<p>No. Am I not speaking English, here? I didn’t suggest faculty “revolt.” I suggest they act like normal people do in the real world – if there are concerns that their management is doing something that is not getting them the “raw material” they desire, that they bring their concerns, thoughts and ideas on how to resolve to them, and take leadership and ownership of trying to figure out a better way. You know – the very same definition of leadership that we try to suss out in high schoolers. </p>
<p>If supposedly oh-so-very-brilliant professors can’t figure out how to do so in a professional, courteous and constructive manner, then guess what? They aren’t as brilliant as they think they are.</p>
<p>And it’s very interesting that when I described what goes on every single day in the real world – people advocate professionally for their points of view – you read it as “advocating the professors revolt.” That speaks worlds about your worldview about working collegially and getting things done. If these profs can’t do so, then they belong in academia, since they’d be eaten alive in the real world.</p>
<p>"I swear, the STEMmies on here are like the blind men feeling the leg of the elephant. It’s all they can think about, and they can’t possibly comprehend talent, leadership, and / or potential measured any way than on some contest. "</p>
<p>Yes. Different schools need different students. There is no “perfect student”. You may like a well-rounded, politically-active athlete. Yet I would prefer to hire a shy geek for my lab. In fact, I would never tolerate a politically active athlete with 100+ hobbies in my lab. Why can’t college give freedom to STEM faculty to choose students for themselves? I know the answer.</p>
<p>Don’t equate popularity to understanding :)</p>
<p>We know that if it cost 30K a year to go to school, $20K in AID isn’t enough for most low SES students. All most folks see is $20K a year of free money!</p>
<p>I may be stereotyping Berkeley faculty, but I suspect they are unhappy that they are forced to exclude consideration of race from admissions decisions. It’s resulting in a pretty bad set of numbers for black admissions, and even worse for Hispanics, given the population of California.</p>
<p>“Why would the faculty revolt when they set policies for the admissions process?”</p>
<p>Not really. STEM is not really involved in setting up admission policies. I know that they ask for veto powers sometimes … but they can veto only students that want to get their “majors”. They can’t ask to get more students that they like. STEM faculty can only filter students that they don’t want.</p>
<p>However, given the “pipeline” described earlier (see links in #74), changes in the university admissions process with respect to race or SES or whatever factors merely redistribute the well prepared college bound students (i.e. those who are UC eligible, or UC+CSU eligible when looking more broadly) among the various UC (or UC+CSU) campuses. Such changes do not magically create or destroy well prepared college bound students.</p>
<p>Looking at it from a statewide point of view, the political hot button of college admissions is really insignificant compared to the situation of K-12 preparation which is often of low quality, and rather uneven across schools and school districts.</p>
<p>Exactly what do you think they actually want for undergraduates, since (at the UCs) the STM (not E) majors typically come in through the pool of undeclared students admitted without regard for intended major?</p>
<p>Oh good lord. What prevents these oh-so-brilliant and oh-so-desired-by-the-university professors from coming together, articulating the failings of the system as they see it, articulating what they think are solutions that address both the institutional needs and their own needs for certain types of students, and presenting those in a professional manner and opening up a dialogue with the relevant administration?</p>
<p>You know, when a 17 yo kid does that, we call it leadership, and we recognize that it’s actually more important in some regards to have that kind of moxie, skill and initiative than it is to have a perfect 2400 on the SAT. But these professors can’t figure out how to do that? They can’t figure out how to influence those around them in a thoughtful, professional and persuasive way? Oh well. Then they’re not very smart, are they?</p>
<p>"They may not want to tolerate that kind of attitude, which is pretty much totally unacceptable in an academic environment. " </p>
<p>Would you ever hire a person that you don’t like? I also won’t. </p>
<p>I am not going to hire a politically active athlete to my lab as a grad student. Period. If I am not getting the right student from my univ., I will hire a Chinese or Russian geek … because I want to have a geek in my lab and I don’t care about well rounded undergrads that I don’t like. In the end, grad student is paid from my grants.</p>
<p>You don’t run the U. You probably don’t even have much view outside your lab. Hire the kids you want. Don’t tell us how the entire system fails. And if the supposed pipeline is failing “American” kids, sounds like you may be part of that, in dismissing them so summarily.</p>
<p>Overall qualifications should matter more than politically active athlete. Next we’ll hear how you won’t hire a kid with a tattoo. Or who doesn’t dress a certain way.</p>
<p>“What prevents these oh-so-brilliant and oh-so-desired-by-the-university professors from coming together, articulating the failings of the system as they see it, articulating what they think are solutions that address both the institutional needs and their own needs for certain types of students, and presenting those in a professional manner and opening up a dialogue with the relevant administration?”</p>
<p>May be, because it is easy to get great students from abroad. In the end, faculty is judged by the publications and startups that they make. They are not judged by “leadership”. Plus, people move from one univ. to another very often, why would they care about one particular univ and its undergrads?</p>
<p>You may have noticed that faculty is not exited about teaching undergrads or having any meaningful interaction with them. BTW, in USA only.</p>
<p>Take your complaints to the folks who can do something about it.</p>
<p>I know plenty of faculty who enjoy undergrads. I know plenty who love the excitement about finding those who are especially interested and competent. You play one role in the education process. That’s all. No more, no less. You either do something with your complaints or not.</p>
<p>Do not insist to us that our experiences and opinions are inferior. Period.</p>