Where do we look
for wisdom? There are many answers to this question but one source many people
turn and return to can be summed up in in two words: “Founding Fathers”. (The
phrase needs amending to include founding mothers too). It is useful to try to
understand how innovations and new approaches began and then compare them with
where we are now. This looking back to assess our current state applies to
politics, business and much else, but in this entry the focus will be on
education.
Who are the people who
help families, students and college and universities find the best fits? There
are lots of answers to this question too, but in this entry you will be able to
learn from one of the experts in the world. Lloyd Paradiso has helped
generations of students do this. He has done this through his work; in
addition, he is one of the founders of IECA --The Independent Educational
Consultants Association. I have written about those who try to help students
navigate the increasingly complex maze of college admission and financial aid
before, but what Lloyd has to share adds not just history and background but
great insight into what is happening today.
*********************************************************************************
Is the job of an independent educational consultant a
noble calling?
In its purest form, the work we do is noble. Or at least I
would like to think that's true. But it's not who we are or our training or
even what others believe about us that makes it so. It's the
people whom we serve, to whom we give sound advice, pragmatic counsel
and even hope that makes this profession noble. And it is precisely because we
can make a difference, sometimes a profound one, in young lives that
we might lay claim to such a term. I am not noble, my profession by
definition is not noble but the good work we are blessed to offer,
the fruits of this labor, what we can do for those we serve, surely are.
This seems to be about
as good a way of describing what you do and others in the field do as I have
read, but before I ask some more about this I want to take you back a ways. You
are a product of a liberal arts education. You attended Hamilton for your
undergraduate education and then went on to Middlebury for your Masters. First
of all can you describe your experience at Hamilton? What was it like to be a
student then? Have you gone back recently or to broaden the question, do you
think things have changed much in the small liberal arts schools and if so in
what way?
You must remember that I am a product of the Stone Age and
therefore my answers reflect this context. I went off to Clinton, New York
knowing very little about Hamilton other than thinking it couldn’t be too
terribly different from what I was used to. I attended an all-male independent
day school in Philadelphia from sixth grade on and I loved everything about the
experience: small classes, individual attention, ability to participate in most
anything I fancied and therefore, somewhat spoiled by the attention and
recognition, I was keen to continue that life. I was a decent student, hard
working, successful enough and I had no reason not to expect more of the same.
Was I in for a rude awakening! Clinton was nowhere. And in the day, a five-hour
drive from home. It snowed seven months out of the year. When the temperature
hit 40, we wore shorts. There were lots of public school guys from obscure
towns and “consolidated” high schools and every one of them was scary smart to
downright brilliant as well as unpretentious and socially, let’s say, none too
worldly. The latter fact was totally irrelevant as social life consisted mainly
of fraternity shenanigans; clumsy, ill-conceived and rarely winning attempts to
lure and beguile any and all versions of the opposite sex who might naively
wander perilously into harm’s way and serial, unbridled, excessive alcohol
consumption which could occur on any day of the week but hit heroic proportions
on weekends. And then there was that fine manifestation of the devil’s genius
we called House Parties which three or four times a year with the catalyst of
non-stop live music and entertainment whipped it all together and us into an
epic frenzy. What impressed me occasionally then and never ceases to amaze me
now is that, despite our best efforts to the contrary, we became incredibly
proficient and accomplished students. Many of my classmates went on to become
lions of industry, government and academia. The professoriate was exceptional;
they demanded our best, worked us hard and were immune to our puerile protests
and frequent excuses for mediocre, unacceptable effort. As tribute to their
insistence on serious scholarship (and infinite patience), I will forever be
grateful that they pushed us beyond what we were sure was our best. One thing
is for certain, even though the phrase can be so overused these days, my
Hamilton years instilled in me the knowledge and understanding of what
excellence in education can and should be, what it is and what it isn’t. Not
that I necessarily possess it, I know it when I see it.
When I hit Middlebury, I was a different person. Certainly
more academically mature and way more focused, I was well aware of why I was
there and what I needed to accomplish. I was on sabbatical pursuing a Master’s
in French Language and Literature; summer on campus and academic year in Paris,
a degree in twelve months, perfect for a mid-career teacher. I struggled
mightily in the beginning as much of my French had been learned on the job as
it were during a year spent in Paris between Hamilton and my teaching debut. I
could speak well enough but grammar, spelling and usage was a challenge and
this was an exceptional crowd. Unbelievable in every possible way, Middlebury
was learning at its most perfect. Theater, poetry, novel, film, music, it
enveloped us; we were exposed to it all, encouraged to taste it all and became
addicted. It was nirvana. Everything about the program from the exquisite
Vermont summer, the traditions of the French School, living and studying in
Paris, the quality of the faculty---it was perhaps the most satisfying and
enriching formal or informal educational experience of my
life.
There are a lot of
competing pundits writing about liberal arts for various media Some say that they are dinosaurs that should be slowly or quickly made if not extinct, at least put in museums instead of out inn the wild. he core of an education that prepares people for
what awaits after graduation. Do you see any merit in the first view or are you
solidly on the side of the liberal arts? Is there room for something that
recognized both views coexisting for different kinds of students?
For me, education means learning how to think, solve
problems, speak, read and write with fluency. I understand the need for career
preparation and job readiness, but I truly believe that too much of our
discussion now seems to focus on vocational training or ROI as a worthy and
necessary goal of an undergraduate education. I realize the educational system
in many other countries requires an early sense of major or specialization but
I still believe that sixteen or seventeen is way too young to know for certain
and commit to what you will do for the rest of your life. That said, I am also
opposed to the idea that a college education should be the goal for every high
school graduate. In this regard, we could learn from our European friends who
place a high regard on and earmark serious resources for vocational and
technical education, training and apprenticeships. If you have the talent and
an affinity for higher learning, academic pursuits and the scholarly life, then
by all means go to a traditional college and make the best of it. However, if
you’re not cut out for existentialism, Greek myth or organic chemistry and your
time is better spent building houses, raising cattle or repairing trucks, learn
how to do that well with the finest instruction, the latest techniques and
materials. Frankly, if politicians are so anxious to correct what they perceive
as the failings of American education, they should spend more time in the early
childhood, pre-school, elementary and secondary arenas. If too many of our
children don’t have access to, aren’t prepared for or can’t succeed in college,
it’s not the fault of higher education.
You also attended an
Ivy League School. The Ivies are another source of great division among editors
and pundits. Some, like William Deresiewicz in his book "Excellent Sheep", characterize
the students who go to Ivies and elites colleges and universities as students
who don’t take the time to think because they are too focused on “getting and
spending” rather than soaking up knowledge and beauty for its own sake.
I am biased. I tell all my clients (some actually do listen)
they can have their Ivy experience later if they are besotted by the idea of an
Ivy degree. The best undergraduate education, the best preparation for the next
step, in my mind, occurs at smaller, more student-centered, liberal arts
institutions or at the very least in Honors programs within larger universities
that resemble the aforementioned. Nothing can replace the individual attention
that a learner receives from her professors, mentors and peers. Sure a lot of
that type of interaction can and does exist at the Ivies or at any elite
institution. For me, it’s simply a matter of numbers. By my sophomore year, my
largest class was about 20 and world-class associate or full professors taught
every course. There was no such thing as a TA. The closest I ever came to that
sort of thing was in my Biology 101 freshman course of about 100 taught by the
department head where a senior took daily class attendance in the back of the
room. By second semester, I became a pledge in his fraternity that may or may
not have been a good thing. As pledges, we had the overall standing of dirt but
I may have caught a break or two when late or absent out of brotherly
affiliation. But I digress, what is more to the point and way more important,
the course also had a weekly lab broken into much smaller sections all taught
by the same professor. As I said, I am indeed biased because I consider myself
having been pedagogically spoiled during my entire undergraduate career at this
remarkable place.
Others think the Ivies
are the place to learn the most in by living and learning amongst the best students many great
professors and within facilities that are the best in part due to their
exceptional endowments. They also see that student will be able to immerse
themselves in the network of high achieving people that will help them for the
rest of their lives. Do you want to comment on any of this? What do you say to
students and families who come to you with Ivy dreams?
This perception about the Ivies is not the reality I’m
afraid. Undergrads rarely see the top professors from these schools or interact
that frequently with their peers in other disciplines or benefit from the
“networks” or “facilities” that inspire such praise. My sense is that these
accolades albeit well-deserved stem more from the reputations of the graduate
and professional schools and not from the undergraduate experience. One of my
sons attended an Ivy as an undergraduate and, although we rarely spoke of his
intellectual or academic experience there, I believe he would agree. That said,
his girlfriend at the time was a Wharton undergrad (guess that’s a dead
giveaway, huh?) and I know full well her educational experience was
dramatically different. She was also innately quite bright, more intellectually
ambitious and academically inclined than he. To be fair, he was a committed
athlete with a grueling schedule of mandatory training throughout his college
career which no doubt affected his academic appetite and performance in the
classroom.
You have a perspective
on independent consultants that makes you perhaps the expert in the world on the
history and the evolution of this group. First of all, not many know the genesis
of IECA and since you were there it would be great to get your perspective on
how it all started.
A few of us were fortunate to be present at the birth and
subsequent infancy of the Independent Educational Consultants Association.
Although there were a handful of true pioneers with legitimate practices prior
to the seventies, only a few had any recognition outside of their local spheres
of influence. What set IECA apart at the outset, and still does in many
respects, is that members and those seeking inclusion, pledged to accept no
compensation from any school, college, camp or other agency billing families
their fees and therefore able to offer their best objective advice as to what
served the child, their client. It is fair to say that this way of doing
business was not necessarily the norm at the time as many quite successful
individuals and their companies routinely charged institutions accepting their
referrals a commission usually ten to fifteen percent of the child's first year
tuition. Some of these firms did extraordinarily well as most schools and
colleges were prone to admit their clients since, more often than not, they
were appropriate candidates for the institution. Consequently, there was a real
risk involved for those who chose to operate in what was deemed an ethical
manner because there was no guarantee a family would opt to pay a fee for what
they could ostensibly receive free of charge (and that's how these agencies
marketed themselves, as a "free service to parents").
So not only were we originals up against an accepted and
lucrative business model but we were also hard-pressed all too
often to gain acceptance by the established school-based counselor
community. Many professionals viewed us askance either as charlatans out to
profit from the anxieties and insecurities of a beleaguered public or feasting
on those who would pay any price for a perceived advantage in the admission process.
I can recall with equal amounts of frustration and distaste being ostracized
from college tours and meetings (some of that regrettably still
persists by the way), having endlessly to justify my role to these counselors
and admission folk and, most egregiously, being mocked or heckled in NACAC
sessions when identifying myself as an independent. On more than one occasion,
several of my colleagues, reduced to tears, felt the need to flee a meeting
rather than submit to the derision. I suppose I gained some degree of strength
and solace by most often believing in my status as an equal. I can remember
telling myself (and no doubt a few of my peers), “Just wait until the naysayers
near retirement age, leave full time employ, search for how to trade on their
years of experience and need to earn a little on the side to pay the mortgage
on the beach house, the metamorphoses will be wondrous to behold for
sure.” That’s probably a bit harsh for which I apologize and really
doesn’t address the issue intelligently but it wasn’t an easy time. I
don’t fault my in-school brethren so much as they were wrestling with their own
demons of cut-backs, over-bearing boards and principals, busy work
unrelated to counseling and nagging, unrealistic parental expectations. I do however
chide them for not giving us the benefit of the doubt when our credentials,
experience and training matched theirs.
I understand worrying about one’s livelihood, the
specter now realized of 500+ student caseloads and all too often unfair
treatment by an ill-informed press. However, I would have appreciated
more acceptance then as the fact is, we are all in this
together. We all receive a paycheck (hopefully)---mine just happens to come
from peddling my ****; not a pretty thought (or image) but the reality for
those of us out in the marketplace. In the end, the accountability factor,
child-centered approach and desire to serve our clients well are
characteristics we all share.
Today, I am pleased and heartened to say that we ALL have
come a long way. I see a much more vibrant synergy with my counseling
colleagues in every aspect of this work and I am optimistic that as we become
more accustomed to seeing and hearing one another, sharing techniques, insights
and innovations, the divide we once knew will diminish and eventually
disappear.
Now I would like to
ask you about what you see are the biggest changes that have occurred in the
world of admission. The ones I would like to hear about as starters are
rankings. Do you think they are useful or are they pernicious or some of
both? Have the rankings become a case of the tail wagging the dog?
The sheer numbers of graduates anticipating and subsequently
enrolling in college has transformed the process entirely. Plus, education used
to be about as ho-hum a topic as you could find, hardly newsworthy that’s for
sure. Loren Pope, who toiled in relative anonymity while espousing the concept
of “fit” and those colleges which were concerned about who might best benefit
from their particular style of pedagogy, is now revered as a veritable seer.
Even after his passing, his work has inspired several revisions of the guide,
“Colleges That Change Lives” and a consortium with an executive director that
has an impressive national tour calendar and growing reputation. Talk to Ted
Fiske about his work fifteen-twenty years ago and what it’s like now that his
Guides have gone platinum. And of course, take the Supreme Evil that is US News
and their ubiquitous rankings, which almost everyone in education and
psychometrics claims to loathe, but whose medallions grace many a view book and
web site proclaiming prestige. I shudder to watch Robert Morse being harassed
at national conferences by the very same people who dutifully complete his
questionnaires and tout in their literature the rankings they receive in his
publications. I’m sorry; you can’t have it both ways. Don’t whine to me about
what the competition does or your Board’s directive or whatever lame excuse you
give for complying. I don’t buy it. If the big boys opted out, there would be
little to no credibility to these games. It is one thing to leave Reed out to
dry or let Colin Driver, despite his eloquence and reason, be one of a handful
of voices in a vast wilderness. But if HYP, the other Ivies, Stanford, MIT, WashU,
Cal Tech and a few other notables aren’t in the cast, the show’s over. We keep
feeding the beast and decrying his power at the same time.
Forgive the rant but to despise a practice yet condone and
nurture its existence makes no sense to me and never has. What scares me even
more I might add is the DOE’s insistence on creating and perpetrating another
example of faux science under the pretext that families need objective criteria
to make sound decisions about educational choice. The means of doing so and the
data necessary exist already, and in abundance. The last thing higher education
and the public need are another set of rankings.
Jeffrey Selingo, in
his book College (Un)bound, writes a lot about how schools went on huge spending
sprees when the money was good and when there were enough students who could pay
fees. He says that many schools have now priced themselves out of the market.
Given what happened with Sweetbriar do you see that many schools are going to
have significant problems in the short and long term with finances? In other
words, is what Selingo and many others say about a crisis in education due to
cost and student debt correct?
I admire Jeffrey Selingo, am a fan of his scholarship and
feel he is entitled to his viewpoints and conclusions. He is an informed
commentator on higher education, an avid student and observer of the field
unlike so many who feel their opinions are important just because they have
them and get press. He may be right. I am not a prognosticator nor do I pretend
to know what the future holds because of my proximity to and experience with
the past. But I will say that I doubt we can make such broad, all-encompassing
predictions because the subject is just way too broad and diverse. Some schools
will close for various reasons and that’s not necessarily a bad thing.
Some may merge, change focus or decide a different mission and that’s
ok too. What I do think though is that, if we cannot effectively run our
own house, considering the vast sums of money involved and the perception
(or reality) that certain groups are being disadvantaged, neglected
and/or ostracized by our practices which we have chosen
to correct ourselves, government oversight of some sort and
with it that inglorious bureaucratic hell it mandates will be forthcoming.
I apologize for the awkwardness of that last statement but I
am convinced we haven’t seen anything yet. The stakes are too high and too many
are affected so that government will have no choice but to intervene soon in
some fashion in how we have historically done business. Education was rarely
newsworthy but that has changed dramatically. Now we have politicians
of every stripe from mayoral to gubernatorial to presidential running on
“education reform” platforms. That’s really scary to me and I know I’m not
alone. Apart from going to school, which I’m assuming they all have, most are
completely bereft of any real understanding of how education works at any
level. They’ll tackle the easy challenges, go after the quick fixes and we’ll
all be the worse for it. I am pessimistic unless and until our finest pedagogical
and administrative minds rise up, create and
commit the responses required to inform the public discourse and
counter the ignorant political chatter we now perpetuate by our
silence. We love to call ourselves “professional.” If in fact that is so
and we are, one of the definitions of a profession is an organization that
polices itself. We’d better get busy.
At the other end,
getting in to highly selective schools has become a nearly overwhelming
endeavor. With selection rates under 10% I feel sorry for the students who hope
to get in these days. Do you think that independent consultants are
increasingly necessary for students who do not have a hook to get into the most
selective schools?
Ah, Parke, this question is the stuff of a whole other
piece! Might I say in brief response however that a consultant’s role is not to
facilitate admission to any particular type or level of school? And one other
point: it’s rarely the students who entertain these delusions of grandeur but
their parents. Somehow the family DNA will be corrupted or the social status of
the name, sullied if junior or his sister are denied at a brand institution. I
used to scoff at that mentality and try to reason with or dismiss those who
came to me with such expectations. I don’t anymore mainly because I don’t blame
those who have drunk the Kool-Aid for their fantasies. This mentality is the
creation of our handiwork or lack of it. As I have said, I cannot disabuse a
client of their insanity about where their child should be applying. All I can
do is try to persuade them by facts and numbers and reality to broaden their
horizons; to seek out, investigate and come to love schools were they will be
admitted, attend and flourish. Full disclosure: I usually add that with a 4.0
wherever, a top-notch undergraduate portfolio and brilliant recommendations,
they can have their Ivy experience at the next level. I never guarantee that
outcome but the excitement of the prospect usually keeps the wolf at bay so I
can concentrate on the matter at hand.
There is still, to
some degree, a negative view some or even many in education hold about
independent consultants. You and many others have dedicated your lives to
helping students. Why do you think there are still people who look at the
profession negatively? Have you seen that this is now changing?
I can only do my best and try to remember with every client
what that is. I am an avid student of my work, a conference junkie, a
teacher, a mentor and a member of several professional organizations one of
which I helped found and continue to serve. There are many consultants I admire
and a few I don’t, not so much for their expertise or success but for how they
promote themselves and market their services. A handful of bad apples can
indeed create a false impression but I am not so sure there’s much to be done
about that other than to try to demonstrate best practices as individual
consultants and, as an organization, to insist upon adherence by members to a
code of ethics that we do.
As long as there’s a public perception that some consultants
feast on anxieties surrounding the admission process and gleefully charge
unwitting clients (especially non-American ones) obscene fees, there will be
naysayers. I don’t do that nor do most of the consultants I know, trust and
admire. What we must never forget is that, at least for now, the prevailing
global model is agency based with minimal oversight and billions of dollars at
play. Often, I equate what was happening in the US 40 years ago with what is
now occurring throughout the world. I am hopeful that eventually educational
consulting firms/agencies/recruiters everywhere will all be adhering to the
same code of ethics as we, earning their fees by forgoing commissions from
schools and for the work they perform, charging clients only.
What are the things
you most want to get across to families and students about the college search
and ultimately the college choice? Many of us who help students make it a
point to say again and again that it is not the name of the school that matters
it is the fit and the performance at the school that matters. Yet no matter how
many times we say this the default mode is to focus on the name. What can be
done to change this or is it a losing battle?
Nothing. Educational systems worldwide are not compatible.
For most, performance and success on a leaving exam dictate to which
institutions a student will have access. Most cultures then can easily rank or
assign quality to a name based on real numbers, statistics that are objective.
We have no such thing here. So when international families trot out a US News,
Forbes, Shanghai Rankings or some other seriously methodologically flawed yet
handy guide and point to where they wish or even demand to
look, apply, attend and graduate, I’m at a distinct disadvantage in so many
ways. And sadly, many American families who I think should know better, behave
similarly. It’s an uphill battle that’s for sure. I can wax eloquently about
“fit” and “match” while producing graphics aplenty which prove without a doubt
their child’s inappropriateness for certain applicant pools, yet most simply
stare at me. What’s at play as well is significant wealth with most of these
families so that they approach admission to a name institution almost as a
consumer exercise. And they have rarely if ever in their lives been told no,
you can’t have that. I hasten to add that I am in no way deriding these
families of privilege. They are behaving as one might expect and no doubt as
they have in most situations. It’s their reality, or at least until they ran
into mine.
What advice do you
have for those who wish to go into field of independent consulting? What are
the skills they should have or develop?
It helps to be independently wealthy or at least,
self-sufficient with modest tastes in residences, clothes, cars and social
activities. Seriously, there are two main elements or bodies of knowledge to
master: human behavior and the educational landscape in which you choose to
practice. You must understand different types of people, what makes them tick,
how they behave, when they’re telling the truth, what drives them, how they
react in various situations, family dynamics and so on. You must also be
comfortable being direct and honest with them, asking the tough questions,
pursuing unpleasant inquiry or insisting on answers when they’re reticent or
refuse to cooperate. You must be confident in your assessment of them and
believe what you’re doing is in their best interests. And you must admit when
you’ve erred, own up when you are wrong. You must never allow them or anyone
else to dictate your practices or behavior and you MUST represent them to
potential placements without pretext, candidly, honestly and fully.
As for the other piece, know your options in depth and
breadth. Have a substantial menu of schools with which you are personally and
frequently familiar, visiting often and keeping abreast of trends and new
programs. Know their strengths, their characters, their specialties and perhaps
what they could be doing better. Know too those who do the admission work as
people and as professionals. Appreciate their priorities, administrative
mandates, constraints and respective roles within their offices. You may never
understand why a given decision was rendered nor does it matter; they may not
know either. Never openly or even privately question them, their bosses or
their staff about a particular candidate’s result if you want them to answer
the phone the next time you call. And if you call (which I would suggest be
rarely if at all), it should never be to complain, attack or rebuke. Certainly
refrain from comment as to the educational philosophy of their institution or
why they do, allow or perpetuate such and such. In brief, know your place in
the scheme of things. Your role is to serve your client not to dictate to a
college how to do anything. If you are displeased about how a given school
handled your client and believe it’s they and not you and not fair or right,
then don’t use them; or not for the same type of candidate any time soon. Also,
an admission result is rarely if ever a one person act so don’t single out the
rep you know and complain; respect their process and live with it. There will
be a next time and you will want to be heard so behave like you deserve to be.
And one more thing, be a student of how various offices and
their inhabitants do things. This knowledge just might help you predict an
outcome (or an educated read) with a current client. Pay attention, remember,
do the aforementioned enough times and before you know it, you will be learning
how certain shops react to certain candidates, profiles, talents and such. Make
book on enough places and, as time goes on, you’ll start to earn more and more
successes for your clients. Track how your kids do where they are admitted,
study their respective experiences, see which ones do well where and before
long, you’ll be on your way to being a real consultant. And that is the short
version!
What about advice for
students who are beginning the search process?
Hamilton’s motto is Know Thyself. If I’m not mistaken, it’s
the same for the College of Charleston and no doubt for others as well. That’s
my best advice for any student embarking on this exciting process. Nowadays we
are all too worried about names and labels and brands and we don’t pay enough
attention to the other piece that is the candidate. Introspection for teenagers
is rare as they tend to mimic their friends, see themselves as others do and
rarely pay attention to what works for them, as individuals, students, athletes
or whatever. I ask my clients a lot about their personal lives: what makes them
happy, sad, successful, scared, elated and so forth. I probe to get at what’s
really going on with them in every aspect of their young lives as best I can.
And I spend a lot of time doing that, getting to know them. So when I get to
where we should begin to look, what colleges to suggest, where they might be
best served and successful, I do it from their perspective and not the other
way around. It’s not easy to be honest with oneself especially at seventeen or
eighteen but that’s where I try to get them to go. The more they (and their
parents) understand and own their realities, the better our chances of creating
winning applications and a fine list of appropriate acceptances to choose from
when the results are in. For me, that is the definition of a successful
outcome, and for everyone involved.
 |
| Lloyd Paradiso |
*********************************************************************************
Lloyd has given me much to think about and much to incorporate
into my efforts to help others. He has learned well from his education at
Hamilton. Know Thyself is something we should all attempt to do and something
we also need to revise and explore on a daily basis. Lloyd has helped me
examine what I think my role should be, but he has also has given me a broader
perspective on what the field of private counselors is like today. It should,
in the best of all possible worlds both reflect the noble goals of the founders
even as the demand for help has expanded dramatically in size and scope. There
are thousands and thousands of people around the world who now are a part if
not of IECA at least of the profession of helping students and families. Some
of these are wonderful and some are in it for the money—something that happens
in many professions. People like Lloyd
and many others I know have spent countless hours visiting schools, talking
with admission officers and most of all spending time talking with students. They
have an ethical commitment to their constituents and believe in the
transformative power of education; in addition, the best of these professionals
have the wisdom to apply the knowledge they have picked up to produce
successful outcomes for students. I
would like to thank him for taking the time to craft these detailed and
insightful answers. While doing so he has been traveling across time zones and countries
to help people. His energy and passion for the field comes through his words
and I am grateful for sharing his vision –both of his own long view back to the
founding of the field and for his eagle-eyed focus on the here and now.
No comments:
Post a Comment