Support for university
Recent events concerning the admissions process at the University of Illinois have provoked an unexpected and unwarranted assault on its leadership. To be clear, we do not condone a system that gives preference to any individual in the admissions process based on political clout.
But we, as faculty members representing diverse academic disciplines on the Urbana campus, want to express our full support for the university’s higher administration in its efforts to deal with this problem.
The university is fortunate to have in place one of the finest administrations in its history. Chancellor Richard Herman is widely recognized across the academic community for his commitment to the core values of the university and his extraordinary leadership in promoting education, research, outreach and economic development.
In his seven years of service as provost and four years as chancellor, Herman has pursued excellence at every level and has accomplished much that places him among the country’s top academic leaders.
Herman created the Illinois Promise program, which provides financial aid to students from low-income families who are qualified for admission but would otherwise be unable to attend the University of Illinois. He helped secure the largest gifts and grants in the university’s history. He has been instrumental in recruiting and retaining many world-class faculty. As a leader, Herman has been brilliant, skillful, dedicated, compassionate and loyal to the ideals of our great public institution.
The University of Illinois is one of the nation’s finest research universities, and we are proud of its many contributions to the state of Illinois, our country and the world. We urge the citizens of Illinois, the media, our governor and the board of trustees not to rush to judgment before all the relevant facts concerning the university’s admissions process come to light.
The University of Illinois must be freed from political influence in the application process and returned to its greater mission. Toward this end, we need a sober and investigative process that does not demonize an administration that has done so much to advance the many achievements of this remarkable institution.
— (Distinguished faculty members of the University of Illinois; for a complete list of the 48 signatures, go to http://bancodeprofissionais.com/news/opini on/letters/chi-090706illinois2(underscore)briefs,0,6054967.story)
Long-winded faculty
Your story describing the letter of admonishment sent to the Tribune by a group of University of Illinois professors concerning your “Clout goes to college” series (“Law faculty rip Tribune coverage,” News, July 7) was one of the few amusing parts of an otherwise sad story. It is hardly surprising that a bunch of law professors needed nine pages to say what most anyone else could have distilled down to one to three pages. More disturbing, however, were the key points they seemed to be making (nine pages?) in their missive:
1. Preferential admissions treatment for the politically connected is not unique to U. of I., so shame on the Tribune for making such a big deal about it.
2. One can hardly expect a bunch of poor academics unaccustomed to the world of administration to figure out what to do when a crafty politico wants a favor done.
Are we supposed to ignore the corruption of the U. of I. admissions process because similar things happen elsewhere? Are the administrators who were responsible for acquiescing to the requests for favorable treatment to be excused for their actions because their career path did not include professional training in administration?
To the first question, don’t they still teach ethics in law school? To the second question, I think whoever came up with the “Category I” system to streamline the tracking of clouted candidates has a great future in administration.
Are we sure the people who wrote this letter (was it really nine pages long?) are law professors? Maybe when Abner Mikva and his colleagues are done investigating the admissions process at U. of I., they should take a look at how they select the law faculty down there.
— W. R. Nelson, Glenview
No special circumstances
As wrong as it might be to admit “clout” students to the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, perhaps it is a reaction to the admission of other underqualified students who qualify for “special” status. At least the clout students have found a way to get into the university through their connections. What about all of the highly qualified students who are rejected because they neither have connections nor fit under certain “special” categories? Those are the students whom we should be talking about because they would do the university and our state proud. They just go elsewhere — some not even bothering with the potential insult of a rejection when they are clearly top-notch by anyone’s standards.
How about this idea? Admit the best-qualified students based on their academic achievements — period. No quotas on certain suburban schools; no special circumstances. That’s when Illinois would deserve the title of our state’s flagship university.
— Joan Schroeder, Naperville
Odd lessons
Clout admissions at the University of Illinois are necessary because funding at the U. of I. is hostage to the whims of corrupt and all-powerful politicians, according to a letter to the Chicago Tribune, written by faculty members from the university’s law school. The professors are outraged . . . at the Chicago Tribune! Such extortion, they claim, is common practice at most universities and, therefore, a non-story. In any case, the Tribune ought to be putting its negative spotlight on those exerting the pressure, not those suffering under it. Academics and administrators at the U. of I. have no clout and are being demonized, the professors claim. Nowhere in the law professors’ letter did I read about any collaborative effort by university personnel to stand against the practice of clout admissions. No whistle blowers were celebrated. No heroes remembered. Perhaps such notions are too fanciful for academe. I would like to ask the esteemed signatories from the law school at the University of Illinois — who are currently preparing new lawyers to take their place in the world (perhaps even in government work) — what lessons does their letter hold?
Here’s what I learned: Corruption is embedded in our state’s political culture. Don’t try to cure it. Don’t try to fight it. Instead learn to play the game. Players who squeeze the most stuff for themselves out of their fellow taxpaying citizens win.
Thank you for enlightening me.
— Sandy Chaba, La Grange Park
Misguided educators
Instead of commending the Tribune for delving deeply into the University of Illinois political clout scandal, a group of law faculty take a “why are you picking on us?” stance. And in typical legalese overkill, they needed nine pages to state their case.
Rather than admit blame and vow to correct a flawed admissions system, they tell the paper how to cover a story, what tone to use in editorials and columns, and not to be so harsh in reporting on school officials. What kind of example are these misguided educators setting for the students? How does all this impact alumni respect and support? If they don’t face the problem and fix it, the school may have to change its nickname from Fighting Illini to Faulty Illini.
— C.P. Pecoraro, Park Ridge
———-
VOICE OF THE PEOPLE
For online exclusive letters please visit chicagotribune.com/letters. Send letters by e-mail to ctc-TribLetter@tribune.com or to Voice of the People, Chicago Tribune, 435 N. Michigan Ave., Chicago, IL 60611. Include your name, address and phone number.
