Horowitz’s Academic Freedom: It Sounds Good, But . . .

Washington Dispatch ^ | Aug 29, 2003 | Cathryn Crawford

[mrustow]

So, basically, I shouldn't be able to go to college. Thanks.

I don't think you read O.C. with clear eyes. Attending college will only give you the same "educational opportunity" as high school graduates of your parents' generation, because over 60% of people now attend college. You have to go college, because "everybody else" does. And since so many low-grades are attending and graduating, you need a graduate or professional degree. The fact that everybody is going to school both inflates tuition, and devalues degrees, relative to the previous generation.

It all started with federal involvement in higher ed with the G.I. Bill. A new inflationary cycle was set off in the 1960 with federal financial aid(ca. 1964), which was for racial reasons. Federal aid pumps millions of people into the system who don't have what it takes, and setting off the inflationary spiral.

[Cathryn Crawford]

Attending college will only give you the same "educational opportunity" as high school graduates of your parents' generation, because over 60% of people now attend college.

So are you saying that I shouldn't go? What's your point? How is this relevant?

[mrustow]

Attending college will only give you the same "educational opportunity" as high school graduates of your parents' generation, because over 60% of people now attend college.

So are you saying that I shouldn't go? What's your point? How is this relevant?

Actually, I wasn't saying that, but you have succeeded at changing my mind. Anyone as unable to see past her own nose as you are, can neither benefit from, nor contribute to higher education.

[mrustow]

I think you might enjoy #62 & #63.

[optimistically_conservative]

Perhaps visual aids would have helped - so much social promotion, so little understanding...

[Cathryn Crawford]

I was asking for an explanation. Obviously, I didn't entirely understand the situation, and I was trying to get more information.

[attagirl]

Hi, Cathryn--i too agreed with your sentiments. It brings to mind the UNConvention of the Rights of the child which says the child has a right to be exposed to different viewpoints. Sounds good until you realize who will be deciding that. It certainly won't be the parents.

Horowitz is empowering govt. to help conservatives? (Pray tell, what could we call this ministry?)

Gimme a break!

Conservatism is naturally antithetical to govt. solutions so caveat emptor when you choose a college. (Hopefully, parents will have done their job guiding their children up to that point.)

What did you do in school today, dear, is getting to be more and more of a loaded question!

[optimistically_conservative]

I was asking for an explanation. Obviously, I didn't entirely understand the situation, and I was trying to get more information.

OK, let's turn this question around and approach it in the manner you seem more inclined to. Why did you go to college? There are a number of negatives to a 4 year college term, as well as some positives. There are a number of social pressures normally involved that are myths - for example if you don't go to college you'll be flipping burgers or pumping gas the rest of your life. In fact, an easy and enjoyable read on the topic of wealth accumulation and some of the myths involved is The Millionaire Next Door: The Surprising Secrets of America's Wealthy. Perhaps you've read it.

So, you decided to go to college, despite the economics that:

1. you couldn't afford it,
2. you were delaying your wage earning years, and
3. you would accumulate debt against your future earnings

because ... ?

It's not that anyone thinks you shouldn't be in college for whatever reason you think, it's that the system of financing post-secondary education is out of whack and there are social, economic and political ways to fix it. Perhaps mrustow was trying to explore the social and economic aspects of "degree inflation" resulting from the ubiquitous college degree, the circular pressure on subsequent generations to get one, and the socialization of post-secondary education through entitlement grants and "student loans."

Ya think?

[Tribune7]

To quote Horowitz’s article again: “By adding the categories of political and religious affiliation to Title IX and other existing legislation, the means are readily available…to redress an intolerable situation involving illegal and unconstitutional hiring methods along with teaching practices that are an abuse of academic freedom.”

I'm afraid I agree with Horowitz, Cathryn. The status quo is so bad, his plan would improve it, I think. This could be especially effective in changing things in teachers colleges where it is most needed.

[Tribune7]

If it weren't for scholarships, grants, and student loans, I would never have been able to afford to go to college.

Public subsidies interfer with market forces. In many cases, what occurs is that a particular college able to charge X dollars raises its tuition to compensate for the public assistance with the student still paying X dollars but the state making up the difference. My cynical view is that the money is then used for administrative perks and faculty featherbedding.

That's not a blanket condemnation of the use of public money for higher (or any other kind) of education, but this is not an uncommon occurrance.

[WaterDragon]

The Left has so deeply entrenched itself into our educational system, particularly higher education, that it's going to take new laws to dig them out.