The Right Opinion
Colleges Skimp on Science, Spend Big on Diversity
How many times have you heard Barack Obama talk about "investing" in education? Quite a few, if you've been listening to the president at all.
In fact, Americans have been investing more and more in education over the years, led by presidents Democratic and Republican. But it's become glaringly clear that we're getting pretty lousy return on these investments.
That's been evident at the K-12 level for a long time. Teacher unions and education-school types have had custody of most of our public schools for more than three decades, during which test results and high school graduation rates have been mostly stagnant.
It has come to the point that Democratic politicians like former New York City Superintendent Joel Klein, past and current Chicago Mayors Richard M. Daley and Rahm Emanuel, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Newark Mayor Cory Booker have taken on the teacher unions.
Obama's education secretary, Arne Duncan, deserves credit for doing a bit of this, as well. All this, despite the fact that teacher unions funnel millions of taxpayer-funded dollars into Democratic campaigns.
On higher education, Democrats and many Republicans as well have followed the same course as on public schools: Shovel in more money, in this case in the form of Pell grants and subsidized student loans.
College and university administrators have been happy to scoop up all the money by rapidly raising tuitions and fees. Higher-ed expenses have been rising much more rapidly than inflation for three decades.
And what has the money been spent on? Some of it presumably goes to professors in the hard sciences and the great scholars who have made American universities the best in the world. Well and good.
But many university administrators have other priorities. The University of California system has been raising tuitions and cutting departments. But, reports John Leo in the invaluable Minding the Campus blog, its San Diego campus found the money to create a new post of "vice chancellor for equity, diversity and inclusion."
That's in addition to what the Manhattan Institute's Heather Mac Donald calls its "already massive diversity apparatus." It takes Mac Donald 103 words just to list the titles of UCSD's diversitycrats.
The money for the new vice chancellorship could have supported two of the three cancer researchers that the campus lost to Rice University in Houston, a private school that apparently takes the strange view that hard science is more important than diversity facilitators.
This doesn't just happen on the Left Coast. The University of North Carolina at Wilmington saved some money by lumping together two science departments and raised spending on its five diversity-multicultural offices.
But, to quote George W. Bush, is our students learning? Not very much, concludes the California Association of Scholars in its 87-page study of the University of California system.
Students aren't required to study American history or Western civilization. But they're subjected to a lot of political indoctrination by leftist activists. "Far too many" have not learned to write effectively to read "a reasonably complex book."
"In recent years, study after study has found that a college education no longer does what it once did and should do," the report concludes. "Students are being asked to pay considerably more and get considerably less."
That's the sort of thing that happens when you pump money into an insular system and don't hold its leaders accountable for results.
Many politicians' instinctive response is to pump in more money. But if you're stuck in a hole, it's a good idea to quit digging.
Millions of young Americans are living with the results. In a time of economic stagnation, the degrees they've earned haven't equipped them with basic work skills, much less expert knowledge that can command a premium even in a sluggish market.
And they're saddled with tens of thousands of dollars of student loan debt, which -- darn it! -- turns out not to be dischargeable in bankruptcy. They can get by on partial payments for a while, but interest keeps accumulating, to the point that Social Security checks may get dunned to pay for college.
Glenn Reynolds, proprietor of instapundit.com and a law professor at the University of Tennessee, says we're watching a higher education bubble that's just about to pop. That's what happens when you throw a lot of money at college and university administrators who don't have much common sense.
COPYRIGHT 2012 THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

5 Comments
Robert
Thursday, April 5, 2012 at 10:31 AM
A big part of the problem with higher education is that the students come to the university without the skills supposedly taught in secondary schools.Then,the instructors and professors are pressured to avoid flunking only but the worst students. You might say that the bad students are subsidizing the education for the good students.
Howard Last
Thursday, April 5, 2012 at 10:31 AM
I may be biased as I have a Bachelors in Mechanical Engineering and a Masters in Civil Engineering, but most of the liberal arts courses are a complete waste of time. What kind of jobs can people with a liberal arts degree get other than teaching liberal arts courses? And some colleges have dropped Shakespeare from English Literature courses, I kid you not.
Army Officer (Ret)
Thursday, April 5, 2012 at 12:32 PM
Any degree program that has the word "Studies" in it is a waste of time and money. Not only is the student paying gobs of money to learn things of little practical value and less intellectual rigor, but many of the things they learn are factually incorrect.I will respectfully disagree with Howard about the value of a liberal (in the original sense of the word) education, though: without a knowledge of culture, literature, and history, a society that focuses all its efforts on technology would be a sad, pathetic place indeed. Such a society may create the best gadgets, but naked materialism is a poor substitute for the soul of a people.Now, I'm not a squishy mush-head who doesn't appreciate the hard sciences. In fact I am constantly mystified by "artsy" types who think the guy who paints a picture of a bridge is an "artist" while the engineer who designed that bridge is not. (I would argue that the engineer who designs a structure that can span a chasm while supporting passing freight trains, year after year, is exhibiting FAR more imagination and creativity than the guy standing on the lip of that same chasm painting a picture of that bridge.) But if one has no exposure to the greatest prose and poetry; the most inspiring music, sculpture, and painting; the history of man's struggles with nature and himself; can one say he has truly lived well? Can one say he has thought "big" thoughts? I would hope that practitioners of the hard sciences would appreciate the liberal arts, while liberal artists should apply themselves to understanding the hard facts about how the world works - lest they think of the forces around them as little other than a materialistic version of magic.I think students of the hard sciences get more exposure to the liberal arts than the other way around, though. Universities generally require them to take a broad range of courses. On the other hand, liberal arts majors can usually get away with a smattering of very basic courses in subjects like mathematics and the sciences. I have both a B.A. and an M.A., but I made it a point to take the "hard" classes as well. I was, sadly, the only English major in my calculus class all those years ago - but I chose to take a year of calculus to satisfy my degree requirement rather than the "Basic Mathematical Concepts for Liberal Arts Majors" tripe that most of my peers took.Perhaps the most important thing all students need to learn is logic - hard, formal logic. Liberal arts students, as a group, are notorious for lacking the ability to think critically. Students of the "hard" subjects fare better, because nature cares not a whit whether you "feeeeeeel" something should work a certain way. But even they are often lacking. While they may be excellent at materialistic determinism, cause-and-effect in the realm of human interaction is infinitely more complex than anything that can be shown with any equation.
Doktor Riktor Von Zhades
Thursday, April 5, 2012 at 1:03 PM
There are only two things that I can think of that would help reverse this trend. One, get back to basics! Enough of the feely good education that puts kids in a hole educationally, and later on in college, (if they're lucky to get there), in a whole financially. Pell grants and/or student loans should be used for only such areas as hard sciences or actual humanity classes. For example, History, English, etc. If you want to have a degree in the relationship between native tribes and the modern era...PAY FOR IT YOURSELF. Second thought, although, it is probably wishful thinking, is for Alumni to take a more active role in the types of courses that are being offered. If it does not meet the basic requirements of a well rounded education it should NOT be funded. Perhaps if they tighten the purse stings, or attach conditions to the aforementioned purses, as to how their donations are spent and where they are spent, more institutes of higher learning would be a lot more responsive to what and what is not to be taught. It is a shame that this our nation was number one in all areas of education, now, we're lucky to be in the top ten. This after throwing trillions, (that's a one followed by 15 zeros) of dollars into educating our children. I do not begrudge teachers et al, wanting a decent living for their services. It is a hard row to hoe, admittedly, but likewise, it is time to say, you make enough, earn your keep folks. Get rid of excessive administrative personal. Perhaps my memory is getting older, but I recall a time when many teachers did double duties working both in the classrooms, and in student lunch rooms. Some did administrative work one or two hours a day before or after classes. Usually it was on a rotating basis. Some did hall monitoring duties. Such are my thoughts on this subject. Maybe they're good ideas, maybe not, but certainly we cannot continue down this path wherein education has become indoctrination.
Jeremy
Thursday, April 5, 2012 at 4:14 PM
"That's what happens when you throw a lot of money at college and university administrators who don't have much common sense."That's great line.I teach at a university (in California, no less) and the "diversity" nonsense is a constant.IMHO, the solution lies with parents, who foot most of the bill to support the current system. Parents should demand a decent return on investment---if not for themselves, then for their kids. Insist that your kid get a degree in a real subject (science, engineering, etc.), not in one of the many fake subjects (psychology, social "sciences" in general, anything with "studies" in the title), and avoid like the plague those once-proud subjects that have been hijacked by the loony left (English, history, etc.).How many foreign students come to the US to study psychology? Compare that to the number of foreign students who study Computer Science. You get the idea...