You raise some valuable issues that deserve to be discussed.  I believe a strong argument can be made for the economic value of the humanities and liberal arts, and I will try to make those arguments later, when I get back from an event I have to attend.  In the meantime, I just wanted to thank you for raising some important issues in a civil way.  Typically, the "other side" is represented by people like "Eatme" and his/her buddies with similarly charming names.

Otherside, I hope this is not really the view of the IHL Board. They want to turn USM into a "high Tech" Vocational Trade School? That would certainly be shortsighted. I suppose you can "save" an institution with the name "University of Southern Mississippi", but it would no longer BE a University. Read Dr.Lawrence Mead's letter in todays H. A.

Why would any faculty want to work at such a place?
They may as well work in the private sector (or a factory smile:)

Newgirl

quote:

---

Originally posted by: snowball
"thanks for the interesting recap, I agree with the other reply - there is value in everything that is done at a university the real challenge is quantifying it for presentation to the legislature. Thames has done it for science, the case for liberal arts and its impact on what little quality of life exists in southern mississippi needs to be brought to the same level."

---

Yes, but who will do it? I thought the arguments could be provided by visitors to this board. I'm listening, but have yet to hear them.

Good points you made on the other thread Snowball.

Otherside

---

Originally posted by: snowball
" members of the Faculty Senate leadership are jockeying to be Napoleon in opposition Mr. Jones as incarnated in SFT, they threaten the deans with legal action, they formalize rumors leaked out of private and protected faculty meetings and they override their own constitution in the name of a pure fight. . . . "

I think it is fair for you to be critical of the Senate, although I disagree with most of your observations. This particular broadside is as much of an argumentum ad hominum as those you are chiding on this listserv. I want to note that the Senate did not begin this year in complete (or even majority)opposition to Dr. Thames. There are excellent reasons why the tide turned in the Senate, and not because the members are stupid. Had you experienced the degree to which the administration has been uncooperative, high handed, and coercive in its dealings with the Senate, you'd have a better sense of why the Senate now so strongly feels that it is in a war. No one on the Senate will profit from this -- the only possible profit may be in the preservation of the concept of shared governance, a concept that seems foreign to many people at Southern Miss but I can assure you has a great deal of credibility elsewhere. I want to note that the officers change every year in rotation (unlike the administration) and therefore it will be very difficult for any one person to get a real hold on any significant power. You analogy is completely false.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Salesperson
"Otherside, I have started two responses to you and been interrupted twice.  You raised some very thoughtful issues that deserve well-thought out responses.  Many of us don't have time to give you those responses on a Sunday afternoon.  Like USM Sympathizer, I plan to come back later.  Whether you believe what you wrote or are simply encouraging alternative thinking is irrelevant.  What is important is that you provided a framework for trying to solve some difficult challenges.  Whatever your motivation, thank you.  It's a worthy exercise.  Have patience, I think you will be getting a great many responses."

---

Thanks Salesperson. I too am hopeful of thoughtful responses on these issues.

Of course, HOW the Thames Administration instituted the changes (mandated by the Board???) is the reason for all of the trouble. A skillful manager could have accomplished changes WITH shared governance providing creative solutions to avoid problems.

Otherside

Dear Otherside,

I am now back from the lecture I attended this afternoon -- which, as it turns out, was much more relevant to the situation at USM than I had anticipated.  It was all about the history of the destruction of great libraries throughout the ages -- libraries as repositories of much that makes human life really worthwhile.  It was chilling to hear how various regimes throughout the ages have deliberately ordered books in the "humanities" destroyed (the "humanists" were causing trouble, apparently, even back in the Chin dynasty), while preserving books on "practical" subjects such as science and technology.  I kept thinking of your earlier post as I listened to the talk.

I don't have the time just now to respond to your post as I would like to; I have a huge set of papers to grade and will be up until early in the morning working on them. (Yes, SFT, we humanists do actually work on weekends and well into the evening.)  In the meantime, though, I thought I would pass along some links I scared up with a bit of googling (see below).  The first link, by the way, seems oddly relevant to MANY of the issues that have been discussed on this board in the past few weeks.  I want to thank you, Otherside, for giving me the incentive that led me to this link.

Meanwhile, after I have at least made a dent in the papers to be graded, I will try to come back to this discussion -- I promise!

http://www.creativeclass.org/

http://www.cac.ca.gov/impact/resources.cfm#11

http://www.nga.org/center/divisions/1,1188,C_ISSUE_BRIEF%5ED_3680,00.html

http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/stories/1997/10/27/story3.html

http://columbus.bizjournals.com/columbus/stories/2002/08/12/smallb1.html

http://www.florida-arts.org/resources/economicimpactofthearts.htm

http://www.capri.neu.edu/WassallIncomeBlurb.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2004-02-23-economy-edit_x.htm

http://www.maash.org/advocacy/impact_of_state.htm

http://www.kieranhealy.org/files/drafts/creative-economy-bib.pdf

http://artsusa.org/EconomicImpact/

 

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Otherside
"2) The main purpose of universities in the state must be to provide a skilled labor force for economic development in order to solve the financial problems. <SNIP>
Are the about points valid for Mississippi today? How would you respond?"

---

I think the main purpose of community colleges in the state is to provide a skilled labor force.

When we talk about "skilled" labor in this state, we are often talking about workers who have basic literacy skills. Are we clear on the kind of workforce training that Mississippi really needs?

The community colleges have a lot more experience with literacy programs & workforce training (OJT stuff) than the universities. A lot more.

So we can leave that "training" business for the folks who have been doing it (and well) for a lot longer. Community colleges are the state's best bang for the buck in that area. It's demonstrated consistently, year after year.

So I guess universities must be about something a bit more than "training." Maybe they're about "education." And you know precisely what definition I'm using.

The universities are supposed to prepare folks for a bit higher trophic level in the workforce food chain than "skilled labor." That requires critical thinking ability & a broad-based background for creativity. What's the difference in how you perceive a nurse with a BSN in comparison with an ADN? Both have the same license, can do the same things, but usually the BSN is paid more. Why? As "skilled labor," they are equals. What's the difference?

One other thing, before you replace "education" with "training"... Thomas Jefferson had something to say about the importance of education to the survival of a democracy. Not just "skilled labor" but a "well-informed" (his words) population.

For that reason, anybody who would erode the place of liberal arts (or any other discipline) in the total curriculum is basically against the American way of life, mom & apple pie in my book. "Unamerican." Simple as that.

As for the other points, I'm afraid they would never be made.

I gave these a few moments of thought, although not as much thought as I should have.  Like others, I have some things to tend to tonight, but here you go.

Your statements/questions in regular face, mine in bold face:

I would love to hear a discussion of the Real Issues.

"Real Issues?"  I would assert that many real issues have been discussed on this board and picked up by the mainstream press. 

So I imagined what a debate with Roy Klumb would be like. My guess he would make the following points.

I think you give Roy Klumb more credit for rationality than I do.  Nothing he has said that has appeared in the papers leads me to believe that he operates on rational thought.  His latest comments in local papers via his letter to the ed provide evidence of my assertion.

1) This state can’t support so many institutions of higher learning (Univ.s and C. Colleges) so institutions must find their own sources of funds.

A conclusion based on a false premise.  But let's say it is so: then how has Shelby affected private funding.  We are aware that several benefactors have decided to withhold funding until Shelby steps down. 

 

2) The main purpose of universities in the state must be to provide a skilled labor force for economic development in order to solve the financial problems.

If one looks at the history of the state (ah, could history be beneficial to economic development), then one is aware that Mississippi has sold its soul to attract industry.  "Right to work" laws, tax incentives, free land/buildings, yet still we lag at the back of the pack.  Perhaps the problem with Mississippi is also its image--Shelby Thames has done NOTHING to improve that; indeed, he has proved that the "good ole boy" network is alive and well in the state.  And let's not forget that Mississippi was recently ranked as the most corrupt state in the nation.  There are problems with the state's ability to attract industry beyond the university system. 

3) If students can get an “education” along the way of being “trained” great, but that is not necessary for the present needs of this state.

Huh?  An education is not necessary?  Well, did you know that liberal arts majors are in high demand for executive positions in the public and private sectors?  So are we to assume that we are to train the brawn for the work force, just not the brain?

4) Major funds can only be brought to the University by disciplines that supply a “product” or “service” to industry.

Your notion of "product" and mine are obviously not the same.  You think of tangible products like paint; I think of intellectual products that are intangible.  Do historians, anthropologists, artists, nurses, etc. NOT provide valuable services to citizens?

5) Thus major support must be directed to science, engineering and technologies.

Another conclusion based on a false premise.

6) Arts and Letters must be reduced to supply the capital. (Enough leaders can be supplied the state by U. of Miss and Miss. State U.)

Or by LSU, because that is where I would have enrolled had USM not had the honors college.  By "killing" liberal arts in the south part of the state, you risk losing tens of thousands of students to out-of-state universities, which are now offering OOS tuition waivers, and who are actively recruiting Mississippi's high-school and community-college students.  Kill USM's liberal arts, watch thousands of students migrate to out-of-state unis in LA and AL.

7) The freedom to make such “creative” moves require the removal of the antiquated institution of tenure.

Only in Mississippi is tenure seen as antiquated.  Basically, what you propone is not a university, and not even a technical college, but a publicly funded institution that serves to enrich a few private entities through performing research, funded by public taxes, funneled into profits for those who have connections at IHL and know how to play the system. 

Should IHL alter the university system so drastically, the fallout won't occur just at USM, but at all state universities.  Since the "antiquated" system of tenure will be removed, no professors in liberal arts will chose to apply to any Mississippi universities--the rules of one apply to all, remember?  If this is what Klumb is thinking, and, again, I think you give him too much credit, then I pity this state.  Any progress made in the pockets of intellectualism (universities) in the past half-century will have been for naught, as the state regresses to mid-twentieth century standards.  It's the same introversion of the past, but with a radically new face. 

So herer we are deciding on what will be the nature of a University is Mississippi.

University?  No, what you are proponing is not a "university."  It's a publicly funded institution that pads the pockets of a few.

Are the about points valid for Mississippi today? How would you respond?

We need to think beyond the "valid points for Mississippi."  Everything contained in your questions points to a Mississippi of yesterday. Fear of intellectualism, value only in what provides profits, brawn over brain, killing the expansion of world views of Mississippians--it's so 1950s/60s.  Do we really want to devolve?

In response to:

2) The main purpose of universities in the state must be to provide a skilled labor force for economic development in order to solve the financial problems.

The following study was found at the link below:

http://www.uwo.ca/wnews/centre/centre99-00/liberalarts.htm

While the economist is mainly concerned with what this study means for Canada it is relevant to the current discussion.  My favorite quotes from the article below are:

The humanities, social sciences and education not only pay their way, but are as profitable investments for Canada as are high technology programs like engineering," says Allen.

“…the emerging economy is "knowledge-based,"

“Cost-benefit analysis shows the rate of return to society on the investments in the social sciences … and education … outstrips the rate of return for engineering… math and the physical sciences…”

Full text below:

Study shows liberal arts degrees pay big dividends

Graduates in humanities and social sciences readily can find well-paying jobs that enable them to climb career ladders, says a study on employability of liberal arts university graduates.

The study by University of British Columbia economist Robert C. Allen dispels myths that liberal arts graduates contribute only marginally to the economy and are headed for low-income employment.

These notions are simply not true, says Allen, who has done a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of the economic impact of social sciences and humanities graduates.

"The humanities, social sciences and education not only pay their way, but are as profitable investments for Canada as are high technology programs like engineering," says Allen.

Because the emerging economy is "knowledge-based," there will be a huge focus on managers and teachers, individuals who traditionally hail from backgrounds in social sciences and the humanities, he says.

"The rapidly changing economy will require people to manage it and to think of creative solutions to new problems," says Allen. "Perhaps these solutions will require imagination beyond the technological."

Some key findings in his study, "The Employability of University graduates in the Humanities, Social Sciences and Education: Recent Statistical Evidence," are:

• Graduates in humanities and social sciences readily find jobs and generally earn high incomes;

• Most graduates in humanities and social sciences are employed in a professional or managerial capacity (50 - 81%);

• Cost-benefit analysis shows the rate of return to society on the investments in the social sciences (9%) and education (10.2%) outstrips the rate of return for engineering (7.9%) as well as the rate of return for math and the physical sciences (7.4%);

• Cost-benefit analysis shows the rate of return for investment in the humanities (7.8%) is on par with that of engineering and slightly higher than the rate of return for math and the physical sciences;

• Earning power for humanities graduates rises an average 78% from their 20s to their 50s; the rise of social science graduate incomes is 106% over the same period. This compares to a 47% income increase for community college graduates and a 76% average income increase for university graduates across all fields;

• The demand for all university graduates in the Canadian economy appears to be growing as rapidly as the supply of graduates.

Further information on this study is available on the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council web site at: www.crsh.ca/archives/allen.html

 

I am taking a quick break from my grading.  During the break, I found (on another thread) the following INCONTROVERTIBLE AND IRREFUTABLE PROOF THAT A LOVE OF BEAUTY AND KNOWLEDGE OF AESTHETICS IS A SOURCE OF MEGA-BUCK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.  WHAT MORE PROOF DOES MR. KLUMB NEED?  CASE CLOSED:

Recently at the Elected Officials Retreat, Dr. Angeline Dvorak of the University of Southern Mississippi noted the importance of presenting a clean and great looking town to prospective businessmen.

"Local gardens have often won been the deciding factor in a business locating in a town,"said Dvorak as she described how clean streets and clean community can promote job growth and increase the chances of a town landing business. She also noted how a clean community can have a postive effect on its residents and increase the good of the community.

http://www.winstoncountyjournal.com/articles/2004/03/18/news/news03.txt

 

 

 

 

Thanks again to Otherside for stimulating me to do some reading I might not otherwise have done!  Here is just a small sampling of the kind of thing I am finding:

DIVERSE SNIPPETS CONCERNING THE IDEAS OF RICHARD FLORIDA, WHOSE THEORY ABOUT ECONOMIC GROWTH HAS JUST BEEN NAMED TO THE _HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW_'S LIST OF BREAKTHROUGH IDEAS FOR 2004:

Human creativity is the ultimate source of economic growth. Every single person is creative in some way. And to fully and tap and harness that creativity we must be tolerant, diverse and inclusive.

=================================

Public policy and regional development books are often considered best as a cure for insomnia, but Florida's work is challenging many of the verities of the field. He claims that the world has moved away from the old "organizational" era of corporations and homogeneity and into the "creative" era, which is spearheaded by 38 million workers -- from scientists to IT workers to artists and writers -- with a variety of lifestyles and needs. ...

FROM AN INTERVIEW WITH RICHARD FLORIDA:

My argument is that in order to harness creativity for economic ends, you need to harness creativity in all its forms. You can't just generate a tech economy or information economy or knowledge economy; you have to harness the multidimensional aspects of creativity. So the book says that there are three types of creativity: technological creativity, which is innovation, new products and ideas and technologies; economic creativity, which includes entrepreneurship, turning those things into new businesses and new industries; and cultural and artistic creativity, the ability to invent new ways of thinking about things, new art forms, new designs, new photos, new concepts. Those three things have to come together to spur economic growth.  

===========================
  
What that means for cities is that instead of "underwriting big-box retailers, subsidizing downtown malls, recruiting call centers, and squandering precious taxpayer dollars on extravagant stadium complexes," the leadership should instead develop an environment attractive to the creative class by cultivating the arts, music, night life and quaint historic districts -- in short, develop places that are fun and interesting rather than corporate and mall-like. It's advice that city and regional leaders can take or leave, but Florida contends that his focus groups and indices -- reporting the important factors needed for economic growth in the creative age, from concentrations of bohemians to patents to a lively gay community -- are more accurately predicting the success and failure of metropolitan areas.  

=================================

... In short, as Paul Romer, a professor of economics at Stanford University put it, there is growing recognition that when it comes to economic growth, "the relatively well educated and relatively creative are disproportionately important."

Where Mr. Florida adds a new twist, however, is to argue that while the creative class is unquestionably a blessing to the economy as a whole, at the regional level the picture is hardly so rosy. Heralding a "pattern of geographic and class segmentation far worse than any we've ever had," he says, the creative class may mean boom times for one city and obsolescence for another. The reason, he contends, is that this tattooed and espresso-sipping set is unusually finicky. According to conventional economic theory, workers settle in those cities that offer them the highest-paying jobs in their fields. But creative-class workers, Mr. Florida says, are more particular: they choose cities for their tolerant environments and diverse populations as well as good jobs. ...

This, in essence, is Mr. Florida's "creative capital theory." As he put it during a recent interview in Manhattan, "You cannot get a technologically innovative place unless it's open to weirdness, eccentricity and difference."  ...

Most economists would agree, but that doesn't mean they buy Mr. Florida's creative capital theory as the explanation. "My view is that the best thing in terms of economic development is to invest in your centers of higher education," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Economy.com, a company in West Chester, Pa., that tracks regional growth. "It's no surprise that Austin came up in the last 10 to 15 years. The University of Texas got all that oil money and invested it in technology." ...

Mr. Cushing went on to test the human-capital theory. But though he found an impressive correlation between a city's percentage of college-educated people and growth, he was not completely satisfied. "There are more than 100 university communities, and only 20 cities stand out as places in which it would appear that high-tech development is quite outstanding," Mr. Cushing said. "How do we explain Austin?" Finally, and with a good deal of doubt, he turned to Mr. Florida's theory. "When you hear about these cities that have gays or bohos, it doesn't sound scientific," he said. "It sounds gimmicky." To his surprise, the creative-capital theory turned out — at least after preliminary testing — to provide the best explanation for Austin's high-tech transformation. "I started the exercise very skeptical of the creative-class notion," said Mr. Cushing, whose findings are discussed in a continuing series of articles in the American-Statesman. "And was astonished by the results."
 
EVERYTHING REPRODUCED ABOVE CAN BE FOUND AT THE WEB SITE BELOW (WHERE'S THERE'S MUCH, MUCH MORE):

http://www.creativeclass.org/index.shtml

==================================

The Hooters that is rumored to be in the works across from USM is not considered "alternative" in terms of lifestyles?  I guess it will only be "red blooded Americans" like Shelby over there at lunch hour.  I hope he is not having a coctail. 

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Salesperson
"  . . . . Very long-winded...sorry! "

---

Actually, very short winded for all of the ground you covered. A tour de force!

We are now beginning to have the kind of discussions we need to have to hire a new administration and rebuild the university. Keep going.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Salesperson
" Very long-winded...sorry! "

---

No, this is really superb!  I originally came to this board to help defend two good men and stand up for some larger principles, but I am learning a great deal in the process about all sorts of things.  This post was exceptionally thoughtful; thanks!

 

MORE GLEANINGS:

Study of ARTS AND THE KENTUCKY ECONOMY performed at The University of Kentucky (the one in Lexington, by business professors tenured there) during the period when AD was a resident of that state:

http://www.kyarts.org/artsecon.htm

MORE GLEANINGS:

Roy Klumb and SFT, please read (in particular) paragraphs 3, 6, and 9 below.

Arts and the Kentucky Economy

[1] The arts in Kentucky have given us pleasure, made us laugh, made us cry and made us think. The arts have also enriched us in a literal sense--adding millions of dollars to the state's economy.

[2] The economic impact of arts organizations alone in Kentucky was $22 million in worker earnings and 1,324 jobs in the state last year, according to a recent report published by the Center for Business and Economic Research at the University of Kentucky. The economic impact of the arts due to arts spending, arts donations, and spending at restaurants, hotels, and shopping near arts events was estimated to be $41.5 million in worker income and 2,400 full-time jobs in the last year.

[3] "The arts are essential to the economic development of the state, not only through direct dollars into the economy but also because the arts are a value-added incentive for drawing new businesses and professionals to the state," says Gerri Combs, director of the Kentucky Arts Council which, with the Kentucky Center for the Arts in Louisville, sponsored this UK study.

[4] The survey also asked households about their willingness to donate money in order to increase the number of arts performances, or to avoid a decrease. The results suggest that the average Kentucky household would be willing to pay $7.38 to increase the number of arts performances by 25 percent. Though this may not seem like a large amount, it suggests that all Kentucky households would be willing to pay $10.9 million to fund a 25 percent expansion in arts performances, in addition to purchasing tickets to those performances. The average Kentucky household spent $104 attending arts performances and events in the last year and donated $48.73 to arts organizations.

[5] "I was surprised by the numbers relating to the value of the arts to Kentuckians, how much they would give to keep or increase the arts and the numbers relating to volunteerism," Combs says. The survey found that Kentucky households on average donated 6.93 hours in the last year to arts organizations.

[6] "And the arts are beneficial to Kentuckians in ways other than economical," says Tim King, vice president of the Kentucky Center for the Arts. "The wide, diversified array of offerings, some mainstream and some not, help to dispel certain perceptions about the provincial nature of the commonwealth by people who don't live here. The arts help tremendously in dispelling that myth."

[7] "The arts are extremely important in the education of our children and to the general livability of the state," Combs adds. "Another benefit is the documentation and continuation of our heritage."

[8] "We wanted to fund this study because we saw it as an opportunity to get a real handle on what's going on in the state, especially in light of the fact that there have been many new centers--in Owensboro, Prestonsburg, Madisonville and Ashland, for example--since the inception of the Kentucky Center for the Arts," King says. A total of 77 arts organizations returned surveys.

[9] One of the reasons for focusing on the regional arts centers, Combs adds,is their potential for spurring economic development in rural areas through their ability to bring in the arts from outside the state, their potential in educating our youth through the arts, and their leadership skills in the arena of social issues--at-risk youth, crime prevention, and keeping kids in school.

--Jeff Worley

http://www.rgs.uky.edu/ca/odyssey/fall98/arts.html

 

 

 

MORE GLEANINGS:

Roy Klumb and SFT, please read (in particular) the paragraphs I have starred (*).

Arts Education Does Pay Off

Support for Sciences Ignores the Benefits of Broader Education

By
Livio Di Matteo

Canada's universities -- particularly the humanities and social sciences -- face a major challenge. The current approach to education emphasizes immediate tangible benefits. This has led to government funding initiatives in science and technology that fail to recognize the importance of a liberal arts education. Yet supporting a humanities and social science education is justified on sound economic grounds, not just on the civic and academic grounds usually used.

The humanities and social sciences provide social benefits that private market mechanisms do not count. Just as a vaccination benefits people other than those inoculated by reducing disease transmission, the humanities and social sciences have spill-over benefits by transmitting wisdom to society. The inability to attach a market price to a literate and civil society of educated citizens does not make this type of education valueless.

The humanities and social sciences complement scientific and technical training, and provide innovative strategies for meeting future challenges. While science graduates can provide technical solutions to problems, only individuals trained in human science can deal with the economic, ethical, cultural and social implications of these solutions. For example, we are told that advances in genetics are making a vastly extended human lifespan possible in the not-so-distant future. How will this affect the distribution of income and employment, and the quality of life in our society? Is this type of analysis not of economic benefit to society?

* Market benefits to humanities and social science graduates translate into jobs, as economist Robert Allen of the University of British Columbia recently demonstrated in a study. Prof. Allen found that unemployment rates for humanities and social science graduates did not substantially differ from those of graduates in other fields. Moreover, these graduates' age-income profiles can actually be steeper than those in the sciences or technical programs, where the latest technical knowledge depreciates quickly. Like fine wine, humanities and social science graduates appreciate with age as their skills deepen, generating a steeply rising income over their working life. Some universities, such as Dalhousie, are beginning to attach a transcript that lists skills such as collaborative work, oral communications and analytical work to their liberal arts graduates. This communicates what was once obvious, but now has to be marketed: Liberal arts graduates are prized because of their ability to think creatively and laterally using skills acquired in analysis, synthesis, research and communication.

Having reduced their market intervention on the grounds that private forces work best, governments are now replicating that interventionist role in post-secondary education by targeting funding increases to programs in science and technology. These programs are worthy of funding, but for universities to function according to a private-sector model, governments should provide universities with block increases in funding and allow them to pursue those programs they are best at. Targeted funding distorts resource allocation decisions by inducing universities to expand government-favoured programs. This leaves governments selecting educational winners and losers when the economy's future needs are uncertain.

Other issues present themselves, too. What about the long-run cost structure of universities, given that the per-student cost of producing science and engineering graduates is higher than in other fields? Who is responsible if such funding generates a graduate glut in any one discipline? Will government be accountable, or will the buck be passed to the universities for once again "failing" in their role to society?

* Humanities and social science students make up approximately half of university enrolments. If you believe that "voting with your feet" is a test of market demand, this enrolment share should be sending a clear message to educational policy-makers as to how the public values these programs. Humanities and social science students should be entitled to adequate research and teaching facilities, and to professors who conduct leading-edge research. When it comes to resource allocation, why should half of university students be placed on a path to second-rate treatment when they are indeed "paying-customers"?

It is time to restore some balance. The current targeted funding approach ignores the obvious demand for humanities and social science training. Governments can best serve the university system by ensuring adequate general funding and allowing universities, in consultation with government and the public, to make the resource allocation decisions. In neglecting the humanities and social sciences, governments have not fully consulted all constituencies, and their funding decisions implicitly attach a negative value to these disciplines. Canadian society will pay huge economic and cultural costs if such myopic policies are continued.

Dr. Livio Di Matteo is an associate professor of economics at Lakehead University and vice-president, external communications, of the Humanities and Social Science Federation of Canada.

http://www.sfu.ca/arts/articles/doespay.htm

 

 

MORE GLEANINGS:

1999 speech by president of Cornell:

THE ROLE OF THE HUMANITIES IN A RESEARCH UNIVERSITY

http://web.cornell.edu/UniversityFaculty/OnLineForum/Humanities.ResUniv19991206.pdf

quote:

---

Originally posted by: MBAgal
"What you guys want to read is this (see link): http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0691114129/ref=sib_dp_pt/102-8988748-6523338#reader-link check it out...."

---

 

Thanks very much for this reference; looks good!

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Otherside
" Yes, but who will do it? I thought the arguments could be provided by visitors to this board. I'm listening, but have yet to hear them. ...Otherside "

---

Dear Otherside,

You seemed anxious to get thoughtful feedback yesterday.  I believe that you received some...response?

If I had the time to distill this thread into one concise letter to fax or e-mail to the IHL Board today, I would do so.  I just don't have the time but there are good, if older and oft-repeated, arguments presented here.  Also, to the person on another thread who just asked if the Dvoraks are living in a house owned by Thames - yes, according to what has been discussed on other older threads that I can't find right now.  Other old reports also indicate that Hudson's family is still living in the university-funded Coast Provost's home despite the rumor that he owns a home in Hattiesburg that he rents out and collects income on and yet another rumor that he is renting an apartment in Hattiesburg that he may not be paying for out of personal funds.  I believe the FOIA requests were due Tuesday or Wednesday of this week.  Perhaps the HA will report today.