How do universities get away with it?

In the wake of the failed financial industry bailout in the US I am once again thinking about our universities. To be sure, the failed congressional vote was politics. So was the proposal from the White House and the outrage with which it was received. But, given that we were looking at a $700B transfer from the federal government to the banking and financial industries, wasn't it nice and refreshing that politicians were insisting that the money NOT go to pay executive compensation to the CEOs who screwed up in the first place? And that provisions be made for those citizens who had, say, lost a home?

It makes me wonder about our universities because it continues to astound me that governments in Canada provide upteen billion dollars ($20B in 2008) in subsidies to these institutions every year without a single meaningful measure of accountability for the money.

I don't believe that it's wasted money and I am totally down with the mission of universities (whatever one interprets that to be), but it is flatly outrageous that politicians are consistently outflanked by academics on this issue and that they appear more ready to impose accountability and regulation on banks than universities. It's doubly outrageous that the attitude of university leaders (anytime accountability is raised) seems to be that their institutions are above such petty matters - i.e., give us the cash and leave us alone.

How do they get away with that?

Sent from my iPhone

John McCain is a liar

I invented the Blackberry.

I also happen to be Spartacus.

Madmen

We have a crisis in this country. You wouldn't believe it, but there are mad, crazy insidious people out there encouraging young men and women to...go to university. In fact, according to a spate of recent articles (here *US article*, here, here *subscription required*, and here), our children are being convinced there is no other option, but university, to the great detriment of society and their self-esteem.

The CSM article is based around the premise that a Bachelor's degree ain't what it used to be, which is fine in so far as one looks only at the gaps in income between bachelor and college graduates in the early years of earning. Wente's notion is that there are some people who simply don't belong in university, or as she says (in a style that only she can muster), "Educational romanticism has led us to believe that every student can become at least average, and that the right teaching strategies can close the achievement gap." Wente is onto something here - our children are being taught, by someone so evil that one can only call him or her Hitler, to believe that they should shoot for a university education. Hells bells! This requires some serious investigation and I've come up with a list of suspects:

1) High school teachers and guidance counsellors
These liberal, university educated pussies have been trying to get our kids to do better for years and have access to our young people more than anyone, including their parents who are so goddamn tired of them by the time their teenagers they'd rather not have to talk to them at all. Naturally, they're pimping their own personal path as that to the promised land. Here's a question though: what self-respecting teenager does what a teacher or guidance counsellor tells them to do?

2) Parents
Bastards! These bastards won't stop putting pressure on young Billy and Suzy to do better in school and go onto a successful life of health, happiness and comfort. Bastards, again, I say! Sure bastards with a university education are role models to their kids and, if you've got some bling to go with it, probably make the university path look attractive. They may also put pressure on their kids to do well in school and live up to the family name. My bastards both have advanced degrees and look how I turned out! However, this only explains part of the phenomenon because it's still only about 50-60% of adult Canadians who ever went to a post-secondary program let alone received a univeristy degree. So how does that explain all the stupid kids that Wente is worried about who didn't have the role model, nor the skills to make it to and in university? Plus, "what self-respecting teenager does what" their bastards "tell them to do?" (Also, see my point above about how bastards don't like their kids.)

3) Universities
For all of the griping that university types do about the lousy students they have to teach these days they are marketing their schools to kids like never before. This kind of thing has a name - bait and switch. We're on to you assholes.

4) Friends and peers
We should definitely stop kids from having friends and speaking to their peers. These little jerks get other kids to do drugs, have sex, and very likely go to university, because as we all know if Timmy jumped off a bridge, Johnny sure as hell will to. This phenomenon only applies more strongly to going to school. You should see the lines of kids lined up to jump off the bridge over the swan pond at Mount Allison University.

I'm sure there are others, such as John McCain, BlackBerrys, Iguanas, Jesus and Kevin Bacon who bear responsibility, but this post is getting a little absurd, as opposed to the articles that inspired it.

Never mind for a second that there are probably half a million people enrolled in community colleges in Canada who obviously never ran into the crazies pushing unviersity like so much crack. Wente and others just miss the point. There is lots of reason to think that people can be taught to learn better and be better students and there are successful programs that do just that. Is it a substitute for proper guidance and counselling to ensure people go where they will be most passionate about their education and future careers? No. They go hand in hand, which is in fact the point. We want all of our young people to have every chance in life to be happy, healthy, productive, employed and well paid and to the extent that meeting those ambitions require post-secondary education we want our young people inspired to take the right form and level of education suited to them. It might be university, but it could also be college or skilled trades. Support your kids to do what they feel passionate about and I'd wager they'll be better people...and still get paid.

However, when prominent university leaders say stuff like this and this, perhaps we need a bigger conversation about what society expects from our institutions.

(PS- We pay for half of your shit with our taxes, assholes. The whole realm of accountability and universities line in is worth another post.)

Why is it okay to lie to Parliament?

As far as inaugural posts go this will seem a bit weird perhaps, but you're basically catching mid-stream of thought, which is pretty close to what this blog will be about. So, in reality, you're getting the point.

I'm following the elections in Canada and the US pretty closely so I caught some blog posts from south of the border about Joe Biden's new stump speech. It goes pretty hard after McCain trying to draw his 2008 persona (snivelling distorter of truths) away from the 2000 version (Maverick) everyone seems to still be enthralled by. It also contains this line, which caught my attention:

"He stands with the oil company CEOs who swore to me, under penalty of perjury, that they didn't need tax breaks to explore for oil."

Now, I assume that Biden has never sued and oil company exec (I assume without proper fact check), so I also assume that he's talking about testimony given to a congressional committee. From experience, I know that when witnesses testify before a House of Commons committee that they can (and often do) say just about anything they want, and unless one of the committee members knows different (chances = slim to fat chance), they can get away with lying out their ass. I realize (thank you C-SPAN) that congressional committees administer an oath of honesty, which Parliamentary committees don't, but I guess the question I don't know the answer to, is:

Why does Parliament consider it okay to lie to its committees?