 |
|
     |
|
|
Hot air Thank you for the interesting article “Tilting toward windmills” (April). It sounds like the marketing departments for windmill sales are going all out. The illustration shows windmills as far as the eye can see. Can this be considered landscape pollution? Would such high densities endanger bird life? I don’t blame Governor Davis for being skeptical of risking a large investment in wind technology. John Conway ’47 Spokane, Washington Murmuring sweet nothings about conservation and renewable energy will not begin to solve the profound problems California will face over the next few years. California and other western states have grown rapaciously while barely addressing their energy requirements. Yet politicians and academics are still talking on a superficial level, pushing old favorites like windmills, peaking plants, and dictatorial conservation programs. These are expensive partial remedies with little long-term value. What is really needed is a fundamental shift in growth strategy, building a balanced energy infrastructure based on gradually declining use of fossil fuels and increasing use of competent renewable sources (and probably nuclear energy), buttressed by an efficient transmission system and tempered by market incentives for long-term conservation. Dave Allen ’79 Redding Testy In reference to “UC to SAT: RIP” (April), standardized tests are an important factor in admissions evaluations. The “holistic” approach is excellent, but by itself is subject to political and racial manipulation according to the philosophy of the reviewers and institution. I question why Cal places exclusive emphasis on the SAT 1 or even SAT 2. Many schools and financial aid providers permit either the SAT or ACT scores, or both, whichever the student chooses. Why is the ACT not permitted to enter the mix as a standard upon which to equalize evaluations? UC President Atkinson had a valid observation that schools program students to excel on standardized tests rather than truly educate them. He unfortunately revealed his bias that wealthy schools always have an advantage by using an exclusive private school as his example. In fact, most schools program students to perform better in state tests rather than really educate them, so the school looks better to prospective families and people who control personnel promotions. Darrell Lackey ’75 Colorado Springs, Colorado Oh, puhleeze. Has the virus of politically sanitized speech and deed totally wiped out the critical thinking process of everyone at UC? Is Atkinson serious when he states that he didn’t expect that his proposal to drop the SAT would be a “big deal on the outside”? Hey, Dick, those of us on the “outside,” plain old parents and taxpayers, do think it is a big deal. If you’re trying an end run around the ban on affirmative action admissions, say so and explain yourself. Then explain whether there are any standards left for admission to UC. According to Calvin Moore, who has been in charge of the Academic Senate’s admissions committee, which sets admissions policy for Berkeley, there’s been a “more holistic evaluation of prospective students” since 1998. Ah, that’s perfectly clear: it’s the politically approved method of admissions. We should have known. Stan Nowicki, MBA ’86 Carol Fickenscher Nowicki ’70 Castro Valley As a member of the Class of ’48, I know well how cherished admission to Berkeley is. I am very disturbed to see President Atkinson proposing to end the SAT as a significant measure for admittance to UC. The argument that the SAT’s do not predict success is a politically correct fraud. I recognize that it is P.C. to try to help increase minority admissions, and that is a desirable goal; however, it is a big mistake to simply lower the bar for admission. My suggestion is to establish a scholarship fund which would allow any qualified minority to attend the UC system. We definitely benefit from a diverse student body; however, we must work to have a qualified diversity in order to retain our standards of excellence. As a past contributor to the UC cause, I would be willing to join in establishing such a scholarship fund, provided the SAT’s are not discarded as part of the admission criteria for entry to UC. Norman Winningstad ’48 Newport, Oregon President Atkinson’s wish to junk the SAT in UC admissions merely continues an ongoing nationwide process. A decades-long worry has been the continuing decline in the median national SAT score and the decrease of students achieving extremely high scores. Few know of the Educational Testing Service’s method of “fixing” the problem in 1995 by renorming the tests so that the current median (900/1600) became 1000/1600 and, as a bonus, hordes of students began to receive scores near 1600. So no need to abolish the SAT—let’s just keep watering it down. Paul Chernoff, professor of mathematics Berkeley Alex Saragoza I was shocked to read “Cal fumbles” in the April issue. My feelings were directed at the shameful behavior of Professor Alex Saragoza and at the statement that he has been suspended from teaching at Cal next fall. Considering that this man was vice president in charge of outreach and then engaged in academic fraud shows he lacks any sense of right and wrong. To punish him by suspending him from teaching in the fall, however, implies that the University does not feel that what he did is totally inexcusable. It also fails to address the fact that the University and the athletic department have been punished for his sins. The man should be discharged, and every effort should be made to assure that he never again teaches anywhere. Max Kalm ’52 Westfield, New Jersey The idea of a professor committing academic fraud is repugnant. In my engineering job, if I committed fraud by falsifying test results or by filing untrue employee evaluations, I would be summarily dismissed from my job. It wouldn’t matter how well my other test results were done, or how wonderfully I performed in other areas of my job. It would be a very clear line that I had crossed. Based on the information I have about Professor Saragoza’s actions, I see a strong parallel to my example. It appears that he stepped across the very distinct line between actions that were part of his job, and actions that would require his immediate and unconditional dismissal from the University. Mike Wondolowski ’86 Carpinteria Genetic programs Professor Richard Strohman’s article, “Beyond genetic determinism” (April) provides an interesting sequel to the sequencing of the human genome; however, it does so by raising a straw man, then batting it down. In fact, nobody (save perhaps a few misinformed venture capitalists) believed the sequencing to be an end in itself. On the contrary, we in the biomedical sciences looked at the sequencing as a means to the same ends which Strohman alludes to: understanding the networks and programs in the cell and organism as a whole and their interaction with the environment. Indeed, this has been the focus of research of microbiologists and developmental biologists for more than a decade. All of us realized that single gene mutations as the cause of disease was the exception rather than the rule, and none of us believed in a “genetic-determinist paradigm” as anything more than an approach to beginning to understand complex problems. Through the use of microchip array technology and with the help of the genome sequencing data, many University laboratories and companies are already studying how the cell or the organism interacts with changes in the environment. Our lecture courses in MCB have been making this clear for well over a decade, and our laboratory courses have been teaching techniques for these studies for the past decade. In essence, in response to the question which Professor Strohman raises, “Where do we go from here?”, I would venture that we are already there, and have been there for quite some time. Stuart Linn, professor of molecular and cell biology Berkeley A superb essay by Richard Strohman! It’s long overdue that someone finally shouted that the emperor has no clothes. My only disappointment is that he left ecology off the list of disciplines that can contribute to a new philosophy of the sciences of life. Robert Ulanowicz Solomons, Maryland Nobel laureates Robert Berdahl stated that a huge number of California’s Nobel laureates taught in the state’s public university system (“Chancellor’s Report,” April). “California in its heyday managed to make genius public property,” he wrote. “The hard question for California is whether…30 years from now…California’s Nobel laureates…will still belong to the people of California.” Governor Davis decided to invest $100 million to build four California Institutes for Science and Innovation on UC campuses, with a requirement that the institutes obtain twice the state monies with outside funding. If that trend continues, the “hard question for California” is already answered: Thirty years from now California’s Nobel laureates will belong one-third to the people of California and two-thirds to private corporations. He who pays the teacher buys the research. Paul Lewis ’81 Rockville, Maryland  Return to Top
|
 Richard Strohman
| |||||||||||
| About
CAA Contact
Us
Update
your Address CAA Career Opportunities Privacy Policy |
©2008 California Alumni
Association. All Rights Reserved For questions about CAA: info@alumni.berkeley.edu Technical inquiries: web@alumni.berkeley.edu
|
Alumni House Berkeley, CA 94720-7520 Toll-Free: (888) CAL-ALUM Phone: (510) 642-7026 Fax: (510) 642-6252
|
