeve Union 221

A frank discussion on the issue of grade inflation at UW Oshkosh from both faculty and student perspectives. What are the causes? Is it really a problem? Professor Bryan Lilly will moderate the discussion. Panel members include Bill Wresch, Undergraduate Program Director of COBA; John Koker, COLS Interim Dean; and Peter Meyerson, Associate Professor, COEHS. Please bring your own lunch, though “treats” will be provided.

This posting has fired up the discussion list as nothing else has in quite awhile. It began with some thinking about correlation between SOS evaluations and grades in the class. Brian Lilly argues that he has found a clear correlation. Others have written in asking if this is truly a problem. Perhaps the higher average represents better students or students fulfilling requirements better than they used to (Ha!).

It has been a very intriguing discussion and I look forward to the Halloween discussion and more dialogue on our list serve. I suppose I will make a comment about it in more detail myself, when I feel like I have a bit more time.

Back to grading now. . . .

Wells still looking to flee

As announced yesterday, the Chancellor's desire to leave UWO has not waned. He has been nominated as a finalist for a job at the College of Charleston. Does he really expect us to believe that he is not actively pursuing other opportunities?

Just as it did last spring, it still makes sense. Why would he want to put up with all the legislative BS that dominates Wisconsin?


The Northwestern ran a front page story about it this morning
Here is the text of his announcement to the university community:

Dear Elected Officials and Colleagues,


The College of Charleston has just announced that I have agreed to be a finalist for the position of President. I was nominated for the position, and after careful consideration I agreed to be a candidate. Christie and I greatly appreciate and enjoy the support and success of the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh community. We fully realize that if it were not for the support of the outstanding people that comprise UW Oshkosh, the UW System, and the state of Wisconsin, Christie and I would not be in the position to consider this excellent opportunity. For this, we are thankful. The College of Charleston Board of Trustees expects to conclude the search on or before November 1st. I regret any distraction this situation may cause for our academic community, and I will continue, with your help, to stay fully focused on moving forward the priorities of the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh.


Richard H. Wells
Chancellor

Do we take care of our LTEs?

Inside Higher Education reports that Madison is moving a number of long-term limited-term employees from part-time status to full time status. They are also making sure that they are meeting the Madison city's living wage mininum ($10.23/hr).

This is a great thing for Madison to be doing. We should be doing it too. I wonder what our policy is?

Tony accuses me of being a McCarthyite today

I am generally very sympathetic to the arguments and positions that Tony puts forth on his blog, but I have trouble taking seriously his attack on me as a McCarthyite.

I didn't watch the little video he posted, so I am not sure what it says in there.

I just want to come back to the question I posed in yesterday's post. Are we supposed to let all and sundry viewpoints be presented on campus in the name of academic freedom, no matter how repulsive and unfounded they are?

I have never once said that Barrett should be banned from campus or not allowed to speak. I also don't think that 9/11 conspiricists are the equivalent of holocaust deniers.

What I have argued consistently is that we as an institution need to work on our reputation as a solid, intellectual community. Barrett does nothing to enhance that. When the Greens sponsor their candidates for elections, I am very glad to see it. When the Earth Charter brings serious people to campus to discuss important environmental issues, I applaud it. When we have Barrett coming to campus, we have to waste our time dealing with the controvery.

As a final note, I have never made any spurious allegations of illicit infiltration by Communists or demanded that anyone be arrested.

For a few links, here is the chancellor in the Northwestern today.

Here is a philosopher discussing why people believe in conspiracy theories.

Tony continues to defend Barrett

Tony added two more posts about Kevin Barrett today and yesterday. It turns out that part of the reason that Tony is so defensive about the invite to Kevin Barrett is that he was involved in inviting him here to speak.

In any case, as you read all of Tony's defenses of Barrett's views, he continues to refer to the cowardice of the faculty for not embracing, or accepting Barrett's conspiratorial premises.

Barrett is not an expert in any of the topic about which he speaks (except that he is a scholar of Islam who seems to agree with many Islamists), but is convinced that the U.S. Government is evil.

Why is it cowardice to say that this is not what our university should stand for? How is it problematic to say that it only causes us political harm? The reality of the situation is that we teach at a public university, funded by state taxpayers with legislators looking over our shoulders. To give Barrett an unchallenged platform only makes us look foolish.

As Tony is our free-speech expert, I want him to respond to the question I have asked several times--where do you draw the line? Would he be as excited about a speaker who repeatedly pushed the falsehood that Saddam was responsible for 9/11? Would we see this adament defense of a holocaust deniers right to speak and not be challenged on campus? How about those who speak of racial differences in intellegence? Do we have to accept all views as equal in our intellectual community?

Should the Liberal Arts include the Trades?

I found this interesting article this morning, where the author suggests that students should spend their summers in the trades, working with their hands to gain a full appreciation of the human mind.

I find it an oddly compelling argument--building things is not rocket science, but gives you great perspective on how things are put together and challenges your mind in ways complementary to intellectual endeavors.

Enjoy!

Petra Strikes Again

In shades of last spring's uproar over the Freshman Experience course, student government expressed dismay that Student Life didn't bother to consult them about changing the structure of dorm living here. The A-T reported this in Thursday's paper.

There is even a quote from some administrator who says that the students are right in their complaint. He just promises that there will be more consultation in the future.

Student government doesn't have the power of the faculty, so I imagine their complaints will go nowhere. Petra and her staff don't seem to realize that our campus is supposed to be based on shared governance. They are not haughty aristocrats who get to act "in our interests" without bothering to inform us.

The paper editorializes about it here

This is now the third time that Petra and staff have ignored the rules and tried to implement changes without consulting anyone. As I was writing this, I remembered the arbtrary change of movie-viewing policies on campus. I wonder who they will ignore next?

Green attacks UW system

I haven't seen the ad myself, but Gubernatorial candidate Mark Green is running an ad attacking the admissions policies of the UWs.

The link is to a TV station site that points out the misrepresentation in the ad, including the use of actors to portray upset parents.

One of his complaints is high tuition. So should we be expecting him to promise a big reinvestment in the system if he gets elected? Is he going to put some monetary pledges where his mouth is?

Wasteful Wireless on Campus

I just thought I would post a petty post today. I noticed this grand article on the front of the A-T today. We have installed wireless in academic buildings.

In a time of scarce resources, do we really need to spend money on this? I don't see how this is going to enhance learning on our campus. It allows the annoying click of keys and students to randomly surf the web when they should be taking notes. Great!

I suppose I'll now have to circulate to the back of the room to see if students are doing something productive on their laptops during my classes.

If someone can find me a decent pedagogical reason for having this, I'll relent, but I sure can't think of one. . .

Students complain about being checked for plagiarism

High school students in Virgina got written up in the Washington Post for their complaint against Turnitin.com. They claim that the for-profit site steals their intellectual property when they are required to submit versions of their paper to the site without compensation.

The article goes on to discuss a few of the intellectual property right issues, but it mostly raises the question about the validity of the complaint.

Do you think students really worry about the "intellectual property" of a paper written for English class, or are worried about getting caught plagiarism?

We don't subscribe to a service like this, but I catch a plariarist or two a semester, so this would be incredibly useful to me!

Economist attacks higher ed

For a change of pace, here is an attack on the elitism of higher education from the editorialist "Lexington" in the economist. The attacks the increaing inequality of admissions procedures.

It is is a two pronged attack: One against the policy of legacy admissions, including for children of faculty. The second is against diversity policies.

He proposes instead a class-based system in which poor children gain preference.

Most of this doesn't affect us. I don't know that we get special treatment for our children (unfortunately and unusually in the world of academia). We are an incredibly monocultural campus and we are increasingly pricing poorer families out of the system. However, I am not sure that we have a restricted enough admissions policy to turn anyone away!

Does UWO fail in teacher training?

I read this article in the Northwestern yesterday (but I can't find the link, so here is a different story from inside higher ed), about a new study that claims that institutions such as our are doing a bad job training new teachers. He argues that statistics demonstrate that Masters granting institutions like UWO do a much worse job training teachers than PhD-granting schools.

I don't know what the data say about UWO, but if we look at the criticisms that the author levels, we have many of them. Low admissions standards, low graduation standards, high student-faculty ration and low spending per student are a few that we meet.

Does this critique hold water for us? Does it hold for Wisconsin in general? I am not in the school of ed, so I don't know what they might say about this study.

Berube on liberals in academia

The NY Times Magazine ran an editorial piece (reg. required) by Michael Berube about liberals in higher education. Berube has been one of the most outspoken critics of Horowitz and his ilk. This piece, I imagine, fits with the arguments he made in his recently published book.

It goes without saying that I agree with the arguments that Berube is making here and the article is accompanied with a nice chart showing that not much has changed in terms of ideological makeup over the last couple of decades. Professors who identify themselves as moderates have declined, while both left and right have slighly increased.

Low Graduation Rates Raising Questions

The NY Times is running a story today (reg. required) about dropping graduation rates at universities across the country. The focus of the story is on African-Americans, but is clearly applicable to all groups.

Our own 6-year graduation rate is around 43%, if I remember correctly.

These stories always present complicated emotions, because they ignore the question of quality, as if graduation is more important than actually learning something. As we have often discussed on this campus, raising enrollment and graduation rates can most easily be fixed by lowering standards.

That is a path that we shouldn't go down, but it always lurks under the surface in a topic like this.

Oil Change and a Hair Cut

I had been meaning to post a comment on Dean Koker's introductory remarks last Tuesday, but I have been distracted by all of the Barrett arguments.

John Koker gave his address to COLS just over a week ago and I think that it bodes well for the next year. He used the fact that on the day that he was appointed interim Dean, he got both an oil change and a haircut. These two events served as the metaphors for his vision of leadership.

His general theme was that things are going fairly well in COLS, and he doesn't envision major changes. There needs to be routine maintenance and only cosmetic changes.

Koker's relaxed demeanor and friendly attitude should serve the college well over the next year. It is good to see that he had no grand plans for change as well.

We are getting to hire 20 more faculty members this year, so we might actually break even in terms of total numbers. He is promising another 20 next year. This is very good news.

What do readers think should happen in COLS this year? What should we be looking for in a new Dean?

BYU puts 9/11 doubter on paid leave

A BYU researcher in a continuing position, but without tenure, was suspended with pay for claiming 9/11 was caused by explosives.

BYU apparently is notorious for its repression of academic freedoms.

See the story at InsideHigherEd.com

Andy Sabai in the Northwestern about Barrett Visit

In case you didn't see it, Andy Sabai had an editorial published in the Northwestern this weekend. He argues that inviting Kevin Barrett to campus is really about the calls for his removal from various political figures.

He suggests that this is all part of the Green Party's desire for peaceful, progressive change in Amerian politics. As one who has been generally disillusioned by major party politics in this country, I applaud that. It is a shame that they decided that the best way to get their message across is to invite Barrett here.

I would also point you to Prof David Siemers comments to my post entitled, "Andy Sabai responds over at Tony's blog." from Sept. 5. He explains better than I have why the arguments in the letter are problematic.

Wisconsin fails in affordability

A national education group released a report today, rating state college systems. Wisconsin did quite well for education, but received an F for affordability.

Here is a link to the AP story describing the Wisconsin results.

It is a depressing story for students, but it gets even better when you hear UW-hater Rob Kreibich's response, as noted by Wisconsin Radio Network, "The Eau Claire Republican says the report shows the need for the UW system to cap tuition."

No talk about refunding the system after the big cuts or help from the legislature, just more cuts as a way of solving the problem. . . .

Barrett and Intelligent Design

After contemplating Andy Sabai's letter in defense of Barrett, it struck me that argument by believers in 9/11 conspiracies are almost exactly the same as that which comes from supporters of Intelligent Design.

Those who accept Barrett's argument about 9/11 are driven by faith that the Bush administration is an evil regime, aspiring to dominate the world through violence and deception. Thus, you can accept the idea that the government would do something like 9/11. What use is there for real evidence?

IDers do the same thing. If you start with an unshakeable belief that evolution is a secular demon, it doesn't matter that there is 150 years of good scientific evidence supporting the theory.

It was Sabai's comment on Galileo that made this connection for me. I read an article a few months ago about how a few IDers saw Galileo as a hero for challenging the established doctrine. Their attack on evolution seemed to them to be like Galileo's challenge to the church. Sabai, of course, makes exactly the same argument.

Thus, we have the left and the right agreeing in their distrust of reality, for completely different reasons. . . As someone once argued, the political spectrum looks more like a circle than a line!

Perhaps the link between 9/11 conspiracists and holocaust deniers, suggested by a few comenters, is more real than we would like to think. . .

Andy Sabai responds over at Tony's blog

Andy Sabai, chairman of the campus greens, has a response letter posted over at talktotony.

It is a nice thoughtful letter, though I take issue with comparing Barrett to the great scientists who challenged the traditions of the church. They had evidence provided through detailed observation. If Barrett were actually a structural engineer who could demonstrate any of his claims, I might be more inclined to take him seriously. He is a scholar of Islam--how that gives him authority to make claims about the sinister nature of 9/11 is difficult for me to fathom.

In any case, read Andy's response. . .

Tony Palmeri weighs in on Barrett.

Tony has posted a comment on the Barrett visit to campus, arguing that since Barrett has not expressed his conspiratorial views in the classroom, he is protected by academic freedom. He claims that Wells dodged this issue, but I don't see exactly what he means here. Perhaps we'll find out in his part II.

Tony wants to claim that politics should not be taken into account, but unfortunately, that is all Barrett's visit is about. There are few, if any facts or research here. Barrett continuously defames us with his crackpot theories and then claims protection of the academy.

In any case, as one of my irate posters pointed out, he is an adjunct, teaching one lousy course. What claim does he have to the protections of academic freedom? Doesn't that come with some demonstration of scholarship and responsibility, accepted by peers in granting tenure??

I feel like such a conservative in this comment, but giving Barrett a public forum mocks what higher education is about. Well's response of bringing in someone to talk about how crazy conspiratorial beliefs develop seems like a great idea!