The dirty little secret of higher education is that governments at all levels are pushing young people (and older folk) to get a college degree, regardless of ability. Because it is so easy to get into some college, there is less pressure on high school students to learn the study skills, time management and work ethic needed to actually graduate.
The federal government requires all colleges to report their 150% graduation rate: the number of entering freshmen tracked over SIX years (150% of the traditional four year college curriculum). This information is buried in an IPEDs site at the U.S. Department of Education, and not surprisingly, schools do not like to advertise that their graduation rate is lower than low.
Disclosure: my university has a 39% graduation rate over six years; higher for transfer students. The rate varies greatly by sex and race -- white and black females are graduating at far higher rates than white and black men. The situation is so severe that the National Urban League has labeled it one of Black America's top problems.
Finally, the American Enterprise Institute has published the high cost of perpetuating failure. Why do "we" do this?
Every politician, Democrat or Republican is an "education" candidate. All voters, it seems, feel their children are "above average" and entitled to a college education. That Woebegone logic runs up against the high proportion of students who are not adequately prepared for college. All of the remedial programs in the world have not changed that basic fact. The Tocquevillian nightmare of democracy running amuck means that all are pulled (with financial inducements) to become "college material" whether or not that is true.
The following site contains an abstract and link to the full PDF, which is eye-opening, to say the least. Chicago State has a 16% graduation rate. Other schools scrape below ten percent!
The only political solution is to mandate graduation through social promotion (think of how many high school students get tracked into Special Ed and then "graduated").
http://www.aei.org/paper/100019
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Free, Free, Free!
At my other site, eHistory, I have posted blog entries that put the fiscally "free" into FreeU:
"Free Textbooks in Our Future?"
"Best Freeware for Students (and Others)":
PC and Mac advice for every imaginable category of software. Why pay when there are good freeware alternatives?
Feedback and suggestions welcome.
PS: Don't waste your money on Kindle DX, the new Amazon product aimed at the textbook market. Not good, not free -- read here.
"Free Textbooks in Our Future?"
"Best Freeware for Students (and Others)":
PC and Mac advice for every imaginable category of software. Why pay when there are good freeware alternatives?
Feedback and suggestions welcome.
PS: Don't waste your money on Kindle DX, the new Amazon product aimed at the textbook market. Not good, not free -- read here.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
All Hail Caesar! Here and Abroad
In the USA, it is "All hail Caesar!" So it seems by the clampdown on students satirizing President Obama at Bucknell University. Readers may recall that during the election campaign the freedom-fighting (?) faculty of the University of Illinois got a reversal of a ruling that would require them to eschew political buttons bashing President Bush and/or candidate McCain. During that free speech fracas, the AAUP and ACLU rushed to join FIRE in protesting this restriction. The AAUP's professed commitment to academic freedom involved both faculty (its constituency) and students (read AAUP Joint Statement here under Student Affairs).
Now that the favorite of academe (Obama) is in power, we wait for the other shoe to drop. And the AAUP, ACLU are . . . silent as a tomb.
Civil libertarian David French opines on the Bucknell situation here. A Bucknell alum notes that his alma mater is a repeat offender.
At least FIRE is consistent: They have defended the right of campus groups to bring left-wingers like Bill Ayers and Ward Churchill to campus.
Speaking of speech tombs, the election in Iran shows how difficult it can be to get out the message. Twitter has emerged as the primary means, along with bloggers who are putting their lives on the line. Why? Because a 2008 Iranian law imposes the death penalty for all those who "disturb the mental security" of others. Hmmm. Have the mullahs been reading U.S. harassment codes?
Read on about the cyberwar being fought in Iran.
Lost in the election debate is the distinction between freedom and democracy. Democracy may be the means to an end but if women are beaten for showing their ankles, Lady Liberty is outraged, even if an election was "fair." The media (and presidential) focus on democracy misconstrues the individual yearning for freedom--the same desire that motivated minorities in this country to cite our natural rights tradition and Constitution protecting the right to deviate from the norm. But that's a subject taken up in my forthcoming book (due out next month), Race and Liberty in America: The Essential Reader.
One final note: there is no moral equivalency between the USA and Iran on matters of speech. Nonetheless, if tyranny has a tendency to spread, it is aided by the forgotten arguments for freedom.
Now that the favorite of academe (Obama) is in power, we wait for the other shoe to drop. And the AAUP, ACLU are . . . silent as a tomb.
Civil libertarian David French opines on the Bucknell situation here. A Bucknell alum notes that his alma mater is a repeat offender.
At least FIRE is consistent: They have defended the right of campus groups to bring left-wingers like Bill Ayers and Ward Churchill to campus.
Speaking of speech tombs, the election in Iran shows how difficult it can be to get out the message. Twitter has emerged as the primary means, along with bloggers who are putting their lives on the line. Why? Because a 2008 Iranian law imposes the death penalty for all those who "disturb the mental security" of others. Hmmm. Have the mullahs been reading U.S. harassment codes?
Read on about the cyberwar being fought in Iran.
Lost in the election debate is the distinction between freedom and democracy. Democracy may be the means to an end but if women are beaten for showing their ankles, Lady Liberty is outraged, even if an election was "fair." The media (and presidential) focus on democracy misconstrues the individual yearning for freedom--the same desire that motivated minorities in this country to cite our natural rights tradition and Constitution protecting the right to deviate from the norm. But that's a subject taken up in my forthcoming book (due out next month), Race and Liberty in America: The Essential Reader.
One final note: there is no moral equivalency between the USA and Iran on matters of speech. Nonetheless, if tyranny has a tendency to spread, it is aided by the forgotten arguments for freedom.
Labels:
AAUP,
ACLU,
Bucknell,
David French,
FIRE,
First Amendment,
Iran
Sunday, May 3, 2009
"Could You Pass the 1885 Admission Test for High School?"
This is an excerpt from my other teaching blog, eHistory:
"Could You Pass the 1885 Admission Test for High School?"
The times they have a changed...
"Could You Pass the 1885 Admission Test for High School?"
The times they have a changed...
Thursday, April 16, 2009
It can happen here (because it is happening here!)
Massachusetts was once a cradle of liberty. In researching my book Race and Liberty in America, how uplifting it was to read those freedom fighters who fled to the more hospitable climate of Massachusetts where they could speak their mind on slavery and other civil rights issues.
Flash forward to 2009 and the thought police are busy quashing "quaint" notions of free speech, free press, and freedom of conscience. For the latest assault on campus freedom, read http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/10475.html
This incident, along with so many others, remind me of The Clash lyric:
"You have the right to free
Speech as long as you're not
Dumb enough to actually try it. . . "
"You have the right to remain silent
You are warned that anything you say
Can and will be taken down
And used as evidence against you."
Flash forward to 2009 and the thought police are busy quashing "quaint" notions of free speech, free press, and freedom of conscience. For the latest assault on campus freedom, read http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/10475.html
This incident, along with so many others, remind me of The Clash lyric:
"You have the right to free
Speech as long as you're not
Dumb enough to actually try it. . . "
"You have the right to remain silent
You are warned that anything you say
Can and will be taken down
And used as evidence against you."
Thursday, March 12, 2009
The Great Depression and College Life
With all the world abuzz with talk of the dreaded "D" word, this post discusses sources for the study of college during hard times. Nearly every college or university has an archive with records dating back to the 1930s. With modern scanning technology, it becomes easy to upload to your own online storage site and then share the 1930s college experience with the world.
Since my institution hired me to teach the Great Depression (among other courses), I grabbed photocopies of all Board and President minutes and reports. Last month I uploaded the entire era (1929-1942) to here. Download the root folder as a zip file, then open with your photo manager.
Google Books is digitizing the world's history of fiction and nonfiction (including newspapers). There is no reason why students and amateur historians can't "do their part" (the early New Deal slogan).
Another great site for documents from that era, including a high school newspaper and college material: "The New Deal Project."
It appears that allegations of liberal bias among the faculty ran rampant in that era too. They didn't call it Political Correctness because that term didn't come along, it seems, until the communist Mao wrote his Little Red Book.
This portal at the New Deal Project examines "Student Activism in the 1930s," with many documents and images from that time period. Most students, however, conformed to the "Joe College" and "Betty Coed" norms of their parents--particularly since the latter (Mom and Dad) sacrificed so much to send their kids to school.
OTHER SOURCES: I also recommend the following free online magazine archives:
Since my institution hired me to teach the Great Depression (among other courses), I grabbed photocopies of all Board and President minutes and reports. Last month I uploaded the entire era (1929-1942) to here. Download the root folder as a zip file, then open with your photo manager.
Google Books is digitizing the world's history of fiction and nonfiction (including newspapers). There is no reason why students and amateur historians can't "do their part" (the early New Deal slogan).
Another great site for documents from that era, including a high school newspaper and college material: "The New Deal Project."
It appears that allegations of liberal bias among the faculty ran rampant in that era too. They didn't call it Political Correctness because that term didn't come along, it seems, until the communist Mao wrote his Little Red Book.
This portal at the New Deal Project examines "Student Activism in the 1930s," with many documents and images from that time period. Most students, however, conformed to the "Joe College" and "Betty Coed" norms of their parents--particularly since the latter (Mom and Dad) sacrificed so much to send their kids to school.
OTHER SOURCES: I also recommend the following free online magazine archives:
Time: http://www.time.com/time/
The Nation: http://www.thenation.com/ -- change search option to 1865-2002.
American Jewish Committee: http://www.ajcarchives.org/main.php -- everything from their archives and publications from 1900 onward. With the Nazi rise to power (1933), the AJC dealt with anti-Semitism overseas and at home.
FDR Cartoon Database: http://www.nisk.k12.ny.us/fdr/
EH.Net: http://eh.net/ -- this fantastic site combines economics and history and is useful for determining the present-day value of past sums or for its ever-growing encyclopedia, book reviews, economic data, etc. Search the site for Great Depression and you will come up with interviews with leading economists in the 21st century, and much more! It is no understatement to state that the Depression is to economics what the Big Bang is to physics. Entire schools of thought grappled (and still do) with the causes, the effects, and the various elements of economic life. Our current Fed chairman, Ben Bernanke, for example, wrote some of his early academic essays on this topic.
Gulag: Lest we forget the other "class genocide" of that era, he are some choice documents (and English translations) of Lenin and Stalin ordering the extermination of property-owning peasants.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
God and Man and U., Part 2
For cases of religious discrimination on campus, readers may consult web sites operated by watchdog groups that defend religious freedom. For some of these groups it is a core mission, but for others it is one of many civil liberties issues:
FIRE: See their guide to religious liberty.
Alliance Defense Fund: One of the top lawyers for FIRE, David French, left to help with this aggressive organization. They can help you with a case of religious discrimination, find local counsel, or seek out similar public interest groups in your region of the USA.
Anti-Defamation League: ADL is actively fighting anti-Semitism on many fronts, including the campaign to battle academic boycotts of Israel. It is a sad state of affairs when thousands of scholars (myself included) have to sign a petition opposing a boycott of the country allowing the freest expression of opinion and religion in the Middle East. There is no such boycott of Iran or other Muslim nations that sharply restrict religious and academic freedom. Read this Freedom House report.
Here is Freedom House's report on Israel rating it "Free." Reports on Egypt and Iran are also available, along with annual reports on every country in the world.
Catholic League: Many years ago, someone quipped that anti-Catholicism was the "last respectable bigotry." The Catholic League is that religion's equivalent of the Anti-Defamation League. Search their site for "academic" (without the quotes) and you will find many items.
The oldest organization in America on this issue is the
ACLU: Often accused of promoting "freedom from religion" (rather than freedom of religion), the organization does take on cases that protect the rights of the religious, as well as the atheist.
FIRE: See their guide to religious liberty.
Alliance Defense Fund: One of the top lawyers for FIRE, David French, left to help with this aggressive organization. They can help you with a case of religious discrimination, find local counsel, or seek out similar public interest groups in your region of the USA.
Anti-Defamation League: ADL is actively fighting anti-Semitism on many fronts, including the campaign to battle academic boycotts of Israel. It is a sad state of affairs when thousands of scholars (myself included) have to sign a petition opposing a boycott of the country allowing the freest expression of opinion and religion in the Middle East. There is no such boycott of Iran or other Muslim nations that sharply restrict religious and academic freedom. Read this Freedom House report.
Here is Freedom House's report on Israel rating it "Free." Reports on Egypt and Iran are also available, along with annual reports on every country in the world.
Catholic League: Many years ago, someone quipped that anti-Catholicism was the "last respectable bigotry." The Catholic League is that religion's equivalent of the Anti-Defamation League. Search their site for "academic" (without the quotes) and you will find many items.
The oldest organization in America on this issue is the
ACLU: Often accused of promoting "freedom from religion" (rather than freedom of religion), the organization does take on cases that protect the rights of the religious, as well as the atheist.
Friday, February 20, 2009
God and Man and U., Part 1
Every crisis provides "teachable moments": lessons forgotten or neglected in more placid times. Americans are now (re)learning the dangers of
"Moral hazard": the notion that people take excessive risk if they know they will be bailed out. Think Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, banks, S&L's (1980s), and the housing industry.
"Too-big-to-fail" principle: hence, the first in line for bailout money are the titans of finance (Citigroup, AIG) or the "Big Three" (not so big any more). Is this moral? Pundits are embroiled in debates over this very question.
This crisis is no different when it comes to economics or academic freedom. That brings us to the concept of
"Crossover sanctions": "force the implementation of federal requirements in one area or the states risk losing money in another, similar area. For instance, states may lose highway grants if they failed to follow certain health or safety requirements imposed by the federal government."
Some well-known crossover sanctions include the federal requirement that all states lower their maximum speed limit to 55 (since repealed) or raise the drinking age to 21. Crossover sanctions grew enormously from the 1970s onward, as Congress discovered the splendid power of "attaching strings" to federal aid. This has worked a quiet revolution in the relationship between the federal and state governments. "He who pays the bills calls the tunes."
So, what does this have to do with higher education? A lot.
The latest stimulus act, with billions for higher education, has come with some "crossover sanctions." One of the issues was whether the money violated the religious freedom of students on campuses. Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC)introduced an amendment "to allow the free exercise of religion at institutions of higher education that receive funding. . . ."
DeMint was responding to the following section of the act (the Demint amendment failed on a 43-54 roll call vote):
The civil liberties group FIRE took a middle-of-the-road stance: Detailing concerns with the vague language, while urging a simple amendment--one that apparently was too "controversial" for passage.
The truth is state universities don't need this current law to restrict religious expression on campus. In fact, they have already found ways to punish, reprimand, and "decertify" Christian, Muslim, and Jewish groups on campus.
That is a story for my next post.
"Moral hazard": the notion that people take excessive risk if they know they will be bailed out. Think Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, banks, S&L's (1980s), and the housing industry.
"Too-big-to-fail" principle: hence, the first in line for bailout money are the titans of finance (Citigroup, AIG) or the "Big Three" (not so big any more). Is this moral? Pundits are embroiled in debates over this very question.
This crisis is no different when it comes to economics or academic freedom. That brings us to the concept of
"Crossover sanctions": "force the implementation of federal requirements in one area or the states risk losing money in another, similar area. For instance, states may lose highway grants if they failed to follow certain health or safety requirements imposed by the federal government."
Some well-known crossover sanctions include the federal requirement that all states lower their maximum speed limit to 55 (since repealed) or raise the drinking age to 21. Crossover sanctions grew enormously from the 1970s onward, as Congress discovered the splendid power of "attaching strings" to federal aid. This has worked a quiet revolution in the relationship between the federal and state governments. "He who pays the bills calls the tunes."
So, what does this have to do with higher education? A lot.
The latest stimulus act, with billions for higher education, has come with some "crossover sanctions." One of the issues was whether the money violated the religious freedom of students on campuses. Senator Jim DeMint (R-SC)introduced an amendment "to allow the free exercise of religion at institutions of higher education that receive funding. . . ."
DeMint was responding to the following section of the act (the Demint amendment failed on a 43-54 roll call vote):
(2) PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS.—No funds awarded under this section may be used for—(A) the maintenance of systems, equipment, or facilities, including maintenance associated with any permissible uses of funds described in paragraph (1); (B) modernization, renovation, or repair of stadiums or other facilities primarily used for athletic contests or exhibitions or other events for which admission is charged to the general public; (C) modernization, renovation, or repair of facilities— (i) used for sectarian instruction, religious worship, or a school or department of divinity; or (ii) in which a substantial portion of the functions of the facilities are subsumed in a religious mission; or (D) construction of new facilities.The usual suspects roared forth with the usual vitriol: The Right claimed that godless liberals and the ACLU were trying to scrub religion from the public square. The Left shouted back that the conservatives were a bunch of know-nothing theocrats.
The civil liberties group FIRE took a middle-of-the-road stance: Detailing concerns with the vague language, while urging a simple amendment--one that apparently was too "controversial" for passage.
The truth is state universities don't need this current law to restrict religious expression on campus. In fact, they have already found ways to punish, reprimand, and "decertify" Christian, Muslim, and Jewish groups on campus.
That is a story for my next post.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
The Right to Blog: The Law for Students and Staff -- and Cops
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has several good web sites explaining the right of students to express themselves on blogs:
http://w2.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-students.php
and for state college faculty and staff:
http://w2.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-labor.php
Since one out of five students blog, and a great many faculty and staff blog as well, these are useful primers on First Amendment Rights.
EFF also discusses your right to an anonymous blog: the contentious issue challenged by police groups and others who do not like sites such as ratemycop.com or ratemyprofessors.com
For more on the efforts of police to shut down cop-rating blogs, see this article.
Perhaps your campus newspaper could do a story on student and staff blogs? Do they educate? Go over the line? What role do they play in college student and faculty life? The new "virtual diary" of the 21st century? Or will all your "status updates" go up in smoke when you shut down your Facebook account?
http://w2.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-students.php
and for state college faculty and staff:
http://w2.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-labor.php
Since one out of five students blog, and a great many faculty and staff blog as well, these are useful primers on First Amendment Rights.
EFF also discusses your right to an anonymous blog: the contentious issue challenged by police groups and others who do not like sites such as ratemycop.com or ratemyprofessors.com
For more on the efforts of police to shut down cop-rating blogs, see this article.
Perhaps your campus newspaper could do a story on student and staff blogs? Do they educate? Go over the line? What role do they play in college student and faculty life? The new "virtual diary" of the 21st century? Or will all your "status updates" go up in smoke when you shut down your Facebook account?
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Big Brother and U, Part II: Is Your University Reading Your Email?
In a previous post, I discussed recent high-profile cases involving college surveillance and the use of email or Internet postings against students, faculty or staff. (Update: The Electronic Frontier Foundation effectively won its case defending the student leader who emailed her criticisms of Michigan State's calendar policy to faculty on campus. The university accused her of "spamming." FIRE referred the litigation to EFF, a civil liberties group specializing in electronic law).
In Part II, I offer the following information to shock you into how little privacy you have via e-mail or the Internet. In short, if you use a university email account--even off campus--the university owns that electronic "property" and may archive it for years.
Most universities have network policies that forbid anything even remotely personal via email or the Internet on campus. Of course, everybody breaks this rule because a) they are not trained to understand the limitations on email; and b) most people believe that "emailing home" about getting dinner for the family is much like calling the family on a university phone. We all do it and yet that too violates university policy. A few campuses allow reasonable private use of university email but my university, like most others, does not carve out that space for students or staff. (Correction: The main Carbondale campus does not allow personal use but the Edwardsville campus does allow "personal use").
The following guide by Tina Murch, "E-mail Privacy? Only a 'Virtual Reality'" is the best wake-up call that I have read on the Internet. I highly recommend it to any one who uses university email or equipment. If you use your own laptop, Murch notes, you are still using university wireless and can be busted. Moreover, if you email from a non .edu account to someone with a non .edu account but that recipient receives it on campus, you are still busted! University discretion is enormous. Since most people are unaware of the pitfalls of email and computer use, even when off campus, Murch offers tips on how to survive this Brave New World.
Her tips are not enough. I urge you to contact university officials and request several things:
1. Training and transparency: The rules on most campuses sound good but there is discretion to do just about anything, particularly when information is archived (my university states that privacy is a "basic right" but there are loopholes, including the unstated "gotcha" category of punishing people for private use of email. Also the catch-all "disclosure made for the purpose of resolving internal disputes," etc.)
2. Question authority: ask questions of campus authorities:
*How many monitoring cases have there been in the past five years?
*How long does your university archive email and other Internet usage logs?
*Campus newspapers need to ask whether their email correspondence is subject to surveillance. In one case, a university fired faculty, in part, because of "private" email sent to a student newspaper editor. Accused of trying to "discredit" an administrator, the campus president fired two faculty members!
For more on that case, read here. Apparently, bringing truthful information to the president, following procedure, and then having the local AAUP investigate when the president did nothing about a serious matter = termination of two tenured faculty. This case, and so many others, is why I have lost my capacity to be shocked but not to be outraged.
So, if you think it can't happen on your campus, it has and will if good people do nothing. Even on my own campus, high-profile termination cases left a lot of questions about the use of past email. But the investigation reports are sealed and heavily redacted, or so we are told. Who knows how far back universities go when retrieving email in cases against students or faculty.
Student email has been punished at my university because it "harassed" the recipient, who was so shattered she published it on her web magazine! Although the email was in poor taste, taking out an ad to decry anti-feminist ramblings sounded like overkill to our campus newspaper. One wonders when a college president will take similar action against some wild-eyed feminist bashing Republican women as "fascist sex-traitors." My guess is: never.
3. Statute of Limitations: Since most people are clueless, and have violated strict network policies, almost any one can have their electronic past used against them. Officials need to set a statute of limitations for violations, as they do in other university code violations. Currently, university network policies set "forever" as the default statute of limitation. That makes the IRS sound like a friendly agency by contrast!
4. Reasonable private use: Some universities take the "chill" off students and staff by allowing reasonable private use. The alternative is for people to avoid .edu email altogether--and that is not good for the university! God knows, this professor has to look up the preferred email of students on Facebook because I assume that .edu is not their primary address. This is an unproductive use of my time.
5. Offense is defense: if you are a free thinker--and who doesn't think freely from time to time?--and feel you may become a target, make a habit of archiving all of your email for contextual defense. Campus prosecutors routinely "cherry pick" email to cast the accused in the worst light. Don't let them do it.
If you become involved in controversies (or not), you may wish to retain certain information in case Big Brother tries to terminate you. Keep this information and your email archive in a safe place, preferably in an encrypted online storage site. (My home was burglarized but I had a backup AND certain information I may need in the future is in a place where burglars cannot get it).
Remember the line: "do not go gentle into that good night!" (Dylan Thomas)
Again, just to let you know what universities can do to you, check out the cases in my prior post and this explicit statement by Temple University in its email usage guide: Scroll down to 14.6 to read this:
"14.6 WORKPLACE SURVEILLANCE AND SEARCHES
Temple University may authorize the use of reasonable surveillance and search measures as necessary to ensure an appropriate work environment or compliance with University policies and applicable law. Subject to legal requirements, the University reserves the right to inspect and search all work areas, desks, computers, file cabinets, lockers, lunch boxes, or other containers, and personal vehicles in University parking lots or public streets within campus boundaries or any other area within University control. In addition, all records contained in computers (including voice mail and e-mail) and storage devices (including removable media) are open to inspection by the University in accordance with University policies, subject to applicable legal requirements."
Got your attention?
Part III (forthcoming) will be a guide to protecting your privacy when you are completely free of campus life. Even at home, you may be vulnerable to keylogging and other privacy-invading practices. Yes, even if you use a Mac!
In Part II, I offer the following information to shock you into how little privacy you have via e-mail or the Internet. In short, if you use a university email account--even off campus--the university owns that electronic "property" and may archive it for years.
Most universities have network policies that forbid anything even remotely personal via email or the Internet on campus. Of course, everybody breaks this rule because a) they are not trained to understand the limitations on email; and b) most people believe that "emailing home" about getting dinner for the family is much like calling the family on a university phone. We all do it and yet that too violates university policy. A few campuses allow reasonable private use of university email but my university, like most others, does not carve out that space for students or staff. (Correction: The main Carbondale campus does not allow personal use but the Edwardsville campus does allow "personal use").
The following guide by Tina Murch, "E-mail Privacy? Only a 'Virtual Reality'" is the best wake-up call that I have read on the Internet. I highly recommend it to any one who uses university email or equipment. If you use your own laptop, Murch notes, you are still using university wireless and can be busted. Moreover, if you email from a non .edu account to someone with a non .edu account but that recipient receives it on campus, you are still busted! University discretion is enormous. Since most people are unaware of the pitfalls of email and computer use, even when off campus, Murch offers tips on how to survive this Brave New World.
Her tips are not enough. I urge you to contact university officials and request several things:
1. Training and transparency: The rules on most campuses sound good but there is discretion to do just about anything, particularly when information is archived (my university states that privacy is a "basic right" but there are loopholes, including the unstated "gotcha" category of punishing people for private use of email. Also the catch-all "disclosure made for the purpose of resolving internal disputes," etc.)
2. Question authority: ask questions of campus authorities:
*How many monitoring cases have there been in the past five years?
*How long does your university archive email and other Internet usage logs?
*Campus newspapers need to ask whether their email correspondence is subject to surveillance. In one case, a university fired faculty, in part, because of "private" email sent to a student newspaper editor. Accused of trying to "discredit" an administrator, the campus president fired two faculty members!
For more on that case, read here. Apparently, bringing truthful information to the president, following procedure, and then having the local AAUP investigate when the president did nothing about a serious matter = termination of two tenured faculty. This case, and so many others, is why I have lost my capacity to be shocked but not to be outraged.
So, if you think it can't happen on your campus, it has and will if good people do nothing. Even on my own campus, high-profile termination cases left a lot of questions about the use of past email. But the investigation reports are sealed and heavily redacted, or so we are told. Who knows how far back universities go when retrieving email in cases against students or faculty.
Student email has been punished at my university because it "harassed" the recipient, who was so shattered she published it on her web magazine! Although the email was in poor taste, taking out an ad to decry anti-feminist ramblings sounded like overkill to our campus newspaper. One wonders when a college president will take similar action against some wild-eyed feminist bashing Republican women as "fascist sex-traitors." My guess is: never.
3. Statute of Limitations: Since most people are clueless, and have violated strict network policies, almost any one can have their electronic past used against them. Officials need to set a statute of limitations for violations, as they do in other university code violations. Currently, university network policies set "forever" as the default statute of limitation. That makes the IRS sound like a friendly agency by contrast!
4. Reasonable private use: Some universities take the "chill" off students and staff by allowing reasonable private use. The alternative is for people to avoid .edu email altogether--and that is not good for the university! God knows, this professor has to look up the preferred email of students on Facebook because I assume that .edu is not their primary address. This is an unproductive use of my time.
5. Offense is defense: if you are a free thinker--and who doesn't think freely from time to time?--and feel you may become a target, make a habit of archiving all of your email for contextual defense. Campus prosecutors routinely "cherry pick" email to cast the accused in the worst light. Don't let them do it.
If you become involved in controversies (or not), you may wish to retain certain information in case Big Brother tries to terminate you. Keep this information and your email archive in a safe place, preferably in an encrypted online storage site. (My home was burglarized but I had a backup AND certain information I may need in the future is in a place where burglars cannot get it).
Remember the line: "do not go gentle into that good night!" (Dylan Thomas)
Again, just to let you know what universities can do to you, check out the cases in my prior post and this explicit statement by Temple University in its email usage guide: Scroll down to 14.6 to read this:
"14.6 WORKPLACE SURVEILLANCE AND SEARCHES
Temple University may authorize the use of reasonable surveillance and search measures as necessary to ensure an appropriate work environment or compliance with University policies and applicable law. Subject to legal requirements, the University reserves the right to inspect and search all work areas, desks, computers, file cabinets, lockers, lunch boxes, or other containers, and personal vehicles in University parking lots or public streets within campus boundaries or any other area within University control. In addition, all records contained in computers (including voice mail and e-mail) and storage devices (including removable media) are open to inspection by the University in accordance with University policies, subject to applicable legal requirements."
Got your attention?
Part III (forthcoming) will be a guide to protecting your privacy when you are completely free of campus life. Even at home, you may be vulnerable to keylogging and other privacy-invading practices. Yes, even if you use a Mac!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)