Rating: 
Summary: Swings wildly, but lands a few near-knockout blows
Review: Sperber does a good job of documenting the general decline in the quality of undergraduate education in the United States. The book overstates and is a bit untempered, but the overall description of contemporary college life - students ignored by faculty and drinking away their four years - isn't that far off the mark. Don't let the subtitle fool you. Beer and Circus is about far more than the degradation of universities due to their emphasis on scholarship athletics. The abandonment of undergraduates is due to many other causes that Sperber discusses as well. Sperber is very sympathetic to the plight of the student trying to get a good education. His heart is in the right place. Beer and Circus won't delight college presidents, but could well serve as a call to arms by those consumers, the parents and students, who are paying large sums of money for education and are getting short changed.
Rating: 
Summary: Some people can't handle the truth
Review: Sperber has been one of the most incisive observers of college sports since the publication of College Sports, Inc. Since then he has written perhaps the definitive history of Notre Dame during the Knute Rockne years.In this book he brings the story of college sports and all its attendant ills into the decade of ESPN and the unholy alliance of "24/7" sports broadcasting, alcohol manufacturers and distributors (e.g. "Spuds MacKenzie" and the proliferation of "sports bars"), and university administrations which have turned relatively petty corruption into big business. Sperber, a former fraternity president, knows all too well that there are many different college students, but even the unreconstructed "party animals" are not his targets, rather it's the broadcasting/advertising/admissions complex mentioned above. The consequences range far beyond the "professionalization" of college sports to being a factor--albeit one factor--in the decline of undergraduate education itself. Sperber played the role of Cassandra at Indiana through the Bobby Knight years and for his trouble been emailed death threats. More proof that the truth hurts and some people can't handle it. Also recommended is Hoberman's DARWIN'S ATHLETES (hell, anything Hoberman writes is recommended).
Rating:
Summary: Devastating
Review: Sperber marshals a stunning assault on the keep of American higher education in this follow up to his previous work, College Sports, Inc.. Neither repetitive nor pedantic, Beer and Circus meticulously sifts through the ashes of our public and private universities alike and offers a detailed account of the pretender that currently occupies the throne of undergraduate college education, and how it got there. The case he presents is open and shut, black and white, clear as day: in a word, devastating. Sperber soundly crushes the empty rhetoric and buzzword-centric policy of today's universities. This is required reading for anyone interested in the quality of education in this country.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting book but suspect argument
Review: Sperber's book on the state of undergraduate education at big-time universities is an interesting read for students and fans alike. I certainly learned about large state universities and the sad state that undergraduate education is in at these schools. The book is certainly worth the time spent reading it. That said, parts of the argument is flawed. As other reviewers have pointed out, he never establishes the link between the crippling of undergraduate education and the rise of academics. He also ignores Division II schools, and more significantly, the existence of the other, smaller NCAA sports: swimming, soccer, etc. These sports account for a majority of NCAA athletes (even at large schools), and they closely fit the model that Sperber idealizes. From the book, it sounds like undergraduate education would be in big trouble without NCAA sports. Sperber complains about undergraduate binge drinking, which is a social problem that has nothing to do with NCAA policies. 18-21 year-old males would drink large quantities of beer even without the "Spuds Mackenzie" advertising campaign. He also criticizes the "consumer" approach that college students have, implying that college students should feel lucky to be "guests in the groves of academe." This attitude is arrogant at best. Still, these flaws do not distract too much from the fundamental and most troubling point of his book: undergraduate education at many large American universities is throughly inadequate.
Rating:
Summary: Undergraduate Education Comes Up Way Short Next to Sports
Review: There is not much doubt that undergraduate education for the typical student at large universities is most unsatisfactory: one is, with few exceptions, a nonentity with no opportunity to shape the educational experience. The only option is to follow the rules; then it is swim or sink. Furthermore, there is no doubt that forming farm teams for professional leagues with substandard students has no place in a university. The author shows through his survey data that major sports teams in Division 1-A of the NCAA give a focal point to the incessant partying that occurs at most major, large universities. It is the essential point of the book that college administrators are more than willing to give undergraduates "beer and the circus" of big-time sports in lieu of drastically overhauling undergraduate programs. The need for tuition dollars leads large colleges to pack freshman courses, virtually precluding a chance to learn. Sports and partying is the cynical substitute. Clearly, the prestige focus of top college officials precludes quality education for most students. It is all about image and reputations. Good sports teams increase recognition. So do adding prestigious faculty, engaging in research for corporate America, and having special, honors education for a select minority of undergraduates. The author makes abundantly clear that well-known faculty and elaborate research do not benefit the typical student. Furthermore, athletic programs are invariably a drain on the finances of the university. Even with Fat TV contracts, athletic programs are net losers. The author breaks down the main student subcultures into "collegiate, vocational, rebel, and academic." They have different goals and different problems interacting with the substandard educational regime. The fact that the party element, the collegiate group, is content, or resigned to, with the current educational situation hardly justifies the de-emphasis on education. The author does briefly touch on the purposes of college education. Is college mostly a social experience; is it to obtain job skills; or is it to be liberally educated. And do colleges actually support all of those goals for all students. There is much wrong with universities and the author makes some effort to shed light on the problems. But much more can be said. Should universities perform a special social role, or are they simply big corporations looking out for the bottom line, cutting costs where they can, while paying lip service to a grand mission? It is clear that universities will not perform that mission with the distorting impact of big time sports.
Rating:
Summary: American U.
Review: This book indicates that American Universities admit
hundreds of thousands of "students" who should not be
allowed within a mile of a university campus. Also the book,which
is written by a Professor of English and History,
contains a large number of errors in grammar and word
usage.
Rating:
Summary: What's Gone Wrong at Big Universities
Review: This is a book definitely worth reading, although it doesn't quite deliver all it promises, and though I do find some points of disagreement with the author. In "Beer and Circus," Murray Sperber has three main themes: 1) What is wrong with what he calls "big-time college sports," essentially meaning NCAA Division I athletics, 2) how and why these Division I schools offer undergraduates subpar educations, and 3) the various facets of the problem of excessive student drinking. Sperber provides ample evidence on all three of these points. He compellingly describes, for example, the ways in which Division I schools short-change their undergraduates--cramming them into massive lecture courses, and relying heavily on poorly paid adjunct faculty and teaching assistants to teach them. He also dispels numerous myths, such as the claim that top researchers are the best teachers, or the legend that Division I athletes are "student-athletes;" on the latter point, he notes that the long hours athletes must commit to competition and training preclude all but a few from compiling strong academic records. Much of Sperber's book rings very true to me--I was a graduate student at a large, Division I university, and I observed examples of many of the ills Sperber describes. However, I have three points of disagreement with him. First, Sperber doesn't quite deliver the explanation--of "how big-time college sports is crippling undergraduate education"--that he promises. From his own account, it appears that the main culprit is in fact Division I schools' excessive emphasis on research. For every Division I school, like my alma mater UCLA, that is a legitimately strong research institution, there are probably 10 or 12 UCLA-wannabees that will never reach that status, but will waste uncounted resources in pursuit of the goal. Sperber does not convincingly demonstrate that athletic programs are more than a minor accessory to the crime against undergraduates that these schools are guilty of. Second, Sperber's discussion of college sports is almost entirely limited to football and men's basketball, but his condemnation appears to extend to all sports. Since football and men's basketball are unusual in being essentially developmental systems for the professional leagues in those sports, Sperber's case would have been stronger had he presented more evidence drawn from other sports. Third, Sperber ends with a number of prescriptions for improving undergraduate education at Division I universities (many of which would be applicable to other colleges as well). Most of these, such as basing faculty hiring and promotions primarily on teaching, are excellent. However, Sperber's recommendation that the Graduate Record Exam be used as a universal exit exam for undergrads should be deep-sixed right away. One flaw of the US education system, well-documented by Peter Sacks in "Standardized Minds," is the overuse of standardized tests. We do not need to make the problem worse. While I don't agree with everyting Sperber writes, I think his book is very good. It would be especially valuable for any prospective student, or parent of a student, at a large Division I university.
Rating:
Summary: What's Gone Wrong at Big Universities
Review: This is a book definitely worth reading, although it doesn't quite deliver all it promises, and though I do find some points of disagreement with the author. In "Beer and Circus," Murray Sperber has three main themes: 1) What is wrong with what he calls "big-time college sports," essentially meaning NCAA Division I athletics, 2) how and why these Division I schools offer undergraduates subpar educations, and 3) the various facets of the problem of excessive student drinking. Sperber provides ample evidence on all three of these points. He compellingly describes, for example, the ways in which Division I schools short-change their undergraduates--cramming them into massive lecture courses, and relying heavily on poorly paid adjunct faculty and teaching assistants to teach them. He also dispels numerous myths, such as the claim that top researchers are the best teachers, or the legend that Division I athletes are "student-athletes;" on the latter point, he notes that the long hours athletes must commit to competition and training preclude all but a few from compiling strong academic records. Much of Sperber's book rings very true to me--I was a graduate student at a large, Division I university, and I observed examples of many of the ills Sperber describes. However, I have three points of disagreement with him. First, Sperber doesn't quite deliver the explanation--of "how big-time college sports is crippling undergraduate education"--that he promises. From his own account, it appears that the main culprit is in fact Division I schools' excessive emphasis on research. For every Division I school, like my alma mater UCLA, that is a legitimately strong research institution, there are probably 10 or 12 UCLA-wannabees that will never reach that status, but will waste uncounted resources in pursuit of the goal. Sperber does not convincingly demonstrate that athletic programs are more than a minor accessory to the crime against undergraduates that these schools are guilty of. Second, Sperber's discussion of college sports is almost entirely limited to football and men's basketball, but his condemnation appears to extend to all sports. Since football and men's basketball are unusual in being essentially developmental systems for the professional leagues in those sports, Sperber's case would have been stronger had he presented more evidence drawn from other sports. Third, Sperber ends with a number of prescriptions for improving undergraduate education at Division I universities (many of which would be applicable to other colleges as well). Most of these, such as basing faculty hiring and promotions primarily on teaching, are excellent. However, Sperber's recommendation that the Graduate Record Exam be used as a universal exit exam for undergrads should be deep-sixed right away. One flaw of the US education system, well-documented by Peter Sacks in "Standardized Minds," is the overuse of standardized tests. We do not need to make the problem worse. While I don't agree with everyting Sperber writes, I think his book is very good. It would be especially valuable for any prospective student, or parent of a student, at a large Division I university.
Rating:
Summary: Great Read, But Even Worse Than Portrayed
Review: This is a must read! As a long time advocate of reform of higher education and college sports, I was attracted to this book after seeing C-SPAN's Brian Lamb interview the author. Although unfortunately based on a non-scientific survey and interviews, I learned some things. The author hits the nail on the head about campus cultural problems -- learning cannot occur if the culture is dysfunctional. He also rightly argues how clueless students, faculty, administrators, and taxpayers are about the near total failure of the current system. They all know there are problems, but the author identifies the convenient myths and misperceptions clung to by everyone involved. However, even the author is too generous to the parties involved. For example, non-athletes are often just as misguided about their impossible dreams. Students flooding into music, journalism, or filmmaking programs are no more likely of finding a career there as a fullback making the NFL. Also, much too much credit is given to faculty, as the author partly defends his occupation. He never points out the studies that show the wrong people are attracted to academic careers (as well as into administration), laying blame exclusively (rather than partly) on the overspecialization, overwork, and perverse pay and glory incentives for research, grants, and grad education. In fact, he fails to question the value of this "research," most of which (especially in the social sciences and humanities) provides little benefit to society. Similarly, he doesn't examine the secondary education system that generates the current undergrad ed failure. High school sports and anti-intellectual curricula feed colleges with jocks, couch potato fans and note-takers, and rote memorizers. The whole educational system needs to be addressed. The declining college enrollment shares of males, and especially of black males, the increasing vo-tech nature of the curriculum, the lack of quality control should all be a call for society to scrap the current model, privatize state universities, require performance measurement and truth in advertising standards.
Rating:
Summary: What are you getting out of your education?
Review: This is the perfect book to analyze the effects of college sports on institutions of higher learning but also much more. This books starts by classifying students into four basic groups and describes what are the motivations of each group as it relates to a college education. I found this to be a very elementary but appropriate evaluation which clarifies why some things are as they are. The author also had sent out surveys, although not scientifically done, from which to draw conclusions. It nevertheless, was insightful concerning students feelings about athletics and their education. The surprise for me in this book was the historical analysis of college enrollment and marketing to prespective students in the last thirty years. Included in this, the author was very critical of the "learning environment" and teachers who want to research but not teach. This was a subject which I had not seen so effectively addressed. Yes, Murray Sperber is critical of college athletics. But I think his presentation was as balanced as possible with this bias and spared no one in his recommendations for improvement. Without giving away the ending, his conclusion is titled, "What should happen vs. what probably will happen." The author has given his subject great thought and presented the reader with good evidence. But I think the author realizes he is tilting at windmills and the ultimate conclusion which may come within 10 years will be painful. Particularly for a dedicated educator.
|
