![Sample our Education journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5932/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Education.jpg"})
Notes
1. When I delivered this address in Denver, I made side comments or offered stories as part of the talk. I represent these asides in italics throughout this work.
2. Here I understand that the terms education, schooling, and training as distinct concepts. Education is the broadest category and need not require schooling or training. Schooling typically yields a certificate or diploma, but may not yield a specialist, as would be the case with training. Training is narrowly focused on an art, craft, or profession. An excellent, if long-out-of-print, text for more on these distinctions is G. Max Wingo's (1974) Philosophies of Education: An Introduction. I am also indebted to my major professor, Jack Conrad Willers, for his inspiring and challenging seminars in the history and philosophy of education at Peabody College, Vanderbilt.
3. There is far more to the dialogue than what I’m indicating, of course. Plato's view of Truth, Protagoras’ role, questions of knowledge (viz. Meno's Paradox), etc., all feature prominently and add to the relatively minor point I’m underscoring. Still, are current students more like Meno than, though still problematically, Socrates?
4. See CitationBaez & Boyles, 2009. A section of this book is modified as part of this address.
5. It may be more informative to substitute the phrase shifting public funds for decreased public funding with regard to revenues coming from state and federal governments. It appears that there has been a shift in government funding away from higher education and toward other social institutions (such as public schools), but concurrently there has been considerable public investment in higher education, particularly for solidifying economic growth. So, it is difficult to gauge the claims made about public funding, except to say that there has been a shift.
6. For example, the Citation U.S. News and World Report (2006) rankings of the top graduate education schools weighs peer school assessments, superintendent assessments, mean Graduate Record Exam scores, acceptance rates, doctorate-granting rates, student/faculty ratio, and total funded research and funded research per faculty members.
7. Indeed, the richest universities and faculty are the most entrepreneurial. Harvard University, for example, is not poor or dependent on state funding by any stretch of the imagination, and yet it is the entrepreneur par excellence. Despite an endowment of close $25 billion, at last count, it still refuses to release its faculty from grant-writing. For a ranking of endowments, see The Chronicle of Higher Education, “Almanac Issue 2006–7” (August 25, 2006): 32–33.
8. Indeed, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) disproportionately funds research in a few states that house the largest and most prestigious universities. In the early 2000s, one-third of all NIH grant money went to researchers in three states (California, New York, and Pennsylvania), and 10 states received a combined 1% of the NIH grant money; see CitationBrainard (2002a).
9. Baez and I prefer to use the term accounting rather than the popular accountability, as the former best exemplifies what is now required of institutions of higher education: That they account for how the money is spent and to ensure that such spending matches the purposes for which the money was allocated. Although accountability incorporates accounting, it also connotes something more ethical or moral: Institutions of higher education, incorporated for the purposes of serving the public should justify their practices—and, indeed, their very existence—to the public, and not just inform the public of what they do and how they do it, but also of how they are serving the public. Thus, we should be leery of using accountability when we in fact mean accounting, as the former carries moral connotations that the latter does not.
10. See CitationBix (1993). This article explains that the bulk of the research funds came from the Department of Defense, implicating Princeton University, perhaps unintentionally, in American imperialism. Some scholars refused federal grants to promote language training in Arabic languages (among others) because of their links to the Pentagon; see CitationBorrego (2002).
11. In a memorandum dated September 12, 2002, to all faculty members, Charles Louis, then the Georgia State University Vice President for Research, announced the availability of internal grants available to subsidize research. These nine grants include those with titles such as Research Initiation Grants, Faculty Mentoring Grant, Research Team Grant, Travel Grant, and Equipment Matching Fund. All but one of the grants, it turns out are explicitly tied to external funding or encourage its pursuit (the sole grant that does not include the words external funding in its description is the Dissertation Grant, which is allocated to graduate students to help them with their studies).
12. The quotation marks here indicate illustrative hypothetical comments, not direct quotes.
13. See Educational Policy Research Unit and Commercialism in Education Research Unit (http://epicpolicy.org/portal)
14. For a longer list of examples, see CitationMolnar, 2005, pp. 47–71.
15. As Laclau and Mouffe (2001, 192) put it, “The educational system, labour relations, the discourses of the resistance of marginal populations construct original and irreducible forms of social protest, and thereby contribute all the discursive complexity and richness on which the programme of a [comparatively] radical democracy should be founded.”
16. “What is needed,” CitationFraser (1990, 76–77) reminds us, “is a post-bourgeois conception [of the public sphere] that can permit us to envision a greater role for … public spheres than mere autonomous opinion formation removed from authoritative decision-making … [that would] allow us to theorize the range of possible relations among such publics …”
17. As CitationLaclau and Mouffe (2001) put it, “Conflict and division … are neither disturbances that unfortunately cannot be eliminated nor empirical impediments that render impossible the full realization of a harmony that we cannot attain because we will never be able to leave our particularities completely aside in order to act in accordance with our rational belief—a harmony which should nonetheless constitute the ideal towards which we strive” (xvii).