“Our working conditions are student’s learning conditions”

I often fell like a curmudgeon, trolling around and finding stories about things like the crazy Hench-woman, Lisa Troyer, who resigned after it was suspect– and then more or less demonstrated– that she had sent anonymous email in an attempt to manipulate the faculty governing process.  A recent UI Faculty Senate resolution called Troyer’s actions part of  ‘”a broad pattern of surveillance and intrusion into legitimate faculty governance deliberations” (“UI senate unanimous in criticism of Hogan“).

That’s bourgeois professor speak for “systemic corruption.”  As an anecdote for cynicism, then, I try to do some reading about positive things, trends that seem to be moving education in a good direction.  I liked “The Time is Now: Report from the New Faculty Majority Summit” for its wonderfully strident call for action. I wish the author would focus more or organizing and less on lobbying and accreditation but I cannot disagree with Bessette‘s call to begin to make university labor exploitation more publicly visible.

Also reassuring is that certain segments of the university system– the small liberal arts colleges–seem to be reinventing “an institutional history of activism” for social justice (“Social Justice Revival“).  There’s no  doubt that this trend has a lot to do with the fierce competition for students, a competition sharpened by recession, but it’s still a welcome trend.  What we need, of course, is a movement that would put these pieces together. A just labor policy ought to be the start of any social justice program at any university.

Pots and Kettles

As someone who works in the for-profit higher education, I am often dismayed at what happens in my little corner of the economy. I think our industry emerged in an economic culture that was far too unregulated and far too greedy. I think we need more regulation and I think that our industry doesn’t need to be so narrowly focused on short-term profits. We share all the problems of modern U.S. capitalism, in other words.

I am also often dismayed at the way problems in the for-profit sector seem to be used as cover for the more profound problems in the public sector.  These problems are dwarfed by the exploitation of adjunct labor, bloated  administrative salaries, the weakening of tenure, the corruptions of big college sports, and the rise of student debt, to name only a few, that have characterized the public sector for the last three or four decades.

These problems in the public sector are more profound because they set the standard for the culture at large.  For-profit schools will come and go– that’s the nature of a market– but without a democratic, service oriented public university system we might not have a democracy or a functioning economy at all. I think, too,  that the for-profit sector will not flourish without profound reform in the public sector.

Less Than Zero

In the year ahead, Texas plans to reduce its arts budget by 77 percent; Wisconsin by 67 percent. Kansas will eliminate arts funding altogether. Even New York, with an economy that is driven by culture, will cut funding by 12 percent. Since National Endowment for the Arts statutes don’t allow a state to receive a distribution without an arts budget, Kansas will receive no appropriation from the NEA either, leaving the arts without a penny of public support in that state (“As Appropriations Dry Up, Arts Infrastructure Is Dismantled“).

One of the main reasons economics in general, and the discussion of politics in particular, bugs me so much is that so little energy seems to be devoted to what we want to do as opposed to what we are supposed to do. Or, at least, what we are told we are supposed to do. It’s an obvious point, but it’s worth asking: do we want the wealthy to get wealthier or do we want the arts in our schools and in our communities?

What we are supposed to do, what we are told we have to do, what Europe is being asked to do, and what the U.S. will be asked to do soon, is to set aside our desires so that material privilege and profits can be protected. In the schools, administrators rarely cut their own salaries or trim their own budgets in times of crisis, and in the economy at large corporations rarely accept reduced profits in the name of the public good.

Debt Forgiveness

I was sorry to see that a recent Rasmussen poll which reported that 2/3’s of Americans oppose full forgiveness for student loans (“66% Oppose Forgiveness of Student Loans“). That contrasts sharply with Obama’s announcement limiting loan repayment to around 10% of income for 20 years before forgiveness (President to Ease Student Loan Burden for Low-Income Graduates“).

Or maybe the contrast only suggests Obama’s tedious sense of caution… Either way, I think we need to do a lot more work in putting student debt into the context of the ongoing destruction of both class mobility in general and the middle class standard of living in particular.  It’s part of the same conservative economic world that brought us the housing crash, the European debt crisis, and the seemingly unending recession.

The Reagan ideology said that the market could do no wrong and wildly privatized and deregulated anything and everything. The result was inevitably the same: a radical concentration of power and resources into the hands of a tiny majority. The ruling class succeed beyond its wildest dreams. The problem, of course, is that they are killing the goose that laid this golden egg. It’s time to start to de-concentrate power and resources.