|
|
|
"Every institution is going to protect itself. And the way an institution protects itself is by weeding out people who might threaten it." Noam Chomsky
"[A]cademics can be activists as long as they do nothing to challenge the structure of the university, or anyone's power within it. If you want to make an issue of labor conditions in Soweto, great, you're a wonderful humanitarian; if you want to make an issue of labor conditions for the janitors who clean your office, that's an entirely different story." David Graeber
"One thing I've learned in academia is no one much cares what your politics are as long as you don't do anything about them. You can espouse the most radical positions imaginable, as long as you're willing to be a hypocrite about them. The moment you give any signs that you might not be a hypocrite, that you might be capable of standing on principle even when it's not politically convenient, then everything's different." David Graeber
"[T]he basic institutional role and function of the schools, and why they're supported, is to provide an ideological service: there's a real selection for obedience and conformity. And I think that process starts in kindergarten, actually." Noam Chomsky
| |
| An Education(al) Experiment at UCLA
How might a person coming into one of the nation's very top ranked
graduate schools of education test the accuracy of the
above quotes on our educational institutions? That is, given that the purpose of any
experiment is to test the accuracy of numerous sorts of
claims to knowledge and understanding, what might this experiment look like?
Before proposing this experiment, I need to make clear that it rests on the following assumption: If the UCLA Chancellor's (or any other UCLA faculty member's) UCLA-going son or daughter were sent home (permanently) from UCLA with the documents found here, the university and its Chancellor would be reduced to an international laughingstock.
On this assumption, I propose this fairly straightforward experiment: Get kicked out of the university. Then collect the documents found in the preceding pages on this website. Next, come back to the university with the facts and circumstances found in these documents and offer them, through this website, to faculty members of the university. Then wait to see if or how these faculty members respond.
In fact, I was able to see if and how faculty of the UCLA Graduate School of Education would respond to my advisor's argument and other faculty statements made on my termination. In Spring 2007, I sent this letter with this enclosure to fifty (50) faculty members within the Graduate School of Education. I received this reply from the departmental administrator. Shortly thereafter, I sent this follow-up email to the same fifty faculty members; I received this second reply from the departmental administrator. In Autumn 2007, I sent this second follow-up email to the same fifty faculty members. I received this third reply from the departmental administrator.
The fifty (50) faculty members of UCLA's Graduate School of Education & Information Studies (GSEIS) who were sent the above letter, enclosure, and follow-up emails:
Marvin Alkin, Walter Allen, Alexander Astin, Helen Astin, Alison Bailey, Eva Baker, Stuart Biegel, James Catterall, Mitchell Chang, Burton Clark, Arthur Cohen, Sol Cohen, Robert Cooper, Annamarie François, Frederick Erickson, Norma Feshbach, Megan Franke, Francine Gelbwachs, Kris Gutiérrez, Tyrone Howard, Sandra Harding, Sylvia Hurtado, Douglas Kellner, Marilyn Kourilsky, Eduardo Lopez, Reynaldo Macias, Jose-Felipe Martinez, Patricia McDonough, Peter McLaren, Ernest Morrell, Bengt Murthen, Edith Mukudi Omwami, Don Nakanishi, Jeannie Oakes, Marjorie Orellana, John Rogers, Mike Rose, José Luis Santos, Linda Sax, Michael Seltzer, Daniel Solorzano, Carlos Torres, Eugene Tucker, Concepcion Valadez, Rae Jeane Williams, Noreen Web, Carl Weinberg, Wellford Wilms, Merlin Wittrock, Jeffrey Wood.
| |
|