ACTA's Must-Reads

Note that in the article that is linked, his main complaint is about the administration, not the academic and other activities at Dartmouth.

There will always be people on the left and right of every issue; but calls for raw financial transparency and accountability will appeal to people across the political spectrum, and that's what is needed more than anything in higher education. What is needed is an open book revolution for higher ed -- just let everyone see where the money is going, and the politics will take care of themselves.

Ugh, Oregon State University. This sounds like yet another publicity stunt by them. The last one I recall was "redesigning the University". They've had chronic financial mismanagement for years with deficits, unaccounted spending. I would guess those few who are interested in Oregon State's accounting will not stay interested for long. Meanwhile their already shoddy offerings continue to decline, from what I hear from colleagues at that place.

What's most disturbing about all of this is that trustees and alumni most often have absolutely no academic experience beyond their own college years and no background in education, research, writing, or publishing.

The alumni with power have purchased that power. Unlike most philanthropic donations, where the non-profit gets to decide how that money will be used, alumni donate with myriad puppet strings attached, and administrators and deans become the puppets, dancing for the puppet masters.

Why should some guy with family money and four years of undergrad education get to dictate how a university is run? Where's the expertise and experience? (And don't tell me that being a businessman is that experience: colleges are not businesses.)

Universities should only accept money with no strings attached, so that they can use it where students, faculty, and administrators -- those on the ground -- know it's needed. Let's not have another memorial bench or Class of 46 garden until every seminar room is fully stocked with omputers and adjuncts and graduate students are paid a living wage with health insurance.

That college and university administrators continue to support corrupt and wasteful programmes like intercollegiate athletics and "affirmative action" should constitute prima facie evidence that closer public and alumni oversight of institutions of higher learning is warranted.

Add to the above corruption and waste in "hire education" the costs attendant to whole bogus "disciplines" like ethnic and women's studies as well as to offices for "trans-gendered" students, which are all thinly-disguised social and political advocacy clubs masquerading as legitimate higher-ed enterprises.

Jacques, you seem to be ignorant of the fact that this is a private college we're talking about. It's free to waste its money with social advocacy clubs if it wants, and it doesn't owe you a thing -- certainly not submission to oversight by the public.

Barry asks "Why should some guy with family money and four years of undergrad education get to dictate how a university is run?"

The whole point of ACTA's post is that the guy campaigning to be a trustee is not some guy with family money, he's an outsider.

"And don't tell me that being a businessman is that experience: colleges are not businesses."

False.

"Universities should only accept money with no strings attached, so that they can use it where students, faculty, and administrators -- those on the ground -- know it's needed."

That's not only foolish, it's impossible. It's from a parallel galaxy where people do things for free.

"Let's not have another memorial bench or Class of 46 garden until ... adjuncts and graduate students are paid a living wage with health insurance."

What makes you think there are many graduate students at all at Dartmouth, or that they aren't paid a "living wage" (whatever that is) or don't get health insurance -- or that they do much teaching at all?

"Let it be."

I note that ACTA didn't quote the portion of Reynolds' editorial in which he (or the Post) evinced a child's grasp of the issues by calling the institution "Dartmouth University."

Publius: Many schools are beginning to preface all receipt of donations with the condition that the money may be spent where the university deems it most necessary. Sure, alumni don't donate money "for free" (whatever that could mean). They donate it for the tax write-off and to feed their vain desires to see a building with their family name on it.

And just because the guy running for a seat on the board is an outsider doesn't mean the guys supporting him are outsiders. It's not infrequent that entrenched interests build up a dark horse candidate to pass him off as an outsider or independent. (See Schwartzenegger, Arnold.)

Publius, I've often seen Dartmouth referred to as "Dartmouth U". They do offer graduate degrees, after all. In some contexts -- legal -- I wouldn't be surprised if they refer to themselves as "University".

Of course, the big point here is that higher ed is being poked, prodded and analyzed as never before, largely, I believe, because there is a growing public perception that our colleges and universities are ideologically biased and intolerant of viewpoints that are incongruent with the biases.

As examples accumulate, momentum is gathering. And for better or worse, the burden of proof seems to be shifting from the critics of higher education to prove that their accusations of institutional bias are well-founded, to the institutions to prove that the cases underlying the accusations are not representative of a general, nation-wide bias in our institutions of higher learning.

That's going to be tough to do.

Publius: Ignorant that Dartmouth is a private college?--pas du tout; that's why I included "alumni" with "taxpayers" (alluding there to both private and public oversight of institutions of higher learning), and in referring elsewhere to shakedown rackets like women's and ethnic studies I often include "donors", "parents of students", legislators", etc.

"you seem to be ignorant of the fact that this is a private college we're talking about. It's free to waste its money with social advocacy clubs if it wants"

What are the chances that Dartmouth does not take substantial tax revenues? I only know of one private college that does not, and it is not Dartmouth.

Barry wrote "I've often seen Dartmouth referred to as 'Dartmouth U.."

No, you haven't. If you have, it's been in error.

"In some contexts -- legal -- I wouldn't be surprised if they refer to themselves as 'University'."

Actually, they refer to themselves as "College" or, generically, "institution." Although the graduate degrees do make them technically a university, they really do shy away from admitting it.

Jacques, your point makes sense if you include alumni and taxpayers, as you do. I didn't see why your response needed to be generic when we are talking about a particular private school with a nearly unique trustee system, though.

Fe[de]ral Dog, Dartmouth does not take substantial tax revenues in the sense of annual state appropriations that are part of a government obligation to support the institution. Those are (were) the lifeblood of state-supported universities, not private colleges.

Every college and university, I would wager, takes particular federal or state grants for one project or another (as distinct from annual legislative appropriations). Dartmouth was built on massive state (i.e. provincial) grants. And that by itself doesn't make Dartmouth or any similar private institution subject to taxpayer oversight. What private college do you know that does not take "tax revenues"?

Publius: for that matter, what major private corporation does not take "tax revenues"? What Social Security or Medicare recipient?