<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>Forum</title>
      <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/</link>
      <description></description>
      <language>en</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2010</copyright>
      <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:42:48 -0500</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

            <item>
         <title>Some Reporters Realized This Must Be A War Photo</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<img alt="iwo.bmp" src="http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/iwo.bmp" width="200" height="178"  align="right" hspace=8 vspace=5/>The <em>Chicago Tribune's</em> <a href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/ct-talk-grossman-world-war-two-20100315,0,4929127.story">Ron Grossman</a> writes:

I took a quick survey in the newsroom the other day, something between a Rorschach test and a pop quiz, asking younger colleagues to identify an iconic photograph of World War II.

While some instantly recognized the image, others couldn't quite place it.

"I know I ought to know it," one co-worker said. "It was in the movie, 'Flags of Our Fathers.'" Some, seeing uniforms, realized it must be a war photo. Maybe Vietnam? One got the era right but the battlefield wrong. She guessed it was D-Day, not, as it was, the raising of the American flag on Iwo Jima.]]></description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/some_reporters_realized_this_m_2.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/some_reporters_realized_this_m_2.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:42:48 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>A Nightmare Proposal</title>
         <description><![CDATA[Sunday's <em>Washington Post</em> featured a lengthy <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/12/AR2010031201792_pf.html">op-ed</a> by Jaclyn Friedman, a <a href="http://www.jaclynfriedman.com/aboutjaclyn.html">self-described</a> "writer, performer and activist" who is "a dynamic and powerful performer who performs and agitates with <a href="http://www.bigmoves.org/">Big Moves</a>, a national size-diverse performance troupe." The column advanced a startling thesis: that "University campuses could easily become labs that innovate effective ways to prevent and prosecute [emphasis added] rape."

Campus judicial proceedings almost always deny to students accused of sexual assault what most people would consider basic procedural protections: legal representation; access to a university equivalent of open-file discovery; or the opportunity to confront his or her accuser. And that's just at a typical university. Consider more extreme versions: Duke <a href="http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2009/09/simply-extraordinary.html">opened the 2009-2010</a> academic year by revising its internal procedures to give all sexual misconduct accusers rights denied to the accused student. Each of these special rights  tilts the process in the accuser's favor: to be treated with "sensitivity," to make opening and closing statements before a hearing panel, and to receive all written information, other than material protected by FERPA, regarding their case.

Given this procedural background, only someone eager to create a system transparently tilted toward convictions would envision universities as laboratories to "prosecute rape." It seems, alas, that Friedman falls into this category. She claims that, as a Wesleyan undergraduate, she was sexually assaulted, but that she "never considered going to the police," since no evidence existed to back up her charge. So instead she filed charges "through the on-campus judicial system," after which, she writes, her alleged assailant "agreed to plead no contest" and was suspended from school for a year. This outcome proved insufficient when her alleged assailant's suspension was reduced to one semester; Friedman informed <em>Post</em> readers that her final months on campus were "a haze of fear, hiding and post-traumatic stress."]]></description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/a_nightmare_proposal.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/a_nightmare_proposal.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 15:51:55 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>The Politically Correct University</title>
         <description><![CDATA[AEI recently released a fine compendium volume <em>The Politically Correct University</em>, edited by Robert Maranto, Richard E. Redding, and Frederick M. Hess, featuring an excellent slate of essays and contributors: here's a sampling:

Do take a look; there's much of worth here:

<blockquote>- "The American University: Yesterday, Today - and Tomorrow"
James Piereson

- "Linguistics from the Left: The Truth about Black English That the Academy Doesn't Want
You to Know"
John McWhorter 

- "Groupthink in Academia: Majoritarian Departmental Politics and the Professional Pyramid"
Daniel Klein & Charlotta Stern

- "Left Pipeline: Why Conservatives Don't Get Doctorates"
Matthew Woessner & April Kelly-Woessner 

- "The Vanishing Conservative - Is There a Glass Ceiling?"
Stanley Rothman & S. Robert Lichter 

- "Campus Speech Codes: Absurd, Tenacious, and Everywhere"
Greg Lukianoff

- "Why Political Science Is Left But Not PC: Causes of Disunion and Diversity"
James Ceaser 

- "Political Correctness in the Science Classroom"
Noretta Koertge

- "Reforming the Politically Correct University: The Role of Alumni and Trustees"
Anne Neal 

- "Where We've Come From and Where We Should Go: The Route to Academic Pluralism"
Stephen Balch 

- "To Reform the Politically Correct University, Reform the Liberal Arts"
John Agresto</blockquote>

 

The essays on the political make-up of the faculty are an excellent tonic for recent conversation that there's nothing odd about the absence of conservatives in academia. To provide even greater incentive, here's an excerpt from Jim Piereson's essay:

<blockquote>..As the diversity thrust loses steam, liberals and far-left groups on the campus will not be at a loss for new causes to absorb their attention and energy. The next iteration of liberal reform in the universities is likley to involve further steps to detach these institutions from the American polity in which they are embedded. We have already noted that the intellectual foundations of the modern research university are somewhat at odds with the philosophy of natural rights that shaped our national instiutions. The logic of liberalism points in the direction of the internationalization of the American university. We can already see fragments of this emerging trend in the banning of ROTC and military recruiters from college campuses in order to disassociate universities from American national policies. The enrollment of international students will receive greater emphasis in the coming decades which will further reinforce the trend. Academic programs in American government or in American studies will be increasingly de-emphasized on the grounds that they are parochial, in much the same way as programs in Western Civilization were de-emphasized in the past...</blockquote>
 
]]></description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/the_politically_correct_univer.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/the_politically_correct_univer.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 10:21:51 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title> A Thriving Department</title>
         <description><![CDATA[John Derbyshire, a frequent contributor to <em>National Review</em>, has made a surprising discovery: San Francisco State University has a department of <a href="http://www.sfsu.edu/~raza/faculty1.html">Raza studies</a>, and the department has thirteen full-time faculty members.   

Derbyshire writes on NRO's <a href="http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MjcwMjgyY2Q1NTM1YWUzNTU3OTdlY2M1NGFmOGE2NDg">The Corner</a>:    

<blockquote>What goes on in a Raza Studies Department? Let them tell us.

"Roberto [Rivera] is presently finishing a book on Liberation Discourse which examines the semantics of counter-hegemony in the philosophies of Gustavo Gutierrez and Paulo Freire."

[Prof. Tomas Almaguer] is currently completing work on a book manuscript entitled <em>Border Men: Gender and Sexuality in the Life Histories of Chicano Gay Men</em>, which will be published by the University of California Press.

[Prof. Teresa Carrillo]'s teaching and research interests reflect her fascination with Latinos as political actors in a constant interaction with local, national and transnational political forces ...

In <em>Systems of Elections, Latino Representation, and Student Outcomes in Central California and Faculty, Managers, and Administrators in the University of California</em>, 1996 to 2002,[Assistant Professor Belinda] Reyes explores ethnic diversity in higher ed and k-12 and the potential consequences of under-representation.

[Writing Specialist Alejandro Murguia]'s memoir <em>The Medicine of Memory: A Mexica Clan in California</em>, University of Texas Press, has been nominated for the Victor Turner Prize in Ethnographic Writing.

[Dr. Nancy Raquel Mirabal] teaches courses in the history of Latina/os, Caribbean diasporas, Afro-Latina/o diasporas, theory and methods, gender and sexuality, and oral history.]]></description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/a_thriving_department.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/a_thriving_department.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:48:21 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Do We Need More College Graduates?</title>
         <description><![CDATA[A  February 26 debate on the subject is online <a href="http://millercenter.org/public/debates/ed_econ">here</a>. The event was sponsored by the Miller Center of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia. Former secretary of education Margaret Spellings and Michael Lomax, president and C.E.O. of the United Negro College Fund, are on the pro side of the topic, "To remain a world-class economic power, the U.S. workforce needs more college graduates." On the anti side are Richard Vedder, economics professor at Ohio University and director of the Center for College Affordability and Productivity, and George Leef of the John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy. The moderator is PBS correspondent Paul Solomon.
]]></description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/do_we_need_more_college_gradua.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/do_we_need_more_college_gradua.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:51:41 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>People Who Never Got a College Degree</title>
         <description><![CDATA[Edward Albee, Woody Allen, Maya Angelou, Wally Amos, Jane Austen, Dan Aykroyd, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak, Joan Baez, Warren Beatty, David Ben-Gurion, Sonny Bono, Rick Bragg, Richard Branson, Albert Brooks, David Byrne, James Cameron, Raymond Chandler, Coco Chanel, John Cheever, Sean Connery, Walter Cronkite, Daniel Day-Lewis, Michael Dell, Princess Diana, Leonardo DiCaprio, Bob Dylan, Clint Eastwood, Thomas Edison, Harvey Weinstein, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Jane Fonda, Benjamin Franklin, David Geffen, John Glenn, Richard Grasso, Ernest Hemingway, Dustin Hoffman, Ralph Lauren, Alex Haley, Peter Jennings, Doris Lessing, Rush Limbaugh, Abraham Lincoln, Charles Lindbergh, Madonna, Malcolm X, Steve Martin, H.L. Mencken, S.I. Newhouse, Jack Nicholson, Neil Simon, Gwyneth Paltrow, Bob Pittman, Edgar Allan Poe, Wolfgang Puck, Robert Redford, John D. Rockefeller, J.D. Salinger, Margaret Sanger, Dawn Steel, Barbra Streisand, William Howard Taft, Nina Totenberg,  Harry S Truman, Ted Turner, Mark Twain, Governor Jesse Ventura, Thomas J. Watson, Walt Whitman, August Wilson, Anna Wintour, Frank Lloyd Wright, Wilbur and Orville Wright.

---from <em><a href=" http://thefastertimes.com/grownupkids/2010/03/10/what-do-you-mean-youre-not-going-to-college/">The Faster Times</a></em>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/people_who_never_got_a_college.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/people_who_never_got_a_college.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:56:08 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Ideals and Realities in Student Protests</title>
         <description><![CDATA[On March 5th in the <em>Wall Street Journal</em>, Peter Robinson penned an op-ed on the California higher education budget crisis entitled <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703915204575103273147345014.html">"The Golden State's Me Generation"</a>. Robinson begins not with the finances behind the tuition hikes and protests, but rather with the framing of the reaction.  He cites participants in the "Strike and Day of Action to Defend Education" casting their efforts in terms of "Freedom Riders," "farmworkers," and the fight for justice in the 60s and 70s.  Berkeley urban studies professor Ananya Roy provided a racial angle as well, announcing "We have all become students of color now."

"Evoking protests against the Vietnam War," Robinson observes, "one banner carried by students at San Francisco State University read, 'Shut It Down like '68.'  'Today we strike!' shouted a Berkeley student, 'Today we march!  Today we show solidarity with the workers!'"

This is the vocabulary of the peace movement and civil rights and labor protections of migrant workers.  It demonstrates, among other things, the continuing moral authority of those causes, even though they took place 40 and 50 years ago.  But there is a giant problem with invoking the movements: if you want to align yourself with the Selma marchers, Cesar Chavez et al, then you better experience some of the same sufferings and indignities that they did.  If not, then the citation of such honored and sometimes martyred precursors starts to look a lot more like vanity than politics.

This is, indeed, Robinson's conclusion:  "Yet what did the protesters demand?  Peace?  Human rights?  No.  Money.  And for whom?  For the downtrodden and oppressed?  No.  For themselves."]]></description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/ideals_and_realities_in_studen.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/ideals_and_realities_in_studen.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 11:22:54 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>The &apos;&apos;Pay Cut&apos;&apos; Crisis</title>
         <description><![CDATA[Both the <em><a href="http://chronicle.com/article/One-Third-of-Faculty-Members/64540/">Chronicle of Higher Education</a></em> and <em><a href="http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/03/08/facsalaries#Comments">Inside Higher Ed</a></em> have reported on a newly-released study regarding faculty salaries from the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources. Both articles highlight how, in the past year, around a third of professors around the country have seen their salaries reduced. (Only at private, research universities has the average professor enjoyed a salary increase in the past year.) Both articles also suggest that the decline might last for some time, because higher education tends to lag behind the economy in reviving from recessions.

It seems to me that both articles buried the lede. We live in a time of nearly-double digit unemployment. Nearly 20 percent of Americans are <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61M1OL20100223">underemployed</a>. Yet higher education has been all but immune from faculty layoffs.

That, of course, should come as little surprise: though faculty salaries (especially in the humanities and social sciences) might not be as high as many professors would like, job security is higher for the professoriate than for just about any other profession. It's almost impossible to fire a tenured professor (unless he or she commits the type of massive research conduct associated with the likes of Ward Churchill), and only a college that wants to sacrifice all pretense of academic quality will dismiss untenured assistant or associate professors during economic downturns.

The AAUP, however, views the new figures as cause for grave concern. As the <em>Chronicle</em> reports, "University officials should seek faculty input on pay cuts, and state officials must chose priorities correctly, Mr. [AAUP director of research and public policy John W.] Curtis, said. 'I do think we're at a pretty critical juncture at looking at higher education as a public good and as a resource that contributes something to society. Unfortunately, a lot of governors and legislators are looking at higher education as only an expense.'"]]></description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/the_pay_cut_crisis.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/the_pay_cut_crisis.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 11:45:38 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>The Tortured Logic of BAMN</title>
         <description><![CDATA[People who have followed the effort to put initiatives on state ballots eliminating racial preferences from college admissions might remember <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAmDwv1DF-I ">this advertisement </a>from 2008, which set Ward Connerly in Klan regalia.  Two years before, a group called Think Progress posted a video on its web page under the headline "Leader of Michigan Initiative To End Affirmative Action Welcomes Ku Klux Klan Support."

Those are revolting examples.  Not much less so are the occasions when Connerly has been shouted down and booed while speaking against racial preferences and supporting various ballot measures across the nation (<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MfvY1LWQ1M&feature=fvw">see here</a> for Connerly leaving the podium after repeated interruptions in Omaha).

Now, according to this story by Peter Schmidt in the <em><a href="http://chronicle.com/article/Defenders-of-Affirmative-Ac/64210/">Chronicle of Higher Education </a></em>, the pro-affirmative action group Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action, Integration, and Immigrant Rights and Fight for Equality by Any Means Necessary (BAMN) has filed a lawsuit against California's ban, Proposition 209, and their target is Connerly himself and the organization he started, the American Civil Rights Institute.  Challenges to 209 have been attempted before and failed, but BAMN believes that 209 nonetheless "violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution by placing a distinct set of legal hurdles in front of minority groups seeking to increase their representation on the university system's campuses."

It takes some tortured logic to reach that conclusion, and here are some of the statements in the actual complaint (which appears <a href="http://www.bamn.com/doc/2010/100216-complaint-overturn209.asp">here</a>). ]]></description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/the_tortured_logic_of_bamn_1.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/the_tortured_logic_of_bamn_1.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2010 14:29:08 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>The Times Does San Diego</title>
         <description><![CDATA[Regulars at FIRE's must-read blog, The Torch, already know the ugly details of events at California-San Diego. A fraternity held an off-campus party that was at best tasteless and at worst racist. Appearing on a student-run TV station (which is funded by the student government through student fees), a student satirical organization defended the party in language, The Torch drily <a href="http://www.thefire.org/article/11597.html">noted</a>, "that many persons on campus found highly offensive."

The university response, however, was nothing short of extraordinary. UCSD president Marye Anne Fox---acting under pressure from various California state legislators---has <a href="http://www.thefire.org/article/11608.html">threatened disciplinary actions</a> against the students involved in planning the party. (That Fox's administration has elected to use a judicial code that was modified because its overly broad nature appears not to have worried the UCSD powers that be.) Even more incredibly, the student government president---working in concert with the university's counsel and other university administrators---has <a href="http://www.ucsdguardian.org/news/media-orgs-defend-free-speech-rights/">frozen funding</a> to all student media organizations. This assault on the First Amendment drew public rebuke from both FIRE and the <a href="http://www.aclusandiego.org/article_downloads/000962/Ltr%20to%20Chancellor%20Fox%20AS%20President%20Gupta.pdf">ACLU</a>, but appears not to have troubled either Fox or her defenders.

The general outlines of the UCSD case should come as little surprise to close observers of contemporary higher education. Regardless of how offensive the student conduct was (and, in this case, it was pretty offensive), the abusive reaction of those with power at the university is far, far more troubling. In the name of promoting "diversity," Fox and her administration seem intent on massively violating due process for her own institution's students and ignoring the requirements that the First Amendment imposes on any public college or university.

Saturday, the <em>New York Times</em> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/27/education/27sandiego.html?hp">brought its attention to events at the San Diego campus</a>. The First Amendment issue received one sentence in reporter Randal Archibold's article: "The student association has suspended financing to all campus media while it studies what to do about the program about the party." The article ignored the protests against this draconian action. Likewise the <em>Times</em> saw fit to gloss over the civil liberties angle, blandly observing, "The administration is still investigating the Compton Cookout, and whether students can or should be sanctioned."]]></description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/the_times_does_san_diego.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/03/the_times_does_san_diego.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 21:44:16 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Double Standards: Fresno and Columbia</title>
         <description><![CDATA[Early February featured an interesting development from Fresno. Students of Bradley Lopez, a health instructor at Fresno Community College, claimed that Lopez was using class time to spread his personal anti-gay views. Lopez denies the allegation, <a href="http://www.fresnobee.com/2010/02/18/1827205/under-fire-instructor-fcc-leaders.html">asserting</a> that all of his comments fell "within the scope of health science."

The students' concerns attracted the attention of the local ACLU branch. In a <a href="http://www.fresnobee.com/2010/02/18/1827205/under-fire-instructor-fcc-leaders.html">six-page letter </a>to FCC administrators, ACLU staff attorney Elizabeth Gill criticized Lopez for presenting "as 'fact' and 'science' inaccurate information that reflects his own highly discriminatory and religiously-based views." According to Gill's letter, students in Lopez's class reported him using a slide asserted that counseling or "hormonal therapy" were the "recommended treatment" for homosexuality. Neither academic freedom nor the 1st amendment, the ACLU letter maintained, applied to professors who present "factually inaccurate information."

The Gill letter also suggested that Lopez's inaccurate remarks might create a "hostile environment" for gay and lesbian students on campus.

The ACLU's "hostile environment" claim strikes me as very troubling. There's no evidence that Lopez punished any gay or lesbian students, or that he retaliated against students who failed to accept his anti-gay views. There's no evidence, in fact, that Lopez ever did anything inappropriate to any student. Surely, for instance, the ACLU wouldn't suggest that a professor opposing racial preferences in admissions produced a "hostile environment"?]]></description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/02/double_standards_fresno_and_co.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/02/double_standards_fresno_and_co.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 13:28:08 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Wesleyan&apos;s Anti-Hate Campaign</title>
         <description>A graduate of Wesleyan sent word that his alma mater now has a &quot;Campus Climate Log&quot; to chronicle &quot;hate incidents and acts of intolerance&quot; and help move &quot;the entire campus towards a hate-free learning environment.&quot; The project, wrapped in conventional diversity rhetoric, is overseen by the Dean of Diversity and Student Engagement as well as the Vice President for Diversity and Strategic Partnerships. The Log can be accessed on on-campus computers, including public ones, but it not available elsewhere. The reports range from the obviously hateful (&quot;kill fags and Jews&quot; scrawled on a bathroom wall) to the banal (suggestive comments from a passing car) and a postmodern graffiti by a student uncomfortable with the belief that a man is a man and a woman is a woman (&quot;f---gender binaries&quot;).  To their credit, the Log committeepersons wonder about the point of major publicity for minor stupidities (&quot;Would it cause more incidents by demonstrating how a single act received so much attention?&quot;) Judging by the scarcity of complaints, either students don&apos;t care much or the campus is already pretty much hate-free: the log for this school year shows only seven reports from last fall, and one since January 1.
</description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/02/wesleyans_antihate_campaign.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/02/wesleyans_antihate_campaign.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 13:09:48 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>The 10 Youngest College Graduates In U.S. History</title>
         <description><![CDATA[In these days of 6-year degrees and students graduating at 25 if at all, it's encouraging to see stories of far more intrepid matriculation - consider <a href="http://www.onlinedegree.net/10-youngest-college-graduates-in-u-s-history-and-where-they-are-today/ ">"The 10 Youngest College Graduates in U.S. History"</a> at Online Degree. Number 1, Michael Keany, current holder of the Guinness World Record for "Youngest University Graduate." "At the age of 8, the homeschooled prodigy completed an Associate of Science degree in geology while at Santa Rosa Junior College. He would then go on to graduate with a bachelor's degree in anthropology from University of South Alabama at 10, a master's in biochemistry from Middle Tennessee State University at 14, and another master's - this time in computer science - from Vanderbilt at 17."

If those aren't accomplishments enough, how about Kathleen Holtz, number 8 on the list, who graduated from California State University at 15, immediately entered law school and, <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2007/11/19/18-year-old-kathleen-holtz-passes-the-california-bar/tab/article/">at 18 </a>became the "youngest law student to ever pass the bar in California - if not the United States." She quickly tried several successful cases as an attorney. Take a look at the list for several more inspiring examples of early talent. 

 
]]></description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/02/the_10_youngest_college_gradua.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/02/the_10_youngest_college_gradua.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2010 11:28:43 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Out Of Her Depth?</title>
         <description><![CDATA[Ruth Simmons, president of Brown University, quit the board of directors of Goldman Sachs, citing the "increasing time requirements associated with her position as President." What she didn't cite were the two or three weeks of steady criticism from financial analysts  and students and the student newspaper in response to belated awareness of her lucrative remuneration from Goldman Sachs and her comments on her role on the board.

    Simmons, who juggles membership on several boards, received $323,000 a year as a Goldman director and she leaves the board, which she joined a decade ago, with $4.2 million in Goldman stock, plus 10,000 options that could raise her take to $5.7 million.

  In <a href="http://www.browndailyherald.com/simmons-won-t-be-buffeted-about-on-boards-1.2144610">an interview with the <em>Brown Daily Herald</em>, </a>Simmons, the only African-American on the Goldman board and one of only two women, stressed that as a director on several boards,  her goal was "to make certain fields more accessible to women and minorities," and implied that that she served on boards to learn something about economics.

The interview, which preceded the Simmons resignation, immediately drew <a href="http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Felix+Salmon&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1">strong criticism from  Felix Salmon</a>, a blogger at <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=TRI%3AUS">Thomson Reuters Corp.</a> who called  for a change in the composition of Goldman Sachs's board because he said some of Simmons's comments indicate that she lacks the business sophistication to challenge management.]]></description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/02/ruth_simmons_president_of_brow.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/02/ruth_simmons_president_of_brow.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Sun, 21 Feb 2010 13:18:01 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Binghamton&apos;s Diversity &quot;Experiment&quot;</title>
         <description><![CDATA[Anyone who follows college sports knows the basic outlines of the fiasco that befell Binghamton University's men's basketball team. A few years after making the transition to Division I and building a new arena, Binghamton hired a new coach, Kevin Broadus, who recruited low-character, academically challenged "students" who happened to be talented basketball players. The team won a conference championship, but shortly thereafter everything collapsed: several players were arrested (on crimes ranging from selling drugs to making purchases from a stolen credit card) and revelations of academic improprieties emerged. In the aftermath, the athletic director was fired, the head coach was "reassigned," and the president "retired."

The new SUNY chancellor, Nancy Zimpher, commissioned a study chaired by Judith Kaye, former chief judge of the New York Court of Appeals. The Kaye Report revealed such things as how Binghamton, a university that claims to be academically elite, granted transfer credit for such courses as "Introduction to Bowling." But the most striking element of the report is how defenders of the rogue program---both during Broadus' tenure and subsequently in the investigation---tried to play the "diversity" card to undermine those who wanted to uphold even token academic standards at Binghamton. That, of course, is a very familiar storyline, even if it usually doesn't appear in the kind of context we saw at Binghamton.

In its opening section, the <a href="http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/sports/20100210_BING_DOC.pdf">report from Kaye</a>---who, after all, is hardly a card-carrying right-winger, and who provided the required paean to the university's "admirable" commitment to admitting "disadvantaged youths" who needed "second (or more) chances"---nonetheless declared, "we have noted the suggestions of 'racism' that have at times been raised to resist questioning, and expressions of concern, about various aspects of the program." (All of Broadus' problem recruits appear to have been minorities.)]]></description>
         <link>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/02/binghamtons_diversity_experime.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/02/binghamtons_diversity_experime.html</guid>
        
        
         <pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2010 09:42:43 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
      
   </channel>
</rss>
