Colleges in Dire Financial Straits

[Wahoo Redux]

This is not to say that awful-old-professor should not be fired (we still have ex-colleagues at University of Toxicity where we worked before who we make fun of now, and our current commuter school currently has a ghost professor who haunts the building from time to time) but that such scenarios are eminently human.

But these stories are highly detrimental to drumming up public support for higher education. When you're trying to argue about how important higher education is, it's not going to be good if you seem to shrug off bad teaching as "no big deal; it happens everywhere". To the general public, people who are bad at their jobs deserve to be fired. If tenure seems like a "get out of jail free" card for bad teaching, don't be surprised if voters aren't anxious to increase funding.

Gosh you're smart, Marshy.  Never thought of that.

I think we can bring the argument that these folks are the minority of faculty and that overall academia represents a communal good.

And yeah, it does happen everywhere.  Reasonable people know that.

The conclusion should be 'why put more of your money into a den of thieves?' just because they demonstrate a claim to having been underfunded by some self-validated measurement.

I personally don't know any thieves. 

I sure would like to see us save our teachers and colleges, however.

[jimbogumbo]

This is not to say that awful-old-professor should not be fired (we still have ex-colleagues at University of Toxicity where we worked before who we make fun of now, and our current commuter school currently has a ghost professor who haunts the building from time to time) but that such scenarios are eminently human.

But these stories are highly detrimental to drumming up public support for higher education. When you're trying to argue about how important higher education is, it's not going to be good if you seem to shrug off bad teaching as "no big deal; it happens everywhere". To the general public, people who are bad at their jobs deserve to be fired. If tenure seems like a "get out of jail free" card for bad teaching, don't be surprised if voters aren't anxious to increase funding.

Gosh you're smart, Marshy.  Never thought of that.

I think we can bring the argument that these folks are the minority of faculty and that overall academia represents a communal good.

And yeah, it does happen everywhere.  Reasonable people know that.

The conclusion should be 'why put more of your money into a den of thieves?' just because they demonstrate a claim to having been underfunded by some self-validated measurement.

I personally don't know any thieves. 

I sure would like to see us save our teachers and colleges, however.

Gypsies? Tramps?

[Wahoo Redux]

This is not to say that awful-old-professor should not be fired (we still have ex-colleagues at University of Toxicity where we worked before who we make fun of now, and our current commuter school currently has a ghost professor who haunts the building from time to time) but that such scenarios are eminently human.

But these stories are highly detrimental to drumming up public support for higher education. When you're trying to argue about how important higher education is, it's not going to be good if you seem to shrug off bad teaching as "no big deal; it happens everywhere". To the general public, people who are bad at their jobs deserve to be fired. If tenure seems like a "get out of jail free" card for bad teaching, don't be surprised if voters aren't anxious to increase funding.

Gosh you're smart, Marshy.  Never thought of that.

I think we can bring the argument that these folks are the minority of faculty and that overall academia represents a communal good.

And yeah, it does happen everywhere.  Reasonable people know that.

The conclusion should be 'why put more of your money into a den of thieves?' just because they demonstrate a claim to having been underfunded by some self-validated measurement.

I personally don't know any thieves. 

I sure would like to see us save our teachers and colleges, however.

Gypsies? Tramps?

None that look like Cher. 

One that looked like Sonny.

[mahagonny]

I personally don't know any thieves. 

Right now they're charging me for parking, though I am not allowed on campus.

Any time you're asking for more tax dollars from the taxpayer there will be some conversation about it being coercion.

I sure would like to see us save our teachers and colleges, however.

Sorry I don't know how. I came late to this thread, and probably don't have the same angst as others about the situation of colleges closing.
I'll let the smart people figure it out.

[marshwiggle]

This is not to say that awful-old-professor should not be fired (we still have ex-colleagues at University of Toxicity where we worked before who we make fun of now, and our current commuter school currently has a ghost professor who haunts the building from time to time) but that such scenarios are eminently human.

But these stories are highly detrimental to drumming up public support for higher education. When you're trying to argue about how important higher education is, it's not going to be good if you seem to shrug off bad teaching as "no big deal; it happens everywhere". To the general public, people who are bad at their jobs deserve to be fired. If tenure seems like a "get out of jail free" card for bad teaching, don't be surprised if voters aren't anxious to increase funding.

Gosh you're smart, Marshy.  Never thought of that.

I think we can bring the argument that these folks are the minority of faculty and that overall academia represents a communal good.

And yeah, it does happen everywhere.  Reasonable people know that.

And it never potentially influences giving patterns by alumni (who had profs like that)  or parents of current students (who have profs like that) so it's nothing to worry about. 

[spork]

I don't know if this qualifies as thievery, but I know faculty members who have constructed curricular requirements so that they can regularly teach overloads and thereby earn enough money to pay their children's private school tuition, etc. Another example of student learning being far down on the priority list.

As a reminder, I work at a university like the one TreadingLife describes.

[Wahoo Redux]

This is not to say that awful-old-professor should not be fired (we still have ex-colleagues at University of Toxicity where we worked before who we make fun of now, and our current commuter school currently has a ghost professor who haunts the building from time to time) but that such scenarios are eminently human.

But these stories are highly detrimental to drumming up public support for higher education. When you're trying to argue about how important higher education is, it's not going to be good if you seem to shrug off bad teaching as "no big deal; it happens everywhere". To the general public, people who are bad at their jobs deserve to be fired. If tenure seems like a "get out of jail free" card for bad teaching, don't be surprised if voters aren't anxious to increase funding.

Gosh you're smart, Marshy.  Never thought of that.

I think we can bring the argument that these folks are the minority of faculty and that overall academia represents a communal good.

And yeah, it does happen everywhere.  Reasonable people know that.

And it never potentially influences giving patterns by alumni (who had profs like that)  or parents of current students (who have profs like that) so it's nothing to worry about.

Do you know if the minority of bad faculty influence giving patterns?  Or is this just typical Marshy clueless hyperbolic conjecture?  Do good professors influence giving patterns?  If they do, we are much better off with less adjuncts, I can tell you that much.

[marshwiggle]

When you're trying to argue about how important higher education is, it's not going to be good if you seem to shrug off bad teaching as "no big deal; it happens everywhere". To the general public, people who are bad at their jobs deserve to be fired. If tenure seems like a "get out of jail free" card for bad teaching, don't be surprised if voters aren't anxious to increase funding.

Gosh you're smart, Marshy.  Never thought of that.

I think we can bring the argument that these folks are the minority of faculty and that overall academia represents a communal good.

And yeah, it does happen everywhere.  Reasonable people know that.

And it never potentially influences giving patterns by alumni (who had profs like that)  or parents of current students (who have profs like that) so it's nothing to worry about.

Do you know if the minority of bad faculty influence giving patterns?  Or is this just typical Marshy clueless hyperbolic conjecture?  Do good professors influence giving patterns?  If they do, we are much better off with less adjuncts, I can tell you that much.

Why wouldn't everything from the food in the cafeteria to the friendliness of the custodial staff affect giving patterns? The better a student's overall experience, the more likely that is to translate into donations, and the worse it is the less likely.

It's not like there's some magic threshhold. Each little problem has an effect, so every one which is ignored has a cost. A bunch of minor issues could cumulatively have a very big impact and so anyone who chooses to overlook them does so at their peril.

[mahagonny]

Do you know if the minority of bad faculty influence giving patterns?  Or is this just typical Marshy clueless hyperbolic conjecture?  Do good professors influence giving patterns?  If they do, we are much better off with less adjuncts, I can tell you that much.

Politically wise thing to say. Not proven. BTW, it's 'fewer' adjuncts.

[Wahoo Redux]

Do you know if the minority of bad faculty influence giving patterns?  Or is this just typical Marshy clueless hyperbolic conjecture?  Do good professors influence giving patterns?  If they do, we are much better off with less adjuncts, I can tell you that much.

Politically wise thing to say. Not proven. BTW, it's 'fewer' adjuncts.

"fewer" - of course, much better.

[mahagonny]

Do you know if the minority of bad faculty influence giving patterns?  Or is this just typical Marshy clueless hyperbolic conjecture?  Do good professors influence giving patterns?  If they do, we are much better off with less adjuncts, I can tell you that much.

Politically wise thing to say. Not proven. BTW, it's 'fewer' adjuncts.

"fewer" - of course, much better.

So if some good student says, at graduation (as my daughter did) 'my favorite prof is here. I'd like you to meet him' and he turns out to be a part timer, then we have a problem. It doesn't fit the narrative that the right people, the tenured, want.
This is why I'm not going to beat the drum for more funding. Higher education has problems of its own making. What's missing is a plausible system of linking job performance to career advancement, and the will to make one.

[Wahoo Redux]

I don't think these conversations serve any productive purpose and we've hijacked the thread again.

[marshwiggle]

I don't think these conversations serve any productive purpose and we've hijacked the thread again.

I'm not sure that's true.

So if some good student says, at graduation (as my daughter did) 'my favorite prof is here. I'd like you to meet him' and he turns out to be a part timer, then we have a problem.

If this is what happens, especially at a place that is struggling financially, it ought to be cause for concern, considering what it signifies. Specifically:

• Part-timers often teach courses full-time faculty don't want to teach.
• Part-timers probably aren't active researchers.
• Part-timers often don't even have a PhD.

In other words, all of the "life-of-the-mind, scholarship inspring teaching" etc. of all of the full-time faculty who taught this student did not connect as much as the probably peripheral content delivered by less of an "expert".

In other words, what the institution believes to be its core focus, delivered by its carefully selected and highly qualified experts, did not engage the student as much as something which the "experts" avoided, delivered by someone more extraneous to the institution's mission.

If that doesn't suggest the institution needs to do some soul-searching about why its enrollment is falling, I don't know what would.

[mahagonny]

I don't think these conversations serve any productive purpose and we've hijacked the thread again.

I'm not sure that's true.

So if some good student says, at graduation (as my daughter did) 'my favorite prof is here. I'd like you to meet him' and he turns out to be a part timer, then we have a problem.

If this is what happens, especially at a place that is struggling financially, it ought to be cause for concern, considering what it signifies. Specifically:

• Part-timers often teach courses full-time faculty don't want to teach.
• Part-timers probably aren't active researchers.
• Part-timers often don't even have a PhD.

In other words, all of the "life-of-the-mind, scholarship inspring teaching" etc. of all of the full-time faculty who taught this student did not connect as much as the probably peripheral content delivered by less of an "expert".

In other words, what the institution believes to be its core focus, delivered by its carefully selected and highly qualified experts, did not engage the student as much as something which the "experts" avoided, delivered by someone more extraneous to the institution's mission.

If that doesn't suggest the institution needs to do some soul-searching about why its enrollment is falling, I don't know what would.

Just did a little googling. According to US News and World Report the university is pretty healthy and successful and so are its students. By the way, this professor did have the PhD, and was teaching journalism. Now he's associate professor, same uni, digital media design. I bet he would rather have taught journalism.
Wahoo should like this.

[fast_and_bulbous]

Urbana University to close permanently, citing pandemic

For those of you at UIUC who read that headline, apologies if your heart skipped a beat.