If you were interested in my post earlier this week about the closing of the Colorado Institute of Technology, you’ll find Al Lewis’s weekend column – which is a sharp commentary on the Colorado Institute of Technology – a useful compliment, both in terms of some of the details of the events around CIT as well as the spin from Mark Holtzman, current Republican gubernatorial candidate and the effective co-founder of CIT with Colorado Governor Bill Owens when he was Colorado Secretary of Technology.
Posted in: ColoradoCOMMENTS (3)
IMO Holtzman is nothing but a blowhard flake. I went to see him speak during the early days of CIT, when Holtzman was the secretray of technology or whatever the hell the job was called. The speech was nothing more than a puff piece about how the governor had John Chambers' private cell phone number. No actual substance or disussion of specific initiatives. Just crap about how, you know, the governor is a Playah!
, April 23, 2006 8:47 AM
Derek,
Too bad to hear how badly CIT failed.
US higher education, coast to coast, is just awash with people
who can do a very competent job of running a good basic
college or university. Running a relatively good research
university requires some experience, understanding, insight,
prudence, stability, and reasonably good 'socialization' but
no brilliance at research or rare qualifications.
It was some years ago, but it did seem to me that Colorado
School of Mines was doing some things well; CIT might have
borrowed from that institution.
Exactly how to run a college deliberately focused on meeting
the current needs of businesses, e.g., as 'information
technology' business people might have described their needs
in 1999, is not so clear due basically to a big gap between
academics and business; still, again, medicine does show that
high quality research and education well connected with
practice are possible.
That a medical school would fail for silly reasons is unheard
of; running CIT reasonably well should have been easier. That
CIT extracted defeat from the jaws of victory is unfortunate.
Derek,
Too bad to hear how badly CIT failed.
US higher education, coast to coast, is just awash with people
who can do a very competent job of running a good basic
college or university. Running a relatively good research
university requires some experience, understanding, insight,
prudence, stability, and reasonably good 'socialization' but
no brilliance at research or rare qualifications.
It was some years ago, but it did seem to me that Colorado
School of Mines was doing some things well; CIT might have
borrowed from that institution.
Exactly how to run a college deliberately focused on meeting
the current needs of businesses, e.g., as 'information
technology' business people might have described their needs
in 1999, is not so clear due basically to a big gap between
academics and business; still, again, medicine does show that
high quality research and education well connected with
practice are possible.
That a medical school would fail for silly reasons is unheard
of; running CIT reasonably well should have been easier. That
CIT extracted defeat from the jaws of victory is unfortunate.
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)