Search News


Browse Archives

News

Losing Critical Mass at Stanford?

December 7, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

He is described by former students as a provocative mentor, a professor whose office hours are packed and whose seminars have long waiting lists. Luis Fraga has won several awards for teaching and scholarship in his 15 years at Stanford University.

Taken alone, news that the associate professor of political science might leave the university would create rumblings. But coupled with the recent departures of two other professors who, like Fraga, study race and ethnic studies, Fraga's potential move is spurring organized protests.

Hundreds of people -- including Stanford faculty members -- have signed an  online petition urging Stanford to do what it can to keep Fraga from going to the University of Washington, which has offered him a position that involves recruiting and promoting minority faculty. Three recent alumni sent letters asking graduates and current students to write administrators voicing their concerns that "Stanford is not providing competitive offers to Professor Fraga that show a commitment to his value as one of our best professors at Stanford.”

Fraga is in the midst of negotiations with Stanford, and those involved in the campaign to keep him want the university to do more than just match Washington's offer. (Neither Fraga nor the political science department chair would mention terms of the negotiation.) Fraga's supporters say the university has already allowed two valuable members of the department leave without a fight.

“I think we see a trend here that is shocking and unacceptable – an administration and academic climate that fails to retain scholars who are producing some of the most pressing and relevant research on minority politics in the U.S.,” wrote Helen Kim, one of the Stanford graduates who started the letter and petition campaign.

This summer, Claudine Gay, whose work focused on African American politics and on how race informs political behavior, accepted a faculty position at Harvard University. Carolyn Wong, a scholar of Asian American politics, ethnicity and immigration in the United States, left for Carleton College.  

Fraga, who is Hispanic, studies the politics of race and ethnicity, voting rights policy and urban politics, among other subjects. Brought in with tenure when he was hired in 1991, he also teaches in Stanford's School of Education.

Fraga said he has been following the petition movement from a distance. "The information is there, and I appreciate what many of my students have written," he said.  

Terry Moe, chair of the political science department and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, said he has not seen the petition but is aware of the group of unhappy alumni and students.

“Some see that certain faculty members have left and the alarm goes off,” he said. “They don’t understand what has gone on behind the scenes and why they left."

Neither Gay nor Wong responded to repeated messages for comment. Moe said that Gay, who came in as an untenured professor and who had received tenure at Stanford, was "very sought after," and that Stanford made her "a very attractive counter-offer." Wong was up for tenure but decided to take herself out of consideration, according to Moe.

He said the notion that the department is looking to rid itself of faculty in specific areas of study is misguided, and that "race and ethnicity is an important subfield" to the university.

“In general, Stanford is concerned about diversity," Moe said. "The political science department is concerned about seeing to it that important subfields are represented. But that doesn’t happen overnight.

"It’s perfectly fine for people to express their views," he added. "These aren’t popularity contests. We hire people on academic merit.

Sarah Ihn, a 2004 Stanford graduate who helped spearhead the petition, said she is skeptical of the department's motives. “Why would all of the political science department’s race and ethnic scholars leave or think of leaving if there was strong institutional support for their research and teaching?” she said in an e-mail. "If Professor Fraga leaves the university, it leaves Stanford with a stunted political science department and an unacceptable chasm between Stanford's rhetoric and reality."

Lizet Ocampo, a graduate of the political science department, said she wants to make sure the university hears from the full range of Fraga's supporters.

“We don’t want to find out that it’s too late," she said. "They would be showing a commitment to him and expressing to students and alumni that they care about undergraduate education and producing great research in race and ethnicity and do care about faculty diversity.”

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Losing Critical Mass at Stanford?

  • Posted by Polisci on December 7, 2006 at 11:10am EST
  • Perhaps because Stanford freshmen already know more than an average freshman so there are decreasing marginal returns for them?

  • Posted by Eveningsun at Small Public College on December 7, 2006 at 2:05pm EST
  • Perhaps because what the ISI considers "knowledge of American history, government, politics and economics" is actually not knowledge at all, but conservative mythology? What if it includes questions like the following (with ISI claiming the correct answer to be "b")?-- "We know the Constitution was inspired by Christ because a.) it nowhere refers to God, b.) the Founding Fathers were all devout Christians, c.) it forbids any religious test for office, d.) James Madison had a Thomas Kincade painting in his study." Who knows? According to a recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Ed (reproduced at http://ed.stanford.edu/suse/faculty/displayFacultyNews.php?tablename=notify1&id=599), the ISI has released only a selected few of the survey's questions and said nothing at all about its actual methodology. Given the ISI's ideological bent and its silence on the survey's details, it seems a bit premature for Mr. Olson to be claiming the survey actually reveals "poor performance." Until ISI wants to come clean, there's absolutely no reason (aside from a conservative predisposition) to take its claims seriously.

  • Diversity & Inclusion
  • Posted by John Bersentes , Director Business Development at TMP Worldwide on December 7, 2006 at 3:10pm EST
  • This morning the Latino National Survey presented at the Woodrow Wilson Center here in Washington DC.One of the principal investigators on the study was Prof. Fraga's. Certainly his research and that of his fellows serves to support why diversity of thought and talent retention are so critical to maintaining a competitive and inclusive workforce.

    Should the good professor go to the University of Washington to work with Gary Segura it will be a sad day for California. But a good day for schools that are willing to recognize the critical nature of this work.

    You can not replace someone like this and the research and insight into the Hispanic community promoted today by the Pew Hispanic Center and Migration Policy Institute should serve as justification for further funding.

    For those of us in the Diversity space the research is compelling and kudos to all of the principal investigators. A copy of the presentation is at http://www.wilsoncenter.org/usstudies

  • ISI historical topics and previous history tests
  • Posted by Jack Olson on December 7, 2006 at 8:11pm EST
  • The appendix to the ISI's report, available on its website www.americancivicliteracy.org, reported all fifty topics which were the subjects of questions on its history exam. Here are the first twenty: The Jamestown colony, Puritan religious tradition, form of the U.S. government, George Washington's founding role, the American Revolutionary War, rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, chronology of major historical events, origin of the doctrine of separation of church and state, outcome of the War of 1812, the thought of Abraham Lincoln, timing of the Civil War, the New Deal, Reconstruction, Women's Suffrage, Roe vs. Wade, Brown vs. Board of Education, World War II, the Declaration of Independence, Plato's Republic, and the concept of representative democracy. If this be conservative dogma, make the most of it!

    Since the ISI's test was multiple choice with four alternatives per question, one would expect a score of 25% merely from random guessing. Hence, the average American college senior's score of 53% does not represent much depth of knowledge and since he outscored the average freshman by just 1.5%, his professors have taught him little of this subject in three years.

    Nor are the ISI's results far from a 1999 study by the American Council of Trustees and Alumni. Testing seniors from 55 prominent U.S. colleges, they count that 99% of them could identify Beavis and Butthead and 98% of them Snoop Doggy Dog, just 1/3 of them knew that George Washington commanded the Continental Army at Yorktown. Only 1/4 of them could identify James Madison as the Father of the Constitution. Only 1/3 of them knew that the Battle of the Bulge was in WWII; an equal number thought it was in WWI. Two out of five could not place the Civil War in the correct half-century. Fewer than half knew when Lincoln was President. Nothing right-wing about such questions but the results reflect the same ignorance as the ISI study.

    No one familiar with the works of Todd Gitlin would call him conservative. In "The Twilight of Common Dreams", Gitlin wrote "I once asked a class of upper division Berkeley students in what year World War I ended. The answers ranged from 1898 to 1939." For the record, UC Berkeley seniors scored 5.6% lower on the ISI exam than Berkeley freshman. The latter university must be a storehouse of historical knowledge since the freshman bring in more than the seniors take away.

  • Posted by Lee Sigelman on December 7, 2006 at 11:05pm EST
  • The great majority of the items just catalogued would be very appropriate as tests of knowledge conveyed in an _American history_ course, but not in political science. History, of course, is an extremely valuable subject for political science students, but a history test simply isn't a political science test.

  • Posted by still grading on December 8, 2006 at 6:30am EST
  • Not only is Poli Sci not History, but students at universities get to specialize, and most will never take an American History course. Yes, they should know more American History. They should know more of a lot of other things too. And no, 99.5% of them will not graduate knowing any more about the Puritan religious tradition than they knew when they matriculated. It's not the role of university to fill in what students missed or forgot in K-12.

    Yes, they should know more about American government, and hopefully the Poli Sci majors do, but a multiple-choice test like this, whatever the questions (and it is a bit weird that they won't publish the questions or the answer choices they gave) of random undergrads is not a good instrument for figuring out whether the Stanford Poli Sci dept is fulfilling its teaching mission.

  • Political science and history
  • Posted by Jim Pakala on December 8, 2006 at 12:35pm EST
  • If mediocre universities have to help students who struggle with illteracy, the elite schools may have to help those lacking historical knowledge. How can one do political science without better knowledge of history than these diverse surveys reveal? Pointing out survey bias must not inadvertently obscure a deeper problem that seems ascertained in common by such instruments.

  • Keep Fraga
  • Posted by Alysia Sanchez on December 9, 2006 at 6:25am EST
  • Professor Fraga is the best professor I've ever had. I've learned more from his classes than I have learned in all of my three years at Stanford.

    He is my advisor, professor and friend, and we will all feel a major loss if Stanford does not negotiate.

    --Alysia Sanchez
    Research Assistant to Professor Fraga