Skip to main content
Skip to content
1 duplicate copy in the archive
Case File
d-17542House OversightOther

Essay on University Culture and Student Expectations

The passage is a personal commentary on higher‑education dynamics with no specific names, transactions, dates, or allegations involving powerful actors. It offers no actionable investigative leads. Describes how elite universities prioritize prestige and grant funding over teaching. Claims professors view students as primarily seeking easy courses and job placement. Mentions personal experience ma

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #023937
Pages
1
Persons
3
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage is a personal commentary on higher‑education dynamics with no specific names, transactions, dates, or allegations involving powerful actors. It offers no actionable investigative leads. Describes how elite universities prioritize prestige and grant funding over teaching. Claims professors view students as primarily seeking easy courses and job placement. Mentions personal experience ma

Tags

academic-culturehigher-educationhouse-oversightuniversity-administration

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit
Review This Document

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
How the Best Universities Inadvertently Ruin Our Schools 197 hire folks who can contribute. I was trying to build educational soft- ware but the principle was the same. I hired programmers, researchers, assistants to do lower level work, video staff, artists, and, of course, graduate students. And, now you know what I did all day. I managed this enterprise. Eventually my institute had 200 people working in it. I did what any person in charge of 200 people does. I set the direction and checked on progress. Also, I wrote books and thought deep thoughts. This is what any professor does who brings in grant money. I was just doing it on a larger scale than most. All of this is about winning the prestige game. Any university wants pre-eminent professors. Universities want the best faculty so their name is mentioned a lot, so they get applications from students, attention from the media, and more grant money. That is what uni- versities do. Teaching? Well, how exactly does teaching fit in with all that? It really doesn’t. Most professors agree that the university is a lot nicer place when there aren’t all those undergraduates around. From May to September New Haven was an idyllic place. Smart people, good weather, interesting conversation. Then in September, thousands of young people, making a racket and expecting to be taught. But, there- in lies the problem. Are students really expecting to be taught? It doesn’t take very long for a professor to learn that those brilliant Yale students, the ones who killed themselves to get into the place, may not be there solely to enter into the life of the mind. While everyone is thinking great thoughts and doing great research over the summer, professors manage to get themselves believing that the job of a profes- sor at a great university is to be an intellectual. What they forget easily enough is who is paying the bills. And, they forget the real agenda of those who are paying the bills. They are reminded soon enough. Students want courses to be easy, not bother them too much with work outside the classroom, and help them get a good job. Of course, I am oversimplifying here. Many students attend Yale to learn what it is that you, the professor, really know and want to teach. In 15 years at Yale I met a number of them. I remember their names because there weren't that many. We can hope that all professors have met their share of that type of student. Most college students are 18-year-olds who are on their own for the first time. They are more interested in exploring themselves and their new freedoms than they are in working hard at intellectual

Related Documents (6)

House OversightUnknown

Opinion piece on Viktor Orbán’s influence and U.S. policy

Opinion piece on Viktor Orbán’s influence and U.S. policy The passage offers general commentary on Orbán’s political stance and U.S. administration strategy without specific names, dates, transactions, or actionable leads. It mentions a few former officials but provides no concrete allegations or evidence of misconduct, making it low‑value for investigation. Key insights: Describes Orbán’s rise from pariah to leader of an authoritarian, anti‑EU movement.; Claims Orbán built a border wall on the Hungarian‑Serbian frontier in 2015.; Suggests the Trump administration’s approach to illiberalism is flawed.

1p
House OversightUnknown

Steve Bannon discusses coordinating European right‑wing leaders and funding through “The Movement”

Steve Bannon discusses coordinating European right‑wing leaders and funding through “The Movement” The email chain reveals Bannon planning extensive face‑to‑face outreach to European populist leaders (Salvini, Orban, Le Pen, Farage) and mentions a new non‑profit “The Movement” that will raise and channel funds. It links a former White House strategist to potential foreign political influence operations and fundraising networks, offering concrete leads (names, dates, travel plans) for further investigation. While the content is largely narrative, the specifics about travel logistics, funding intent, and coordination with right‑wing parties provide actionable investigative angles. Key insights: Bannon proposes a 8‑10 day European trip to meet multiple right‑wing leaders.; Reference to a new non‑profit foundation “The Movement” to coordinate strategy and raise funds.; Mention of collaboration with European populists such as Matteo Salvini, Viktor Orbán, Marine Le Pen, Nigel Farage.

1p
Dept. of JusticeAug 22, 2017

15 July 7 2016 - July 17 2016 working progress_Redacted.pdf

Kristen M. Simkins From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Irons, Janet < Tuesday, July 12, 2016 10:47 AM Richard C. Smith     Hello Warden Smith,     mother is anxious to hear the results of your inquiry into her daughter's health.   I'd be grateful if you could  email or call me at your earliest convenience.  I'm free today after 2 p.m.  Alternatively, we could meet after the Prison  Board of Inspectors Meeting this coming Thursday.    Best wishes,    Janet Irons    1 Kristen M. Simkins From: Sent:

1196p
House OversightUnknown

Empty House Oversight Document Lacks Substantive Content

Empty House Oversight Document Lacks Substantive Content The provided file contains only a title and no substantive text, offering no names, transactions, dates, or allegations to pursue. Consequently, it provides no investigative leads, controversy, novelty, or power linkages. Key insights: Document contains only a header and filename.; No mention of individuals, agencies, or actions.

1p
House OversightUnknown

President Trump discusses Bob Woodward interview on phone, claims staff ignorance

President Trump discusses Bob Woodward interview on phone, claims staff ignorance The passage provides a brief anecdote of Trump’s phone call with journalist Bob Woodward, noting a claim that White House staff failed to inform him of the interview request. While it mentions a high‑profile figure (President Trump) and a senior aide (Kellyanne Conway), it lacks concrete details about wrongdoing, financial flows, or actionable leads. The information is already publicly reported and offers little novel investigative value. Key insights: Trump claims his staff did not tell him Woodward wanted an interview.; Kellyanne Conway is referenced as having asked Trump about a call.; Trump characterizes Woodward as "always been fair" but later calls the book inaccurate.

1p
House OversightUnknown

Alleged Draft Indictment Strategy Targeting President Trump for Obstruction by Mueller Team

Alleged Draft Indictment Strategy Targeting President Trump for Obstruction by Mueller Team The passage describes alleged internal documents and strategy discussions about a potential obstruction indictment against President Trump, naming several senior officials and outlining a timeline of alleged obstruction acts. While it provides a narrative and names key players (Mueller, Rosenstein, Giuliani, Flynn, Comey, McCabe), it offers no verifiable documents, dates of filings, or concrete transaction details. The lead is moderately useful for investigators seeking to locate the referenced “proposed charges” or to corroborate the existence of a draft indictment, but its speculative nature and lack of hard evidence limit its immediate investigative value. Key insights: Claims that Mueller’s team prepared a draft obstruction indictment as early as April 2017.; Alleged requirement that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein approve any indictment of the President.; Specific alleged obstruction acts: Trump’s requests to Comey, firing of Comey and McCabe, attempts to influence Flynn’s plea, and use of pardon power.

1p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,500+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Support This ProjectSupported by 1,550+ people worldwide
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.