Search News


Browse Archives

News

Quick Takes: Presidents Condemn Boycott of Israel, Supercomputer Grant, Churchill Panel Offers Clarification, Aid Rules, President Placed on Leave, Dodd's Proposal for Community Colleges, 'Action Plan' for STEM Education, Oxford Governance Battle Is Back

August 9, 2007

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement
  • Nearly 300 college and university presidents in the United States have endorsed a statement by Lee Bollinger, president of Columbia University, denouncing the push by Britain's main faculty union to have professors boycott Israeli academics and universities. "In seeking to quarantine Israeli universities and scholars, this vote threatens every university committed to fostering scholarly and cultural exchanges that lead to enlightenment, empathy, and a much-needed international marketplace of ideas," the statement reads. The presidents who signed received an appeal to do so from the following presidents and chancellors: Lawrence S. Bacow of Tufts University; Henry S. Bienen of Northwestern University; Robert J. Birgeneau of the University of California at Berkeley; Richard Herman of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; M. Lee Pelton of Willamette University; Jehuda Reinharz of Brandeis University; Donna E. Shalala of the University of Miami; Harold Shapiro of Princeton University (emeritus); and Graham B. Spanier of Pennsylvania State University. The full list of presidents who have signed is available here.
  • The National Science Foundation on Wednesday announced a $208 million grant to the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign to acquire and make available for use a petascale computer that will be 500 times more powerful than today's typical supercomputers. The system is expected to go online in 2011.
  • The members of the investigative committee that explored allegations of research misconduct against Ward Churchill have unanimously adopted a statement that identifies one misstatement in their report, offers additional language to fix that mistake, and clarifies that the changes in no way relate to their conclusions about Churchill, who has since been fired by the University of Colorado. While the members all agreed on the statement, only three of them agreed to its release to Inside Higher Ed. Their names appear at the end of the statement.
  • The U.S. Education Department on Wednesday proposed rules to simplify the application process for several aid programs.
  • The president of the Utah College of Applied Technology, Robert O. Brems, has been placed on leave after a state audit uncovered significant problems at one of the college's campuses, The Deseret Morning News reported. The state auditor told the newspaper that the problems involved internal controls.
  • Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut, who is running a long-shot campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, on Wednesday proposed a plan that could make community college free. Under the Dodd plan, any state that cut its tuition would receive a match in federal funds to double the cut, so a state cutting tuition in half would eliminate tuition. The leading Democratic candidates have issued dueling plans on student loans and other issues, but free tuition is emerging as popular theme for those further behind the leaders. Dennis Kucinich has proposed that tuition be free for undergraduates at all public colleges and universities.
  • The National Science Board on Wednesday approved a draft "national action plan" for improving the quality of elementary and secondary education in science, math, technology and engineering and ensuring an adequate supply of teachers in those subjects. The plan, which will be available for public review and comment today on the science board's Web site, calls for a range of actions by the federal government, states, and school districts, including creating an independent, non-federal National Council for STEM Education, establishing a new assistant secretary position in the Education Department, and developing strategies to pay teachers in those fields at "market rates."
  • The struggle over the governance of the University of Oxford has resumed. The Guardian reported on a leaked copy of a report by British government officials criticizing the university for failing to modernize its governance system. The report is seen as giving John Hood, the university's vice chancellor (its top position) an opening to resume his push for the creation of a structure more like those of American universities, with boards that consist largely of business leaders. Power at Oxford is largely in the hands of the faculty, which rejected Hood's plan to change that in December -- after many months of bitter debate.
See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Comments on Quick Takes: Presidents Condemn Boycott of Israel, Supercomputer Grant, Churchill Panel Offers Clarification, Aid Rules, President Placed on Leave, Dodd's Proposal for Community Colleges, 'Action Plan' for STEM Education, Oxford Governance Battle Is Back

  • Boycott of Israeli Universities and Academics
  • Posted by Hans Gesund on August 9, 2007 at 8:40am EDT
  • I believe that all British academics who support the boycott of Israeli academics and universities should themselves be boycotted as individuals by the entire worldwide academic community. They are a disgrace to our profession.

  • Presidents, not faculty, condemn
  • Posted by Bob on August 9, 2007 at 8:40am EDT
  • Two necessary observations about the presidential condemnation of the British faculty: (1) Only about ten percent (a minority) of American universities and colleges have joined to condemn the British faculty on the Israel issue. (2) Oddly, it is the presidents, not the faculty, who are condemning another faculty group.

    One wonders how many of these presidents received favors from Israeli lobbies. For instance, how many of them were treated with all expense paid trips to Israel?

    The Israeli treatment of Palestinian eductional institutions deserve honest discussion, not condemnationn. Condemnation belogns in the religious arena, not in academia. The faculty expect thoughtful and ethical leadership from their presidents.

  • The "free tuition plans"
  • Posted by Anothervoice on August 9, 2007 at 8:40am EDT
  • I appreciate that Dodd and others are looking at ways to make education more accessible for everyone; at least, I assume that is their platform. But if only they had someone with an education background with them in the planning stages. If we could just get them to understand that access does not mean success. How about helping students who need it with aid, and then giving the funds they were going to use for "free tuition" to the programs to help students succeed once they get there. Not with some artificial testing system- but with real programs to help like the Ed Psyc cognitive learning skills programs that have shown dramatic results in helping real students achieve their goals. Just a thought.

  • NCSA
  • Posted by George Gollin , Professor of Physics at University of Illinois on August 9, 2007 at 9:30am EDT
  • A small piece of history, and congratulations to NCSA, the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois-- NCSA is the lead institution on the successful petascale computer proposal. The first widely-used web browser, Mosaic, was invented at NCSA. (Mosaic later evolved into Netscape's browser.) The organization has done great things in the computational sciences.

  • The "Free Tuition Voice"
  • Posted by Dan on August 9, 2007 at 10:50am EDT
  • I completely agree with Anothervoice's keen evaluation of the senator's platform. Access does not equal success!
    While a benevolent idea, access was the forerunner in the 90's and today it has become a question of student persistence. Many k-12 students can gain entry to an institute of higher education, but there are many obstacles preventing them from succeeding upon arrival. A more sagacious use of the funds would be to focus on helping students graduate first, then concentrate upon universal education. If we cannot foster that which motivates students to persist while making everything readily accessible, then we will just be opening doors to empty rooms.

  • Persistence a persistent problem
  • Posted by Kevin Drumm , College President on August 9, 2007 at 12:05pm EDT
  • It is true that many students who start community college do not achieve a certificate or degree, however, (1) many of those students do advance in their careers to a point where it is economically infeasible (due to the opportunity costs of lost wages) for them to continue their educations until a later date when that lucrative work is no longer available or they cannot continue that work for various reasons but want to match the high income level to which they have become accustomed.

    Further, (2) many students transfer to bachelor programs well before they receive an associate degree. These students are also currently counted as drop-outs by the Feds.

    And (3) more on point with this free-tuition argument, many more students drop out simply because they cannot afford to continue.

    Free tuition would mitigate all 3 of these dynamics, thus free tuition would itself serve to dramatically increase the graduation rates for community colleges.

    Students will still drop out in some numbers. College is not for everyone in the first place and even some otherwise capable students are not willing to do what it takes to be successful in college no matter what support mechanisms are in place or what rewards await. Nevertheless, as a community college president, I (for one)would support some level of outcomes measure to continue whatever state or federal subsidy led to free tuition status.

  • Free tuition
  • Posted by vinnie on August 9, 2007 at 1:10pm EDT
  • Using the term “free tuition” is based on the false premise that this program is truly free. Maybe for the 18-23 year olds out there who take advantage of such a program would see it as FREE, but it is the taxpayers who will truly pay for this service. So while the states can lower their tuition rates (and presumably their financial stake) our federal taxes will increase to cover this program thereby not making it free.

    Also, before anyone challenges me with the idea that if the federal government would stop paying for boondoggles such as the war we would be able to cover this proposal. I would ask why you would think the government would want to? It is just easier to raise taxes and keep the plethora of other wasteful federal projects going!

  • Israeli institution boycott
  • Posted by Marti on August 10, 2007 at 11:10am EDT
  • Excuse me, but the comment about university presidents receiving favors from Israeli lobbies makes me physically ill. Why make such a base assumption without supporting evidence? Maybe more academics haven't spoken up individually because they AGREE with the university presidents. Also, just because it isn't published doesn't mean that we haven't spoken up. For instance, I personally made my views known to the UCU, as have several of my colleagues.