This text offers a comprehensive account of the social, political, and cultural forces undermining academic freedom. At once witty and devastating, it confronts these threats with frankness, then offers a prescription for higher education's renewal.
Since the end of World War II, the primary political regions of Illinois, Chicago and "downstate, " have lost population, wealth, and political power to a third region, the suburban collar, which has relentlessly expanded outward from Chicago. At the same time, legislative service has changed from a largely part-time "citizen" activity into a "professional, " career-oriented pursuit. Parochial perspectives of elected officials have intensified as reflected in candidates' promises to deliver their districts' "fair share" of government spending. The state legislature has become an arena in which each region battles for its own fair share, rather than an instrument for comprehensively addressing the state's problems. The authors foresee the emergence of political coalitions linking downstate and Chicago-historically at odds-in efforts to protect their "shares" and contend with the suburban collar. Illinois's political leaders face the challenge of looking beyond district interests to the broader concerns of work-force quality and statewide economic prosperity. Samuel K. Gove is Director Emeritus at the Institute of Government and Public Affairs, and Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Illinois. He is coeditor with Louis H. Masotti of After Daley: Chicago Politics in Transition. James D. Nowlan is an adjunct professor of public policy at Knox College and a Senior Fellow with the University of Illinois Institute of Government and Public Affairs. He is the author of A New Game Plan for Illinois.
The debate over affirmative action has raged for over four decades, with little give on either side. Most agree that it began as noble effort to jump-start racial integration; many believe it devolved into a patently unfair system of quotas and concealment. Now, with the Supreme Court set to rule on a case that could sharply curtail the use of racial preferences in American universities, law professor Richard Sander and legal journalist Stuart Taylor offer a definitive account of what affirmative action has become, showing that while the objective is laudable, the effects have been anything but. Sander and Taylor have long admired affirmative action's original goals, but after many years of studying racial preferences, they have reached a controversial but undeniable conclusion: that preferences hurt underrepresented minorities far more than they help them. At the heart of affirmative action's failure is a simple phenomenon called mismatch. Using dramatic new data and numerous interviews with affected former students and university officials of color, the authors show how racial preferences often put students in competition with far better-prepared classmates, dooming many to fall so far behind that they can never catch up. Mismatch largely explains why, even though black applicants are more likely to enter college than whites with similar backgrounds, they are far less likely to finish; why there are so few black and Hispanic professionals with science and engineering degrees and doctorates; why black law graduates fail bar exams at four times the rate of whites; and why universities accept relatively affluent minorities over working class and poor people of all races. Sander and Taylor believe it is possible to achieve the goal of racial equality in higher education, but they argue that alternative policies -- such as full public disclosure of all preferential admission policies, a focused commitment to improving socioeconomic diversity on campuses, outreach to minority communities, and a renewed focus on K-12 schooling -- will go farther in achieving that goal than preferences, while also allowing applicants to make informed decisions. Bold, controversial, and deeply researched, Mismatch calls for a renewed examination of this most divisive of social programs -- and for reforms that will help realize the ultimate goal of racial equality.
The founding of the university in 1867 created a unique community in what had been a prairie. Within a few years, this creative mix of teachers and scholars produced innovations in agriculture, engineering and the arts that challenged old ideas and stimulated dynamic new industries. Projects ranging from the Mosaic web browser to the discovery of Archaea and pioneering triumphs in women's education and wheelchair accessibility have helped shape the university's mission into a double helix of innovation and real-world change. These essays explore the university's celebrated accomplishments and historic legacy, candidly assessing both its successes and its setbacks. Experts and students tell the eye-opening stories of campus legends and overlooked game-changers, of astonishing technical and social invention, of incubators of progress as diverse as the Beckman Institute and Ebertfest. Contributors: James R. Barrett, George O. Batzli, Claire Benjamin, Jeffrey D. Brawn, Jimena Canales, Stephanie A. Dick, Poshek Fu, Marcelo H. Garcia, Lillian Hoddeson, Harry Liebersohn, Claudia Lutz, Kathleen Mapes, Vicki McKinney, Elisa Miller, Robert Michael Morrissey, Bryan E. Norwood, Elizabeth H. Pleck, Leslie J. Reagan, Susan M. Rigdon, David Rosenboom, Katherine Skwarczek, Winton U. Solberg, Carol Spindel, William F. Tracy, and Joy Ann Williamson-Lott.
In What Universities Can Be, the high-profile educator Robert J. Sternberg writes thoughtfully about the direction of higher education in this country and its potential to achieve future excellence. Sternberg presents, for the first time, his concept of the ACCEL model, in which institutions of higher education are places where students learn to become Active Concerned Citizens and Ethical Leaders. One of the greatest problems in our society is a lack of leaders who understand the importance of behaving in ethical ways for the common good of all. At a time when new models of education are sorely needed, universities have the opportunity to claim the education of future leaders as their mission.In the course of laying out the ACCEL concept and how such a model might be achieved, Sternberg offers many insights into the realities of higher education as it is practiced today and suggests ways that we could move in a better direction, one that would produce graduates who make the world a better place in which to live. Sternberg's compelling narrative and convincing argument address all aspects of universities, such as admissions, financial aid, instruction and assessment, retention and graduation, student life, diversity, finances, athletics, governance, and marketing. This book is essential reading for educators and laypeople who are interested in learning how our universities work and how they could work better.
Using case studies and relevant literature, this book illustrates the challenges to legitimate, Shared-governance domains when the routine of the academy is forced to deal with big issues, often brought on by external forces. Mortimer and Sathre have gone beyond a discussion of faculty/administrative behavior by focusing on what happens when the legitimate governance claims of faculty, trustees, and presidents clash. They place these relationships in the broader context of internal institutional governance and analyze the dynamics that unfold when advocacy trumps collegiality. The book closes with a defense of shared governance and offers observations and practical suggestions about how the academy can share authority effectively and further achieve its mission.