Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Lots of names floated, but most appear to be wrong *** UPDATED X2 ***
Next Post: Can Illinois Democrats get away with anything this year?
Posted in:
* Universities are like little political kingdoms dotting the landscape of Illinois. They’ve resisted every attempt to reform their fiefdoms, whether it be throwing some sunshine on their insider contracting, or freedom of information or the Public Meetings Act. Every time the General Assembly tries to force reforms, they gin up their almuni organizations to oppose them as certain death knells. It’s pretty ridiculous to watch.
Also, their budgets ballooned over the years while salaries for top administrators soared beyond alll reason except “everybody is doing it.” So, I often avoid the topic of university budgets because they still have a lot more to cut.
Even so, this story makes a decent point up front…
Gov. Rod Blagojevich wants to give $300-per-child tax rebates to help families make ends meet, but they may need it to help cover rising tuition under his budget plan.
Faced with stagnant and now possibly declining state funding in Blagojevich’s proposed budget, state schools say they’ll be forced to raise tuition even higher next year.
All told, the governor’s higher education budget would drop state general support of public universities by nearly $11 million to $1.36 billion. […]
Randall Kangas, budget spokesman for U of I Urbana-Champaign, said its proposed state funding is below what it received in the 2000 budget year, not accounting for inflation.
Somehow, some way, state government needs to rein in university spending while still providing enough resources to avoid massive tuition hikes. Maybe you can come up with some ideas in comments.
* More budget stuff, compiled by Kevin…
* SEN. KIRK DILLARD: Imperative to hold the line on spending
* SJ-R: Governor’s ‘results’ don’t spur optimism
* ‘Deadbeat’ state plays waiting game
* Back to the drawing board for state capital plan
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 10:26 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Lots of names floated, but most appear to be wrong *** UPDATED X2 ***
Next Post: Can Illinois Democrats get away with anything this year?
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I can’t imagine anyone hasn’t noticed the higher ed tuition issue. It has represented a huge middle class tax increase over the past several years.
Comment by steve schnorf Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 10:35 am
How about a single, unified Illinois public university system, a la California or Wisconsin? Ending the fiefdoms should realize savings and efficiencies in a number of areas.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 10:46 am
The merits of his proposal aside, Wordslinger has no idea about the political realities in Springfield.
Comment by Fight for Justice Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 10:52 am
Put State universities under elected officials (not unlike State superintdentents). Thus, there would be a person responsible to voters for the budgets.
It would also help if the media would run more stories discssuing the salaries and overhead costs of University budgets detailing the waste.
Comment by Ghost Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 10:53 am
=== It would also help if the media would run more stories discssuing the salaries and overhead costs of University budgets detailing the waste.===
Which is one reason why I find it extremely disconcerting that the Champaign News-Gazette closed its Statehouse bureau.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 10:54 am
===Wordslinger has no idea about the political realities in Springfield.===
How about explaining yourself rather than just whack somebody?
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 11:00 am
Fight for Justice, I’m quite aware of the “realities” of Springfield politics, but if you’re going to be bound by those, what’s the point of discussing, or seeking to change, anything? You can leave public policy to the hacks and hustlers.
Comment by wordslinger Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 11:03 am
Wordslinger is right. And if there is one thing
Obamamania should be doing for us peons, it is
challenging the notion that in government there are only a few set ways to accomplish things. That kind of thinking gets us corruption, patronage, disintegrating state agencies like DHS and DCFS,
massive budget deficits, and astronomical salaries unconnected to performance for a large corps of upper level government employees like state agency administrators and administrators at all levels
of the public school systems, including universities.
Give them even more money to waste is not the only answer.
Comment by Cassandra Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 11:20 am
Universities are large organizations with large budgets. It is easy to whack away at high paid administrators. What is their % of the personnel costs as a whole? Do Univesities have bloated management systems? Pick an organization (private or public)does not have some excess management or line workers. Increases do not just go to VP and up positions. They also go to the contract instructors, janitors, dept heads, band directors, cooks, librarians and everyone else who works there. Ameren asking for 10% more, liability coverage increases, health insurance, fuel increases all add to the same inflation that every company faces. At the same time competition raises costs to keep good staff who would easily go elsewhere for more money or opportunity.
How is what the Universities do in Springfield any different than what the private business, Chamber of Commerce, education, social services, or any other group partially funded by the state through contract, grant or fee not also doing?
Comment by zatoichi Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 11:42 am
So, Zaitochi, you are saying….nothing to be done,
it’s the way it is, keep paying, forget accountability?
Comment by Cassandra Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 12:00 pm
A single unified university system would be something worth investigating, put the question then is are you are going to go from fiefdom to a giant bureaucratic mess of one, one that is in theory a unified system on the surface but still has all of the little fiefdoms fighting it out below the surface or would you end up with a system were the unified system would end up representing the interest of prestige campus, UIUC, at the expense of the other schools.
The elected leadership idea may also have merit to it. The biggest thing is that we need more attention in the media, government and public given to how the budgets are made and what they are spent on, how much to go to administration, overhead, question programs and departments, ect.
Comment by RMW Stanford Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 12:19 pm
The problem with a unified system is it makes it harder for schools with different needs to lobby around their programs. I would hate to see U of I lose its reputation and become marginalized because it was thrown togetehr with eastern, northern etc.
I like the idea of elected officials responsible to the public over each university like we have local superintendents.
Comment by Ghost Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 12:28 pm
Yeah, open the secondary education system up to intense scrutiny. Let the public get into a position to mico-manage the universities and get those lazy Nobel Prize winners off their butts. It works for local school boards.
Comment by Enemy of the State Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 12:28 pm
To do anything about this issue, you have to deal with the fact that universities get their money from several sources, including public appropriations (which they can’t control) and tuition payments (which they control). The two types are co-mingled in their budgets.
Comment by Mr. Wizard Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 12:30 pm
===and get those lazy Nobel Prize winners off their butts===
Funny, that’s exactly the argument we hear all the time. I’m not sure what that has to do with contracting or open meetings or FOIA, but thanks for the input.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 12:30 pm
Cut administrative budgets, line-by-line.
The last time I looked at the list of the Top 100 paid University of Illinois employees, the first professor didn’t come in until #71. And he had a Nobel Prize in Economics.
See related story here.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 12:31 pm
Before you start ragging on the News-Gazette, note that the related story above is from October, 2007.
I used to be involved in student government at U of I, before the student trustee had a vote.
We had a public meeting on the budget, and I grilled the Dean over a simple fact: 17% of the departments budget was under the line-item “Miscellaneous,” and in the sub-budget for “Miscellaneous,” 33% was identified as “Miscellaneous.”
I simply wanted to know what “Miscellaneous Miscellaneous” was, and nobody could answer me.
Better student oversight is one answer: after all, it is mostly their money.
Sounds like a great project for an economics class.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 12:37 pm
Also, lets go back to direct election of the U of I board.
Comment by Yellow Dog Democrat Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 12:39 pm
Steve Schnorff is correct that the higher ed tuition cost increases have been a huge blow to middle class parents. But middle class parents are certainly not a hugely influential bloc of voters. And with the state already facing structural deficits, inequitable funding for primary and secondary education, and an aging tranportation infrastructure, the higher education cost problem, because it significantly affects relatively few Illinoisans, gets moved down the “things-to-fix” list. I don’t have much faith that college tuition reforms are anywhere near to getting done in the next 3 years.
Comment by Budget Watcher Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 12:40 pm
The state gave up the control of the university income funds several years ago. Maybe wresting back control of thoise funds would be a step in getting some soaring tuition costs back to accountability.
Comment by anon Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 1:17 pm
IMO, the main reason for rising college costs are unionized faculty (and staff) and tenure. The star professors/researchers, who are in a national sellers’ market, demand the top salaries. Then all other faculty expect similar compensation. Why should faculty in lower demand fields (english, humanities, etc.) where it’s a buyers’ market, get paid like the stars? The next reason is the proliferation of colleges, schools, departments, institutes, etc. within universities. Each with their own administrative staff, clerical staff, building, etc.
Comment by Sir Reel Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 1:36 pm
The majority of students in Illinois higher education are NOT in universities; they are in community colleges. Community colleges have been lean for years but under Blago they are being starved out. The impact on minority, rural, and other underserved communities is enormous– these are all truly “little people” who are simply short-changed in higher education funding and who pay higher tuition and higher property taxes as a result.
Comment by Prairie Pasha Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 1:36 pm
It has been noted in the press a little recently that NIU is trying to build a $150 MILLION high-tech cancer treatment facility. With all respect towards the fight against cancer, what in the world is a school with no hospital or medical school doing getting into this business to the tune of $150 mil? We have great hospitals and medical centers all over the state fighting cancer every day. NIU, with no experience whatsoever in this arena, is going to sink money into this while its appropriations from the state are going down. This is EXACTLY the kind of misguided waste that is going to cripple the state universities!
Comment by Adam Smith Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 1:37 pm
Universities should certainly be accountable under sunshine laws: no ifs, ands or buts. I saw in the article that Gov. spokesperson Kelley Quinn says: “What’s not reflected in individual universities’ budgets is that the state pays the state employees’ pension and healthcare costs — costs which continue to rise, but must be covered by the state.” Ummmm….is the state in fact paying these costs, or just delaying them?
Comment by South of I-70 Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 1:41 pm
A first step that would not take any large organizational or legislative change would be to put some daylight on the budgets. Each publicly funded University or College should be required to simply and briefly publish their budget for the upcoming year. By briefly and simply I mean that it should not take up more than one half page in readable print. A statewide paper should be chosen or maybe two one in Chicago and one downstate as the paper all schools would use. All schools would have to report at the same time. This would allow for comparisons of how different schools are spending their money. Other papers would be allowed to also carry the message if they wanted to do so.
I was on the local elementary school board for 16 years and every year the budget was precsented to the public at one of our meetings and then a summary was published in the local paper. While this did not give anyone any power over what our budget was, it kept everyone aware that extravagance would surely bring questions from the public.
This might not solve all of the problems but it would be a start.
Comment by Irish Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 1:52 pm
Rich
I understand your point somewhat, but the public universities and higher education in general have gotten the crap beaten out of them by Blago and even GRyan in his last year. You cannot compare university administrators to agency directors, the jobs and pre-requesites are very different. Most university department heads and professors are required to have PhDs and not just be administrators but former faculty as well. Higher education is not known for high salaries, but I believe that the top administrators who have them - earn them and deserve them. Compare our state university’s administrative salaries to similar states and college systems - we’re in line with them.
While I’m sure you can find some areas that might deserve cutting here and there, overall the only reason why the public universities cost so much more today is that Blago has effectively passed on a middle-class tax hike to the consumer through higher tuition by cutting the state subsidies. I agree with Steve Schnorf on that point entirely.
Only one time in the past 6 years has this Governor increased financial aid funding, and that was in an election year. The Governor does not care about higher education one bit. Apparently, college students aren’t part of his great middle-class agenda.
N
Comment by Napoleon has left the building Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 1:53 pm
Cassandra,
All for accountability in the private and public areas. That accountability should also include the management of Ameren, Blue Cross, Sears, Walmart, ADM, and many other large private companies where compensation packages over $1M are common and far exceeed anything paid at an Illinois university I am aware of, yet my cost for their products continues to climb. Would cutting their salaries cut my cost for buying their services? Aren’t those companies just as responsible to stockholders as the public system is to tax-payers?
Is a better solution to drop all state support to the university systems and let them go it alone? Don’t see that happening. My point is no matter how you want to argue the politics, the operating costs keep going up. At our company, we are pretty lean, but if we want to keep good people we have to provide decent salaries, benefits, and raises. They have other places to go if we do not do that. We have to “control” our costs to keep our company going and keep customers happy with pricing comparable to our competitors, but costs keep climbing. Universities are no different. If you do not like them, do not use them. Trouble is where else do you go for a college education? Another state? Without state support I would have not been able to afford where I went. Are there systems changes needed at the University level? Sure just like any large company. Are they all dens of massive funding wastage? Hardly.
Comment by zatoichi Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 2:29 pm
A lot of the issue also has to do with very poor PR on the part of the universities. They poor-mouth about not having adequate funds, then pay their head coaches high-six or seven figure salaries and give their athletes free rides at the expense of the tuition-paying public. The universities are not funded by any formula, and receive appropriations based alomost solely on previous year’s appropriations. U of I, especially with its national reputation as a school teaching underclassmen almost exclusively with TAs and not professors, captures one of the largest budgets of any state agency (and universities ARE state agencies). Yet hearing after hearing, U of I cries that its faculty salaries are below national averages. My own bias is that no public funding at unversities should go toward athletic programs. Let the NBA and the NFL and the alumni pick up that slack.
Comment by anon Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 2:42 pm
Every member of the University Administration should have to teach one undergraduate class (3 classroom hours per week. They have the degrees. Use them
Comment by Truthful James Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 3:01 pm
Prairie Pasha is correct–a large majority of first- and second-year college students attend community colleges, and their state funding has been flat for the past five years. In addition, many of the grants (especially the technology grant) have dwindled away to nothing, so community colleges have lost even more.
The funding for CCs is theoretically supposed to be 1/3 from the state, 1/3 from local taxes, and 1/3 from tuition. In Illinois, that state figure is much lower than 33% because Gov. Blagojevich has not made post-secondary education a priority. When higher ed. is not a priority, the educated and trained workforce dwindles, and our state–which is already seen as anti-business–becomes even less attractive to business and industry. Fewer jobs makes Illinois less attractive to the young and educated, sending our future spiraling downward.
Comment by Fan of the Game Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 3:08 pm
===You cannot compare university administrators to agency directors, the jobs and pre-requesites are very different. Most university department heads and professors are required to have PhDs and not just be administrators but former faculty as well.====
your kidding right? I worked for a while in higher education. Compared to the director of a large agnecy like DOC or DCFS, its a cake walk. The number of administrators and their pay is out of control.
Also, the thanks most agency directors get for their service is being sued, constantly. Not a lot of University administartors going through litigation and having to constantly worry if some mad at the goverment jury will take away their personal assets and pensions. University administartor is a low stress job by comparison. Not to mention bloated staffs and out of control budgets/overhead.
Comment by Ghost Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 3:15 pm
I have a relative who worked in the finance department of a major Illinois University. She was appalled at the free spending policies including buying professors any hardware and software they requested often at premium prices. The professors would then require their graduate students to obtain the same software and could not understand why the students would complain about the cost. Truthful James suggested requiring administrators to teach a class. How about requiring professors to teach a class? The general public would be shocked to learn how many U of I professors teach no classes, but spend their time researching, writing and traveling the world presenting papers. Employees of the U of I Cooperative Extension Service, with offices across the state are paid the same union wage whether their office is in an urban area or in a rural county with a much lower wage rate. Many of these rural offices couldn’t afford to pay the escalating personnel costs so they held county-wide property tax referendums requesting funds so that “4-H programs wouldn’t be eliminated”. No one mentioned the real problem was that their office workers were paid wages two and three times the going rate.
Comment by puzzler Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 3:30 pm
One of the little understood facts regarding the University system is way grants brought in by Professors who are ‘Rainmakers’ are divied up. In some locations the Rainmaker — in law firms, investment banking firms and other professional organizations, the person with the reputation of bringing in paying clients — is attracted to a campus with high pay, supporting staff and graduate students (the last paid next to nothing to act as teaching assistants (TA) but on track for Doctorates) and non tenured assistant professors looking for tenure by publishing or at least for a springboard elsewhere to a tenured associate professorship (with the help of his full professor for whom he has labored in the vineyard, old boy network in action).
Note that nowhere is actual teaching mentioned — classroom hours being inverely related to rank. So, students get the huge auditorium for the once a week lecture from the full prof if you are lucky and then break out into sections.
And they quickly find out that in the sciences at least a high proportion of TA leading the sections are foreign graduate students with a lesser or greater relative proficiency in the English language.
TA are individually quite smart, but communication skills was not their major. And quite a few of them are heading back to the home country when they have gotten that PhD.
Where are the Americans? Our best and brightest are not as educationally pepared because of poor high school science and math programs, and not emotionally prepared after getting a Bachelor of Science to work as the galley slaves of the system. Oh, the humanities are chock full of Americans who will shortly find out that prospects are not that bright in their field with a PhD. Ever decreasing circles with ever increasing speed…
So the University splits the grants with the Aces who brought them in. Sometimes 50% to each, but depending on the deal made when they came on board. And if the professor is fortunate to have landed at Urbana, there are always Research Institutes and Patent seeking corporations in their scientific fields there to join and channel one’s work through with profitable implications.
Too much to do, not enough time to teach.
Comment by Truthful James Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 4:04 pm
The University of Illinois UC, is a research institution. Researching, writing, traveling, presenting papers, publishing, etc.. this is what they are supposed to do.
The Athletic Administration Foundation uses grants, gifts and gate reciepts to fund the athletic programs at the UI-UC. Very little if any tax dollars are spent on sports.
Comment by Enemy of the State Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 4:17 pm
===The University of Illinois UC, is a research institution. Researching, writing, traveling, presenting papers, publishing, etc.. this is what they are supposed to do.===
Tell that to the students.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 4:18 pm
Perhaps someone at Illinois UC could research how to control tuition costs, write a paper on it and then travel all the way to Springfield to make a presentation.
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 4:32 pm
Bingo!
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 4:33 pm
Trouble is where else do you go for a college education?
“Looks like it’s the University of Phoenix!”
to paraphrase from the movie Risky Business
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 4:51 pm
~~The University of Illinois UC, is a research institution. Researching, writing, traveling, presenting papers, publishing, etc.. this is what they are supposed to do.~~
————————————————–
Land Grant schools have three purposes: 1) research, 2) instruction, 3) extension
Comment by Fan of the Game Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 5:11 pm
I currently work at a four-year public university in Illinois and can tell you that times are getting tougher on our campuses. While I can’t formally speak on behalf of any state institution, I think they are tightening their belts these days.
One issue that is not going away in the near future - and is only going to get worse - is deferred maintenance. Most of the buildings on our campuses were constructed decades ago (and several more than 100 years ago, for that matter). The total amount of these needs on Illinois campuses totals more than $1 billion and is growing by staggering amounts each year. We’re not talking about “wanting” new buildings but making repairs that we wouldn’t tolerate in our own homes or our K-12 facilities…cracks in the bricks, leaking pipes, crumbling walls, HVAC systems installed 30+ years ago that are failing on a regular basis.
In addition, students today in all majors – and their families – expect the best technology and resources that are available on the market. The reason for that expectation? If they don’t have access to learn using those technologies, they won’t be marketable upon graduation when competing against alumni from other institutions for jobs. Students – and, yes, their families – also insist on updated campus recreation facilities, dining centers and residence halls; fully-staffed counseling centers and health services; computer labs and wireless technology throughout the campus; opportunities to study abroad; cultural activities; off-campus and internet-delivered courses and the list goes on. You see, it’s not the same type of atmosphere on college campuses that it was when we attended 20 years ago, 40 years ago or even longer. Every campus has fully-staffed counseling centers that meet with students every day on issues that would make you cry if it were your child. Each campus has a fully-staffed police unit to offer every bit of protection that they can to your child although we can look to our friends at NIU to see that it will never be enough. Do we eliminate or downgrade these items…not if it were your child.
Students and their families demand more and if universities don’t meet those needs our children will go elsewhere…and recent studies have shown they are leaving the state. Tuition hikes aren’t a pleasant thing for universities or families. Are there things we can do to help ourselves? Absolutely! What other state agencies employ fundraisers to seek grants and donations from the private sector (hundreds of millions every year…and we’re not talking about matching funds from the federal government) to cover costs not supported by the state or to offer scholarships to academically-talented and low-income students who need the funds? Universities are doing a lot to help themselves but it’s much easier to criticize the “underworked and overpaid professors.” Of course, there are many things that could be improved and it will likely take political pressure to get in line with the times but each campus is different and must be looked at in a different light.
Two final thoughts…first, the comment about “alumni organizations” is probably only accurate as it relates to one campus in our state. I don’t think any institutions outside of the U of I have the ability to bring any political pressure to our legislators. Second, why is it that we are up in arms if our students (my children!) have to borrow $15,000 or $20,000 in student loans to pay back over 10 years? While we must be good stewards of the funds we receive, a college education is a tremendous investment that pays dividends to its holder. We don’t hesitate to borrow $20,000 to buy a car that we’ll drive for five years and trade in but we think it’s deplorable to borrow money for a college degree.
Sorry about the venting!
Comment by Higher Ed Employee Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 5:59 pm
Tuition is only one measure of the condition of our higher education system in Illinois, and it shouldn’t stand alone as the basis for this discussion. College, like anything, costs money. In today’s economy, a college degree pays for itself many times over during the course of a graduate’s lifetime. How much is that worth?
What is it worth for Illinois to have excellent public colleges? Why does Illinois export so many college students? Why are state schools more selective today than 20 yrs ago?
Why hasn’t IL invested more in higher education given the increased demand? Instead, schools like my alma mater, ISU, have increased selectivity because they have more applicants than seats and dorm rooms.
We can all point to questionable spending in large institutions, but that doesn’t really get at the reasons tuition seems out of reach for most lower middle class families. There are many reasons, and cutting budgets doesn’t.
It is expensive, but it is worth it for students and for the state.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 6:33 pm
Er, that should read:
cutting budgets doesn’t paint a complete picture.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 6:35 pm
Sorry this is so late, but i just got home, after being in my office since 8:a.m.. I am a full professor and I know that most of you think I work just a few hours per day, but that is just not the case. What did I do today-Put in about 4 hours on a law review article I am writing about an Illinois unified business theory tax case that is before the Supreme Court this term. Spent about half an hour helping a student understand adjusted basis for federal income tax purposes. Spent an hour and one half revising a lesson for my 3 hour graduate tax class. Taught the three hour class, then spent 15 minutes talking to a student about which accounting firm might offer her the best fit. Returned to my office and until 6 pm I returned emails, and did those housekeeping things that all of us must do in the office. Luckily I live close to campus and the drive home is only 5 minutes. When I log off here I still need to upload a new case to my blackboard site for my state and local class. And tomorrow i start all over again. Hardly under worked.
Comment by SIU Prof Monday, Feb 25, 08 @ 7:13 pm
You are right to think that higher tuition is yet another attack on social mobility. Public education is now thought to be a private benefit that should be paid for privately as if it were a kind of investment vehicle. This of course ignores all of the ways in which public universities and community colleges serve the “public good” beyond “workforce preparation.” But you are quite wrong to blame higher tuition on wasteful universities and lazy professors. Economic studies of the return to the state on state dollars spent for higher ed show that the return is 10-15% in the short run and 35% over time. See the work of Walter McMahon of the U of I. But you probably think that the work that Professor McMahon has done on the economics of higher ed is just the problem. He could have been teachng a course! Of course, he wouldn’t have had quite so much to teach in that course if he skipped the research but oh well. Reading blogs like this one with its hatred of “lazy professors” reminds me of the Reagan era attack on “welfare cheats.” It is a form of bigotry, in this case not racism but anti-intellectualism. (another fine American tradition.) What I’d like to know, as a career academic who rose from the lower middle class, is when do I get compensated for the ten years of 60 hour weeks I spent getting professional preparation in college and grad school? For which I was paid zip. Economists call that “deferred opportunity” but boy this one is really long deferred. So 10 years in school on a crap shoot that you can land a tenure track job. Entry level salary for me was $14,000. then I’d like to know when I’ll be compensated for the 4-5 hours per day I work over summers reading and preparing classes for the next year while i’m not on contract. The state has contracted with me for 9 months work and yet here I am summer after summer working for what? the love of the game? So I can have others think I’m lazy? Of course, at private colleges and universities they assume that the work of intellectuals requires research and creativity and time for both. They could care less what you think. But since the publics get tax dollars, well, maybe we have the right to look into just what they’re doing, these notorious professors. Public universities are supposed to offer the less affluent all of the educational experiences including love of learning, creativity and other things you probably think are wasteful, just as if they were paying a fortune to go to Harvard. That’s how it’s supposed to work. the funny thing is that starting next year, if you get into Harvard and make less than $100,000 you can go for free. It’s higher eds version of “let em eat cake.” Can’t afford your local public university, well, go to Harvard, it’s free. Meanwhile, back in the publics we’ll be raising tuition and beating ourselves up about being inefficient and lazy.
Comment by ckwhite Tuesday, Feb 26, 08 @ 2:15 pm
ckwhite et all
sorry if you didn’t get a felowship and part time teaching employment as well as TA compensation. That’s the way it usually works, having been in the system myself, although at the time I had GI Bill to help out.
You ands many of the University respondents who appear to be in involuntary servitude and view yourselves as hourly wage workers make me laugh and cry.
For goodness sakes, you chose your posion not for the pay but for the love of scholarship, and as it turns out not for the love of teaching.
There is no such thing as forty or sixty hour weeks, fifty two weeks a year in any professional ranks. As I recall, Micheangelo stopped after forty hours a wekk…Not.
The law school professor cited two courses he is teaching, perhaps one more, but for how long has he been teaching the same courses. Four quearters a year? I think not.
You think that the prosecutors who work with Patrick Fitz put in forty hours a week and get weekeneds and summers off?
I am sorry == world’s saddest song, played on the world’s smallest violin == for your predicament.
Tenured, unfireable, sabbaticals –I wouldn’t want that. I enjoy my professional life, pushing the edges of the envelope. I wish you did.
Comment by Truthful James Tuesday, Feb 26, 08 @ 2:29 pm