r-wmsmmnm^
NEWSROOM:
(541)346-5511
E-MAIL:
ode@oregon uoregon.edu
ADDRESS:
Oregon Daily Emerald
P.O. BOX 3159
Eugene, Oregon 97403
ONLINE EDITION: www.uoregon.edu/-ode
mm
EDITOR IN CHIEF
Sarah Kickler
EDITORIAL EDITOR
Mike Schmierbach
NIGHT EDITOR
Holly Sanders
Higher education technical training can go too far
A recent report suggests
the need for high
technology> education
is less than believed
■ 1 or several years now, the
Oregon’s h igher ed ucat i on
JL system has been that stu
dents need to receive an education
that will prepare them for “the real
world.”
In particular, that world is per
ceived as being made up primari
ly of “skilled" jobs, positions that
often require specific training in
science, math and technology.
The University of Oregon and
other state schools have increased
their involvement with business
and added more classes to teach
about computers and other high
tech industries.
Additionally, Oregon schools
have taken other steps to cater
their programs to industry. The
assumption of those pushing
these changes has been that cor
porations will request more tech
nical training and a greater num
ber of high tech-ready graduates.
For example, in November the
Oregon State System of Higher
Education Board (now called the
Oregon University System) voted
to implement a new set of perfor
mance indicators. These indica
tors rely in part upon surveys of
graduates and employers about
the usefulness of the student’s de
gree in the job market.
In fact, OSSHE Chancellor Joe
Cox specifically pushed for em
ployability to be considered a
high priority among standards of
performance, according to an arti
cle in the Emerald (ODE, Nov.
24).
There are certain philosophical
and social problems with pushing
so hard for business-oriented edu
cation and especially with em
phasizing high tech.
As many critics of recent
changes have pointed out, flood
ing the market with high tech
trained graduates will not only
save businesses money in training
(amounting to an additional sub
sidy of an industry that already
dominant mentality in
AN EMERALD EDITORIAL
4/
CHRIS HUTCHINSON/Emerald
reaps major rewards from local
and state government), but it will
also create a glut in the labor mar
ket, artificially lowering wages
and making it hard for graduates
to become employed in this sup
posedly booming field.
In addition, more fundamental
questions exist about the degree to
which corporations should shape
the curriculum. If the primary fo
cus of the university system is to
tailor graduates to the needs of in
dustry, we stand to lose more than
just humanities and arts classes
that are perceived by companies
as being of little use in the job mar
ket.
We also face the greater risk of
censoring professors, classes and
departments that represent a
threat to the dominant, pro-corpo
rate view that higher education
administrators seem to hold.
Whether done in the name of
progress or politics, such propos
als would greatly weaken the abil
ity of free-market capitalism’s foes
to organize, educate against and
combat the omnipresent forces of
the market.
All of these arguments have
been made before, of course, and
will be made again. Now, howev
er, there is new evidence that, re
gardless of the desirability of
preparing students exclusively for
the job market, high-tech training
might not be the right path to take.
A new study, reported in Tues
day’s New York Times, suggests
that the majority of new jobs being
created nationwide are in middle
management, not high technolo
gy
There are, of course, certain
problems with the study. The
question of what constitutes mid
dle management is a valid one, as
the researchers created the catego
ry for the purposes of the survey.
Additionally, the study reflects
national, rather than local, trends.
Nevertheless, we think the re
sults of the survey warrant consid
eration. According to the story,
only 8 percent of new jobs created
between 1989 and 1995 were in
high technology, while 37 percent
of the jobs were in management.
Those jobs, according to re
searchers from the Educational
Testing Service, require only ele
mentary training in problem solv
ing and creative thinking. Such an
education can be given through
most “traditional" liberal arts pro
grams — although employers did
show a preference for those
schooled in business classes and
their often pro-corporate rhetoric.
Realistically, in fact, many of
these jobs don’t require college
training at all, which suggests that
a diploma's crucial role is not,
and should not, be enabling its
holder to get a job. Rather, college
ought to be primarily about pro
viding students with a broad edu
cational background that allows
them to understand their commu
nity, the world and the social, po
litical and artistic landscape of
the time. -*■
Even in Oregon, the majority of
jobs will never be in technical
fields. Opportunities in these ar
eas are not rising as quickly as
predicted and training the re
quested number of students will
only help lower wages.
Instead, the Oregon higher edu
cation system (and it is still a sys
tem, rather than a collection of in
dividual schools) should work
toward creating critical thinkers.
Such students are capable of fill
ing the jobs of the coming century,
but they are also capable of alter
ing the structures that create those
jobs.
After all, it is worth noting that
this rise in management came in
the midst of downsizing that low
ered even management wages and
eliminated many lower level jobs
(replacing them not only with use
less layers of management but also
low-paying service positions).
Although it may seem hypocrit
ical, the thing universities most
need to teach is that students
should question the very exis
tence of elite institutions of learn
ing that funnel different classes
into different rungs on the corpo
rate ladder.
That would be higher educa
tion than we have today.
Ihis editorial represents the opinion
of the Emerald editorial Ixxtrd. Re
sponses may he sent to ode@ore
pon.uorepon.edu
IETTEBS TO THE EDITOR
ASUO needs Hunter
Ln regards to next year’s proposed
budget elimination of staff member
Cheryl Hunter (ODE, Jan, 27), the
Club Sports Executive Committee
implores you to reconsider the
ASUO proposal. The severance of
Hunter’s position is a regressive ma
neuver that will inevitably set back
future ASUO leaders.
We give ourselves as an example.
The Club Sports team coordinators
would not be as effective in their
leadership role without administra
tive support and guidance. Through
out the years, our director’s (Sandy
Vaughn) actions as a general facilita
tor, organizers and representative of
student needs have kept this program
running smoothly. We see Hunter’s
position as synonymous. In response
to ASUO cries for “autonomy,” the
Club Sports Executive Committee
manages to make all our budgetary
and management decisions without
administrator interference; rather, we
are advanced by Vaughn’s adminis
trative and advising experiences.
We understand the desire for the
1997-98 ASUO to leave behind a visi
ble legacy at the University (“This is
Ben and my watch,” (Miner) said.
“We’re going to do whatever we can
to slam dunk it, to do what a lot of
other administrators saw was needed
but couldn’t do anything about”
(ODE, Jan. 27).), however this is not a
productive nor endearing contribu
tion. On behalf of the student body,
we hope the ASUO channels its en
ergy into more effective campaigns.
Think before you “slam dunk.”
Donna Goode
Peter McCormick
and three co-signers
Club Sports Executive Committee
University needs cash
While I may not like what busi
nesses like Nike do overseas, I’m not
certain institutions like the Universi
ty can afford to turn away large cash
donations. State funding of higher
education is on the decline, and not
just in Oregon. If someone like Phil
Knight gives $25 million to hire more
professors and build a new law
school, with no strings attached, then
the University should take it and run.
If there is any oversight to be done re
garding from where and from whom
the money comes, it should only be
to determine if any conditions are at
tached. Does the University give any
thing to a donor in exchange for a
large donation? If the answer is no,
then the money should be used for a
good purpose, regardless of what we
think of the donor's politics or busi
ness practices.
St8ve Williams
Graduate student
Safe campus needed
In the recent years, students have
worked hard to try to guarantee a safe
campus environment. In creating a
conduct code that supported sur
vivors, students said campus needed
to be a safer place.
Now that process is in jeopardy.
With the current ruling concerning
sexual misconduct, the safety and ef
fectiveness of the code are in ques
tion. Because an alleged offender is
being allowed back on campus after
four separate findings of guilt, the
code is proving ineffective. That is
unacceptable. Students need a safe
campus. Students need to stand to
gether to demand a process that gives
survivors the protection they need. If
a strong code cannot protect the cam
pus environment, then students need
to both help and protect themselves.
One in four women are survivors
of sexual assault during their college
careers; giving support to survivors
to know their rights and to empower
them to do something is important if
we all truly want to see a decline in
sexual violence. Demonstrating con
cern and a pledge for help will not
solve the problem, but it will go a
long way to start finding solutions.
It is true that not every person has
heard the specifics of any case; one
does not need to know the specifics
to support the findings. One needs
to trust in the system that students
created to make campus a better
place to be. If students cannot trust
themselves, who can they really
trust?
Bill Miner
ASUO President
Ben Unger
ASUO Vice President
CORRECTION
The story “In
tern files to im- -
peach ASUO Ex
ecutive" (ODE,
Feb. 11) con
tained an error.
The story
should have
stated that the
Student Senate
can also for
ward a brief to
the Constitution
Court opposed
to the grievance
against the
ASUO president
and vice presi
dent. The Emer
ald regrets the
error.