I don’t think the reason we interview the way we do is that complicated.  Here’s the guesses I got from folks yesterday.

hmm…maybe.  I have referred to some of our processes as “sanctioned hazing”.  I’m not sure exactly what she’s referring to with HR issues.

Also, TJ went the “sanctioned hazing” route as well.

Fascinating.

Here’s my guess:

In student affairs, we regularly do national job searches.   When we bring in candidates, usually a final three, then folks often have to fly in, often including an overnight stay or at the least, difficulty in doing an interview and flying out on the same day (though business travelers do this sort of thing).

So, that leaves many schools with a lot of hours to kill with a candidate.

I think, quite literally, the repetitive interviews with assorted groups of students and staff is more about filling the time than anything.  We’ve got candidates on campus for a whole day and we feel like they should have something to do the whole day.

Let’s be honest, there are often a limited number of deciders in a job interview.  Usually these people get the alone time that they need to evaluate.

I’ve mentioned before that often these presentations that candidates give do nothing but reinforce what we see from candidates in singular interviews.

I just have a hard time believing that “because we have the time!” is really a good reason for having a process that either wastes ours or the candidate’s time and may not even be that efficient.

One of my colleagues said the other day that “we are silly for how we interview in student affairs”.  I agree.  The process of having one hour interviews where different constituent groups ask the same questions is hilarious and repetitive, and could even be called time wasted.

And if the only reason we do it that way is because we literally have to kill the time, that’s even worse.

One of the articles that I’ve thought a lot about is the Malcolm Gladwell article about bias in interviewing.  I certainly don’t want to chop his article down to small pieces, but the part that was most troubling to me was that the research he cites found that job interviewers opinions of a candidate within 5 seconds of meeting the candidate and after an hour of interviewing were essentially the same.  That is, the actual interview had nothing to do with the opinion of the candidate but instead the thin slice of your perception within 5 seconds.  This would be fine if we were experts at people, but while many of us would like to believe that we are, we are not.  

At work here is the confirmation bias, the idea that people tend to accept information that confirms that which we already believe and to refuse all other information.  It’s our brain at work and, while you can fight it, you cannot defeat it.  It’s our brain’s way of filtering information.  You immediately want to like or dislike the candidate, and you may not even know why.  They may even just look like someone you’d met before and didn’t like for one reason or another (maybe an ex partner), but it doesn’t register.   You just know immediately your feelings about this person.  While the skill of being able to quickly decipher someone may be a positive in life or death situations (i’m vaguely paraphrasing “blink“), in an interview situation, it’s not positive at all.  You’re trying to grasp a holistic view of the candidate and all you’re getting is a quick reaction to your initial meeting and that’s hardly a holistic view.

Some solutions were proposed by Twitter folks and while well meaning, they don’t necessarily remove the bias:

1. competency based interviewing – asking the right questions does not preclude confirmation bias.  while it may help to glean better information as a whole, it does not necessarily remove the “i like them” or “i don’t” bias.  Also, how does an interview situation help you to learn anything about how good this candidate is at their job and how they “fit”?  Have any of you been forced to sit around a table and be quizzed by 6 people other than your interview day?  Yeah, thought not.
2. references – this is on the right track, but there is a significant incentive to the referencer to not be completely honest about the candidate.  It weeds out the truly bad apples, but doesn’t necessarily give you all the information you need.  What if the situation they were in was a toxic one?  Is the referencee a quality referencer (to put it bluntly, are they an incompetent and you just don’t realize it)?  I think there’s an assumption that we “know” people when we’re in a professional association with them and I think that’s faulty.

I propose that the interview process should be flipped on it’s head.

I’m hoping to hire a candidate to do Job X.  Why not bring them in to do Job X?  For instance, you’re hiring a candidate to run a weekend program – bring them in for 3 days and tell them that their assignment is to create a weekend programming calendar for the next 2 months.  Let students that they’ll be working with actually be advised by them on their programs (schedule their advising meetings for these 3 days).  Run them through the ringer and forget this staged interview crap.  These interviews don’t actually measure what you want to know!

Step 2.  Instead of asking for a resume with a list of job responsibilities, give me some real actual metrics.  I want references from students on what you’re about.  I want event attendance numbers.  I want demographic information.  I want to see what you’ve done to materially improve the department and program you’ve worked with.  I want to see where your impact was.  Don’t give me a list of job responsibilities, I want to know what you did, how well you did and where your impact was.  Don’t have it?  Guess you didn’t want this job.  Our job is not about dollars and cents (well, not all the time), but there are ways that you can materially show your impact.

Like I said previously, I stand by most of this.

As Teri Bump said in the comments on that post, I’m probably being unrealistic.

A year later, I stand by my thought that interviewing people around a table, or having them do a presentation is horribly inefficient for determining whether someone can actually do a job and do it well.

I don’t stand by my resume and cover letter suggestions completely.  I’d change the following:

1. I know that employers typically have a good idea of what they’re looking for in a candidate for a position, especially specific skills (someone in student affairs who’s raised grades in a greek system, for example).  Employers need to be more specific about what they’re looking for in a candidate.  If the candidate doesn’t specifically address your specific requests, they go in the trash.
2. Candidates should be encouraged to only send resumes that highlight specific accomplishments that pertain to the specific job they’re applying for.  We don’t need laundry lists of job responsibilities that would fit with any other position out there  We need to know what you actually do to separate yourself from any other warm body we could hire.  Frankly, this would limit the need for a cover letter, which are mostly unimpressive anyway.

I still support the idea of creating a job interview that actually tests the skills that they would use in their position.  However, I think 3 days would be unrealistic.  We already have many candidates on campus for single or two day interviews though.  Instead of throwing them in front of 75 different groups of people, you could easily throw them into real life job situations and encourage them to show what they’ve got instead of showing they have the all-important skill of being grilled with questions by groups of 5-10 people.  The presentation that many candidates do does seem to be of some value, but I would only include it at the percentage that a candidate might do it in their actual job.  I would imagine for most people, presentations are a minimal part of their job.

One other wrinkle that I have thought about that I wanted to propose, even though I’m almost certain this is easily ripped to shreds is doing trial basis hires.  I know that this is not the case at all campuses, but for many campuses, getting fired is exceedingly difficult.  I propose that new hires be given a 6 month to 1 year contract that allows for a performance eval and possible termination based on performance.  It would allow for employers to test out a candidate for a while before determining if they would be hired.  Probably an extreme idea, but I just throught I’d mention it.

(a reason) that explains almost all the tuition increase at UC schools, is the decline in state, local, and federal government’s share of education costs. By and large, tuition is going up not because schools are raking in more money, but because subsidies are going down.

nailed it.  Because of reduced subsidies, students are starting to feel more of the real cost of their education.

The most unfortunate part of this is that surging tuition costs are not, for the most part, rewarding students with a higher-quality education. Costs are simply being shifted around. And while states are slashing higher education budgets, taxpayers aren’t being rewarded with lower tax rates, or even lower budget deficits; most states are cutting education spending to offset rising health-care and pension costs.

Ouch.

Two things that weren’t mentioned in the article though, that I think are important.

1. Tuition is really just the tip of the iceberg.  Check out this data from UNC on Cost of Attendance  http://studentaid.unc.edu/studentaid/cost/ssa_ug_general.html .  I wanted to point out, in particular, the tuition and fees number.  As someone inside the university, I know that these are often calculated separately, but on the website, these are lumped together.  It took some digging, but here’s the listing of student fees http://studentaid.unc.edu/studentaid/cost/ssa_ug_general.html.   Not to mention costs like textbooks, living expenses, food, etc.  Not to mention the oppportunity cost of not working like you could be. Which brings me to point 2.
2. Subsidizing of colleges is finally getting students to feel the whole cost of their education, so naturally, they’re starting to wonder why it costs so much.  Could the questioning of the system be starting to reveal some inefficiencies within the system?    It wasn’t in the article, but I think it could be.
3. While the author suggests that the wage premium is increasing, I’m not sure I’d agree.  As I’ve stated before on this blog, I think we’re using old data to do these calculations.  A degree obtained by saving as much money as possible is still a degree of mobility.

I just wonder how long this can continue.  I’m sure most of my readers have seen the crazy graph that calculates the cost of college skyrocketing past both CPI and housing costs.  Regardless of the why, I don’t think that can last.

http://edusportstalk.com/2012/01/04/kraft-fight-hunger-bowl-actually-fights-interest-in-bowl-games/

From Kevin Guidry….

First and foremost, much of your argument seems to be completely rooted in capitalistic terms where the only things that are valuable are those that have been monetized. For example, you write about “ROI” and value in purely economic terms. That bothers me not because they are unimportant but because there are other things that are also important. The strongest counter argument I can muster is the classic idea of the value of a well-educated and literate electorate, value that doesn’t necessarily map to economic value but is inherently critical for a democratic society. Another strong counter argument focuses on the other resources and experiences that are undervalued in economic terms but important to us all i.e. the arts, education.

I’m confused as to how this counters my argument that we’d like graduates to stay in the state they were graduated in.

Second, it seems unrealistic and unfair to expect people – especially young people if we’re talking about traditional students – to *know* that they want to live in a particular state many years in advance. Jeff brought up the practical point of “can they stay e.g. will there be a job available?” which is a very similar counter argument.

Who said anything about planning it out?  We’re talking about staying in the state you were educated in for a few years after graduation.  Some will choose to leave, and they’re more than welcome to, as long as they are good with paying the out of state rate.

Your final point about decreasing state funding levels making this a moot discussion is a good albeit depressing point. It seems like we’re not really willing to have this discussion and are instead backing into it. The discussions about the DREAM Act and its state-level equivalents seem to be the main arena for this discussion and they’re charged with so much nationalism and racism that I don’t know if it’s a fair gauge of public opinion on this different issue.

agreed.

Isn’t one of the primary foundations of in-state tuition the idea that you (or your parents if you’re a dependent) have already paid a significant amount in state taxes and have already earned or paid for this benefit?

So you’re going to argue that they’re expecting a direct benefit to them of their investment in the university system?  I’m almost certain that is a private good.  Public good would indicate that the system is supported by the state because it supports the state as a whole.  It’s like a highway.  You pay to pave roads all over your state, even if you don’t drive.  The benefit is still available to them, but the state needs to protect it’s investment for the benefit of all, no?

From Liz Gross…

At what point does the federal interest in education play into this? Most students are only able to attend school because of federal aid/loan programs.

Now, THERE is an interesting question and the reason I had planned on writing a part 3 to this anyway.  I’m going to avoid the obvious discussion about whether the federal aid/loan system recoups any money for the feds, especially now that they’ve taken over the loan system completely.  It’s too complex for a blog post, and frankly, I don’t want to dig up the data.  For the purposes of this post, let’s just assume that if you take out a loan, you eventually pay it back to the government loan system with interest.

I absolutely think the federal interest plays a part, and should probably pay a bigger part here.

First, my idea is loosely patterned off of the system I mentioned in my previous post about my home state as well as the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program offered by the Feds.  In order to qualify for the PSLF, you must:

• be employed full-time in a public service job for each of the 120 monthly payments. Public service jobs include, among other positions, emergency management, government (excluding time served as a member of Congress), military service, public safety and law enforcement (police and fire), public health (including nurses, nurse practitioners, nurses in a clinical setting, and full-time professionals engaged in health care practitioner occupations and health care support occupations), public education, early childhood education (including licensed or regulated childcare, Head Start, and State-funded prekindergarten), social work in a public child or family service agency, public services for individuals with disabilities or the elderly, public interest legal services (including prosecutors, public defenders and legal advocacy on behalf of low-income communities at a nonprofit organization), public librarians, school librarians and other school-based services, and employees of tax exempt 501(c)(3) organizations. Full-time faculty at tribal colleges and universities, as well as faculty teaching in high-need subject areas and shortage areas (including nurse faculty, foreign language faculty, and part-time faculty at community colleges), also qualify

Unfortunately, way too many folks taking out loans don’t know about this program.  The system in my home state definitely has a lot of similarities.

Second, I wondered when I was initially conceiving this why North Carolina should have any problem with that young lady pursuing employment in Wisconsin.  Why should we be in competition with other states (or institutions within our own state…a question for another time)?    Wouldn’t the more obvious support for education come from the federal government instead of the states if we live in a society which encourages mobility post-graduation?

Third, and coming back to Jeff’s question from yesterday…if each state has a specialty, a generalization but roll with me, wouldn’t it be better for the federal government to be a primary supporter of education generally through loans and grants, and then allow the individual states to offer incentive programs to either retain top students or encourage top students to attend their schools and stay in their states?   For instance, we know North Carolina has a strong banking industry…what if they offered to retire loans on any aspiring business students that attended a UNC school and worked for 5 years in the banking industry in NC?

Let’s continue using my home state as an example.  Instead of using where I work, I’ll go a few miles down the road and look at UNC Chapel Hill and consider their fees, etc.

Base Tuition for In-State is $7008, but the full cost of attendance (shoutout to #EDUsports) falls at a gag inducing $20,660.  Yikes.

For out-of-state, the tuition is $26,834, and the full cost of attendance is $41,140.  Oh boy.

Over the course of 4 years, you’re looking at  a cost of attendance of $82,640 for in state students and $164,560 for out of state students.  And, just because of the tuition gap (the rest is estimated travel), the difference is $19,826 per year and $79,304 for 4 years.

So, basically, I was making the claim yesterday that students who choose to leave the state after their graduation should have to pick up the full out of state cost, since they’ve chosen to use the benefits of their education to not benefit the state.  And with that suggestion, I’m implicitly saying that because you choose to leave the state, you should owe an additional $79, 304 dollars to the state of North Carolina.  Yes, that is what I am saying.

I want to address some things in the comment that I got yesterday from JJ:

When I worked at UT-Austin’s Business School companies came from all around the US to recruit our students. That was one of the reason it was ranked so high (5th at the time, not sure now). When companies came to visit they brought their checkbook creating scholarships, funding leadership programs, and endowing professorships. If students were discourages to leave the state that would all go away. It would be interesting to see the flow of out of state money/donations versus the number of students leaving the state for employment.

Interesting point and one I hadn’t considered.  I’m curious how the difference between the in-state funding and the moneys coming from these companies matched up.  But here’s the critical point – you’re actually making an argument that it’s a private good here, since students are leaving the state to find the best situation, not staying in the state to benefit the state.

Back to the example of your friend. I do not know how the NC tax system is, but I’m sure he and his family have paid a fair amount of taxes into the system. That should count for something.

Frankly, I disagree.  People without kids pay for the school system through tax dollars.  People pay it forward to social security that may never receive it.  People fund social welfare programs that may never use it.  You fund the university system because it’s supposed to benefit the state.  It’s absurd that people who get the funding from the system (the students) should then be allowed to go elsewhere without actually benefitting the state.

Lastly there is always a question of major employers. Does NC have enough major employer to pay a competitive wage for all the graduates of NC? When I worked at The U of A it was assumed many of the student would leave AZ due to lack of employment opportunities. CA, NY, TX would not have this problem, but how would other states deal with this?

I’d use this as a private good argument as well.  Are the students doing what best benefits them or what best serves the state?  You can do investment banking in North Carolina.  If you go to New York, frankly, I don’t blame you, but I resent that you took the money and ran, and I think you should have received the out of state rate.

There’s still an obvious argument hanging out there, but I’m going to let it alone for now.

But I revisited this idea over the weekend as we were discussing a mutual friend who was educated in our state university system and now works in Wisconsin.  How is North Carolina reaping benefits from this individual?  Or any other individuals who are educated on the state’s dime and then bolt for greener pastures?

I’d argue that they don’t.

So why are their educations supported in a similar manner to those of people who do stay in the state?

Now you could definitely make the argument that they’re ambassadors for the state and for the institution, but frankly, I’d say the cost of supporting them educationally is very high compared to the value that the state receives from educating them.  Astronomically high, even.

Our state in particular has done something to try to get people to stay so they can glean some benefit from education, offering tremendous assistance to those in what you might call “public service” professions (ie medical, education) to get their education paid for if they agree to serve in an under served area for a few years.

But for those who major in non-service professions, shouldn’t there be some incentive to stay home if we’re going to educate you?

My opinion is that state aid should, specifically the enormous money that the state spends on higher ed, should produce more skilled work force for the state, that stays here, and that produces a highly qualified and skilled workforce for the state.  If that’s not happening, we shouldn’t be supporting their education.

So what if, instead of flat support for student’s education, we offer the out of state tuition rate for all students, and then students can only owe the in-state tuition (or less) if they spend 10 years living in the state they went to school AFTER school?

You’d guarantee a more direct ROI, you’d keep the people you educated at home, and you’d guarantee that the great schools that are in your state, that produce great product, would actually be benefitting the state itself, instead of the best and brightest going elsewhere.  Also, you’d encourage people to actually attend school where they might want to be AFTER school.

What do you think?

My Festivus Grievance – Amateurism

During the year I did student activities, I had 30 credit hours and pulled 2.57 GPA.

The following year, as student body president, a less demanding role on my campus, I was back to a 3.66.

So, what happened?  I was super involved.  I always tell people that my job during that year became student activities.  I was Mr. Involved Student.  Hell, I apparently liked it so much that I decided not to be good at my grades.

Of course, there could be 75 other factors in there, like the ending of a long term relationship, and a lot of other personal change.  But I do believe the numbers are startling.  A full point down in GPA and a return to that previous position the next year.

I can’t be alone here, right?

EDUsports talks issues and ideas related to sports at the college level.  On the December 9th show, we talked about…

Like the Show?  Leave us a donation.

How To Subscribe to #EDUsports

iTunes Store: EDUsports ONLY http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/edusports/id466247018 All Breakdrink shows http://itunes.apple.com/podcast/breakdrink-blog-talk-radio/id346969286#

Stitcher Radio.  Download the App from Your Phone’s App Store.  Search for “EDUsports”.  Click the star button to favorite!

Podomatic http://edusports.podomatic.com/

Droid: download the app Listen. Then subscribe the link for EDUsports ONLY http://edusports.podomatic.com/rss2.xml  all Breakdrink podcasts http://www.blogtalkradio.com/breakdrink.rss

BlackBerry: download the Podcast app. Then subscribe the link for EDUsports ONLY http://edusports.podomatic.com/rss2.xml all Breakdrink podcasts http://www.blogtalkradio.com/breakdrink.rss

Facebook: For EDUsports http://tinyurl.com/edusportsfacebook.  For Breakdrink https://www.facebook.com/BreakDrink

EDUsports talks issues and ideas related to sports at the college level.  On the December 2nd show, we talked about…

Like the Show?  Leave us a donation.

How To Subscribe to #EDUsports

iTunes Store: EDUsports ONLY http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/edusports/id466247018 All Breakdrink shows http://itunes.apple.com/podcast/breakdrink-blog-talk-radio/id346969286#

Stitcher Radio.  Download the App from Your Phone’s App Store.  Search for “EDUsports”.  Click the star button to favorite!

Podomatic http://edusports.podomatic.com/

Droid: download the app Listen. Then subscribe the link for EDUsports ONLY http://edusports.podomatic.com/rss2.xml  all Breakdrink podcasts http://www.blogtalkradio.com/breakdrink.rss

BlackBerry: download the Podcast app. Then subscribe the link for EDUsports ONLY http://edusports.podomatic.com/rss2.xml all Breakdrink podcasts http://www.blogtalkradio.com/breakdrink.rss

Facebook: For EDUsports http://tinyurl.com/edusportsfacebook.  For Breakdrink https://www.facebook.com/BreakDrink

EDUsports talks issues and ideas related to sports at the college level.  On the November 18th show, we talked about…

How To Subscribe to #EDUsports

iTunes Store: EDUsports ONLY http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/edusports/id466247018 All Breakdrink shows http://itunes.apple.com/podcast/breakdrink-blog-talk-radio/id346969286#

Stitcher Radio.  Download the App from Your Phone’s App Store.  Search for “EDUsports”.  Click the star button to favorite!

Podomatic http://edusports.podomatic.com/

Droid: download the app Listen. Then subscribe the link for EDUsports ONLY http://edusports.podomatic.com/rss2.xml  all Breakdrink podcasts http://www.blogtalkradio.com/breakdrink.rss

BlackBerry: download the Podcast app. Then subscribe the link for EDUsports ONLY http://edusports.podomatic.com/rss2.xml all Breakdrink podcasts http://www.blogtalkradio.com/breakdrink.rss

Facebook: For EDUsports http://tinyurl.com/edusportsfacebook.  For Breakdrink https://www.facebook.com/BreakDrink

EDUsports talks issues and ideas related to sports at the college level.  On the November 11th show, we talked about…

How To Subscribe to #EDUsports

iTunes Store: EDUsports ONLY http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/edusports/id466247018 All Breakdrink shows http://itunes.apple.com/podcast/breakdrink-blog-talk-radio/id346969286#

Stitcher Radio.  Download the App from Your Phone’s App Store.  Search for “EDUsports”.  Click the star button to favorite!

Podomatic http://edusports.podomatic.com/

Droid: download the app Listen. Then subscribe the link for EDUsports ONLY http://edusports.podomatic.com/rss2.xml  all Breakdrink podcasts http://www.blogtalkradio.com/breakdrink.rss

BlackBerry: download the Podcast app. Then subscribe the link for EDUsports ONLY http://edusports.podomatic.com/rss2.xml all Breakdrink podcasts http://www.blogtalkradio.com/breakdrink.rss

Facebook: For EDUsports http://tinyurl.com/edusportsfacebook.  For Breakdrink https://www.facebook.com/BreakDrink

EDUsports talks issues and ideas related to sports at the college level.  On the November 4th show, we talked about…

How To Subscribe to #EDUsports

iTunes Store: EDUsports ONLY http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/edusports/id466247018 All Breakdrink shows http://itunes.apple.com/podcast/breakdrink-blog-talk-radio/id346969286#

Stitcher Radio.  Download the App from Your Phone’s App Store.  Search for “EDUsports”.  Click the star button to favorite!

Podomatic http://edusports.podomatic.com/

Droid: download the app Listen. Then subscribe the link for EDUsports ONLY http://edusports.podomatic.com/rss2.xml  all Breakdrink podcasts http://www.blogtalkradio.com/breakdrink.rss

BlackBerry: download the Podcast app. Then subscribe the link for EDUsports ONLY http://edusports.podomatic.com/rss2.xml all Breakdrink podcasts http://www.blogtalkradio.com/breakdrink.rss

Facebook: For EDUsports http://tinyurl.com/edusportsfacebook.  For Breakdrink https://www.facebook.com/BreakDrink

It’s my 30th birthday today.  I hope you will join me in celebrating the start of my next decade.

Here’s my birthday gift to YOU.  The Draw on Chickering app is free in the Android Market.  So, get that.  You’re welcome.

Draw on Chickering (FREE)

I also have a few other projects that I think are worth your while, but do cost some money.  Seriously, buying these would make my day.

Pocket Student Affairs Theory (.99)

Student Affairs Theory Quiz (.99)

My Android Market page

I’ve also got this presentation that I wrote up and put in the Amazon Kindle Marketplace.  I’m kinda excited about it.

Social Media Primer on Amazon.com

One last option, if you’re really feeling ambitious and like me (or just like helping people), Anyone who gives a gift of at least $5 to Charity Water using my birthday page will not only make MY day, but also make someone else’s.  And just for the hell of it, I’ll throw in everything I mentioned above…for free.

Donate to Charity Water here.

So, you decide.  Help yourself, Help me, or Help humanity.  Make my 30th birthday count.  I know I’m going to.

1. I genuinely believe higher ed is in trouble. And by higher ed, I don’t mean education.  I mean the general model of the 4 year away from home university as we know it.  Look, we know that social media is a part of a larger movement where publishing is going to the masses and information sharing isn’t restrained to publishing houses, record labels, newspapers, and university ivory towers.  It’s not hard to figure out that higher ed is in the crosshairs of this societal wave.  Seriously people, this is the biggest change since the printing press.  It’s turned publishing from a professionals game into anyone’s game.  Case in point, this article about SUNY .  I predicted 4 years ago that this exact thing would happen (ask my homie TJ).   Folks, that is the beginning of a seismic change in higher ed and kudos for SUNY for stepping up and getting with the times.  That’s just the beginning.  If your business focuses on sharing of information, you’re going to get caught up in the tidal wave and not only do we do that in higher ed, that’s the CORE of our business.  Ruh roh.
2. Academic Publishing is in trouble. Have you seen the costs for these journals?  Get the hell out of here.  How long can they restrain those hungry to publish their work when we can publish FOR FREE TO THE ENTIRE WORLD?  It’s only because the academic world has an established order and hierarchy that this system continues to persist, but it can’t last.  Too many societal and economic forces are pushing against it.  The walls are coming down. Here’s a thought: you don’t need a PhD to publish anymore.  Hell, you don’t even need a degree.  Got a great idea and want to share it with the entire world?  You can literally publish it immediately and share it with everyone.  Who’s going to be the first to thumb their nose at the entire publishing system and get theirs in their own way?
3. This is all about power structures.  Traditional power structures that have already been affected by the democratization of publishing – newspapers, the music industry, radio, Arab leadership, and the 1% .  Freedom to publish media cheaply is causing havoc to traditional power structures.  I described it as an “end around” to traditional power structures, but even that I’m not sure is accurate. Traditional power structures are a dam designed to hold the elite above everyone else.  The democratization of publishing is a battleaxe.  It’s erosion.  It’s a hurricane.  It’s an earthquake.  These power structures cannot hold.  I described higher ed the other day as holding the fort walls.  Here’s the thing: the game’s already over.  Either get with the future and move, or get your ass knocked over when the dam bursts.  Your choice.

EDUsports talks issues and ideas related to sports at the college level.  On the Oct 28th show, we talked about…

Headlines

Feature

How To Subscribe to #EDUsports

iTunes Store: EDUsports ONLY http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/edusports/id466247018 All Breakdrink shows http://itunes.apple.com/podcast/breakdrink-blog-talk-radio/id346969286#

Stitcher Radio.  Download the App from Your Phone’s App Store.  Search for “EDUsports”.  Click the star button to favorite!

Podomatic http://edusports.podomatic.com/

Droid: download the app Listen. Then subscribe the link for EDUsports ONLY http://edusports.podomatic.com/rss2.xml  all Breakdrink podcasts http://www.blogtalkradio.com/breakdrink.rss

BlackBerry: download the Podcast app. Then subscribe the link for EDUsports ONLY http://edusports.podomatic.com/rss2.xml all Breakdrink podcasts http://www.blogtalkradio.com/breakdrink.rss

Facebook: For EDUsports http://tinyurl.com/edusportsfacebook.  For Breakdrink https://www.facebook.com/BreakDrink