Drake Univ./David Maxwell and Pat Chaput's postDrake Univ./David Maxwell and Pat

[Rodney Patterson]

It seems to me that Pat Chaput's cogent and very clearly written letter
should not be forgotten.  Scholars sometimes seem to forget that they are
scholars if the matter before them has no obvious connection with their own
research or their own particular professional welfare.  Thus, for an example
closer to the skin, a professor of Russian literature who cannot read German
well or at all may agree to serve on the tenure committee responsible for
preparing a case concerning a professor of German linguistics who is not a
personal friend and/or whose work the Russian professor does not know at
all.  If the German linguist were unable to read Russian, would the Slavist
welcome the German linguist's analysis and recommendations concerning his
(the Slavist's) tenure case?  I doubt it.  Suddenly the Slavist might
recover or discover his ethics.  Yet I think this kind of "university
service" is common and largely escapes ethical scrutiny.  It should not.

Emily Tall's letter, though honorably intended, I am sure, fails to address
the essence of the question.  She wrote, "... David's decision to abolish
the language department there was done because of the specific circumstances
at Drake and was not intended to serve as a general model!!! I discussed
this with David, so this is not hearsay."  Simply asserting that something
is true and then "proving it" by pointing out that "I discussed this with
David, so this is not hearsay" tells us nothing except that Emily is David's
loyal, but in this instance not entirely logical, friend.

Pat Chaput wrote (wisely, in my view) "My discussion was intended to serve
as a caution. Whenever and wherever faculty who teach language do not
support opinions with evidence from research and scholarship, do not
persistently articulate the content of what they do in an effort to
reeducate their colleagues, do not insist on the centrality of understanding
language and culture to the educational mission of their institutions, do
not articulate the integration of language with other college subjects, or
allow themselves to be isolated in any form, and so on and so forth, then
'the default' basis for many  of the opinions that affect them is likely to
be the personal experience of the individuals charged with the
decision-making (whoever they might be)."

I would add only this:  when a University hires a business executive without
any experience as a teacher or research professor to serve as its "C.E.O,"
the "default system" is fully operative and the prospects for Academia are
not too promising.

Rodney L. Patterson
Associate Professor of Slavic Languages and Literatures
State University of New York at Albany
kotuchenny at onebox.com


_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Use your web browser to search the archives, control your subscription
  options, and more.  Visit and bookmark the SEELANGS Web Interface at:
                http://members.home.net/lists/seelangs/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------