The bond between learners and teachers has been fraying for years in higher education, but it appears that it is becoming increasingly broken.
I was always known as a tough grader. Still, it was only recently that administrators literally changed the marks for two students—one considered a star and another a woman whose father threatened a lawsuit.
That’s why I sympathize with a New York University chemistry professor whose medical students complained that his course was too challenging, and he got fired because of the criticism.
For a number of years, I taught the final course for journalism students—known in the trade as the capstone—before the budding reporters went into the real world.
The students had to travel outside of their comfort zones to report about troubled Philadelphia neighborhoods. They had to do so while creating stories in text, photography, audio, video, and web design.
Most students wanted to work in less difficult environments and only in their preferred journalism sector, whether in text, photography, or broadcasting. After my colleague and I left the course we created, the class has been dumbed down so much that it’s almost impossible to gain any significant understanding of the requirements of the craft of journalism.
Because of the escalating cost of higher education, students treat teachers like a commodity. If you pay for that commodity, you should expect it to do what you want it to do.
If you want a higher grade, you complain.
If you think the work is too hard, you complain.
If you don’t like how the teacher treats you, you complain.
It’s heartening that even some liberal professors agree that the system is broken.
Feminist journalists lamented the state of academia in opinion pieces for CNN and NBC after the NYU professor got axed.
“Faculty members aren’t commodities, and programs aren’t products. Education isn’t a raw material with a return policy,” Christina Wyman, an adjunct professor at Michigan State University, wrote for NBC.
Feminist writer and former adjunct New York University journalism professor Jill Filipovic agreed that the firing showed “what’s wrong with academia” in an opinion piece for CNN. “Turning education into a consumer product rather than a public good also subjects educators to the whims of the consuming public,” she wrote.
It’s nice to see that liberals and I can agree on something!
As you’ve learned in my recent posts at Da Tech Guy, Illinois’ SAFE-T Act will become effective on January 1, which will make the Prairie State the first in the union to abolish cash bail. Under very narrow circumstances, accused criminals can still be jailed, but these are among the crimes that will be non-detainable, which means, after perhaps 24 or 48 hours, they’ll walk free until their trials.
Aggravated Battery
Aggravated DUI
Aggravated Fleeing
Arson
Burglary
Intimidation
Kidnapping
Robbery
Second-Degree Murder
Threatening a Public Official
Drug-Induced Homicide
Fact checkers, an ever increasingly dishonest lot, have been running to the defense of the law, which is being championed by the far-left of the Democratic Party. Illinois’ governor, J.B. Pritzker, a likely candidate for president if Joe Biden doesn’t run for reelection, probably plans to use the SAFE-T Act, which passed the state Senate at 5:00am on the last day of the 2021 veto session, to enshrine his woke credentials for 2024.
Illinois’ rising crime rate is a hot-button issue this election season, as it should be. The opinion of prosecutors of the SAFE-T Act is hostile. As I’ve mentioned in prior posts, 100 of Illinois’ 102 county prosecutors–they’re called state’s attorneys here–oppose the law. Tellingly, Kim Foxx, a George Soros-funded politician who is the so-called prosecutor in Cook County, where I live, is one of the two who support it.
Claiming the SAFE-T Act is in violation of the Illinois constitution, at least 24 state’s attorneys have filed suit to prevent it from going into force.
And I may be way short on this count. East Peoria’s mayor, John Kahl, claims 50 state’s attorneys have filed suit again the SAFE-T Act. But I’ll stick with my number for now–I derived my figure after an exhaustive Google News search. Some of the plaintiffs are Democrat and some are Republicans. Many county sheriffs have joined in on these lawsuits, most of which list Pritzker, Illinois’ attorney general, Kwame Raoul, and the state House speaker and state Senate president as defendants.
Pritzker, along with some Democratic members of the Illinois General Assembly, are promising that changes will be made to the SAFE-T Act after Election Day, but no details are being offered. Which means that Illinois voters shouldn’t take their promises seriously. During Thursday’s televised debate with his Republican opponent, Darren Bailey, Pritzker didn’t mention any specific changes that he favors to the law. Bailey favors full repeal of the SAFE-T Act.
Pritzker, as I’ve written for my own blog, has resorted to the ad misericordiam fallacy, an appeal to sympathy as the props up the controversial law. He keeps clinging to an apocryphal story about “addressing the problem of a single mother who shoplifted diapers for her baby, who is put in jail and kept there for six months because she doesn’t have a couple of hundred dollars to pay for bail.” Breitbart, in an honest fact-check, shot holes into Pritzker’s “Diapers Mom” argument.
If the SAFE-T Act is so wonderful, then why does Pritzker have to lie when he defends it?
The foremost political issue in Illinois is crime. And we have plenty of other issues to choose from, including negative population growth and endemic corruption. The election of Kim Foxx as Cook County’s state’s attorney in 2016–her campaign was funded by radical leftist billionaire George Soros–set forth a rise in crime in Chicago and its inner suburbs that accelerated during the COVID-19 lockdowns.
The spirt of Foxx’s catch-and-release philosophy of law enforcement will go statewide, but only worse, on New Year’s Day when the SAFE-T Act goes into effect. In case you missed my last two posts at Da Tech Guy, I cited a Democrat, Will County state’s state’s attorney James Glasgow, who had this to say to Fox Chicago’s Mike Flannery about the SAFE-T Act, “There are forcible felonies that are not detainable: burglary, robbery, arson, kidnapping, second degree murder, intimidation, aggravated battery, aggravated DUI, [and] drug offenses.” Which means these accused felons walk free with the promise of returning for trial. An exception for flight risks, which a former Cook County assistant state’s attorney, John Curran, who is now a Republican state senator, says is almost impossible to use for jailing accused criminals. Curran told John Kass last month in his Chicago Way podcast that the SAFE-T Act passed the state Senate at 5:00am in the morning on the last day of a veto session of the General Assembly. He was given one hour to read the 764-page bill.
Some critics of the SAFE-T Act are calling it “the Purge Bill,” a reference the 2013 movie, The Purge, where crime goes unpunished for a 12-hour span.
As I noted before, Pritzker notoriously claimed that the SAFE-T Act was about “making sure that we’re also addressing the problem of a single mother who shoplifted diapers for her baby, who is put in jail and kept there for six months because she doesn’t have a couple of hundred dollars to pay for bail.” I called on the fact-checkers–even contacting them directly–to vet that statement. I’m considering offering a $1,000 reward to the person who finds Pritzker’s “diapers mom.”
Kass, a former Chicago Tribune journalist who was essentially demoted after his woke colleagues falsely claimed that a column he wrote blowing the whistle on Soros was anti-Semitic, now writes essential articles at John Kass News. He’s been at the forefront of the battle against the SAFE-T Act, and he’s calling for its repeal. Illinois’ Democrat governor, billionaire J.B. Pritzker, is promising unspecific changes to it after next month’s general election. He’s up for reelection, his opponent is state senator Darren Bailey.
Kass says, and I’ve been expressing the same view, that the Democrats are panicking about the SAFE-T Act. As they should, it’s a dangerous law that is a threat to public safety. He’s asking that Pritzker call an immediate special session of the General Assembly, “eat a few platters of steaming hot crow,” and repeal the SAFE-T Act. “J.B. Pritzker has the supermajority,” Bailey told NBC Chicago, which Kass recalled in his column. “Why hasn’t he called the legislature into action? Literally a text or a phone call, we could be demanded to meet in Springfield within a few hours. Why aren’t we meeting tomorrow at 9 o’clock hammering this thing out?” I believe I know the answer to that question. Pritzker wants to run out the clock.
Kass suspects that the SAFE-T Act is a woke exercise in credential building for the governor’s possible run for president. I’ll add my own theory. In addition to minting a badge of honor for himself, Pritzker is prepping himself for receiving a Nobel Peace Prize as the prophet who, at least in Illinois, atoned for the murder of George Floyd. Only the aftermath of an in-force SAFE-T Act will anything but peaceful.
Ads from the People Who Play By The Rules PAC focusing on violence have been very effective, even though at least three Chicago television stations have banned “The Scream.” A more recent ad, even more disturbing than “The Scream,” shows a robbery and a bloody assault that occurred last Sunday on Chicago’s CTA Red Line train. A few hours earlier my daughter was a passenger on the Red Line. One of the perpetrators in this attack has been arrested. He’s now locked up, amazingly, bail was denied to him. But the People Who Play By The Rules PAC has this message for Illinoisans, the attack you’ll below is “a non-detainable offense under Pritzker’s Purge law.”
Bailey, in my opinion, is still a decided underdog in the gubernatorial race, but the downstate farmer is closing his gap with Pritzker according to a recent Fabrizo, Lee, and Associates poll.
Twice last week non-political acquaintances of mine told me, “Hey John, you are wrong about the SAFE-T Act, I read a fact-check about it.” I exposed the phony SAFE-T Act fact-checks in an entry on my own blog a few days ago. Yet once again, and almost certainly not for the last time, I am compelled to point out that fact-checkers are primarily propagandists for various leftist narratives. And if you are told by someone that you are incorrect about the SAFE-T Act and they cite a fact-check as evidence, this needs to be your response: vomit on that person.
Back to Pritzker: If he is really serious about addressing the numerous flaws in the SAFE-T Act, he’ll call for that special session of the General Assembly with the purpose of repealing all of it. His feeble and non-specific calls for changes to the SAFE-T Act are empty promises.
Early voting for the November election in Illinois began last week. One way to block a Pritzker run for president is for voters to evict him from the governor’s mansion. A whole bunch of new state legislators in Springfield is needed as well.
By the way, no Republican legislators voted for the SAFE-T Act.
John Ruberry regularly blogs from suburban Cook County at Marathon Pundit.
During nearly 30 years in higher education, I saw first-hand the growing problems at colleges and universities.
When I started in the academy in 1994, my colleagues already had a decidedly leftist bent. But other trends took hold. Money flowed out of the classroom into administrative coiffeurs, mainly because the federal government insisted on the changes to fight “racism” and other leftist aims. As a result, the cost of tuition soared.
But U.S. Senator Tom Cotton, R-Ark., has developed a solid solution for many of higher education’s ills.
Here are a few salient facts that Cotton points out in his argument for the Student Loan Reform Act of 2022:
–Almost one-third of college students drop out before graduation. Nearly two in five college graduates regret their major, over 40% of recent graduates are underemployed, and more than half work in fields they didn’t study. Yet, in the past 20 years, tuition prices have risen over 180%, and total student loan debt is now nearing $2 trillion.
–College endowments have grown to over $800 billion in value—with Harvard and Yale sitting on over $70 billion of untaxed wealth. Colleges use their massive fortunes not to serve their students but to pay for bloated bureaucracies. Between 1976 and 2018, total student enrollment increased by just 78%, while the number of college administrators ballooned by 616%.
The federal government’s guarantee of virtually unlimited student loans is the primary cause of this disconnect. In return for issuing trillions of dollars worth of loans and protecting these loans from bankruptcy, the government demands almost nothing from the colleges.
Here’s how Cotton’s proposal would fix some of these issues:
–It would penalize colleges that leave students in debt from undesirable and unmarketable programs, causing graduates to default years later. The proposal would require that colleges become guarantors of up to 50% of future federal student loans and would fine colleges 25% of the value of future defaulted loans.
–It pressures colleges to reduce the cost of tuition and to stop hoarding large amounts of endowment money. Any university charging over $20,000 a year for undergraduate tuition must gradually eliminate 50% of its administrative staff to qualify for future student loans.
–The legislation also places a 20% luxury tax on undergraduate tuition above $40,000 and a 1% tax on the wealthiest private college endowments. The revenue raised from these taxes would go toward workforce education to help the majority of Americans who don’t have a college degree.
The legislation also requires universities to implement policies protecting campus diversity of thought. It would protect free speech and ban all forms of racial discrimination as a condition of participation in the federal student loan program.
As Cotton puts it: “This will lessen the grip left-wing ideologues have on college campuses and ensures their academic environments no longer impedes the intellectual growth of all students.”
If Cotton’s proposal becomes law, I might be convinced to come out of retirement!
Da Techguy's (no longer backup) Blog 