ts. Think Responsibly

Academia Isn’t a Pit, It’s a Ladder

Bobby Mars

April 02 2024 at 05:09 pm

Higher Ed is Eating Everyone’s Lunch Think of an image of a college professor. Middle-aged, perhaps even older. Well-dressed. Dignified. A man or a woman, but still, you probably imagined a man. Bespectacled, of course. Tweed, leather elbow pads, mahogany bookshelves, maybe even a tobacco pipe puffing away. Strolling the campus, having deep conversations, researching, never getting rich, but living a life of quiet dignity and the pursuit of knowledge. What they don’t imagine are poorly paid, overworked, contingent laborers known as adjuncts. Or their equally unfortunate cousins, the graduate student instructors, who make up roughly a quarter of all instructors. Adjuncts and GSIs are the foot soldiers of the university systems, the shock troops filling the gaps where the regular soldiers can’t. They take heavy losses, of course, but that’s the point of mercenaries. Adjuncts make only a few grand to teach a class for a full semester. GSIs with a teaching stipend make just above the federal poverty line, something like $35k per year in most university systems. They’re expendable, and they know it. Adjunct positions still require advanced graduate degrees, but the low pay and lack of research support ensures that their focus remains elsewhere. Grad students focus on their own studies, research and career advancement—teaching courses is their Faustian bargain for financial survival. The irony is that this system undermines their future career prospects in academia. The academic job market is equal parts ruthless and over-saturated, with far more PhDs and advanced degrees granted than there are full-time positions. The tenurati (tenured elite) are able to focus on their research, perhaps a lecture or two per week, serve on a few committees, etc. This isn’t to say their jobs are easy. They’re undervalued by the system too. In fact, most of them are miserable. Even as they advance up the ladder, they never quite reach that dreamt of place of stability. There’s always a bigger fish, always someone up the chain who seems to be eating their lunch. Academia is still a medieval hierarchy, a complex system of rank obtuse to outsiders. The hypocrisy of all the ivory tower talk of equity, and social justice, stings like salt in a wound given the way academics organize themselves and behave to one another. There’s an old saying in academia: the severity of infighting is inversely proportional to the stakes of the outcome. As in, the smaller the consequences, the more brutal the fight. Ask any academic and they’ll laugh, they’ll think back to every committee meeting they ever sat in, the endless debate over minutiae of so little consequence it would make your head spin. All of this fiddling while Rome burns, while the colleges were swept out from under faculty governance by the legions of faceless bureaucrats. As a former professor, I’ve seen it myself. Once, a faculty meeting involved a seemingly endless debate over many classes each professor should teach. The administrators had just changed some arbitrary metric that, in the end, lowered the teaching load for all tenured faculty. Great, they said, but what do we do now? We’re all getting paid more to teach half the number of classes, but we still need our department to teach the same number of classes overall. The solution, of course—hire more expendable adjuncts, hire more contingent faculty to teach more and pay them less. The gap grew wider, and no one gave a shit. In these conditions, lifelong grudges, intrigue, severe burnout and even suicide have plagued many a college department over the years. One small college in Michigan had two such incidents of faculty suicide in the span of a single year. A music professor offed himself, followed shortly by a widely beloved art professor. Both tenured professors supposedly living the dream. Little was said about the incidents, they were swept under the rug, scandalous emails implicating faculty intrigue were deleted or lost. You only heard about it in rumors after the fact, hushed tones, whispers in the corridors. Nothing changed except the music department is now said to, “have issues,” and the art department got some more money and a fancy title for their replacement. All of this while the rest of the faculty are in therapy, only partially covered by their fancy health plan. All this intrigue happens at the expense of the students, of course, and boy you’d be shocked to hear the disdain with which they’re spoken of. They’re viewed, to put it mildly, as patsies, marks to be recruited into the cult. Faculty actively conspire on how best to manipulate them into declaring a major within their department. They pick their favorites to get scholarships, and openly disdain the students who don’t conform to their behavioral or aesthetic wishes. One particularly talented student was denied a scholarship because a tenured professor was offended that, “she’s missed two of my classes this semester.” Students keep the money flowing, they keep the faucets running and the lights turned on. With debt, of course. Who benefits from this? Surely not the students. Certainly not the expendable, underpaid adjunct instructors and graduate students. The tenured faculty may seem comfy from the outside, but they’re not particularly happy or well paid either. Who benefits, then? Mostly the well-paid bureaucrats, the administrators. That’s the goal, to join their ranks. I remember one department chair complaining about the administrators,, swearing she’d never be one of them… until they offered her a huge raise to become vice provost. She accepted and now makes more money than she ever would have as a professor. The purpose of a system is what it does, not what it claims to do. Don’t look at their words, look at what they actually accomplish. What higher ed manages to do year after year is continually grow its glut of fancy new buildings, bureaucrats, administrators, regulations, DEI officers, and political apparatchiks. The functionaries benefit themselves alone, the faculty are too afraid of losing their status to challenge them, and the students get shafted. Suspend all moral idealism and consider it for what it is—a grift on the dreams of the naive.

On STEM, Meritocracy and Youth in India

Sadhika Pant

April 21 2024 at 11:58 am

Note: This article was authored by a close friend and colleague, Ankit, for publication on my blog Dregs of Yore, and edited by me. Introduction Using a phrase like "When I reflect on my life..." might seem odd for someone who is just 30 years old. One imagines this expression to be used by grandparents fondly reminiscing the days of their youth to their grandchildren. However, if you find yourself using it when the past isn't that far removed, it might indicate one of two things: (a) You're experiencing a midlife crisis, or (b) There's something unresolved from your past that still carries present significance. I often encounter teenagers contemplating their future, anxious about the results of critical exams like IIT-JEE or NEET, which determine admission into India's top engineering and medical schools. Conversations about these exams on social media can quickly become contentious due to differing beliefs. Some argue that meritocracy should be the only factor worth consideration, while others contend that the costs of this rigid approach are too high. In my view, these polarised discussions miss all that falls through the cracks, focusing more on the system that shapes individuals rather than the individuals who will ultimately build the system. An Average Day in the Life of an Aspirant A small town in the state of Rajasthan, that goes by the name of Kota, is fabled for its coaching institutes for IIT-JEE, where students throng in thousands, in the hope of getting into the prestigious IITS (Indian Institute of Technology) that spawned the Pichais and Nadelas of the world. I was one of those thousands in 2008, and it was my first time living away from my parents at the age of 15. The first day was the orientation, and I remember a question posed to the auditorium packed to full-capacity with teenage kids from all across the country: “Who, among you all, was a topper at your school?” To my disbelief, all five thousand hands went up immediately. First off, every student had to stick to a demanding schedule set by the institute. Every student was trying to crack the formula for clearing these exams, and we got no help from the pamphlet that was handed to us, which broke down the number of hours of the next two years into four broad categories: Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, and Shitting (no kidding). Our day began at 7 a.m., when we got up, got ready, and had breakfast before heading to class by 8 a.m. Apparently being half an hour early for class wasn’t proof enough of my sincerity; the class was half full already. Classes went on till 2 in the afternoon, with an hour-long lunch break, then two more hours of classes in the afternoon. The rest of the day was filled with homework and preparing for the next class. Missing even one day of homework meant you'd fall behind in the following day's class, leading to a snowball effect. We typically went to bed at 2 a.m., worn out from ten to twelve hours of intense study. The Upside of This System The biggest advantage of this system is that it can set you up for life. If you endure the gruelling two-year coaching program and secure admission to one of the top colleges, you'll gain access to some of the best opportunities, skills, education, and facilities India has to offer. Being accepted into these prestigious institutions virtually ensures job placements in leading companies within India and abroad, a dream for many, especially those from smaller towns or villages. It costs an arm and a leg to put your kid through coaching institutes that promise such outcomes, and this may be the only fair shot for many of them towards upward social mobility. Try imagining yourself in place of that kid who has been tasked with pulling his family out of generations of poverty. Not to mention, kids who pull through undergo a radical change in outlook - they can take on the world. These two years act as a wellspring of confidence that can be tapped into throughout life. They become the yardstick of endurance, and every problem encountered thereafter seems smaller in comparison. The Other Side of the Story The top 5 percentile are promised a life full of opportunities. But what about the rest? For many, this is their first encounter with failure, and it can take years to break free from the cycle of self-pity—if they ever do. I was one of the lucky few who was able to articulate what happened, and not lose perspective. But for many, it remains to be the biggest regret of their lives that they couldn’t get into IIT, leading to perpetual self-doubt, a sense of inadequacy, and, worst of all, the crushing feeling of letting down their parents. For some, this even became a cause of resentment towards their parents, adding on to the baggage that one has to unpack. During these two years, most students follow the "flying route" for their school education, enrolling in schools affiliated with coaching institutes that don't require regular attendance. As a result, they miss out on typical high-school experiences. While this may seem like a minor trade-off, the broader impact is significant: an entire generation lacks interaction with the opposite gender, has weak communication skills, little to no engagement in extracurricular activities, and minds shaped solely by competition. The local newspapers of Kota are flooded with reports of student suicides and drug abuse. Meritocracy — Why It Matters For a developing country like India, it is important to have technocrats in decision-making roles and an entrepreneurial ecosystem that can reap the demographic dividend. This requires quality human capital, which is produced by institutions like the IITs. India may have a Gandhi, but it does not have a Musk. If the vision of a developed India is that of a rule-based capitalist system, then it needs more Musks than Gandhis. The vision of the government in setting up IITs was to instil scientific temperament in the youth so that we can break the shackles of our past and catapult to a more advanced economy. In the last two decades, the buzzword in India has shifted from ‘BPO’ to ‘start-up’, which implies an unprecedented shift from the erstwhile risk-averse working-class mindset to a more enterprising and exuberant disposition. The tangible contribution of the students who come out of these institutes is there for the world to see, but what they miss is how a meritocratic set-up has touched the lives of a billion people and reinforced faith in the country just like the American dream did. Caste-based Reservation and its Unintended Consequences Even within this highly competitive and meritocratic system of selection, half of the seats to these colleges are reserved for those groups that the government classifies as backward or in need of affirmative action. Additionally, they have lower cut-offs for admission. Candidates who get in solely on this basis find it difficult to compete with the others and many end up dropping out prematurely. Furthermore, those who do go on to have successful careers, are left wondering whether their victory was their own and it is often worsened by the fact that their peers do not validate their efforts. On the flip side, there is a major chunk of disillusioned students who missed out because they fell short by a few marks, and they end up bitter towards those who got in through reservation. While well-intentioned, reservation brings casteist overtones in the campus to the fore instead of equalising the playing field as it was supposed to. These impressionable young minds have friends across communities, but reservation widens the rift between them, making it difficult for students to feel genuinely happy for their classmates who gained admission through these reserved quotas. Conclusion On a micro-level, the question that needs to be asked is whether you would want to put your own kid through this ordeal. But let he who has a better alternative for stimulating talent in the country come forth, and try replacing a functional system which may be mired in a unique set of problems. My two cents will be: For those who don’t get through, life still has a lot to offer and so does India.

The true purpose of Public Schools

CanadianLibertarian

April 13 2024 at 01:24 pm

To truly awaken the masses, in particular our youth, they must first be made aware that our public education system is based on a model of obedience and conformity. The Prussian model (modern day Germany) on which it is based is designed to teach them what to think, not how to think. It was first introduced in Ontario (Upper Canada back then) in the 1840's by Egerton Ryerson, son of Colonel Joseph Ryerson, who was not only an authoritarian type military man, but first and foremost, a united Empire Loyalist. It is not surprising, therefore, that Ryerson believed that monarchy gave dignity to government and acted as a check on the radical excesses of the people. The system had proven to be wildly successful at maintaining a large degree of control over societies, regimenting their behaviors, and in establishing more productive labor resources. It was generally accepted that it takes multiple successive generations of implementation for the established goals of the curriculum to be fully realized. Now, with the Woke DEI agenda and Identity Politics being added to the curriculum, there is even more reason for parents to be concerned and seek out alternative forms of education for their children. This style of education has been widely used throughout Western cultures, and has been upgraded and modified to suit the social, economical and labor needs of the given time, but the core principles of Authority, conformity and obedience are still the foundation of the system. It is the very reason why most full grown adults who have spent almost the entirety of their childhood in these institutions clamor for a ruling class, parental surrogates, or protectors, while rejecting self-ownership, independence, and genuine liberty. Completely enveloping the mind of each individual in such an adolescent state assures the continuation of power in the hands of those who seek to dominate us and plunder our resources, while giving the illusion that bowing to the demands and edicts of central planners is in fact an act of benevolence and being a good citizen. The instinct to defend oneself from external threats subsides entirely if a person can be convinced that their forced sacrifices and subjugation defines what it means to be contributors to the great good. When, in fact, it is voluntary acts of kindness, generosity, charity, and contributions that truly defines a person's merit, in terms of social/economic values. I have a lot of hope for the future if enough people can break free from their slave-psychology, and help usher in what I have termed 'Enlightenment Era 2.0 in the 21st Century. It is not only plausible, but very much possible, considering we live in the age of information. Full on human ownership was once part of the fabric of past societies, and accepted as normal until the ethical implications were thoroughly brought to light and vigorously fought against by an ever growing population of enlightened individuals. Today, nobody advocates for human ownership as it was practiced in the past. Which shows that cultures can change, and adopt entirely new ways of living socially with each other, and dealing with each other economically. For anyone that is skeptical about the validity of these claims or just want to learn more about the history of our education system, you can always take it upon yourself to Google, use any other search engine, or visit your local Library in order to seek out other literature or information regarding the history of our education system. A truly informed individual is much better suited to making rational decisions and forming opinions.Bennett (CL)

Fascism and Socialism Are Twin Brothers -...

CanadianLibertarian

April 26 2024 at 10:37 am

Members of the "antifa" movement often claim to be the exact opposite of fascists. However, a closer examination reveals that substituting "socialism" for "fascism" in many statements made by fascists would likely receive instant approval from socialists. Consider how Mussolini describes the role of the "individual” in a Fascist state: "The citizen in the Fascist State is no longer a selfish individual who has the antisocial right to rebel against any law of the Collectivity." (p. 280 of his autobiography)Or consider Hitler’s vision of an N4z1 economy: “The state should retain oversight, and each property owner should consider himself appointed by the state. It is his duty not to use his property against the interests of others within his own nation. This is the crucial point. The Th1rd R3ich will always maintain its right to control the owners of the property. "Still not convinced? Consider Lawrence Dennis, a prominent American fascist of the time, who wrote in his book The Coming American Fascism in 1936: “Fascism does not accept the liberal dogmas regarding the sovereignty of the consumer or trader in the free market. It does not concede that the market can or should be entirely free.” (p. 299) "Social planning is the paramount imperative for public order and material abundance in the present and near future.” (p. 104) “Fascism assumes that individual welfare and protection are primarily secured by the strength, efficiency, and success of the State in realizing the national plan.” (p. 160) "Under fascism, private property, private enterprise, and private market choices have no intrinsic rights. They are valued only for their social utility, subject to proper public control.” (p. 180)Indeed, fascists and socialists often clash violently. Yet, they fight over the same type of mindset: those who believe individuals should sacrifice their lives to serve the dictates of a few in power. This point was brilliantly articulated by F.A. Hayek in The Road to Serfdom and later expanded by Ayn Rand. In 1962, during one of her lectures at Ford Hall, she quoted passages from the 1920 political platform of the German N4z1 Party, which included demands for “an end to the power of financial interests,” “profit sharing in big businesses,” “extensive care for the aged,” “the improvement of public health” by the government, “an all-around expansion of our entire public education system,” and more. These platforms remain evident in today's socialist programs. Moreover, the platform, as Rand pointed out, concludes by stating that progress “can only come from within on the foundation of 'The Common Good Before the Individual Good. '”Can you imagine any socialist opposing these words? - @sfliberty on X

Celebrating Discrimination

Right Away

April 05 2024 at 09:07 pm

My oldest son was a good student in terms of grades and behavior in the classroom, but he was mediocre on standardized tests. He wasn’t bad at testing, and I am not belittling him. However, he was average. He went on to play collegiate football, get married, and have kids, all of which are considered good outcomes. But he didn't get the same consideration as my youngest son, who was a good test taker. My youngest son is a rockstar when it comes to test-taking. He has exceptional insight into the patterns within the words and numbers and always scores at the top, regardless of the type of test. He and his brother had similar classroom grades, but the nationwide tests that they both took showed them to be much different. However, he wasn’t at the absolute top of the list. The National Merit Semi-Finalist Qualifying Test (MNSQT) had a rubric that said if the student scored in the top 0.2%, they were given the label of Semi-Finalist. That said, he did well. I don’t remember the number, but he wasn’t in the top 0.2%. He began applying to colleges and playing the game of admission, financial aid, and scholarships. He didn't have the football card that his brother had, but he could appeal to reverse discrimination and get a good outcome. Unexpectedly, our son received a letter congratulating him on becoming a National Merit Minority Scholar. We didn’t know what a minority scholar was, so we investigated. We learned it is a revisitation of his test scores once all the scores from students who list themselves as Caucasian or Asian are removed. With the upper crust of test takers now out of the pool, his score became in the top 0.2%. His name was placed on a form that every university could download, and recognition was sent to his high school. As a national merit minority scholar, he got national attention. On the back end, the guidance counselor received an affidavit to complete that affirmed that Alex was a minority. His word was not enough. A copy of his grandfather’s birth certificate from Puerto Rico was all we needed, and then, the money started to flow from every corner of the country. Without applying, our son received full scholarships at multiple universities. That doesn’t sound strange, but it was. He never applied to most of the schools that offered him full tuition and fees if he had only agreed to attend their institution. They saw his singular accolade, and they wanted it as a feather in their marketing cap. Sure, he has proven himself to be a good test taker, but a lot of applicants are good test takers. They were offering scholarships without looking at his classroom grades, behaviors, criminal background, or the like because he was a minority, and they wanted to show to the world that their student body was diverse. They knew the world was drinking the Kool-aid of diversity as a nearly indisputable justification that diversity leads to all the good things in life outcomes. The mailbox filled up with offers. His phone rang. That all sounded normal. Some schools offered more than tuition and fees. Some offered airplane tickets to come. When we went on one visit, we were met by several other students who had “similar profiles.” My phone rang one time, asking for him. That didn’t seem normal. He ended up selecting one of those schools, and he has long since graduated without ever paying a dime of Fall or Spring tuition and fees. Our son was the beneficiary of a celebrated form of discrimination. At his high school graduation, I watched as his friends walked on the stage to receive their diplomas. I wondered if some of his friends who were at a disadvantage of being Caucasian were going to college for free like he was. A few were. Most weren't. Yet, that pathway is gone. Like the Jim Crow laws, it only resides in stories like these. As of the writing of this post, the National Merit website now reads, “Winners are chosen on the basis of their abilities, skills, and accomplishments—without regard to gender, race, ethnic origin, or religious preference.” There is no minority scholar referenced on the site now. That advantage our son got is now gone. The Supreme Court unwound all of this. Yet, it happened. Our oldest son was not the only beneficiary. I put the unused portion of his college savings in a new account for our grandchildren to use when they are old enough to go to school. I wondered. Had our youngest listed that he was white on the standardized test form like his brother did, he would not have received that minority scholarship and that money would not have been passed from one generation to the next. Just because the scholarship is gone, we still reap its benefits for at least one more generation.

Recently Active Rooms

Recently Active Thinkers

All Thinkers

Search

Trending Topics

Recently Active Rooms

Recently Active Thinkers

Search close

Trending Topics

Recently Active Rooms

Recently Active Thinkers

Cookies on ts.close

Actions Listclose

Please confirm your account

Description

New Stream close

In this stream

Contributors I Follow

Followersclose

AboutClose

thinkspot TERMS OF USEclose

Search

Cookies on ts.

Actions List

New Stream

Followers

About

thinkspot TERMS OF USE