Harry Targ
(State legislatures, prominent politicians, special
interest groups, and university administrators and boards of trustees have
placed the character of higher education on the public agenda for the first
time in years. Unfounded criticisms of the teaching and study of racism in US
history, shifting to online education, further encroachments by university
administrators on what is taught and how, all necessitate a serious
reexamination of the transformation of the university in incremental and
non-transparent ways. For example, even the teaching of STEM courses is being
examined with a grant from the Charles Koch Foundation at one prominent
university.
The
materials below were written a few years ago but reflect some of the issues
that are currently being raised, and decided, without sufficient public
discussion and without input from most educators. (Some organizations, such as
the American Association of University Professors, have committed themselves to
stimulating a broad-based public discussion of higher education in the 21st
century. See for example the emerging
discussion of a New Deal for Higher Education which addresses the process and
content of higher education and the support for students pursuing higher
education. The campaign includes the idea that higher education is a public
good. https://newdealforhighered.org/)
REMODELING LIBERAL ARTS IN THE PUBLIC
UNIVERSITY
Harry Targ
In the recent book, Democracy in Chains: The
Deep History of the Radical Right’s Stealth Plan for America, Nancy
MacLean traces the intellectual development of the libertarian right and
its connection with the Koch Brothers and state programs to promote an
ideologically-driven policy agenda. She argues that many of the
libertarian right’s policy proposals would be opposed if public discourse and
majoritarian democracy prevailed. Consequently, she suggests, efforts are made
to limit transparency, public discussion, and legislative and electoral
participation in major public policies.
Public universities are among the institutions in
which the lack of transparency is becoming the norm. The tradition of shared
governance is being trampled on. Educational decisions are being made by
politicians, and administrators and boards of trustees without any advice and
consent from educators and taxpayers. Under the guise of a “business model”
driven by metrics and profit-making, many years of educational practices are
being overturned by administrators with little educational experience. Great
state universities such as those in Wisconsin, Michigan, Texas, North Carolina,
and Indiana are being reconstructed. Programs of teaching and research are
being uprooted. Sometimes ongoing programs are abolished. And new liberal arts
curricula measure success by creating narrowly trained job seekers. Further, research
is increasingly channeled to meet the needs of corporations or the military.
The Vision of the 21st Century
University
The President of Purdue University, Mitch Daniels, on
October 12, 2018 received the Philip Merrill Award for Outstanding
Contributions to Liberal Arts Education presented by the American Council of
Trustees and Alumni (ACTA). Daniels reported with enthusiasm that Purdue
University is the third “most STEM-centric school in the country,” with over 60
percent of its undergraduate students matriculating in engineering, chemistry,
physics, and agricultural and biological sciences. And he implied that there is
a struggle going on in great universities everywhere about what should
constitute liberal arts (Mitchell E. Daniels Jr. “Re-liberalizing the Liberal
Arts,” Washington, October 12, 2018, goacta.org.) From Daniels’ point of
view, administrators cannot wait for liberal arts programs in the twenty-first
century to transform themselves. This is so because liberal arts education
today consists of “conformity of thought, intolerance of dissent and sometimes
an authoritarian tendency to quash it, a rejection of the finest of the Western
and Enlightenment traditions in favor of unscholarly revisionism and
pseudo-disciplines.”
Daniels then railed against the “one-sided view of the
world” being presented in liberal arts classrooms in opposition to critical
thinking. He appropriately celebrated the “clash of competing ideas,” but
characterized liberal arts curricula and research as dogmatic and
authoritarian. (Many liberal arts educators would argue that old ideas are
always revisited bringing new, diverse, perspectives to bear on traditional
disciplinary formulations in the social sciences and humanities). In other
words, while most scholars and students appreciate the openness and
creativity of education and scholarship that has resulted from the last fifty
years of ferment, debate, and thought characteristic of the intellectual life
of higher education, Daniels advocates to the contrary that the newer
scholarship and education should be challenged and expunged (Daniels
referred in his lecture to some of his intellectual mentors including Charles
Murray and Jeb Bush).
Daniels added that the tenure system protects
dogmatists rather than what he would regard as free thinkers. He characterized
modern liberal arts education as “the celebration of mediocrity;” the liberal
arts as the home of “illiberal viewpoints;” and as the transmitter of
“conformity of thought.” He condemned what he called “shoddy scholarship” as
well. “Hopelessly abstruse, jargon-laden papers from so-called ‘studies’
programs read like self-parodies.” He claimed, with no evidence, that “…fewer
than half the published studies across the social sciences can be replicated.”
And the final and most damaging claim Daniels made was
that practitioners of liberal arts make their subject matter boring. He
asserted that histories are written without heroes, excitement, “…glory, the
human elements…”
All this, Daniels suggested, requires reform of
liberal arts from outside the clutches of the educators in the various fields
he condemned. At Purdue University change is occurring because of a program
called Cornerstone which brings STEM students to specially crafted liberal arts
courses. “Enrollees will read Locke, Hobbes, and Jefferson as well as other
works in the Great Books tradition.” Reading the great books, which according
to Daniels are not already being taught in existing courses, and offering
various dual degree and fast track three-year degrees, he said, are responses
to the needs of the business community for liberal arts graduates.
And as to free speech on campus, Daniels castigated
students who, he asserted were coached by faculty, made unwarranted demands on
him to denounce fascist and racist flyers on campus. And without any sense of
irony, Daniels quoted 1960s Chancellor of the University of California system
of higher education Clark Kerr who said that a proper university “is not
engaged in making ideas safe for students. It is engaged in making students
safe for ideas.” He apparently did not recall that students at the University
of California launched the Free Speech Movement on their campus in 1964 because
Kerr’s administration banned literature tables on campus.
Discussions of Higher Education Are Held
in Secret
Lastly, Daniels praised the work of the American
Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA). ACTA, formed in 1995, says it works “…to
support liberal arts education, uphold high academic standards, safeguard the
free exchange of ideas on campus, and ensure that the next generation receives
a philosophically rich, high-quality college education at an affordable price.”
Henry Giroux has characterized ACTA as “…not a friend of academic freedom, nor
is it comfortable with John Dewey’s notion that education should be responsive
to the deepest conflicts of our time…” (Henry Giroux, The University in
Chains, Paragon Publishers, 2007, p. 161).
ACTA, while claiming to be independent, is an
associate member of the State Policy Network. SPN is a “think tank” with
affiliates in 49 states. SPN groups are affiliated with the American
Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) which was a creation of the billionaire
Koch brothers and rightwing organizations such as the Bradley Foundation, to
promote a radical libertarian policy agenda in virtually every state. Jane
Mayer, Nancy MacLean and others have shown that ALEC, SPN, and ACTA leaders
realized that public discourse and transparency in political and other
institutions might lead publics, often majorities, to reject their
anti-government, “free-market” agendas.
Universities historically have had public discussions
about curricula and most universities, including Purdue University, have
institutionalized mechanisms for decision-making on educational policy matters.
Faculty Senates, curricula committees, and promotion and tenure committees,
have been the lifeblood of higher education. And, appropriately enough, as a
result of student movements on college campuses, students have been included in
conversations about educational matters as well. And some state universities
value the input of citizens and a broad representative array of alumni from
their universities, not just the wealthy who become the core of boards of
trustees or the small number who can afford to donate millions of dollars.
What the speech represents is a capsule summary of the
Daniels vision of what liberal arts should be. It is largely a series of claims
about modern liberal arts programs, diametrically opposed to the reality. It is
a policy brief for his campus that Daniels presented to the non-transparent
ACTA, an affiliate of a larger covert institutional network with a presence in
every state. The network is committed to a radical transformation of economic,
political, and educational institutions, a radical libertarian America. Since
the liberal arts tradition includes a rigorous conversation about this and
other visions, questions of the direction of higher education at Purdue
University deserve a rich diverse public conversation among educators,
students, and citizens. Private conversations within and between organizations
that restrict this conversation violate the spirit of higher education.
21st CENTURY
UNIVERSITIES: THE STRUGGLE BETWEEN THE PUBLIC AND CORPORATE POWER
(This essay, originally posted in June,2014,
reflects the continuing and growing debate about the vision and purpose of
higher education. As Purdue University celebrates its 150-year anniversary,
conversations about the purposes of higher education are in order).
The university is a site for intellectual excitement:
debate about new theories and hypotheses; rigorous examinations of competing
ideas; and research, teaching, and community service. Most men and women who
pursue a career in the academy are inspired by intellectual curiosity, the
prospect of educating and inspiring students, and serving diverse communities
of citizens.
Moreover, the Morrill Act passed by Congress in 1862
committed the United States to construct and support state universities which
would serve the people, in those days largely rural populations. Great
state-funded public universities grew over the subsequent 150 years to
facilitate the education of a growing population. They enriched that
population with varieties of knowledge and the tools to improve the lives of
the citizenry and, as a result, helped build a more vibrant democracy.
But there are darker truths about the growth of the
modern university. First, higher education is stimulated by, and financially
beholden to, governments, political processes, corporations, and banks. These
institutions affect what research is done and what subjects are taught in the
university.
Second, and related to the first, conceptions of
disciplines, bodies of knowledge, appropriate methods, ideas accepted as
unchallengeable truths in various fields, and the basic principles of whole
universities are shaped by economic interests and political power.
Third, professional associations, journals, forms of
peer review, and general procedures for validating the quality of academic
research and teaching are also affected by the same economic and political
interests that dominate universities.
Fourth, therefore, in the main, the university as an
institution is, and has always been, designed to serve the interests of the
status quo, a status quo again that is governed by economic and political
interests.
The following examples are from one university, Purdue
University. Similar examples can be found at virtually every large and
prestigious university in the country. David Smith and Scott Bauer (The
Lafayette Journal and Courier, “Daniels: Georgia Trip Was Good for
Purdue,” May 1, 2014) reported on Purdue President Mitch Daniels’ attendance at
a conference of the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute.
Daniels said he attended the meeting to learn and to touch base with one of
Purdue’s biggest donors.
The meeting, held every year since 1982, was populated
by presidential candidates, and conservative governors from Michigan and
Florida. Other attendees included former Vice-President Dick Cheney, former CIA
Director David Petraeus, and former Amway President Dick DeVos, and current or
former CEOs from TD Ameritrade, Apple, and Google. Karl Rove, premier
Republican operative, also attended. Inadvertently highlighting the connection
between corporate and political power and the university President Daniels
said: “I considered this a trip of use to Purdue.”
Academic advocates for large-scale government and
corporate commitments to increased space exploration, such as President
Daniels, who served as co-chair of the National Research Council, can be seen
as serving the economic needs of research universities. The NRC issued a 286-page
report in May, 2014, suggesting that a huge and redefined commitment would be
needed to land on Mars by the 2030s (Reed Sellers, “Report Calls for Increased
NASA Budget,” The Exponent, June 9, 2014). Despite the document’s
skepticism about the possibilities of achieving new goals in space, Daniels
said “human space exploration remains vital to the national interest for
inspirational and aspirational reasons that appeal to a broad range of U.S.
citizens.”
The report outlined a range of steps that would be
needed to achieve long-term goals in space, from a one-year mission of persons
living on the international space station, to flight tests, rovers exploring
Mars, and the development of new technologies involving health, transportation,
robots, vehicles, and many other components of space travel. These multi-billion-dollar
research-based programs could occupy the research agendas of academic
departments in universities such as Purdue for decades and enrich the biggest
corporations in America.
Daniels was not the only university affiliated
spokesperson of note who recently made news. Board of Trustees member Don
Thompson, President and CEO of the McDonald’s Corporation, weighed in on the
debate about raising the minimum wage for fast food workers after a nationwide
set of protests against McDonald’s on May 22, 2014.
Thompson at a shareholders’ meeting declared that
“McDonald’s is often a first job for many entering the work force. About
one-third of our employees are 16 to 19. We are proud that we open doors to
opportunity” (Bruce Horowitz, “McDonald’s Plays Offense on Wages,” USA
Today, May 23). Thompson praised his corporation for being a
worker-friendly employer and added that it was the largest employer of veterans
in the nation. Later he hinted at the possibility of raising the minimum wage
at McDonald’s. However, protestors argued that the median age of fast-food
workers was 29, most worked at today’s minimum wage, and economic survival on
McDonald’s wages was virtually impossible.
Finally, the Purdue news service has announced
increased collaboration of the university with the notorious Duke Energy
Corporation, most recently in the news because of its responsibility for a coal
ash spill in North Carolina that coated 70 miles of the Dan River along the
North Carolina and Virginia border with 60,000 tons of toxic sludge. A North
Carolina judge ordered Duke Energy to immediately eliminate the source of
groundwater pollution from company coal ash dumps. A criminal investigation of
links between the spill and Duke Energy and state government officials in North
Carolina is still underway.
Purdue News (June 11, 2014) reported that the
university would collaborate on the expansion of an education program to create
the Duke Energy Academy at Purdue, a six-day instructional program to inspire
high school students and teachers to work in STEM-related disciplines related
to energy. The article erroneously claimed that “the amount of students
entering the STEM fields is declining.” Other co-sponsors of the six-day
educational experience include Bowen Engineering, General Electric, Kidwind
Project, Siemens Energy, and Windstream Technologies Inc.
Higher education is at a fork in the road. One path is
to maintain its traditional mission to educate and inspire students while
sharing knowledge with communities at home and abroad. Another path is to
expand the needs of special interests, political and corporate, at the expense
of the traditional role of higher education. Growing social movements should
include demands that universities continue to serve the needs of the people,
rather than politicians and corporations.
