|
Egalitarian
U.
by
John Galvin
My
last article
commended Christopher Woodhead for having the cojones to
expose the reality of "bog-standard universities" in the
UK. The former #1 education administrator in England was willing
to go
on record opposing the lowering of university admissions standards
and supporting Kingsley Amis’ dictum that "More means worse."
I
described my experiences as a Little League manager because they
afforded me a real-life opportunity to participate in implementing
an affirmative action program and to witness the results. We lowered
the standards required to enter the upper league, thereby pushing
a large cohort of lesser-qualified players into a more competitive
situation. Rather than waiting years to see the results filter through
society, as is required with some other affirmative action programs,
we saw the results of our actions immediately: an abrupt drop in
the quality of play all across the league. Our system, burdened
by the weight of affirmative action, was no longer able to be competitive.
I
contend that this is an accurate experimental model that demonstrates
what happens in every affirmative action program. Imagine a pyramid
of talent and skill which could represent intelligence or artistic
aptitude, just as easily as baseball playing ability. Somewhere
you need to draw a horizontal line across that pyramid to differentiate
the "Major Leagues" from the "Minor Leagues."
The higher you draw that line, the higher the quality level you
achieve in BOTH the upper section AND the lower section. Every time
you lower that dividing line, you lower the average level in both
the upper and the lower groups.
But
does the Little League analogy really apply to education? Let me
tell you about my recent "close encounter" with an institution
of higher education, and you decide whether standards have been
lowered.
My
oldest son will soon begin his pursuit of a college degree at the
University of Cincinnati. This institution of higher learning is
famous primarily for its Bearcat basketball team whose players,
while understandably not intensely focused on academics, are not
even very interested in learning to play basketball. "Just
give me the damn ball and get out of my way," seems to be the
team motto.
Parents
and students were invited to come for two days of orientation. Students
were separated from the parents and went through a different program.
As for the parents, the first few sessions concerned realities of
financing, housing, etc. But soon it became apparent that these
activities were not the real purpose of the program. The sessions
started to focus on "tolerance" and "diversity."
In fact the director of the program accidentally let slip the phrase
"diversity training." Our so-called "Parents’ Orientation
Days" was technically, from their point of view, "diversity
training"!
As
I suffered through two days of "diversity training" sessions,
I waited in vain for some mention of academic standards. The presentation
by the Associate Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences was our
last hope for some evidence of intellectual activity, but it was
not to be. He talked about majors, courses, credits and graduation
requirements certainly essential topics but not a word about the
pursuit of knowledge or the love of learning. At no point was there
the smallest indication that students should have anything but a
strictly pragmatic interest in whatever they study. Even the presentation
on the Honors program spoke only of the canoe trip and spring break
in Hawaii.
As
I listened to the AD of the CAS, it was easy to imagine that I was
living through C.S. Lewis’ science fiction novel, "That Hideous
Strength." For the first time we were in a room that looked
like a real classroom, rather than an experimental laboratory, located
in a building which stands like a lonely island of classical architecture
amidst a sea of never-ending construction and hideous poured concrete.
The AD looked like a real professor and spoke like someone who had
probably received a decent education. But like the characters in
"That Hideous Strength," somewhere along the line he had
traded in a life of genuine study for the politics of administration.
And just like the characters in the novel, the poor fellow practically
had to shout to be heard over the din of the construction going
on behind him.
The
money, the activity, the projects, they’re astounding! The size
of the campus and the number of students makes the mind reel. And
this is just one small corner of the project of higher education
in the United States. But nowhere in this massive project is there
room for even the tiniest bit of actual intellectual activity, most
especially any intellectual activity that dares to question don’t
even dream of threatening the dominant PC mindset.
At
last we reached the final event: a panel discussion where we could
present questions to the team of S.O.L.’s (Student Orientation Leaders)
who had guided us around campus and acted out a dramatic presentation
of "A Year in the Life" (of a freshman, consisting of
sex, beer, and indoctrination programs in which white males have
their consciousness raised to be tolerant of other races, sexes
and sexual preferences). They had been presented to us as the "top
of the top" of the previous year’s freshman class (no europhile
phrases like "crème de la crème" here please!).
Parents
asked about buying books, securing parking, etc. Then I raised my
hand and asked, "How would you describe the intellectual atmosphere
on campus?" Stunned silence. First I was asked to repeat my
question, which I did. Then I was asked to clarify what I meant.
Using words of only 1 or 2 syllables, I asked, "What do you
talk about on campus? What do you read? What do you care about?
What issues do you debate?" More stunned silence. Apparently
the "top of the top" does not read, think or discuss (unless
required for class).
Finally
a double winner a member of 2 victimized minority groups spoke up
and said, "Well the intellectual atmosphere isn’t too great
during most times of the year, but it gets real intense around mid-terms
and finals." Another S.O.L., Steve, replied, "I don’t
think that’s what he had in mind."
At
the session on the Honors program, Steve had been described as the
prize pupil, a model of what an Honors student should be. To give
Steve his due, he was perceptive enough to realize that they were
unable to answer the question and that this inability revealed a
profound ignorance of what "education" is supposed to
entail. And he was too honest to claim, "My roommates and I
typically have fierce discussions concerning the relationship between
neo-Thomism and Platonism."
Steve
was intelligent enough to be embarrassed, which is more than can
be said for the female pre-med student who came back with, "Well
I guess we must be interested in this stuff because we wouldn’t
spend all this time taking these classes if we weren’t interested,
would we?"
Robert
Bork proposes that this breakdown in the academy is the result of
a system imposed upon the unwilling masses by a small elite. My
experience does not support his hypothesis, in fact it suggests
the opposite: that democracy run amok has taken over elite institutions
and replaced historic value systems emphasizing things like "knowledge"
and "learning" with the values of the lower classes. Here
are two events that occurred at the orientation:
Incident
1:At the conclusion of the drama "A Year in the Life,"
there was a discussion session designed to elicit concurrence from
the parents. My wife threw some cold water on the party by questioning
their outright promotion of homosexuality, casual sex and alcohol
and drug abuse. She was especially outraged at the skit where the
girl gets herself drunk, has sex, and then decides the next day
that she was raped. After all, if she was so drunk, she couldn’t
she have given consent, could she? Or so went the party line.
But
the other parents were eager to demonstrate how thoroughly indoctrinated
they were by parroting lines like "No means no" (even
when it’s unspoken). They couldn’t be too quick to disassociate
themselves from my wife’s heresy. They were thoroughly in favor
of tolerance (except towards white heterosexual males). And my observations
would tend to indicate that they were not members of the "intellectual
elite" that frightens Judge Bork.
Incident
2:At the end of the orientation program, we were asked to fill out
evaluation forms. Here is the actual conversation of two ladies
sitting behind me:
Lady
1: "I gave the SOLs a 5 [on a scale of 1 to 5], but that didn’t
really show my true feelings so I added 3 plus signs."
Lady
2: "Ohmigod, I can’t believe it. Look at my sheet. I added
3 plus signs too. I gave every session a 5, so I just had to give
an even higher grade to the SOLs, they’re just so wonderful."
With
parents like these, can you really place the blame on the administration
for grade inflation and the lowering of standards? If our group
of parents had been offered a proposal to guarantee every student
an automatic 4.0 GPA, it would have passed in a landslide. The only
discouraging word heard during the weekend was from some parents
of engineering student who were shocked to find out that this was
going to be a difficult program with demanding standards and that
the engineering school expected their little darlings to work their
tails off.
To
be fair, some programs, like the engineering school, continue to
maintain high standards in admissions and a rigorous program of
instruction. And the PC indoctrination had the feeling of play acting;
it had none of the fierce zealotry of the true believer that one
encounters at an East Coast Ivy League institution. Despite the
messages encapsulated in the orientation program, the student newspaper
reported that organizers of "womyn’s programs" are rather
like Maytag repairmen, while the sororities, described in the paper
as "drunken brothels," are overflowing.
But
the College of Arts and Sciences, which should be producing Cincinnati’s
next generation of doctors, lawyers, scholars and scientists, seems
to have declared "unconditional surrender." The barbarians
are no longer at the gates. They have breached the walls, captured
the town and are running the show. Having long ago cast aside moral
standards, they have abandoned intellectual standards as well. For
some time now, primary schools have been forthrightly proclaiming
that "socializing" students is a higher priority for them
than teaching mere facts about numbers and letters. Based on my
experience at the parents’ orientation program, I have to conclude
that this philosophy dominates at the university level as well.
August
23, 2001
John Galvin is a businessman living in Cincinnati.
His most recent publication is "Humanae Vitae: A Critical Re-evaluation."
©
2001 LewRockwell.com
|