Skip to main content

A Gray Day


Early in February, the faculty of Connecticut’s four state universities – Connecticut Central State University (CCSU), Eastern Connecticut State University (ECSU), Southern Connecticut State University (SCSU) and Western Connecticut State University (WCSU) – wrote a letter to the relevant chairs and co-chairs of the General Assembly’s education committees critical of Gregory Gray’s attempt by pedagogical fiat to “change the way we teach and deliver education to our students.” Mr. Gray is the President of Connecticut’s State University system.

“Many education pundits,” the educators wrote, “now suggest the teacher is no longer the center of learning, and that students learn more from one another than from the faculty. . .this re-alignment means faculty must become ‘facilitators’ of learning. It's imperative that WE. . .[change] our pedagogical approach immediately.”

The letter’s verbiage may be unfamiliar to those who have little acquaintance with cutting edge teacher education colleges, but anyone in Connecticut who has been exposed to the Marxist pedagogical flummery of Paulo Freire, here explored by Connecticut Commentary, will be familiar with “Pedagogy of the Oppressed.” Bill Ayres, the Chicago pedagogue and flag stomping former domestic terrorist whom some suspect may have had a hand in writing President Barack Obama’s highly fictionalized memoir “Dreams of My Father,” is a fervent follower of Freire.
Way back in 2008, Connecticut Commentary noted:

“American education has been deteriorating roughly since the early 70’s when Paulo Freire’s “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” became part of the curriculum in teachers' colleges. Freire’s idea was that the pedagogue or teacher was an oppressive creature so long as he taught his students, for teaching implies the conveyance of ideas or, as Freire would prefer to frame it, propaganda. Learning, however, is a liberating activity. Oppression in the classroom therefore would end when the teacher no longer taught a subject to his students. To become liberators, teachers must become ‘learning facilitators.’ They may shuck off the imputation that they are indoctrinators or propagandists by leading their charges to drink; but they must not prescribe the drink. No lecturing, please.”

Mr. Gray has now submitted his resignation; no doubt he is actively pursuing more promising opportunities elsewhere. Mark Ojakian, Governor Dannel Malloy’s chief of staff, will serve as interim president. The position is a monetary step-up for Mr. Ojakaian, who will earn an annual salary of $335,000 in his new position. Since Mr. Malloy appoints both the chairman and nine of the fifteen voting members of the board of regents that sets policy for Connecticut’s university system, the transition from his former position, where he earned a measly $189,000, was effortless.

Thinking out of the box, State Representative Gail Lavielle suggested, prior to Mr. Ojakain’s elevation to the position, that Connecticut might easily scrub the post altogether:

“Talk has already turned to the question of who will replace Dr. Gray. A far more important question, however, is why the Board of Regents is failing to produce real added value. Instead of simply filling the top spot, the legislature, the administration, and the Board’s members should be reassessing the Board’s role, its relationships with the state colleges and universities, the limits of its authority – and, if necessary, whether it should exist.”

The position exists because then Governor Lowell Weicker wanted to provide a soft landing, once he left office, to Bill Cibes, the Office of Policy Management (OPM) guru who facilitated the imposition of the Weicker income tax. Mr. Cibes ran for governor on an income tax platform, was soundly defeated and later had a “second act” as Mr. Weicker’s OPM chief. Both have resurfaced recently: Mr. Weicker to say that the national Republican Party is an idiot to entertain the possibility of multi-billionaire Donald Trump as President, and Mr. Cibes to suggest that Connecticut was under taxing its businesses.

Mrs. Lavielle may be on to something. The administrative architecture created by Mr. Weicker and further embellished by Mr. Malloy is one of those top-down political schemes that serve mostly to stifle creative competition among participating colleges, increase the cost of education and provide a soft landing pad for heroic administrative personnel who have assisted Mr. Malloy in beggaring the state.


Why don’t we just strangle this one in its crib?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

PCBs, GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH

By Gerald and Natalie Sirkin c2007 A front-page story on PCBs in the March 9 News-Times is just wrong. The first thing to know about PCBs is that they never killed a single person nor did they ever cause cancer. The second is that although they are invariably called “cancer-causing,” that designation comes chiefly from a single rat study. The third thing is that the subject rats were exposed daily for 21 months to 100 parts per million (ppm) of PCBs containing 60% chlorine. (The 100 ppm was about 5,000 times the tolerable daily intake of PCBs set by FDA in 1973.) When rats were exposed to PCBs containing less chlorine, they developed no cancers. The fourth, that when the exposed rats were allowed to live out their lives, they had fewer cancers and lived longer than the unexposed rats. PCBs is a family of chemicals known as polychlorinated biphenyls. PCBs contain chlorine ranging from 12% to 70%. They were used in two General Electric plants that manufactured electrical equipmen...

Taking The Fifth, After Esty

Whether or not U.S. Representative Elizabeth Esty will serve the remainder of her term or resign immediately is very much an open question. But, in any case, the battle for Connecticut’s 5 th U.S. Congressional District has begun with a show of unexpected fireworks. For many years, the 5 th District was a toss-up proposition; both Republicans and Democrats have held and surrendered the seat. Geographically the 5 th District touches the border of New York from Connecticut’s northern-most point to Danbury in the southern quadrant and includes much of Litchfield county and parts of Fairfield, Hartford and New Haven counties. Party affiliation is competitive, in round figures, 30 percent Democrat, 25 percent Republican and 45 percent unaffiliated. Over the years, the Democrat Party in Connecticut has moved from the center to the left, but the 5 th District has been a moderate preserve. During the Obama presidential election, Republican moderates within Connecticut's U.S. ...