Forums: Community: Campground:
You are not wanted here.
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Campground

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 ... 4075 4076 4077 4078 4079 4080 4081 4082 4083 ... 4131 Next page Last page  View All


climbingtrash


Jan 17, 2014, 3:55 PM
Post #101951 of 103272 (1342 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 19, 2006
Posts: 4822

Re: [caughtinside] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

I remember whut a PTFTW iz?!?Angelic


climbingtrash


Jan 17, 2014, 3:55 PM
Post #101952 of 103272 (1342 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 19, 2006
Posts: 4822

Re: [tripperjm] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

wo0?!?


climbingtrash


Jan 17, 2014, 3:55 PM
Post #101953 of 103272 (1342 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 19, 2006
Posts: 4822

Re: [chossmonkey] Lost [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

durp


climbingtrash


Jan 17, 2014, 3:55 PM
Post #101954 of 103272 (1342 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 19, 2006
Posts: 4822

Re: [snoopy138] Lost [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

suk it sn00b!


dr_feelgood


Jan 18, 2014, 9:59 AM
Post #101955 of 103272 (1308 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 25796

Re: [snoopy138] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).


granite_grrl


Jan 18, 2014, 10:11 AM
Post #101956 of 103272 (1304 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 14773

Re: [dr_feelgood] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

What's the cost to go to school in the States now? For classes and books I remember paying maybe $3.5k a semester (taking 6 classes instead of the regular 5 classes per semester), so $7k a year total (two semesters).

Talking to a guy at running this morning his daughter is going to school for ~$15k a year, but that includes living in a dorm. Which didn't seem too bad.

Oh, and in Canada there's no such thing as a state University. Cost would have been similar going to another University. I think as a resident in Quebec you get a big break though (the province of Quebec has the most social programs in Canada, but they also have the highest taxes. They seem happy with this).


lena_chita
Moderator

Jan 19, 2014, 8:40 AM
Post #101957 of 103272 (1270 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 5667

Re: [granite_grrl] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

granite_grrl wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

What's the cost to go to school in the States now? For classes and books I remember paying maybe $3.5k a semester (taking 6 classes instead of the regular 5 classes per semester), so $7k a year total (two semesters).

Talking to a guy at running this morning his daughter is going to school for ~$15k a year, but that includes living in a dorm. Which didn't seem too bad.

Oh, and in Canada there's no such thing as a state University. Cost would have been similar going to another University. I think as a resident in Quebec you get a big break though (the province of Quebec has the most social programs in Canada, but they also have the highest taxes. They seem happy with this).

I don't know what the average is, but I have heard $35k-50K. At Case, undergrad tuition is $41,420.00 for full-time. But it is misleading, somewhat, bc hardly anybody actually pays that, because of various grants, etc. Still, $41K? That is STAGGERING!

(source: http://www.case.edu/...r/bursar/tuition.htm)


granite_grrl


Jan 19, 2014, 4:20 PM
Post #101958 of 103272 (1253 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 14773

Re: [lena_chita] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

lena_chita wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

What's the cost to go to school in the States now? For classes and books I remember paying maybe $3.5k a semester (taking 6 classes instead of the regular 5 classes per semester), so $7k a year total (two semesters).

Talking to a guy at running this morning his daughter is going to school for ~$15k a year, but that includes living in a dorm. Which didn't seem too bad.

Oh, and in Canada there's no such thing as a state University. Cost would have been similar going to another University. I think as a resident in Quebec you get a big break though (the province of Quebec has the most social programs in Canada, but they also have the highest taxes. They seem happy with this).

I don't know what the average is, but I have heard $35k-50K. At Case, undergrad tuition is $41,420.00 for full-time. But it is misleading, somewhat, bc hardly anybody actually pays that, because of various grants, etc. Still, $41K? That is STAGGERING!

(source: http://www.case.edu/...r/bursar/tuition.htm)

$41k, holey smokes!


granite_grrl


Jan 19, 2014, 4:21 PM
Post #101959 of 103272 (1251 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 14773

Re: [climbingtrash] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

So you know what's the one thing more terrifying then driving through snow drifting on a secondary highway? Driving a Honda Fit trough drifting snow on a secondary highway.

That little car is not made for winters.


Partner macherry


Jan 19, 2014, 4:58 PM
Post #101960 of 103272 (1242 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 10, 2003
Posts: 15795

Re: [granite_grrl] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

granite_grrl wrote:
So you know what's the one thing more terrifying then driving through snow drifting on a secondary highway? Driving a Honda Fit trough drifting snow on a secondary highway.

That little car is not made for winters.

this is true. we have a fit, well the husband drives it. can get a little squirrely in slushy, snowy highways


granite_grrl


Jan 19, 2014, 5:10 PM
Post #101961 of 103272 (1241 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 14773

Re: [macherry] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

macherry wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
So you know what's the one thing more terrifying then driving through snow drifting on a secondary highway? Driving a Honda Fit trough drifting snow on a secondary highway.

That little car is not made for winters.

this is true. we have a fit, well the husband drives it. can get a little squirrely in slushy, snowy highways

We've got snow tires, but the car weighs so little it just gets tossed around in the snow.


dr_feelgood


Jan 19, 2014, 6:15 PM
Post #101962 of 103272 (1235 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 25796

Re: [granite_grrl] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

granite_grrl wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

What's the cost to go to school in the States now? For classes and books I remember paying maybe $3.5k a semester (taking 6 classes instead of the regular 5 classes per semester), so $7k a year total (two semesters).

Talking to a guy at running this morning his daughter is going to school for ~$15k a year, but that includes living in a dorm. Which didn't seem too bad.

Oh, and in Canada there's no such thing as a state University. Cost would have been similar going to another University. I think as a resident in Quebec you get a big break though (the province of Quebec has the most social programs in Canada, but they also have the highest taxes. They seem happy with this).

I don't know what the average is, but I have heard $35k-50K. At Case, undergrad tuition is $41,420.00 for full-time. But it is misleading, somewhat, bc hardly anybody actually pays that, because of various grants, etc. Still, $41K? That is STAGGERING!

(source: http://www.case.edu/...r/bursar/tuition.htm)

$41k, holey smokes!
16k a year for MT residents, 30k a year for out of state students at MSU.


caughtinside


Jan 19, 2014, 7:45 PM
Post #101963 of 103272 (1227 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30406

Re: [dr_feelgood] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

dr_feelgood wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

What's the cost to go to school in the States now? For classes and books I remember paying maybe $3.5k a semester (taking 6 classes instead of the regular 5 classes per semester), so $7k a year total (two semesters).

Talking to a guy at running this morning his daughter is going to school for ~$15k a year, but that includes living in a dorm. Which didn't seem too bad.

Oh, and in Canada there's no such thing as a state University. Cost would have been similar going to another University. I think as a resident in Quebec you get a big break though (the province of Quebec has the most social programs in Canada, but they also have the highest taxes. They seem happy with this).

I don't know what the average is, but I have heard $35k-50K. At Case, undergrad tuition is $41,420.00 for full-time. But it is misleading, somewhat, bc hardly anybody actually pays that, because of various grants, etc. Still, $41K? That is STAGGERING!

(source: http://www.case.edu/...r/bursar/tuition.htm)

$41k, holey smokes!
16k a year for MT residents, 30k a year for out of state students at MSU.

My first year of grad School was 11k. My third year was 24k.


camhead


Jan 20, 2014, 5:41 AM
Post #101964 of 103272 (1209 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 9, 2001
Posts: 20738

Re: [caughtinside] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

What's the cost to go to school in the States now? For classes and books I remember paying maybe $3.5k a semester (taking 6 classes instead of the regular 5 classes per semester), so $7k a year total (two semesters).

Talking to a guy at running this morning his daughter is going to school for ~$15k a year, but that includes living in a dorm. Which didn't seem too bad.

Oh, and in Canada there's no such thing as a state University. Cost would have been similar going to another University. I think as a resident in Quebec you get a big break though (the province of Quebec has the most social programs in Canada, but they also have the highest taxes. They seem happy with this).

I don't know what the average is, but I have heard $35k-50K. At Case, undergrad tuition is $41,420.00 for full-time. But it is misleading, somewhat, bc hardly anybody actually pays that, because of various grants, etc. Still, $41K? That is STAGGERING!

(source: http://www.case.edu/...r/bursar/tuition.htm)

$41k, holey smokes!
16k a year for MT residents, 30k a year for out of state students at MSU.

My first year of grad School was 11k. My third year was 24k.

Fortunately, I got all my higher ed for free, which was lucky since it hasn't really gotten me jack shit.

I always appreciated the double irony, as an adjunct professor, of teaching 21 year olds with five figures of debt about how terrible and outdated colonial indentured servitude was.


lena_chita
Moderator

Jan 20, 2014, 6:55 AM
Post #101965 of 103272 (1202 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 5667

Re: [camhead] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

camhead wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

What's the cost to go to school in the States now? For classes and books I remember paying maybe $3.5k a semester (taking 6 classes instead of the regular 5 classes per semester), so $7k a year total (two semesters).

Talking to a guy at running this morning his daughter is going to school for ~$15k a year, but that includes living in a dorm. Which didn't seem too bad.

Oh, and in Canada there's no such thing as a state University. Cost would have been similar going to another University. I think as a resident in Quebec you get a big break though (the province of Quebec has the most social programs in Canada, but they also have the highest taxes. They seem happy with this).

I don't know what the average is, but I have heard $35k-50K. At Case, undergrad tuition is $41,420.00 for full-time. But it is misleading, somewhat, bc hardly anybody actually pays that, because of various grants, etc. Still, $41K? That is STAGGERING!

(source: http://www.case.edu/...r/bursar/tuition.htm)

$41k, holey smokes!
16k a year for MT residents, 30k a year for out of state students at MSU.

My first year of grad School was 11k. My third year was 24k.

Fortunately, I got all my higher ed for free, which was lucky since it hasn't really gotten me jack shit.

I always appreciated the double irony, as an adjunct professor, of teaching 21 year olds with five figures of debt about how terrible and outdated colonial indentured servitude was.

No kidding


dr_feelgood


Jan 20, 2014, 8:31 AM
Post #101966 of 103272 (1193 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 25796

Re: [camhead] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

camhead wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

What's the cost to go to school in the States now? For classes and books I remember paying maybe $3.5k a semester (taking 6 classes instead of the regular 5 classes per semester), so $7k a year total (two semesters).

Talking to a guy at running this morning his daughter is going to school for ~$15k a year, but that includes living in a dorm. Which didn't seem too bad.

Oh, and in Canada there's no such thing as a state University. Cost would have been similar going to another University. I think as a resident in Quebec you get a big break though (the province of Quebec has the most social programs in Canada, but they also have the highest taxes. They seem happy with this).

I don't know what the average is, but I have heard $35k-50K. At Case, undergrad tuition is $41,420.00 for full-time. But it is misleading, somewhat, bc hardly anybody actually pays that, because of various grants, etc. Still, $41K? That is STAGGERING!

(source: http://www.case.edu/...r/bursar/tuition.htm)

$41k, holey smokes!
16k a year for MT residents, 30k a year for out of state students at MSU.

My first year of grad School was 11k. My third year was 24k.

Fortunately, I got all my higher ed for free, which was lucky since it hasn't really gotten me jack shit.

I always appreciated the double irony, as an adjunct professor, of teaching 21 year olds with five figures of debt about how terrible and outdated colonial indentured servitude was.

The economy, then and now, cannot function without massive amounts of debt.

Fortunately, I got all my indentured servitude out of the way while marching in goosestep.


snoopy138


Jan 21, 2014, 11:02 AM
Post #101967 of 103272 (1154 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 7, 2004
Posts: 28777

Re: [dr_feelgood] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

According to this, 57% of football programs and the same percentage of basketball programs at FBS schools (Division I-A) are profitable.


snoopy138


Jan 21, 2014, 11:03 AM
Post #101968 of 103272 (1152 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 7, 2004
Posts: 28777

Re: [caughtinside] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

What's the cost to go to school in the States now? For classes and books I remember paying maybe $3.5k a semester (taking 6 classes instead of the regular 5 classes per semester), so $7k a year total (two semesters).

Talking to a guy at running this morning his daughter is going to school for ~$15k a year, but that includes living in a dorm. Which didn't seem too bad.

Oh, and in Canada there's no such thing as a state University. Cost would have been similar going to another University. I think as a resident in Quebec you get a big break though (the province of Quebec has the most social programs in Canada, but they also have the highest taxes. They seem happy with this).

I don't know what the average is, but I have heard $35k-50K. At Case, undergrad tuition is $41,420.00 for full-time. But it is misleading, somewhat, bc hardly anybody actually pays that, because of various grants, etc. Still, $41K? That is STAGGERING!

(source: http://www.case.edu/...r/bursar/tuition.htm)

$41k, holey smokes!
16k a year for MT residents, 30k a year for out of state students at MSU.

My first year of grad School was 11k. My third year was 24k.

wasn't there a lawsuit about that?


snoopy138


Jan 21, 2014, 11:06 AM
Post #101969 of 103272 (1150 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 7, 2004
Posts: 28777

Re: [snoopy138] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

snoopy138 wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

According to this, 57% of football programs and the same percentage of basketball programs at FBS schools (Division I-A) are profitable.

link: http://sportsologist.com/...etics-by-the-number/


dr_feelgood


Jan 21, 2014, 12:12 PM
Post #101970 of 103272 (1134 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 25796

Re: [snoopy138] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

snoopy138 wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

According to this, 57% of football programs and the same percentage of basketball programs at FBS schools (Division I-A) are profitable.

link: http://sportsologist.com/...etics-by-the-number/

Yeah, that means 43% are unprofitable. And what about lower division schools that need a football team? I bet those represent a net loss.


lena_chita
Moderator

Jan 21, 2014, 12:24 PM
Post #101971 of 103272 (1132 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 5667

Re: [snoopy138] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

snoopy138 wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

According to this, 57% of football programs and the same percentage of basketball programs at FBS schools (Division I-A) are profitable.

link: http://sportsologist.com/...etics-by-the-number/

You have an interesting way of reading. Are you a lawyer, or something? From the same link that you posted:

In reply to:
12% of college athletic programs are profitable.

AND

In reply to:
Average assistance that each university gave to the athletic department was $10.2 million.


Seems like looking at the entire spread, instead of cherry-picking Division 1_a (which are going to be the best, and STILL have 43% of colleges losing money) is more appropriate, no?


caughtinside


Jan 21, 2014, 3:20 PM
Post #101972 of 103272 (1115 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30406

Re: [snoopy138] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

snoopy138 wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

What's the cost to go to school in the States now? For classes and books I remember paying maybe $3.5k a semester (taking 6 classes instead of the regular 5 classes per semester), so $7k a year total (two semesters).

Talking to a guy at running this morning his daughter is going to school for ~$15k a year, but that includes living in a dorm. Which didn't seem too bad.

Oh, and in Canada there's no such thing as a state University. Cost would have been similar going to another University. I think as a resident in Quebec you get a big break though (the province of Quebec has the most social programs in Canada, but they also have the highest taxes. They seem happy with this).

I don't know what the average is, but I have heard $35k-50K. At Case, undergrad tuition is $41,420.00 for full-time. But it is misleading, somewhat, bc hardly anybody actually pays that, because of various grants, etc. Still, $41K? That is STAGGERING!

(source: http://www.case.edu/...r/bursar/tuition.htm)

$41k, holey smokes!
16k a year for MT residents, 30k a year for out of state students at MSU.

My first year of grad School was 11k. My third year was 24k.

wasn't there a lawsuit about that?

That is correct.

Years later, in 2008 I received a check since I was part of that class action. It was like $4200. Which was great, because it showed up the very week I bought the MoleStar, for $4200. ha ha! free wheels!

This all comes full circle today, when I sold the MoleStar Frown

I did sell it to Cornelius though, so I retain visitation rights.


caughtinside


Jan 21, 2014, 3:24 PM
Post #101973 of 103272 (1112 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30406

Re: [caughtinside] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

What's the cost to go to school in the States now? For classes and books I remember paying maybe $3.5k a semester (taking 6 classes instead of the regular 5 classes per semester), so $7k a year total (two semesters).

Talking to a guy at running this morning his daughter is going to school for ~$15k a year, but that includes living in a dorm. Which didn't seem too bad.

Oh, and in Canada there's no such thing as a state University. Cost would have been similar going to another University. I think as a resident in Quebec you get a big break though (the province of Quebec has the most social programs in Canada, but they also have the highest taxes. They seem happy with this).

I don't know what the average is, but I have heard $35k-50K. At Case, undergrad tuition is $41,420.00 for full-time. But it is misleading, somewhat, bc hardly anybody actually pays that, because of various grants, etc. Still, $41K? That is STAGGERING!

(source: http://www.case.edu/...r/bursar/tuition.htm)

$41k, holey smokes!
16k a year for MT residents, 30k a year for out of state students at MSU.

My first year of grad School was 11k. My third year was 24k.

wasn't there a lawsuit about that?

That is correct.

Years later, in 2008 I received a check since I was part of that class action. It was like $4200. Which was great, because it showed up the very week I bought the MoleStar, for $4200. ha ha! free wheels!

This all comes full circle today, when I sold the MoleStar Frown

I did sell it to Cornelius though, so I retain visitation rights.


I should also mention that today I think the cost for one year is over 40k. So it's basically quadrupled in 15 years.


snoopy138


Jan 21, 2014, 5:52 PM
Post #101974 of 103272 (1100 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 7, 2004
Posts: 28777

Re: [lena_chita] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

lena_chita wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

According to this, 57% of football programs and the same percentage of basketball programs at FBS schools (Division I-A) are profitable.

link: http://sportsologist.com/...etics-by-the-number/

You have an interesting way of reading. Are you a lawyer, or something? From the same link that you posted:

In reply to:
12% of college athletic programs are profitable.

AND

In reply to:
Average assistance that each university gave to the athletic department was $10.2 million.


Seems like looking at the entire spread, instead of cherry-picking Division 1_a (which are going to be the best, and STILL have 43% of colleges losing money) is more appropriate, no?

The article was only talking about Division I-A (now referred to as FBS).

And I was only talking about the football and basketball programs, 57% of which it said are profitable. The 12% is where the athletic department is profitable, meaning (basically) that football and basketball cover the rest of the department, since none of the other sports make shit.

The article also mentions that while alumni/booster donations are counted towards revenue, that is most likely just donations designated specifically for the athletic department. It's unclear whether the amount of those donations that would otherwise go to the school (vs. not being made at all if there was no athletic program) is more than the additional donations given to the school for its general funds based on alumni generally being happy with the sports programs.

They also list 25% of the expenses as scholarships/grants, which obviously go up with tuition, and pay for the education of the athletes. Obviously, a certain number of these athletes are deriving minimal benefit from the education, but there's plenty of them (especially in the lesser sports) that are getting an education.


snoopy138


Jan 21, 2014, 5:53 PM
Post #101975 of 103272 (1098 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 7, 2004
Posts: 28777

Re: [caughtinside] You are not wanted here. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
dr_feelgood wrote:
snoopy138 wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
lena_chita wrote:
Completely out of character for BET< but I thought this was a good read:

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.2.html

In reply to:
Nowhere has the DWYL mantra been more devastating to its adherents than in academia. The average Ph.D. student of the mid-2000s forwent the easy money of finance and law (now slightly less easy) to live on a meager stipend in order to pursue his passion for Norse mythology or the history of Afro-Cuban music.

The reward for answering this higher calling is an academic employment marketplace in which about 41 percent of American faculty are adjunct professors—contract instructors who usually receive low pay, no benefits, no office, no job security, and no long-term stake in the schools where they work.

There are many factors that keep Ph.D.s providing such high-skilled labor for such low wages, including path dependency and the sunk costs of earning a Ph.D., but one of the strongest is how pervasively the DWYL doctrine is embedded in academia. Few other professions fuse the personal identity of their workers so intimately with the work output. Because academic research should be done out of pure love, the actual conditions of and compensation for this labor become afterthoughts, if they are considered at all.

In “Academic Labor, the Aesthetics of Management, and the Promise of Autonomous Work,” Sarah Brouillette writes of academic faculty, “[O]ur faith that our work offers non-material rewards, and is more integral to our identity than a ‘regular’ job would be, makes us ideal employees when the goal of management is to extract our labor’s maximum value at minimum cost.”

I'm thinking of you, camhead, Doc... and myself, of course.

If 41% of professors are way underpaid adjuncts, why is college so fucking expensive now?

You've got to support the college athletics program! Football, man! And basketball...

At many schools that spend significantly on football and basketball, those programs generate enough money to easily support themselves, including the exorbitant head coaches salaries, and often cover a lot of the additional athletic costs.

I'd like to see sources for this. Sure, some may be self-sustaining, but there is the penis-measuring contest of all the other schools that are mandated by social pressure to have a football(or ski, or water polo, or midget curling) team at every university certainly means that a lot of the less successful schools are losing a fair amount of money into the athletic black hole.

I mostly blame the decrease in state support and funding for public institutions. Call me a commie, but I think states (and their taxpayers) have a duty to support their students, as this support will pay dividends in the future. Unless you live in a shitty state with an aging population and youth flight(connecticut).

What's the cost to go to school in the States now? For classes and books I remember paying maybe $3.5k a semester (taking 6 classes instead of the regular 5 classes per semester), so $7k a year total (two semesters).

Talking to a guy at running this morning his daughter is going to school for ~$15k a year, but that includes living in a dorm. Which didn't seem too bad.

Oh, and in Canada there's no such thing as a state University. Cost would have been similar going to another University. I think as a resident in Quebec you get a big break though (the province of Quebec has the most social programs in Canada, but they also have the highest taxes. They seem happy with this).

I don't know what the average is, but I have heard $35k-50K. At Case, undergrad tuition is $41,420.00 for full-time. But it is misleading, somewhat, bc hardly anybody actually pays that, because of various grants, etc. Still, $41K? That is STAGGERING!

(source: http://www.case.edu/...r/bursar/tuition.htm)

$41k, holey smokes!
16k a year for MT residents, 30k a year for out of state students at MSU.

My first year of grad School was 11k. My third year was 24k.

wasn't there a lawsuit about that?

That is correct.

Years later, in 2008 I received a check since I was part of that class action. It was like $4200. Which was great, because it showed up the very week I bought the MoleStar, for $4200. ha ha! free wheels!

This all comes full circle today, when I sold the MoleStar Frown

I did sell it to Cornelius though, so I retain visitation rights.

Yeah, I was after the tuition had already gone up, we got no lawsuit $.

Sad news on teh molestar.

First page Previous page 1 ... 4075 4076 4077 4078 4079 4080 4081 4082 4083 ... 4131 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Community : Campground

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook