Yes, I can see these gents crashing helmets on the ol' gridiron

From today's New York Times:

Men’s wear designers at New York Fashion Week look to the world of sports to muscle up their collections.

But what about free riders?

Apparently Kent State is sharing the wealth with professors when the institution hits fundraising and student retention goals:

If Kent State Beats Goals, Professors Will Profit
By KATHRYN MASTERSON

Kent State University is trying a new and unusual tactic to improve its status, retention rate, and fund raising—paying cash bonuses to faculty members if the university exceeds its goals in those areas.

The bonuses are built into a contract, approved last month, that covers 864 full-time, tenure-track faculty members who teach and do research on the university's eight campuses. Proposed by Lester A. Lefton, Kent State's president, the "success bonus pool" will be divided among faculty members if the Ohio institution improves retention rates for first-year students and increases the research dollars it generates and the private money raised through its foundation...

Cheryl A. Casper, a professor emeritus of economics and chief negotiator for the AAUP chapter at Kent State, says she is unsure how much tenure-track faculty members can pitch in if they don't teach first-year students or are not directly involved in fund raising. But as an economist, she knows that people respond to incentives.

"Lester Lefton was very keen on the idea of trying out an incentive pool," she said. "We were willing to experiment, too"...

Here's how the system works: Faculty members share a bonus of 10 percent of the growth in research dollars over the year before, as long as the increase is at least $2-million. For the 2008 fiscal year, Kent State brought in $32-million. So if research grants reach, say, $35-million next year, the faculty would split 10 percent of the total increase of $300,000, or about $350 for each of the 864 faculty members.

For fund raising, the faculty would receive 2 percent of the increase above the year before, as long as that increase was at least $2.8-million. Last year Kent State's foundation raised $28.5-million. For the bonuses to kick in, the university must raise at least $31.3-million next year. If Kent State hit that minimum, faculty members would then split 2 percent of the increase, which would be $56,000, or about $65 a person. If a big gift showed up, of course, the bonuses would increase accordingly.

For student retention, faculty members would receive 40 percent of the additional revenue when retention goes up at least 0.5 percent on the main campus.

Presumably Professor Casper is aware of the glaring free-rider problem in this scheme. Every faculty member benefits from the institution's performance regardless of whether he/she directly, individually contributed to it. Hence the incentives are going to be very weak. No wonder they're not willing to let this system replace merit pay.

Kids say the darnedest things

The Chronicle reports:

Herding the 'Escape Goats': Contest Sends Up Epidemic of Student Howlers

Gone are the days when careless students are humiliated only in front of their professors, or their classmates. Nowadays British students who don’t double-check their writing risk seeing their slip-ups circulated everywhere online.

The students can thank the Times Higher Education’s recently revived annual “exam howlers” competition, in which merciless professors submit their students’ dumbest — and most unintentionally amusing — writing flubs to the magazine. At least the anonymous students can wallow in their shame unrecognized.

Some of the honored blunders of the year:

A research student’s assertion that “tackling climate change will require an unpresidented response.”

An English student’s literary interpretation: “The Handmaid’s Tale shows how patriarchy treats women as escape goats.”

An economics student who bemoaned a regulator’s “laxative enforcement policies.”

In at least one instance, however, the student got the last laugh. Apparently, the student wrote, “Control of infectious diseases is very important in case an academic breaks out.”

I have a passage from a student's paper of a few years ago tacked up on my bulletin board:

"The effect of the tax cuts are eminent whether or not tax cuts are expired or repelled."

A big step forward in race relations

Portrayal Of Obama As Elitist Hailed As Step Forward For African Americans

Sarah Palin takes on Ted Stevens and the Alaska Republican establishment

Misdirection

The Republicans are very good at misdirection. In previous elections, they diverted attention from bread and butter issues by talking about "values" issues. This campaign, they say, isn't about issues - let's talk personal stories! But regarding Sarah Palin and the reform angle, they've really developed misdirection into an art form.

The problem with Sarah Palin is that she is not who she says she is. She was a typical local politician milking the federal taxpayer for everything she could get before she found religion and decided earmarks were bad. She's not so much a small town girl taking on the establishment as a serial power-abuser. She was with Ted Stevens before she was against him. But that's not what everyone's talking about now, is it - the Republicans and the media are all talking about her daughter's pregnancy, and it's unfair to beat her up about that, isn't it?

I was trying to figure out how John McCain was getting away with his talk about bringing change to Washington and rooting out all the corruption. After all, his audience at the convention consisted of people who had no problem with the corruption lo these last seven and a half years. They all voted for George Bush twice and saw how he put lobbyists in charge of regulatory agencies and had political appointees interfere with the work of public servants. They elected Republican Congresses that initiated the K Street Project and let lobbyists write legislation in return for campaign contributions. They saw all this, and were just fine with it. Now McCain's telling them that he's going to end it all?

Well, no. McCain narrowed the definition of corruption. The only corruption going on in Washington these days, if I read his speech correctly, is earmarks. So "reform" means getting rid of earmarks, which most Republican voters are willing to swallow if for no other reason than that the chief recipients of earmarks under a Democratic Congress promise to be Democrats rather than Republicans. I'm not expecting any change in a McCain administration in the general power of lobbyists (especially since so many of them are deeply involved in his campaign).

The case against liberals

I guess I've gotta watch Mitt Romney tonight. I can't believe he's going to say this:

"Liberals would replace opportunity with dependency on government largesse (sic)," Romney's prepared remarks state. "They would grow government and raise taxes to put more people on Medicaid, to work requirements out of welfare, and to grow the ranks of those who pay no taxes at all. Dependency is death to initiative, risk-taking and opportunity. It's time to stop the spread of government dependency to fight it like the poison it is! It’s time for the party of big ideas, not the party of Big Brother."

So providing health care to the uninsured is not just expensive - it actually hurts those it's intended to help by making them more dependent on the government (whereas they should be dependent on their employer I guess). Eliminating taxes for low income workers is bad because it means they get something for nothing (a few years ago the Wall Street Journal made a similar argument, calling people too poor to pay taxes "lucky duckies").

So here's the Republican plan for the struggling middle class (a la Mitt Romney): less health care, more taxes. That'll sell.

Our next president (of Gettysburg College, that is)

I am confident that the presidential search committee will do their jobs carefully and conscientiously. Everyone on the committee that I've met seems sensible, understanding of what the college needs, and responsive to the people who work here. But the same could have been said about the committee that selected our last president. The fatal flaw in that search was that it was conducted as a closed process. Within days of the announcement of the committee's choice, faculty had identified a number of problems that apparently had been overlooked - a weak cv, grumblings at her previous institution, a decision by the trustees at her former institution to cut her pay. So this time we're going to do it right and have an open search, right? That's what Jim Weaver told the department chairs last year. He said that during the last search the search firm had convinced the search committee to close the search because the top candidates did not want their candidacies known publicly. He said something to the effect of "I promise you we won't make that mistake again." He left himself some wiggle room, but not a lot. Unfortunately, Bob Duelks just told us that while an open search would be nice, the committee would close it if that was necessary to ensure the strongest possible pool. A lot more wiggle room in that statement. This worries me. Those of us who think the search should be open need to keep speaking up.

Our next vice president

Her views on God's plans for humankind are mainstream, if the stream we're talking about is the collection of nutjobs who run the Republican party:

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin told ministry students at her former church that the United States sent troops to fight in the Iraq war on a "task that is from God."

In an address last June, the Republican vice presidential candidate also urged ministry students to pray for a plan to build a $30 billion natural gas pipeline in the state, calling it "God's will."

Palin asked the students to pray for the troops in Iraq, and noted that her eldest son, Track, was expected to be deployed there.

"Our national leaders are sending them out on a task that is from God," she said. "That's what we have to make sure that we're praying for, that there is a plan and that plan is God's plan."...

Palin told graduating students of the church's School of Ministry, "What I need to do is strike a deal with you guys." As they preached the love of Jesus throughout Alaska, she said, she'd work to implement God's will from the governor's office, including creating jobs by building a pipeline to bring North Slope natural gas to North American markets.

"God's will has to be done in unifying people and companies to get that gas line built, so pray for that," she said.

Grade inflation at Gettysburg College

Ralph (nom de blog: "Anonymous") sends me these stunning graphs documenting grade inflation at Gettysburg College.

The mean semester GPA of our students is rising at a rate of 0.0112 grade points per semester. At this rate the average student will earn a Dean's Commendation (3.33 GPA) by Fall 2016; the average student will make the Dean's Honor List (3.6) by Spring 2030; the average student will have a 4.0 average by Fall 2046 (This is just about the time the Social Security Trust Fund will be extinguished. Just a coincidence? I think not!)

In Spring 1984 43 students received a grade of A+. By Spring 2008 it was 215 (it was 325 in Spring 2007!). If the upward trend (3.5% increase per year) continues, every student in every course will receive an A+ in Spring 2064.

Slippery slope, people, slippery slope!

Fight grade inflation!

From Wellesley College's website:

On April 14, 2004, the members of Academic Council approved by overwhelming majority a resolution on grading standards and policies. This resolution was presented by the Committee on Curriculum and Instruction after almost two years of careful study and sustained discussion of grading practices at Wellesley. It was the clear understanding of Academic Council and the CCI that the new standards and policies would be applied by all members of the faculty, in all fields of study, beginning with this academic year.

The points below are presented to answer common questions:

What is the new policy on grading, approved by the faculty in April 2004?
- The average grade in 100- and 200-level courses should be no higher than B+ (3.33)
- The median grade for courses will be recorded on student grade reports (but not official transcripts).

Why did the faculty choose to adopt a new policy?
- The ultimate purpose of these measures is to insure Wellesley’s commitment to excellence.
- The inflation and compression of grades that has occurred obscure vital distinctions in performance.
- Current grading practices are inconsistent with the College’s legislated standards.
- Inflated grades may indicate that students are not being adequately challenged.
- The inflation of our grades relative to other institutions undermines our credibility and reputation.
- The disparity in grades between different departments penalizes students majoring in lower-grading fields and gives students misleading information about their abilities and achievements.

Memo to self

Self - the student who comes into the office in a rush and asks "where is the Econ class?" is the exception, not the rule. Most students know what Econ class they are taking and where it meets, even during the first week of classes.

Evidence that many of our students do in fact have interests and talents that should give us something to work with: yesterday in my classes I gave each student a note card and asked them to write something about themselves. Here are some of the things I got:

- I'm a religion minor and I fly fish
- I just returned from study abroad in Australia / Copenhagen /
- I won $60 playing blackjack at Foxwoods
- My family makes maple syrup
- I taught group dynamics and team building to Israelis and Palestinians over the summer
- I like Ike
- My brother plays professional hockey in Germany
- I am a big skier back in Denver
- I did an internship with Dr. Mahmet Oz and Dr. Argenziano who did Clinton's heart surgery
- I live in a theme house: The Natural Kitchen
- I've toured Europe playing classical piano and surf every day of summer
- I have big plans...

Double standard

John McCain gets up and tells his story - navy man, POW, straightshooter. He says that America is the greatest country on earth, he loves America. He pledges to protect the country, clean up Washington, keep faith with our good 'ol American values. The crowd applauds. The pundits say, John McCain is presidential timber. You're up, Barack.

Barack Obama gets up and tells his story - product of a mixed race marriage, pulls himself up by his bootstraps, gives back to his community. He says that America is the greatest country on earth, he loves America. He pledges to pursue peace abroad, clean up Washington, restore the American dream for the middle class. The crowd applauds. The pundits say - wait just a second there little feller, you've got some high falutin' rhetoric there, but if the working class swing voters are going to vote for you, you're going to have to tell 'em exactly what you're going to do for them. Vague promises and appeals to emotion are ok for John McCain, but you've gotta cook up a mess o' meat and potatoes, bring it to the voters nice and hot on your best china, stick it under their noses and waft the scent at 'em. While we (the pundits) stand behind you complaining that the meat is underdone or overpriced and repeating the Republicans' charge that serving meat and potatoes to the middle class makes you a raving communist.

Why's that?

Bridge to nowhere

Since Friday bloggers have been dissecting Sarah Palin's conflicting statements about her support or lack thereof for the "bridge to nowhere" that is John McCain's and other Republicans' number one example of wasteful "earmarks" that they vow to get rid of. Sarah Palin now:

"I told Congress, 'Thanks, but no thanks,' on that bridge to nowhere," Palin said Friday in Ohio, using the critics' dismissive name of the project. "'If our state wanted a bridge,' I said, 'we'd build it ourselves.'"

Sarah Palin then:

"We need to come to the defense of Southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge, and not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that's so negative," Palin said in August 2006, according to the Ketchikan Daily News.

and

According to the Ketchikan Daily News, the bridge issue came up on Sept. 20, 2006, during an appearance the gubernatorial candidates made in Ketchikan. "The money that's been appropriated for the project, it should remain available for a link, an access process as we continue to evaluate the scope and just how best to just get this done," the newspaper quoted Palin as saying. "This link is a commitment to help Ketchikan expand its access, to help this community prosper."

Now the story has hit the big time, with this in the New York Times:

Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska owes her selection as Senator John McCain’s running mate in part to an irresistible slogan: the Bridge to Nowhere.

Mr. McCain and other critics of the Congressional pet projects known as earmarks adopted the label to deride a $220 million allocation for a bridge to the tiny Alaskan island of Gravina (population, a few dozen). And Ms. Palin became famous as the governor who, in 2007, finally killed the project.

“I told Congress ‘thanks but no thanks’ on that Bridge to Nowhere,” she said in a speech on Friday after being introduced by Mr. McCain as his vice presidential pick.

But Ms. Palin’s history with the infamous bridge — and earmarks, which many critics call pork — is more complicated.

But the story isn't really "more complicated." It's quite simple - she supported federal funding for the bridge then, and she lied about it Friday.

Marching orders

In regards Sarah Palin, I shall take my marching orders from Dana Goldstein, who says to attack McCain's choice for VP on the issues, not her credentials. After all, she believes that if your daughter is raped by her uncle and is at risk of death if she carries through with the pregnancy, the federal government should force her to carry the baby to term against her wishes. She also believes the government should teach your children the "theory" of intelligent design, and that human activity does not contribute to global warming.

If I may add to the marching orders: critics should also focus attacks on John McCain, not Sarah Palin. Two arguments in particular:

1. John McCain is a raving hypocrite, attacking Barack Obama for lack of foreign policy experience one day and then nominating Sarah Palin for VP the next. A hypocrite and a political opportunist. Rinse, repeat as necessary.

2. Selecting Palin was not the move of a "maverick". It was a bone tossed to his political base, plus an attempt to appeal to women and boost his "outsider" image. A maverick would have gone with his first choice, Joe Lieberman, the religious right be damned. This was pandering plus shrewd political calculation.

Sarah Palin

The more I think about Sarah Palin as John McCain's choice for vice president, the less I think it's a crazy choice. Food for thought:

1. It's not like there were a whole lot of appealing choices out there. Not many outside the Republican party could stomach watching Mitt Romney on tv every night. Huckabee would be an object of ridicule. Lieberman would turn off the Republican base. And so on.

2. I argued before that it made sense for McCain to pick a female governor. I discounted Palin because of the experience issue, but Whitman wasn't going to be chosen anyway because she's too liberal. So he went the female governor route, trading away experience in order to keep his base. A defensible choice.

3. So McCain can't very effectively use the experience issue anymore. That's a serious cost. But he can gain some headway in the "outsider" and "maverick" columns. It'll be harder to tar McCain as "more of the same" with Palin beside him.

4. Palin is, from the little I've seen of her, a refreshing, spunky person. She might not know anything about anything, but she'll tell it like it is. She seems genuine, "one of us". That's usually a winning set of attributes for Republicans.

5. There are a million traps the Democrats could walk into with Palin. For starters, Biden could humiliate any of the Republican candidates for vice president in a debate with his superior knowledge and aggressiveness. But a lot of voters (esp. women) would be turned off by an overly aggressive performance against a youngish, prettiesh, homespunniesh woman. Biden will have to defang himself and will therefore be less help to Obama.

6. The other trap is to be too dismissive of her. Heaping on the scorn looks bad if it's interpreted through the lens of gender - which it surely will be, if necessary with the help of Republican spinmeisters. She's unqualified? Why, because she's a woman? Already some clever person has come up with a VPILF website - funny, but offensive.

7. The Republican convention was certain to look like a prolonged snoozefest in comparison to this week's Democratic convention. Now it's got some zing. I'll certainly tune in to see Sarah Palin, even if I have no intention of voting for her.

So - well played, McCain. Crazy like a fox.

Oops

The Chronicle of Higher Education reports that Robert A. Paxton, president of Iowa Central Community College, has been relieved of his duties following the publication of the picture below in the Des Moines Register (he's the one holding the keg).

In his defense, Mr. Paxton noted that he never actually opened the keg's tap. "The thing didn't work," he said. "If I was doing anything, I was grabbing it and trying to put it back down." And Bill Clinton didn't inhale.

This is why I don't understand the "passer rating" statistic

In last night's game against the Tennessee Titan's, Packer's QB Aaron Rodgers stepped on the field for the first play of the game and threw a 68 yard touchdown pass to Greg Jennings. He then returned to the bench for the remainder of the evening. His game stats, then, were: 1 pass attempt, 1 completion, 68 yards, 1 touchdown, 0 interceptions. This translates to a quarterback rating of 158.33333333333334.

Note: If he had tossed a 10 yard touchdown instead, his score would be 147.91666666666668.

God does not want John McCain to be president

That's why He has sent a hurricane to devastate the Gulf Coast during the Republican Convention. Well, technically it's still a tropical storm, but there's still time. Special bonus curse: after Gustav, Tropical Storm Hanna is on its way to distract America from the closing days of the Republican Convention. Mark Hanna, of course, being the political genius behind William McKinley's rise to power at the end of the 19th century and Karl Rove's personal hero and role model.






As always, we can count on Karl Rove to express his sympathy for those who are directly in harm's way:

"The Republicans can't seem to catch a break when it comes to August and when it comes to the weather," said Karl Rove, a former Bush adviser, on Fox News yesterday.



Hurricane Andrew struck South Florida as a Category 5 storm in August 1992, and the sluggish federal response was castigated by state leaders as well as then-candidate Bill Clinton in his successful bid to defeat President George H.W. Bush that fall.


The current President Bush believed that the nation had dodged a bullet after Hurricane Katrina struck in August 2005, only to realize belatedly that New Orleans had flooded and his administration's homeland security apparatus was overwhelmed.



Yes, why does God always expose Republicans' incompetence in governing precisely when it would maximize the political benefit to Democrats?