I have some colleagues– all in the non-profit education business– who feel a little too smug about the for profit industry. It’s naive, of course, to think that the for-profit industry schools are, by and large, less ethical than the traditional universities, with their multimillion dollar athletic programs (essentially an advertising and recruitment expense as extravagant as any drug company) and two-tier employment system of a few tenured professors supported by the many non-tenured, par time teachers and graduate students. No sector can afford to throw stones in these glass houses.

The for profits, for example, are no more likely to put students into debt, according to Neal McCluskey (Politicians Are The Problem For Higher Ed). What’s unique about…

Academics are notoriously hateful about university committees; that bad attitude might be one of the best explanations for the ongoing destruction of full time employment and tenure. In essence, the powerful (and increasingly rarefied) tenured full professors are can pursue their individual interests and let the least experienced try to run the university. It’s a great way to make sure that the administration is always better prepared to deal with problems.

I enjoyed Sufka’s call for attention to service, although I think that his rhetoric is interestingly tepid, as if he were afraid to stir up the ant pile (“Serving the University: Better Mentors for Young Professors Would Help“). He ignores a more profound problem, too. I keep wondering…