Received: from frosty.irss.unc.edu (frosty.irss.unc.edu [152.2.32.82]) by csf.Colorado.EDU (8.7.6/8.7.3/CNS-4.0p) with SMTP id FAA10976 for ; Fri, 16 May 1997 05:47:56 -0600 (MDT) Received: (from cassell@localhost) by frosty.irss.unc.edu (8.6.12/8.6.10) id HAA08095; Fri, 16 May 1997 07:46:51 -0400 Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 07:46:50 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Cassell To: socgrad@csf.colorado.edu Subject: Re: Talk of the Nation In-Reply-To: <199705152042.NAA20820@weber.ucsd.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 15 May 1997, Laura Miller wrote: > Thanks Jim for alerting us to the Talk of the Nation program. I found it > quite interesting, but was amazed that a program about the use of grad > students in teaching roles did not have any grad students among their > main panelists. We're supposed to listen to some physics prof talk about > teaching assistants? What a surprise that he'd never come across grad > students acting as lecturers, since I assume that it almost entirely > occurs in the humanities & social sciences. I think the most eloquent > and honest statements came from two sociology grad students (1 from > Michigan, 1 from Madison) who we heard from briefly. But of course > sociology grads would know how to explain exploitation. :) Michelle Mueller, the grad student from Michigan, _was_ a regularly scheduled person on the program (as opposed to a someone who called in). I'm not sure why she wasn't on the panel, but it is not unusual for one or more of the "guests" to do a short interview as she did. Could be an issue of timing (since the show is done in real-time). To be honest, I'm embarrassed about recommending this show. I usually like TOTN because it features intelligent, _civil_ discourse. Yesterday's program needed a stronger referee. I would like to have heard more from O'Brien and a helluva lot less from the physicist (who name escapes me) and Martin Andersen. It seemed to me that the physicist had an ax to grind with Martin--he dug into him at every opportunity. Now I've never been fond of the Hoover Institution either, but this really got in the way of the topic. Note, also, one of the proclaimed foci of the program was the effect of "TA as teachers" on undergraduate students. This kinda got lost also. I think there were some useful bits in the program (I was working at the time, so I may have missed some stuff), but overall it sounded too much like _Crossfire_ for my tastes. More heat than light. > > People on the list may be interested in checking out an article in this > week's Chronicle of Higher Education (May 16 issue). There's a long > piece on Cary Nelson and the book he's just published which, among other > things, really goes after the university's exploitation of grad student > labor. > > Laura Miller > Thanks for the tip. One of the things missing from a lot of this discussion (especially in the general media) is any sense of the _diversity_ among post-secondary ed institutions. Like our physicist "friend," everyone looks at the institutions in their own experience and think they define the universe. (See Time Magazine's cover from a few weeks back for a good example of this.) A couple of yesterday's panelists tried to talk a bit about this, but not very much. Has anyone read Neil Rudenstine's book "In pursuit of the PhD?" One of the panelists mentioned it as a good compliation of trends and actual data. (Yes, I have empiricist tendencies; mea culpa, mea culpa, maxima mea culpa. :->) George Dennis O'Brien, the quiet member of the panel, also has a book title "All the essential half-truths about higher education" coming out from U. Chicago Press. That might also be interesting. Jim ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ James Cassell Institute for Research in Social Science e-mail: cassell@irss.unc.edu University of North Carolina Ph: 919/962-0782 Fx: 919/962-4777 Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3355 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~