After reading this on the U of M website, I’d say that the need for a cost/benefit analysis study is urgently needed:

Gender, Women and Sexuality Studies B.A.

In addition to the faculty in gender, women, and sexuality studies, several departments and centers lend their interdisciplinary teaching and advisory expertise. Among these are the Departments of African American and African Studies; American Studies; American Indian Studies; Anthropology; Chicano Studies; Communication Studies; Comparative Studies in Discourse and Society; English; French and Italian; German, Scandinavian, and Dutch; History; Philosophy; Sociology; and Spanish and Portuguese. Affiliated programs include the School of Nursing; the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs Center on Women and Public Policy; the Institute for Global Studies; the Interdisciplinary Program on Global Change, Sustainability, and Justice; Minnesota Institute for Sustainable Agriculture; and the Tucker Center for Research on Girls and Women in Sport.

Gender, Women and Sexuality Studies B.A. isn’t a class. It’s a program. In fact, it’s more about indoctrination than it’s a study of the issues in the title. What does “advisory expertise” from the Minnesota Institute for Sustainable Agriculture or the Interdisciplinary Program on Global Change, Sustainability, and Justice have to do with Gender, Women and Sexuality Studies? (I REALLY can’t wait to hear that explanation.)

More importantly, what type of a job will someone with a B.A. degree in Gender, Women and Sexuality Studies be able to get? What type of salary might a graduate start at? Would a graduate be more likely to get a job in the public or private sector?

Putting this simply, is the U of M wasting the taxpayers’ money offering this program? It’ll take some salesmanship to prove they aren’t.

After briefly skimming through some higher ed offerings at various universities, it’s imperative that these universities stop wasting our money on marginal subjects. That’s our money that universities are throwing away, money we can’t afford in this struggling economy.

The common denominator in these programs is that, if you just do a routine search, you’ll find far left political, PC agendas driving at least part of these programs.

Here’s a part of the description for the Masters Degree program for Social Responsibility:

Human Relations 1) collaboratively offers an interdisciplinary Master’s of Science in Social Responsibility with sociology, and women’s studies; 2) provides quality courses that fulfill the human relations requirement for teacher licensure in the state of Minnesota; 3) provides courses, resources, and leadership in meeting the SCSU mission and various accreditation standards on multicultural, gender-fair, disability-aware, GLBT-sensitive education. The graduate courses develop and enhance personal and professional skills in individuals, organizations, and global social responsibility for a wide range of non-profit, public and private sector positions in advocacy, education, communications, health, government, social services, business, and international careers.

That’s absurd!!! You can’t be licensed as a teacher in Minnesota if you haven’t been indoctrinated in multicultural, gender-fair, disability-aware, GLBT-sensitive education? Let’s stipulated that NOBODY should be discriminated against. PERIOD. END OF DISCUSSION. I’ll repeat myself in asking whether we need a Masters Degree college program to live by the Golden Rule.

This is the type of thing that, in the private sector, can be addressed in a corporate training course. That training course might take the entire morning but it’s possible it’d only take 2 hrs.

Academia has misspent fistsful of our money over the past quarter century. NO MORE!!! We can’t afford to pay for more of their foolishness. More importantly, even if we could, THERE’S NO SUCH THING AS ACCEPTABLE WASTEFUL GOVERNMENT SPENDING.

If the universities whine about getting funding stopped for offering programs that serve no useful purpose other than a) keeping far left professors employed and b) indoctrinating students, then I’m fine with that. People whining that we aren’t supporting their colleg cronyism is music to my ears.

Technorati: , , , , , , ,

7 Responses to “Cost/Benefit Analysis Urgently Needed In Academia”

  • Alan says:

    The writer brings up very valid points. According to this website, I see the social responsibility program uses 17 faculty. Isn’t that a bit overkill? If businesses and every day working citizens had a say in what programs and courses were offered in public higher education, I think programs and the curriculum would look “day and night” different than what we see now. For far too long, public higher education has been doing its own thing without being accountable to the taxpayers. If the day comes when they receive NO money from the taxpayers, then I would agree they could offer a master’s in underwater basketweaving or whatever they want without public input. I think it is a reach to say that a vast majority of Minnesotan’s feel that a Master’s in Social Responsibility is truly needed. However, I am open to hear any logical, reasonable argument in keeping this program at taxpayer’s expense.

  • G Leisen says:

    I have stated to many of my friends that the Education Establishment is just as guilty of fraud and over-spending as any other institution that the liberals are always attacking, such as the Military – Industrial complex.

    By being in control of the vocabulary and having a friendly media in their back pocket, the education lobby gets away with robbing the tax payers in every instance. Somehow “it’s for the children” gets them a shield against any criticism.

  • Gary Gross says:

    Somehow “it’s for the children” gets them a shield against any criticism.

    It doesn’t here!!! That’s a guarantee.

  • James Rugg says:

    The college education system has morphed into a social training system with a little academics thrown in on the side. I submit that until a serious public discussion to determine the meaning of the word “education” takes place and a full audit of the operations of the current higher education system has been completed, high costs and low educational outcomes will prevail.
    Since higher education trains K-12 teachers, the same condition will occur at that level. The money and time is spent. Graduates are not prepared to be productive members of society.

  • Jethro says:

    Well stated, James! It was also interesting watching the U of M president defend the multiple span and layers of administrators. Hang on to your wallet.

Leave a Reply