Your comments on the Dream Act...particularly with regard to it's effect on colleges, reminds me of something I experienced years ago.
In the spring of 1978 I was taking a graduate course in Police Organizational Management at Sacramento State College. Course requirements included three oral book reports and an in depth, 45-50 minute oral presentation of a documented law enforcement management case study and how an issue was resolved (or not resolved), with a written synopsis and a bibliography to be handed in after the presentation, followed with a Q & A.
My presentation went a bit over time...and was a little disorganized, as I was terrified of speaking in front of a group. My bibliography cited 8 or 10 different sources. I received a "B" letter grade, which, though disappointing, was probably appropriate..
A black state police officer in attendance...when it came time for his presentation...spent about 5 minutes reading from a one page hand written book report...and received...a "B" letter grade.
I spoke with the professor, Dr. James Poland later that week, politely asking him WTF? Professor Poland informed me that he could not fail a black student...especially one all ready employed by a state agency.
Now...in all honesty...I don't hold this against the officer/student at all. He was doing his best to succeed. But he didn't have much on the ball. Even so, I am sure that...armed with his masters degree and some time on the beat...he went on to become a supervisor and maybe even an administrator in that or another agency.
Throughout my career I worked for supervisors (and some administrators) who could barely string two coherent sentences together, but were oh so full of themselves based on their "accomplishments." One was the Warden of a correctional facility, one was a captain, and one was a lieutenant who, after reading his written assessment of an incident that occurred on my unit...thankfully agreed to use my synopsis of the incident and sign his name to it.
There is no telling how much real damage has been done to our institutions and to our society by giving unqualified people a free pass to management positions based on perceived need...past injustices...or "to right a terrible wrong."
Once standards are lowered and unqualified members of a "protected class" are promoted...those standards remain low [for everyone]. This allows unqualified members of the non-protected class to promote also. This is destructive to the system and it is my firm belief that this is one cause of the demise of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.
It started with blacks...went to women...then to gays. Soon Hispanics were included as well. Once a target group was identified...the rush to hire and promote was on.
So Howie....I have absolutely no trouble believing you when you opine that the Dream Act would create yet another protected class in our colleges....illegal immigrants.
Funny thing. That nutbag [Michelle Huff aka ‘michilines’] you guys were capping on is an ESL teacher at the University of Houston? Tell me Howard....why in the HELL do we need to be teaching English As A Second Language at an institution of higher learning? Is it just me? I mean.....couldn't ESL be taught much more cheaply and more effectively at community outreach centers....in grade schools and high schools to PREPARE people to attend college?
ESL at the College level?
OK. Done with my rant......
EDITOR’S NOTE: Well done, Centurion.
2 comments:
Concerning your comments on the lowering of standards, back in the 1970’s, the San Diego Police Department was under heavy criticism because it’s affirmative action program was not working. Their height standards kept Latinos and Asians out. Their intelligence entry standards kept blacks out. And their physical standards kept women out. When they lowered their minimum height requirement it still kept Latinos and Asians out, forcing them to do away with any height requirements at all. They dumbed-down their intelligence standards to accommodate black applicants and they lowered their physical standards for women applicants.
Dr. Mike Roberts [Michael D. Roberts, PhD, Law Enforcement Psychological Services, Inc., Los Gatos, CA] a highly regarded police psychologist, says that when you lower standards to accommodate any protected (by law) group you lower the standards for everyone and far more white males will benefit from the lowered standards than minorities and women. Dr. Roberts said that SDPD’s revised standards resulted in the hiring of a bunch of short, dumb, weak white male cops.
My point exactly, Howard.
What really bothers me is that there were members of these "target groups" at Sac State who were very bright, physically fit, and motivated.
Why were these people not actively recruited?
And the lieutenant I refrenced in the above post happened to be white. And some of the best supervisors I ever worked for were members of these targeted groups.
But when they lowered standareds across the board to get the numbers up...they seem to have lost the incentive, or the ability, to hire and promote the best and the brightest. What they did instead was to hire and promote their friends, relatives, and suck ups.
With a little committment and common sense we could have hired and promoted many more competent people. In so many cases...we did not.
California is still reaping the consequenses.
Post a Comment