Quick Takes

November 5, 2009

Coming Soon: Direct Feed for IRS Data into FAFSA

Students and parents will be able to import their tax information directly from the IRS website to the online FAFSA in a pilot program beginning early next year, a representative of the Education Department's Federal Student Aid program revealed during Wednesday's negotiated rulemaking session on the verification of information on student aid applications. Stephanie Gross, team leader for FAFSA on the Web, said the department will offer the option for first-time and renewal applicants beginning January 24. By next summer, it will be open to all applicants from the start of the 2010-11 application process.

Flu Status

During October, 43 percent of the 274 colleges being tracked on H1N1 and related illnesses by the American College Health Association said that they had the H1N1 vaccine on hand. Meanwhile, 97 percent of the colleges reported new flu cases. Details on the association's study may be found here.

NCAA Punishes Miles College

The National Collegiate Athletic Association has levied a weighty set of punishments against Miles College for major violations in all 10 of its sports. Wednesday, in a public report, the Division II Committee on Infractions said that “from the 2004-05 though 2008-09 academic years, Miles allowed 124 athletes in all 10 of its sports to practice, compete, receive travel expenses and/or receive athletically related aid while ineligible.” These students were ineligible for numerous reasons, but most did not meet the NCAA’s initial or continuing academic requirements to play. The committee discovered that Miles “did not have written procedures for certifying the eligibility of initial enrollees, continuing student-athletes and transfers.” During the investigation of this violation, the committee noted that the former director of athletics “provided false and misleading information to the NCAA enforcement staff.” In another violation, the committee reported that the former head track coach “knowingly allowed six student-athletes to participate under assumed names during the 2006-7 academic year.” Also, the committee found that the track coach at the time “worked with an administrator at another institution to fabricate results from two women’s outdoor track meets to make it appear that Miles College had enough participants to meet NCAA sport sponsorship minimums." As punishment, Miles will serve a four-year probation, all of its sports are banned from the postseason this year and all games during which ineligible athletes competed must be vacated. The former athletics director and track coach, whom the report did not identify by name but who could be identified through news reports as Augustus James and Marcus Dowdell, also have four- and three-year show-cause orders, respectively -- meaning any institution that hires them during that period must report to the NCAA how it will monitor their behavior.

Son's Loyalty Costs Central Florida a Sports Apparel Deal

The University of Central Florida's $3 million, five-year contract with adidas isn't the biggest sports apparel deal for a college athletics department, but it is nothing to sneeze at, either. Or "was" nothing to sneeze at, it might be more appropriate to say. The sneaker manufacturer reportedly ended its relationship with Central Florida Wednesday night -- a decision announced via an e-mail message to the Orlando Sentinel -- because one of its men's basketball players, who happens to be Michael Jordan's son, insisted on wearing Nike shoes named for his father in the team's opening game. Marcus Jordan's decision to wear his Air Jordan shoes instead of the team's contracted adidas sneakers prompted this missive from an adidas spokeswoman: "The University of Central Florida has chosen not to deliver on their contractual commitment to adidas. As a result we have chosen not to continue our relationship with them moving forward."

History Group Seeks Younger Members

The American Historical Association, which like some other scholarly association has struggled to recruit younger members, has announced a new membership category designed to attract them. "For years now, younger members of the association have chafed at the doubling of dues when they switch from student to regular member, and quite a few have indicated they had dropped their memberships as a result. To encourage sustained membership in the association, the new category will provide an incremental step on the path toward sustained membership — rising from the student rate of $39 to the transitional rate of $50 for the first three years after leaving the student membership category," said the announcement, on the association's blog.

A Female President Vows to Encourage Men -- and Faces Backlash

Some students at the University of Alberta are angry that Indira Samarasekera, the president, has expressed concern about the declining numbers of men on Canadian university campuses. In an October interview, Samarasekera cited figures showing that women make up 58 percent of Canadian university students and said that she worried that 20 years from now, "we will not have the benefit of enough male talent at the heads of companies and elsewhere." Further, she said she would be an "advocate" for young white men because, as a minority woman, she "can be." The Edmonton Sun reported that her comments irked some students, who felt she was suggesting that female students were somehow a problem, and for not focusing on disadvantaged students -- as opposed to men -- who may need help. Some of the students created posters showing a giant, King Kong-like woman walking over a university building. The caption: "Women are attacking campus! Only white men can save our university! Stop the femimenace."

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Around the Web

Philosophers shoveling snow, in The Duck of Minerva.... Dual authors in anthropology, in Savage Minds....

FREE Daily News Alerts

Comments on Quick Takes

  • You go Alberta President!
  • Posted by annoyedstaffmember on November 5, 2009 at 9:15am EST
  • It's nice when people have the courage to state the obvious...there is actually a crisis now with male students on college campuses. Obviously, the pendulum had to swing years ago to help focus on women's issues. However, it's probably the time for it swing back a little in the other direction to help out struggling men.

  • The Annoying Truth
  • Posted by R. J. Williams on November 5, 2009 at 9:45am EST
  • Biases, even those well meaning and aimed, inevitably come back to haunt us all. The president of U of A, whose courage buoys her integrity, will now and forevermore suffer the slings of those benefited by the prior favored bias of affirmative action until the pendulum has gone so painfully far to their favor that the truth can no longer be ignored. It is unfortunate that the social laws are not subject to the discipline of the laws of physics, where much as we would wish an different outcome, gravity does not cease its pull just because we wish it to be otherwise.

  • No way!
  • Posted by Not On My Watch on November 5, 2009 at 11:30am EST
  • Why did the coach and/or administration at UCF even let Jordan's kid suit up if he was not wearing the regulation uniform? No way would I have even let him even sit on the bench! Seems this kid may have a little trouble with the team concept since this seems to be all about him and what he wants. If Jordan's kid was so worried about what sneakers he was wearing then why didn't he go to a school that wore them? He needs to lose the me, me, me attitude and UCF needs to learn to stand up to this kid. If this was any other student athlete whould UCF have allowed this to happen?

  • Imbalance not a problem
  • Posted by Beenherealongtime on November 5, 2009 at 11:30am EST
  • There are more women because they are better students and don't flunk out. The men are either dumb jocks, just dumb or have some weird entitlement attitude.

  • Posted by Micki on November 5, 2009 at 11:45am EST
  • According to your own logic, the effects of Affirmative Action wouldn't be an example of bias. Rather, it would be a necessary means in which to have the "pendulum" of which you speak swing in a direction that it never before had. However, the "pendulum" analogy is severely flawed in the first place because it assumes that the end goal is for one group to be on top and dominant in one time frame and for another in the next. That would be a ridiculous goal. The aim is to created a balanced society that is reflective of all its parts. Before you choose an analogy, think it through.

  • Male Culture in Higher Ed
  • Posted by concerned sister on November 5, 2009 at 11:45am EST
  • While I see no problem with there being more women in higher education than men (afterall men dominated higher education for years, and it will be years before the academic contributions of this influx of women will be fully realized), I think that the U of A President's remarks do bring up an important point about 16-20-something-year-old male culture. It seems that male students today don't seem to know what they can do to be "men" in a female dominated educational system, and so often try to differentiate themselves by demonstrating that they have no "need" to put in the work to succeed. For instance, my young brother, who is currently in college, will often lie about where he is going before locking himself in his room to study. He says that his friends either do the same--or they get bad grades (which is socially preferable to trying). I believe there was also an past article in Insider Higher Ed, which describes a study much to this effect. Maybe I just don't "get it," but I see this as unhealthy behavior that could lead to undesired social consequences, and should be recognized and addressed by higher education.

  • Posted by Adjunct George on November 5, 2009 at 12:00pm EST
  • Only in America can a majority be considered a minority. What about doing things to encourage the men to stay - such as sports. Oh, I forgot. Title 10 says we cannot do that. So much for minority rights.

  • Women CEOs
  • Posted by DKA , Marketing/PR at WITC on November 5, 2009 at 2:30pm EST
  • She says in 20 years "we will not have the benefit of enough male talent at the heads of companies and elsewhere."

    I had to do a little research, found this at Infoplease:

    Although women make up over half of America's labor force, as of 2009, only 12 Fortune 500 companies and 25 Fortune 1000 companies have women CEOs or presidents.

    Catalyst, the not-for-profit New York-based women's research organization, points out that its data shows a change over the last ten years. In 1998, 11.2% of corporate officers in Fortune 500 companies were women. This percentage rose to a peak of 16.4% by 2005, but has since fallen and in 2008 it rested at 15.7%. While this is progress, Catalyst notes that, at this rate, it would take 40 years for the number of female corporate officers to match the number of male officers."

    So where's the problem with men opting out of college?

  • The men
  • Posted by Beenherealongtime on November 5, 2009 at 2:30pm EST
  • Adjunct George: first of all, it's Title IX. And we already have sports to encourage men to stay -- and that's the problem. They do stay and that's all they think college is for. So in this case -- the hell with your minority rights.

  • A College President who does critical thinking
  • Posted by Blue-collar faculty on November 5, 2009 at 2:30pm EST
  • Alberta has a president who can use evidence. How refreshing to find North America finally has one. The only difference between racists, sexists, and lunatics who incorrectly think of themselves as affirmative action advocates is the different categories of people that they stereotype, label, deprecate and, when possible, mistreat. People who like to label all white males as privileged are those whose life experiences are so privileged that they can't name one white male who doesn't fit their stereotype. What fits such labelers are the words "prejudiced, narrow and uninformed."

  • Posted by NorthernPro on November 5, 2009 at 3:30pm EST
  • Adjunct George & Beenherealongtime: Title X, XI or IX it does not really matter as the University of Alberta is in Canada.

  • Keep up,
  • Posted by Beenherealongtime on November 5, 2009 at 5:45pm EST
  • NorthernPro: of course Alberta is in Canada, but the discussion left the Edmonton example a long time ago....

  • aristocracy
  • Posted by PiledHigher&Deeper , Ph.D. at European on November 5, 2009 at 7:15pm EST
  • ar·is·toc·ra·cy
    Pronunciation: \ˌa-rə-ˈstä-krə-sē, ˌer-ə-\
    Function: noun
    1 : a ruling class of citizens privileged and empowered by their hereditary status (i.e., by birth)

    So has affirmative action been equalizing, or has it been the long, slow establishment of a new aristocracy?

    In the last two schools where I've worked, the women absolutely ran the show. Yes, there are a few good old boys doddering around the administrative buildings, but they are mere emblems, symbols that he high-powered donors (of their own generation) recognize as "presidential" or "a fine leader," always ready with a toothy smile, a meaty handshake, and a good joke.

    But the careers of these men are about to end; and it will end even sooner if the donors with whom they schmooze expire. So the leadership at the administrative level will change just as it has in the departments and, before that even, the classrooms.

    The question is whether men are valuable to society? If they are not (as some feminists openly posit), if they are another evolutionary dead end that will "run its course in a few more millenia," then the sooner the better, right! This kind of reasoning is like the person who sees his car racing toward a cliff. Believing that the end is inevitable, the driver chooses "the sooner the better" as his philosophy, and he mashes the accelerator to the floor. Of course, as the car careens over the precipice, that poor might wonder why he didn't try one last time to stop the car...

  • Affirmative Action and Male-Female Ratios on Campus
  • Posted by CC Prof on November 5, 2009 at 7:15pm EST
  • Even if racial affirmative action is completely abolished it would not necessarily translate to more men on campus. It might mean more white males, but not more males in general. Women are not being admitted in higher numbers than men because of affirmative action. To claim that there is selection bias against males is not true.

    The University of California has either eliminated or greatly reduced affirmative action. The result was typically an increase in Asian-American students. Also, many, if not all, of the UC campuses have more female undergrads than male undergrads. The problem of male underrepresentation will not be solved by abolishing affirmative action.

    Furthermore, affirmative action programs in the past have typically been justified by appeals to historical injustices or historical biases. Since such historical injustices and biases do not apply to men in general, it is difficult to see how one could justify affirmative action for men.

    I teach at an open admission college where anyone with a high school diploma or a GED is admitted. In general, the boys just aren't as studious as the girls. However, among my older students, this is not the case. The non-traditional students are all usually quite studious regardless of gender. It seems to me that the current issue with male underrepresentation is generational rather than the result of any sort of affirmative action. (This is neither an endorsement nor a rejection of affirmative action.)

    I don't have any solutions to this problem, and I see it as quite intractable. Urging the young men to study more isn't doing the trick for me, but I really don't know what else to tell them.

    As for the President at the Canadian college, I don't really understand the emphasis on white males. I would imagine that the non-white males aren't doing so well either. At my college, there is a marked difference in the performance of African-American men and African-American women. Our retention levels for African-American men are not good, but the African-American women that I have taught over the years, in general, are quite serious about coming to class and doing the work.

  • Posted by Jay , Grad Student in A Wonderful Department at A Lovely University on November 6, 2009 at 12:45am EST
  • You've just got to look at the social benefits of college for men- there aren't any. It won't earn you that much more money; the average plumber makes $50,000, the average doctor makes $135,000- but after taxes, they're not that different. You don't get anywhere with women for having a degree- most women I meet are more interested in the size of my biceps than my degrees. It doesn't get you any respect in the community- you're more likely to be viewed as over-educated.

    Basically, there are no extrinsic reasons for men in our society to get an education. Hell, that's exactly what they told me when I started my PhD- there are no jobs, and even if you get one, you won't make any money, so if you don't love this work for its own sake, you shouldn't be here. For most men, that same logic applies to a BA. They're better off joining the army, or fixing cars, or doing something else that gets them some money, sex, and respect.

  • Posted by Annoyed Staff Member on November 6, 2009 at 10:00am EST
  • LOL Jay! I appreciate honest opinion in all forms. I do appreciate how people assume I make a bazillion dollars because I have a Ph.D.

  • The Problem with Boys
  • Posted by William Calin at University of Florida on November 7, 2009 at 10:30pm EST
  • It is rather sad, yet illuminating also, whenever the topic of boys' self-exclusion from education is raised, that there are a few out-of-date feminists to cheer the phenomenon and to posit that girls are more intelligent and that there is, in fact, no problem. Oh yes there is. A society in which young men abandon the life of the mind is a doomed society.
    I see this as an Anglo-Saxon problem, endemic to English-speaking North America and England -- and not to Scotland or Ireland and not to the entire European continent. We live in a popular culture profoundly anti-intellectual, in which young people, and especially boys, are bullied and punished -- think geek, nerd, dweeb, dork -- if they do well in shcool and actually like school. Think of our television culture where the male hero is intested in three things: sex, beer, and fast cars. The life of the mind is relegated to women.
    The problem is much worse in the black and latino ghettos where the bullying is overt and physical and where, indeed, a bright boy has to hide his brightness.
    The solution? A major investment in altering the mind set and the culture of the masses, to convince them that getting the best grades in school is masculine and virile -- as it is considered naturally in France, Germany, and Italy.