Spitzer and hypocricy

Spitzer - via NewsdayWhy was the left so mean when it went after Larry Craig, among others? Why, some said, would those who described themselves as broadminded be so adverse to a wide stance among their politicians? They failed to see that the issue was not Mr. Craig’s sexual orientation, nor even his relationship with his family, but his advocacy for policies that his experiences would seem to completely contradict. In other words, he was a victim of his own political positions.

It doesn’t particularly bother me that Elliot Spitzer, as the New York Times is reporting, made use of the Emperors Club VIP (“Every client is an emperor… ” even if he’s only a governor), a high-priced prostitution service. The public loves a sex scandal, and no doubt this will be front-page news for some time. There are lots of reasons Spitzer should be held to the fire for this. First, he violated the law when he was charged with enforcing it. I think that alone is the biggest issue. The cops in our neighborhood rarely bother to stop for red lights, even when it’s pretty clear they aren’t on their way somewhere, and I’ve seen a lot of near-misses for that reason. You expect those sworn to uphold the law to apply that to themselves as well.

The second issue, whether he violated the trust of his spouse, is chiefly, in my opinion, a private matter. The public does have a right to judge the character of their leaders, but how someone relates to their family is really only the family’s business.

I suppose you could suggest that the money that was spent was a waste of his taxpayer-supplied salary. After all, these were not inexpensive professionals (though the claim of $5,500 an hour seems to contradict the agency’s price list). But I don’t think this has a lot of traction.

The biggest issue seems to be that Spitzer made prostitution rings a special target of prosecution. This, to me, raises a lot of pretty substantial issues: most pointedly whether this group received protection in trade for their services. Even the appearance of this besmirches his office, his reputation, and the reputation of the state of New York.

What it doesn’t change is my opinion that prostitution should be legalized. I am perfectly capable of condemning Spitzer for hypocrisy and for breaking the law, and at the same time recognize that what he did shouldn’t have been illegal. Too bad he couldn’t stand up for what he thought was right, either by not patronizing sex workers, or advocating for legal structures (i.e., legalization) that would provide them with fuller access to the law.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

“Collateral misinformation”

Today’s urban dictionary word:

collateral misinformation

When someone alters a Wikipedia article to win a specific argument, anyone who reads the false article before the “error” is corrected suffers from collateral misinformation.

I changed the scientific classification of red foxes last night in order to win an argument with Judy. I hope some stupid High School student didn’t suffer from collateral misinformation.

Lest you think this is an unlikelihood, I’ve been told by at least two students of instances where they have done just this.

Oh, and the dictionary has some other useful Wikipedia-related entries: I like wikipedestrian and wikipedance.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

Chronicle on Quinnipiac’s expansion

It’s funny that I should have to turn to another publication to learn more about my own university, particularly a university that is (and prides itself on being) so small and community oriented. It’s too bad our own Chronicle isn’t writing stories that are equally as revealing. Today they are running a story entitled “A Private College Builds on Its Confidence” (available to subscribers here).

The article provided an interesting outsider’s perspective, since our president refused to comment on it. (Why? Beats me.) Although I have heard some talk of tightening our collective belts a bit in the coming years, I didn’t realize why. It seems we have maxed out our credit cards in order to facilitate our expansion to two new campuses.

Now, the expansion is absolutely necessary. Over the last few years our enrollment has continued to grow, and we are still a tuition-driven institution. We need the buildings to house our new students, and we need the new students to pay off the buildings. It’s a pretty classic set of demands that really require us to get bigger if we want to get better.

I don’t worry about the financial position of the university, which the article suggests may be precarious. Nothing wagered, nothing gained, and the reputation of the university has increased substantially even in the short time I’ve been here. Our standards are also increasing, though not as rapidly. Don’t get me wrong, I think students here get a very good education. Can you get a better education at a larger state university? I think you probably can, with a lot of effort and luck and dedication. Will you? Probably not. I think if you compare the average student in our programs with the average student of most large schools (public and private) you will find that our students learn significantly more in their time here, and are far better prepared to enter the workforce. My concern is not the finances directly, but what it might mean for the quality of our education, and of our student body.

The article suggests that Quinnipiac is banking on continued enrollment growth, during a period when college enrollment is predicted to decline. If it turns out that we cannot sustain that enrollment and continue to increase the standards for admission, I fear that we will lower our requirements for admission; the economic conditions would require it. Tuition is already steep, at nearly $40,000 a year, and with housing costs on top of that, I don’t think the market would bear an increase in tuition. So this means that we would be forced to admit students who are not as capable. Moreover, if we follow the pattern of other universities, that means tracking students who are less capable into degree programs designed to accept them, while concentrating the brightest students in programs meant to be standard-bearers. The university has already started down this path, picking out programs that have the potential for “national prominence” due to their “excellence.” This leads naturally to those in departments not picked for “excellence” to feel a lot less enthusiastic about expansion; one of my colleagues has suggested that if we have “excellence” programs, the others should remain “proud of their mediocrity.”

The other worrying statistic revealed in the article is that the university plans to expand its faculty by 45, or about 9% during a period when it expects graduate and undergraduate admissions to grow 20%. This, to me, seems especially worrying. During a period, for example, when Fordham has announced it plans to move undergraduate teaching loads to 3-2, Quinnipiac has increased the graduate program teaching load to 4-4. Now, I’m not teaching 4-4 (far from it), but even with all the caveats, having to tell applicants that is our teaching load is a hard sell. It’s made easier by the fact that our classes remain small, but that is also threatened by the necessary growth of the student body.

From a more personal perspective, I don’t particularly care where the university places its focus; obviously I want my own work and my own program to be “excellent.” Actually, I’ve decided–unilaterally–that if the journalism and PR programs in our school are targets of excellence, the interactive communication program (in which I mainly teach), should target “awesomeness.” Excellence is easy, dare to be awesome. Unfortunately, since the “awesomeness program” is only in my head, it may not translate to resources at the university level. I should say, that certainly is not the problem now. The Interactive Communications program has been very well supported and nurtured by the School and the University. But as pressures increase, I’m sure it’s better if you are thought of as a target for national prominence.

There is always a drive to increase enrollment in every university. I would hate to think that the cost of the expansion of facilities would drive down our admissions standards. There is always an alternative to expanding outward, and that is capping (or reducing) the incoming class size, and increasing the quality of the faculty and instruction. I would far prefer Quinnipiac became a tiny, elite institution than it became a giant, fairly good private university.

In any case, it is exciting to be at a school that is changing so rapidly, and that seems to prize entrepreneurism within. After nearly two years, I have to admit that I am continuing to try to find my place, and constantly finding my assumptions–based on teaching elsewhere–fail me in understanding the culture of the place. I know for certain that Quinnipiac in five years will look nothing like it does today, and although I can sympathize greatly with those for whom this idea is worrying, I am instead excited to see what those changes might bring, and eager to put my own thumbprint on a program that strives for awesomeness.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

The market speaks on Vista

Newegg adNewegg demonstrates that even in OS-land, market demand drives pricing.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | 2 Comments