ECONOMIC ILLITERACY. Conference or no, the lack of understanding of economics by people who ought to know better suggests I'll never run out of projects to work on, although a colleague's description of his work as "sand castles" might be more to the point. The latest: a couple of whinges about the state of the academic job market (in some disciplines -- economics departments rely heavily on green cards and work permits) recommended by
Laura at Apt. 11-D. Let's start
here:
And I wouldn't want to give administrators any more reasons than they already have for treating part-time instructors as a great way of balancing budgets and ignoring the true cost of higher ed. The logic of the marketplace is already used too often in American colleges and universities.
The author is that rarity, a freeway flyer who is happy with his two temporary positions at two very different colleges. There are, however, two propositions deceptively packaged as one in the quote. The true costs of higher education are, as the author suggests, quite high. One of the sand castles a colleague has built is a time-intensive course with the objective of fostering mastery of some core proficiencies in economics. In the break after his presentation, I asked him about the chances of persuading the administration that in order to offer that sort of learning experience university-wide, the economics department ought to be sufficiently staffed with faculty members that each faculty member would teach one such course a semester, in order to be able to work intensively with each student and produce quality research. The colleague knows me well enough to recognize I was being outrageous to make a point. The logic of the marketplace, however, precludes that in economics departments, even with starting salaries in the mid $60K range.
The logic of the marketplace, however, is something too often ignored by advocates of the academy. A service that has such serious quality control problems as a
defect rate in excess of 50 percent, a failure rate among entering employees in excess of 50 percent (including economics, although there is no great mismatch between tenure track positions offered and tenure track applicants in the labor pool), and continued denial by
senior administrators (if I keep
this up, I will end up with 99 theses to nail to a cathedral door, won't I?) is hardly a paradigm of market-driven thinking. (And it is worth remembering that there is an element of market competition -- school choice -- in the academy that is missing from the primary and secondary schools that provide our students, many of whom the administration is not worthy of serving.)
The passage that really calls for a fisking, however, is Lucy Snowe in the latest (where do they get these people)
Jobs article (in the
Chronicle of Higher Education.
It has often been remarked of college teaching that in no other profession do people compete so ardently for stakes that are so low. One might add that in few other professions do employees behave as if those who are at the bottom of the hierarchy are Untouchables. What will it take for powerful people in academic departments to acknowledge that their humanity, their core decency, would be enhanced if they practiced the liberal values they espouse so passionately in the classroom? If the literary canon can be expanded to include the work of women and minority writers, why can there not be a seat at the table for adjuncts and lecturers at faculty meetings?
Speak for yourself. But do better than this.
And we all know (choose your favorite cliche) that it's survival of the fittest, that it's the law of supply and demand, that life is unfair, that beggars can't be choosers, that nobody held a gun to your head and forced you to write a dissertation, that sanitation workers earn more than most academics, and that people who can't write teach.
Wasn't it Paul Fussell, long ago, who compared the academy with the ancient courts and salons (Northern Illinois defers to Northwestern defers to Harvard, except on Saturdays) rather than to any open institution whether a government agency in a republic, or a business in a competitive market? The court model describes the behavior of the Anointed relative to the Untouchable, much more accurately than any analogy from government or business. (The wisecrack, "I'm not running for Congress, I don't have to be nice," is not without its point.)
To talk about those liberal values is to laugh. Visit
Critical Mass:
In my selective perception it seems that with the exception of fraternity "ghetto" parties and other acts of hate speech that are grossly insensitive but harm nobody's physical person nor property, a very high proportion of contemporary campus racial incidents are fake.
The fakes are often the ones that get the Undies of the Anointed in a bundle.
John at Discriminations has extended coverage of just how bundled some undies are, at the Claremont colleges. On the other hand, questioning the intellectual capabilities of people in business or in government, particularly if they are Republicans, is often all in a day's work for the Anointed.