Introduction - Panderers and Sycophants

Campus gender politics have become an obsession. Traditional Appalachian vendettas and the liaisons within decadent French aristocracies pale in comparison with the simmering hatreds and collegiate resentment engendered by admissions quota systems based on gender preference. Ironically, officials acknowledge the illegality of quota systems then spend all their time finding ways to develop them. Moreover, few social situations have become as power motivated as those existing between female administrators and their male apologists at the University of Washington.

Compromised principles for personal gain and academic privilege without merit.

If administrators reward exploitive panderers and self-seeking sycophants, then pandering and sycophancy will predominate. If money forms the single measure of recognition, one rests assured that merit-less decisions resulting from "merit raise" fights will prevail. Frequently, female administrators intellectually prostitute themselves while obtaining their PhD degrees and then incestuously obtain lifelong administrative positions in the institutions that spawned them. These situations could become more equitable with more emphasis on rights and responsibilities and less on status and privilege. [01] [Revelation: Womyn and Womynx]

Administrators, regardless of gender, must again answer to both faculty members and to students. Hiring and firing needs to return as a collaborative function between the president and the professorate. Moreover, appointments should not result solely from presidential decree, department and college mandates, or from pressure by commercial or other special interest groups. They should result from democratically appointed campus-wide committees with a membership appropriate to the position and discipline under review.

Universities have paid lip-service to the accepted principles and practices of The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) for many years. [02] Now, the time has arrived to consider these principles ethically. Appointments must hinge on merit and not on personal, political, gender-related, or ideological agendas. University trustees need to promulgate procedures for public accountability and insist that officials act responsively, competently, and, perhaps more importantly, within the law. Those who violate their positions by breaking laws, who fail to serve faculty and student interests, or who do not contribute to academic life, have no right to remain in the academe. [Introduction and Apologia]

Bureaucratic Bungling

Powerful, non-educating, absolutist university officials and powerless faculty and student bodies have become one of the most elemental problems facing contemporary higher learning. Consequently, the politically motivated, administrative power structure now interferes with the pedagogic process. Crucially, any improvement must accompany significant changes in the structure and employment of those who wield power.

Both male and female officials at the University of Washington have increasingly modeled that institution in imitation of big business and, with female officials, on negative male stereotypes. This becomes particularly noticeable in computer science with its cosy relationship with major software manufacturers: a relationship that benefits individuals and degrades academic integrity. However, these models have now become increasingly apparent in the social sciences where the scramble for money and prestige emulates “commercial” science practices. Part of the problem relates to the power superstructure having simultaneously transformed from faculty serving temporarily as deans and provosts to corporate-model executives whose careers define as "administration."

Many “non-pedagogic executives” receive six-figure salaries, occupy plush office suites, have abundant staff, use first-rate office equipment, and have shelves without learned books. In contrast, professors in Washington receive the lowest salaries in the United States. Many occupy offices that resemble in size and temperature the butlers’ pantries described in many eighteenth-century English novels. Additionally, they have virtually no staff and must find a place for their libraries at home. Furthermore, in sartorial splendor the administrators "do lunch" with other administrators and spend the remainder of their time ”consulting” with similarly attired business executives. Meanwhile, their secretaries omnipotently command the professorate using memoranda to treat them like commercial employees. Of course, all of this minimally benefits higher education as one traditionally knows it. Moreover, the process misplaces decision-making power, wastes large sums of taxpayers' money, and demoralizes faculties and students alike.

[Nmesis]