I have finally gotten around to catching up on all the Atlantics that have piled up in my absence in Berlin. One very compelling article is an anonymous essay written by “Professor X,” In the Basement of the Ivory Tower.

I am still trying to sort out my thoughts on this — please excuse the disjointed nature of this post. Would you be so kind as to comment?  Maybe a conversation is just what I need to sort this out.

The premise is that many of the colleges and universities that populate the United States are are not actually members of the Ivory Tower.

And, if they are part of the Ivory Tower, they are in the basement. As a professor at one of these “basement” schools, Professor X suggests that the majority of the students who come through his English class should not be there — that America’s obsession with college educations, graduate schooling, and professional degrees as de rigeur is seriously messed up.

Why?  Because not everyone is capable of becoming collegiate.

America is a land of opportunity where everyone is equal and all it takes is hard work and focus to do whatever  and become whatever one desires. According to In the Basement of the Ivory Tower, however, this is not so.  From his vast experience teaching remedial high school-level English classes in the guise of Introduction to College Writing (English 101) and Introduction to College Literature (English 102), Professor X believes that the vast investment of time, money, debt, and academic shame associated with going to college if you’re neither prepared or intellectually capable of doing so can be ruinous to the finances, ego, pride, and self-esteem of all of the folks who fail out, still saddled with relatively enormous loans and a send of abject failure associated — all for naught!

I never believed this, myself — all of my friends are bloody brilliant — but I have started to begin to believe, especially in light of the sort of comments I have been receiving in response to my series of incendiary posts about Whales:

• Will Subliterate 17-Year-Olds Save the Whales?
• Wisdumb of Crowds: SAVE THE WHALES
• “Don’t Save the Whales” Review: “you obviously is idiot”
• u are a bitter old man all alone trying to get attion because u are lonly and missible
• May God Have Mercey [sic] on your Souls

I know. I can’t stop making fun — and that I am in fact an Awful Awful Man but I am actually starting to wonder what I can do to encourage these kids that actually saving whales requires a rigorous education and lots of training and support. Saving whales requires amazing copy writing skills and the ability to network, fundraise, and communicate.

Are these commenters “just young” or are they just “communicating casually?” I was pretty literate and intellectually curious when I was in 6-12th grade!

I was writing and researching and participating in my school’s newspaper from 7th grade (my high school spanned 7-12th grade).  So where all of my geeky, nerdy, intellectual friends, too.  I was a book worm. I preferred to spend my time in Hawaii at the library than I did the beach.

I think the problem lies in the incestuous nature of intellectualism, of the academy, of the Ivory Tower, and of the social network associated with urban centers, university towns, and professional and corporate communities.

I was at BlogPotomac the other week and everyone there said that they suffered from Social Network Burnout — but outside of the Social Network Maven world, most people may have a MySpace or Facebook profile, but that’s it — no digg, del.icio.us, reddit, Plurk, Pownce, or anything else!

The same thing happens with regards liberal Democrats in the USA — everyone in NY, DC, Atlanta, Austin, San Francisco, Connecticut, New Jersey, Los Angeles, Chicago, only know Democrats, activists, and people who voted for Gore, Kerry, and who support Choice and evolution in schools — but that’s not America proper!

I mean, of course there is great diversity of belief, politics, and passion, but extrapolating personal beliefs and political, professional, and academic expectations can result in the sort of myopia that can not just leave children behind but might just well leave most Americans behind as well.

What is the current state of vocational training in America?  Why are our public universities, colleges, and community colleges so limited in their scope?  Should these publicly-funded places offer training and services for everyone, where everyone includes opportunity for lives wearing other collars than white!

I see this all the time in technology and the Internet — people just aren’t interested in being geeky. There is no interest there, even when I get into conversations with doctors and lawyers. I always took to being a geek. I always took to being a book worm. Mind you, my parents were both bookish and in the art world, so I guess my vector was partially chosen for me.

Much of the time, it all comes down to just not being interested. Not caring at all. The “I don’t have time for this shit” theory when you’re sitting in class wondering why you’re there instead of at your desk or in the store or at you job, making money for today, tomorrow, and for your family.

Life is messy and there is no need to make it any harder.  Yes, I understand that there is a lot of incentive for these college and universities to broaden their appeal to just about everyone, but my friends like to speak of “opportunity costs” — will going to business school and spending two years in school add to your marketability and brand more than staying in your current job?  What is the opportunity cost of attending a college, spending money you don’t have, and then fail out?  What is the opportunity when you try your hardest and can’t handle the stress or have too many things going on in your life to actually spend the time and attention required to thrive in academia.

I think one of the issue here has to do with our K-12 education. There are quite a few high school graduates who need to basically redo high school — especially if they are returning to college after years away as mature students.

Back in the day, there were all sorts of public services and night schools that were virtually free — they allowed people to take remedial course, to bone up before moving on, and to learn English as a second language.  Are these sorts of services still serving Americans or have they all become privatized into the sundry schools soliciting me late at night?

Please join me in the comments — I would love to continue the conversation and sort out my thoughts along with you.  Thanks in advance.

Richard C. Levin, the President of Yale, just popped its alumni an email announcing the expansion of Yale College — growing the hallowed university by two residential colleges:

I am pleased to announce that the Yale Corporation has authorized increasing the enrollment of Yale College through the creation of two new residential colleges. This expansion will allow us to make an even greater contribution to society by preparing a larger number of talented and promising students of all backgrounds for leadership and service.

This is an excellent time for Yale to expand. Harvard and Yale had to reject most of all the applicants who applied to matriculate this Fall — many of whom were exceptional and some of whom were the sons and daughters of Harvard and Yale graduates — legacy applicants. The questions remains: will the increase of placement supply affect the brand integrity of this exclusive — and arguably finest — undergraduate education? What do you think?

You may not have heard but we’re entering what is called the “echo boom:”

The Echo Boom generation is an expansive term for children born between roughly 1988 and 1992 (though sources disagree on the exact years). In 1989 the number of live births exceeded four million for the first time since 1964, and the Echo Boom peaked in 1990 (33 years after the peak of the Baby Boom) with 4.16 million live births, the greatest number since 1962 in the United States.^[1] Children of this generation are called Echo Boomers, a reference to the fact that the generation falls between about 30 and 36 years after the Baby Boomer generation, and thus many Echo Boomers are the children of Baby Boomers.

While the lure of a larger incoming class of elite and monied incoming Freshmen into their undergraduate programs may be too attractive to resist, there is always the possibility that the quality and exclusiveness of Yale — its brand reputation — could well be eroded by this expansion. Also, since one of Yale College’s appeal is the tradition behind each of its residential college, I wonder how incoming Freshmen will take to becoming part of starting a new tradition?

There is a serious deficit of elite university inventory. We are going through a renaissance of academia and a national passion to be truly rewarded with a spot at a top-five undergraduate education where a second tier college won’t do. Many universities are desperately trying to expand not just their capacity but also their services, their resources. And, why not generate more income and also expand the ranks of a very devoted, generally well-healed alumni who will generally do whatever they can to give back on the investment that Yale made in them — and that devotion is palpable.

So, what to do, what to do?

What’s more, many of the children of baby boomer Yalies can’t get their children into Yale. So, many of these expansion are being made to be able to accept more legacy student as well as the growing tide of superboys and supergirls who have their hearts set on the Harvards, Yales, Princetons, Berkeleys, Stanfords, and the lesser Ivies.

Anyway, for you amusement, here’s the letter that President Richard C. Levin sent its alumni (also viewable via the web):

Dear Yale Alumni and Parents:

I am pleased to announce that the Yale Corporation has authorized increasing the enrollment of Yale College through the creation of two new residential colleges. This expansion will allow us to make an even greater contribution to society by preparing a larger number of talented and promising students of all backgrounds for leadership and service.

We will achieve this goal while ensuring that the quality of the Yale College educational and social experience will be as extraordinary as ever.

As I stated in February, when we shared the report of the Study Group to Consider New Residential Colleges, the last significant increase in the size of the Yale College student body came with the admission of women in 1969. By 1978, undergraduate enrollment first reached 5,200, and it has remained between 5,150 and 5,350 ever since. When women were first allowed to apply to Yale College, the number of applications soared immediately from 6,781 to 10,039, and the number fluctuated between 9,000 and 13,000 until 2001, when it began a steady rise to its current level of 22,500, spurred by dramatic improvements in financial aid, wider awareness of Yale’s accessibility, the extension of full need-based aid to international students, and a growing appreciation of the quality of a Yale College education. Along with the rise in applications has come an equally dramatic increase in the percentage of those admitted who accept Yale’s offer, from 53 percent when I became president, to over 70 percent in recent years.

The principal result of these changes in the admissions picture is that Yale College has become significantly more selective. From 1969 to 2000, the percentage of applicants admitted to Yale College ranged from 18 to 27 percent. It was above 20 percent as recently as 1999. Today, Yale College admits fewer than 10 percent of its applicants. Admissions officers agree that in each of the past several years we have denied admission to hundreds of applicants who would have been admitted ten years ago.

The mission of Yale College is to seek exceptionally promising students of all backgrounds from across the nation and around the world and to educate them, through mental discipline and social experience, to develop their intellectual, moral, civic and creative capacities. The aim of this education is the cultivation of citizens with a rich awareness of our heritage to lead and serve in every sphere of human activity. For three centuries, we have made this aspiration a reality, to the great benefit of the nation and, increasingly, the world. Today, we have a long queue of highly qualified applicants who collectively would allow Yale to make an even greater contribution to society if more could be educated here. In addition, since the late-1970s, when the undergraduate population ceased to grow, Yale is larger in virtually every dimension: faculty, staff, library and museum resources, and physical presence. We are well poised, therefore, to expand.

Our 12 existing residential colleges are admired because they create intimate communities and a superb environment for learning. The new colleges will emulate Yale’s proven model with a master, dean, fellows, and students forming a close-knit family, supported by the highest caliber public and private spaces for living and study. With an anticipated opening in 2013, these colleges will allow us not only to increase the undergraduate student body by about 15 percent, but also to alleviate crowding throughout the residential college system. We expect to reduce the population of the existing colleges by approximately 140 students and largely eliminate the need for annex housing.

Our goal is that students in every residential college, old and new, will have an even more robust and enlivening experience as a result of this expansion. Thus, we are adding facilities in the vicinity of the new colleges that support academics and student life, including classroom space, a student café, exercise facilities, a theater, and more. We are also expanding the faculty to sustain our favorable ratio of students to teachers, particularly in highly subscribed majors, and we are growing our system of academic advising. New resources will augment curricular development, student research, study abroad, and the whole range of extracurricular activities so important to a Yale education.

The new colleges will be built in a triangle just north of the Grove Street Cemetery bounded by Prospect, Canal, and Sachem Streets, creating a new sense of the geography of our campus by enlarging the footprint of Yale College. I believe that the presence of undergraduate residences north of Grove Street will alter the perception that Science Hill is “too far away” from the “center” of campus. In fact, the site proposed for the new colleges is only three blocks north of Elm Street, which divides the Old Campus and the Cross Campus. As the Study Group Report indicates, the new colleges have the potential of making the whole campus seem smaller, more effectively linking Science Hill with the historic “center” through the proper treatment of Prospect Street, the creation of appropriate “stepping stones” along the way, and the development of facilities for student activities at, near, and beyond the site of the new colleges.

To support the expansion of Yale College, the Corporation has authorized an increase in the goal of the Yale Tomorrow fundraising campaign from $3 billion to $3.5 billion. I am delighted to announce that, thanks to generous commitments from a handful of leadership donors, we have already secured $140 million in gifts and pledges for this purpose.

Almost 80 years ago, Edward H. Harkness, B.A. 1897, gave the funds to create Yale’s residential college system. He saw the residential colleges as a way to sustain the collegiate spirit in a school that was fast becoming a university. Since then, Yale College has grown in ways that Harkness never predicted. The student body has doubled, women have been enrolled, and young people have been welcomed from more than 100 nations. Remarkably, the members of this vast and vibrant enterprise still consider themselves part of a family. This is Harkness’s great legacy, and one that we will preserve in a new era of expansion. I am grateful for the outstanding work of the Study Group for providing us with wise counsel on how to achieve this objective.

Sincerely yours,

Richard C. Levin

So, what do you think?