In a message dated 8/9/2007 1:00:04 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just because Penn as an institution fails to meet acceptable standards in real estate development, community planning or education projects, is it right to tar and feather their academic courses that deal seriously with these issues? That's a good point, Andy. It begs several questions. Among these are: 1. Why doesn't Penn as an institution have enough confidence in those on its academic staff to have them oversee what the folks interfering with the community are doing? 2. In the case of Penn Praxis, where the community engagement facilitators are indeed on the academic staff, what accounts for someone like Andrew Goodman throwing a tantrum in print about the fact that his agenda didn't get media coverage -- while the tenor of the meeting in question showed that the community was not especially interested in that agenda? 3. What actual practical results can the "experts" on the academic side show? 4. Are the people designing and running these courses and seminars intellectually honest enough to discuss the many failures of top-down planning and caution their students against believing that somehow their privileged positions may be hindrances in dealing with strata of society they may not understand and are highly likely to disdain? Always at your service & ready for a dialog, Al Krigman -- 36-year local resident, housing provider, curmudgeon, and all-around crank, ************************************** Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL at http://discover.aol.com/memed/aolcom30tour