More Thoughts on Larry Summers
D. Rayner (the pen name of a professor at a Southern University)

One university administrator, asked about the Summers debacle, commented tactfully (as Summers probably would not have) as follows:

He is a very, very, smart man who has great independence of mind and has the courage to say all sorts of things that a more tactful person would not say . . .

In a world where certain people who used to be shut out categorically from higher education and have only recently been enfranchised, there are still many, many cultural and institutional obstacles to these things. For a leader at a very famous university to utter those things -- it really is not improbable to suggest that it had a chilling effect . . . We all have an affirmative obligation to try to keep equalizing the odds for some people . . . So I . . . would enlist myself in the criticism that came down upon him . . .

When a university gets in the business of implying some things can't be said because nobody is strong enough to hear them and fight back against them, that's a university that has gone out of the business of education in some sense . . .

These comments are interesting for what they tell us about assumptions held by the academic establishment, one false, one questionable and one true:

1. Some people used to be “shut out” from higher education. Who? African-Americans, yes, but the case in point involved not blacks, but women, who have in the last century had free access to most academic disciplines, and now are in the majority in many and “shut out” of none.
2. We need to be tactful in what we say about things that affect women – perhaps even to the point of not saying them at all.
3. But a censored university has “gone out of the business of education.”

Obviously 2 and 3 are incompatible with one another. But as consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, no administrator is on oath to clarify contentious issues in a casual remark.

Nevertheless, the issue is in fact pretty simple. On the one hand is the need for tact: one shouldn’t needlessly upset people. On the other is the importance of free inquiry and its corollary open discussion of all matters of fact -- a core principle of the university.

The issue is in fact no different from the notorious Mohammed cartoons. On the one hand, the sensitivity of Moslems, on the other the right to free speech independent of threats of physical violence.

Just as no one is entitled to react to something like a cartoon with threats of murder, in a university no one is entitled to suppress discussion of matters of fact -- like the existence or non-existence of intellectual differences between men and women.

These dichotomies do not reflect any kind of delicate balance. The choice in both cases should be obvious to anyone who believes in the basic principles of Western civilization (which, despite Gandhi’s comment, used to exist and perhaps does so still). Publish the cartoons. Say what you think about sex differences. And shame on those whose exaggerated sensitivities threaten our basic values.

Of course, Larry Summers was fired for many things in addition to his comments on women -- but the fact that he made those comments and then failed to stand up for his right to say them fully justifies his removal.

Unfortunately this almost certainly was not one of the reasons that weighed with the Harvard’s Governing Board.

NAS2:05 PM

Campus Sports, Inc.
Thomas C. Reeves, The Wisconsin Policy Research Institute

In a recent poll published in the Chronicle of Higher Education, 75 percent of respondents thought that colleges and universities were putting too much emphasis on sports. That’s a remarkably high figure given the widespread popularity of athletics in this country. Ticket sales for football games at the University of Wisconsin-Madison totaled nearly $13 million as of 30 June 2005, and nearly $5 million was taken in on men’s basketball tickets. Imagine what the annual budget is at, say, Notre Dame, USC, Penn State, the University of Texas, and Ohio State. Perhaps the public’s reserve reflects an awareness that colleges and universities cheapen education by lowering admission standards, inventing easy courses, and bending rules to keep student athletes academically eligible. (Media interviews with athletes often strongly suggest such conclusions.)

Perhaps people also believe that tuition could be lowered if campuses spent less money on sports. In 2003, the basketball coach at Marquette University made $1.1 million; the University of Kentucky’s coach made nearly twice that amount. That same year, Duke University spent $7.4 million on its basketball program, paying the coach $1.4 million.

The University of Wisconsin - Madison, the major campus in my state, illustrates the perception that not all is well in campus athletics. By any measure, the major University of Wisconsin System campus features “big time” sports. The Athletic Department has a $70 million annual budget and boasts nearly 300 full-time staff members serving 800 student athletes in 23 sports. And yet for all that formidable data, the Athletic Department has a serious image problem. During a span of 42 days, from 16 December 2005 through 26 January 2006, eight football players were arrested or issued citations by police. The charges, several involving violence, were sufficiently serious to cause the suspension of five players from the team and the dismissal of another. Two of the accused are repeat offenders.

UW Athletic Board members have announced that they are studying ways to strengthen the student athlete discipline policy on campus and plan to vote on changes at the end of the spring semester. This prompted one prominent alumnus, a Milwaukee public relations executive, to ask “Isn’t there something more you can do than say we’ll figure it out by the end of May? Is there no executive authority? Is there no bold leadership?” According to one Board member, student athletes consider the current policy something of a joke, for every athlete given a suspension has seen the penalty reduced on appeal.

The biggest worry on campus, according to an 8 February story in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, is that the scandals will prompt a slowdown in alumni giving. Which tells you a lot about higher education today. There is also, of course, the potential of damage to the image of the entire campus, for Madison has long been proud of its intellectual reputation.

What is needed is not only a review of the athletic discipline policy but a full airing of the admission standards that apply to student athletes and a detailed report of what the 800 student athletes are achieving in the classroom. The public might also like to know details of the $70 million budget and why it is necessary to have nearly 300 full-time staff members on the payroll. Many colleges don’t have that many full-time professors in all departments combined. Administrative costs in the Athletic Department totaled more than $8 million as of 30 June 2005, well above the 2003-04 amount actually spent. And how about a detailed examination of what we might call “student athlete favors”? This would involve a precise accounting of what these students receive in return for their extraordinary labors -- beyond a measure of local fame and the opportunity to be seen by scouts from professional teams. The annual financial statement provided to the U.W. Athletic Board shows athletic scholarships as of 30 June 2005 totaling more than $3.5 million. Do the goodies stop there?

In short, why not open the full financial and academic records and invite outside investigators to examine and reveal what is going on in Madison, insuring state taxpayers that their money is being honestly and efficiently spent and that all students are being offered a demanding and intellectually challenging education? University officials might also wish to tell us the steps they are taking to instill good character in their student athletes.

Such an open records policy seems sensible and prudent, and ought to be adopted throughout academia. It could do much to assure the public that colleges and universities are serious places concerned with learning as well as fun.

For relevant data and commentary, click on the following items [1] [2] [3] and [4] and see Jeff Potrykus, “Red in the Face,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 8 February 2006. I am grateful to John Jentz, U.W. Assistant Athletic Director of Business and Administration, for providing me with the financial data.
NAS1:53 PM