http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/...n-terrain.html
I think this article brings out quite a few of the different issues we have discussed.
Printable View
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/...n-terrain.html
I think this article brings out quite a few of the different issues we have discussed.
Here's another one with a somewhat different slant.
http://chronicle.com/temp/email2.php...92s46gkmf6WrKM
programmatic issues are concerned...Quote:
Originally Posted by marct
The personal issue in your link may be a case of excessive security paranoia, may not be -- we only see one side of the story.
H Ken,Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken White
I was thinking more about the organizational and training issues. Then again, the events happened before the first assessment came out, so there really hadn't been any time to retool he training.
cited -- though in less detail -- in the USN&WR article as well. IIRC, I've seen them mentioned in most articles I've read on the topic. With more years in the bureaucracy than I care to recall, I'm so familiar with the bobbles, panic and confusion in startup programs I tend to look at them as simply business as usual and thus as being unremarkable (redundancy to show how normal... :) ).Quote:
Originally Posted by marct
Too many believe (or, possibly more correctly, would like to believe) that the processes of government are far more efficient than they are. They are generally chaotic and it typically takes around 18 months to get a ndew mechanism grinding and another 18 to smooth out the wrinkles. No surprise to me at all.
Though I do think it fascinating when academics who become involved in government programs (in the US or anywhere else) are surprised that all is not efficiency and light -- that is not a slam on you, Ms. Helbig or anyone else, just that in my observation the vales of academe can themselves be a little, uh, chaotic, in their operation and decision making. Not to mention that many of those vales worldwide nowadays are involved to one degree or another with government and thus expectation of confusion would seem to me to be the norm...
I did find it interesting that even though she may have had a bad experience, she essentially believes that some cross feed is desirable and that program has merit. Be interesting to see if any more comes out about her case.
This lack of understanding of the messiness and art of "real" policy processes is even common--and particularly inexcusable--in my own discipline of political science. The result is that far too many scholars believe that the best way to influence policy (if they can even be bothered to try) is to publish a paper with a "good idea" --as if the goodness of ideas is the sole, or even primary, driver of bureaucratic or political decision-making.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken White
As for university politics and governance, I'm reminded of William F. Buckley's comment:
...although I think an even better explanation of the system can be found here. :DQuote:
I'd rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University.
The fascinating thing is that the syndrome carries over to the people involved in governance. Senior folks will 'write' (read: edit the writing of a minion) a paper that they expect to become the Word -- and are flabbergasted when it is either ignored or tried and doesn't work. They and the legislators who pass inane and unenforceable laws and then cannot understand why the great unwashed ignore said law... :wry:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rex Brynen
A point to be sure. Fortunately for all of us, the collective wisdom of the polity in most nations restrain who ever happens to be 'in charge' and thus avoids the truly catastrophic -- usually. :oQuote:
As for university politics and governance, I'm reminded of William F. Buckley's comment:...
I keep threatening to buy 535 T-Shirts printed with "Avoid stupid people in large groups" to send to Washington but the family treasurer wont certify the funds. She contends too many of them would wear the shirts with no realization of why they were sent, not cost efficient. Yet another great idea from on high that won't work. Sigh...
Ala Monty P, the Treasurer, no M.P fan, did laugh at the one but still wants Dave Allen resurrected... :) Thanks again.
I am reminded of the fact that so often in any arena be it business or government, there is a stigma attached to anything different from the " norm".Quote:
Originally Posted by marct
I can't count the number of times in my life I have seen or experienced the reaction from others of distrust( for lack of a more adequate term) in regards to a new program, or product. or approach.
As with any grouping there will always be those storming stages where everyone fights for their own way and eventually some win ,some lose and others just hop on for the ride.
The confusing part about it is however:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken
That the military who so often have had to deal with the hurry up and wait, win at all cost but count the cost before winning, do everything while trying to do only what is necessary do to budget constraints; is actually surprised by how hard this integration with academia is.
The best I can tell it comes down to the very aspects that both articles present. Expectations vs capabilities vs risk aversion.
I know thats all over the place but that seems to fit right in with whats going on. :rolleyes:
From Inside Higher Ed.
I was particularly struck by the cavalier way in which all "secret" research is to be banned, including corporate market research. I am certain that my clients will love that :rolleyes:!! Just another reason why I won't join the AAA.Quote:
Secrecy and Anthropology
With debate over the role of anthropologists in aiding the military machine a theme threading through their annual meeting, scholars voted Friday to demand that the American Anthropological Association reinstate strict language from its 1971 code of ethics prohibiting secret research. Members at the meeting who, for the second time in about 30 years and the second year in a row constituted a quorum in excess of the required 250 also voted overwhelmingly to oppose any covert or overt U.S. military action against Iran.
More...
Marc
But if one wants to be very picky, shouldn't their OWN secret research be banned as well?:DQuote:
Originally Posted by marct
What secret research :eek:?!?!? NO Anthropologist would ever do THAT!!!!!! I mean, after all, it's okay to change names, dates, places and events, but it's still published and that, after all, is what counts - right ;)? Besides that, research done in a good anti-military, anti-capitalist, pro-downtrodden group's cause is never "secret"; merely witheld until the full effects can be made in the social arena :cool:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Blair
One would think in an arena of studies dedicated to placing oneself in others shoes, that reciprocity would be a given.Quote:
Originally Posted by marct