There’s a bit of a problem here. The agency currently responsible for providing security vetting services in New Zealand is… *Drumroll* the SIS.* So by saying that oversight staff need to be security vetted, you are basically giving the SIS the right to choose who will be performing oversight over it. Which is obviously problematic.

The only solution to this that I can see is to not require vetting, or to set up a third agency in order to vet the oversight people. Which would be potentially very expensive.

*Technically, the SIS only provides a recommendation and the Chief Executive of the agency makes a decision based on that recommendation. But in practice the recommendation is binding.

Backsides on seats academia is so off putting for most all involved bar the slimiest of functionaries.

Very good points in both of your comments. It strikes me that many people “of the Left” in the US have retreated into local politics or community issues as a way of making a difference. The inertial weight of the machine is such that people see their hopes for change continually dashed at the federal level, as politicians from the president on down succumb to the Beltway ethos. So the disenchanted have two options: a retreat from activism entirely, which often is very hard for ideologically-driven people; or a re-focus on the local. A third option is, of course, to get all bitter and twisted in the privacy of their own alienated lives.

I take some solace in the fact that in the two places that I use as points of reference in the US–Tucson and Delray Beach–my old lefty friends have done the re-focus on local thing. That has also happened with friends located in other places. So not all is lost, because even small change can be incremental.

No, what has been most disappointing is the mysterious disappearance of the activists and movements that ended up putting Obama in back in 2008. The peace activists who marched against Iraq, where are they now, during the 12th year of the war in Afghanistan? The civil liberties campaigners who repeatedly charged Bush with violating their freedoms through the Patriot Act, who have largely vanished even though the same policies are being followed. The anger that was felt in the wake of bailouts for greedy banks has largely been replaced by passive acceptance of policies that benefit the very wealthy.

Why aren’t those who were so vocal when Bush was in charge still out protesting, when nothing has really changed? Were those activists just using worthy causes to get their particular politicians into office? If so, that is the greatest betrayal of all.

I am sure that the lecturer very much appreciated the support he received from your son and other students. But institutional weight and money trumps moral and ethical claims, at least in NZ academia.

The most telling comment was uttered by the Dean who did the firing at an ERA hearing. When asked why he choose summary dismissal over a host of lesser penalties, the Dean replied that “in a reputation-based enterprise such as academia, he knew that it would end (the lecturer’s) career.” When pressed further he said that the lecturer’s actions had harmed the university’s reputation abroad and that was the action that had to be taken.

And so it was.

Not that one can’t disagree with the censorship while still disagreeing with the conclusions being censored, of course.

This is compounded by the new academic managerialism that sees students as fees-paying clients. The students are well aware of this and increasingly have adopted the attitude that since they are paying tuition, they will pass their courses and get a degree no matter what. This is not exclusive to Asian societies–there are plenty of native-born Kiwi students with that attitude. Since managers rely on fees in climates of fiscal austerity, they exert pressure on staff to pass even the dim-witted, the dishonest, and particularly the dimwitted, dishonest yet well-monied or connected.

It is a sorry state of affairs and will not change until the regime of academic Taylorism is abandoned.

And lost in all this are the kids, who all too often are allowed little or no say in what they will study where, and who for so many years have been loaded down with books and assignments, starved of sleep and leisure time and told constantly by parents and teachers to study hard, to the point where very many arrive at university without a lot of really basic experience or life skills. So I’m inclined to see assignment4U’s clients as much as victims of this social and educational system as offenders.

I showed some of my students your article and the Stuff article you linked to, and at first they just laughed it off – they agree that it’s wrong, but cheating on exams and buying and selling assignments are very common, and I’m sure many see it as just one of the ways you survive this system. So it’s certainly no surprise to see them doing the same in New Zealand.

Your mention of “credentialism” reminds me of my time in SIngapore–it is not the quality of scholarship that matters but where one gets their degree. A C graduate from a “good” university is always favored over an A+ student from an “inferior” institution, regardless of the monetary or familial considerations that go into the choice of school (for example, high performing working class Malay students often have to go to schools that are cheaper than the national university, whereas middle class low performing ethnic Chinese students use the national university as their default option for entry into the public bureaucracy).

You’re right.

But also, I often find myself wondering how much those universities actually understand about the countries they recruit from let alone how much they attempt to research. I can tell you that basically everything that happens in New Zealand is reported in some form or another in China, and so anybody thinking of sending a child (really, child – a whole ‘nother discussion, albeit related to this issue) to study in NZ will find out the good, bad, ugly and whatever else goes on by asking Baidu a simple question or two. I can also tell you that the decision making processes behind sending a child to university are radically different here than what your average Kiwi is used to, as is, far too often, the reasons for the decisions made. Credentialism is an extremely healthy beast in China, and I’m sure it is a major motivation behind assignment4U and the market it supplies.

I could easily rant a lot more on this and many related issues, but I have lessons to prepare for tomorrow…

I agree with you, though, on who is to blame for this mess.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8624285/US-scholar-embroiled-in-NZ-security-row

Would be nice if they could lift their game somewhat.

Your last observation is also very apt. He still thinks he’s the victim in all this. He’ll have a good long while to stew on that, for sure.

L