• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Institutional essence of a University

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Graduate students and people with teaching experience at the university level are encouraged to respond, as I am interested in their insights. I apologize in advance for the non-conversational essay format of the exposition, yet as these ideas are still fresh in mind, I could not think of a more informal way to present the message.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today, very few of us could doubt that universities are a revered part of our society. For many of us, they represent the true path to social advancement and financial security. For others, they represent the place where the best and the wisest of academics congregate. Without a doubt, someone who can state 'PhD' next to their name must appear superior to those who do not and very few graduate students question the wisdom of this evaluative convention.

Thus far, I have briefly sketched what universities appear to be on a superficial level and what most people who are involved with these institutions tend to see them as. Now, I would like to point out what universities truly are.

This topic is certainly very broad and my description will not apply to every single institution, however, it will underline the prevalent tendencies that are common among most of them.

Before I begin, I have several warnings and disclaimers.

-First of all, I am not a professor, adjunct, visiting lecturer or a holder of any academic position with a university. The factual basis for my arguments comes from my four year education, experiences at my current 'job' as academic ghost writer (someone who writes college papers for students), independent reading and correspondences with senior professors and graduate students. The best I could do is start with as uncontroversial of premises as possible and employ reasoning devoid of fallacies to arrive at my conclusions.

-You should not read or respond to this thread if you fear disillusionment, are easily disturbed or for any reason prefer to dogmatically cling to the belief that most universities are exactly as I have described them in my first paragraph.

-Readers who have done a great deal of research on this subject matter or have far more experience with the academic community than I do, are more than welcome to contribute to or correct my expositions.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

First of all, the University by definition is an institution that is a part of our society by and large. For the very least, it is influenced directly by our cultural values and economical circumstances. On that note, what are these cultural values that I have in mind?

The obvious notion that flies in the very face of that question is the American Dream, the goal of attaining wealth and fame. After all, many conventional Americans believe that if they work hard enough and make the right choices in life; one day they will be rich, possibly even famous! This thought is not at all uncommon among undergraduate students, especially freshmen. More pertinently, very few of them question that they must acquire a degree in order to seize their beatific goal as since Middle School they've been taught to believe that the smarter they are, the more money they make and that knowledge is power of course!

The University is the intercessor between the plebeian and the American dream; to frame the notion in the context of Christian theology, it is analogous to the common person as Jesus to the sin forsaken by God.

Our second prominent cultural value is mindless entertainment. As we can see, intellectuals exert very little influence over the American public in comparison to actors and pop-artists. Recently released movies often include copious action scenes and a distinct appeal to the senses as opposed to the intellect. For example, the previews often emphasize the fighting and catchy one-liners that took place in the movie, very little is the sufficient information granted to allow the viewer to understand the plot. This style of presentation has been selected for compelling reasons from the standpoint of marketing, as people aren't interested in complexities, they first and foremost desire to see what they could enjoy while reflecting very little and preferably not at all.

Thus, people are not in the habit of questioning the wisdom of pursuing the American Dream as critically reflecting upon anything strikes them as a decidedly arduous endeavor. If circumstances forces them to conjure up a reason why they shouldn't question it, they'd vindicate their prejudices by exclaiming 'why should we question it, don't we have better things to do? After all, will someone pay us for doing so, will someone think better of us?


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

What are the implications of such cultural values and attitudes with respect to the Universities? Since we live under the 'free market' regime, it is deemed inappropriate for the government to offer copious financial resources to the Universities. From their standpoint, if they aspire to remain active in business, they are largely on their own as the government cannot be counted on to support them significantly.

At the outset, this scenario seems austere for all educational facilities; after all, how can an institution that provides learning opportunities survive in the market where consumers tend not to be interested in learning? In light of the fact that the public is generally unreflective, the solution is very simple: protect the integrity of the University as an institution by misleading the public to believe that they are learning and befool them into thinking that the more education they receive, the more valuable they shall become in the workforce.

Quite obviously, if the Universities instituted an educational system that is genuinely edifying, the overwhelming majority of the public would drop out or willingly choose to have nothing to do with it, even if they believed that they cannot achieve the American dream without education. As John Milton has once stated in verse 'it is better to rule in hell than to reign in heaven'. The American Dream may be seen as heaven by these people but if suffering the excruciating pangs of purgatory in the classroom is the prerequisite for admission, aborting the mission quickly becomes a viable alternative.


From the standpoint of such aforementioned 'higher learning' institutions forcing the general public in that situation is obviously an unacceptable result. Accordingly, they have been left with no option but render the services that were likely to be lucrative. That is, construct a curriculum where students will not be forced to think for themselves and shall be evaluated on how well they follow instructions and conform to the arbitrary etiquette of proper scholarship.

It is also in their interests to reinforce the myth of education as the gateway to wealth because the more the public relies on the university, the more their revenue will increase. Although it is true that certain degrees often do maximize a person's employment opportunities, it is false that they do so in all cases. Nonetheless, universities are very much interested in propagating this myth for financial reasons and are quite comfortable with the cultural meme regarding the unquestionability of the notion that education separates the wealthy from the poor and the successful from the unsuccessful. Yes, there are anomalies, as for instance certain actors and music performers never had degrees, yet they are wealthy and successful; but again, the public must be led to believe that they will never be as fortunate as their successful counterparts who lack education. Therefore they ought to work, work and work, but doing so without a university degree is next to impossible.

There can be no doubt that students are very important to these institutions and they are very much interested in attracting as many of them as possible. However, this does not at all mean that they value their clients as individuals or that they are interested in inspiring them to learn or that they in any way have the students' best interests in mind. The fact of the matter is that historically, universities have not been primarily dedicated to educating the public as this was mostly the business of conventional schools that are now part of the K-12 education.

Universities have traditionally been regarded as facilities of research that were operated by researchers and geared towards the task of preparing students for a scholarly life. Today, a significant percentage of academics believe that at least some universities should be reserved for research only and students should no longer be admitted. Not a great deal has changed other than the 'capitalization' of the enterprise which forced them to feign allegiance to the humanitarian values of public education.

If my argument thus far sounds unconvincing, consider the following chain of reasoning. It is a fact that a person's moral values are largely a result of his social experiences. The majority of university authorities are practicing scholars who spent most of their lives practing in the academic discipline of their choice. Most of their training had little and in many cases nothing at all to do with educating others and in this respect they are very different from conventional K-12 teachers. Quite self-explanatorily, people become professors for reasons far different from the reasons why people become K-12 teachers. Whereas teachers are often inclined to see themselves as ordinary citizens of the community with earnest ambitions of aiding their neighbors, academics tend to be by far less inclined to share this viewpoint.

Academia has long been regarded as the domain of the wise and the esoteric, with its own set of values and aspirations that are detached from that are nearly unfettered by the mainstream society. This certainly does not mean that no professor is sincere when he or she claims that they have your best interests in mind or that they genuinely do want to help you learn, but it does mean that such attitudes are not supported or reinforced by the general academic culture that they are environed in. University officials who utter such remarks with great earnestness are mavericks.

Most are more than happy to pay lip service to these while maintaining fierce loyalty to the values of their own community where superciliously alienating the general public is not only tolerated but encouraged. It is regarded as highly desirable on the account that such an attitude supports the vision of academia as the domain of the wise who should be exempt from the conventional moral responsibilities and demands. It is not at all uncommon to see professional scholars cite a distinction between 'us' and 'them' where 'they' are but the ordinary people inferior both in intellect and worth as human beings. As William Pannacker has stated on a number of occassions, Academia operates under a set of clearly defined values, the main of which is the need to preserve the dogma that life outside of academia amounts to a failure in life. "Newhouse argued that graduate school in the humanities indoctrinates its students into believing that they are failures if they do not remain inside the ivory tower, even if there are no suitable academic jobs for them. Career counselors, she argued, have to find ways to persuade unemployed Ph.D.'s to believe that the outside world is not evil and that they are not apostates if they do something besides teaching and research." (Is Graduate School a Cult? - Manage Your Career - The Chronicle of Higher Education)


Pannacker aptly observed that these attitudes are irrational and as I may add altogether incompatible with the environment of the real world.

"Even after several years, many former graduate students grapple with feelings of shame and failure that, to outsiders, seem completely irrational." ((Is Graduate School a Cult? - Manage Your Career - The Chronicle of Higher Education I refuse to use APA, MLA, Chicago or any other scholarly format as a subtle act of conscious rebellion against the arbitrary and irrational values that academic officials endeavor to impose upon their current and prospective students.)

One is compelled to ask exactly how do academics manage to preserve such seemingly absurd values that are inapposite to any other activity outside of academia? Their strategy is not at all new and its great efficacy and frequency of use made it somewhat of a classic in social and political disputes. One phrase pithily summarizes the fundamental principle of academic moral values, it has been once effectively uttered by Jesus and recently recited by Bush as an instrument of vendetta against the 'terrorists'. It is 'whoever is not with me is against me!'.

This is not to say that university officials are zealots who are willing to slaughter thousands to further their own jihad, but not due to their reasonableness, equanimity, kind regard or any human virtue. These people have spent over 10 years in institutions of post-graduate education, at least the last six of which focused on professional publication and public debating. Their training in the art of rhetoric and propaganda by far surpasses that of conventional lawyers, politicians, journalists or any group of con artists who have earned their profession notoriety by skillful practice of public deception.

Universities do need to maintain their appearance of benign, practically instrumental institutions for whose services the general public would gladly pay. Furthermore, it is a fact that because academics have spent the majority of their lives in activities that are irrelevant to society by and large as well as moral values that are incompatible with a life outside of academia, they shall in all cases cling to their institution with the tenacity of rats holding on to the sinking ship.

Because of their superb skills in elocution and nearly unrivalled intellect, the officials of academic institutions have successfully preserved the public myth that education is the bridge to fulfillment of the American Dream. To bring further stability to their own enterprise, they strengthened the faith of their most ardent aficionados by compelling them to believe that they have no other choice but remain true to the academic life-style which is founded on rigid values of social elitism. That, however, is not only the product of their cleverly contrived propaganda, but is also the inevitable byproduct of a person remaining a member of a community with very narrowly defined moral values and intense hostility to outsiders. The university student feeds on the emotional ambience of academia and develops fanatical zeal in its support similarly to how a recent convert to Mormonism is influenced by the unverbalized attitudes of the leaders of his cult.

The fact that hundreds of students eagerly apply to graduate studies in humanities with a full awareness of the fact that even if they do acquire a PhD, they can well expect to confront 500 other competitors for a University professorship position. These applicants are also aware that their career opportunities in the field of their specialization are strictly limited to professorship only. What, other than prejudice inspired by the propaganda of university officials can lead us to believe that these students apply to graduate school programs for any reason other than that their communities have convinced them that life outside of academia is unacceptable? What, other than the above mentioned prejudice can lead a reasonable person to believe that academia does not operate on the basis of 'whoever is not with me is against me'? What, other than this invidious yet ingenious propaganda can convince us that the University is not a mere cult, although an inconspicous and a highly refined one, the primary purpose of which is nothing but affirming its own goals by alienating and maligning the heathens?

Daniel Dennett once refuted the design argument by citing evolutionary reasons to believe that the oryx exists not because it was designed by God for man's benefit, in fact it does not need to be in any way desirable by mankind to exist. What must it be good for then, Dennett inquires? Only for making more of itself, in his own words.

The same can be said for academia, although just like the oryx it could be put to a use that is benign to the rest of the community, it is not at all the case that academia was created to benefit mankind, nor is it the intention of its average practitioner to change the system to render it more beneficial to the society by and large. Strictly speaking, academia is necessarily only good for making more of itself, or for solidifying its own foundations by convincing outsiders and its existing members to fervently believe that university education must be an indispensible part of their lives. This institution has cooperated with and catered to the needs of others strictly for the sake of ensuring of its own political and social survival, exactly in the way that the oryx may have been forced to show non-aggression or even gestures of cooperation towards other animals in order to merely survive.

But wait a moment, an adversary of this view could respond and say, is it not the implication of Dennett's evolutionary insights that this is how all creatures and institutions must behave. Not quite, this must may be the most natural way for them to behave, however, it is not an inevitability. It is possible to create artificial social constructs where individuals will be willing to engage in tasks that benefit others without seeking immediate reward for their actions.

Clearly, the University is not one of such constructs: it appeals to the infantile desires of every bohemian intellectual by convincing him that it is possible to have a fulfilling life without answering to the moral demands of society by and large or merely having basic responsibilities that every decent citizen can be expected to have.

But wait a moment, many academics have fought to protect us from tyranny, political manipulation, ignorance, corruption and even the unbenign behavior of institutionalized universities. They have used their supreme intellect and expository skills to inspire many to join their cause, this appears to be the opposite of the behaviors that I have accused the conventional academic of engaging in. Noam Chomsky, Stephen Jay Gould, Daniel Dennett, Bertrand Russell and William Pannacker constitute glaring examples of the case in point.

These men were mavericks, an average academic has none of their intentions to ameliorate society by and large. An average academic is chiefly concerned with forging a professional reputation for himself by impressing his colleagues with how extraordinarily clever he is and publishing his papers in an esoteric journal that will not be read by any scholar outside of his academic discipline, even less someone from the general public.

If academia is unbenign to the rest of society, is it at least instrumental in promoting genuine scholarly values? Not in all cases, and in many it does not. It is a fact that academia is influenced by vagaries of fashion in a manner similar to that of the fashion industry itself. Ideas go in and out of professional discourse for reasons other than their merit or demerit. Graduate students are often directly instructed to cite this, that and that theorist in their papers as otherwise they stand no chance of being published. Radical ideas are frowned upon as they threaten the pre-established social trends and the general culture of the institution or a scholarly journal in the context of which they have been propounded.

Over 400 years ago, the wisest of philosophers were independent scholars who lacked commitments to universities such as Spinoza, Hume and Schopenhauer. Today, the university has expanded and its institutionalization sent a clear message to all existing and future savants: they have no choice but to conform to the cultural whims of their institutions as otherwise they shall not succeed in academia and that is tantamount to an altogether failure in life.

If we cannot conclude that academia obviously is not conducive to affirmation of the values regarding honest scholarship and the pursuit of knowledge, we can be certain that it is not at all obvious that it does conduce towards a successful fulfillment of that objective.

The main reason for this is because it is an institution the primary purpose of which is to promote itself or in Dennett's words 'make more of itself'. Thus, any honest attempt to pursue knowledge or to promote values of genuine scholarship must be suppressed if it opposes the pillars which uphold it. Very often these values entail resolutely independent thought that is critical of the pre-established social conventions and for this reason it will, in many cases, demand the most uncompromising censure from the custodians of the current institutional regime. It insidiously reputed itself as the guiding light of those who pursue knowledge, wealth and the American dream to effectively conceal the nature of its profoundly parasitic relationship to the rest of society.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
The 'Not Hot for a teacher' thread is getting more hits and replies than mine, what!?
 

Little Linguist

Striving for balance
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
6,880
MBTI Type
xNFP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
SolitaryWalker, I would like to address your points on Sunday, when I have the freedom and clarity of mind to focus on these things.

Since I have had some years of teaching experience at practically every level of English, I think I'd like to comment.

However, I have a billion things floating around in my head right now and cannot give it the attention it deserves.
 
S

Sniffles

Guest
I wouldn't mind commenting on this since I've often been critical of many of the prevailing perspectives concerning university education.
 

FDG

pathwise dependent
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,903
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
7w8
Italian university: don't relate to the first part (nobody goes to uni thinking that'll make him rich), partially relate to the second. It seems like professors have to write some "standard" papers to get tenure, however once they have gotten tenure they don't seem to give a shit anymore and some of them can be really creative/unconventional (it's impossible to fire a tenured professor).
 

sofmarhof

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
327
MBTI Type
INTP
The 'Not Hot for a teacher' thread is getting more hits and replies than mine, what!?

When a person posts a 3500 word essay I usually just move on, rather than complain about the length. But when they then ask why they don't have more replies I might tell them their post is too long.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Italian university: don't relate to the first part (nobody goes to uni thinking that'll make him rich), partially relate to the second. It seems like professors have to write some "standard" papers to get tenure, however once they have gotten tenure they don't seem to give a shit anymore and some of them can be really creative/unconventional (it's impossible to fire a tenured professor).

I notice that. Also, I see that many of the tenured professors aren't fond of the bureaucracy and the 'academic games' that are definitive of the profile of their institution. Of all the people that I talked to about the academic regime, above they were the most critical about it.
 

Stanton Moore

morose bourgeoisie
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3,900
MBTI Type
INFP
Can you reduce your ideas to some bullet points? I just don't have time for 1.5 pages of pedantry.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
-Universities reinforce the myth that staying in school for as long as possible is the true path to the American dream.
-They are able to do so successfully because the public is generally stupid and does not question the most prestigious institutions of the nation, also because university officials are outstanding propagandists: they learned the art of persuasion in their scholarly career and PhD training by constantly publishing and debating with other scholars.
-University officials successfully misled the public into thinking they have good intentions for society, but the reality is that they have a contemptuous attitude for the 'ordinary people' and seek to create a community insulated from the mainstream society. By doing this, they effectively abandoned their duties and responsibilities as citizens of the mainstream society.
-The university communities manage to survive today by employing deft manipulation techniques that are endemic to religious and political cults. They employ the famous 'whoever is not with me is against me rhetoric' to convince the graduate students and other aficionados to do all in their power to serve the interests of the institution by convincing them that they have no other options in life.
 

Stanton Moore

morose bourgeoisie
Joined
Mar 4, 2009
Messages
3,900
MBTI Type
INFP
Thank you.

Don't forget that many universities have adopted a highly market-driven perspective on the value of educaton, that is in line with the expectation of the general populace. a college education is considered a rough proxy to attending a trade school in this era. How many people graduate with a degree in, say business, with virtually no concept of what is meant by the term 'liberal arts education'? why is the uni just another form of technical school?

The divide is not between society and the university (which I consider a red herring designed for political gain), but between the older, more idealistic (and more elitist) segment of the campus, and the more pragmatic side.
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Thank you.

Don't forget that many universities have adopted a highly market-driven perspective on the value of educaton, that is in line with the expectation of the general populace. a college education is considered a rough proxy to attending a trade school in this era. How many people graduate with a degree in, say business, with virtually no concept of what is meant by the term 'liberal arts education'? why is the uni just another form of technical school?

The divide is not between society and the university (which I consider a red herring designed for political gain), but between the older, more idealistic (and more elitist) segment of the campus, and the more pragmatic side.

I don't think that there is a divide between the university and the pulbic, but the university officials would like to believe that there is. That way they can avoid responsiblity to the society by and large and merely use them as a financial resource that they need in order to create a community in which they don't have to answer to the society by and large.

Yes, universities have adjusted to the business demands of the public, I have mentioned that in my paper, though not in the summary. They noticed that people are generally not interested in learning and created a curriculum where they could pass just by thoughtlessly following instructions. Creating a non-educative curriculum is more lucrative than teaching courses where people are genuinely forced to learn.

Although getting a degree from a university is not nearly as helpful to an average person's career, they propagate the message that it is extremely helpful. Similarly, the university degree is not at all educative, yet nonetheless it is within the best interests of the universities to lead the public to believe that their courses are not only of instrumental value but also are the path to true wisdom!
 

FDG

pathwise dependent
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,903
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
7w8
A good thing about Universities is their libraries. I don't know how's the situation in the average university, but over here the libraries are immense, you can find almost every book you need (well, unless it's just come out).
 

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
A good thing about Universities is their libraries. I don't know how's the situation in the average university, but over here the libraries are immense, you can find almost every book you need (well, unless it's just come out).

The University that I've attended also had a very large library. Just a few weeks before my graduation I had to return over 100 books. Today, I am fortunate enough to have clients who give me access to their online university library accounts.
 

Little Linguist

Striving for balance
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
6,880
MBTI Type
xNFP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I. Introduction

In general, I believe you present a cogent argument regarding the American school system and its culture. Aside from some minor issues, your essay is nearly flawless and does not contain that pedantic style that so characterized your initial writing on this forum. It is very insightful, and it was really an enjoyable read.

There are several inherent problems with the American system that you did not address, and I would like to address them in this little tidbit.

To give you the background on my insights, please allow me to quickly state my limited experience with academia and teaching. Since I was born and raised in the United States, where I attended both school and university, I think I can comment on the American school system. After moving to Germany over five years ago, my professional experience has been nearly solely based in teaching, where I have taught pupils, students, and professionals from several backgrounds. Recently, I have also taught language courses to graduate and undergraduate students in Germany. Although I do not have an academic title, I do have (limited) experience in the field.

II. Higher education or low-wage job?

One problem in the American school system is the nearly compulsory nature of university education. What students are paying for, in essence, is a chance at a decent living standard - nothing more.

Check your newspapers. Is it easy to find jobs that do NOT require a university degree? Basically, our teachers presented our future possibilities as follows: get a university degree, or you are screwed because you are not going to hold a candle to the MILLIONS OF OTHER PEOPLE out there getting a B.A., even if you are bright. (There are obvious exceptions; however, I think you know what I mean).

In fact, once we started university, the outlook seemed even more grim: since so many people are competing for so few jobs, you have to get a MASTER'S or a PH.D, or you won't hold a candle to the MILLIONS OF OTHER PEOPLE getting these academic titles. Great.

What are they going to tell us when we get a Ph.D.? You're screwed if you don't get a double or triple doctorate? Waitresses must get a professorship to have a shot at a job? What the hell?

In contrast, Germans have several alternatives to academia, which allows individuals with other interests and inclinations to congregate there. Although we are sadly also adopting the American trend towards university education for all, usually unsuitable students do indeed drop out rather than clogging the works because there are VIABLE alternatives. (FH, VHS, BK, IHK, etc.)

III. The issue of funding

Meanwhile, in America people - also those who really should not be in academia - invest thousands and thousands of dollars in a worthless education that is so valuable (!) - what a paradox. One should also note that this education is not even compatible with other educational systems in other countries. That means you can invest $50,000 in your education, move to Europe, and they don't even know what the hell prestigious university you attended, and they sure as hell will not accept your degree. Super.

Even worse, most people do not have the money to attend university, which forces students with limited funding to cater to the system or get poor grades, as a scholarship is the only means of entry. This fact leads most students (and people entering academia) to pander to conventional wisdom and not think outside the box.

Most people still do not have all the funding they need to attend, and they take out huge amounts of loans to gain access to this worthlessly valuable education. This debt results in a nationwide populace that is not on stable financial footing - imagine, there are 22-year-olds who are already $60,000 in debt or MORE. And they do not even have car payments or a mortgage yet, assuming they do not have credit card debt up the ying-yang.

The fact of the matter is: The government/state and financial institutions have you by the balls crying "MOMMY" before you even get a job. That makes for pretty compliant workers and citizens, now, doesn't it?

All this aggravation, and you have not been even promised a job!!! But woe to he who decides to circumvent the system and go another route - he will surely not get a job at all!

However, in Germany universities are indeed supported by the state, which means they do not have to pander to the needs of the 'plebeians', as you refer to them. Therefore, German universities have the freedom and funding to engage in other methods (whether or not they DO is another question, and German universities have their own issues I will address later.)

Because German education is funded by the state, it is nearly free of charge. Although you would expect universities would swarm with plebeians who are idiotic, this trend generally only happens within the first year or two of higher education and becomes less prevalent. One issue I will concede is that the universities are filled with students who take forever FINISH university. Nonetheless, students typically realize that holding themselves to rigid standards of scholarship proves difficult and move to other areas (since there are other possibilities).

IV. Bureaucracy and standards

However, German education has its own aggravating tendencies. I really do not know why educators lack passion in what they do - it seems that on all levels of the education system in Germany, people do not give a fat rat's ass one way or the other about their students. They abide by rules. Regulations. Nonsense.

Thankfully at university, this habit mellows out, and people love what they do a great deal more, which is why I love teaching at university a great deal more than grades 5-13. You meet really wonderful colleagues who engage in exchange of ideas and the like. The students are really engaged and work with you. If you give them the freedom, they will explore and delve more deeply into matters.

However, they are very strict with standards. No stamp, no go. Same with employers. No stamp? No degree? No job. You cannot do it. ARGH. Drives me bat-shit crazy. "You haven't studied English? Well then - you cannot teach English! Oh, you're a native speaker? Well, that's interesting, but you still cannot teach English! You have five years of experience teaching pupils, students, professionals from many different backgrounds? That's nice, you STILL CAN'T TEACH ENGLISH." This pedantic regimentation is extremely frustrating.

In America, you at least have the option of getting jobs if you have a great deal of provable knowledge and experience - meaning as long as you do your job well, it does not matter if you have a certain stamp or not, contrary to what these pedantic academics want you to believe. Bosses want to know: CAN YOU DO THE JOB OR NOT? And if you are a kid who needs a wet nurse but has a Ph.D., you still will not hold a candle to the dude with real experience who knows what the hell he is doing.

However, this freedom apparent in the American system IS DYING due to high competition for limited jobs. Nowadays, people swarm universities, flying on the magic carpet of debt, because they have no shot in hell of getting a job in the current labor market. So at the moment America is predicated on the necessity to obtain a university degree to EVEN HAVE A SHOT at decent jobs. This requirement makes no sense, particularly for jobs that do not really have implications that require higher education. In essence, this tendency renders the value of education to practically nil, although students pay a great deal of money. Therefore, this 'FREEDOM' in the American system necessitates a good, stable economy, or the whole thing falls apart.

So when the American system works, I do like its relative freedom. As much as SolitaryWalker criticizes its bureaucracy (which is surely apparent) or its lack of originality and unconventionality (which is also a fact), it does not even come CLOSE to the bureaucracy and the regimentation we see in the GERMAN system. On the other hand, even though the standards are more regimented, there appears to be a greater freedom of thought in the German system.

V. Educators' motivation

One HUGE - and I mean HUGE - objection I have to SolitaryWalker's argument (although granted, he did indeed mention that he was not making a blanket statement) constitutes the idea that educators and academics do not care about their students.

What...the...hell?

Well, I cannot speak for other idiotic morons that might be teachers, and granted there are a hell of a lot of people who couldn't give a rat's gas-expelling behind whether or not their students succeed.

However, I have to say that I really do indeed genuinely care about my students and their success. In fact, I engage in a great deal more work than is required from me because I am so personally engaged. A good lesson makes me feel like I can reach to the skies; a poor lesson makes me grumpy the whole day, wallowing in my thoughts and analyzing what went wrong. Happy students make my heart sing; discontented students make my soul sink.

Yes, indeed, we university educators (I am not a professor, simply a teacher there) do have to 'entertain' students as well insofar as we have to REACH them. When you have a bland subject like academic writing, you need to make it palatable to people, or they will zone out.

However, I would not say I am a regimented teacher who does not accept things out of the norm; in fact, I would say I'm very fair. If people have a better, more creative idea for projects, I welcome these ideas.

The fact of the matter is: Several people do not have creative ideas, or they have forgotten. You have to coax and tickle it out of them.

In essence you have to EDUCE (educate) the beauty within the mind and soul. If you're not educing, you are an INCOMPETENT teacher/professor.

And I cannot help it if there are idiots out there who don't give a rat's ass. I GIVE MORE RATS' ASSES THAN LIVE IN NYC. And more I cannot do. I cannot compensate for incompetencies found in my field - I can just live up to my own high standards. And not all educators are idiots.

VI. Conclusion

Indeed education standards both in Germany and America need to be reworked and revamped; if you do not move forward, you fall behind. However, does this fact render the education system meaningless and vacuous? Only if we allow it to do so. Education does NOT HAVE TO BE a waste of your time - if you grasp opportunities, you will find the rare gems who love what they do, who have access to incredible contacts and resources, and who help you develop. Please do not write off an entire system due to its flaws; rather help us to rework the system so that it does bring the greatest benefit to the people who are willing and able to be receptive to its potential.
 
Last edited:

SolitaryWalker

Tenured roisterer
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,504
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
II. Higher education or low-wage job?

One problem in the American school system is the nearly compulsory nature of university education. What students are paying for, in essence, is a chance at a decent living standard - nothing more.

Check your newspapers. Is it easy to find jobs that do NOT require a university degree? Basically, our teachers presented our future possibilities as follows: get a university degree, or you are screwed because you are not going to hold a candle to the MILLIONS OF OTHER PEOPLE out there getting a B.A., even if you are bright. (There are obvious exceptions; however, I think you know what I mean).

In fact, once we started university, the outlook seemed even more grim: since so many people are competing for so few jobs, you have to get a MASTER'S or a PH.D, or you won't hold a candle to the MILLIONS OF OTHER PEOPLE getting these academic titles. Great.

What are they going to tell us when we get a Ph.D.? You're screwed if you don't get a double or triple doctorate? Waitresses must get a professorship to have a shot at a job? What the hell?.

What are the possible strategies that we may employ to create jobs in America for people who lack a formal a degree?

In contrast, Germans have several alternatives to academia, which allows individuals with other interests and inclinations to congregate there. Although we are sadly also adopting the American trend towards university education for all, usually unsuitable students do indeed drop out rather than clogging the works because there are VIABLE alternatives. (FH, VHS, BK, IHK, etc.)?.

Explain what they are in greater depth. Doing so may give us an idea of what can be done make people without a degree employable.

III. The issue of funding

Meanwhile, in America people - also those who really should not be in academia - invest thousands and thousands of dollars in a worthless education that is so valuable (!) - what a paradox. One should also note that this education is not even compatible with other educational systems in other countries. That means you can invest $50,000 in your education, move to Europe, and they don't even know what the hell prestigious university you attended, and they sure as hell will not accept your degree. Super.

Even worse, most people do not have the money to attend university, which forces students with limited funding to cater to the system or get poor grades, as a scholarship is the only means of entry. This fact leads most students (and people entering academia) to pander to conventional wisdom and not think outside the box.

Most people still do not have all the funding they need to attend, and they take out huge amounts of loans to gain access to this worthlessly valuable education. This debt results in a nationwide populace that is not on stable financial footing - imagine, there are 22-year-olds who are already $60,000 in debt or MORE. And they do not even have car payments or a mortgage yet, assuming they do not have credit card debt up the ying-yang.

The fact of the matter is: The government/state and financial institutions have you by the balls crying "MOMMY" before you even get a job. That makes for pretty compliant workers and citizens, now, doesn't it?

All this aggravation, and you have not been even promised a job!!! But woe to he who decides to circumvent the system and go another route - he will surely not get a job at all!.)?.

Although the statement that you must have a degree or you will never get a job and that if you have a degree, you'll probably get rich is false, there is something to it. People who lack a BA have significantly fewer resources than those who do have it. The problem is that getting a BA is extremely expensive, one way to fix the problem is to ensure the state provides more funds for universities, but how could this be done? Secondly, how could we provide sufficient employment opportunities for people who lack degrees, in the current American system this seems altogether unimaginable.

However, in Germany universities are indeed supported by the state, which means they do not have to pander to the needs of the 'plebeians', as you refer to them. Therefore, German universities have the freedom and funding to engage in other methods (whether or not they DO is another question, and German universities have their own issues I will address later.)

Because German education is funded by the state, it is nearly free of charge. Although you would expect universities would swarm with plebeians who are idiotic, this trend generally only happens within the first year or two of higher education and becomes less prevalent. One issue I will concede is that the universities are filled with students who take forever FINISH university. Nonetheless, students typically realize that holding themselves to rigid standards of scholarship proves difficult and move to other areas (since there are other possibilities).!.)?.IV. Bureaucracy and standards

However, German education has its own aggravating tendencies. I really do not know why educators lack passion in what they do - it seems that on all levels of the education system in Germany, people do not give a fat rat's ass one way or the other about their students. They abide by rules. Regulations. Nonsense.

Thankfully at university, this habit mellows out, and people love what they do a great deal more, which is why I love teaching at university a great deal more than grades 5-13. You meet really wonderful colleagues who engage in exchange of ideas and the like. The students are really engaged and work with you. If you give them the freedom, they will explore and delve more deeply into matters.

However, they are very strict with standards. No stamp, no go. Same with employers. No stamp? No degree? No job. You cannot do it. ARGH. Drives me bat-shit crazy. "You haven't studied English? Well then - you cannot teach English! Oh, you're a native speaker? Well, that's interesting, but you still cannot teach English! You have five years of experience teaching pupils, students, professionals from many different backgrounds? That's nice, you STILL CAN'T TEACH ENGLISH." This pedantic regimentation is extremely frustrating.

In America, you at least have the option of getting jobs if you have a great deal of provable knowledge and experience - meaning as long as you do your job well, it does not matter if you have a certain stamp or not, contrary to what these pedantic academics want you to believe. Bosses want to know: CAN YOU DO THE JOB OR NOT? And if you are a kid who needs a wet nurse but has a Ph.D., you still will not hold a candle to the dude with real experience who knows what the hell he is doing.

However, this freedom apparent in the American system IS DYING due to high competition for limited jobs. Nowadays, people swarm universities, flying on the magic carpet of debt, because they have no shot in hell of getting a job in the current labor market. So at the moment America is predicated on the necessity to obtain a university degree to EVEN HAVE A SHOT at decent jobs. This requirement makes no sense, particularly for jobs that do not really have implications that require higher education. In essence, this tendency renders the value of education to practically nil, although students pay a great deal of money. Therefore, this 'FREEDOM' in the American system necessitates a good, stable economy, or the whole thing falls apart.

So when the American system works, I do like its relative freedom. As much as SolitaryWalker criticizes its bureaucracy (which is surely apparent) or its lack of originality and unconventionality.

The bureaucracy of an Academic institution that I had in mind was of an altogether different kind than the one in Germany. The German bureaucracy, as you've described it, seems to consist of requirements that can be summarized as follows: if you don't have the following certificates or accolades, you don't get a job. The bureaucracy in American institutions is primarily about the student evaluation policy where students are graded not on the basis of the quality of their thinking, but on the basis of how precisely they follow the instructions.


So when the American system works, I do like its relative freedom. As much as SolitaryWalker criticizes its bureaucracy (which is surely apparent) or its lack of originality and unconventionality (which is also a fact), it does not even come CLOSE to the bureaucracy and the regimentation we see in the GERMAN system. On the other hand, even though the standards are more regimented, there appears to be a greater freedom of thought in the German system.

It is a curious historical observation that Germany produced many great scientists, philosophers and mathematicians. Possibly even more than any other European nation. Is there anything about the German culture as a whole that encourages deep thinking and creativity?

V. Educators' motivation

One HUGE - and I mean HUGE - objection I have to SolitaryWalker's argument (although granted, he did indeed mention that he was not making a blanket statement) constitutes the idea that educators and academics do not care about their students.

What.

The.

Hell?

Well, I cannot speak for other idiotic morons that might be teachers, and granted there are a hell of a lot of people who couldn't give a rat's gas-expelling behind whether or not their students succeed.

However, I have to say that I really do indeed genuinely care about my students and their success. In fact, I engage in a great deal more work than is required from me because I am so personally engaged. A good lesson makes me feel like I can reach to the skies; a poor lesson makes me grumpy the whole day, wallowing in my thoughts and analyzing what went wrong. Happy students make my heart sing; discontented students make my soul sink.

Yes, indeed, we university educators (I am not a professor, simply a teacher there) do have to 'entertain' students as well insofar as we have to REACH them. When you have a bland subject like academic writing, you need to make it palatable to people, or they will zone out.

However, I would not say I am a regimented teacher who does not accept things out of the norm; in fact, I would say I'm very fair. If people have a better, more creative idea for projects, I welcome these ideas.

The fact of the matter is: Several people do not have creative ideas, or they have forgotten. You have to coax and tickle it out of them.

In essence you have to EDUCE (educate) the beauty within the mind and soul. If you're not educing, you are an INCOMPETENT teacher/professor.

And I cannot help it if there are idiots out there who don't give a rat's ass. I GIVE MORE RATS' ASSES THAN LIVE IN NYC. And more I cannot do. I cannot compensate for incompetencies found in my field - I can just live up to my own high standards. And not all educators are idiots.

You're showing that you've misunderstood the point of my message. You know where? Right here, in the very title of the section.

V. Educators' motivation

My point was not at all about the motives of educators but about the influence the system has upon college professors, it discourages them from being concerned with students as it forges a community that is altogether separate from the rest of society. Universities create what may be called a bohemian intellectual's paradise where they can avoid responsibilities that they should have as citizens of their community. Since they are encouraged to duck those responsibilities, their community minimizes their incentive to care about their students. The success of a professor's career does not depend on whether or not his students are learning, it depends on how well his professional publications are received by scholarly journals. Research is the primary part of their job, teaching is just something that they have to do in order to convince the rest of the society that they are performing a valuable service that they should be paid for. Had most of them had their own way, most Universities would not accept students at all.

Regarding the motives of professors, I mentioned that most do not care about students because their community encourages them not to. Those who do otherwise are mavericks. The fact that you happen to care about your students does not refute the claim that most professors also do.


VI. Conclusion

Indeed education standards both in Germany and America need to be reworked and revamped; if you do not move forward, you fall behind. However, does this fact render the education system meaningless and vacuous? Only if we allow it to do so. Education does NOT HAVE TO BE a waste of your time - if you grasp opportunities, you will find the rare gems who love what they do, who have access to incredible contacts and resources, and who help you develop. Please do not write off an entire system due to its flaws; rather help us to rework the system so that it does bring the greatest benefit to the people who are willing and able to be receptive to its potential.

What problem are we trying to solve by restructuring the educational system? The fact that American students are not genuinely learning? The fact that they fall far in debt and their job opportunities are not nearly as the universities and the general public led them to believe they would be?

Which of these problems is the most important?
 

nozflubber

DoubleplusUngoodNonperson
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
2,078
MBTI Type
Hype
Very good post, i agree with most if not all of it.

I also think a large part of the problem with Academia, that didn't seem to be mentioned, is the over-emphasis on GPA and simply "How many articles have you published". I believe this unfairly discriminates those with creative intellectual talents and puts more effort into regurgitating older, more sterile theories to the detriment of science and the humanities. I believe the "Publish or Perish" paradigm is a disease in an institution where high quality theories, values, ethics and reflection over them is supposed to be its most principle goal. The model scholar should resemble that of Edmund Gettier - parsimonious yet insightful and ground-breaking. Instead, academia prefers you to publish much and not make much noise in doing so.

The modern (American) university has become a manufacturing facility of garbage, just so the wanna-be so called "scholars" (aka, those irrationally pursuing the American dream in your words) can say to others "Hey, look at ME! Give ME the high-paying professorial position because I've been published a lot!"


I truly wish/long for the days when every student of the University was forced to learn Latin and Calculus - mandatory for all, because it instilled a "Stronger" mind more or less. These days, all one has to learn for a solid academic position is how to compute a mean and standard deviation (trivial in comparison to finding the solutions to a differential equation or reading Cicero). Compute your irrelevant, "statistically significant results" so the government and faculty can simply JUSTIFY keeping you there, because that's all they care about: ease of justification . There's no real effort intellectually, and no one's really trying to solve any problems of science or philosophy - they just want their phatty pants salaries and grants so they can coast in life. It's very sad indeed.

However, part of me also believes this is pretty much the way its always been. Marx said the "history of academia is an economic history" and this rings too true today. However, not all persons in academia are there to secure a salary and tenure so they can sit fat and happy in life - i have met a couple people at my Uni that seem like genuinely, curious and scientifically minded folk, but they are TOO few and far between.

If I ever become successful professionally and financially, I plan on putting forth a new model for a University that will try to steer clear of the road blocks to scientific progress that have been sewn in its wake.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
Originality

To be awarded your Doctorate at a top ranking University, you need to demonstrate the ability for original thought.

So the essence of a top University is originality.
 

FDG

pathwise dependent
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
5,903
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
7w8
Italy?

(btw, Germany is the most popolous nation in Western Europe, so it'd be perfectly normal if it had produced more eminent academics than the others; not to mention that Ashkenazi Jews used to reside mostly in western germany, and they are known for their drive towards academic achievment)

Anyway, I wanted to comment on this:

I also think a large part of the problem with Academia, that didn't seem to be mentioned, is the over-emphasis on GPA and simply "How many articles have you published". I believe this unfairly discriminates those with creative intellectual talents and puts more effort into regurgitating older, more sterile theories to the detriment of science and the humanities. I believe the "Publish or Perish" paradigm is a disease in an institution where high quality theories, values, ethics and reflection over them is supposed to be its most principle goal. The model scholar should resemble that of Edmund Gettier - parsimonious yet insightful and ground-breaking. Instead, academia prefers you to publish much and not make much noise in doing so.

Actually, often rankings are based on measures such as the Impact Factor, which mostly takes into account how many citations your papers receive, rather than the sheer number of papers. This would ideally protect somebody that tends to discover very few extremely important things, since he'd always get more citations than somebody writing many papers on unimportant, unoriginal matters. Obviously these measures are not perfect, so they don't always produce the desidered results.

I truly wish/long for the days when every student of the University was forced to learn Latin and Calculus

LOL, Latin? Have you ever studied Latin? I have, for 5 years, It's a fucking dead language, it would be better to teach Chinese, Russian, Persian, Turkish (actually probably teach any agglutinative language would contribute significantly to open-mindedness, given their structure, completely different from the indo-european's branch structure). Every student in Italy hates latin, even the best and most motivated think it's a total waste of time.
 
Top