Friday, January 20, 2006
UCLA Profs: Just whom do they work for?
...So some gadfly has decided to offer $100 for tapes of UCLA's most radical left-wing professors in action in the classroom.
UCLA, for its part, is doing its best to cover for and enable these professors by warning students that doing so "may violate University policy."
UCLA Chancellor Carnesale, exposing his own dimwittery, calls this act of holding these public employees accountable to their own words and writings "reprehensible."
Look, Carnesale - doing so can only be as reprehensible as the views of the professors themselves. If these professors weren't so embarrasing for the University, there wouldn't be a problem at all.
UCLA is asserting that these professors also hold the copyright to their class materials. That's sheer stupidity. All these professors are public employees. Any material generated on UCLA computers and on UCLA classroom time should be the property of the people of California. And if they are drawing public salaries, then they should be held accountable to the people for their actions, just like anyone else on a public payroll.
No one is suggesting that anyone is recreating course materials so that people can take the course without paying for it. The only downside is the embarrassment of the faculty members themselves and the bad name they'd give to UCLA.
Which seems to me to be UCLA's problem.
Just who is the UCLA chancellor to call the efforts of a group of UCLA alumni to hold these public employees accountable "reprehensible?"
Remember whom you work for, chancellor.
Splash, out
Jason
UCLA, for its part, is doing its best to cover for and enable these professors by warning students that doing so "may violate University policy."
UCLA Chancellor Carnesale, exposing his own dimwittery, calls this act of holding these public employees accountable to their own words and writings "reprehensible."
Look, Carnesale - doing so can only be as reprehensible as the views of the professors themselves. If these professors weren't so embarrasing for the University, there wouldn't be a problem at all.
UCLA is asserting that these professors also hold the copyright to their class materials. That's sheer stupidity. All these professors are public employees. Any material generated on UCLA computers and on UCLA classroom time should be the property of the people of California. And if they are drawing public salaries, then they should be held accountable to the people for their actions, just like anyone else on a public payroll.
No one is suggesting that anyone is recreating course materials so that people can take the course without paying for it. The only downside is the embarrassment of the faculty members themselves and the bad name they'd give to UCLA.
Which seems to me to be UCLA's problem.
Just who is the UCLA chancellor to call the efforts of a group of UCLA alumni to hold these public employees accountable "reprehensible?"
Remember whom you work for, chancellor.
Splash, out
Jason
Comments:
UCLA is asserting that these professors also hold the copyright to their class materials. That's sheer stupidity. All these professors are public employees. Any material generated on UCLA computers and on UCLA classroom time should be the property of the people of California.
Sadly, Jason, that's not how it works. Almost anywhere else, it would be true. But not in a university setting. Even research developments often are given over to the primary investigator to commercialize, if the university gets its cut. Developments that are often funded by federal grant monies. Yes, that's right: we get to pay for it twice, once as tax payers, and perhaps again as consumers.
In the interest of full disclosure, my employer is a large university in Florida.
Sadly, Jason, that's not how it works. Almost anywhere else, it would be true. But not in a university setting. Even research developments often are given over to the primary investigator to commercialize, if the university gets its cut. Developments that are often funded by federal grant monies. Yes, that's right: we get to pay for it twice, once as tax payers, and perhaps again as consumers.
In the interest of full disclosure, my employer is a large university in Florida.
Addendum: and yes, having to pay twice for research and development chafes me the wrong way. Even if my employer gains a benefit from it.
I spent my undergraduate years at UCLA. I can say, I never encountered any conservative viewpoints, but was exposed to plenty of liberal ones from student activists to faculty, including a poly sci professor and an American history professor. I might have been bathed and lathered in their indoctrinating influence if I had been a better student in their classes. They certainly were charismatic and seemed to make some sense at the time. I've learned more, on my own, since then.
Post a Comment
