Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required. Learn more
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
Profscam Audio Cassette – Audiobook
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherBlackstone Pub
- Dimensions9.61 x 6.75 x 1.28 inches
- ISBN-100786102276
- ISBN-13978-0786102273
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.
What do customers buy after viewing this item?
- Highest ratedin this set of products
A Nation of Victims: The Decay of the American CharacterPaperback - Most purchased | Lowest Pricein this set of products
Fail U.: The False Promise of Higher EducationHardcover
Product details
- Language : English
- ISBN-10 : 0786102276
- ISBN-13 : 978-0786102273
- Item Weight : 13.6 ounces
- Dimensions : 9.61 x 6.75 x 1.28 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #10,203,057 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #75,791 in Instruction Methods
- #77,272 in Higher & Continuing Education
- #1,075,335 in Politics & Social Sciences (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
Important information
To report an issue with this product, click here.
About the author

Charles J. Sykes, is the author of eight previous books including "A Nation of Victims," "Dumbing Down Our Kids," "Profscam," "The Hollow Men," "The End of Privacy," "50 Rules Kids Won't Learn in School, "A Nation of Moochers," and "Fail U."
Charlie identifies as a conservative, but in "How the Right Lost Its Mind," he presents an impassioned, regretful and deeply thoughtful account of how the American conservative movement came to lose its values. How did a movement that was defined by its belief in limited government, individual liberty, free markets, traditional values and civility find itself embracing bigotry, political intransigence, demagoguery and outright falsehood? This book looks hard at the Trump era to ask: How did the American conservative movement lose so many traditional values?
Until he stepped down in December 2016 after 23 years, Sykes was one of Wisconsin's top-rated and most influential conservative talk show hosts. He is now an NBC/MSNBC contributor and a contributing editor for The Weekly Standard, where he also hosts the magazine’s daily podcast. In 2017, he was co-host of the national public radio show, "Indivisible," which originated from WNYC. Sykes has written extensively for The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Politico, New York Review of Books, Newsweek, Time.com, and other national publications. He has appeared on Meet the Press, the Today Show, ABC's This Week, Real Time with Bill Maher, as well as on PBS, CNN, Fox News, the BBC, and NPR.
Sykes is a member of the Knight Commission on Trust, Media, and Democracy and sits on the Advisory Committee for the Democracy Fund.
He lives in Mequon, Wisconsin with his wife and three dogs. He has three children and two grandchildren and spends way too much time on Twitter.
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on AmazonSubmit a report
- Harassment, profanity
- Spam, advertisement, promotions
- Given in exchange for cash, discounts
-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
A grad studies program welcomes grad students for a number of reasons. Obviously, they provide warm brains for the profs to teach advanced courses in their favorite specialties (thus helping the profs enjoy themselves and pull down a paycheck). Grad students also can serve as TAs, relieving profs of some of their teaching load dealing with undergrads (often in very large classes). Many of the grad students develop a great liking for their field of study, and want to turn around and teach about it to other students after being certified as Ph.D.s. But their ability to do so depends on the "effective market demand" in the academic job market. Will there be enough available positions for them to get the jobs they're aspiring to and been trained for?
It's a relationship between supply and demand, of course. But a student's decision about whether to embark on, and continue in, such a program of study would be heavily influenced by that crucial piece of information: What is the ratio between the number of qualified applicants to the number of available positions in the field concerned? In other words, what are your chances? And the incumbent profs have a pretty good idea what this is. Not just from the number of applicants to open positions in one's own department, but also from discussions and gossip with colleagues in other schools.
The trouble is, they don't readily share this insider fact with students in a realistic sense, limiting themselves to vague expressions like--the market is kind of "tight," or whatever word (not number) they use. But it makes a lot of difference to a student whether his/her odds are one in 10 or one in 300. If the students were to know the actual odds were closer to the latter, they might well decide not to let themselves be shepherded through the programs to end up with the degree but unable to have a decent chance to work the job.
And the professorial lack of candor and deception don't end there. Over the years, I sent out hundreds of applications for a "regular" (full-time tenure track) job. I figured my excellent grades and superb dissertation would get me hired. But the rejection letters coming back wouldn't say why I wasn't. Except an occasional one (maybe one in thirty or so) which said its department had to pick from X number of applications. After a while, I computed what that X number average was. In my case it came out to be somewhere between 275 and 300.
Now, this means that all the other university and college departments were de facto accomplices in covering up information about what was the relationship between supply and demand. When you think about it, if each rejection letter contained this information, the applicant would fairly quickly realize the reality of the job market. I would certainly have quit wasting my time and money mailing out application materials a lot sooner than I finally did. As it was, I kept trying without success for about five years before I said the hell with the sleazy corruptions and deceptions of academia. Eventually, I just went to a three-month (but expensive) vocational training program to become certified for a somewhat dangerous blue-collar job where I made $23/hour. There was a minimum educational requirement to get into that program. It was a GED.
The book is full of lingo, rhetoric, and name-calling. But through all the words, which actually make an otherwise dull subject electric, his contentions hit the mark bulls-eye. The faculty has the power to determine the product, the terms upon which it will be offered, and the customers who will be served. Profs are hyper-specialists, instead of offering students a general education. They are institutionally rewarded for more research grants and publications, and punished for good teaching and time spent interacting with students. In the past twenty years, profs have had decreased teaching loads while huge increases in salaries. Academic democratization has lowered standards while inflating grades. Academic thought police have promoted prof freedoms while imprisoning students in by-gone ideologies. Rather than broadening minds, the academic culture has ended up ratifying and strengthening our culture's most basic features. The rich humanities have been replaced by the sterile statistics of the social sciences.
Sykes blames the profs, but it's the culture of academia that is often the problem. Profs are forced to publish or perish, and they have to specialize in minute details to get published. And outstanding teaching is simply on the backburner of most of the major university's job descriptions. In order to survive in academia, they have to play the game of academia. Grade inflation occurs because so many low grades merely get student complaints to adminstrators who pressure grades upward. Student evaluations forced by accreditation agencies force profs to entertain students rather than educate them.

