That Time The New Yorker Incensed Me Into Writing the Editor

While I find John Cassidy’s concerns on the evolving  (devolving?) value of higher education largely on point (“College Calculus,” September 7), I question what appear to be potshots aimed at Kansas State University (full disclosure: not an alumnus, but I am native to the State and support the school’s research and extension mission). Cassidy is concerned that colleges are enticing students with specialized degrees that may sound exciting and even offer short-term reward, but fail to provide lifetime value. He then holds up Kansas State’s major in Bakery Science and minor in Unmanned Aircraft Systems as examples. While understanding of drone technology holds obvious value as the robotics become more ubiquitous in society (a fact the article fails to acknowledge), Cassidy condescendingly suggests that the purpose of the Bakery Science major is to “run a bakery.” Were this the purpose of the degree, it would well buttress his argument that students are increasingly taking on student loans to obtain unnecessary degrees. Unfortunately for Cassidy, it’s not. K-State’s Grain Science program has been in operation for over fifty years, suggesting it is far from a fly-by-night scheme to bring in additional tuition dollars. The program enjoys 100 percent placement (a statistic Cassidy may find dubious), and graduates earn the highest starting salary of all College of Agriculture graduates (a more difficult fact to quibble over - K-State’s College of Agriculture is consistently ranked among the top ten in the nation, signaling a semblance of worth in the degree.).

The irony is that the bakery program appears to be imbuing students with specific skills that make them more marketable in the workplace. Graduates are trained to work for Kellog’s, Nestle, and King Arthur Flour – not the local donut shop. As genetic science continues modifying the protein composition and nutritional nuances of grains, this training will only increase in value. We now want sweet foods without the sugar content and savory foods without the cholesterol – who do you think develops these products?

This article is dog-whistling at its finest. Cassidy fears that college degrees may only be used for signaling, thereby failing to provide specific training that makes a graduate worth more. He then purposefully singles out a program that provides specific training that makes students more knowledgeable and marketable, but condescendingly suggests these students are only good for running local bakeries. There are undoubtedly examples of narrowly focused degrees with inherent risk that can be mocked. I like to think an Oxford/Columbia/NYU-educated journalist didn’t simply single out a funny-sounding degree from a seemingly Podunk institution in Kansas and decide this was the perfect example without actually doing any research into the program, because that would be really lazy. I like to think this wasn’t a play to an overly educated East Coast audience readily willing to join the mockery of a public school in Kansas, because that would also be really lazy. Unfortunately, the author appears willing to do exactly that. I’m personally familiar with better examples on the East Coast, but we must apparently consider where our readership lies – in the ivory towers of the original colonies, and not the plains of the Midwest.


What's unfortunate is, I otherwise completely agreed with the article.

I Can't Right Good. Need School Help.

The further removed I become from college, the more inane I realize my experiences as a legal (albeit young) adult were. About eight years ago I failed Washburn's writing exam, which was an awful member of this collection of experiences.

A couple levels of context should be leveled here. First, Washburn University was an open admissions school - get your high school diploma and you get in. Or your GED. Whichever. Aside from community college (which no one attends out here on the East Coast), I'm not sure if my friends really grasp the idea of not having to 'get into' college. You just graduate from high school and you go. This is why jokes about seniors not being able to get into college perplex me.*

Don't think for two seconds I'm talking down on the students that attend Washburn. Some, yes - the campus is rolling (har har!) with nontrads at a level unknown to most college campuses. However, our mock trial team took 3rd nationally my freshman year. And there are no divisions in this activity - we weren't competing against comparable institutions. First place was Virginia and second was Harvard. We kicked the shit out of schools that have average ACT scores of 28-30. Georgia Tech and Yale. And  those bastards from Washington-St. Louis. There's no chip on my shoulder, just highlighting that despite its low floor Washburn still enjoyed a high ceiling. We had kids would (literally) nail 179 on the LSAT, but were too modest to choose a private school at the age of 17.

I've digressed masterfully here, which may be one of my principal problems. Circling back to the writing exam, this is a written test given to all students to determine whether they must take English 201. 201 is a remedial course that must be completed before taking the junior English course, which must be completed by all students. A bit under 10 percent of the student body must take EN201. These are the kids that can't right good. Each essay is individually graded on a scale of 1-5, and the recipients of ones must take EN201. Easy enough - don't get a one.

I got a one.

The average ACT score at Washburn is 21 (equivalent to a score of 980-1010 on the SAT), and the bottom decile hovers around 17-18 (820-890). There's nothing wrong with falling in that range - someone has to squish into that end of the bell curve - but I'm a damn elitist. The notion of falling here kills pieces of me. Large, kill the dinosaurs asteroid-sized pieces. I wrote papers for money my freshman year, and provided partial refunds for non-As. I killed the the GRE writing exam. My work has been featured on Yahoo! and Sports Illustrated (ok, maybe I do have a chip on my shoulder). Point is, I shouldn't have fallen into the one category. And worst of all, there's no way to protest your score - you simply get shepherded onto the dolt track and live the rest of your life in embarrassment. I did not know a single friend who took English 201.

And neither did I. Washburn requires a freshman and junior English course, at minimum, and a sophomore English course to boot for the dumb-dumbs. Yet I only sat in on one English class during four years there. Not a semester course, mind you, but one, single, 75-minute class. Never went back. Still got my BA (I'd share more, but you know how I hate divulging trade secrets). Every system can be hacked if you're determined enough.

*Fearful of appearing to lie by omission, there are admittedly prescribed actions an incoming student must take if they don't meet some sort of minimum ACT/GPA criterion. The degree process will take longer due to the necessity of remedial coursework by approximately a semester, but this does not preclude enrollment in and of itself. GED still gets you in.

Letting Detroit Burn

Just finished Detroit: An American Autopsy. About the quickest I've ever flown through a book (I'm not the best of readers). Charlie LeDuff the author isn't Steinbeck, but I appreciate how he follows a similar intent - kind of a, it's the system's fault so no one person had control to stop it, but everyone has the responsibility to be responsible. Steinbeck would be down with that.

My last girlfriend opened me up to some solid perspective. There was an intriguing oblivity to be exposed to she brought to the relationship. Ideas like how Robert Moses was good for America, and for blatantly selfish reasons. The discrepancies were bloated - Moses essentially wanted to wall black people into the cities and make it really easy for whites to drive to the cities without actually living among them. Detroit was nothing more than niggers shooting niggers. American society can burn as long as the rich can stay rich. But at the same token, being poor was immoral and if you had a shit position in life you probably deserved it. I'm sure there's a nexus of selfishness, indifference, and ignorance that leads people to believe in the existing power structures while also not understanding why people don't just better their socioeconomic class. It's why I think more conservatives should be forced to take behavioral economics courses.

She used to jokingly refer to Red Lobster as Black Lobster, because only black people would be poor enough to want to eat there. This was regularly thrown in my face with the knowledge my parents wouldn't have been able to afford eating there when I was little. I turned into a bad person during that time; I think I'm getting better.

Chevy Chase is a Joke

Community was given a temporary shot in the arm today with the announcement the show has been extended for 13 more episodes. I'm happy. Despite society's demonstrated indifference to this slice of programming genius because it doesn't feature nut shots or drunken spoiled 20-somethings fighting over fake tans, NBC is willing to pay for a great sitcom with meager ratings. Ayn Rand would be proud.

Methinks Ayn Rand would also call Chevy Chase classic second-hander. Chase is a well-known jackass, and he does a great job of playing one on the show. He also hasn't done anything worthwhile in over a decade. Yet his lack of talent hasn't stopped him from publicly feuding with the creator while calling the show a "fucking mediocre sitcom" unworthy of his time. Other classic quotes from Chase include "I've been too funny in my life to have to play a character who's ... moderately funny," and that he could make the show funnier by adding "his brand of humor" to it. Once again, Chase hasn't done something funny over the past 20 years. The opportunity to appear in such a brilliant show shouldn't be squandered on an asshat who believes he could make it funnier by essentially adding more nut shots. I imagine the man walking onto every set hungover while muttering, "ugghhhh... clever jokes make old man head hurt." Chase's character adds an excellent element to the show; it's unfortunate he's too much of a Philistine to appreciate it.

Nothing is Wrong With Kansas - I Just Don't Want to Live There

Frank Thomas, the (in)famous author of What's the Matter with Kansas?, is perplexed why Kansans consistently vote against their self-interest (as defined by Thomas). He's wrong, obviously. Kansas voted in Republicans for the Governorship, both Senators, and all four Representatives (you don't even want to see how decisively they swept the state house) hoping to further their self-interest. Fortunately, none of them support small government. They're anti-free market (witness massive subsidy programs), love interventionalist policies (Iraq, anyone?), and siphon wasteful pork barrel spending to the state every year by propping up Boeing and Raytheon. Increasing the Pentagon's budget is awesome as far as Wichita and Riley County are concerned. Don't even get me started on Cuban policy (boycotts for everything except wheat!) and foreign food aid. We don't vote against our interests because we simply don't vote conservative - he just doesn't like that we don't vote Democratic. And yes, I still sent in my Kansas absentee ballot this year.

It seriously benefits Kansas to vote for big government Republicans. If you subtract taxes paid from federal funds received, Kansas gets over 19K more than it pays in taxes PER PERSON. We don't even have 3 million people (ranking 33rd), but rank 25th in payments from the federal government. You know who pays more in taxes than they get? Democratic voting states. We totally vote to give ourselves money all the time - we just don't want to share it.

I'm amazed at how many educated people have actually read this book. Not only read it, but were impacted by it. I tell academic Democrats that I'm from Kansas, and a solid 50% of them mention this book. The myriad converses are not true (e.g., conservatives do not care to mention this book, taxi drivers do not mention this book, etc.) I've never read a book about another state's politics; my birthplace is obviously more interesting than yours. I went to listen to Thomas speak while attending Washburn. He's smarter than I am. It's not that he said anything profound, but I could hear it in his tone. When people talk down to you, they're operating on a higher level. They're also not pro-democracy. "The best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter." - Winston Churchill