a rant

I can't let this one slip by. This morning I was reading Inside Higher Ed and of course I was interested in the opinion article: Where is the faculty in the admissions debates? As a former admissions director, I have an interest in the topic. It was a good column and I appreciated the insights, but what really got my blood boiling was this moronic and uninformed statement by a commenter:

"Quite frankly, most admissions officers are not in tune with too much on an intellectual level. They don’t publish. They don’t take part in scholarly debate. Instead, they spend their working day dealing with high school students and critiquing their lives. Essentially, they are glorified high school teachers, who have no idea how adults act, and who might later bring glory to the school."

Oh really? Well, I won't even begin to 'critique' this particular commenter's writing skills. But I will say this to a person who claims that he has 'superlatively sophisticated social skills:' Perhaps, Larry, your skills do not extend to common decency. You clearly know nothing about the work of admissions officers, their skills, research interests, or day-to-day work. In fact, I would venture to guess that you might have applied to give campus tours as a student and were turned down because of your 'superlatively abysmal social skills' and you harbor some deep, dark unresolved issues about rejection. Perhaps you were even rejected by a university based on your interview with an admissions officer.

Regardless, Larry's view represents a larger issue: The often antagonistic relationship between teaching faculty and administrators. I have a lot to say on that subject. But for now, I feel better having ranted and I need to get back to writing.