Education for All?

I was reminded of my last letter to the editor last night as I wrote again to the editor of the local newspaper. Back then I was living in Tennessee and I argued for the creation of a state lottery. The lottery was designed to provide higher education access to students that would otherwise not be able to afford it. A lofty dream then when I was a graduate student in history; now, having spent considerable time on the "other side" of the desk as a professor, I see the complete error of that opinion.

Higher education should not be for all. Some people are not cut out to go to university and have no business being there. The results of lottery-financed students are the watering down of education, overcrowding of classrooms, over taxation of already strained teaching faculty, and worst of all, the erosion of the ideals of enlightened thought! Our universities (the ones that are glutted with lottery-financed students) have become breeding grounds for mediocrity!!

Some people were not meant for college...period. Vocational jobs require workers as well and the delusion that someone of substandard ability can achieve in a university classroom is wholly without merit while they could succeed in other, less academically challenging, environments. Call me an elitist if you will, but universities are symbolic of the elite. They have been for millennia!!

I say take lottery money and put it to use in the universities by increasing staff and faculty wages, buying new resources and equipment, and expanding areas of study. The last thing needed are more substandard students clogging the hallowed hallways of learning.

Faculty and Librarian Collaboration?

The grand failure of librarian/faculty collaboration in my institution has come to fruition at last! Of late, an English instructor has given out an assignment that requires students to cite at least three critical essays about an author's play in their paper. Of four given plays, my library and its extended resources can only provide information on three of them. Student's come to me day in and out seeking information about the one play for which there is no information, save one article. This is my lot...

If only the instructor had bothered to consult with us on the assignment, we could have avoided this dreadful situation. But alas, after years of repeated attempts to gain access to assignments before hand, we still have nothing. Students come to the library seeking information that cannot be provided for assignments that cannot be completed.

We are not sure what the problem is with faculty not wishing to share their assignments with us before they are given out. Is it that it will indicate their ignorance of what is actually available in the library? Perhaps, but it certainly would save them the trouble of having students say that they cannot find enough sources because there is nothing available!

Academic Hiring...

Last week I had the opportunity to observe the presentations of several candidates that were being interviewed to fill the newly created position of Coordinate of the Writing and Learning Center. Let me tell you about my experiences.

First, in typical academic administrator fashion, the announcement that everyone was welcome to attend the first presentation was made at 10am when the candidate was presenting at 10am. It seemed to me that the admins did not want anyone coming. So, I missed the first person. However, I was able to make the others.

No keep in mind, these people were interviewing to lead a new Learning Commons system and none but ONE actually talked about it! It was quite odd. Finally, the last person seemed to have a vision of what to do, had the desire to do it, and was not only my pick, but also the director's choice.

Ultimately, the search committee picked the first person because she was "doctorally prepared," but had never had a real job outside of being a teaching assistant while in grad school! And she is going to be the Coordinator of the entire Writing and Learning Center?

This proves beyond all doubt that degrees count more than experience in academic settings. Now don't get me wrong - I understand the value of degrees, but experience MUST count for something. Knowing how to apply that degree is also valuable.

What a world...

Truth...

Truth is a big topic to consider on a blog. LOL! It is a big topic to consider for anything, actually, but the nature of truth has me in its grips again and I feel that I must put something down.

I'm nearly finished with Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and it has proven to be quite extraordinary. Pirsig's discussions about "quality" seem to have something to do with truth in the universe, but I am not certain what, or even if I'm correct. Quality, as he notes from the Greeks, is excellence in all things, a virtue to strive for beyond the moral, modern implications of virtue. When quality is reached, is it true, or it is in a state of excellence beyond this plane of existence?

While reading about truth yesterday, a sentence a philosophy book jumped out at me. The author notes that "it is obvious that St. Paul's Cathedral is beautiful, and the new Lloyd's building is repulsive; but is there some 'aesthetic reality' that makes these judgments true?" I immediately contemplated the idea that some people may see St. Paul's Cathedral as repulsive and the new Lloyd's building beautiful. Is one more beautiful or repulsive than the other? Pirsig speaks of quality as something that makes things true, that the most ugly things (as perceived by people) that are made with quality are actually beautiful. So, if the cathedral was made sloppily and Lloyd's made carefully, then Lloyd's has quality and is beautiful while the cathedral is without quality and is thus ugly. This is way too much of an oversimplification of concepts far too important to include here, but it is something to think about.

Quality is excellence and the striving for excellence is the striving for things beyond us, but reaching for them makes us better, and thus gives us quality. I've got to put this into action the next time I get to teach a class.

Thinking about Dan Brown's books...

Having just completed Angels and Demons and The Da Vinci Code, I must now take a moment to reflect on the general themes of both books. I have never read any other Brown book and cannot speak to them, but regarding these two, I have a grasp of their meanings.

Angels and Demons has the basic theme of science versus religion/faith. Such a meaning is not hidden at all and is evident as one reads the book. This debate has been one of the cornerstones of Western thinking since the days of the Enlightenment when the very foundations of the Church were shaken by the re-emergence of scientific rationale. While not nearly as controversial as The Da Vinci Code, Brown brings into question the possibility of whether science can explain the creation of existence in logical terms devoid of religion. This is a hot topic for sure and one that all scholarly people should engage in at least once in their lives.

The Da Vinci Code has a message that is a bit less obvious. Many seem to think the theme is the credibility of the Church regarding nearly two millennium's worth of cover-ups, lies, and deceit. While these are elements of the story, the real theme is facts versus beliefs and power of each to effect human thinking. This is a theme that transcends Brown's adventure-type stories and permeates all of human history. Are beliefs so powerful as to block out obvious facts that contradict beliefs? That is was The Da Vinci Code is about - not about a lie perpetuated by a Church, but what facts, of any kind, can do to beliefs when those facts come to light.

After having read The Da Vinci Code, I formulated this basic philosophy, one that I had always known, but for the first time was able to put into words: The Facts are what they are; the Truth is what you make of it.

Technology as Religion

I’m reading The Da Vinci Code and it forces me to look back to graduate school when we all sat around and debated religion, faith, and the nature of spirituality. Ah, those were the days! I still ponder these notions today; not doing would besmirch the education and training I received as an historian.

Anyway, while reading Brown’s book, I began to contemplate the role that technology plays in our daily lives as opposed to religion. Which receives more attention? The computer screen you stare at daily or the church, temple, or shrine you visit only a few times per week? Have Intel Duel Core processors supplanted supreme deities and have computer work stations become the new alters? Where do you spend most of your time? Reading the Bible, Koran, or Torah, or reading e-mails?

Historically speaking, religion is the oldest form of technology in human existence, created by a social class determined to control the rest, often by means of fear. Now, the same class of people exists, but they exist as the IT Department in your organization. Interesting isn’t it?

Brown raised many interesting points with his books and sparked controversy to this day, especially concerning the possibility that an entire religion is founded on false principles. He asks the reader if it is worth it to expose such frauds for the sake of truth. If at all came crashing down, how would most ill-educated people cope? The same holds to paying homage to our technological deities. When they fail to work, we curse the day they were made, demanding a return to normal function immediately. Did the Israelites not do the same when all when well in the Promised Land and curse God when their expectations were not meet?

I’m supposed to be the Cynical Librarian, and in keeping with a cynical thread, I postulate that the religion of the modern, western world is technology, the priests, the IT people, the church, the Internet, and the prophet, Google itself!! I invite arguments, attacks, and support.

"I did absolutely nothing..."

"I did absolutely nothing and it was everything I thought it possibly could be." This is one of the great lines from the classic film "Office Space". It sums up a great deal of philosophy concisely while at the same time opens many doors for further exploration. Thus it must command our attention, if only briefly.

What is the significance of doing nothing? Can it be done? How do you do nothing at all? Surely one would actually be thinking of something at least, presuming the person is not completely brain dead already. The very concept of nothing is a difficult one to grasp if you try to understand it. Nothing is taken for granted in general as is the concept of eternity, but an attempt to come to a full understanding of either is monumental in a universe of material existence and spiritual givens. Is nothing itself something, or is it totally bereft of all existence? And you can measure the total absence of any and all things? It seems immeasurable to me.

Anyway, just sitting around and doing nothing, as the saying goes, can be quite restful for some and unnerving for others. Some people have to be doing something - they can't just sit around. I can just sit and do nothing for long periods. It serves to recharge my brain for when I have to do something else.

BTW - I looking forward to doing nothing later this evening....