The University: An Owner's Manual

by Henry Rosovsky

Book Overview

A view of America's colleges and universities and how they are run, the challenges they face and the issues that affect their owners - students, faculty, alumni, trustees and others. Among the issues covered are tenure, the admission process in elite institutions and curriculum.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0393307832
• ISBN13: 9780393307832
• Release Date: June 1991
• Publisher: W. W. Norton & Company
• Length: 310 Pages
• Weight: 0.70 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.9" x 5.2" x 7.9"

Customer Reviews

Good overview

I enjoyed the book immensely. I found it to be a very good introduction to the fundamentals of the US university system. I would recommend it to anyone who is considering higher education either for study or as a career.

Military instruction without "verve..."

In "The University---an Owner's Manual," Dean Rosovsky of Harvard states that "The chances of having courses taught well---with verve and imagination---are greatly diminished when content and structure are imposed by "outsiders" without debate and discussion. Anyone who has attended schools run by our armed forces will have little difficulty in appreciating this point." I beg to differ. The teaching staff at every military school that I have attended (Infantry, Airborne, Amphibious Reconnaissance, SERE, Ranger) was, in a word, outstanding. True, the curriculum was imposed from outside and taught by "teachers" largely without voice in either structure or content, but the instruction provided by the non-commissioned officers staffing the intructor's rolls could be characterized by the very words "verve" and "imagination"! These dedicated men and women took their responsibilies seriously, and went to great lengths to ensure that all students mastered the material presented. Granted, most military subjects are not rocket science, although guiding missiles from a forward observation post may arguably come close. Perhaps the guiding force behind military education is an assumption that a single failure to learn may make or break a military operation, and very likely will cause needless casualties. This is in sharp contrast to, say, the "Harvard" model of education. At Harvard, indeed (one hopes) in the university in general, one may assume that students are independently motivated, that they are "burnin' to learn." Or if they aren't, they ought to be. Not so in the armed forces. Students may require external motivation, both positive and negative. I firmly believe that a large majority of veterans of the US armed services will agree with me when I say that, for the most part, military instruction is delivered with "verve" and "imagination!" On a separate note, I heartily concur with the Dean's assessment that the academy loves pomp and titles nearly as much as the military! Further parallels, such as the extraordinary amount of "idle time" enjoyed by service members (growing directly in proportion to length of service...), or the intense dedication and commitment to service practiced by typical military professionals, are better left unexplored...