Printable View
Some figures from the Intellectual Dork Web have started their own (unaccredited) university: The University of Austin.
What do you think?
Exciting new opportunity to subvert a broken system of higher education?
A glorified book club?
A free speech grift?
We shall see.
Not that it’s a bad idea
But brother you’d be a real dumb ass to attend this university
I'm kinda leaning toward "free speech grift", which is sad because higher education really does need a complete reset.
However, many of the people involved have made careers out of being cancel culture victims, so this whole thing is a bit suspect. I want to see a free speech university created for the love of the game, not as a money grab because the university libs have pissed off enough conversatives to where such a thing would be profitable.
I think the problem here is the fact that it's a university which centers itself around free speech, rather than being a regular university which promises to welcome free speech. The former seems somewhat like a grift, whereas the latter is sorely needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I keep seeing variants of this statement that "higher education needs a complete reset" but what does that actually mean? Certainly aspects of universities need to be reformed but what, practically speaking, do you think a "complete reset" of post-secondary education would look like?
And I think you've nailed it by saying that universities need to welcome free speech rather than building around it. We're already seeing the predictable ridicule of UATX for just being a free speech university:
All that being said, I would take the shit out of a David Mamet play writing course.
That’s hilarious.Quote:
Originally Posted by The ShrinkQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I keep seeing variants of this statement that "higher education needs a complete reset" but what does that actually mean? Certainly aspects of universities need to be reformed but what, practically speaking, do you think a "complete reset" of post-secondary education would look like?
And I think you've nailed it by saying that universities need to welcome free speech rather than building around it. We're already seeing the predictable ridicule of UATX for just being a free speech university:
All that being said, I would take the shit out of a David Mamet play writing course.
This “university” is a grift like everything else aimed at Trumpers and other right wingers who think they’re victims (lol). These people are extremely gullible.
Not only is it a grift, it seems like they’re trying to create confusion with the name of an actual well-regarded university, UT-Austin (UTXA).
Complete reset of what? America’s universities are the envy of the world. It’s one of the few parts of America that still works and is actually better than other countries, unlike our systems for democracy, health care and primary education, which are all way behind the rest of civilization.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
:wtfQuote:
Originally Posted by Walter SobchakComplete reset of what? America’s universities are the envy of the world. It’s one of the few parts of America that still works and is actually better than other countries, unlike our systems for democracy, health care and primary education, which are all way behind the rest of civilization.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I would like to know how you think the universities work but health care doesn't. Considering that the primary talking point of both is financial, I would imagine most people lump both together as either "they're fine" or "they're fucked".
Unless you somehow think the quality of American health care is lagging behind all of civilization, which would be quite the hot take.
I know the libs think that the above tweet is sooooooooo hilarious, but it actually validates the exact reason why such a university might end up being viable. It pretty much denies that a lack-of-free-speech problem exists at universities, and portrays this effort as racist/misogynistic/homophobic/etc. Totally misses the point, even though I actually agree with the criticism that this whole thing is probably a grift by professional cancel culture victims.Quote:
Originally Posted by The ShrinkQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
I keep seeing variants of this statement that "higher education needs a complete reset" but what does that actually mean? Certainly aspects of universities need to be reformed but what, practically speaking, do you think a "complete reset" of post-secondary education would look like?
And I think you've nailed it by saying that universities need to welcome free speech rather than building around it. We're already seeing the predictable ridicule of UATX for just being a free speech university:
All that being said, I would take the shit out of a David Mamet play writing course.
Anyway, I was being hyperbolic when I said that higher education needs a "complete reset", but it really does need a massive overhaul, and not just on the free speech front.
Among the problems with today's higher education:
- Too expensive. Tuition costs have skyrocketed far faster than inflation over the past 30 years, mostly due to the mistake of allowing federally guaranteed student loans. The prices just kept getting artificially jacked up, with universities knowing that the price would be paid anyway by either parents or the aforementioned loans.
- Unfair admissions processes. The admissions scandals a few years ago with Lori Loughlin and the rest should have spurred some major change in the very corrupt and backward admissions process at most universities, but somehow it didn't. First off, as the Louglin scandal showed, there's all kinds of shady backdoor ways people can get their kids in -- usually via big donations to the school, but also via nepotism and connections with school employees. Second, the whole "college essay" thing is a huge sham. It benefits those with parents who can hire professional coaches to write essays for their kids (or parents who are good writers themselves), and fucks the kids who actually do it honestly and write their own essay. The extracurricular activity element is another sham, as wealthy people with resources can easily falsify such things for their kids, whereas the average person cannot. Also, why should extracurricular activities even be a factor for admission? A quiet kid who just keeps his head down and does his schoolwork shouldn't be penalized for not having a life outside of academics. Then, of course, there's the sham of college athletics, which have been turned into pseudo pro leagues in many sports, except the players don't get paid -- they just get admitted to college for a sham education that their academics didn't qualify them for. And how about the racial preference bullshit, where being Asian actually hurts your chances of getting into college? Much of these admissions oddities benefit the rich and well-connected, whereas the average student gets fucked.
- Removal of standardized tests. This is recent, but horrible. Standardized tests, while not perfect, are the great equalizer. The Lori Loughlin scandal actually proved that! Loughlin and William H. Macy, for all their money and resources, simply couldn't coach their not-so-bright daughter into getting a good SAT score! This should be proof positive that the SAT isn't a test "for rich white people", but rather is a nice tool to look at academic ability. Are there coaching coarses which improves kids' scores, which are typically only used by middle and upper class people? Yes. But that can easily be rectified by funding the same courses to be given (for free) in lower and lower-middle class schools! Removing the test, however, once again benefits rich famililes. A dirty secret of private schools is that grade inflation is a huge issue, as the schools are incentivized to keep paying parents happy. If you're just going by grades and no SAT, there is a huge edge to families which can afford these grade-inflating private schools, whereas the typical kid in public school gets fucked. See a pattern here?
- Incredibly uneven political affiliations. Some universities actually have zero politically conservative professors. Others have a few, but most of them keep quiet out of fear of ostracism. This unfortunately informs the research which is done or allowed to be done. As you've said yourself, Shrink, no university would tolerate a study on whether teenagers transitioning genders is harmful, unless it's done from the slant attempting to prove that it's not harmful.
- Lack of free speech. Students are often forced to repeat the left-wing propaganda pushed by professors, or fail the course. (Even in the early 90s, I had to do this a few times, but it's much worse today.) Right wing speakers are threatened, chased of campus, or denied permission to speak at all. Right wing viewpoints are treated as not just unwelcome, but actually dangerous. There is no longer the belief that free speech is king on college campuses. Now wrongthink is being suppressed.
- Lack of real world application of many majors. While some majors perform the function of preparing students for a role in industry, many do not. I have a big problem with huge, taxpayer-funed (or backed) loans being handed out for kids to study Women's Studies for 4-5 years, with no plan how that will translate into a career which would result in repaying it.
- Perpetual students. If you're getting loans or the state is footing much of the bill, you shouldn't be able to just drift in college without a coherent plan toward graduation. I saw this occurring in the early '90s and actually wrote an editorial about it.
As I said before, I think universities should strive for complete ideological diversity. I don't feel a university should exist simply to be a place for free speech, but reform is badly needed. There are also far too many useless degrees being handed out. I think that, in general, higher education should be de-emphasized as a destination for the typical student, and instead just one of many viable options to a productive life. In high schools, they should direct the academic-minded students to universities, and the others to something like a trade school which best suits them. We should also lose the stigma against those who "only have a high school diploma", as if that's something to be ashamed of.
TexasQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffI know the libs think that the above tweet is sooooooooo hilarious, but it actually validates the exact reason why such a university might end up being viable. It pretty much denies that a lack-of-free-speech problem exists at universities, and portrays this effort as racist/misogynistic/homophobic/etc. Totally misses the point, even though I actually agree with the criticism that this whole thing is probably a grift by professional cancel culture victims.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Shrink
Anyway, I was being hyperbolic when I said that higher education needs a "complete reset", but it really does need a massive overhaul, and not just on the free speech front.
Among the problems with today's higher education:
- Too expensive. Tuition costs have skyrocketed far faster than inflation over the past 30 years, mostly due to the mistake of allowing federally guaranteed student loans. The prices just kept getting artificially jacked up, with universities knowing that the price would be paid anyway by either parents or the aforementioned loans.
- Unfair admissions processes. The admissions scandals a few years ago with Lori Loughlin and the rest should have spurred some major change in the very corrupt and backward admissions process at most universities, but somehow it didn't. First off, as the Louglin scandal showed, there's all kinds of shady backdoor ways people can get their kids in -- usually via big donations to the school, but also via nepotism and connections with school employees. Second, the whole "college essay" thing is a huge sham. It benefits those with parents who can hire professional coaches to write essays for their kids (or parents who are good writers themselves), and fucks the kids who actually do it honestly and write their own essay. The extracurricular activity element is another sham, as wealthy people with resources can easily falsify such things for their kids, whereas the average person cannot. Also, why should extracurricular activities even be a factor for admission? A quiet kid who just keeps his head down and does his schoolwork shouldn't be penalized for not having a life outside of academics. Then, of course, there's the sham of college athletics, which have been turned into pseudo pro leagues in many sports, except the players don't get paid -- they just get admitted to college for a sham education that their academics didn't qualify them for. And how about the racial preference bullshit, where being Asian actually hurts your chances of getting into college? Much of these admissions oddities benefit the rich and well-connected, whereas the average student gets fucked.
- Removal of standardized tests. This is recent, but horrible. Standardized tests, while not perfect, are the great equalizer. The Lori Loughlin scandal actually proved that! Loughlin and William H. Macy, for all their money and resources, simply couldn't coach their not-so-bright daughter into getting a good SAT score! This should be proof positive that the SAT isn't a test "for rich white people", but rather is a nice tool to look at academic ability. Are there coaching coarses which improves kids' scores, which are typically only used by middle and upper class people? Yes. But that can easily be rectified by funding the same courses to be given (for free) in lower and lower-middle class schools! Removing the test, however, once again benefits rich famililes. A dirty secret of private schools is that grade inflation is a huge issue, as the schools are incentivized to keep paying parents happy. If you're just going by grades and no SAT, there is a huge edge to families which can afford these grade-inflating private schools, whereas the typical kid in public school gets fucked. See a pattern here?
- Incredibly uneven political affiliations. Some universities actually have zero politically conservative professors. Others have a few, but most of them keep quiet out of fear of ostracism. This unfortunately informs the research which is done or allowed to be done. As you've said yourself, Shrink, no university would tolerate a study on whether teenagers transitioning genders is harmful, unless it's done from the slant attempting to prove that it's not harmful.
- Lack of free speech. Students are often forced to repeat the left-wing propaganda pushed by professors, or fail the course. (Even in the early 90s, I had to do this a few times, but it's much worse today.) Right wing speakers are threatened, chased of campus, or denied permission to speak at all. Right wing viewpoints are treated as not just unwelcome, but actually dangerous. There is no longer the belief that free speech is king on college campuses. Now wrongthink is being suppressed.
- Lack of real world application of many majors. While some majors perform the function of preparing students for a role in industry, many do not. I have a big problem with huge, taxpayer-funed (or backed) loans being handed out for kids to study Women's Studies for 4-5 years, with no plan how that will translate into a career which would result in repaying it.
- Perpetual students. If you're getting loans or the state is footing much of the bill, you shouldn't be able to just drift in college without a coherent plan toward graduation. I saw this occurring in the early '90s and actually wrote an editorial about it.
As I said before, I think universities should strive for complete ideological diversity. I don't feel a university should exist simply to be a place for free speech, but reform is badly needed. There are also far too many useless degrees being handed out. I think that, in general, higher education should be de-emphasized as a destination for the typical student, and instead just one of many viable options to a productive life. In high schools, they should direct the academic-minded students to universities, and the others to something like a trade school which best suits them. We should also lose the stigma against those who "only have a high school diploma", as if that's something to be ashamed of.
No more to be said