In California, it seems like the state government raises tuition to help balance the budget. I think the real question should be whether or not the cost of instruction (per pupil) has gone up faster than the rate of inflation.

A side inquiry could be to see how many more classes are taught by graduate students and non-tenured professors versus full professors than in the past. This would seem like an attempt by the university to decrease the cost of instruction.

A second side inquiry would be to see how much tuition raises and student assistance have been used to promote income redistribution between students from wealthy families to those of lesser means.

Another interesting question is whether or not basic instruction (teacher communicating information to students) is subject to the same types of productivity increases we see in different types of industries. Or is the student / teacher ratio needed for effective teaching subject to an upper limit.

VDH, I regret to state that your characterization of academic science and technology as “non-political and still untainted” seems a shade optimistic. Granted, this area is in much better shape than the humanities, but that is faint praise. (But I’m not claiming that academic science was a bower of fairness and purity before political correctness slithered in.)
******
This is now a boring topic since 9/11—our postmodern refinement and their premodern savagery. One final thought though. I used to hear people say “It will take another 9/11” to come to our senses about our real peril. Now in several gloomy conversations I hear instead, “It will take three or four 9/11s to …”

Please don’t let this be your final word. I’m not suggesting you drive away your audience, but the importance of the matter warrants keeping it on the table somehow until history disposes one way or another. They also serve who only stand and prate.

2. To do whatever they can to bring the Iraq war to a speedy conclusion.

Really? “whatever”? Talk about idiots in professorial clothing: A nuke would “bring the Iraq war to a speedy conclusion”.

do you seriously think that Iran or any other Islamic or Islamist country that considers us an enemy has the wherewithal to invade and conquer the US?

Do you seriously think that a nuclear exchange in the Middle East wouldn’t reduce us to 18th century (at best) conditions? Oil gone == global trade gone. Oil gone == Internet gone. Oil gone == cities abandoned and white-collar workers becoming farmers.

You have to invade to conquer. You do not have to invade to destroy.

What is the plan for a nuclear armed Iran that will be a regional superpower?

Indeed. And what is the plan to deal with the nuclear arms race that will take place in the Middle East because of that? There is plenty of money floating around. Dubai can easily stop building artifical islands and start building nukes. Egypt and Saudi Arabia have alread said they would. Does anyone honestly believe that nuclear weapons in that region would not be used? Then, well, see above.

But then, neither are the universities, committees notwithstanding.

Not that gender roles are social constructs, which could be discussed (but not in a class that’s supposed to introduce us to non-fiction narrative) but that actual physical gender doesn’t exist!

The worst part was that the ultra-liberal teacher was actually a really nice, polite person, but so wrong on so many things it was painful. Now I’m writng a a proposal for my thesis, but can’t get it started because I keep thinking that I just can’t deal with these people anymore.

I agree that democracy is threatened by the overwhelming ignorance taught in American universities so perhaps the Ivory Tower might want to learn a little something from the military instead of ejecting it from American campuses.

As for a challenging college with solid credentials, try the Virginia Military Institute.