Sunday, November 14, 2010

* Inspiration vs. Information: C.P. Snow is Spinning in his Grave



Hillhouse High School

Hamden High School



Is Teaching an Art or a Science?

This entire posting series  (Yale Daily News articles and posts below) is really a debate about CP Snow's Two Cultures. At the moment, Science is in the ascendancy, and the Gradgrinds (Dickens's Hard Times) and their Utililitarian unctuosuness* have entranced the public.

After the Gates-Rhee-Kline-Christie Quartet passes from the scene, and we are left with a nation of soulless children clacking their boots in unison to the zeig heil of Princeton's Standardized pontifications, we may yearn for the gleeful chaos of joyful childhoods, sculpted by the artists we used to call teachers.



Rest in Discomfort, Lord Snow.



 *Jeremy Bentham, King of the Utilitarians and the model for Dickens's educational tyrant, Thomas Gradgrind, in Hard Times, had himself stuffed after his death. His mummy is wheeled out in a chair at the annual Board Meeting of the British  Museum and the secretary records "Mr. Bentham is present." 

A Fitting Fate for a Gradgrind



Univ. examines school options for faculty families


Wilbur Cross High School
By David Burt
Staff Reporter
Yale Daily News
Thursday, November 11, 2010






Administrators are exploring ways to encourage faculty to send their children to public school — and the city’s recent efforts at education reform may help them make a stronger case for enrolling in New Haven public schools.
Deputy Provost for Faculty Development Frances Rosenbluth said she is now collecting information about how faculty members choose schools for their children, but she said her efforts are still in preliminary stages, and she does not yet have a concrete plan for making public school more attractive for faculty. Michael Morand ’87 DIV ’93, associate vice president of Yale’s Office of New Haven and State Affairs, is working with Rosenbluth on the project. Morand said that New Haven public schools’ bad reputation is discouraging faculty from sending their children to public schools. Adding that he thinks the school system’s bad reputation is now unjustified, Morand said Yale could do a better job of providing information about improved public school options in the city.

Oswald Schmitz




Zachary Schmitz is a graduate of Wilbur Cross High School. Zachary is the son of Professor Oswald Schmitz.


Laura Bontempo


Maria Bontempo Dildine, daughter of Yale faculty member Dr. Laura Bontempo, does her homework. She is one of the few children of Yale faculty members who attend a public school.

“It’s everybody’s responsibility to get rid of those outdated stereotypes by distributing accurate information,” he said.
Claudia Merson, director of public school partnerships in the Office of New Haven and State Affairs, said new reforms will make public schools more attractive for Yale faculty, along with other parents in the New Haven community. The School Change Initiative, which went into effect this school year, takes a critical approach to evaluating teacher performance and allows the city to institute sweeping changes in underperforming schools while allowing top schools to continue with their current systems. The reforms are likely to result in higher test scores for New Haven students, Merson said, which parents often take into account when researching schools.
Six of eight faculty and spouses interviewed said New Haven Promise, which was announced Tuesday and guarantees funding to in-state public schools to New Haven Public School graduates who meet certain academic thresholds, would not have a significant effect about how they view the decision between private and public school.
“It’s so hard to think so far ahead,” said Eeva-Liisa Pelkonen ARC ’94, an associate professor in the School of Architecture, of the appeal the New Haven Promise held for her. “I think when parents make the decision [about which school their children will attend], it’s more about the here and now.”
Others said the New Haven Promise has less of an impact for Yale faculty because Yale already subsidizes their children’s college education.
The University provides up to $15,200 per academic year faculty and staff who have been employed by Yale for at least six years.
Public schools are advantageous for faculty because they do not pose the financial burden of private schools, Provost Peter Salovey said, and Yale faculty also benefit the community when they get involved in the public school system.
Yale currently provides a brief introduction to New Haven schools for Yale staff on the “Living in New Haven” page of the Office of New Haven and State Affairs website, and includes links to the school district’s websites.
Basmah Safdar, an assistant professor of emergency medicine at the School of Medicine, said finding information about the private school admissions process was much easier than finding information about public schools. Still, Safdar said she would have benefited from receiving clearer information on schooling options from the University.
“Having an appointed person or even a website instead of just the generic information available on school websites would be really helpful,” she said.
Morand said people tend to take advice more seriously when it comes from a friend or colleague, instead of from admissions officers at schools or from school websites. He said department chairs, provosts, and other faculty should take a more active role in sharing information about private and public education in New Haven, adding that relaying this knowledge to incoming faculty is especially important.
But some faculty still believe that the area’s public schools do not measure up to some of the private schools. Three of five faculty and spouses interviewed who have children in private schools said that quality of education was the deciding factor.
Cindy Karlan, wife of economics professor Dean Karlan, said her son entered a public school in 2004 when her family moved to New Haven, but she was unhappy with the class sizes and the lack of programming for advanced students. She decided to send her son and her younger daughter to the Foote School, a private school in New Haven north of Science Hill, where a math specialist works with accelerated students. Though she is happy with her decision, she said, the cost of private school tuition has made her “soul-sick” at times.
“If we had kept them in public school, we would have been satisfied with the cost, but [we would have] wondered if we made the right decision because of the academics,” she said, “but now we are satisfied with the academics but wonder if we made the right decision because of the cost.”
Faculty whose children are in public schools said they believe in the importance of public education, and several said diversity of the student body was critical in their decision.
“We thought it would be great for our kids to interact with the whole cross section of people that New Haven has to offer,” said ecology and evolutionary biology professor Oswald Schmitz, whose children went to Conte-West Hills School. “They got to appreciate people from different walks of life.”


Danny Serna contributed reporting.









Comments


Half a century ago (that's 50, as in fifty) when I entered Hamden High, three of my teachers were Yale Law school wives or Yale wannabee wives, and many of my peers were Yale faculty kids.
Mrs. Philetus Havens Holt IV (my Western Civ. teacher and the wife of a Yale Law student) once told me "I think you are ready to read Look Homeward Angel " Those words, and the fact that she thought I was worthy of an adult conversation which surrounded them, CHANGED MY LIFE FOREVER.
That's teaching. That's INSPIRATION. That's helping kids "CATCH FIRE", as Yeats described education.
Hamden and Mt. Carmel were Yale bedroom communities.
Had I attended Wilbur Cross or Hillhouse (my father's alma mater) I would have had the living daylights beat out of me for being an artsy-fartsy kid (aka a "sissy") even if I was 6' 2" and 195 lbs.
There was even that danger at Hamden High, but it could be avoided if you went to football games and screamed for the home team. I was "Mr. School Spirit" for my class, an easy cover for an intellectual. And, believe me, "intellectuals" needed a cover if they were male.
God forbid that a BOY be interested in IDEAS.
It was a sure road to humiliation and sissyfication, the male equivalent of society's fraternity initiation, only the "fraternity" was macho maleness and I was much too much a Holden Caulfield (minus the money) to be intetersted in being a stupid-Ward-Stradlater-male. So I simply avoided most males, as did Holden, BTW.
If you think I'm stereotyping, welcome to the world of the 1950's and The Catcher in the Rye. It hasn't sold 65 million copies because it deviates from the truth about the stupiditry of growing up a male in America.
When I was a kid, I mowed the lawn of the Director of Adoption for what was then called The Children's Center , located in Whitneyville. She, Mrs. Elizabteth Jacobs, had an M.A. in Social Work from the University of Chicago, rare then, for a woman. She once said these words to me and I had no idea what she was talking about: "OUR SOCIETY DOES GREAT DAMAGE TO MALES."
I understand now.
Think twice before sending a sensistive child to New Haven Schools.
"Hail Hamden High: We hold our banners proud and high..."


Paul D. Keane
Hamden High School
Class of 1963
Mr. School Spirit,






Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 11, 2010 at 8:32 a.m.
PS: There was a "MRS. School Spirit '63" too: Michele McCarthy, one of the great hearts on this planet. Fifty years later we are still friends and see each other a few times a year.

Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 11, 2010 at 8:59 a.m.


@ anti-yale: Stereotypical. Also, who cares?


Posted by wtf on November 11, 2010 at 11:11 a.m.


I was at a master's tea given by the asst. superintendent of New Haven schools. Almost everybody in attendance - perhaps 50 students - worked closely with New Haven schools. When the superintendant asked us if we would be comfortable sending our own (fictional) children to the school we worked in, not a single person raised their hand. Not a single one--myself, usually a fierce advocate of public education and a graduate of public schools, included.






Posted by Yale12 on November 11, 2010 at 12:54 p.m.

Also, PK, WTF.

Posted by Yale12 on November 11, 2010 at 2:31 p.m.
...finishing my comment:


Also, PK, WTF. You're seriously about to discourage people from sending their children to New Haven public schools because you were bullied fifty years ago? Wow. The egotism is unbelievable.


Posted by Yale12 on November 11, 2010 at 3:07 p.m.

Yale12:


Why did you focus on the NEGATIVE in my remarks? A Hamden High teacher (and Yale Law School wife) INSPIRED me and CHANGED my life. FOR ALL TIME.


That is monumental in Mercantilia, where money and its attainment seem to be the primary source of inspiration touted in the media day and night 24/7/365.


I have been involved daily in public education for the last 25 years. Male gender teasing and bullying hasn't changed much. My friends teaching in New Haven tell me the gender bullying remains unchanged there also, with the additional twist of "gangs" nowadays.


Only the "politically correct" language has changed.


I would be just as apprehensive about sending a SENSITIVE son to Hamden schools as New Haven schools, despite my jingoistic ( admittedly tongue-in-cheek) Hamden High school-spirit alumnus rhetoric in previous post


It is the informal initiations and hazings (AKA bullying) into American male culture which are STUPID, not the schools which host them.


Just look at your own Yale fraternity flap about sexist chanting a few weeks ago. Boors and bores dominate American male activities from the Ivy league to the major league.


Why couldn't a Yale - wife -teacher or Yale - husband - teacher INSPIRE kids in New Haven Schools?


I doubt they feel safe at Wilbur Cross or Hillhouse.


(Wilbur Coss has the distinction of being the only high school in the world where the body of a murdered prostitute was found in its dumpster circa the 1980's) .


Do you have the personnel statistics about Yale affiliated teachers in New Haven schools?


Start recruiting .


PK

Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 11, 2010 at 5:54 p.m.


PS to Yale12:


I WASN'T bullied 50 years ago. Read what I said. I barely escaped it by the same techniques Holden Caulfield mentions in The Catcher in the Rye.


Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 11, 2010 at 6:15 p.m.

The PR campaign for New Haven public schools is just that. Look at the test scores. Look at the class sizes. Look at the safety issues in the halls--I believe Wilbur Cross still has metal detectors at the front door. Right?

It is a HUGE issue for Yale recruiting and retaining faculty, and now, belatedly, they try to address the issue. Otherwise, the faculty live in Woodbridge, Guilford and even further out. Places with half-decent schools. Emphasis on half. As opposed to New Haven, which rates not at all.


Folks who like cities and want to live in one, and not drive thirty minutes to work, and walk to downtown from their home-- wont come here. THe city is perhaps more liveable with restaurants and the arts etc, but thats great for hipsters, young marrieds without children and the wealthy. FOlks raising a family with kids??? THE big drawback is the complete and total lack of ANY city services for the outrageous and about to be higher taxes in the city.


Posted by townieexprof on November 11, 2010 at 7:21 p.m.

PK: You clearly said, "Think twice before sending a sensistive child to New Haven Schools." The fact that you said that because you were almost bullied is even worse.

Why focus on the negative? Because frankly, I don't really care what kind of point you were trying to make about sensitive boys (and nor does anybody else, I can guarantee you). It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the article. What I do care about is the fact that you said, "Think twice before sending a sensitive child to New Haven Schools." From your second post, it's clear that you weren't actually singling out New Haven schools, you were just mentioning them to make your obnoxious, egotistical ranting seem slightly related to the article, but that wasn't clear from your first post, and the fact that you would discourage people from sending their children to an already-struggling school district simply in order to make a bitter point about American males is infuriating. I can usually deal with your asinine assumption that people actually want to read the unrelated nonsense you write on comment boards, but when it's done at the expense of New Haven schools, I really can't stand it.


Posted by Yale12 on November 11, 2010 at 7:57 p.m.


Mr. Keane- It was with great pride and pleasure that I read your comment about my mother, Mrs. Philetus H. Holt (Carol). Unfortunately, she passed away several years ago but she would have been thrilled to know that she had such a positive impact on you. Thank you. Sincerely, Stephen Holt






Posted by StephenHolt on November 12, 2010 at 10:29 a.m.


Dear Mr. Holt,

I also had a nice email from your sister. Truly, your Mother's words changed the very course of my life. I have thought of them often over the decades as my own life unfolds.


Something else she did as a teacher which was extraordinary: When Michele McCarthy and I decided to take a train trip to Manhattan as Juniors at Hamden High, your Mother offered to meet us at the U.N. and show us around !!

Is that dedication, or what.


I am sorry to hear that you Mother will not be able to read my words herself. The fact that both you and your sister saw this highly idiosyncratic tribute, amazes me.


"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."


So in the trillions upon trillions of digits which were keyboarded on our planet last Thursday, your and your sister's eyes were drawn to mine?


It makes me wonder in awe at the mysterious forces which surround us.


Again, my thanks and greetings to you and your sister.


Sincerely,


Paul






Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 13, 2010 at 5:32 p.m.
______________________________________
Zelinsky: An empty Promise
By Nate Zelinsky
The Yale Daily News
Wednesday, November 10, 2010






On Tuesday, the City of New Haven and Yale announced New Haven Promise, a joint program to provide college scholarships to New Haven high school graduates. While this plan is well-intentioned, it will actually end up hurting the very high school students it seeks to help.
New Haven Promise is a poorly disguised Band-Aid which will only allow the larger problem to continue festering: New Haven’s high schools do a bad job of preparing students for college. The true beneficiaries of the “Promise” are the political interests who have refused to enact real school reform for their own political benefit, and who can now point to this program as a claim of their intention to reform.
It is an unfortunate reality that many high school students in New Haven are getting a bad education. This trend is not unique to our city, but is a national scandal. The blame for poor educational attainment lies squarely on the teachers and their unions.
Many public school teachers do not commit the necessary time and effort needed to do their job well. Instead of staying after school to tutor or help run an extracurricular, unionized teachers typically leave as soon as the final bell rings. One-on-one time, after school activities and caring mentors can make the difference for struggling students in New Haven and across the country. These efforts help keep teenagers off the streets in a supportive environment that they may not find at home.
In New Haven, Yale students have admirably (but haphazardly) tried to fill in the gaps left behind by teachers. While specific programs have been successful, these efforts fail to address the larger systemic problem: Our public schools lack the out of classroom experiences that prepare students for college and life beyond.
Moreover, because public school teachers achieve tenure after only a few years, administrators have extreme difficulty firing those who perform poorly. The American Federation of Teachers fiercely defends the tenure status quo, claiming teachers need the “job security,” which no comparable private sector employees enjoy. The result is a school system governed by apathy, in which the teachers go through the motions, viewing their job as secure regardless of their effort and involvement. Public school students consequently suffer in the classroom.
No doubt there are many teachers who care deeply about their students. But we cannot ignore the fact that there is a definite, established trend of poorly performing teachers who are a detriment to their students. These teachers continue to teach until retirement, doing a disservice to the students they claim to help.
New Haven Promise will send students to college unprepared, without the skills they actually need to succeed. Sure, we may send more local children to two- and four-year colleges, but will they actually learn? Will they really be better off at institutions of higher learning if they cannot consistently write a five-paragraph essay or solve a basic algebraic equation?
Instead of throwing money at the problem, New Haven needs to enact real school reform. School administrators must have the ability to fire teachers who view their job as ending with the final school bell. Tenure must be abolished and a system of accountability put into place. Good teachers should be rewarded and bad teachers should be fired. Sadly, this will not happen, because the mayor and Democratic machine in New Haven (and nationally) are wedded to union votes, chief among them the teachers.
Last year, the city announced a small step toward reform. Schools were supposed to be classified into three categories, each tier a different level of success. But this scheme has yet to bring out the radical change needed for children in New Haven.
New Haven Promise whitewashes the true problem in New Haven. We should not care about how many New Haven students we send to college, but rather how many we send to college prepared. The program allows the mayor to claim that he is attempting real reform, without having to actually make the difficult decisions needed to make public schools work for inner-city students.
Let’s not waste Yale’s money on political grandstanding by the mayor to dodge a bullet and pretend to be undertaking educational reform when he is placating the teachers’ union. Instead, let’s work together to actually (and courageously) address the problems in New Haven’s schools.


Nate Zelinsky is a sophomore in Davenport College.




Comments


Bashing teachers is such fun, isn't it.


Does the naive writer here have any idea what baggage a New Haven student carries from home and neighborhood when s/he steps over the threshold of a classroom: Poverty, drug-valorized culture, violence on the streets, single parent homes where the breadwinner is exhausted or constantly away at work; sexuality and conspicuous consumption and competition in all areas of life ritualized on the media and the Internet and bombarding students thousands of times a week.
In addition, hyperactivity is fueled by the non-nutritional foods pumped into our convenience-addicted-culture.
I've seen kids drink two Jolts and eat a large bag of Nachos for breakfast and then be expected to concentrate in class.
The culture is mad.


PK


PS: Full disclosure: I have taught in public schools for 25 years.






Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 10, 2010 at 5:51 a.m.
Public Education has been the sole domain of the Left for decades. They have been bathed in funding to enact all of their fantasies. The teachers unions are uniformly Democrats. Every Leftist ideology has received fertile soil in public education.
What is the result? Disaster. Complete failure.
Time to hit reset.


Posted by RexMottram08 on November 10, 2010 at 9:02 a.m.

"Instead of staying after school to tutor or help run an extracurricular, unionized teachers typically leave as soon as the final bell rings. "
really? unionized teachers typically leave as soon as the final bell rings? What are you basing this off of? Where is your data? This is the most prejudiced, one-dimensional piece I have read in a long time. The author makes blanket assertions with no evidence to back them up. Has the author ever been inside a New Haven public school?


Posted by SY_2009 on November 10, 2010 at 10:53 a.m.

This literally was 'kick' the teacher. If the author actually believes this, he should be ashamed.


Posted by y10br on November 10, 2010 at 11:35 a.m.
Granted, there are plenty of terrible teachers in the city, the state, and the country, who don't devote enough time to their jobs, but if the author wants to play a game of "making empirical claims without statistics," then I would counter that the percentage of teachers that clock purely daytime hours without a further thought to their jobs and students is significantly lower than the percentage of their working peers in other fields. For all of the homework you had to do as a student, your teachers did more, and for all of the preparation you did for class, your teachers did more. Even the sub-standard ones. This isn't to mention the ongoing recertification and continuing education processes that teachers go through during breaks and summers, days without pay due to state budget cuts in many states, and so on, that counter all of the "teachers have it easy/work less than the rest of us" arguments. School reform is needed, yes--it is direly needed. I am in general agreement that the mayor of New Haven does most of what he does not in order to care for the population, but in order to make himself look good. You are right on those counts. You are wrong to blame the majority of teachers for the folly of a few.


Posted by Saybrook10 on November 10, 2010 at 11:49 a.m.


A good teacher NEVER clocks off even when asleep at night : His/her mind is always assembling new configurations for lesson plans of everything s/he hears or sees. It is endless creativity; and it is invigorating.


Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 10, 2010 at 12:47 p.m.


Homeschoolers and Private religious schools outperform public schools every time.


Posted by RexMottram08 on November 10, 2010 at 1:14 p.m.
The blame for poor educational attainment lies squarely on the teachers and their unions. what about the families? and the services lacking in the community? Instead of staying after school to tutor or help run an extracurricular, unionized teachers typically leave as soon as the final bell rings like hell they do. also, how do you even know? in general, most are required to stay like an hour after... public school teachers achieve tenure after only a few years three-four is not "few" years, especially on the low salary that teachers make. The result is a school system governed by apathy, in which the teachers go through the motions, viewing their job as secure regardless of their effort and involvement. ... ad hominem. teachers who are a detriment to their students. These teachers continue to teach until retirement, doing a disservice to the students they claim to help a teacher>no teacher
older teachers tend to be better at managing classrooms and teaching than younger ones; tenure keeps them there.... is placating the teachers’ union how is he placating the teacher's union?


Posted by JM on November 10, 2010 at 1:28 p.m.
As a former Yalie and current public school teacher, I am extremely disappointed by this article.
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.


Posted by jfs81887 on November 10, 2010 at 1:44 p.m.

Education starts at home.


The reason private, parochial, and charter schools outperform public schools is because parents who send their kids to these types of schools tend to care more than the average public school parent.


Posted by River Tam on November 10, 2010 at 3:08 p.m. 


 I rarely agree with RiverTam, but this time I must admit he's right. I work extensively in New Haven public schools. Most teachers are amazingly dedicated and are nothing like this article characterized; the problem is in large part among parents. Most of the children in the kindergarten classroom I work in came into school not knowing the alphabet or how to write their name. No wonder they fall behind the students of parents who care enough to find their child a school that best fits them (and have the financial resources to do so).


The mischaracterizations in this article are absolutely disgusting. While I agree, in general, that NHPS is not adequately preparing students for college, it is not because of the teachers. Mr. Zelinsky, have you spent any time with these teachers you so quickly, and unfairly, demonize? I strongly, strongly doubt it. For every "unionized teacher" that doesn't do more than the bare minimum, I can find you two or three that do ten or fifteen times that while getting paid frighteningly small amounts.


Posted by Yale12 on November 10, 2010 at 4:31 p.m.


The blame for poor educational attainment lies squarely on the teachers and their unions. what about the families? and the services lacking in the community? Instead of staying after school to tutor or help run an extracurricular, unionized teachers typically leave as soon as the final bell rings like hell they do. also, how do you even know? in general, most are required to stay like an hour after... public school teachers achieve tenure after only a few years three-four is not "few" years, especially on the low salary that teachers make. The result is a school system governed by apathy, in which the teachers go through the motions, viewing their job as secure regardless of their effort and involvement. ... ad hominem. teachers who are a detriment to their students. These teachers continue to teach until retirement, doing a disservice to the students they claim to help a teacher>no teacher
older teachers tend to be better at managing classrooms and teaching than younger ones; tenure keeps them there.... is placating the teachers’ union how is he placating the teacher's union?


Posted by JM on November 10, 2010 at 4:57 p.m.

So let's take the lowest-paid college-educated public servants in our society and bash the intestines out of them. Does it feel gooooood? Does it make you feel POWERFUL?

It just so happens that there is at least one state in the Union where teachers do not get tenure, at all, EVER.

And I have worked in that state for 25 years as a teacher, with collegues of high integrity and dedication.

The columnist and many of his posting-board respondents don't want dedicated teachers and inspired students; they want TEST RESULTS, because our society has sold its soul to the false god of QUANTIFIABLE NUMBERS, turning the art of teaching into just another business spread-sheet.

As William Butler Yeats said, "Education is about catching fire."
It is not about vomiting forth facts and formulas into the bedpans of fill-in-the-bullet digitized answer sheets.

Zeig Heil Michele Rhee and Bill Gates.

Theirs is a business-model-marriage, waiting to be consummated in Hades.


Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 10, 2010 at 5:54 p.m.
The columnist and many of his posting-board respondents don't want dedicated teachers and inspired students; they want TEST RESULTS, because our society has sold its soul to the false god of QUANTIFIABLE NUMBERS, turning the art of teaching into just another business spread-sheet.

Test results may not tell the whole tale, but without them, how would you propose judging the ability of teachers to teach?


Posted by River Tam on November 10, 2010 at 6:45 p.m.
I rarely agree with RiverTam, but this time I must admit he's right.


She. And thank you.


Posted by River Tam on November 10, 2010 at 6:45 p.m.


RT:






Let's see. The fad of "standardized testing" became an EPIDEMIC gleefully spread by The College Board Testing Service INC. located in American Education's Vatican, Princeton, New Jersey, about ten years ago. For a hundred years before that, public schools managed to suiccessfully serve (that's SERVE, not SERVICE) colleges and universities, and society's job market itself.


The OBSESSION with KEYBOARDED-QUANTIFIABLE EVERYTHING which computers and the internet have spread like a plague has enabled us to SELL OUR CHILDREN"S SOULS by turning them into digitized production machines.

Your question itself betrays how mechanized, how dehumanized we have become. Why would we even think that an "art" could be "MEASURED"? Becausse it makes us feel secure to measure things.


And make no mistake about it: OUR CHILDREN KNOW WHEN THEY ARE BEING TREATED LIKE THINGS.


God save us from Joel Kline, Michele Rhee, Chris Christie, and Bill Gates.


Oh, I forget. They are God.


Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 10, 2010 at 7:15 p.m.
PK -






And the decline of the public school preceded the rise of standardized testing "about ten years ago". Standardized testing and NCLB were reactions, not causes to an epidemic of poor public school performance, a problem that begins with the lack of parental involvement. It was the it issue of the 90s - "is our children learning?"


Your question itself betrays how mechanized, how dehumanized we have become. Why would we even think that an "art" could be "MEASURED"? Becausse it makes us feel secure to measure things.


There is such a thing as objectively "good teaching" and "bad teaching", as you yourself have stated. What metric do you use to make your own claims?


And make no mistake about it: OUR CHILDREN KNOW WHEN THEY ARE BEING TREATED LIKE THINGS.


I don't mind being treated like a "thing" as long as I learn how to read past the fourth grade level. Students in Hungary and China leave high school far more educated than students in America not because they have been coddled and told how "special" they are. Rather, they have not been taught by teachers who (like you) worship at the altar of feelings and therapy over facts and figures.


Schools are for learning, not for finding yourself. Teachers need to stop being parents - this requires work on the part of both parents and teachers. Parents need to do their jobs - teachers need to do theirs. In low income schools, parents don't parent and teachers try to parent in vain. In high income schools, parents do parent, but teachers still insist on trying to parent rather than teaching.


School is not therapy. It is not an exercise in humanization or enlightenment. It is a method of empowerment - a way to give students the preparation to live the Good Life - the life they want to live. We measure teachers and we measure schools because without this measurement we are left in trusting self-serving metrics from public schools more interested in protecting their own rear ends than the interests of students. There is no job where you can be gainfully employed and NOT subjected to performance metrics. It's the way the world works, and it's what we need to ensure that our children don't come out of school unable to read at the fifth grade level. I'd prefer a hyper-literate 18 year-old who hasn't been told how special he is to an illiterate 18 year-old who feels secure in his ignorance. One of these children will be in for a rude awakening. The other will be pleasantly surprised.


I'm glad it's not your call.


Posted by River Tam on November 10, 2010 at 9:31 p.m.
RT:

I spent 17 years in four colleges as a student. I would be ashamed to apply a mercantile word like "metric' to the behavior,achievements, and dignity of human beings. ( Note:children are human beings. )Perhaps it is an old-fashioned idea but I believe that human beings are sacred. "Measuring" them is a crude violation of that sanctity. If you do not perceive that every day the competetive, mercantile culture we live in dehumanizes its children, then we really have very little to say to each other.


PK


PS


I'll be happy to buy you a ticket to DEATH OF A SALESMAN: It's at Dartmouth's Hopkins Center this season. "A man can't go out the way he came in. A man has got to add up to something." Willy Loman


Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 10, 2010 at 9:57 p.m.


Though I strongly disagree with the broad-brush approach that Nate takes to appraising teachers in this piece, I think that he very, very indirectly raises an important point that I have not heard or read in the discussion of the New Haven Promise. This program goes a long, long way toward making college a financially realistic option for the city's students but doesn't directly address the college-readiness of the students who will benefit from this Yale-New Haven-Community Foundation initiative.


Fair.


But let's appreciate the extent to which the Promise, by increasing the numbers of New Haven students who will advance to college, will no doubt increase all stakeholders' investment in improving students' college-readiness. As a first-year teacher far away from New Haven, in a struggling school district in an impoverished section of the United States where barely 15% of the adult population has a college degree and where no such tuition guarantee exists, I spend each day with eighth graders who do not see college as a realistic possibility. They demand less of themselves and of me, their teacher, than I want them to, because they don't see what this whole learning thing is aimed at. The urgency about education isn't there---and it can be excruciatingly difficult to build in---because so few of my students come in seeing themselves as true students. I would argue that this is much less a product of bad teaching than it is a result of the circumstances in which they have grown up and to which they return every night.


I can just about promise you, Nate, that this initiative will not so much whitewash problems in the district but, rather, will raise the stakes of what goes on inside the New Haven Public Schools and serve as a positive motivator for all those who work in the system.


Posted by Davenport2010 on November 10, 2010 at 11:04 p.m.
PK:


Perhaps it is an old-fashioned idea but I believe that human beings are sacred. "Measuring" them is a crude violation of that sanctity.


Do we give students grades in their classes? Did you - as a teacher - grade them on an assignment? Did you ever say that a piece of art was "good" or "bad"? Has a student of yours ever ran track and been timed? Do you get your weight checked when you go to the doctors office? Do salesmen have their sales tracked? Of course. There are metrics in everything.


Of course, there is an implicit measurement in life. Willy Loman didn't add up to anything and it didn't matter whether or not he took the SATs or not. Standardized tests do not replace students' ability to freely live their lives. What it does, however, is attempt (however imperfectly) to hold accountable those charged with ensuring that these students do not become little Willy Lomans, frustrated by their lives and unable to make changes.
Posted by River Tam on November 11, 2010 at 9:10 a.m.
This is an unbelievably shortsighted article. Even the LA Times, which raised uproar among teachers' unions for publishing analysis of students' test scores and rating teachers as "effective" or "ineffective," admitted that "The achievement gaps are three to four times larger than the estimated teacher effects for LAUSD." That is, that while teachers have an effect on their students, racial and socioeconomic effects are far, far stronger. To say that teachers share the strongest--and only--blame is a vicious lie.


Not only does Mr. Zelinsky make the outrageous claim that "The blame for poor educational attainment lies squarely on the teachers and their unions," he said it without a single modicum of evidence--besides his own unsupported beliefs that unionized teachers do not stay after school--to support it. This article should not have been published.


Posted by Yale12 on November 11, 2010 at 9:57 a.m.
Zelinsky has no idea what he's talking about. Even if a "band aid solution," the Promise will help students who would otherwise not be helped and provide a tremendous amount of incentive for students to work hard throughout high school. School reform is a notoriously difficult thing to get right, and would this presumptuous Yalie rather students languish with no help until authorities get it right?






And where does this man get off saying the Promise will only send students to college to fail? The Promise will only apply to kids with at least a 3.0 average, and then only if they get into college at all. It's not throwing the unprepared into a ruthless environment. After all, I'm a successful Yalie from L.A. public schools. Should I be considered "unprepared" and incapable of writing a five paragraph essay just because I came from a rotten school?


Typical Yalie critiquing progressive measures by making generalizations about a population he knows nothing about. As a middle school me would've said, All up in the kool-aid and don't even know the flavor. Stick to stuff you know, hombre.


Posted by matilde11 on November 11, 2010 at 11:09 a.m.
Also, it's not as if the New Haven Promise is the only school reform going on in New Haven. In fact, they've enacted a radical new plan of tiering schools, year-long turnarounds, rehiring staff at failing schools, etc. etc. But that's only something Zelinsky would have known about if he had done any research whatsoever, which he clearly did not.
Posted by Yale12 on November 11, 2010 at 12:47 p.m.
"Willy Loman didn't add up to anything'


This statement is true, River Tam, ONLY if materialism is your value system, and apparently it is yours (and, tragically, Willy Loman's).


There are other value systems which people adopt to guide them in living their lives; aestheticism (my own); asceticism; hedonism, narcissism, machiavellianism, militarism, humanitarianism, nihilism, etc.


Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 11, 2010 at 6:48 p.m.


This statement is true, River Tam, ONLY if materialism is your value system, and apparently it is yours (and, tragically, Willy Loman's).


Willy Loman cheated on his wife and lost the respect of his children. His personal failings were numerous. He did not merely fail materially, but also morally.


Posted by River Tam on November 11, 2010 at 11:43 p.m. 


"I was lonely Biff, I was terribly lonely. She's nothing to me." Willy Loman upon being discovered by his 16-year old son, in a compromising situation with a woman.


It is a culture which has sold itself to the God of Materialism which allows a man to utter these words about another huiman being ( aka "woman') and expect that those words will be understood: "She's NOTHING to me Biff'."


"A man can't go out the way he came in. A man has got to ADD UP TO SOMETHING."


Death of a Salesman is drenched in and dripping with the language of MATERIALISM. You seem so soaked by it yourself that you do not recognize it for what it is.


Thus goeth the culture.


We are lost. (And Arthur Miller knew it.)


Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 12, 2010 at 6:08 a.m.
"I was lonely Biff, I was terribly lonely. She's nothing to me." Willy Loman upon being discovered by his 16-year old son, in a compromising situation with a woman.


Lonely, not poor.


The tragedy that Miller highlights in Death of a Salesman is not that Willy Loman is obsessed with material success (that's merely portrayed as a flaw). Willy Loman is, more importantly, obsessed with having friends, which he considers the root of greatness (and riches - not exclusively riches). Willy Lomans sons do not respect him, because he's caught up in illusions of grandeur - of being and important person who knows the right people.


Key line:

Willy Loman never made a lot of money. His name was never in the papers. He's not the finest character that ever lived. But he's a human being, and a terrible thing is happening to him. So attention must be paid!


It's not just about the money - it's about the fact that American society fetishizes greatness at the expense of goodness. Miller himself says that the fundamental struggle for Loman is the struggle for meaning - in a life that is not extraordinary, how can he be expected to be happy?


The Death of a Salesman is the anti-Dead Poets Society. Life shouldn't have to be extraordinary for us to be happy.


Posted by River Tam on November 12, 2010 at 8:12 a.m.

Miller's great theme is the ANONYMITY OF MODERN MAN.. Dustin Hoffman's brilliant actor's choice in the 1987 video version of Death of a Salesman comes in the final scene. Willy is talking to the ghost/fantasy of his dead brother, the successful Africa and Alaska diamond mine and timber baron, Ben Loman.


He is debating the "ins and outs" of committing suicide. Willy tells Ben that Biff will finally see "who I am" because the funeral will be massive, with all the "old-timers" attending. Dustin Hoffman utters these lines: "It changes all the aspects. Because he thinks I'm nothing, see, and so he spites me. But the funeral---Ben, that funweral will be massive! They'll come from Maine, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire --that boy will be thunderstruck, Ben, because he never realized ---I am known! Rhode island, New York New jersey, I am known ---" (Miller, p. 100)




Hoffman uses Willy's Brooklyn accent to make "I am known" sound like "I am knowen" which sounds very much like "I am no one."


It is Willy's life insurance MONEY that will enable Biff to get "AHEAD of Bernard [ his childhood friend and now a successful lawyer] again" when "the mail comes" bringing the insurance check.


It is Biff's winning life's COMPETITION, by getting MONEY, which convinces Willy's twisted mind to equate suicide with an act of sacrifice and love.


Yes Willy's credo is "Be liked and you will never want." ( p. 21) But the emphasis is on "want" which equates to money, which equates to being "known" (and ironically. with Dustin Hoffman's brilliant actor's choice of a Brooklyn pronunciation) being "no one" .






Salesman is about how competetion, and its surrogate "money," rots the human soul.






Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 12, 2010 at 7:32 p.m.


"School is not therapy. It is not an exercise in humanization or enlightenment.'


May these words sear your soul if you become the parent of a child with "challenges".


Let's turn childhood into a workhouse, where getting ahead and being on top are lauded, and all those who remain behind and below our exalted "Numbers One, Two and Three" are scorned.

Let's squeeze every last drop of joy and fun and silliness out childhood so that we dour adults can be satisfied that our tax dollars are moving our children along on the assembly-line of life, to be defecated out into the world as competent competitors after being shaped and moulded by the Peristaltic Educational Testing Service at Princeton.


Ugh.






Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 13, 2010 at 2:48 p.m.


PS: This entire posting series is really a debate about CP Snow's "Two Cultures". At the moment, Science is in the ascendancy, and the Gradgrinds (Dickens's "Hard Times") and their Utililitarian unctuosuness have entranced the public, and Ms. River Tam. After the Gates-Rhee-Kline-Christie Quartet passes from the scene, and we are left with a nation of soulless children clacking their boots in unison to the zeig heil of Princeton's Standardized pontifications, we may yearn for the gleeful chaos of joyful childhoods, sculpted by the artists we used to call teachers.

Rest in Discomfort, Lord Snow.
Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 14, 2010 at 12:40 a.m.




Palitz: An irresponsible argument



Point-Counterpoint

The Yale Daily News
By Akimi Palitz






Friday, November 12, 2010


As an English teacher at Wilbur Cross High School and a 2010 graduate of the Yale Masters’ in Urban Education Studies program, I am deeply disturbed by Nate Zelinsky’s criticism of New Haven Promise and its associated sentiments (“An empty promise,” Nov. 10). The stereotypes and clichéd critiques of teachers that Zelinsky offers are unfounded. They do serious damage to the public education system by diminishing the respect given to teachers and discouraging smart, hardworking people, like Yale students, from entering the profession.


When I entered New Haven public schools as a student teacher last year, I am ashamed to admit that I expected to find the kind of teachers Zelinsky describes. What I have found is just the opposite.


I am lucky to work each day with such intelligent, dedicated and supportive colleagues. They take pride in their work, have high expectations for students and themselves, and put in many more hours than their salaries justify. I challenge Zelinsky to shadow any teacher at Wilbur Cross for one week or even one day, and stand by his statement that teachers “do not commit the necessary time and effort needed to do their job well.” I don’t know how early I would have to arrive to be the first teacher in the building — many teachers are there well before 7:00 a.m. And most teachers, including myself, work late into the evening on lesson plans and grades. Wilbur Cross teachers are constantly developing new ways to teach, challenge and inspire their students.


So if teachers aren’t the problem, it must be parents, right? This was my second shameful misconception. Urban parents typically don’t care about their kids’ educations, and do not provide the kind of support students need to be successful, right? This year I have made over 120 phone calls home to parents and have learned how wrong this stereotype is. My students’ parents care deeply about their children’s education. Many have come in to meet with me before work or on their lunch break in order to discuss a child’s progress. Others call or e-mail me to make sure that their children are on track. They are invested in their children’s success and are eager for help. However, my students’ parents do not have power — this city does not hear their voices.


Before I started teaching, I was much more sure of what needed to be done to “fix” urban schools. Now when friends and family ask me, “What’s the most needed reform in urban schools?” I stumble to answer. I cannot put my finger on “the problem” because there is no one singular problem responsible for the widespread low achievement in urban public schools. This problem is far more complex than most people realize, and it certainly won’t be remedied by bashing teachers.


Teaching is a craft that takes time to learn. Great teachers are not born, but developed over time. Programs like Teach for America, though well-meaning, ensure that our nation’s urban students will be taught by a rotating staff of idealistic but inexperienced teachers. Parents in suburban communities would never allow their children to be taught by untrained teachers.


Yale and New Haven need to work together to solve this. Working together does not end with Yale throwing money at a problem. Our public schools are not Yale’s charity case. Yale and New Haven need to genuinely collaborate to desegregate neighborhoods, desegregate schools, and take co-ownership over the economic and social problems the city faces.


So I ask you, Mr. Zelinsky, are you ready to start building a better New Haven?

Akimi Palitz is a 2010 graduate of Yale’s Masters’ in Urban Education Studies program and an English teacher at Wilbur Cross High School.









Comments


Teaching is a craft that takes time to learn. Great teachers are not born, but developed over time


In the 1950's Yale President A. Whitney Griswold ABOLISHED Yale's Graduate Department of Education saying "It is not necessary to teach teachers how to teach."


Good teachers are born, not made. Teaching is an ART, not a craft. Artists PAINT; they don't talk about painting.


Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 12, 2010 at 5:25 a.m.
PS: The dichotomy is a savage, soulless one: Modernity wants a teacher to be an
INFORMATION DELIVERY SYSTEM.
A. Whitney Griswold recognizes that a teacher is an
INSPIRATION DELIVERY SYSTEM.

Paul D. Keane






Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 12, 2010 at 6:20 a.m.

Good teachers are born, not made. Teaching is an ART, not a craft. Artists PAINT; they don't talk about painting.


How then do we ensure that bad teachers don't teach? I'm open to ideas, unless you think that will somehow interrupt the art.


Posted by River Tam on November 12, 2010 at 8:02 a.m.

 
Peer review; classroom observations and feedback; continuing education.


Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 12, 2010 at 12:30 p.m.

PK- Would you say that good doctors are born, not made? Perhaps some people are born with natural talents that suit them to be good physicians, but they still have to go to medical school. Requiring ALL teachers, from pre-school through 12th grade, to have an advanced degree and complete something like an internship or residency would make them better prepared for their work, and weed out those who are resorting to the profession because they think it's easy/aren't smart enough to do anything else. Education is largely clinical, after all, dealing nearly entirely with the brain, and seeking to promote the cognitive and behavioral development of our children.


(P.S.- Your dichotomy is a false one. Plus, information=/=learning.)


Posted by penny_lane on November 12, 2010 at 1:14 p.m.
Good pornstars are born, not made. Some think their craft is teachable, but trust me - I've studied the best. You can't teach that.


Posted by Goldie08 on November 12, 2010 at 2:32 p.m.
Peer review; classroom observations


Peer review doesn't work because teachers cover for their colleagues. Peer review becomes a popularity contest. It's been tried, and it failed. Hurrah for union solidarity.


feedback; continuing education.


But I thought good teachers were born not made.


Posted by River Tam on November 12, 2010 at 2:41 p.m.

Don''t ask me, ask the late Yale President, A. Whitney Griswold.


If the rest of academia had abolished their graduate departments of eduaction (as President Griswold did at Yale , saying, "It is not necessary to teach teachers how to teach".) we wouldn't have those Mickey Mouse M. Ed' degrees RexMottram'08 abhors.


In fact all teachers getting an advanced degree over the last 50 years would have had to get it in their discipline (since "Education" would have disappeared from the catalogue) and we wouldn't be in the pedagogical funk we are in now.

I predict that in fifty years teaching and school as we know it will cease being about 'inspiration", cease being an attempt to make minds "catch fire" (Yeats), and become, instead, an "INFORMATION DELIVERY MECHANISM."


You will win River Tam and Penny Lane and you will join Michele Rhee, Chris Christie, Bill Gates, Joel Kline and perhaps even Oprah on Charon's raft gliding across the River Styx with bodies of deceived children piled high waiting to be interred on the shores of Princeton's Educational Testing Service, Inc,


I'm glad I will be dead by then.


Welcome to your Competent, Competetive, Cold New World.


Heaven save our already isolated and solipsistic children.


Paul D. Keane

M.A.

M. Div.


M.Ed.


Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 12, 2010 at 4:41 p.m.

In fact all teachers getting an advanced degree over the last 50 years would have had to get it in their discipline (since "Education" would have disappeared from the catalogue) and we wouldn't be in the pedagogical funk we are in now.


I completely agree that teachers should be experts in their fields, not in "education".


However, this doesn't solve the problem of teachers being born, not made.


Posted by River Tam on November 12, 2010 at 5:27 p.m.
 It's not a problem. It's an observation.


Good luck in Mercantilia.


Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 12, 2010 at 5:30 p.m.

It's not a problem. It's an observation.






Wouldn't you agree that it is a problem if people who are not born teachers end up going into teaching.


Good luck in Mercantilia.


Thanks!






Posted by River Tam on November 12, 2010 at 5:36 p.m.

 
We can't expect every teacher to be Mr. Keating (Dead Poet's Society) or Miss Dove (Good Morning, Miss Dove! )


Somone once pointed out that half of all practicing MD's graduated in the lower half of their class.


But don't make schools so mercantile---so spread-sheet-obsessive--- that the Mr. Keatings and Miss Doves are driven out.


Artists and Mercantiles don't mix.


Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 12, 2010 at 6:27 p.m.

There's something about sophomores telling us how to fix public education that's, well, sophomoric.
When I was at Yale, a couple of students wrote a guide called "Sex at Yale" that purported to tell us what sex at Yale was all about.


Uh huh.


Part of the process of growing up is about realizing that you were a complete flaming idiot back when. I imagine Mr. Zelinsky will have one or two of those moments. For his sake, I hope they come sooner rather than later.


Posted by Mikelawyr2 on November 13, 2010 at 10:21 a.m.


Somone once pointed out that half of all practicing MD's graduated in the lower half of their class.
Oh my god, have you heard that half of Americans are below average? Doesn't that frighten you?
And your comments up to this point are strung with so many non-sequitors it's painful. Teachers are artists? Standardized tests are pushing good teachers away?
I mean these are normally the types of claims people justify, instead of expecting to stand on their own because you have a few M.xx at the bottom of your posts


Posted by Standards on November 14, 2010 at 11:25 a.m.

Is Teaching an Art or a Science?


This entire posting series on "Education" (Yale Daily News articles and posts below them ) is really a debate about C.P. Snow's "Two Cultures". At the moment, Science is in the ascendancy, and the Gradgrinds (Dickens's "Hard Times" ) and their Utililitarian unctuosuness* have entranced the public.


After the Gates-Rhee-Kline-Christie Quartet passes from the scene, and we are left with a nation of soulless children clacking their boots in unison to the zeig heil of Princeton's Standardized pontifications, we may yearn for the gleeful chaos of joyful childhoods, sculpted by the artists we used to call teachers.
Rest in Discomfort, Lord Snow.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Jeremy Bentham, King of the Utilitarians and the model for Dickens's educational tyrant, Thomas Gradgrind, in "Hard Times", had himself stuffed after his death. His mummy is wheeled out in a chair at the annual Board Meeting of the British Museum and the secretary records "Mr. Bentham is present."


A Fitting Fate for a Gradgrind.


http://atlasobscura.com/place/jeremy-benthams-auto-icon


Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 14, 2010 at 2:39 p.m.

PS (to Standards) I'm going to say this once and only once: The reason I use the Mxx's on posts is because in the narrow world of Yale, such artifacts are presented like calling cards, to gain entrance to certain situations. I use the M. Div. for entry to the so-called Yale Daily News posting board and especially on posts about religion and ethics. I use the other non-Yale Mxx's when the posts call for secular credentials. I almost never use them otherwise, except to write recommendations, eulogies, and tributes.


Oh, and they do appear on my blog profile http://theantiyale.blogspot.com/  simply because I had no music groups, videos, or tv shows to declare. I'm boring.
If they irritate you, it is only because the artificial world of academia prizes such gewgaws. They are almost useless in the outside world.


PK MAMDIVMED






Posted by The Anti-Yale on November 14, 2010 at 3:03 p.m.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

* Tell and Get Out ?




Coming out, then to Yale


 Comments:

A courageous position; a courageous person.

Why does America have to be dragged kicking and screaming into living up to the ALL in "all persons are created equal"?

And (not to open another controversy) why can't we agree on the definition of "person" in the first place ---- from Dredd Scott to Roe vs. Wade?

And why is all pursuit of justice so confounded SLOW and PAINFUL?

PK

 Posted by theantiyale on September 1, 2010 at 5:15 a.


"Courageous?" Yes, in a way.

But also disobedient, even of rules that do not "compromise" her ethics, e.g.,

"Service members are also forbidden from giving interviews in uniform."

Whatever. She's perfect for Yale, indeed, tailor-made.


 Posted by Hieronymus on September 1, 2010 at 11:05 a.m.


PK wrote "Why does America have to be dragged kicking and screaming into living up to the ALL in "all persons are created equal"? "

Yes, let us single out America for its resistance to equality. America is so far behind its peers that it is disgusting. I mean, just look at its peers on the UN Human Rights Council, members such as China, India, much of the Muslim world, Angola, Russia: heck, how can Americans even hold their heads up?

Thank you PK for pointing out the backwardness, the monoculture, the utter lack of equality and "justice" afforded by our rag of a Constitution and the legal system stemming therefrom. Only a true patriot such as yourself could aim us toward the proper level of self-loathing. Huzzah!

Posted by Hieronymus on September 1, 2010 at 11:10 a.m.


Give me a break Hieronymus. No country you mentioned had a Supreme Court which made the selling of human beings LEGAL.

This sin is unSURPASSED in human history. Perhaps equalled by the death camps and quiet genocides of the past ; but, none of those heinous acts were publically declared by the supreme judicial body of the land as LEGAL behavior. As for gays: A kind of perverse egalitarianism exists among countries there----homosexuals seem to have been hated equally.

PK


Posted by theantiyale on September 1, 2010 at 5:47 p.m.


PS

What's a "true patriot" Hieronymus? A U.S. Senator from Connecticut who, as a Yalie, stole an Apache Cheiftain's skull for fun? A Yale professor who stole for Academia the artifacts of an ancient people of color? The Yale administrators which condoned the construction by slaves of campus buildings?

PK

Posted by theantiyale on September 1, 2010 at 6:23 p.m.


Katie Miller ’12 left West Point in opposition to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy.

Photo by Eva Galvan.
By Juliana Hanle
The Yale Daily News

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

When Katie Miller ’12 met her suitemates last week, she had to introduce herself with a reporter from The Hartford Courant in tow.

Miller transferred to Morse College this year from the United States Military Academy at West Point in reaction to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, which bans service members from openly displaying their homosexual orientation or homosexual behaviors. Miller, who identifies as a lesbian, said she wanted her resignation to have an impact, and since she posted her resignation letter on an anonymous blog she had been keeping since May, her story has drawn national attention.

“I felt I was in a position where I could make a change,” she said in an interview with the News. “I didn’t want to walk away from West Point with my head down.”

Now, she has been interviewed by The New York Times, the Rachel Maddow Show, NPR, The Los Angeles Times and ABC News. Today she talks with the BBC.

“Everything just sort of blew up at the exact same time,” she said. “How ironic that [the discipline of West Point training] prepares me for situations like this.”

Video
Cadet at Yale.


Katie Miller '12, a lesbian transfer student from West Point, discusses the media buzz surrounding her transition and her goals at Yale.
DECIDING TO LEAVE

Miller takes her training very seriously. News reports often introduce her by her class rank (ninth out of 1,157) and her GPA (3.829).

Miller said in an interview that she was attracted to West Point for its holistic educational approach, which helped her to grow academically, athletically and “militaristically,” she said. But emotionally, Miller said she felt stunted, leading a double life. She said she had to substitute male pronouns when describing a relationship with an ex-girlfriend. In her resignation letter, she said the stress of realizing she wanted to leave kept her awake at night for an entire semester, calling it “constant cognitive dissonance.” These lies, she said, compromised her integrity, a key pillar of the academy’s honor code.

The one other West Point transfer currently enrolled in Yale, Max Hendrickson ’11, attested to the seriousness of that code.

“I lied about changing my socks, and I got reported,” he said. “By my roommate, actually. I almost got kicked out for not changing my socks.”

He said he could barely think of a single similarity between Yale and West Point.

At the academy, Miller discovered other LGBT cadets living in a covert social scene. She played on the rugby team and during matches met a few lesbians from other schools — including Yale.

In the summer before a West Point cadet’s junior year, he or she must sign a contract committing to seven years in uniform, Miller said. She said she started seriously considering a transfer last winter, though she said she had tooled with the idea during her freshman year.

Before attending a dinner in late March during an internship in Washington, D.C. with the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, an organization that supports LGBT people who serve or have served in the military, she contacted Knights Out, an organization of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender West Point graduates and allies, and requested seating at their table.

Sue Fulton, co-founder of Knights Out and their current spokeswoman, said she became Miller’s “sounding board” for her future college (and military) plans. After Miller decided she would leave West Point publicly, Fulton said she used the media contacts of Knights Out to help Miller publicize her departure.

Miller’s story is especially powerful, Fulton said, because of her achievements at West Point prior to her resignation.

“The notion that there are gays in the military and that they can succeed still comes as a surprise to some people,” Fulton said.

Knights Out does not actively encourage cadets to “come out” and leave the Army, and allows cadets to join as only LGBT allies, Fulton said. She called Miller’s resignation a “tragedy” because the Army lost “a great potential officer.”

GOING OUT WITH A BANG

Before her resignation was officially accepted, Miller remained at West Point, where she had to complete routine cadet duties while also busily giving interviews.

The night she appeared on the Rachel Maddow Show, Miller was running late from dinner. In 10 minutes, she set up a webcam, posted a friend to guard the door, threw on a fresh uniform, and shushed some fellow cadets hiding in the corner of her room. An hour later they watched her face on TV.

“I was slightly traumatized by what I did,” Miller said. “We were just packing tobacco — I was so stressed out.”

In fact, Miller was disobeying orders from West Point, which had forbidden her from doing the interview after another student passed word of the interview to the administration. Service members are also forbidden from giving interviews in uniform.

Still, after the incident, Miller continued to give interviews with news outlets without disciplinary consequences. When a reporter from NPR called at a scheduled time, Miller had to ask for two minutes to sprint across campus for privacy in a vacant room.

Miller said she received largely supportive reactions from friends. There were a few nasty e-mails — not about her sexuality, but about the publicity she purposefully courted.

According to Miller, the officer reviewing her resignation thought Miller was “throwing her life away.” She recalled that he thought she should be able to sacrifice a small portion of her life to remain in the service.

West Point did not respond to an e-mail request for comment sent Sunday.

Hendrickson, Fulton and Nicholas Leppla ’11 , who transferred to Yale from the United States Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md., all emphasized that the military is not inherently homophobic.

“I frankly don’t think the proportion of outwardly bigoted people is any more in the military,” Hendrickson said.

Miller said that after she came out at West Point, some of her fellow cadets approached her and apologized that she had needed to keep her sexuality a secret.

COMING TO YALE

Miller said she hopes to explore her lesbian identity, now that she is free to do so, at Yale.

“I heard Yale was friendly to the LGBT community and I wanted to learn about myself that way,” she said. “I wanted to flourish because I’ve been repressed.”

Miller said she is considering the idea of picking up rugby at Yale after playing during her freshman year at West Point. Sophia Shapiro ’11, who is on the board of the LGBT co-op and is a co-captain of the women’s rugby club, said the team is welcoming.

“Everyone is really proud of what Katie has done,” said Shapiro, who met Miller at a rugby party last year.

However, it was Yale’s ability to challenge Miller academically and prepare her to be a leader of social change that really drew her here, Miller said. She was majoring in sociology at West Point and will continue to do so at Yale.

Miller calls her time at Yale so far “a whirlwind — seeing the openness of culture, not just in sociability, but in a diversity of thought.”

She has said in earlier interviews that were “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to be repealed, she would immediately apply for readmission. In her interview with the News, she said that she wants to keep her options open and would consider the Reserve Officer Training Corps at Yale. (In November, 2009, University Secretary Linda Lorimer said Yale would pursue the creation of an ROTC program on campus if “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” were repealed.)

“We know that [Miller] will serve her country in one way or another,” Fulton said.

Correction: Sept. 1, 2010

An earlier version of this article misstated the class year of Sophia Shapiro '11, as well as her position on the women's rugby team. Shapiro is a current, not a former, co-captain.

More like this story
West Point transfer Miller '12 garners national attenton
Dr. Ruth promises lifetime of ‘good sex’
In small ROTC corps, focus and discipline
Less than stellar behavior in our military
I didn't have a dinner invitation, but I did have a press pass

Monday, August 16, 2010

* Grave-Misconduct

Judge dismisses Apache suit against Skull and Bones 

By Nora Caplan-Bricker
Staff Reporter

Montgomery Burns of The Simpsons: the most famous Yale Skull and Bonesman
The Yale Daily News
Geronimo's Grave
Two future U.S. Presidents and a Grave Robber (?) and wives
Published Monday, August 9, 2010

It looks like the public will not be learning any times soon whether the secret society Skull and Bones keeps an Apache warrior's skull in its tomb.

A District of Columbia judge on July 27 dismissed a case that had been brought against the mysterious society, as well as the University and senior members of the U.S. government, in February 2009. The plaintiffs are 20 descendants of the legendary Native American chieftain Geronimo hoping to reclaim their...


#1 By Long live the lawyer 5:44a.m. on August 10, 2010


Ramsey Clark fought for the Kent State issue 40 years ago and is still going strong. Long live the lawyer!

PK
M.Div.'80

#2 By I know it's summer... 12:24p.m. on August 10, 2010

...but come on:
Slobodan Milošević

#3 By Coit 2:23p.m. on August 10, 2010

Keys has it.

#4 By Pasta Keane 8:58p.m. on August 11, 2010

Ahhhh the long hibernation is over. I look forward to waking up to some nice AntiPasta

#5 By radical civil libertarian? 6:42a.m. on August 13, 2010

shadowpress.org ends a long piece on Ramsey Clark with the following question. (Can they actually believe in a conspiritorial view of history? Maybe he's just a radical civil libertarian.)

PK
M.Div.'80

"What is Ramsey Clark: dupe, kook or spook? Has a well-intentioned but none-too-bright Clark been duped by the WWP cadre? Or has his reasoning become unhinged for reasons of personal psychology? Or, is he a deep-cover spook, whose real Devil's pact is with sinister elements of the US intelligence community, his mission to divide and discredit any resistance to Washington's war moves?

You decide." shadowpress.org

#6 By Y10 6:47p.m. on August 13, 2010

@Coit: says who?

#7 By aaron 10:24p.m. on August 13, 2010

let me get my thoughts together and write my response. never in my life have i felt the need to respond to something as to what i feel. what has happened to this country? being half native american, this is clearly a mistake.

#8 By @6 6:20a.m. on August 15, 2010

Maybe Scroll and Key, another secret society.

#9 By mark albino 11:38a.m. on August 16, 2010

What is wrong with this country! Native American Indian or not he was still an American and a human being. No one has the right to own someones remains. They should be returned to the family for proper burial! I guess because it is Yale and the people there think they are privileged and entitled they can do anything they want. The judge is wrong and should do the right thing and force skull and bones to return Geronimo's remains back to his family! If not, then his family has the same right to desecrate not only the judges family remains but the Bush family and all those involved as well. Maybe after this their feelings of entitlement will change!

#10 By Wag 12:17p.m. on August 16, 2010

Is the judge who made this ruling a member of this "secret" society? Just wondering...

#11 By Grave-Misconduct 9:00p.m. on August 16, 2010

@ #9

The white man's religion hasn't done much better: their own God's body was stolen from its tomb at the Garden at Calvary; grave robbery extends as far down the centuries as Dickens's Jerry Cruncher in A Tale of Two Cities.

And grave-misconduct with the remains of the dead has its most shocking example right into this very year of 2010 with the mislabelling and downright loss of thousands of soldiers' bodies at Arlington National Cemetery.

The members of Skull and Bones would treat the remains of Yale's BULLDOG with more respect than they have bragged about treating the skull of Geronimo.

And this is considered to be the legendary(but historical) Yale practical joke of the grandfather of TWO Presidents of the United States!?

We steal the Indian's land; we exterminate his people; we rob his graves; and then we send our children to Yale to learn how to trivialize these events.

Proud to be an American.

PK



#12 By Correction 9:33p.m. on August 16, 2010

PS
I should have said "grandfather and father of TWO Presidents of the United States" not "the grandfather of TWO Presidents of the United States". (Even that correction sounds odd, as if he fathered TWO and grandfathered TWO. Oh well, the limits of language.)
PK

#13 By med '10 3:09a.m. on August 17, 2010

And Yale Medical students used to steal the bodies of New Haven citizens to practice upon. Is PK going to get on his high horse over that? If you hate Yale so much, why do you continually post nonsense here? Really, go bother Harvard or something.


#14 By Ghoulish 1:21p.m. on August 17, 2010

@ Yale Med '10

Many of my relatives, descended from my great grandmother five removed, who was a Pequot squaw, have been buried in New Haven or nearby over the last century, so I am certainly willing to get on my high horse about Yale med students stealing New Haven bodies for research.

Ghoulish.

(Like drinking out of Geronimo's skull).

And BTW, no one FORCES you or anyone else to read my posts. If you and Yale are "bothered" by them, the "bother" is self-imposed.

Just ignore them.

I hope if anyone with my name ever comes under your care -- or knife --that you will be professional and put your "botheredness" aside.

Solzhenitsyn's motto is on the masthead of my blog, The Anti-Yale: ("Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful." Proverbs 27:6.)

I don’t hate Yale:I hate Yale’s self-intoxication ( much as a son hates not his mother but her alcoholism).

PK
M.Div. ‘80



#15 By Easy 1:43p.m. on August 18, 2010

You know what would get a real investigation done quickly?

Protests here on the campus.


#16 By Invite 5:44p.m. on August 18, 2010

How about inviting the descendants of Geronimo to campus to request the skull in person?

PK


#17 By AC 12:19a.m. on August 19, 2010

There's absolutely no way that any judge is going to rule in favor of the Native Americans. Their case is based on a LEGEND. They don't have any proof whatsoever. The words "innocent until proven guilty" come to mind. Ridiculous.

Ramsey isn't a kook, he's just taking these Apaches for the proverbial ride. I bet he's loving raking in his hefty retainer!

#18 By Pro Bono 6:24a.m. on August 19, 2010

@ 17

Stop speculating and paste this url into your browser search window and watch Ramsey Clark speak about the case himself on this Youtube clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x94KVMAFWEY

You don't understand civil libertarians if you think he's getting a big fat fee. Just type in a google search for "ramsey clark pro bono" and see what comes up.

PK

#19 By Y2010 7:44a.m. on August 19, 2010

I would be upset by this ruling if I believed Skull and Bones actually had the skull.

They don't have it.


#20 By What was going on at Yale 100 years ago! 12:38p.m. on August 20,
2010

Let me get this straight.

In the same list of contents for this YDS on-line edition I see that on the hundredth anniversary of Geronimo's death (Feb. 17, 2009) a Yale secret society is being sued for recovery of Geronimo's grave-robbed skull; and on the hundredth
anniversary of Yale Professor Bingham's discovery of the treasures at Machu Picchu Yale itself is being sued for recovery of those Inca artifacts.

What was going on at Yale 100 years ago that made Yalie's (both undergraduate and faculty) think it was OK to steal?

Could it be that people of red and brown skin were not seen as human and therefore not embraced by the long WHITE Judeo-Christian arm of the Ten Commandments?

Ironic since the authors of the Decalogue ( the Ten Commandments) had browner skin than Obama.

Give the skull back. Give the artifacts back. And maybe Yale should give whatever buildings were built by slaves back. (But to whom?)

In any of these three instances, has any spokesperson thought of simply offering a sincere apology?

Oh, an apology suggests guilt.

Can't do that.

PK



#21 By Y10 12:36p.m. on August 21, 2010

There are actually a lot of bones in Skull and Bones. Maybe they just can't keep track, you know.

Scroll and Key's not that big on bones-- they're much more into intellectually ethereal stuff, so I doubt they have it.

#22 By Yalie 4:19p.m. on August 21, 2010

@ PK

Take a bit of your own advice and stop speculating yourself. You're wasting your time crying for the return of items which have not even been shown to be stolen in the first place.

Maybe you should start asking Santa to give back all of those milk and cookies while you're at it?

#23 By Santa under oath 5:12p.m. on August 21, 2010

The point of Ramsey Clark's suit is to compel testimony under oath. Then the speculating stops. Even Santa tells the truth under oath: No, Virginia.

PK


#24 By Yalie 3:05p.m. on August 23, 2010

Oh yes! I've heard that even O.J. Simpson tells the truth under oath.

#25 By Cross-examined 6:23a.m. on August 24, 2010

@ 24

CROSS-EXAMINED under oath.

PK




* McChrystal Blue


Old Blue Eyes
McChrystal to teach graduate-level seminar


By Nora Caplan-Bricker
Staff Reporter
The Yale Daily News
Published Monday, August 16, 2010

Retired four-star Gen. Stanley McChrystal, dismissed in June from his post in Afghanistan, is coming to teach at Yale this school year.

McChrystal, who was relieved of his duty after he and his staff insulted top White House officials in a Rolling Stone magazine article, served in the military for 34 years and was chosen to command U.S. Forces in Afghanistan because of his expertise in counterinsurgency strategy. He will teach a graduate-level seminar in leadership to students studying international relations. Jim Levinsohn, director of the new Jackson Institute for Global Affairs,...

#1 By JP 12:32p.m. on August 16, 2010

Barf!

#2 By ExStr8 1:02p.m. on August 16, 2010

Wow! You think McChrystal is gonna 'fess up about his role in the distortion of the cause(s) of Pat Tillman's death?



Perhaps he and Tony Blair could lead a seminar on dissembling...

#3 By Yale11 1:12p.m. on August 16, 2010

He is a retired four-star General, not a five star.

#4 By A Journalistic Prophylactic on the Pentagon 1:28p.m. on August 16, 2010

I'm all for this appointment. Seriously.



While Obama was correct in dismissing him for defying ["disrespecting"] civilian control of the military, the General, through "Rolling Stone," performed a service to the public in letting us know how haphazard and uncoordinated civilian control of military policy really is.



This cost him his neck and caused Defense Secretary Gates to install a journalistic profylactic on the Pentagon. But Truth was served.



If a Prime Minister who walked lock-step with President Bush in invading Iraq and sending thousands of young men and women to their deaths can teach THEOLOGY at Yale, then a General whose greatest offense was hanging-out the White House's dirty international underwear in public, ought to be able to teach International Leadership at Yale. Of course, he may have signed a prior-agreement not to speak in public on certain issues if he retired with full pomp and honor (which he did). If so, his value at Yale may be pre-gagged.



Just wondering about Yale and other famous resignees.

Was Nixon invited by Yale to teach on Tragic Flaws?

Or how about The Duke of Windsor? Was he invited to teach on Romantic Love(or Fashion)?

Helen Thomas on Middle Eastern Affairs?

And of course, General Mac Arthur. What would he have taught (besides Style)?

Nuclear Border Control in the Third World?



PK
M. Div.'80


#5 By y11 2:30p.m. on August 16, 2010

Awesome. Haters gonna hate, but this is sick.

#6 By Boola '66 2:31p.m. on August 16, 2010

A real coup for Yale. I'd rather Gen. McChrystal was still in uniform and Afghanistan, of course.

#7 By Anonymous 2:59p.m. on August 16, 2010

The man does know leadership better than most as well as being pretty experienced with international relations. He's also played a clear and high-level role in some of the most important conflicts in recent memory.

How is this anything but a great opportunity for students at Yale to learn from someone worth learning from?

#8 By Rush to Judgement 3:13p.m. on August 16, 2010
I wonder if he realizes that he's entering an area more hostile to the US military and it's members than Afghanistan ever could be? What could he possibly think he'll gain from lecturing at Joe Stalin U ? Just the first four comments should be enough to realize he's done before he ever get's to open his mouth.

#9 By Bull Dog 4:12p.m. on August 16, 2010

OK Yalies, in the spirit of academic freedom, don't let Gen. McCrystal off the hook in asking the tough questions in his class. Questions that a sycophantic and star-struck press and government establishment may not feel the need to ask.

Questions on media relations, truth being the first casualty of war, etc.

#10 By Y'12 4:12p.m. on August 16, 2010

Absolutely awesome.

#11 By Mike 4:36p.m. on August 16, 2010

I am quite confident that the good General can more than take care of himself. As noted before, he does have the advantage of experience, as opposed to theory.

#12 By @ #8 4:44p.m. on August 16, 2010
Given the choice between someone shooting their mouth off at me or shooting their AK at me, I'll take someone shooting their mouth off at me any day of the week. I imagine he'll be just fine.

#13 By Done? 5:00p.m. on August 16, 2010 @ 8

"Done"? Not at all. I am serious when I think he will make a valuable contribution to campus debate. But you can't expect that he will be seen in a vacuum. His role as Petraeus's second-in-command in Iraq and his cavalier, macho comments to Rolling Stone won't evaporate simply because he has a Yale lectureship.

PK



#14 By Recent Alum 7:14p.m. on August 16, 2010

Nice to see a true patriot will be teaching at Yale. The double standard shown by the Left in their criticisms of McChrystal is astounding. The man would be seen as a hero by the media, Hollywood and most of the Yale community if he had made similar comments to Rolling Stone during the Bush Presidency.

#15 By @ #14 12:44a.m. on August 17, 2010

Very well said, and very accurate

#16 By @ 14 7:58a.m. on August 17, 2010

Agreed, but I hope that those who criticize are the right are considered just as patriotic.

#17 By George 10:23a.m. on August 17, 2010

A true American hero who has devoted his career to defending freedom. Yale should be congratulated on this appointment.

#18 By Wag 11:09a.m. on August 17, 2010

No one can say that Yale's choices aren't controversial. Keeps life interesting...
Who is next? Abedinijad?

#19 By Carwygyd 11:43a.m. on August 17, 2010

Just wait till he makes the same comments about Richard Levin in the Rumpus.

#20 By ???? 1:29p.m. on August 17, 2010

This is Bizzare. Are they attempting to bribe the unemployed anti-obama, right wing, puppet with a job ? Yale does not need people like this. I think Obama should be given work at Yale.

#21 By ???? 1:31p.m. on August 17, 2010

The man is an anti-obama, self admitted homophobe and we want this guy at Yale ? He needs to reach out more to the GLBTPQ community first.

#22 By @#20, 21 6:35p.m. on August 17, 2010

I'm going to guess you're not a Yalie, so maybe you shouldn't use "we."


#23 By @ #21 6:51p.m. on August 17, 2010

I truly hope you're kidding.

He isn't hear to teach about liberal policies. Or sexual issues. He's coming to teach leadership and international relations, which he has a great deal of experience in.

Yale evidently needs more people like this, if only to expose people like you to the reality that someone can be a good man able to teach people many things while not holding exactly the same beliefs you hold.

#24 By b74 1:28p.m. on August 18, 2010

I am very glad to here he is coming to Yale. He will be great for the students who have the good luck to get in his course.

He may also want to do the other side of the academic experience and take a course regarding primacy of civilian control over the military, and Handling the Press 101. :)
But yes, very glad he is coming.

#25 By j87 3:24p.m. on August 18, 2010

Yale even more than before adores having here people who have been in the headlines. John Negroponte, who was one of the architects of the massacre of peasants deemed left-wing by the U.S. administration, came to teach. Tony Blair showed up every couple of weeks to free-associate on "faith and politics." Etc. If Pinochet were still alive, he would be a logical person to appear in New Haven to participate in the "Grand Strategy" seminar. It is all very sad.

#26 By h99 4:09p.m. on August 18, 2010

Perhaps Gen. McChrystal might invite the parents of the former NFL football player, Pat Tillman, who died in a "friendly fire" episode in Iraq, so he and they could discuss McChrystal's leadership strategy of dissembling and prevarication in trying to hide the cause of Tillman's death because the Army, and McChrystal, feared it would compromise then shaky public support for the Iraq war.

Leadership requires honesty and fortitude, and Gen. McChrystal's public evasions and cowardice in the Tillman death ought to make anyone wonder about his capacity to teach a graduate course on "leadership" at Yale or anywhere.

#27 By @26 6:51p.m. on August 18, 2010

Perhaps he should just teach a small seminar for senior administrators...

#28 By @ #26 8:41p.m. on August 18, 2010

I would have preferred the Army was honest in its original report on Tillman's death but to imply that invalidates his ability to effectively teach on leadership is a severe leap.

It could have been he was ordered to, and while he could have argued that was an unlawful order, it was a pretty inconsequential one compared to the fact that he has soldiers dying every day and a war to fight.

Or maybe his intention, though revealed to be flawed, was to spare the family the horror of friendly-fire taking Pat.

Or possibly he just calculated that, yes, the public opinion would wane sufficiently and that would jeopardize the mission, and consequently would leave many good people in harms way if that mission were prematurely aborted. Would that be so horrifying? On the one hand, emotional pain for the family, yet on the other, many lives at stake?

If you're looking for perfection in a leader, you're going to be looking for a long time.

#29 By Honesty? 8:53p.m. on August 18, 2010

@ # 26

"Leadership requires honesty and fortitude . . ."

Fortitude yes. Honesty---not so sure. Nixon could never have been elected if he campaigned on making friends with "communist China". (They've even made an opera about that!) Reagan almost the same----only "it was "communist USSR". Johnson could NEVER have been elected president to pass civil rights legislation; his ability to do so was made possible through his elevation-by-assassination. In a way, the civil rights laws were cloaked in the sheep's clothing of a memorial to JFK.

So my hunch is honesty is a dubious prerequisite for leadership.

Playing your cards close to your chest is a more liely prerequisite.

PK

#30 By @h99 9:04p.m. on August 18, 2010

Seems he'll do well at Yale, considering the public evasion and cowardice Yale has shown in regards to Muslim threats.

#31 By Harvard and Hauser 4:56p.m. on August 19, 2010

Hello, YDN? I know it's summer, but are you paying attention to the Marc Hauser scandal at Harvard? You would do well to look at his collaborations and do some digging closer to home.

#32 By THE AFGHANISTAN SONG 9:04p.m. on August 19, 2010

AFGHANISTAN!!! AFGHANISTAN!!!!!!

#33 By ? 10:07p.m. on August 20, 2010

What are his academic teaching credentials? I'm not saying he doesn't have any, I'm just wondering whether he's been through something similar to TA positions and the tenure track to learn the ropes of teaching to university students as opposed to military contexts.

#34 By JS McGuire 2:39a.m. on August 21, 2010

Have one of those bright students ask McChrystal about his roll in the Pat Tillman affair, unless of course that is too upsetting for everyone.

#35 By Harvard? 5:17p.m. on August 21, 2010

@ 31

Marc Huaser "science misconduct" at Harvard is right up there with Professor Bingham's Machu Picchu (sp?) misconduct at Yale---just 100 years apart.

PK

#36 By #36 6:38p.m. on August 24, 2010

Idiots on this board think that McCrystal was in charge of American policy rather than executing the policy and leading the military. The man in charge of policy is Obama, who the media and the communists at Yale blindly adore.

#37 By Walking the plank 8:50p.m. on August 24, 2010

@ 36:

The charming thing about McCrystal is that in his final incarnation he WASN'T blindly following the rhetoric of Obama (and certainly not of Biden or Holbrook). He was doing what all good revolutionaries do: subverting from within.

Too bad he outted himself in Rolling Stone. (Freud would have something to say about that.)

He had no choice but to walk the plank after that.

PK

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

* MYOB : Don't be Stuffy!


Slifka's Ponet '68 officiates Clinton wedding


By Sam Greenberg
Staff Reporter
The Yale Daily News
Published Sunday, August 1, 2010


Updated, August 2, 2010: The Slifka Center’s own Rabbi James Ponet '68 officiated at Chelsea Clinton’s uber-hyped wedding at an estate in Rhinebeck, N.Y., on Saturday, according to multiple news outlets.



The Clinton family tried to keep the details of the event secret from everyone but the hundreds of guests in attendance, who included Ponet, Yale’s Jewish chaplain and director of the Joseph Slifka Center. He was joined by Rev. William Shillady in leading the interfaith ceremony between Clinton, who is Methodist, and her Jewish husband, Marc Mezvinsky.



“It was a...

#1 By Joanna Wurzler 8:04p.m. on August 1, 2010

They look so beautiful and so much in love.

Joanna Wurzler,

Tampa,FL

#2 By Xan Tanner 8:26a.m. on August 2, 2010

They really do. It makes me believe Love is REAL! And Marc really did look handsome.

#3 By Yale 08 9:46a.m. on August 2, 2010

How exactly do you conduct a Jewish-Methodist wedding?

#4 By natalie 11:22a.m. on August 2, 2010

We are all God's children. Mazel Tov to the newlyweds.

#5 By Recent Alum 12:48p.m. on August 2, 2010

An atheist from a Jewish background marries an atheist from a Methodist background in a wedding that makes a mockery of both religious traditions. One wishes that the couple at least had the decency to make this a purely secular wedding... but then again, decency and Clinton have never gone too well together.

#6 By Alum '04 1:47p.m. on August 2, 2010

Rabbi Ponet is great--mazel tov to all.

#7 By Marta 5:41p.m. on August 2, 2010

How come a rabbi desecrates the Shabbat in a public mock-wedding?

There is a sense of decency in reform rabbis in Israel. There are don'ts

They could have a civil and nice ceremony, they could have a Methodist ceremony, but not a Jewish "wedding". Rabbi Ponet has hurt the kavod of the reform movement.

#8 By Really Yale... 6:58p.m. on August 2, 2010

...THIS is news?

#9 By Stuffy 7:55p.m. on August 2, 2010

@ # 5 "makes a mockery of both religious traditions"

Stuffy?
"Religious traditions" were created by human beings, so why can't they be revised or amalgamated by human beings?

PK
M.Div. '80

#10 By Cyndalah 8:19p.m. on August 2, 2010

When I was married over 30 years ago, I was a devout Methodist, marrying into a very Conserva-dox family. I became a Jew by Choice when I was ready to do so on my own terms. What I would like to relay as being in an inter-faith marriage, the couple, not the lives of the parents are the important ones. If these two adults appeased their families, it's on their heads. Somehow they will find the path for their siritual happiness, hopefully with a common religin that will lead them, if and when they plan a family. Having this spiritualness is their business....have they actually proclaimed that they are atheists? It's not fair to judge them on their family's history..they are entitled to their own.



Mozel Tov to the newlyweds! May they have a happy and joyous life together, that's the key to their future. They deserve to have their privacy, although we really want to know how the wedding and festivities went:))When you're Jewish you want to know everything!! Just ask any Jewish Mother-In Law!!

#11 By joerlivstja 10:18p.m. on August 2, 2010

What gives anyone the right to judge or dictate by what traditions people should get married?! Isn't it possible that Chelsea and Marc are deeply in love, but their own religious traditions are also important to them?! They seem to love and respect each other and respect each other's religious traditions. You should try it sometime.

#12 By Yale 08 10:18a.m. on August 3, 2010

@#10- so you were a "devout Methodist" but gave up Jesus to become Jewish? How does that square with Methodism?



@#11- we all have the responsibility to use right reason to judge the prudence of the actions of others. That is what people do in civilized society.



Unless you want to ask for a definition of "is"...

#13 By yale10 10:46a.m. on August 3, 2010

Marta- how dare you assume and jump to conclusions. The ceremony took place early Saturday evening, at the end of Shabbat and was done tastefully and with absolute respect for Jewish traditions. Rabbi Ponet holds his own and his community's Jewish beliefs in high regard and has done them proud.


#14 By YaleAlum 11:16a.m. on August 3, 2010


I am disgusted by those who feel the need to ridicule Rabbi Ponet for giving Marc a Jewish wedding that fit his life and was no doubt meaningful to him. What has made Rabbi Ponet such a successful leader of Yale's Jewish community and doubtlessly is a reason why the Clintons selected him for their wedding is the way he manages to make Judaism relevant and meaningful to people from all types of backgrounds and in different religious situations.





#15 By Slifka Boy 11:52a.m. on August 3, 2010
@#14,

Judaism isn't meant to be "relevant"

The world was already old when the covenant was made.

#16 By Perfect Post 12:43p.m. on August 3, 2010

Many posters here are critical of the groom. The groom, unfortunately, knows very little about his Jewish heritage. He proudly wore his "talit" and a "kippah", and believes that he fuffilled the Jewish requirements. The "Rabbi", however, does know better. Regardless of his own background, he knows that most Reform clergymen, will not perform weddings on Shabbat. Many others, will still not perform an intermarriage.. By lending his imprimatur, he is, in effect, teaching the groom, that his actions are acceptable. So, a 4,000 year old chain is broken.

Shame on you, "Rabbi" Ponet. For a brief moment in the limelight, you've broken our chain. From Avraham to Moses, to King David, Ezra, the Maccabees, through the Roman Exile, Crusades, Inquisitions, Pogroms, and to the crematoria and back, we've survived as Jews, And now, thanks to you, the Mezvinsky branch of Jews, has reached a dead end. Shame! Shame ! Shame!

#17 By Communist/REALDemocrat 2:27p.m. on August 3, 2010

The only "wedding" they should have had was a certificate from the government (no religion) and there should have been a party open to all Workers ! and no food except that given to them by the glorious government ! Van Jones should have presided over the ceremony as well and there should be a bust of obama, Mao, Lenin and Stalin to watch over the event ! Shame on these burgoise hypocrite hippies. Up the Protelatariat ! Down with DINO clintons wealth !

#18 By Star 4:11p.m. on August 3, 2010

Yale10: Marta was correct & I wondered the same question. Shabbat ended at or after 8:58pm (local time). Numerous reports said that the wedding concluded before the end of Shabbat (including an official email that was sent announcing the conclusion of the wedding and the newly married couple status). Notwithstanding the media reports, one look at the photos of the couple post wedding vows shows sunlight on everyone. If the wedding occurred after sundown plus 1 hour (which is the conclusion of Shabbat), it would have been dark outside.

#19 By cc'09 4:44p.m. on August 3, 2010

lovely ketubah

#20 By WakeUp 6:24p.m. on August 3, 2010

Rabbi Ponet is a great guy, but I'll bet you the service went on so long that Roger Clinton had to call his narc-anon sponsor.

#21 By Steven 7:32a.m. on August 4, 2010

In my opinion as a Jew, I believe that their wedding ceremony and the Rabbi that officiated created a desecration of G-d's name and Judaism. The Reform rabbinical seminary and movement supposedly "sanctifies" and sanctions something that is against the precise wording of the Bible itself from which Judaism's laws directly came from. That the Reform institution approbates and sanctions interfaith marriages is a slap in the face of the Bible and G-d's words to Moses. This is written in the Bible clear as day , that this kind of marriage union is gravely prohibited for Jews and the Bible and its laws to the Jews has been believed to have been given by G-d himself - despite the seemingly widely and falsely believed claim that the Rabbi and they were doing the "right" thing by "Jewish" law.

#22 By Lee Smith 1:31p.m. on August 5, 2010

A further step in the deterioration of rational categories and meaningful differences --- it's the law of entropy in action. It takes energy and motivation to preserve differences such as Judaism and Christianity, but in the absence of effort, things blend together, ice melts, Shabbat becomes just another day, walls tumble, and bland sameness is created that descrates thousands of years of effort to maintain meaningful distinctions. A local "kosher-style" deli had bagels hanging on the Xmas tree one year --- no doubt we will find a similar tree in the Yale Jewish center this December, being decorated merrily by Rabbi Ponet. And while we are at it, lets give yale grads the same salaries as GED recepients, after all -- all is the same and there are no meaningful differences.

#23 By Andi 1:44p.m. on August 5, 2010

As a Jewish women, brought up in a Conservative Synagogue, whose grandparents were orthodox, I find everyone's narrow minded opinion the reason the Jewish people are diminishing in number. We have become intolerant, unforgiving, and judgmental. Is that what G-d wants? Seems to me, that isn't in the Torah anywhere. If we take everything that literally, we all need to sacrifice our eldest son, to see if G-d provides a ram instead. Does everyone leave the 4 corners of their land unharvested to be left for the poor? And do we pay all labor at the end of each day of work? I guess maybe we are all "cafeteria" Jews who do what is convenient for ourselves, and decide what others are supposed to do. I say Mazel Tov to Chelsea and Marc. And let's show the world we are a tolerant people, as we expect others to be. This is 2010. Do we want Judaism to be eradicated by 2020? Let's keep this attitude up and it might be.

#24 By Precise wording @ 2l 4:35p.m. on August 6, 2010

#21 says of the wedding ceremony presided over by Rabbi Ponet: "[it goes]against the precise wording of the Bible itself from which Judaism's laws directly came from.[sic]"

No less an authority than Roland H. Bainton, Titus Street Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Yale for 42 years, author of 36 books, including the critically accalimed biography of Luther "Here I Stand" (Abingdon Press), pointed out to me in person in 1980 that Deuteronomy 20 is no less than a proof text for GENOCIDE. (So much for the authority of the Bible and rigid adherence to the text):

Deuteronomy 20:16-17 (King James Version)

"16But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:


17But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee:"

Loosen your tie a bit and lighten up.

Paul Keane
M. Div. '80




#25 By Yale 08 11:00a.m. on August 7, 2010

Andi,

The Jewish population diminishes because for most non-Orthodox Jews, their Judaism is synonymous with liberal social views. They aren't reproducing.

When your religion doesn't seek converts, and you don't have babies, then you go away...

#26 By Alum 4:22p.m. on August 8, 2010

@24. Sir: Lighten up yourself. Put aside your simplistic, out-of-context reference to Deuteronomy. A reference to the conquest of Canaan and your distaste for your understanding of it is a much different matter than adherence to basic precepts of the religion regarding the family, such as: marriage; when a "Rabbi" should participate in a marraige ceremony; and the continuation of peoplehood. The continuation of the Jewish people may or may not matter to you or Prof. Bainton. It does matter to some of the readers here.

#27 By Celebrate/Proliferate 11:49a.m. on August 9, 2010

@ # 26

I have no objection to proliferation of the Jewish people or any other people. I have great objection to mindless, rigid adherence to 2000 year old "sacred" texts, whether of the First Testament or The "Second" Testament (as my Jewish friends refer to the "New" Testament, apparently offended by Christianity's limp attempt at one-upsmanship).

Loosen that tie.

Celebrate!

Proliferate!

PK
M.Div. '80



#28 By JE '11 8:50p.m. on August 9, 2010


My parents were married in a secular ceremony because the country they lived in at the time did not permit interfaith marriages. Their marriage has lasted far longer than any of the marriages of my more conservative relations on both sides, and they've produced four good Jewish children.



I suppose many of you wouldn't consider my brothers and I Jewish. But luckily for us, we live in a country with great rabbis like Rabbi Ponet who will allow us to marry as we choose. See you next year in Jerusalem.

#29 By Veritas 2:19a.m. on August 10, 2010

At the end of the day, we're all carbon-based blobs with much less than 1% chemical variation among us, and we're trying to segregate ourselves based on tangential beliefs? We're really arguing against interfaith marriages? This is disappointing coming from anyone, but coming from this country and this school, it's not just disappointing: it's deeply embarrassing.

#30 By Yale 08 12:12p.m. on August 10, 2010

@Veritas,

Your positivism is more frightening.

#31 By #21 12:03p.m. on August 11, 2010

What else is there to expect from some graduates of this great "enlightened" "progressive" institution of higher education. In that process you never actually studied any semblance of actual religious study. You deceive yourself by concocting what you believe is true and aligns with your societally brainwashed beliefs. How about taking some good courses in the various theology departments? Most university educated Americans are completely uneducated about religion anymore - it's looked down on. No "rational" person can believe that this entire natural planet came about as a product of the big bang theory, if people would stop and think for themselves - they wouldn't be as ignorant. I'm signing off as I do not want to continue to invite "brainwashed" ignoramuses to a forum of their ignorant popular dogma. Ignorance and self imposed "feel good" popular values are bliss - I see why this country is in the kind of state that it's in. Basically it's Soddom and Gommorah. I am truly embarrassed to have people like this as citizens, neighbors, and leaders of a country whose founders and legislators were scholarly and deeply religious people at the same time - the founding fathers in today's "enlightened" and "progressive" America would be branded dangerous religion preaching and adhering fanatics.


#32 By Veritas 6:46a.m. on August 13, 2010

@#31 -- We disagree on two main points: 1. that the founding fathers would be considered dangerous and religious (they were, in fact, mostly Deists, which means they accepted the existence of a god and no more) and 2. the definition of "rational".

@Yale 08 -- Perhaps positivism is frightening, but it's useful for gaining perspective. If we're gonna restrict marriages, why not start with the more salient characteristics, like race? Anti-miscegenation laws, anyone?


#33 By A bit more. 11:09a.m. on August 14, 2010

@ 32

Not quite.
PK

de•ism
–noun
1.
belief in the existence of a god on the evidence of reason and nature only, with rejection of supernatural revelation (distinguished from theism).
2.
belief in a God who created the world but has since remained indifferent to it.

the•ism

–noun
1.
the belief in one god as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation ( distinguished from deism).
2.
belief in the existence of a god or gods ( opposed to atheism).

#34 By devil05 12:00p.m. on August 16, 2010

How could a Rabbi help officiate a wedding on the Sabbath day? It is against all Jewish law.

#35 By Veritas 2:32a.m. on August 17, 2010

@PK -- Fair. Let me rephrase that, "...which means they accepted the existence of a god but LITTLE more."

Thursday, July 29, 2010

* Race Against the Clock

Efforts intensify to find donor for Schwartz '11
By Alison Griswold
Staff Reporter
The Yale Daily News
Published Monday, June 7, 2010

Time is ticking to find a donor for Mandi Schwartz ’11, the women’s hockey forward who has battled leukemia on and off for nearly 18 months. As the search becomes increasingly critical, efforts to find Schwartz a matching marrow or cord blood donor have intensified.

“It’s pretty urgent right now,” head women’s hockey coach Hilary Witt said. “Mandi’s staying tough and doing the best she can, but it’s quite a battle for her. She’s staying as strong as she can, and she’s an...

#1 By Faculty 8:24p.m. on June 8, 2010

She took a course from me. Wonderful person -- hoping this all works out for her.

#2 By old blue 5:47p.m. on June 9, 2010

The idea of donating cord blood should be better publicized within hospitals and prenatal classes - seems like very few expectant mothers are aware of the value of these donations.

#3 By Devin 10:10p.m. on June 10, 2010

Mandi I hope you are able to find a donor.

#4 By Sarah 8:57a.m. on June 11, 2010

To old blue - the idea of collecting / donating cord blood is discussed a bit in prenatal classes. What never seems to be discussed is who would pay for the $2,000 (ish) that it costs. You might get more expectant moms to consider this if they don't have to pick up such a large expense.

#5 By Heidi 9:08a.m. on June 12, 2010

The cord blood donation in this case is free for expectant couples, thanks to the efforts of Dr. Ted Collins' foundation, Natasha's Place (www.natashasplace.org). Normally cord blood collection companies don't process the paperwork after 34 weeks gestation, but they're making an exception in this case. I am expecting any day now, and managed to get a kit delivered in just 3 days. One final hurdle is that the cord blood can't be collected between 3pm on Fri and 3pm on Sun -- doing my best not to go into labor this weekend. :)

#6 By @Sarah 11:01a.m. on June 12, 2010

I believe that the cost only applies if you intend to keep the cord blood for potential use by your own family. If you're donating it for use by others in need, I don't think there's any charge.

#7 By Bill 12:38a.m. on June 14, 2010

With her brother being a likely 2010 draft pick and the CBC and HNiC already involved, I assume that the whole NHL junior hockey community is involved. I say this because top prospect Erik Gudbranson's younger brother suffered from the same disease and I would assume that he would take a personal interest in Mandi's situation as well.

#8 By ESPN 9:25p.m. on June 15, 2010

Story featured on ESPN: http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5288507

#9 By Yalie '04 4:06p.m. on June 18, 2010

The thing that is infrequently said with respect to cord blood donation is that many collection protocols call for the cord to be clamped immediately after birth. Immediate cord clamping deprives the newborn of blood. I wonder whether the organization that is seeking cord blood donation allows delayed cord clamping (that is, until the cord stops pulsating) as part of the collection process.

#10 By Yalie MD 11:01p.m. on June 19, 2010

Yalie '04 what the hell are you talking about? The umbilical cord is clamped right after birth with no ill efects on the baby. The baby starts breathing immediately and doesn't need any oxygen from the mother after that point. The baby has its own blood and never receives any blood from the mother. It only receives oxygen from mom and this is no longer needed outside the womb where there is air available. Were you trying to say something different because your point doesn't make sense.

#11 By YDN Update 12:35p.m. on June 26, 2010

Any update on this?

#12 By @ #11 9:08p.m. on June 29, 2010

Last I heard, she's scheduled for a transplant via a partial match in early September or so. A partial match is better than nothing, but it would be very nice to find a better fit.

If you know people of Ukrainian, Russian or German heritage, mention it to them - pregnant mothers of that lineage may be able to donate cord blood and save a life.

#13 By Y2010 9:55a.m. on July 1, 2010

I know a few people of that heritage who might be willing to donate bone marrow. What information can I give them about how to register to be a donor?

#14 By @ Y2010 4:00p.m. on July 1, 2010

Even with that heritage, it's by no means likely that they're a match - but it would be fantastic if they wish to get registered. All it takes is a cheek swab. The primary source of information for registering is the National Marrow Donor Program at:

http://www.marrow.org/

From that website, they can find additional information including local drives where they can get the swab test done.

I believe in Mandi's case, since it's imminent, they're now looking for cord blood from expectant mothers. In case any of the people you know are pregnant, here's a link with more information specifically on Mandi's case:

http://www.becomemandishero.org

If you have more questions, just ask. I don't know Mandi and don't have any official information on her, but it's clearly a great and urgent cause.

(And if you're on campus I can give you some small flyers with information, too.)

#15 By Anon Mother of an Infant 3:14p.m. on July 8, 2010

At the time I was researching donation in late 2009 there were no cord blood banks in the area that would take the cord blood from my newborn as a donation. My OB even said he would be willing to waive their cord blood collection fees if they were collecting for donation, but I was unable to find a cord blood bank that accepted donor cord blood. There are plenty willing to take the blood (and substantial fees) to store for use by my own family, but I consider that to be a waste of a potentially life-saving resource (the cord blood) and a waste of money.

#16 By Yalie '04 11:21a.m. on July 12, 2010

@#10 Yalie MD: I am just now seeing your post. Immediate cord clamping deprives the newborn of blood that would otherwise flow from the placenta. (I never said anything about blood from the mother.) There are many scholarly articles that discuss the potential benefits of delayed cord clamping. Why not use your alleged physician access to read some?

#17 By Yale M.D. 9:50p.m. on July 25, 2010

Again, Yalie '04- you have no idea what you are talking about? How much blood do you think is in the placenta that doesn't get back to the baby? Not very much. OBs have been cutting the umbilical cord right after birth for time immemorial with no ill-effects on the baby. So please, enlighten me with one of these scholarly articles about delayed cord clamping and how beneficial it is. Post a link to an article so I may educate myself.

#18 By PK, M.Div. '80 6:37a.m. on July 28, 2010

Please read the following article in today's (July 28) NYT:

Questions About Yale Cancer Patient’s Benefactor
By THOMAS KAPLAN
The man spearheading the effort to help a Yale hockey player with leukemia has a tangled financial past.

Friday, July 16, 2010

* Academic Industrial Complex


250 staff laid off since May

By Vivian Yee
Staff Reporter
The Yale Daily News



When the dust from Yale's last budget shakeup has settled, the University will have laid off nearly 250 employees — and there may be more to come.

In another round of layoffs that began in May, after the Yale Corporation approved a tightened budget for the next fiscal year, University departments have accepted the voluntary resignations of about 150 staff and cut almost 100 more, University spokesman Tom Conroy said. The latest budget cuts are likely to be the last for the time being, administrators said, but as their effects play out over the next few years, more staff could lose...

#1 By Old Blue 1 12:31a.m. on July 10, 2010

Two words: Raise tuition. Especially in Yale College. Maintain the actual level of tuition for needs-based where it is. But soak the hell out of the legacies, who will pay $10,000 per year more to spare the indignity of sending their child to Penn.

#2 By GoodRiddanceToWorthless 6:44a.m. on July 10, 2010

hopefully they will cut some fat cat "professors" too !

#3 By super 12:11p.m. on July 10, 2010

Hell, cut all of the professors. Just who do they think they are believing that becoming a world expert at an elite university after earning multiple degrees over a decade or more is really worth that "fat" $50k starting salary??!!



Better to hire another admin. The students can teach themselves, what with the internet and everything these days.

#4 By Faculty 5:44p.m. on July 10, 2010

The faculty are now such a small part of the employee numbers at Yale that getting rid of ALL of us would make less difference to the bottom line than relatively modest cuts in administrative ranks.

#5 By @#4 By Faculty 9:56p.m. on July 10, 2010

You guys can't tie your shoes without an administrator, or an associate dean arranging a symposium, or turn on your computer.



There are a lot of PhDs who would take a Sterling Chair at half-price, a lot of entry levels who would give anything for a job at Yale. Slash their salaries. Bring in more grad students to do the real teaching so that you can have bigger classes.

#6 By super @#5 11:57a.m. on July 11, 2010

We can't tie our shoes without an associate dean arranging a symposium, or turn on our computer?



Well, you can't even write a coherent sentence. Next time ask a fat-cat professor to help you edit your post!



#7 By Grad student 12:32p.m. on July 11, 2010

@#5, terrible idea.

#8 By #5 2:45p.m. on July 11, 2010

Sorry you hate the faculty so much. But what you advocate would be the end of Yale as a first-class institution. May you should get a job at Q-Pac, you more comfortable with that kind of place.

#9 By 2 live students 4:08p.m. on July 11, 2010

Nobody likes to hear about lay offs, and nobody but nobody would want to see that pink slip in their hands. Handed to you by a recent hire.

We can only hope that the newly unemployed are the most recent hired, or better yet , the ones that cause so much derision , backbiting, slander , and intentionally play for a tumultuous work place, they know who they are.

It's sad that they are the privileged and connected ones. We have heard so many statements directed towards new hires and / or Non Family members , it's unbelievable how that was tolerated.

They only stop when the Nepotism is done , an office is replete with family and friends , Ala Amistad.

#10 By joey '00' 8:42p.m. on July 11, 2010

And 250 more stiffs are lined up on the wall outside Phellps on College St.

Uncanny and downright unnerving the timing of some Union people, how they pull up and meet and greet the union Official and way to chummy Administrators

As they exit the offices almost joined at the head.

#11 By Anonymous 12:42a.m. on July 12, 2010

This is a school. We need faculty and students. We don't need the hordes of people in development, middle management, IT services, etc.



Unfortunately the leadership here seems incapable of making tough decisions - cuts are 'across the board' in the same amount rather than looking at what is useful and what isn't.



#12 By #5 4:46a.m. on July 12, 2010

#8 is not #5, I think you meant @#5. Yes, that sentence could have been more coherent but it got the point across. I wasn't writing an English paper. @#5: I love the faculty. They should take pay cuts if others in the Yale community are absorbing pain. @#7: It's not a terrible idea in this market. The hiring market for you is not what it was 5 years ago. Where things come apart for Yale: when student loan interest rates go up, the tuition climbs will stop. Then the top line for the university just gets flat while expenses rise. Reopen the Kagan-Pollitt plan from 1992- shrink the weaker departments (we all know what they are) and create a smaller, finer Yale.

#13 By Faculty 9:48a.m. on July 12, 2010

Most faculty are painfully aware that in recent years, the university has been taken over by highly-paid management types whose purpose seems to be to struggle for turf with each other. I am not sure who the "fat cat" faculty are, but I know that very few of us earn anything like what the various new vice-presidents earn. Most of us earn substantially less than the *deputies* these new vice presidents bring with them.



And it is not just the cost. These people either don't "get" that it is a university, or actively oppose the basic mission of a university. So, for example, they make it harder to get grants (for no reason: they simply do not cooperate), the grants that support staff directly and indirectly. (For example, I know of some faculty who could not get one of the "stimulus package" grants submitted because the relevant Yale office refused to cooperate.)



So please direct you anger elsewhere. We are not the problem.

#14 By @13 5:01p.m. on July 12, 2010

Most students and administrators are aware that tenured professors have job security through retirement, unlike anyone else in the university. Perhaps out of equity, they could give back some their benefits, given that they have this security. Or perhaps, Yale could initiate a long-overdue wave to abolish tenure, so that we can compensate professors based on merit. Slash deadwood pay, reward productivity and maybe even... teaching ability. In other words, turn academia into a real job. "Oh Cry Me, Academic Freedom!" At what cost?



The faculty is not entirely pure here. Sorry if this anger is ruining your job-secure day, while the rest of the labor force suffers.

#15 By More faculty 7:15p.m. on July 12, 2010

All institutions change. Yale is in the currently process of moving on from being a university to being a brand-based merchandising corporation.

#16 By By @14 8:37p.m. on July 12, 2010

Twice in my career I have turned down offers in industry that would have paid me 2-3 times as much as Yale does. One reason I turned it down was, as you say, job security. But you can't have it both ways: you can't pay us less than industry because we have tenure, and then get angry that we have tenure.



Tenure is a way for a university to *save* money: it allows Yale to attract and retain people who would otherwise cost far more. Abolish it, and you have Q-Pac.



It is sad to me that someone who so hates what Yale stands for apparently works here.



I have a specific suggestion: figure out what Shauna King earns (it is public). Add to that her entire staff, and then compare it to the cost of small departments such as French literature. Which costs more? Which contributes more to the real mission of the place?



BTW, our pay was frozen last year... but the union members got their contractual wage increases.

#17 By @14 10:09p.m. on July 12, 2010

You identify a problem with this country and suggest complicity instead of improving things for everyone else? That's plain stupid, plain unpatriotic, or both. Why don't you go kick a homeless man between the legs while you're at it?



#18 By @14 9:40a.m. on July 13, 2010

To be fair it should be noted that the members of both unions are neither paid nor promoted based on merit and there's plenty of deadwood that's been protected by the unions for years.

#19 By Some animals... 11:14a.m. on July 13, 2010

"Some animals are more equal than others...."

Let us not forget to discuss the fallout from all these departures. The process for consolidating or replacing all the vacancies has settled into the hands of just a few people at this university. These are people whose primary motivation is to justify their existence by manipulating outcomes. Vacant positions aren't even posted at this point, instead favorites are moved around like chess pieces. If you aren't a handpicked BOLT favorite then you're screwed, no matter how good you are.



Time for everyone to revisit "Animal Farm" for a quick read, because Yale is the living breathing model of organizational corruption.

#20 By Hey! 3:34p.m. on July 13, 2010

Tenured faculty are just a part of the faculty population. All the other faculty are just as vulnerable to exploitation as everyone else--worse in fact, since they've set themselves up to be exploited in hopes of getting tenure. Anyone can see how difficult it must be to spend years striving so hard only to get knocked down when you don't get tenure. At least as an M&P, you don't have to put quite so much of yourself on the line. Look, the current situation really sucks for everyone but those belonging to the Corporate Bloat (you know who you are), or those who have tenure or a union to protect them. It is pretty hard not to be bitter about the corporate bloat and a burn rate on consultants comparable to a shuttle liftoff.



If we didn't have YaleNext (and what to show for it, again??) would we be in this situation? I doubt it. But, who's asking the tough questions?



#21 By TC '12 9:51p.m. on July 13, 2010

Yale is not an employment agency, it is a school. As a student who has held several different work-study jobs in various departments, I have noticed that there are lots of people working for Yale who are completely useless.



For example, one of my bosses literally sits at her desk all day making personal phone calls to her extended family and networking within her church. Additionally, many of the dining hall workers spend hours at a time outside, smoking and chatting with their friends who stop by, or talking on their cell phones. The computer clusters in the library are often taken over by bored security guards who would rather play online games and check their email than patrol and do what they're actually supposed to be doing.



I often feel appalled that the hard-earned money that I make doing work-study goes toward paying thousands of dollars in Yale tuition, which will be in turn used to put money into the pockets of hundreds of lazy staff and employees who do nothing.

#22 By Occam 1:01a.m. on July 14, 2010

1. This isn't a "school" anymore, this is a research and clinical operation with a boarding school attached. If you think tuition payments make the place tick you have another think coming.



2. 3400 union members in Local 34 took a pay freeze for 2010. The around 1200 union members in Local 35 got 2% raises this year. That did not break the bank.



3. The University's finances are in roughly the same shape now as they were in mid-2006. The university has also not grown beyond its means in the past four years. So ask yourself if the cuts are about the bottom line, or are about restructuring the institution and steering it in a certain direction. Are these cuts in academic areas? In research? In medical clinics? Look at the answers to those questions and you might get a sense of what the plan is.



4. It probably makes Shauna King very happy to see faculty, students, C&Ts, M&Ps all hoping eachother gets the axe, rather than looking at the leadership of the university to, you know, provide actual leadership.

#23 By Professors? 2:35a.m. on July 14, 2010

I can't believe all the disrespectful posts on here by people claiming to be Faculty. #6 picking on grammar, #16's elitism and direct jibe a Q-Pac. I know this is a contentious issue, but are you really Yale professors? If so, I'm shocked.

#24 By Shhhh 12:21p.m. on July 14, 2010

Check out this job posting:



https://sjobs.brassring.com/1033/asp/tg/cim_jobdetail.asp?jobId=369871&PartnerId=25053&SiteId=5248&type=mail&JobReqLang=1&recordstart=1&JobSiteId=5248&JobSiteInfo=369871_5248&gqid=0

#25 By @Hey! 6:20p.m. on July 14, 2010

Junior faculty buy their tickets and know what they are getting, which is an apprenticeship until you can get tenure at another fine school. Sometimes that is Yale's loss, but believe me, it is an improvement over the way it used to be- you don't want an inbred faculty.



Junior faculty, however, are not the problem. They are the workhorses of the university.



We may need some changes at the top, as the leadership did not insulate Yale from this downturn. Perhaps if we had an economist running the show, we could have seen this... oh wait.



That economist has spent his entire career, grad school, junior fac, tenured fac, chairman, dean, presidency at one institution. Even Joe Torre stayed too long with the Yankees...

#26 By Faculty 9:05p.m. on July 14, 2010

Yes, I am faculty.



Elitism is sort of the whole idea of Yale.



Q-Pac is a terrible school: exactly what you get when the administration dominates the faculty. Which is what we are moving to at Yale.

#27 By Alum 7:48p.m. on July 15, 2010

Great posts by Faculty. I think many people, from students to alumni, have little idea what it really takes to become tenured faculty at Yale, how really selective the process normally is (particularly outside the professional schools) and how truly elite the faculty is.



#28 By @26 @27 10:24p.m. on July 15, 2010

@26 It's not about elitism, it's about snobbery. The whole idea of Yale is not to look down on people, which is what you are doing. "Yes, I am faculty." Right.



@27 It's tough. You have to get into the right grad school, find the right adviser to get you placed for your first job, publish well enough to get tenure somewhere. If you have made it through that gauntlet, usually you have enough love and pride in the academy that you are going to be productive. I would add that getting a job at LAW is incredibly hard, even with NYU / Columbia competing.



#29 By Just wondering. 10:29p.m. on July 15, 2010

Isn't Yale in the middle of a re-certification process by NEASC (New England Association of Secondary Schools and Colleges)?

Doesn't that process have a survey section for faculty to offer anonymous feedback?

Do the faculty sentiments voiced in posts 1-27 here bode well for Yale in that re-certification process?

Just wondering.

PK
M.Div. '80



#30 By Goal of the Academy 9:14a.m. on July 16, 2010

PS:

Tenure exists so that great minds can think without the MINDLESS yakking of mercantilia constantly interrupting their search for the truth.

BTW "Searching for the truth" is the GOAL of the Academy, even if that truth bites the hand that feeds it.

PK

#31 By @#29 2:53p.m. on July 16, 2010

PK - Are you questioning whether the NEASC will pass Yale? Seriously?


32 By Flypaper 7:52p.m. on July 16, 2010


Almost every instiitution 'passes' NEASC.

The big question is how many recommendations (aka 'citations') do you get which REQUIRE action by the mid-term evaluation?

Sometimes this is as few as 16, sometimes it can be 70 or 100.

Responding to these 'recommnedations' is like dancing with fly-paper: incredible nuisance.

From what I read in posts 1-28 there is a sentiment in the faculty that Yale is becoming a tool of the Academic Industrial Complex, is bureaucrat-centered, and is in danger of becoming an instrument of Mercantilia rather than a safe 'haven' for the pursuit of truth.

For NEASC to find a discontented faculty at a school of Yale's stature in the Academy, could be unsettling-----and result in a host of required compliances, of nuisance proportions (square-dancing with flypaper).

PK


#33 By More 2:13p.m. on July 17, 2010

Nobody is being a snob. One poster claimed the way out of our financial problems is to eliminate tenure. I simply pointed out that this would make it harder to hire first-class faculty, and in the end would COST Yale a lot of money. Q-Pac is a good comparison: it is also a private university, but it is run by its president, and faculty there are treated like temps. So they *act* like temps: they spend their time consulting, trying to get a better job, instead of trying to make the place better.

Look at *their* financial situation: they get few grants and have a tiny endowment.

Finally, any Yale employee who wants to work at a place like that should just ask staff at Q-Pac what is like. I know some folks who work in their library and such, and they would move to Yale in a heartbeat if they could.

The "fat-cat" faculty are what make Yale what it is, and, if you ask non-faculty employees of similar places, it's a pretty good place to work. Nobody likes seeing layoffs. But when employees think the answer is to ruin what Yale is in the first place, well...

Here's a fun exercise: walk around campus after 5pm on a weekday, or on a weekend. Look at who is in their office. It's mostly faculty. Our salaries are not what some posters here think, and if you divide that by the number of hours most of us work, you'll find many of us have a lower hourly wage than the admin assistants who work with us. That's what tenure is about: it gives people like us a reason to commit our lives to an institution like Yale.