This is a criticism of Politico? To the effect that they haven't covered higher ed more generally and in a balanced way?
I haven't followed Politico's higher ed coverage carefully over the years, but I'm not inclined to look a gift horse in the mouth when they rake these charlatans over the coals.
I haven't followed Politico's higher ed coverage carefully over the years, but I'm not inclined to look a gift horse in the mouth when they rake these charlatans over the coals.
January 17, 2026 at 3:33 AM
This is a criticism of Politico? To the effect that they haven't covered higher ed more generally and in a balanced way?
I haven't followed Politico's higher ed coverage carefully over the years, but I'm not inclined to look a gift horse in the mouth when they rake these charlatans over the coals.
I haven't followed Politico's higher ed coverage carefully over the years, but I'm not inclined to look a gift horse in the mouth when they rake these charlatans over the coals.
I work at a large college, and the IT department is accelerating their plan to replace a bunch of employees' machines to get ahead of the RAM price spike. I think they know what they're doing
January 16, 2026 at 5:00 AM
I work at a large college, and the IT department is accelerating their plan to replace a bunch of employees' machines to get ahead of the RAM price spike. I think they know what they're doing
I am that kind--I literally teach logic--and while I agree re: 'begs the question', I don't insist we have a monopoly on 'valid'. Points, feelings, concerns can all be valid. (In fact, logicians use 'valid' in different ways--to describe both arguments and formulas true in all models.)
January 11, 2026 at 6:53 PM
I am that kind--I literally teach logic--and while I agree re: 'begs the question', I don't insist we have a monopoly on 'valid'. Points, feelings, concerns can all be valid. (In fact, logicians use 'valid' in different ways--to describe both arguments and formulas true in all models.)
Photographs do not create mirror images of their subjects
November 26, 2025 at 6:12 PM
Photographs do not create mirror images of their subjects
hell yeah. pastures of plenty, 2 dollar shoes, things of that nature
September 11, 2025 at 10:32 PM
hell yeah. pastures of plenty, 2 dollar shoes, things of that nature
Here's a PDF finally. Workload policy is around p. 141, contains all the language from JFC doc. docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2025/related...
docs.legis.wisconsin.gov
July 3, 2025 at 5:28 PM
Here's a PDF finally. Workload policy is around p. 141, contains all the language from JFC doc. docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2025/related...
Hmm. Yeah, same. Maybe the text from yesterday's joint finance document has yet to be included? If you search '9247', which is the section for fiscal changes to UW System, it takes you to a heading with no associated text.
July 2, 2025 at 8:36 PM
Hmm. Yeah, same. Maybe the text from yesterday's joint finance document has yet to be included? If you search '9247', which is the section for fiscal changes to UW System, it takes you to a heading with no associated text.
At his emergency spring meeting with L&S, the provost openly said that he'd rather we didn't worry about R1. If this budget passes, retaining R1 better be right up there with retention on his list of priorities
July 2, 2025 at 5:24 PM
At his emergency spring meeting with L&S, the provost openly said that he'd rather we didn't worry about R1. If this budget passes, retaining R1 better be right up there with retention on his list of priorities
lose it in 2028, I should say.
July 2, 2025 at 5:09 PM
lose it in 2028, I should say.
Presumably stable till then. Also in the meantime they can axe enough PhD programs so we fall below the $50M research and/or 70 PhDs per year thresholds and lose R1
July 2, 2025 at 5:06 PM
Presumably stable till then. Also in the meantime they can axe enough PhD programs so we fall below the $50M research and/or 70 PhDs per year thresholds and lose R1
R1 status is written into the text of the proposal (see pages 38 - 39): docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/misc/lfb/jfc...
docs.legis.wisconsin.gov
July 2, 2025 at 4:37 PM
R1 status is written into the text of the proposal (see pages 38 - 39): docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/misc/lfb/jfc...
Didn't ~everybody read Bradley back then?
June 30, 2025 at 7:45 PM
Didn't ~everybody read Bradley back then?
I think you can argue that it's every film-lover's duty to Bear Witness to the thing. But it's a catastrophe
June 30, 2025 at 2:03 AM
I think you can argue that it's every film-lover's duty to Bear Witness to the thing. But it's a catastrophe
So I guess you didn't see Megalopolis. Best to keep it that way
June 30, 2025 at 12:59 AM
So I guess you didn't see Megalopolis. Best to keep it that way
brainstorming: "I/me/me/mine"?
April 24, 2025 at 4:38 PM
brainstorming: "I/me/me/mine"?
Oh, man, that stings. And things were *really bad* right about then
April 2, 2025 at 12:07 AM
Oh, man, that stings. And things were *really bad* right about then
Lol, time to lowercase that O
March 16, 2025 at 11:23 AM
Lol, time to lowercase that O
Reposted by matt knachel
The placement of "trans issues" here is, without exaggeration, one of the most depraved things I've ever seen in the pages of this publication.
Of course the NYT sees the "DEI" stuff positively & is neutral on anti-trans discrimination
March 1, 2025 at 3:59 PM
The placement of "trans issues" here is, without exaggeration, one of the most depraved things I've ever seen in the pages of this publication.