Surely the real point is that administrators are managers of the
system as it comes to be
given to them.
So they are mere "micro managers" with little or no interest in world
view notions of
making the system better --- for the common good.
What this means. in effect. is that universities increasingly
suppress, or abandon the
truth mission -- about revealing how the system operates in reality.
So we get what we
have always got. What a pity.
Mainstream micro economics particularly assists in pulling the
'Matrix" over student's
heads. Yet Schumpeter said long ago that the first thing to go from
mainstream economics
is or ought to be micro based greed theory.
Quoting Carl Dassbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Pater Drucker observed this trend a long time ago. Accompanying the
growth in administrators is, I maintain, the "proletarianization" of
the faculty. Hence, there is little wonder that faculties who correctly
understand this situation are responding like proletarians and
unionizing.
The increasing bureaucratization of education has now reached the
tipping point where faculty represent less than half the full-time
professional staff at Title IV institutions. I have not seen any
data to be able to project when more than half of faculty time will
be devoted to unproductive administrative duties, but what I
noticed here is that that point will not be too far off in the
future.
U.S. Department of Education. 2008. Employees in Postsecondary
Institutions, Fall 2006, and Salaries of Full-Time Instructional
Faculty, 2006-07, NCES 2008-172 (Institute of Education Sciences
National Center for Education Statistics).
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/2008172.pdf
Only 48.6 percent of full-time professional staff at Title IV
institutions are faculty, indicating a surge in administrators. In
public institutions, 51.1 percent, while the figure for private
institutions is 44%.
W.-Robert Needham
Professor Emeritus
Department of Economics
University of Waterloo
Home Tel: 519-578-4143
http://economics.uwaterloo.ca/fac-needham.html
The dominant consideration in our economic system is not what people want,
either as consumers or workers, but what people can afford or be persuaded to
buy, and what they can be persuaded by force of circumstance to do for
money, as
a job. To put the matter another way, the modern economy is driven, not by the
aggregate desires of what people want out of the economy, but by what the
economy can get out of them. The only fitting word for this is
slavery. Michael
Rowbotham, The Grip of Death: A Study of Modern Money, Debt Slavery and
Destructive Economics, (Charlbury: Jon Carpenter Publishing, 1998),
73. Emphasis
added.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
