Pepper-Sprayed for being Non-Violent

Wow! The campus police made a big mistake. Students at the University of California at Davis were pepper sprayed as they sat peaceful arms linked together protesting non-violently. And if being pepper sprayed isn’t bad enough, they were also jabbed with police batons. Thank goodness for everyone shooting footage because the public can have an eyewitness account of the unnecessary act of the campus police. The officers who sprayed the students were suspended with pay and according to reports, Chancellor Linda Katehi, is the person who ordered the police to use the pepper spray. Once word got out of this, students and some faculty called for her resignation. Katehi issued a statement saying she would form a committee to investigate what happened and report to the campus community within 90 days.

What started the whole ordeal was police were ordered to remove the students and their tents from the premises. The students were part of the Occupy movement, in which they were protesting against economic inequality, tuition increases, budget cuts at the University of California, and interestingly enough police conduct. The students ignored the request by the police to disperse, so then the students were peppered sprayed and were physically removed one-by-one. Katehi called for a review of student conduct policy to find out if the police did or did not act in accordance with policy. And if they did, then she wants to change the policy so that students can protest within reason and not worry about being harmed by campus police.           

Katehi is drawing much criticism from everyone. The president of the University of California system issued a statement saying the incident was appalling and there needs to be an effort made to ensure peaceful protests go unharmed. On Saturday, the day after the incident, students’ anger rose to which they protested against Katehi by lining the walkway from the office to her car as she exited the campus. Students did not say a word they just stood around her in silence. Katehi did not acknowledge them at all. Katehi issued a statement saying she would address the students in the coming days and that she needs to regain the students’ trust, so the first thing she did was place the chief of police on administrative leave Monday morning after gathering more information. Even observers in the community who do not agree with the Occupy movement, showed sympathy toward the students and agree that the police were out of line with over aggressive actions.

In closing, it will be interesting to see if Katehi retains her position. I feel she has a lot of explaining to do and she obviously does not understand student protest. If she was the person who ordered the use of the aggressive action by campus police, she should be removed or state that she was wrong in her decision. She has yet to do either. I think what she should have done was went out to where the students were protesting and speak to them as her students instead of stereotyping them as an out-of- control mob. One would think that she would have student affairs qualities mastered by now to be able to reach out or show compassion for the students. This was a good lesson for her of what not to do during a non-violent student protest.

 http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/11/21/experts-and-activists-question-use-pepper-spray-davis#ixzz1eRvb7Dfa

       

Chilean Protests

Chilean Protests over Higher Education
Chilean students’ have been protesting all semester about the high costs of tuition for higher education to get the governments attention to help pay for school or lower the costs. The Chronicle published many articles about this, one of them speaking how Chile has one of the highest costs of tuition (http://chronicle.com/blogs/global/thousands-march-in-chile-to-protest-high-cost-of-college/29612) for higher education based on the per capita income. Students obviously are outraged by this and shown from these chili protests photos. (http://photoblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/05/12/6633605-chilean-students-throw-rocks-get-blasted-by-water-cannons-while-protesting-education-system)
In June of 2011, the protests began with some high school students who were protesting about attending the poorly funded private secondary schools. However, this carried over to the University of Chile and its students very quickly because of the extremely high costs of University of Chile’s tuition is. Times Higher Education (http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=417904) wrote a report describing how Chile has very low levels of public spending on higher education, but has very high tuition costs which THE describes as the highest student fees in the world. Many of the students who attend higher education in Chile are usually first generation enrollees. Many of them come from very low income backgrounds. They do have a chance of obtaining financial aid, but the interests rates are hovering around 5.5%, and are expected to start payment immediately after graduation. Due to this, students have been protesting the decision of the University for almost 6 months now.

There have been some negotiations that have tried to take place, but the students’ are not budging on anything right now the University is trying to deal with them. A majority of the talks are about student loans, scholarships (who is granted them and how much), and what happens when students can not pay their fees.

I know this is would probably never happen on a college campus in the US, but what if it did. Could a student protest, usage of the first amendment right, with enough attention, grant colleges to lower the cost of their tuitions if enough students stopped attending? I understand the need for higher education in today’s day and age, but if there were peaceful protests, and not violent ones where public bystanders would be in fear of getting hurt and not be for the students ideals, could enough students have enough power to withhold the government? Are there too many students who would not join a protest in fear of not getting their diploma? I know it couldn’t happen because how driven people are in the US, but it sure would be quite a skeptical to see if it happened.

How Far Would You Go To Pay Off Student Loans?

A popular blog topic for this class seemed to be student loans and repayment. Some of the discussions have focused on educating students about loans before they sign, loan forgiveness, and repayment plans. I am guessing that most of us will graduate with loans. I have been very frugal when taking out loans but even with a small amount of loan, I am not looking forward to the day my repayment plan begins. I could think of many things I would do to have those loans simply wiped away. FYI: None of these things are illegal or unethical, in case you were wondering. However, that is not the case for everyone.

An article in the Chronicle discussed one former student, Michael Vivenzio, had a unique loan repayment plan...selling marijuana. Yep, you read that right. This particular student had around $100,000 in student loan debt. He moved to Oregon to grow and sell pot with a friend. Unfortunately, for Mr. Vivenzio, he was caught and sentenced to two and a half years of prison and a pretty hefty fine. In addition, the authorities seized 831 marijuana plants and $27,000 in cash from Mr. Vivenzio. Quite the business they had, I guess. Vivenzio had managed to repay about $80,000 before he was arrested.

What a lot of graduates are not aware of is that there are many loan forgiveness programs available. These programs are sponsored by the Federal Government and can erase anywhere from a few thousand dollars of loan to $100,000 dollars in loans. This seems like a good deal to me. The options of professions to go into, however, are somewhat limited but can lead to quality careers. Some of the fields include: teaching, medical, nursing, mental health, and legal.

Some grads complain that there is an absence of job possibilities but I wonder if some of them are aware of the loan forgiveness programs available or maybe they just want to the government to pay their student loans without putting in any effort. While I will never condone selling drugs, I think this article shows the extent some may go to in order to pay off their student loans. $100,000 is a lot of student loan debt. I wonder if Vivenzio had anyone is his life educating him about student loans. This can help us remember the importance of educating the students we work with so they do not get themselves in so deep with dept that they feel overwhelmed and as if there is no way out.

Library Drama: Forget the Books, Give Me Video Games

The value of the college library has significantly declined over the years. Libraries were once recognized as the cornerstone of the institution. Today libraries fight to prove that they still serve as a useful resource for today’s college students. Many of our class discussions have resulted in a debate on whether or not libraries are necessary and if students can get the same benefit by utilizing on-line resources. Throughout the debate it was determined that institutions are reducing costs by relying on electronic text and journal articles instead of traditional books. What if I told you that libraries are using their savings to bring gaming centers and video games to campus? Yes, college libraries are creating gaming space for students to play, rent, and learn the history of gaming.

An article in The Chronicle of Higher Education highlights multiple universities around the world who are “adapting to the needs of students” by introducing gaming centers in the library. The University of Calgary will soon open the doors to the Taylor Family Digital Library which will house a retro gaming space. The project cost the institution $175 million dollars to build. Likewise, the University of Michigan forked over $20, 000 to enhance its archive of video games. Author Ben Wieder highlights many professors who believe that the historical contexts of video games should be known by all students who are seeking a degree in media relations.

As you might imagine, libraries have been met by a fair share of resistance. In 2009 Miami University was suffering from budget cuts which resulted in the library losing 15 staff members. Today you will find the university “rolling out 42-inch plasma screens and Xboxes.” The new additions didn’t necessarily go over well with faculty. What’s the solution? Ms. Santucci, the colleges assistant dean for instruction and emerging technologies, reports that she makes sure not to bring out new equipment “too soon after cuts are announced.” I sure would hate to be one of the staff members who was let go due to budget cuts only to find a library full of brand new flat screen televisions and gaming consoles.

I am a big fan of video games and I trust that students can learn meaningful lessons while playing. The hardcore gamers are increasingly becoming more critical of video game producers. They demand that the characters and scenes in games are consistent with the events that have taken place throughout our history. However, I have a hard time understanding the motivation to bring gaming to the library. I trust that any and all gaming can be carried out within the confines of the student’s residences. I find it appalling that library personnel are losing their jobs in order for institutions to bring the latest, greatest games and consoles to campus. I feel that this article serves as a symbol of the efforts libraries are making to stay relevant on today’s college campuses. If gaming centers are the answers, I believe the presence of libraries on college campuses looks grim.

Respone to Occupy Protests

A Chronicle of Higher Education article, November 16, 2011, discusses the Occupy Protests at the University of California - Berkeley. Recently there was a violent altercation between protestors and the campus police who were trying to enforce rules that barred them from camping overnight. The students joined arms to create a barrier around the protest area and were met with police who hit them with batons and pulled their hair. The immediate reaction from University President, Robert Birgeneau, was to release a statement condemning the actions of the protesters, claiming that their linking of arms was beyond passive resistance. He reminded the students some of the most successful protests have utilized passive resistance to push their message.

Students quickly became outraged as they viewed the presidents response as a lack of support for them. They argued that campus police were out of line when they used batons and resorted to physical violence against protesters. The President released a followup statement that took a softer line against the protesters. He claimed that because he was in Asia at the time, he had limited access to the internet and was not able to view the videos of the clash that showed the force utilized by campus police.

The article goes on to state that protests on campus require balancing free speech, keeping the campus safe, and managing public perception. Some schools are having a harder time with this than others. Idaho State University has flipflopped on its approach to dealing with occupy protesters. According to the article they initially approved a permit for an overnight protest, then tried to limit the protest to daytime hours, and then allowed the overnight protest anyway when demonstrators ingnored instructions. Seattle Community College officials have expressed their view that they do not have the legal authority to prevent protesters from occupying city park. The Supreme Court has ruled that colleges can limit when protests can occur without limiting free speech and it seems that some colleges are better at this than others.

Students at Duke and Harvard have reported that the rapport with administration is actually quite amicable. At Duke, protesters have asked to be made aware of any weddings that are planned at a local chapel so that they do not disrupt the services. Harvard was checking student ID's prior to allowing students to enter Harvard Yard, but since demonstrators have been so well behaved, this has become less necessary. As the article points out, it is interesting that Berekely who has such a history of student activism has a President who is flipflopping on policy regarding student protest. Of all schools it would seem that UC-Berkeley would have set policies in place.

I wonder if the problem with having set standards for dealing with protests is difficult considering the varying dynamics of student protest, including size of the demonstrations, the possible presence of competing protesters, and historical background of the issue being protested, for example. I'm guessing this is probably the case. I wonder though, if we can do a better job of planning for student protests so that we do not appear to flipflop when we set standards for student conduct.

Gender Inequitites in Mathematical Acheivement

In my current edition of Journal of College Admission, I read an article titled "Gender Inequities in University Admissions Due To The Differential Validity of the SAT". The article attempts to explain the gender inequity in higher education and seems to blame the SAT for that difference. The hypothesis is that the mathematical portion of the exam is biased toward male test-takers, therefor unfair to female test-takers, which in turn effects the type of institution that each sex would be admitted to.

Males generally score 35-50 points higher on the quantitative portion, where the English and reading portions of the exam are pretty even. What or whom is to blame for the disparity? The author of this article says it is social cultural norms. This is a much better answer than what was given 30 years ago....genetic differences. The author also indicates that there is a threat to girls for doing well in math, so some of the reason they may not do well on that section of the SAT is purely psychological (clearly a more reliable study is needed here). A more scientific explanation for modern gaps could be that geometry, statistics and data analysis are the areas where high school men tend to outperform women. More than 40% of the quantitative assessment is in these areas. So, women are already set up to underperform on the SAT compared to men.

What I do not understand is where the author seems to get the idea that women are under-represented in higher education these days. Hasn't everything I have been reading of late talk about the reverse? In fact, I just completed "Why Boys Fail", an entire book about the fact that men are not entering colleges at the rate of women. So, I am a little unclear on what the author of this article is referring to. He could be talking about certain types of institutions where men are more likely to enroll than women or perhaps it is certain academic majors that are more likely to admit men than women.

This was the backdrop for my final blog. Are there gender inequities in certain majors? Being that my employment experience has been at a school that specializes in education and health care (fields typically dominated by women), my institution has historically been 60/40 where more women are enrolled than men.

One of the points in this article was that College Board, who is the company that authors the SAT, apparently admits that the quantitative portion is geared to those skilled in certain elements of mathematics. The areas that it measures however are not deemed to be the most important indicator of college success....so, then why ask these questions?

I really have not ever understood the point of standardized testing, and prior to a meeting I attended earlier this month, I might have been among the first to say that college admission should not focus so much on the scores of these standardized assessments. However, I had the opportunity to go to a College Readiness workshop conducted by ACT, org. I learned a lot at this session. Specifically, I learned about how the different scores translate to having met certain competencies. For anyone who does not remember the scoring of the ACT, it is on a 36 point scale. Science reasoning, English, reading and mathematics are evaluated. What I did not know prior to this workshop was that a student scoring a 14 on a certain subject was actually only meeting the competencies of an 8th grader (as determined by the ACT, Org., of course).

The admissions director at a public institution in the state of Colorado, has quite a bit of flexibilty to admit students with varying scores. Students are admissible based on a high school gpa as well as their test scores. If a gpa is higher, there is more room to have a slightly lower ACT score and vice versa. I have seen students be admitted with scores hovering around that 14 mark for a composite score. This means they are at 8th grade knowledge. Is it a disservice to admit them into college? I am now starting to think that it is.

But, is it just the proposed gender inequity mentioned above that leads to lower scores? There has been speculation about cultural sensitivity and lack of culturally reposnisive questions on those tests as well. So, I guess , more than anything, I just find myself wondering about the future of standardized tests. Will they change? Will we change? Will they always carry the weight that have in the college admission process? Some research shows that fewer colleges and institutions are requiring these scores. Only 75% of then require the SAT score in 2010-2011, according to the article.

I guess we will wait and see!

Engaged Adjunct Faculty May Lead to Engaged Students...

Since the last weekend class, I have thinking about the role of adjunct faculty in higher education. As discussed in class, issues of higher education are complex and intertwined. Prior to the class discussions, I had a simplistic view of the relationship between adjunct faculty, higher education, and students. I believed adjunct faculty played a crucial role but were simply undervalued by administration. In my mind the way to improve adjunct faculty morale was to increase their pay. However, the discussions during the last weekend class enlightened me to the fact that not only is throwing money at an issue fiscally incompetent, it would probably do little as a long term solution. So, I set out explore viable alternatives.

I found an article that sought to explore through qualitative inquiry of 85 participants at a medium sized public four year institution, the experiences of adjunct faculty. The researchers were interested in the effect the sense of inclusion by adjunct faculty had on students and faculty. According to the author’s literature review, most of the research available pertains to community colleges and focuses primarily on the increasing numbers of adjunct faculty in the system of higher education. Although the researchers did acknowledge that a few universities are striving to promote a sense of inclusivity among the adjunct faculty, the vast majority do not. The researchers felt their data would draw a connection between adjunct faculty’s sense of inclusivity in the institution and overall student engagement.

Three prevailing themes emerged from the data collection. The first theme, receiving outreach, involved the adjunct faculty’s perception of and experiences related to inconsistent outreach, messaging, and communication from and across the institution. Mentoring emerged as a strong sub theme and a possible solution to address the lack of connectedness reported by some adjunct faculty. The next theme focused on challenges and the relation to teaching. The last theme identified by the researchers, developing skills, related particularly to professional development opportunities, specifically the lack of professional opportunities.

After analyzing and integrating the data related to the aforementioned themes, the researchers shared possible recommendations for institutions to implement to improve the sense of inclusion among adjunct faculty members. The recommendations narrowed down to advocacy and programming components. In relation to advocacy, the authors suggest some very simple steps that may be taken by administration to promote engagement with adjunct faculty members such as meeting with them for five minutes per week. The programming components suggested by the authors seemed quite simple to institute as well. Many respondents reported email dysfunction because some faculty do not have email access over the summer, or their email address may not include their full name as one of the main reasons for their feelings of disconnect from the campus. At the institution where I work, it was only within the last year that adjunct faculty’s email address actually included their full name. Prior to that, only full-time faculty had the honor of their email address including their full name. The authors recommended making access to email comparable to their full-time counterparts to better develop a sense of campus connectedness among adjunct faculty members.
Although I am a novice student to the world of qualitative research, I can appreciate the methodology employed by the researchers to collect, analyze, and integrate the data. The overall goal of the researchers was to gain an understanding to the question: How do adjunct faculty members describe their experience as a member of an institution of higher learning. Before reading this article, I only had anecdotal information gleaned from conversations with adjunct faculty. By administering open ended survey questions, the researchers were able to identify common repeated themes among the respondents.

Having been a part time staff member recently, albeit not a faculty member, I related to the feelings of disconnect reported by the survey respondents. It seems counterproductive for institutions to marginalize the front-line individuals most readily available to promote engagement with the students they serve. Although student engagement is typically a campus-wide initiative, faculty are typically the folks that students interact with on a regular basis throughout the semester. If the adjunct faculty members are feeling disconnected from the institution how can they be expected to be authentic in promoting a sense of belongingness among the students?

The Plagiarism Conflict Continues....

Using someone else’s words, ideas or research without giving the appropriate credit....this is plagiarism! As the increase in the use of technology, along with the fact that more and more academic materials are available on line, there seems to be an increase in plagiarism across the universities. According to the article, Plagiarism, Academic Dishonesty on the Rise Among College Students, there is more cases of plagiarism to investigate these days. Some of the increase in the number of cases reported may be due to the resources being used to check for plagiarism that are available to college professors. It is so easy to copy and paste from internet sites right into the contents of a paper. Such a simple process but consequences ranging from letters of reprimand to permanent expulsion from a university.

How can plagiarism be avoided among college students? First, the students need to be educated about what is plagiarism, how and when to cite others’ work, and how to avoid it altogether. Second, professors can help in avoiding by asking students to compare and contracts particular articles where they have a good understanding of the material being presented or they can ask questions that ask for opinions and reflections. Third, work on the “honor” code within the university setting. Try and influence the students to monitor each other and ask questions when they are not clear on a citation. Forth, the university needs to have strong policies with both explanations of what is considered plagiarism and details of the the consequences. And finally, there needs to be a system of follow through whether this includes rewriting a paper or dismissing the student, it is important for everyone to see the consequences being taken seriously. Each university needs to create a culture of honesty and an environment where credit is given on all levels from staff, students to tenure faculty.

But what happens when plagiarism is happening between university professors? Journal Editors’ Reaction to Word of Plagiarism? Largely Silence is a disturbing article that was posted today in the Chronicle of Higher Education. Lior Shamir, from Lawrence Technical University, is a computer science professor that recently discovered that a paper he presented in a conference in 2006 was “borrowed” some 21 times. Two professors from Iran published a similar paper in 2010 that had some identical wording and continued to utilize his work, his words and ideas in eight different publications with absolutely no credit to Mr. Shamir. As he researched and contacted many authors, journals and editors, he was shocked to receive only a few replies. He was hoping for the editors and the journals to retract such articles and was even hoping for some apologies. None of this happened. One professor acknowledge that portions of Mr. Shamir’s paper was copied but blamed it on the graduate assistant that was the co-author of their paper. But this very professor failed to acknowledge that this same paper had been published for a second time this year still without the proper credit! Another professor responded that “only one page had been copied” with no apology or retraction. If the editors are allowing this practice to go on without any consequences, they are in essence allowing plagiarism to continue.

University professors are supposed to be the role models in the area of plagiarism. What about integrity, honesty and ethics? These characteristics need to start from the top and be expected at all levels. Such dishonest practices can not be tolerated at the professor level and writings should be protected by strict and ethical guidelines.

Plagiarism is not going to go away but it should be an area of focus for universities to produce honest and ethical students and to uphold the same expectations of their professors, as well!

Accreditation and the Winners (or Losers?) of Tighter Policies

The recent article on InsideHigherEd.com, Raising the Bar on Quality Assurance, really struck a chord with me. Now let me say up front, I’m not sure if it was a positive or negative chord but it got me to thinking and debating with myself at any rate. The article talks about the Western Association of Colleges and Schools (WASC) accrediting body considering how to find a way to make their institutions more accountable for student outcomes. One of the major components they’ve considered is requiring five graduation proficiencies including written and oral communication, critical thinking, quantitative skills and information literacy. Other components include an “offsite review process,” comparing your institution to others for graduation proficiencies and making the accreditation process more translucent. For now, the only component that is being mandated is that colleges define a “stated level of proficiency” for each of the five graduation proficiencies.

There are pros and cons to the WASC, or any accrediting body for that matter, increasing accountability and structure. Just from the article and what I thought immediately:

Pros:
• Students almost guaranteed to graduate with core proficiencies
• Colleges are held more accountable for the education they’re providing
• More competition could mean more consistency across accrediting bodies
• Focus on retention and graduation
• May make public more aware of regionally accredited institutions and the implications of attending a non-accredited institution

Cons:
• How do you prove proficiencies without implementing standardized testing?
• Could lead to all institutions looking the same and therefore losing individuality
• More accreditation policy means heavier government involvement and more work to be done by everyone involved. How is this maintainable?
• Heavier focus on retention and graduation rates may not always be focused on student development and learning.
• More policy will only require institutions to “do what they have to do” to comply
• Comparison of institutions could lead to more pressure on ranking systems (example US News & World Report)
• Could lead to competition across accrediting bodies that lead to inequality in institutions

The issue of regional accreditation policies and what that means for students is something that affects my job every day. While the space of this blog doesn’t allow me to go into how I feel about every one of the pros and cons listed above, I’d like to share one of my biggest concerns and know what others think about this topic.

One of the worst parts of my job is having to tell a student that they went to an unaccredited institution that UNC will not accept credit from. To be fair, I wonder how many high school/college-aged students know what an institution being regionally accredited (or not) even means. I didn’t know anything about accreditation until I started working at UNC, and I count my lucky stars I went to a regionally accredited institution without knowing better.
A pro to further discussion of the WASC to have stronger requirements is that perhaps this would bring the topic into common conversations and news and bring a larger awareness of regional accreditation and what that means for students attending non-accredited institutions. Honestly, however, this is probably a pipe dream; it will only become a common place conversation if media outlets and the government decided to bring it to the fore-front of policy decisions.

The con to this is who suffers when there are harsher restrictions on regional accreditation? I would venture to say that it is first-generation students and those who do not know which questions to ask who are getting recruited to non-accredited institutions (a topic that could be an entire different blog topic in itself). If I’m a first-generation student and maybe a minority and do go to a regionally accredited institution without knowing better, will I have the support to not only make it through my education but then pass a proficiency exam after working hard through school?

I think there is a lot to be considered when looking at tightening regional accreditation. I definitely don’t think it’s all bad but I think the focus needs to remain on the student and consideration should be had about who is really being affected.

RateMyProfessors.com: This post is Chili-Pepper hot!

One of the top stories in the Chronicle of Higher Education this week focused on the web site, www.RateMyProfessors.com.  This site has been around for approximately 10 years, and allows students to rate their professors based on factors like helpfulness, clarity, easiness, and overall effectiveness.  Additionally, the site allows students to provide a chili pepper icon to students who may find physically attractive, or “hot”. 

Anecdotally, the site has been controversial since its inception.  Criticisms of the site include that it is not comprehensive.  There is a distinction between clarity and easiness and teaching effectiveness.  However I scanned the site for an old professor of mine and found that students were quite honest, acknowledging when she was very hard but effective.

Through my undergrad and master’s programs, I have had conversations with my professors about how they felt about being portrayed on the site.  Professors with good ratings and chili peppers did not mind at all.  In fact they felt honored and amused by the ratings and feedback they got from the site, whereas the professors I spoke with who had more constructive ratings did not really care about what the site had to say.  I am not sure whether not I believe that, or if they were initiating a personal defense mechanism.  Either way, none of the professors I spoke with took the site particularly seriously.

According to the article in the Chronicle, some professors are highly concerned about how their rating on the site may or may not impact their very real career prospects.  One even went so far as to say that this website will potentially impact a professor’s ability to gain tenure at a particular institution as a result of the ratings.  While the article does not cite an example of this actually happening, it does outline the level of fear that exists amongst the academic community.

Another criticism is that the site is incredibly reactionary, drawing those who have either had extraordinarily positive or extraordinarily negative experiences with any given professor.  The argument is that the sample is self selected, and therefore likely inaccurate.  To investigate this, two research articles have been published on this exact topic.  The researchers found that while the language may be cruder than what might be found on a traditional course evaluation, the general sentiment by students on a particular instructor directly reflects what is found on their course evaluations facilitated by their institutions.  This pattern held to be true, even with a sample as small as 10 ratings and did not change with a sample of up to 50 ratings.

This has very interesting implications, especially since UNC has gone to online course evaluations.  Matt mentioned in class that the response rate for course evaluations has plummeted, but I wonder if the overall quality of responses will change much.  I believe that this new online course evaluation may allow students to feel less inhibited and therefore more honest about their experiences.  At the same time, why even bother with online evals if a third party is already doing it for us?  (did you get that neo liberal jab J)

A shooting on the Berkeley campus

I'm not sure where, if anywhere, this posting fits, but I was moved to comment so here it is.

As I was searching the higher education news websites looking for the topic of this next blog, I noticed that police shot an armed student yesterday after he pointed his gun at them on the University of California Berkeley campus yesterday.  The story caught my eye for a couple of reasons.  First, as we know, we discussed the issue of guns on campus earlier this year and that brought about many lively discussions regarding the benefits and detriments of weapon possession (concealed-carry) to campus safety.  As is often the case, the lively discussion calmed while shootings remained out of the headlines for a few weeks.  Unfortunately, Berkeley is the site of the latest tragedy.  This post is not a direct follow-on to the question of whether or not the situation might have played out differently if one of his fellow students was armed.  In all honesty, that discussion does not matter to me as much as the possible reason for this student’s decision to go to the campus brandishing a weapon.

Reading the story, it sounds as if this might have been a case of suicide by police officer.  The individual involved had apparently mentioned two previous suicide attempts on his personal website – a site that was removed from the web shortly after the incident.  From the Chronicle article, it is not clear whether anyone from the university was aware of that information before yesterday.  As many who work in higher education are aware, this time of year is particularly stressful for some students. Projects and papers are due and final exams loom.  Two weeks ago, the Chronicle ran an article titled, Can Student –Affairs Professions Help in a Time of Stress?  Whereas that article was specifically discussing the topic of financial stress, it is an appropriate question for those of us who can literally be lifelines for students in need of counseling, support, and caring.  Amongst our own busy lives, I encourage each of us to keep an eye out for students who seem to be flailing or withdrawing.  Genuine and kind words may not be enough to alleviate a student’s stress completely, but the simple act of showing that you care could end up saving a life. 

This Saturday, November 19, 2011, is International Survivors of Suicide Loss Day.  According to the event flier, “This is a day for survivors of suicide loss, their family and friends and the clinicians who support them.”  For any of you who have lived through the loss of a loved one through suicide, I hope that you will consider sharing your experience and your strength with others who share a pain similar to yours.  There are far too many people who take their own lives, and an even greater number of survivors who face the challenge of continuing to live in the aftermath.

Worldwide Social Protests: How Is Higher Education Affected?

In the last few years there have been strong expressions of public disapproval worldwide over the lack of efficiency of political systems and how these systems fail to fulfill the demands of the people within a context of extreme capitalism.

The social and economic unrests of the global economic crisis have raised a new awareness among citizens with respect to the effectiveness of their form of government; in many instances that form of government is a democracy, at least on its face. A combination of both a democracy and a capitalist system is now referred to as “democratic capitalism”.

This growing public discontent with politics and the omnipresent capitalist system in the western world and beyond have forced people to take to the streets. We are in a situation where the most basic demands and concerns of people are often ignored and the divide between the power elites and the population at large is growing. As Stefano Bartolini, has indicated, “most mainstream parties in Western democracies have lost their capacity to represent and channel the voices and demands of mass electorates.”

According to Wolfgang Streek, director of the renowned Max-Planck- Institute in Germany, the inherent tensions of democratic capitalism are fundamentally: “the inevitable dispute between social demands and economic interests.” Streek argues: “the issue is how far states can go in imposing profit expectations of the markets on their citizens, while avoiding having to declare bankruptcy and protecting what may still remain of their democratic legitimacy.”

The Worldwide Occupy Movement, is only the most recent expression of this challenge. In fact, there are many global manifestations and specific demands that relate to all levels of education. For instance, in Europe, thousands of students protested over student fees in the UK . As reported in The Guardian students marched to protest against tuition fee hikes and the “privatization” of the higher education system. In the Americas, students have demonstrated against education cutbacks and tuition increases, e.g.: in Chile protesters have demanded more funding to the public education system. In Puerto Rico students went on a two-month strike following an attempt by university officials to increase tuition and thus limiting access to education for lower income students. In Africa, students boycotted classes to demand student aid and better living conditions. Higher education’s reform is the central issue of Arab protests.

As long as the contradictions and tensions of democratic capitalism in the 21^st century continue to be unresolved, social and economic unrests will continue to spread throughout the world. If we are to provide a solution to these tensions, inevitably something will have to give. Political and economic leaders must provide avenues for all people to be included in a truly democratic and social justice context.

According to Diamond (2011) the purpose of social democracy is to ameliorate inequality, to promote social and economic justice and to supplant markets with politics.

Adopting a socio-democratic system whereby social based values are embraced and social-based programs are enhanced while allowing a well regulated and moderate capitalist system might be the solution. In such a context, education at all levels including public higher education will be given the attention it deserves.

.

Another Case of Academic Freedom (or lack there of)

I find that I am consistently entertained by reports of what faculty members do or don't do in their classrooms. Perhaps these situations should be taken more seriously than I tend to take them, but I cant help it. I find many faculty members to be quite eccentric and therefore I find there actions entertaining. I mentioned once in a blog comment that I had a faculty member who did not allow sneezing or coughing in her class. It was actually in the syllabus! Of course, that terrified me as 19 year old undergrad, but looking back at it...it was quite funny! if nothing ele these oddities help students learn about working with others, how to adjust to odd social situations, and how respect peoples differences



This title of this article Will Teach for Food grabbed my attention. Upon first glance it would appear as though a "seasoned" faculty member will walk out of his psychology class if the students do not bring handmade snacks to class. This does seem unreasonable...perhaps eccentric...perhaps crazy....at the very least, weird. Turns out the faculty member requires students to get into groups and work through a snack schedule. If, on any given week the snack does not show up, he will walk out and class is cancelled. And that is what happened last week when one section of his course failed to bring a snack, he left. Clearly, students are reportedly upset. Although I wonder how upset they really were...have you seen many students upset when a class is cancelled?



In reading the article further, the professor defends his actions and claims that his policy is justified as well as purposeful and intentional. He claims that he is teaching about group work- accountability, working as a team, making a a plan and executing it. He says he has seen student culture change a lot in his career and he finds that students are more inclined to do what is asked when they know othesr depend on them. I would agree with that observation...intrinsic motivation seems to be a lost art. Opponents of his requirement believe that what he is trying to teach is fine, but that it is the way he does it that is not okay. Rather than relating to food, one person said the lesson could be acheive better, it could be related to the maintenance of the equipment in the lab, for example. Each student has a responbility to take care of soemthing in the room. Whatever, I think we all know that students are more likely to pay attention and respond to a message when food is involved!



An element that was not addressed in the article that I had thought about was the cause and effect (psychology term- behavioral modification). Of course he has to leave the class when the students end of the deal was broken. If he not cancelled class and continued to teach that day, the students would not have learned their lesson about commitment. of course, the students have now also learned that if they don't want to have class that day, all they need to do is bribe the kid with snack-duty and convince him not to bring the treats.



Of course, there are actions of faculty members that I do take more seriously and those that do merit disciplinary actions, as we have discussed in class. But this is not one of them :)

Is this really Higher Education? I'm not sure I want to be a part of it...

I tried to ignore this story for a while but now I can’t ignore what I am seeing. When I first heard the words “sex scandal” and “Penn State” last weekend, I shut it off in my head. Didn’t have time to think about it, didn’t want to deal with it. Then, on Wednesday night, coming out of a week of being sick, I looked on the Chronicle website to explore topics for my next blog…and I saw that Joe Paterno had been fired. I knew then that it was time for me to deal with what I had been ignoring and deal with my reactions regarding the grand jury report, which gruesomely outlines the systematic abuse of young boys by a coach who had been celebrated for his contributions to the epic Penn State football program.

So I sat in my house watching ESPN, CNN and MSNBC and started working on sorting through the many reactions I am having.

My first reaction is anger…which it usually is when I hear of violence in college athletics. I am livid each time I hear of a different Division I football program that has covered up allegations of violence. It happens so often that it is hard not to assume that it is true across the board. Decisions are made to protect power and money as opposed to helping the victims.

Then I think of all the students who are out there rioting. (This, according to one tweet I saw on twitter, is the reason victims hesitate to come forward.)

Then I think of the young boy as he was being raped in the shower knowing that someone saw what was happening, and presumably hoping that that person would do something. None of them did anything. No one followed up with the young, traumatized, tortured boy. We still don't know who he is.

But as long as Sandusky got his locker room keys taken away, it's all fine now.

Molly Yanity, in her November 8 commentary The Stench From Penn State Permeates Big-Time College Sports in the Chronicle voices some of the same concerns I have in a much more measured, articulate way.

She writes that on the day that the scandal broke, ESPN, the “worldwide leader in sports” did not even have the story on the “ticker” at the bottom of the screen. She says that the story was swept under the rug because there was money to be made in the LSU vs. Alabama game.

When the rest of the media started to run with the story, ESPN stepped in and echoed how horrified they were. They covered the rioting that happened Wednesday night but true to media form, they found the seemingly least educated, most opinionated individuals to speak to the reporter. They yelled drunken declarations that “Joe Pa” shouldn’t have gotten fired for “something like this,” “he’s done so much for the university”…blah blah blah.

Yanity goes on to write that neither ESPN nor CBS made much of the story the day that it broke, because it was a Saturday…lots of games to cover. Then she writes:

“This is not just a scandal. It's a deal-breaker. This is not just about allegations of a man raping little boys; it's about a nation that has deeply troubling priorities. This is not about missing a story; it's about entertainment trumping the truth.

And it is all about money.”

I agree with her there.

I struggle a lot with my justice issues when it comes to Division I football. I grew up watching games every weekend, learning offensive and defensive formations from my dad, and feeling the euphoria of a last minute hail Mary pass to win the game. At the time I loved the game of football, I had no idea how evil the world can be. Now, in my disillusionment around athletics, I wish I could watch a game and love it, and feel like I did when I was a kid. But now as I think that thought, I realize that at the age I was watching football with my Dad and brother, these boys were being groomed, molested and raped. Charmed by the glamour of the game by a coach who was well-respected in his community and at Penn State.

Mostly, my justice issues go to the fact that these are institutions of higher education. In my idealism, I believe that colleges and universities should be working toward the greater good, educating and creating responsible citizens. What we have instead are athletics regimes who undermine the integrity of the ideals of education, who cover up criminal activity and cut loose any victims who would get in the way of the a sold out Saturday nationally televised game. Is this really higher education? Then maybe I am in the wrong field.

This issue is difficult. And as it unfolds I believe it will continue to be horrifying. The ripple effects of this scandal will be felt at every institution, especially a DI football school. I hope that the soul searching that happens as a result of this brings out the “sweeping changes” that the NCAA boasted a few weeks back. I am skeptical.

In this past week, I find that the reporting that most resonated with me was with Molly Yanity in the Chronicle and Jon Stewart on the Daily Show…here is what Jon Stewart has to say…

I can't say it any better than that.