Blogs

Every job is in some way fascinating. I'm particularly interested in how you earn your living. Those of us who are in some way associated with higher ed, and who gather in this community to learn and share what we know. Jeanne Marie Laskas is one of us, an associate professor and director of the writing program at the University of Pittsburgh. Maybe in her next book she will turn her attention closer to home (or maybe your campus or office), but the lack of higher ed people in Hidden America should not dissuade you from reading this terrific book.

I had a bad week. And then I played a game on Twitter and gained some perspective. And had some fun, too.

Over the years, I have participated in many telephone interviews of potential candidates for positions at Hofstra as well as for not-for-profit boards that I have participated on. Interviewing candidates in this way has always struck me as second best (but certainly better than not participating).

Over the past week, as we attempt to return to normal after Sandy, the term that recurs most often in conversation with friends and colleagues is "9/11," as in, "Remember after 9/11, when we..." or "People were more eager to volunteer after 9/11."

For the first time in ten years, I was able to devote my entire week to the EDUCAUSE National Conference. Allow me to share some take-aways from the experience.

What are your big takeaways for EDUCAUSE 2012?

Congratulations to the long-suffering California public higher education system, which received a stay of execution from the voters. Proposition 30 raises enough revenue to prevent the next round of cuts, and to actually plan something. Even better, the voters sent enough Democrats to the legislature to achieve the supermajority status that California quixotically mandates for any tax increases. (Tax decreases don’t have the same requirement.)

I get a little testy when every attempt at developing a new way to share scholarship is required to pass a sustainability test. What we’re doing now isn’t sustainable. So why should new things have to prove they can do something our current system cannot do? I’m all for thinking through the implications and having a some kind of plan. I’m not in favor of abandoning ideas because we can’t figure out how to put them to a test that the status quo has already failed. Miserably.