Site Map
Calendar
Join our lists and receive site news!
 
Return to Higher Ed home page
  Contact Higher Ed
Higher Ed Conference
Guide to HE Site
  Table of Contents
June 2006
Advocate Online
They're Talking On Campus...
On the Road
Action Line
In the Know
From Capitol to Campus
NEA Affiliates in Action
Thriving in Academe
Higher Education News
The Dialogue
Speaking Out
Previous Advocate Issues



Advocate Online

Speaking Out

An Open Letter From Reg Weaver

speaking out pictureOn behalf of the 125,000 higher education professionals represented by the National Education Association, I am writing to express our concern with a paper from the Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings’s Commission on the Future of Higher Education. 

The paper, titled “Frequently Asked Questions About College Costs,” makes the unsubstantiated assertion that the nation’s full-time faculty is responsible for the high cost of a college education. The paper further asserts that a proprietary business model with an over-emphasis on part-time employment is the solution to rising college costs. We disagree.

NEA believes the faculty has primary responsibility for the curriculum, the area in which the faculty is most capable. The Spellings paper attacks this concept of faculty preeminence in curricular decisions as “inefficient.”

NEA believes that faculty work is a full-time profession. The Spellings paper argues for reliance on part-time faculty as a cost-saver that gives management greater flexibility.

NEA believes that tenure and faculty self-governance protect academic freedom and are essential for quality higher education. The Spellings paper argues that “tenure is costly” and no longer needed.

NEA believes the three functions of the faculty calling—teaching, research, and service—are critical functions of the academic enterprise. The Spellings paper celebrates a business model used by for-profit schools that ignores the research component of faculty work.

Despite concerns about the make-up of the commission, NEA has taken the initiative to participate to the extent possible in this national dialogue, including meeting with commission staff and having two of our leaders, Catherine A. Boudreau, president of the Massachusetts Teachers Association, and NEA’s Legislative Committee chair, testify before the commission.

NEA’s vision of the future looks toward a broader and better informed discussion of higher education’s role in our society.  Our nation needs to recognize that higher education is a public good, as well as an individual benefit. And we must ensure that higher education is accessible and affordable to all.

I look forward to a continuing dialogue with the commission and hope to see its future reports reflect more comprehensively the varied voices of the academy and the best of the rigorous, peer-reviewed research that higher education has to offer our nation.

Sincerely,
Reg Weaver
President, National Education Association

For full text of President Weaver’s letter to the Spellings Commission, visit www.nea.org/he.

 




Search NEA Higher Ed

I'd like to say!

I'm a lecturer in Linguistics at San Jose State University. Last fall, I taught in the developmental writing program for the first time, so I read with interest the April Dialogue.

The course I taught has been designed specifically to assist students who have failed the required campus writing skills test twice.

It might interest you to know that I was contacted recently by one of those students from a few months ago. She was recently admitted to the nursing program and got in touch with me to invite me to the campus honors convocation. It seems Ms. “Remedial Student” is on the Dean’s List.

—Roslyn Raney
San Jose (CA) State University

I resent William Figg’s assertion (April Dialogue) that remedial courses are the sole province of the community colleges and that four-year institutions should not have to deal with this “inconvenience” so they can “get on with their work.” Does Mr. Figg believe that his four-year school is too good to have to offer remediation?

I agree “students should be prepared before they arrive at a four-year college,” but that is not reality. To insist that remediation at the university level “wastes resources” is to foster a separate standard on our educational system that implies a social prejudice unworthy of our society.

—Steven McDevitt
Victor Valley (CA) Comm. College

Share your opinion
Write to the editor at: Clehane@nea.org


   ^ Back to Top
 

NEA 1201 16TH Street, NW Washington, DC 20036  |  Tel. 202.833.4000
Privacy Statement | Report problems to: HEwebmaster@nea.org