Piled Higher and Deeper: There's No Pony
In an
earlier post I referenced Christian Smith’s astute article “Higher Education is
Drowning in BS” in The Chronicle of Higher Education, in which he outlines the
various turds on the higher ed poop pile.
He cites among others the outdated tenure system, needless (and useless)
jargon, and the state of denial concerning ongoing funding. His article has
drawn considerable attention for its perspicacity and forthrightness.
But perhaps
the most astute observation comes when Smith steps back from the dung heap and
looks at the big picture, or mound, as the case may be. His spot-on analysis is simple. American higher education today embodies the
very problems that “it was intended to transcend and transform.” He lists unreason, duplicity, and an
inability to comprehend the big picture, as examples of these ills.
I think a
closer, more specific look is in order here.
America is in the throes of a cultural shift that is characterized by
the “Me Too” movement, an overhaul of our political system, and a call for
accountability in all sectors of society, including higher education. So it is that we see college sports programs
forced to defend academic transgressions and exorbitant budgets that pay fired
personnel millions of dollars. And we
find senior administrators resigning or being fired in the face of personal misconduct
or complicity with that of other colleagues.
Smith also
makes clear (correctly) that the problem is systemic. Michigan State is a symptom, not a
disease. Higher education is rife with
similar examples. But he also points out
that self-correction is not in the interest of the status quo. The privileges and perks that have become
common abuses are now part of the fabric of higher education. So if change is to come, it will most likely
come from the outside. Those who created
the mess are not likely to muck out the stalls.
A response
to Smith’s piece authored by Clara Lovett makes this point poignantly. She sees no solutions offered in Smith’s
diatribe (in his defense, I don’t think that was his intent). In any event, she offers what she calls
“three practical steps to start digging out” of the BS. She proposes three “compacts,” all led by
higher education insiders. The outcomes
of these pacts would be:
1. A ban on
institutional rankings
2. A reduced
production of Ph.D.s
3. A
reaffirmation of tenure
If we try to
match these outcomes with the societal issues currently plaguing higher
education, we see a total disconnect. These outcomes are all inward-focused on
ways to preserve the status quo, not fix it. Institutional rankings and the number of Ph.D.s
being turned out are irrelevant to, well, anything, but certainly to any
significant societal issue. And hanging on to tenure is a misguided attempt to
preserve an outmoded piece of a system that was built centuries ago and that
has little significance today. (By the way, I earned tenure at Temple
University). These proposals tinker with things that are of importance only to
the self-interests of higher education.
In short,
Lovett is proposing to add to the heap. Looking to the people who got us into
the mess to now resolve it is a form of denial. Her proposal is not so much about digging out
of the pile, as it is about digging in the heels of the status quo and preserving
a rapidly eroding legacy. There is an old joke about a little boy digging
through a large pile of manure in hopes of finding a pony. The higher education compost heap holds no
such promise.
Comments
Post a Comment