"The family has the good fortune to have an island made of oil and salt, with constant revenues, and has not had to follow the fortunes of family businesses that depend on one product," Richard Schweid, the author of "Hot Peppers: The Story of Cajuns and Capsicum," wrote in an e-mail message. "This has meant they could reject alternative practices with Tabasco sauce that would mean less quality and more savings."

Avery Island has also helped keep the family together because it is more than just a place where Tabasco is made. It is also home. Many family members grew up working summers on the island, from picking peppers to operating the company's general store. Many still spend their weekends here. Before they joined the company, Mr. Osborn was a civilian military contractor and Mr. Simmons was a construction crane supplier.

They have ideal commutes: both live on the island. Half of their 200 full-time employees do, too. The company has 40 part-time workers. Around 80 clapboard homes for employees dot the island, a holdover from the days when most people didn't own cars and traveling to remote Avery Island was difficult. (The family leases the homes to workers.) Many of the employees' parents and grandparents worked on the island and many still send their children to the island's elementary school.

"Everyone here could leave and work in the oil industry and make twice the money, but why?" said Kip White, 28, a third-generation employee. "We have a good time, and we're like family here."

'UNM's Dedication to Sports Shortchanges Education

I am probably one of the biggest Lobo sports fans in this entire University, and I have been since my childhood. My parents used to bring me to football and basketball games, and I became one of the loudest fans in the stands, next to my father. Also, when it came time to choose my college, there was no doubt I was going to be a Lobo. I enjoy being at this school, and I support all Lobo athletics, but I was absolutely appalled when I picked up Wednesday's Daily Lobo and found out how much our new basketball coach was going to make.

The article compared it to giving out 225 school tuitions or hiring 10 full professors. I can only imagine that the money could be used in other ways, as well. I am especially concerned about this as I am nearing the end of my college career, and I am being stopped dead in my tracks just meters from the finish line.

You see, I am an education major, and I cannot be accepted into the College of Education. This is not because my grades are bad; they are excellent. This is not because I scored poorly on entrance tests; I scored in the top 4 percent in all categories. This is also not because I do not have all the preliminary classes; I have completed all of my basic courses. I am very qualified to be accepted into the College of Education, but the reason I cannot be accepted is because there is not enough money to hire enough teachers to teach the classes I need. I know through conversations with my peers that many education majors are in the same boat as [I]. I also know that the nursing program faces the same problems ....

I am aware that sports events may very well bring in the most revenue for our school, and I fully support athletics, as I mentioned previously. But the question I have is this: When did sports become more important than education? The state of New Mexico is hurting for good teachers and nurses, but our school is failing to supply them because the specific colleges do not have enough money.

I do not want you to go away from this letter thinking I am one of those people who believe that athletics get all the money and breaks. Please understand that I am trying to complete my education and become a teacher, and I am tired of being held back from that dream because UNM cannot get its priorities straight and make education No. 1 - as it should always be. So, instead of spending the cash on a basketball coach, why don't we try to focus on the students? Because some of us do not want to spend six years here - I know I don't. Then again, what choice do I have?

Lindsay Holloman'

Campus Readies for Potential Deer Attacks

SIUC is gearing up for deer season.

A committee of university staff and wildlife specialists are set to meet Friday to discuss how to prevent deer attacks like those on campus in recent years, a university official said Wednesday.

University Communications Coordinator Tim Crosby said he was not sure what the staff would decide to do to prevent the attacks, but that the focus would be on educating the public.

There have been 15 reported deer attacks in the Thompson Woods and Campus Lake areas since 2005. Several injuries have resulted from the attacks and one of the rogue deer was shot and killed after attacking an SIUC police officer in June 2006.

Last year, university staff put up caution tape and warning signs to warn pedestrians about potentially dangerous deer, Crosby said.

"They were up during the height of fawning season last year," he said. "They were up at several strategic locations where there was a lot of cover for deer."

Public Safety Director Todd Sigler said his department assists in education, but it doesn't increase patrols during fawning season - the time of year when deer are taking care of their young.

"With only a limited number of officers, it's difficult to be everywhere at the same time," he said.

People often disregard the signs and caution tape that warn them to stay out of areas where deer are more likely to be present, Sigler said. He said the police don't take any action against those who ignore the warnings.

The previous attacks have all occurred during the summer, which is probably because most fawns are born in late May or early June and female deer are protective of their young, said George Feldhamer, a professor of zoology.

Feldhamer said he has never heard of incidents similar to those that took place at SIUC and he isn't aware of any clear reasons for the attacks.

He said that when fawns are studied in the wild, humans often come in close proximity to the mother deer without major problems.

"The doe normally stands off about 20 yards and stares at you and that's the whole show," he said.

Anthony Clemente, who said he saw seven deer Monday near his dorm at Thompson Point, said he thought pedestrians could avoid deer problems by using common sense.

"I imagine if you walked up [to] a doe and it had a young deer next to it, it would be defensive of [its] young," said Clemente, a freshman from Gurnee studying mechanical engineering. "But I don't think it would maul you for no reason."

Jennifer Shelton, a freshman from Hillsboro studying early childhood education, said despite past attacks, she is not scared when she encounters the deer on campus.

"I think I feel more threatened by the squirrels than the deer, actually," she said. "I've had a couple squirrels kind of run at me."

A resolution in the Senate to consider impeachment of University of Alaska Regent Jim Hayes was introduced and referred to committee on Feb. 26, and there - a month later - it sits.

Unfortunate and painful as the process may be, it's time the resolution moved forward for the good of the state, our university and for the future of the board of regents.

... If Mr. Hayes has not met conditions for removal, it's hard to imagine what threshold must be reached.

He missed nearly half the board of regents meetings in 2006 and has not attended either of two meetings held so far this year. His endorsement letter written on home-made letterhead featuring his photo, the university seal and using his title as regent to solicit public funding for the nonprofit he and his wife operated stands in clear opposition to what most Alaskans would consider honorable. The same goes for a similar endorsement letter he crafted using his title as Fairbanks mayor.


... On top of this are dozens upon dozens of questionable administrative actions involving federal dollars - documented in the past four days in this newspaper - that were carried out in part by a man who should be no stranger to the accountability demanded in public venues. The entire debacle - and it can be considered nothing less - will at the very least prove to be a colossal embarrassment to the federal agencies involved and to Sen. Ted Stevens. [Surely Senator Stevens is way past embarrassment.]


... And of course he and his wife, Chris, have been indicted on numerous federal charges of misappropriating hundreds of thousands of public dollars. Mr. Hayes is innocent until proven guilty in the criminal courts, but no one can possibly believe a person could fully perform the duties required of a regent when faced with defending himself in a federal case that will take months, if not years, to resolve.

"If you're a college student, and you're going anywhere other than Lynn University in Florida, then you're in the wrong place.

[S]tudents are spending the weekend at the Final Four, going to all three Final Four games, going to a Georgia Tech baseball game, a Thrashers hockey game over the course of six days ... and they're getting three hours of college credit for it.

... It's part of a class called "The Final Four Experience," which is supposed to teach students about what all goes in to putting on a massive sporting event.

And what makes it worse is the "oh, but it's not all fun and games" paragraph in the article, that's designed to make this seem like it's not just an obscenely fun thing for these kids to do, but an example of educational perseverance.

'Though it may sound like a sports fan's dream, the students will be required to put in some work. They'll take a couple exams, keep a diary and will hold a presentation after the trip.'

Ooooh, a presentation. Here, kids, let me help you out with that report. Feel free to use this verbatim. "Here are some Power Point slides of me doing blow with a half-dozen nude Ohio State cheerleaders. Oh, and I don't care if I fail this class, because I just went to three Final Four games for $3,250, while some people are paying $12,000 per ticket, under the pretense that this is somehow educational. I plan on repeating this class next year, anyway. Go ahead. Fail me. Really."

"The Final Four Experience." Please. What else does Lynn University offer? Can I get the university to send me to The Bahamas and supply me with rum for a week, and get three credit hours for the "Effects of Alcohol and Sun Experience"? Can I get three credit hours for the university to set me up with a high-priced hooker and call it "The Human Reproductive Experience"?"

'Former professor wins lawsuit against colleague

Shannon Muchmore
Editor in Chief


A jury has awarded a former OSU assistant English professor more than $150,000 in actual and punitive damages for her lawsuit against a former colleague and current associate professor.

The jury decided Lisa Lewis acted intentionally and with malice to sabotage Andrea Koenig’s bid to receive tenure in 2005. It awarded $136,000 in actual damages and $25,000 in punitive damages in verdicts earlier this month.

Koenig and her lawyers maintained throughout the trial that Lewis had a personal vendetta against Koenig after Koenig began discussing the possibility of a course that studied the Bible as literature. Lewis was furious at Koenig for promoting that idea and told graduate students she would “get” Koenig, court documents allege.

Lewis said she didn’t recall saying that and denied all the charges, according to the documents.

Koenig deferred all questions to her lawyer, Stan Ward.

He said the verdict vindicated his client.

“It’s a scarlet letter type of event for a faculty member to be denied tenure and promotion,” Ward said. “It’s not like I got fired at Wal-Mart and I’ll go work at Target.”

A spokesman for the Oklahoma attorney general said the office is still reviewing its options for continuing with the Koenig case.

“We’re disappointed with the jury’s decision,” Charlie Price said.

The office won’t comment on whether it plans to appeal or when it will make a decision, Price said.

Koenig began working in the creative writing department at OSU in 1999. She was on the tenure track and her contract was extended for three years in 2002. She was authorized to seek tenure for 2005, but a tenure committee composed of five English professors voted 3-2 to deny tenure.

Her employment contract was not renewed and she lost her job in June.

Koenig sued Lewis in July 2005 for intentional interference with a contract and business relationship.

Lewis was not a part of the tenure committee but wrote a letter attacking Koenig’s worthiness for tenure.

The tenure committee relied heavily on Lewis’ letter, which “was nothing short of an impermissible multi-page personal attack aimed at Koenig,” according to Koenig’s trial brief.

Lewis’ trial brief states Lewis acted within the scope of her employment at OSU and was only doing her job.

Koenig has also filed a lawsuit against the Oklahoma A&M Board of Regents alleging breach of contract when she was denied tenure.'

'Oklahoma State's donors were selected because their age, gender and health "best matched the university's needs," said John Lee, chairman of Dallas-based Management Compensation Group, which is managing the insurance program.

To put it less delicately, the donors selected are expected to die in a timely manner to generate the $250-million payout....

... The [T. Boone] Pickens insurance plan passed muster with Oklahoma state regulators, but Oklahoma State's Gift of a Lifetime Program is generating controversy.

U.S. Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R- Iowa), who has been investigating the tax-exempt status of major college athletics programs, last week told Congressional Quarterly that he had questions about the Pickens program.

So do many college professors in Stillwater who are frustrated by the athletic department's spending spree when faculty salaries and benefits are at or near the bottom among universities in the Big 12 conference.

"The comments I've heard range from morally bankrupt to outrageous," said longtime chemistry professor Lionel Raff. "It's totally inappropriate for any organization to be betting on how long its alumni will live." ..."I'm not going to say that the response has been all positive," [one of its undertakers] said. "But we believe that athletics is the front porch of the university. That's how you advertise nationally. Right, wrong or indifferent, you don't see the science bowl on ABC. You see the Cotton Bowl and the Final Four."'

'OSU fans will now need to change their reading habits. Instead of turning to the sports pages to see how things are going, they'll read the obits first to see if any of the gang of 25 have croaked.

Could make for some good conversation over morning coffee.

"Hey honey, I see here that old Jim Jones died yesterday. He sure was a great guy, wasn't he?"

"Yes, he was dear. Now if Hank Evans goes too, we'll have just enough for that new weight room."'

Colleges and universities have been less than forthcoming with the public and legislators about tenure, leading to the suspicion that higher education’s primary focus is protecting its own rather than guaranteeing the highly effective and productive teachers and researchers that students and taxpayers deserve.... Public confidence in academic tenure, much less its understanding of the concept, is dropping. To reduce this downward trend, we must be transparent in our processes and straightforward in our explanations of why tenure is necessary and how it works.

I studied at MGU [Moscow State] the past two years (04-06) in the Philology Faculty, which shares the 1st Humanities Corpus with Sociology, History, Law, Political Science, etc.

[M]ost of these faculties have about 2,000 students each. The 1st Corpus itself is 11 stories tall, and the 4th-11th floors have about 75 rooms each.

I noticed that there were a fair number of nationalistic and far-rightish lectures in the Humanities Corpus during my time (the First Humanities Corpus is a huge building encompassing sociology, politology, philology, law, and history). A couple of times [Vladimir] Zhirinovsky spoke, though that is somewhat normal given that he is the leader of the third largest political party and votes with the government.

Additionally, I can say that a disproportionately high number of major KPRF (Com-Party) figures teach in that corpus. This includes their municipal elections candidate, who was a dekan of one of the faculties there, and the late (as of Spring 2006) Aleksandr Zinoviev who was himself a sociologist (and lived an emigre from the USSR in Munich until 1999--but he apparently still preferred Russian Communism over 'Basic Law').

Elements of the KPRF are anti-Zionist to the point of being anti-Semitic, and certain Communist MPs were the main signatories of a letter that quoted the Protocols of the Elders of Zion a few years ago.

That said, I do not believe these opinions are very prevalent in academia. Zinoviev himself was a Communist and anti-cosmopolitan/anti-globalist (and assumedly anti-Zionist), but himself a partly Westernised Jew. One lecturer I mentioned, Aleksandr Dugin, where you purportedly had to show your passport to be admitted [to his classes], is properly a Eurasianist. He is something of a Russian nationalist, but very far from a standard anti-Semite or anti-brown people skinhead, favoring instead a geopolitical alliance of Europe, Russia, and the Middle East against Anglo-Saxon hegemony.

He once had many contacts with the European New Right around Alain De Benoist, GRECE, and the Junge Freiheit newspaper. Then he turned to advise the Russian Communist Party, then began the ridiculous National Bolshevik Party, then promptly left it (since it is not for intellectuals), then cultivated himself as a geopolitical advisor to the party of power. In this realm, he has been moderately successful.

Largely due to America's hostility towards Russia and seeming military encirclement of it, a very harsh, Realpolitik analysis of geopolitics is increasingly popular, and with an ever more anti-American bent. This is true both in the government and the opposition, though anti-Zionism is concentrated in the Left opposition.

There are fascistic elements in both the pro-Putin, Duginist camp and in the KPRF and other opposition groups, and some fascist graffiti can be found even at MGU (from students - but it is usually contradicted with either liberal or communist slogans).

However, the student body and academia, while somewhat nationalistic and concerned with Russia's position in the world, are not terribly anti-Semitic ... Many of these intellectuals are nationalistic and anti-Western, but not particularly racist or fully xenophobic (I think of Eurasianism as a sort of modernised and glorified Soviet nationalism).

I looked for information on this episode in the sociology faculty webpage of MGU, and was unsurprised to find nothing (though, unlike the philology pages, it was very modern and updated). I looked up information on the dekan, and I did find one article he wrote entitled, "The Spiritual-Moral Evaluations of Contemporary Russian Society," which rather gives away that he is a social conservative. Other than that, he has no apparent links to the far Right or the racist end of the Left opposition.

In short, there is truth to the claim that there are academics with certain views at MGU, and held by regularly invited lecturers like Dugin, who might not be treated warmly by much of Western academia. But I find the idea that students were forcibly subjected to anti-Semitic teachings somewhat absurd. The only real direct accusation in the blog post was that the faculty posted something quoting the disreputable Protocols. That's possible -- there is a corner of the intellegentsia that believes the standard conspiracy theories, but if I had a dime for every time something with official approval morally offended me here at my university...

The New York Times (which is the source of the article cited in the post) falls in the section of Western media that disproportionately seeks out alleged instances of anti-Semitism and incidents that make Russia appear to be teetering on neo-Soviet fascism (these come from both liberal and neoconservative intelligentsia -- New Republic, Washington Post, Weekly Standard, London Times, Telegraph). Meanwhile, comparably few stories report the suffering of regular Russians due to the economic and political reforms; and due to the leaders of the past who are always heralded by the same Western leaders and publications. There are very few articles about Russian fear of NATO encroachment (though I notice American paleoconservatives seem to be increasingly sympathetic to this). I would not have much confidence in a NYT article on Russia . . . but if the Guardian begins to complain, then take notice.

... While we await blessed baseball and its promise of renewal, here comes the National Collegiate Athletic Association Men's Division I Basketball Championship--the Big Dance for sportswriters, the Bracket Racket for gamblers, a frat-rat party, a racist entertainment, and a subversion of higher education, perhaps democracy as well.

Calling it March Madness slaps lipstick on a pig.



...In 2002, when I finally got to my first Final Four, I was amazed by the extravaganza. I had expected the usual painted yobs in the stands and the normal adolescent excess, not a corporate audience at a series of networking parties thrown by major sponsors. The Big Dance was a Super Bowl! Coaches looked for jobs; university presidents trolled for sportswriters who looked for drinks. What's the difference, I wondered, between a university that pours Pepsi and wears Nike and a NASCAR team that pumps Bud Lite and wears Drakkar Noir cologne? I wished I hadn't sworn off the word "hypocrisy" as too easy, too banal.


...College basketball coaches tend to be big guys with the confident patter of televangelists; just the kind of mouthy jocks who were allowed to dominate the dorks in high school because their personal goals, winning games to advance their careers, complemented the principal's goal, putting the school on the happy map.

Now, as coaches, they dominate their institutions because their goals are the same as their presidents'--raising money and visibility. Because they are without tenure, they can easily be fired when they start losing, which is why they will do anything to win. Because one or two players can turn a losing basketball team into a winner, coaches are tempted to recruit the illiterate, the felonious, and the "one-and-dones" (who will spend only a season at college en route to the pros).



... Myles Brand has always been the problem. He was the pragmatic fundraiser in college; now, he's the head of a trade association whose main functions are to generate TV income and keep a lid on corruption so it won't escalate into a ruinous arms race, with schools in sky's-the-limit bidding wars for teenage giant prodigies.


... No matter who you think causes the problems here--fans, players, boosters, coaches, presidents, or shoe salespeople -- the only group that could begin to solve them are the faculty of the schools in question, at once victims and accomplices when it comes to sports. They are intimidated by the jock bullies, easily bought off by them, and protective of their own little campus deals--why risk blowing the whistle on the altered or eased grades of athletes when someone could knock off your summer-in-Prague Kafka scam? ...

'Stanford is always just asking for money — which I find odd, since I already paid them a lot. My latest letter says the school is trying to raise $4.3 billion by 2011 as part of the Stanford Challenge.

... For those of you who have never been to the 8,000-acre Stanford campus, it's very dissimilar to most places begging for charity. Darfur, for instance, doesn't have its own new rubgy stadium. AIDS hospitals rarely have as many tennis courts.

Stanford, which raised nearly $1 billion in donations just last year — a record for a university — has an endowment of more than $14 billion. That's more than the Gross Domestic Product of Belize or Sierra Leone — which has diamonds.

New buildings pop up at Stanford like weeds. Weeds with names like Packard and Gates. The just-renovated basketball arena has no advertising at all inside, because a rich guy found them aesthetically displeasing. So he simply bought them all.

Stanford could stop charging undergrads the $43,361 for tuition, room and board and call it an accounting error on its interest. It makes more sense for Rupert Murdoch to ask me for charity money. At least I still use his products.

I understand that rich people like to give money to organizations that make them look good. They want a powerful alma mater, a nice opera house, a buoyant Venice and a tidy stretch of road for Bette Midler to drive on. But they shouldn't be able to write these donations off as tax-deductible charities.

Time Inc. will match my donations to Stanford, but not to actual educational charities. That's despite the fact that only 3 percent of students at the top colleges come from families in the bottom economic quartile....'

'The [University of Florida] Faculty Senate [...] rejected a proposal on Thursday to award [Governor Jeb] Bush an honorary degree this spring. Some members openly criticized his policies.

It is the first time in memory that the group has rejected a nominee put forth by its honorary degrees committee, said J. Bernard Machen, the university president.

The Senate voted, 38 to 28, against the proposal, which came from a former president of the university and was supported by two university trustees appointed by Mr. Bush.

The Senate chairwoman, Denaya Wright, said the nomination was a mistake, not just because some faculty members dislike Mr. Bush, a Republican who called himself “the education governor,” but also because he did not have the right background for an honorary degree.

“Recipients have pretty much always been distinguished scientists, engineers, artists, nurses, doctors,” Ms. Wright said.

The university, based in Gainesville, has awarded honorary degrees to five former governors, including Bob Graham in 2004 and Reubin Askew in 1983. All were Democrats. It also bestowed one on Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, in 2004.

Mr. Bush did not respond to an e-mail request for comment.

Mr. Machen, for one, is embarrassed.

“I think it’s a horrible decision,” he said in an interview. “I’ve heard from lots of alumni today who are very upset.”

Though it rejected Mr. Bush, the Senate approved two other nominees, Andrew H. Hines Jr., a mechanical engineer and former power company executive who is an alumnus, and Barry C. Barish, professor emeritus of physics at the California Institute of Technology.

Kathleen Price, a law professor who voted no on Mr. Bush, said he had let down the university by vetoing a measure that would have let its graduate and professional schools raise tuition.

Mr. Machen said that he feared reprisal from the Legislature, but that Mr. Bush was “probably having a good laugh” about the vote. In sports, the real passion at most Florida colleges, Mr. Bush roots for the University of Miami, Mr. Machen said.'

'The University of Colorado Board of Regents on Thursday drastically shortened the amount of time it takes to fire a tenured professor, approving what CU officials believe to be one of the quickest faculty-dismissal timelines in the country.

Under the new timeline, the process will take about 100 days. In the past, it could take years for the university to fire a tenured professor for misconduct.

"This will be a model that other universities across the country will look to," Regent Stephen Ludwig said. "That's something we can be proud of."

The new timeline, as well as several other changes CU has made to its tenure processes, is due largely to the controversy surrounding CU-Boulder ethnic-studies professor Ward Churchill, who in an essay compared Sept. 11, 2001, victims to Nazis and who, after a lengthy investigation, was accused of plagiarizing, fabricating and falsifying material in his research and writings.

CU's chancellor at the time, Phil DiStefano, started the process to fire Churchill in June 2006. Churchill's case is still pending, two years after the initial review of his research was launched.

Churchill has vigorously fought dismissal. He had a hearing on his case in January, and CU spokeswoman Michele McKinney said CU president Hank Brown is waiting for the hearing committee's report.

In the meantime, Churchill is on paid administrative leave and continuing to draw his $96,000 annual salary.'

'The remaining charges against three Duke University lacrosse players originally indicted for rape may be dropped sometime within the next few days, according to a report.

Inside Lacrosse Magazine writer Paul Caulfield told FOX News on Thursday that several sources have revealed to him that the assault and attempted kidnapping charges still pending against Collin Finnerty, 19, of Garden City, N.Y.; Dave Evans, 23, of Bethesda, Md.; and Reade Seligmann, 20, of Essex Falls, N.J., will soon be dropped.

Caulfield said his sources include more than just attorneys for the defense.

"There is no case here and they will be hearing a dismissal in the coming days," Caulfield told FOX News.'

Professor Never Far from Feathered Friend


By Cecelia Johnson Contributing Writer | March 22nd, 2007

John Locke, an [Ithaca College] assistant professor of strategic communication, is rarely seen around campus without a cockatiel on his shoulder. An accomplished cartoonist, Locke is involved with the Rochester Committee on Latin America and the Venezuelan Solidarity Network, attempting to end the embargo and travel ban with Cuba. Contributing Writer Cecelia Johnson spoke with Locke about his enthusiasm for teaching and his love for birds.

Cecelia Johnson: Are you related to the historical John Locke?

John Locke: Sort of. We traced it back to the captain John Locke who brought a ship over to New Hampshire around the 1600s, but John Locke, the philosopher, never had any kids.

CJ: How do you like your job?

JL: I’m convinced this is my life calling. I’ve always been an art director. I’ve always done artwork on some level for my whole career. I enjoy it, but I never ever had the feeling of fulfillment until I started working with students. I wasn’t certain [teaching] was going to click for me, but I love it. [The students are] so bright and enthusiastic and yet there’s a sense of idealism and optimism in [them] that’s just infectious. … It’s a great feeling.

CJ: Do you have any specific goals you’d like to accomplish here?

JL: The [integrated marketing communications major] has an extremely well-developed program, and I can build on what has already been established as far as the creative classes. That’s my specialty, and I’d like to expand the creative classes. ... Instead of having one class for art direction and copy writing, I’d like to have a one-semester class for copy writing and another one for art direction.

CJ: What is your bird’s name?

JL: Groucho, after Groucho Marx.

CJ: Why do you keep him on your shoulder all the time?

JL: When I went to work, I’d leave him in his cage all day. I’d get home around 6, 7, 8 at night. He’d get all excited and dance around on top of his cage. I played the radio for him all day, but I thought, What a miserable life. He’s just sitting in his little room all day long with nothing to do. So I started carrying him on my shoulder and he got really attached. When I started here, I would just bring him in here on my office hour days.

CJ: Where else do you bring him?

JL: It depends on the time of year. If it’s cold, he’ll fall asleep under my jacket, so I can go grocery shopping or whatever. I can’t bring him into restaurants, but grocery stores don’t really care.

CJ: Is he potty trained?

JL: No. Another reason why I got him and not a big parrot is because it’s more manageable and my daughter made me a bunch of [spit up rags].

CJ: Does anyone ever think that you’re a pirate?

JL: Yeah, I get that sometimes, between the earring and [the bird].

CJ: What do you say to them?

JL: “Yeah, OK, I’m a pirate.” ... I get a lot of people who see me from a distance and say, “Oh, is it real?” I say, “Of course it’s real. It’d be really weird to have a fake bird on my shoulder.”

[Tenure] distorts people’s effort so that they face strong incentives early in their career (and presumably work very hard early on as a consequence) and very weak incentives forever after (and presumably work much less hard on average as a consequence).

The idea that tenure protects scholars who are doing politically unpopular work strikes me as ludicrous. While I can imagine a situation where this issue might rarely arise, I am hard pressed to think of actual cases where it has been relevant. Tenure does an outstanding job of protecting scholars who do no work or terrible work, but is there anything in economics which is high quality but so controversial it would lead to a scholar being fired? Anyway, that is what markets are for. If one institution fires an academic primarily because they don’t like his or her politics or approach, there will be other schools happy to make the hire. There are, for instance, cases in recent years in economics where scholars have made up data, embezzled funds, etc. but still have found good jobs afterwards.

Imagine a setting where you care about performance (e.g. a professional football team, or a currency trader). You wouldn’t think of granting tenure. So why do it in academics?

The best case scenario would be if all schools could coordinate on dumping tenure simultaneously. Maybe departments would give the deadwood a year or two to prove they deserved a slot before firing them. Some non-producers would leave or be fired. The rest of the tenure-age economists would start working harder. My guess is that salaries and job mobility would not change that much.

Absent all schools moving together to get rid of tenure, what if one school chose to unilaterally revoke tenure. It seems to me that it might work out just fine for that school. It would have to pay the faculty a little extra to stay in a department without an insurance policy in the form of tenure. Importantly, though, the value of tenure is inversely related to how good you are. If you are way over the bar, you face almost no risk if tenure is abolished. So the really good people would require very small salary increases to compensate for no tenure, whereas the really bad, unproductive economists would need a much bigger subsidy to remain in a department with tenure gone. This works out fantastically well for the university because all the bad people end up leaving, the good people stay, and other good people from different institutions want to come to take advantage of the salary increase at the tenure-less school. If the U of C told me that they were going to revoke my tenure, but add $15,000 to my salary, I would be happy to take that trade. I’m sure many others would as well. By dumping one unproductive, previously tenured faculty member, the University could compensate ten others with the savings.

“Why,” asks Victor Davis Hanson, “does this strange practice linger on?” If it’s there to guarantee free and unfettered thought, he writes, why is thought in our universities monolithic?

“Why then does uniformity of belief characterize the current tenured faculty? Contemporary universities are among the most homogeneous of all American institutions, at least in attitudes toward controversial issues of race, gender, class and culture. Faculty senate votes aren't just at odds with American popular opinion; they often resemble more the 90 percent majorities that we see in illiberal Third-World stacked plebiscites.”

Tenure, further, has contributed to the maintenance of the university as a strikingly unjust hierarchy:

“Our universities are also two-tiered institutions of winners and losers. Despite the populist rhetoric of professors, exploitation occurs daily under their noses. Perennial part-time lecturers, many with the requisite Ph.D.s, often teach the same classes as their tenured counterparts. Yet they receive about 25 percent of the compensation per course and without benefits. Universities cannot remove expensive tenured "mistakes" or public embarrassments, but they can turn to cheaper and more fluid part-time teaching.”

As for job security, “the warning that, in our litigious society, professors would lack fair job protection is implausible. Renewable five-year agreements — outlining in detail teaching and scholarly expectations - would still protect free speech, without creating lifelong sinecures for those who fail their contractual obligations.” No, what tenure has wrought is “a mandarin class that says it is radically egalitarian, but in fact insists on an unusual privilege that most other Americans do not enjoy. In recompense, the university has not delivered a better-educated student, or a more intellectually diverse and independent-thinking faculty. Instead it has accomplished precisely the opposite.”

Max Boot agrees: “Churchill and his professorial colleagues are beneficiaries of the most ironclad protection for mountebanks, incompetents and sluggards ever devised. It's called tenure. To fire a tenured professor requires a legal battle that can make the Clinton impeachment seem like a small-claims dispute by comparison. Even if there is clear evidence of wrongdoing, professors are entitled to endless procedural safeguards against being fired. The University of Colorado wanted to offer Churchill a generous financial settlement to leave voluntarily, but that idea has been torpedoed by regents angry at the idea of buying off this buffoon. An epic struggle looms in which Churchill and his numerous faculty defenders will nail their colors to the mast of ‘academic freedom.’”

He also agrees with Hanson on the intellectual freedom argument:

“The rigid ideological intolerance of American universities makes a mockery of tenure's primary justification: It is supposed to allow scholars to pursue their work without outside pressure. Professors like Churchill are all too happy to take advantage of this freedom to mock off-campus pieties. But few dare to disagree with the received wisdom of the faculty club, where the political spectrum runs all the way from left to far-left.

The primary practical effect of tenure is to make universities almost ungovernable. Those ostensibly in charge — presidents and trustees — come and go; the faculty remains, serene and untouchable. This helps to explain some of the dysfunctions that mar big-time universities, such as the overemphasis on publishing unintelligible articles and the under-emphasis on teaching undergraduates. Armies of junior faculty and graduate-student drudges have been enlisted to assume the bulk of the teaching load because most of the tenured grandees think that instructing budding stockbrokers and middle managers is beneath them. And there is almost nothing that administrators can do about it because mere laziness is no grounds for removing someone with a lifetime employment guarantee.

The solution is obvious: Abolish tenure. Subject professors to the discipline of the marketplace like almost everyone else. But of course this is an idea too radical to be seriously entertained on campus. Comparing the United States with Nazi Germany, as Ward Churchill routinely does, doesn't raise an eyebrow among the intelligentsia, but suggesting that there may be something fundamentally wrong with a system that rewards a Ward Churchill is considered too outre to discuss.”

Amy Ridenour concurs:

"Rarely do I criticize another for being old-fashioned, but I find the very notion of tenure distastefully medieval.

Literally.

In the Middle Ages there were few institutions offering scholars the opportunity to ponder -- not just few alternatives to universities, but very few universities, period. If that were the case today, perhaps tenure for the purpose of protecting academic freedom would make some sense. But it isn't, and it doesn't.

A simple question: If professors at universities need tenure to feel free to think, how is it that think-tanks do so well without it?"

That’s one side of it, and UD has more than a little sympathy with these arguments. But then there’s this, from Winfield Myers:

“Recently, a friend who teaches at a major state university told me that he and some of his colleagues -- all tenured full professors, all known to be conservatives -- would have been gone ‘long ago’ were it not for the protection that tenure affords. It's the only thing keeping him in his job, he said, and despite the abuses it can bring, nothing else could protect like-minded scholars from being tossed out by the left-wing majority.

I think he's correct in this, and that conservatives who want to see tenure abolished should think through the implications of opening up academe to an even more thorough scrubbing of conservatives or libertarians than we've already seen. Granted, tenure is abused -- massively -- by both the entrenched left and the drunk, the lazy, and the incompetent. I've known dead wood who fit some, or even all, of those descriptions, and their presence on campus is a disgrace.

But until some way is devised to protect professors whose politics are deemed beyond the pale by sanctimonious left-wingers, tenure works to preserve their careers. Perhaps some means can be worked out that would allow universities to fire those who should never have been granted tenure to begin with, or who have abused the system since winning their lifetime positions. Surely, some means of holding professors accountable can be devised that would allow a sense of responsibility and obligation into campus life while protecting the minority of true radicals -- those who uphold high standards and who lean to the right. Reform is long overdue in higher education; let's just be careful not to leave embattled conservatives vulnerable.”

Thomas Reeves says the same thing:

“What about the protection of intellectual freedom? In fact, there is more to academic life than just the knee-jerk leftist reaction that is often celebrated in the media. Genuine thought goes on everywhere in academia and can be viewed in learned journals and books and heard in untold numbers of seminars and lecture halls. (The University of California System spends $30 million a year on scholarly journals.) Many of the best professors spend their lives seeking the truths of the universe, nature, and human conduct; indeed, that’s why they entered the academic profession. When the responsible scholarship of serious and qualified scholars clashes with conventional thought, it should be protected, for in that way alone do we advance. Heresy has long played an important role in history. Ask the historians of science.

Today, on campus, conservatives are heretics, often challenging the established principles of orthodox leftist ideology with scholarship and bold thinking. It is a dangerous business, for the people who talk the most about diversity and tolerance are rarely in the mood to welcome dissent. As an abundance of literature shows, and experience verifies, conservatives are often persecuted on campus. They must sometimes mask their beliefs in order to be hired. But tenure, once achieved, protects them. Eliminate that protection and watch conservative heads roll, both at the hands of administrators and fellow faculty members.

Instead of arguing for the elimination of tenure, conservatives should be defending it strenuously, for without its protection the heresy of thinking outside leftist orthodoxy would be eliminated. Tenure may need adjustments; conservatives should demand more objectivity and fairness in the process. But let us not abandon what has long served us well. Today, the tenure system enables free minds to step beyond the iron curtain of political correctness without fear of serious reprisal.

Tenure is not one of the major problems in contemporary academia. Indeed, it is a blessing for those, all across the ideological scale, who are interested in thoughtful scholarship. Intellectual freedom is among the most valuable features of Western civilization, and we threaten it at our peril.”

“The dean’s office has distributed a brochure to all students that approvingly quotes the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion,’ blames Freemasons and Zionists for the world wars, and claims that they control U.S. and British policy and the global financial system,” the students wrote in one of their public appeals. “Studying conditions at the department are unbearable.”

...“The quality of the education has become so low that it has become terrible,” said one of the students, who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation by staff members. “For the last two years all of my education has had to be self-education.”

UD is an assignment in a Carnegie Mellon University calculus course!

The longstanding practice at U.S. colleges of admitting athletes with substandard academic credentials is coming under fresh scrutiny.

The National Collegiate Athletic Association has launched a review that might limit the number of these so-called special admits. At the University of Oklahoma, which just completed a four-year review of admissions, Athletic Director Joe Castiglione says some students read only at a fifth-grade level.

For years, football and basketball players have lagged other students in graduation rates. Coaches, administrators and faculty have wrestled with the sometimes conflicting goals of creating winning teams and well-educated students. Now, special admits may become the focus of efforts to reconcile the two.



..."Sports are an important part of the psyche of our institution," says Castiglione. "It's not to be made fun of or laughed at, it's to be embraced. But we have to work on some things."

[Strange comment from the AD at one of the most shameless abusers of athletes in the country. We're not making fun of his charges; he is. They're entirely used for their entertainment value.]



... Such policies risk eroding the reputations of the nation's top universities, says Larry Faulkner, president emeritus at the University of Texas at Austin.

"It goes to the heart of what is the intercollegiate model and what business we are in," Faulkner says. "Our institutions don't exist principally to provide entertainment to the public." [Certainly Castiglione's, and many other institutions, exist precisely for that principal purpose.]

... Faulkner is a member of an NCAA task force on admissions that called in October for a review of the special-admit system. NCAA officials might recommend changes within 18 to 24 months, says Myles Brand, president of the Indianapolis-based sports governing body. Rules changes would require the assent of the body's 18-member board of directors.

Among the possible steps, according to the task force: setting a maximum number of special admits per team or athletic department, adding programs to monitor and assist students, and collecting information on the progress of special admits who are athletes so the data can be submitted to faculty boards. [Blahblah.]

Brand, 64, says he doesn't support limiting special admits [Quelle surprise], so long as athletes have a chance to graduate once they're given assistance. Yet Brand says the NCAA doesn't track graduation rates for specially admitted athletes and doesn't know of any school that does so. [Rollin' along, singin' a song!]

`A Student First'

University administrators agree with Faulkner, in principle, when he says the athlete is a student first." [Sure, sure!] Even so, they say schools must meet the needs of the communities they serve. [It's a matter of needs, not entertainment, man!] Fans, alumni and financial supporters care about sports, says Tom Reason, associate director of admissions at the University of Wisconsin in Madison.

"Athletes are a group that has been identified as important to the institution and to society," Reason says. "You can't deny the reality of it." [Longtime readers know the thrill UD always feels on being lectured to by a Reality Instructor...]





... Administrators argue that without special admits, it would be difficult to compete in sports against schools that have lower academic standards. [It's a race to the bottom... as Oscar Wilde might put it...]


... Oklahoma has been increasing the number of special admits given to its football, baseball and women's track and field teams, according to admissions records. Castiglione says the athletic department is trying to improve its 60 percent graduation rate. [This is like balancing the budget and lowering taxes.]



..." In an ideal world, you might wonder if we wouldn't be better off getting rid of athletic scholarships, then it would really just be about going to school," Wisconsin's Reason says. "But things have evolved in a way that's dramatically different. You have to accept the reality of it and help the kids the best you can." [This is by far the slimiest bit of university sports rhetoric out there. We're here to help the kids.]

'Angry state legislators called for a criminal investigation of Florida A&M University's continuing financial woes today... They said it's time to turn the books over to the attorney general's office of Florida Department of Law Enforcement.... "There could be a decision by the Legislature not to fund it," said [one legislator]. "The university would cease to exist." ... [Along with ongoing payroll discrepancies,] FAMU didn't have records for $1.8 million in athletics department collections, and university property that went missing sometimes was not reported to police agencies, the audit said.'

'"Nightline" aired a report on November 2, 2006, about the college admissions process that focused on the advantages that candidates can have if they come from a wealthy family perceived as potential big donors to the school. In this regard, we reported on the admission into Duke of two children of the designer Ralph Lauren, who later made a six figure contribution to the university. We also noted that the then Vice Chancellor of Duke, Professor Joel Fleishman, recommended that the children be admitted to the university, solicited donations from the Lauren family, and later was appointed to the Ralph Lauren Company's board of directors. We want to make clear that we did not intend to imply — and have no evidence to suggest — that Professor Fleishman's appointment to the Ralph Lauren board in 1998 was in exchange for or conditioned on the admission of the Lauren children to the school in 1989 and 1992.'

"The system is self-referencing," complains Michele Cascella, an Italian research scientist now at the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale in Lausanne, Switzerland. "Have you ever seen an Italian university advertise a position in a top international journal such as Science or Nature?" ... There is also the appeal of other countries. Italy's young scientists are leaving for institutions abroad at an estimated rate of 6000 per year. Schemes to stanch the flow and facilitate their return have been in place for years, but with little effect. One brain-gain mechanism was introduced in 2001 by a previous government, with a budget of €50 million that paid for about 500 contracts in universities and research institutes for up to 4 years and with a view to tenure. The scheme was scaled back when the previous government channelled funds into making these posts permanent--but very few tenured positions have been secured, mainly because the procedures for appointment were so vague and complex that there was no consensus on how to apply them.

America has much to learn from the university licensing standards of Pakistan. The Pakistani government, after investigating Preston University, a far-flung entity with campuses in their country, “classified all 15 Preston campuses in that country as ‘illegally operating.’ The Islamabad campus in particular was deemed ‘seriously deficient,’” writes a reporter for the Billings Wyoming Gazette.

Why then did a high-level Wyoming delegation which went to Islamabad and was shown a good time by Preston while it inspected its campuses (Preston has a presence in Wyoming too), determine that Preston was “in compliance with Wyoming law”? Why did some of the delegates go further and introduce legislation on their return that will help checkbook universities like Preston?

Well… first off, it looks as though these folks examined only the architecture and interior design of the campus, not whether anything went on in its rooms. They declared themselves satisfied that it has a “clean,” “two-story building,” in “good condition” with “adequate space.” I used to live in a two-flat like that, but I didn’t try to get it accredited.

Given their interest only in whether Preston’s buildings stood up, it’s not surprising that, as the reporter notes, “seven months” after the ten-day trip, the four visitors “have little to show” for it:

“For example, each of three inspection reports by Deputy Superintendent Quinn Carroll and the department’s finance director, Fred Hansen, was about 1 - ½ pages - about as long as the application form for opening a private fish farm in Wyoming.”

Gills flapping, an outraged member of the group responds to this challenge with Diploma Mill World’s magic word: “I can’t see how anyone has a problem with a decently priced education with nontraditional students.”

Nontraditional! sings Tevye. Nontraditional! We are simple people! Leave us alone!

As the reporter probes the story a little more, things get ontologically obtuse very quickly.

Current laws, one of the delegates explains, “don’t gauge the quality of a school’s academics - only whether a school is really a school.” But - but - when is a school not a school? When is a school a school? What beyond academics distinguishes a school qua school? Is a school really a school, as Wyoming suggests, if it has a building with the word “school” on it?

In response to a crackdown on diploma mills in Wyoming, an entity known as “Preston University” is moving part of its operations to Alabama, where laws are laxer.

According to the Associated Press, the, ah, institution will continue to operate an online business program in Wyoming under the name “Fairmount International University.” It has campuses in Pakistan and Dubai as well. In 2001 Preston was caught pretending that it employed professors that it, in fact, did not.

Wyoming, once a haven for dubious institutions, has since gotten tougher, causing a number of diploma mills and similar operations to flee or otherwise to shift gears.

two players from A&M on this year's Academic All-Big 12 team [who] earned that distinction by getting a great GPA in 'Agricultural Leadership And Development,' a major Wright has called out as mostly fictional. A&M football stars and scrubs alike -- like Reggie McNeal, Kellen Heard, and Courtney Lewis -- seem to develop a robust interest in raising livestock once they matriculate at A&M.

The undergraduate major, Agricultural Development, was created in the early 1990’s by the Department of Agricultural Education to provide an educational strand that emphasizes leadership theory, productive use of people-resources, and acquisition of skills in scientific agriculture. The multidisciplinary degree program is designed to develop students for leadership positions in local, regional, state, and national groups and in organizations and agencies that are directly and indirectly involved in agriculture and life sciences.

Students recognize the importance of this degree which has been described as “leadership and communications in agriculture.” In fact, of all the majors within the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Agricultural Development has the 4th largest enrollment surpassed only by Animal Science, Biochemistry and Agricultural Economics.

The New York Times ... last Sunday ran a piece from its apparently bottomless reservoir of stay-at-home-moms on the Upper West Side. Once again, the idealistic author studied art, found the corporate world too common for her pure soul, and wound up being a marital nanny for a rich lawyer decades her senior. Let's recap: He is an attorney. She is doing a job you can buy in most places for a sawbuck an hour. ... This is the fate of dreamy young women who don't prepare for the real demands of the world of work and marriage.

'Harvard has to disclose how much it pays its top financial managers. In fiscal 2005, [Jack] Meyer earned $6 million, and two other managers earned about $17 million each.

Those figures — which had been higher in earlier years — drew sharp criticism from others at Harvard that the team was earning unseemly amounts, given academic pay levels.

[David] Swensen, the Yale investment chief who made $1.6 million last year and does not have any in-house managers, said he was not surprised at the friction. “Paying some people $35 million where others earn $35,000