tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post4526334901052442870..comments2024-02-24T05:19:10.949-05:00Comments on Durham-in-Wonderland: Group Profile: William Chafekcjohnson9http://www.blogger.com/profile/09625813296986996867noreply@blogger.comBlogger175125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-39717466442390722092007-08-29T12:27:00.000-04:002007-08-29T12:27:00.000-04:00Steve:KC Johnson is to academia as Bjorn Lomborg i...Steve:<BR/>KC Johnson is to academia as Bjorn Lomborg is to environmentalism and global warming. Both are courageous, intellectually honest, with the soundest morals and the courage to follow the facts toward the Truth. <BR/>You can choose, with defensive cowardice, to stay where you are, in the gloom. Most of us on this blog have welcomed and prized its illumination, however.<BR/>TomAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-36461958705970972582007-08-29T09:24:00.000-04:002007-08-29T09:24:00.000-04:00"it's a recruiting medium for the right's culture ..."it's a recruiting medium for the right's culture wars"<BR/>Only if your definition of "right" includes Barack Obama. But then, if you're an academic, it probably does.<BR/><BR/>"and a publicity organ for Johnson's book."<BR/>And I hope he makes a mint.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-33859160814743254852007-08-29T09:03:00.000-04:002007-08-29T09:03:00.000-04:00Amazing! Johnson's agenda is just as transparent a...Amazing! Johnson's agenda is just as transparent as Chafe, et al.'s: Johnson, at the hands of "liberal" academe, underwent a bruising and public tenure fight. Now, his objective is to destroy the reputations of liberal academics in some sort of bizarre revenge fantasy.<BR/><BR/>Don't get me wrong: the Duke case was a rush to judgment based on pre-conceived notions of jock culture, and mature, intelligent people should have known better than to condemn the players before the case had run its course.<BR/><BR/>But again, this blog is not about the Duke case: it's a recruiting medium for the right's culture wars and a publicity organ for Johnson's book.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-30171930873659552772007-08-28T19:42:00.000-04:002007-08-28T19:42:00.000-04:00There's one more thing about Chafe you forgot to m...There's one more thing about Chafe you forgot to mention.<BR/><BR/>Like several other G88'ers, he projected his own sexual fetishes/hang-ups/fantasies onto the case. Chafe said that the boys saw something particularly erotic about black women.<BR/><BR/>Of course there is no evidence of this. In fact, they had specifically requested white or Latin strippers. <BR/><BR/>So where did Chafe come up with this idea of black female eroticism? Obviously, that's how HE feels about black women.<BR/><BR/>Chafe is a racist, or a pervert, or both, and should refrain from attributing his own fetishes to others.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-10715798407341701562007-08-28T04:41:00.000-04:002007-08-28T04:41:00.000-04:00Not to be overly cynical, but who monitors the edi...Not to be overly cynical, but who monitors the editing. <BR/><BR/>"...With KC's permission, we will videotape the talk. Not sure yet where or when the tape will be available. There might be a live stream. Stay tuned for more details. - Duke Prof"<BR/><BR/>Er, ah, what I meant to say was thanks...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-55784445062143534612007-08-28T04:38:00.000-04:002007-08-28T04:38:00.000-04:009:11 RR Hamilton. One other observation...I don't ...9:11 RR Hamilton. One other observation...<BR/><BR/>I don't know how you define "rich", but, as you know Texas isn't some third world cess pool there are an awful lot of people who have done all right. Suggesting they must pay more because they have more is a long way from my understanding of Liberterian thinking.<BR/><BR/>Besides SMU, Baylor, TCU, Rice, Trinity don't have room for all the wealthy candidates, qualified or otherwise.<BR/><BR/>And the music, beer and BBQ aren't nearly as good as is in Austin.<BR/><BR/>More broadly this problem speaks to admission issues at the elite private schools. Just as they are dumbing-down the faculty, they are dumbing-down those admitted. Exceptional, qualified students are being passed-over due to diversity and affirmative action goals.<BR/><BR/>Either you are and want to be the best, or you do not. Duke has chosen not to be the best and it is costing them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-78722167325702881692007-08-28T04:27:00.000-04:002007-08-28T04:27:00.000-04:009:11 RR Hamilton, I politely disagree.A defense of...9:11 RR Hamilton, I politely disagree.<BR/><BR/>A defense of Elitism: We demand it of our children's teachers and schools, we depended upon it when we married our spouse, we opt for it when we dine out. We even are elitist about the blogs we read.<BR/><BR/>There is no reason a public University cannot be elite and attract the world's best students. With 50,000 there is plenty of room. <BR/><BR/>The notion that we must educate everyone...leave no child behind is bullshit. Education is a privelege and we should not dumb-down primary, secondary, or university for those that don't want to participate. Currently the system favors the marginal at the expense of the best. <BR/><BR/>This will have a long-term negative economic consequence.<BR/><BR/>Granted the best of the best can do as they please. <BR/><BR/>Regardless there isn't one damn thing the matter with striving to be elite. We all do it every day, with just about every decision we make, including the hypocrites like Chafe.<BR/><BR/>That is one thing that is so damn galling about what Brodhead and the BOT have done (are doing) to Duke. They are racing toward the bottom.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-80773477572797699842007-08-27T23:34:00.000-04:002007-08-27T23:34:00.000-04:00To Duke Prof as Anon at 9:19.Outstanding. Thanks....To Duke Prof as Anon at 9:19.<BR/><BR/>Outstanding. Thanks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-15514817932339763272007-08-27T22:17:00.000-04:002007-08-27T22:17:00.000-04:00Anonymous 2:26 said... ...I have followed the fact...Anonymous 2:26 said... <BR/>...I have followed the facts and the statements closely from the start, and have given a great deal of thought to all of it -- seeking out subtleties and complexities that would allow such "intelligent" people to be so completely and utterly wrong, and so childishly unable to admit it.<BR/>...And, after considering any and all more complicated answers, I have decided it comes down to 3 things.<BR/>...EGO, EGO, and.....EGO!!!!<BR/>...EGO. <BR/>::<BR/>The EGO Workshops offered by organizational development (OD) people were popular about ten years ago and they were quite fashionable with people who presented themselves as 'shy' and easily intimidated. <BR/><BR/>The workshops dried up when someone got around to noting that ego is always a 'real' consideration unless the person under discussion is dead.<BR/><BR/>Why do you suggest be done with all of these EGO problems? Any medicine available? Therapy?<BR/>::<BR/>GPGary Packwoodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05177986821224068759noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-78381574862155242042007-08-27T22:14:00.000-04:002007-08-27T22:14:00.000-04:00re competition for BS studies jobs; Texas's 10% ru...re competition for BS studies jobs; Texas's 10% rule<BR/><BR/>Steve: there may be a lot of competition for BS studies tenure-track slots, but you can bet that most of these job seekers are the bottom of the barrel. Hell, the so-called star professors in these fields would never make it in cognitively demanding disciplines. Can you see Cornel West doing innovative research in artificial intelligence? Give me a break! BS studies attracts stupid BS artists who are unable to compete for authentic academic positions.<BR/><BR/>the 10% rule in Texas, which is probably unconstitutional, is a quota system that rewards "minorities" who matriculate from schools where other low-performing "minorities" congregate. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to detect how racialist this "public policy" is.<BR/><BR/>Trinity '74Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-78204043271885448392007-08-27T21:29:00.000-04:002007-08-27T21:29:00.000-04:00Psych:Your Mom's memory is flawless. Before the a...Psych:<BR/>Your Mom's memory is flawless. Before the advent of open admissions in the late 1960s during the Lindsay administration, getting into CCNY or any one of the other free, public colleges in New York City was considered a considerable achievement. When I graduated from High School in the early 1950s, one needed an 89 average to get into Brooklyn College, for example. A close friend of mine, now a respected dentist, failed that test and had to settle for NYU, much to his distaste, because it was an inferior institution and cost much more than the free tuition that Brooklyn, City College, Queens, or Hunter offered.Dodgerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10472204091601959760noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-88231740763983466562007-08-27T21:19:00.000-04:002007-08-27T21:19:00.000-04:00"will anyone be video taping the speech and postin..."will anyone be video taping the speech and posting to you tube or to this blog?"<BR/><BR/>With KC's permission, we will videotape the talk. Not sure yet where or when the tape will be available. There might be a live stream. Stay tuned for more details.<BR/><BR/>Duke ProfAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-39983554374194938722007-08-27T21:18:00.000-04:002007-08-27T21:18:00.000-04:00Anon @ 7:19 writes:Horwitz is right. One Spook for...Anon @ 7:19 writes:<BR/><BR/><I>Horwitz is right. One Spook forgets the difference between net and gross.</I><BR/><BR/>No.<BR/><BR/>I'm not getting into an accounting math contest with anyone.<BR/><BR/>As *I* read the article, it was about a line item of an anticipated revenue stream from tuition by adding 20 students per class. it was reported as "between 2 million and 4 million."<BR/><BR/>I'm going to assume that Duke employs intelligent people who do financial forecasting. They have over 50 years of good data that accounts for whims and other variables, and they know how to do linear regression to predict the future assuming 20 students per class are added.<BR/><BR/>Bottom line: A good manager would NEVER accept such a forecast, let alone publicly report it showing a 200% variance.<BR/><BR/>I realize close only counts in horsehoes, hand grenades and hydrogen bombs, but as a manger I expect closer than plus or minus 200%! <BR/><BR/>Please.<BR/><BR/>Let me guess ... you work for the government?<BR/><BR/>One SpookOne Spookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00592774438681904368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-6850817063400648112007-08-27T21:16:00.000-04:002007-08-27T21:16:00.000-04:00Anonymous @12:05 PM said... A lot of people compet...Anonymous @12:05 PM said... <BR/><I>A lot of people compete for jobs in gender studies; it's a very popular academic subfield. I suspect you could find out how many undergraduates/graduate students get a certificate if not majoring/minoring in it. </I><BR/><BR/>If I was entering university today it would be near the top of my list.<BR/><BR/>Why? Because it would be the easiest pass imaginable. Simply parrot the rhetoric. My major problem would be restraining myself from alerting everybody else to the elephant permanently resident in the room.<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>One Spook @1:43PM said...<BR/><I>That is an important distinction that I believe some have totally missed in KC's writing here. And, the discussion of scholarship with respect to Chafe is this:<BR/>His is not a failure of scholarship but rather, of management. When he rose to a position of management, he failed, pure and simple. <BR/>All of us have seen people who have suceeded in the basic tasks of a profession, and often times those highly skilled in scholarship in an educational institution are not those necessarily suited to managing in that profession.</I><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle" REL="nofollow">The Peter Principle</A> is a natural feature of beaurocracies and large systems. It is enhanced by affirmative action.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-35952755141723567842007-08-27T21:11:00.000-04:002007-08-27T21:11:00.000-04:00NJNP,I should clarify: I am not in favor of the "...NJNP,<BR/><BR/>I should clarify: I am <B>not</B> in favor of the "10% rule". I agree that there should be only one way for all Texas students to get in. <BR/><BR/>When I was admitted in the 1970s, it was simple: If you were in the top 1/2 of your HS graduating class (not me!), then you needed an SAT/ACT score of such-and-such. If you were in the bottom 1/2 of your HS graduating class (<I>c'est moi</I>)then you needed a much higher SAT/ACT score.<BR/><BR/>That said, I am tired of Big State Universities trying to be "World Class" institutions for the elites. That is <B><I>not the proper role</B></I> of taxpayer-supported higher education. Think of government education like government housing: Should we be happy if the government is building mansions to sell at low-cost to those who could afford to buy their own mansions?<BR/><BR/>This is not to say that government universities should be "low class". However, when the best and brightest among the state's upper economic class begins to clamor to get into Big State U than into comparable (but higher priced) private universities, that's when you know Big State U has gone too far. <BR/><BR/>I can recall back in the early-80s when SMU was creaming us in football because they had Eric Dickerson and Craig James, a SMU banner at one of the games reading "<I>Our maids went to U.T.</I>" That's how it should be: let the rich go to SMU, etc. Leave the Big State U for the best and brightest of the working classes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-59099294589102274402007-08-27T21:10:00.000-04:002007-08-27T21:10:00.000-04:00NJNP writes: "I love the Internet. KC's work will ...NJNP writes: "I love the Internet. KC's work will have a shelf life. It is perused daily, on average by 5.400 people with almost 3,000,000 total visits."<BR/><BR/>. . . and if a third or more of the total visitors buys the book . . . and tells a friend . . .Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-86507861638340376892007-08-27T20:42:00.000-04:002007-08-27T20:42:00.000-04:00You know, some may find this amazing -- but for me...You know, some may find this amazing -- but for me, the part I found most outraging was Chafe's dishonest commentary about the purported e-mail and phone calls he'd received. If it had really happened, he could have just said "I have received hateful e-mails and phone calls saying these things" and he'd have been believed. But he has to be dishonest, and make a charge that he has no evidence for claiming that it was "Bloggers who have targeted the 'Group of 88'" who were behind the alleged harassment. In its way, this is even more disgusting than the Group of 88's rush to judgement regarding the lacrosse case. In the lacrosse case, the G88 were simply believing Mangum when she selected victims for her frame that fit their prejudices. Here, Chafe <I>knows</I> that he knows nothing about who is committing harassment besides, of course, what they're angry about -- but he declares, as if it were fact, that it was "bloggers" who did it. Did he simply think that he could safely go from his prejudices about who would do such a thing to an actual accusation about who did such a thing? Or did he cynically decide that as long as he was getting harassment from an unknown source, he might as well turn it into ammunition against his own enemies? Or, most cynically of all, do we have any reason to trust that he wasn't lying about receiving harassment, just as he was lying about knowing who was behind the harassment?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-40802233342505187852007-08-27T20:21:00.000-04:002007-08-27T20:21:00.000-04:002:31 YesAt flagship, top tweny Universities, absol...2:31 Yes<BR/><BR/>At flagship, top tweny Universities, absolutely. There are plenty of other alternative for others.<BR/><BR/>To drop kick residents into other states is an economic disaster in the making.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-6314318568036293082007-08-27T20:11:00.000-04:002007-08-27T20:11:00.000-04:00RR Hamilton, inre: "...After all, there is no reas...RR Hamilton, inre: "...After all, there is no reason that UT and TAMU should be getting students that should be going (and can afford to go) to Baylor, SMU, Rice, and TCU..."<BR/><BR/>That sure doesn't look very Libertarian to me. If my child wants go to UT or TAMU and has the academic credentials to get in and succeed. He/She should get in.<BR/><BR/>Wealth and ability to pay should not be a factor. Besides the private schools may not offer what the public schools do. <BR/><BR/>Having said that I know TCU's admissions/applications are going through the roof as a direct result of the 10% rule.<BR/><BR/>One last comment, the McCombs School and the Engineering School appear to be somewhat immune to the frauds. In the Liberal Arts, I know they are creating a Western Civ tract which about caused me to sieze up - an unexpected surprised. <BR/><BR/>To everyone else, excuse the side-tract regarding the Texas 10% rule. It is somewhat relevant as it is an affirmative action program, though it is not working as such.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-35419409925602377302007-08-27T19:19:00.000-04:002007-08-27T19:19:00.000-04:00Horwitz is right. One Spook forgets the difference...Horwitz is right. One Spook forgets the difference between net and gross. While gross tuition T associated with a gain of 50 students is clear (50T), the issue is net tuition, since financial aid is an offset to revenue. If no one is on any aid at all, then revenue is 50T. If all are on 100% grants, then net tuition is 0. Certainly the actual is between the two numbers, but it is not possible to predict except on average, and a pool of 50 off a waitlist is a biased sample.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-4379038118424263592007-08-27T19:15:00.000-04:002007-08-27T19:15:00.000-04:00Hman,Thanks for both comments - the former and lat...Hman,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for both comments - the former and latter, since the former made me clarify my muddy comments, and the latter because it shows you are very considerate.<BR/><BR/>Professor Horwitz rightly pointed out that there are "stacks" of resumes for positions in gender/ethnic studies, and also pointed out that while there were great numbers of applicants, "large pools say nothing about quality." I agree, and I'm glad he pointed out the difference: I was wrong about the number of competitors. (I was about half-off, like a sale at Walgreens.) <BR/><BR/>My point was that the more deeply vested studies tend to have a better pool of applicants, and that the competition was at a higher level, and that those who are already invested (but without tenure) are probably happy to see other academics choose "silly-studies" and "angry studies" and so forth. Less competition for tenure - (but still the inevitable competition for dept. bucks.)<BR/><BR/>That's where the comparison with the CON was made, when I was a bit off and tangental, just as my comment about the competition was not well-stated. Glad this isn't a defense of a dissertation, or my @$$ would be fried. <BR/><BR/>You mentioned that you teach in Med School? Here's a better analogy with regard to scholarly intransigence - (though you might not agree with my interpretation of the FDA's motives:)<BR/><BR/>Some doctors who perform gastric bypass surgeries - (like those who performed total prostatectomies and didn't want to have to learn pelletization procedures)- don't wish to have to learn vagus nerve stimulator implantation techniques, (as are now the standard in Europe.) The FDA will "slow-mo" the approval process of the safer, reversible type of weight loss surgery, IMO because it puts American surgeons at a disadvantage, and gastric bypass surgeries are so profitable! (Is it possible that we're repeating the wrong refrain: "out with the good air, in with the bad?") <BR/><BR/>In any case, thanks again for your input, and for being a gentleman! <BR/><BR/>Macmachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14248016116043347912noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-85636447014419229762007-08-27T19:04:00.000-04:002007-08-27T19:04:00.000-04:00Professor Johnson: This is arguably one of your ve...Professor Johnson: This is arguably one of your very best efforts. Thank you. <BR/><BR/>I believe the concept of analyzing the ethics/morality/integrity of the Gang of 88 is mis-stated. What is being done is an autopsy. Their integrity/ethics and morality are all dead. Stone cold dead.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-12407954821561457812007-08-27T18:52:00.000-04:002007-08-27T18:52:00.000-04:00Steve Horwitz writes @ 3:03You try doing budget fo...Steve Horwitz writes @ 3:03<BR/><BR/><I>You try doing budget forecasting when your revenue stream depends not only on the whims of 17 year olds but the income levels of their parents and what the market value of your endowment is. <BR/><BR/>Seriously. The complexity and uncertainties of college admissions are greater than those of many other industries. The problem of year-to-year variance is huge.</I><BR/><BR/>Steve, I can agree with you to a point. However, if you read the article, you'll note that this was an income stream derived from adding 20 students per class. It was not an income stream dependant on the market value of the endowment.<BR/><BR/>Duke has far more applicants than class positions, and if a few "whims" happen or family checks bounce they have more than enough replacements and particularly with "early enrollment," time.<BR/><BR/>Given those facts, I'd expect the forecast for this particular budget revenue to be a hell of a lot closer than a variance of 200%, Doctor. I'd fire a forecaster who could not be more accurate than that, and if it was truly impossible, I'd surely NEVER report to anyone in public that my "forecast" was plus or minus 200%!<BR/><BR/>One SpookOne Spookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00592774438681904368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-83882517091577896712007-08-27T18:37:00.000-04:002007-08-27T18:37:00.000-04:00Mac Re; CON Points well taken. I was speaking fr...Mac Re; CON<BR/> Points well taken. I was speaking from out-of date-notions since my state did not continue with CONs after the Federal repeal.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32542246.post-91211890502888751052007-08-27T17:23:00.000-04:002007-08-27T17:23:00.000-04:0012:02: I'd rather hear about the "Gay Mayan Flying...12:02: I'd rather hear about the "Gay Mayan Flying Phallus" myself. Especially if there are pictures.<BR/><BR/>of course you would, 88er. no need to venture out into the real world at all.<BR/><BR/>best thing I can tell you is that if YOU find yourself in a similar miscarriage of justice, don't worry. We will be here for you too. maybe thats the real difference between K.C. and his fans and the 88 and theirs.<BR/><BR/>Floyd sez: Go to Page, maybe K.C. will bring pictures for you!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com