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
