The Broken Edifice of American Higher Education
The underlying structural problems within American universities that make them resistant to meaningful change and erode public trust.
The Story:
American universities are currently grappling with a multitude of complex challenges, exposing deep-seated fault lines in the governance and structures of these institutions. As a former university president, Brian Rosenberg notes, "In virtually no other workplace does a structure like this exist. A shared governance system essentially means that a university's faculty gets a say in a lot of decisions about what the organization does and how." This unique structure of shared governance in universities has contributed to the complexities they face.
The recent pro-Palestinian protests and police crackdowns on campuses across the country have laid bare the inherent tensions between the principles of free speech, collective security, and the enforcement of campus regulations. These protests have shattered the tenuous compact governing free speech, forcing university leaders to confront the limitations of their ability to regulate hateful, false, or outrageous speech that may be protected by the First Amendment. While private universities have more leeway to restrict speech compared to public institutions, they have struggled to find the right balance between upholding free expression and maintaining an environment conducive to learning. The polarizing nature of the Israel-Palestine conflict has only exacerbated these challenges, with chants like "Globalise the intifada!" testing the boundaries of what universities consider acceptable. Universities have struggled with how to regulate hate speech and handle the polarizing effects of the conflict in Gaza.
In their efforts to maintain order and safety, university administrations have been criticized for both heavy-handed interventions, such as the use of police force at Columbia University, as well as for perceived inaction. Some universities, like Brown and Northwestern, have negotiated deals with protesters, while others, like Columbia, have resorted to calling in the police.
Faced with demands from both Democratic and Republican politicians to curb antisemitic speech and student trespassers, college leaders have often resorted to vague and unsatisfactory formulations, unable to navigate the nuanced complexities of these situations. The protests have also exposed the limited tools at the disposal of universities to enforce their own regulations. The ease with which student demonstrators have been able to defy campus rules and swiftly reestablish their encampments has underscored the ineffectiveness of the punitive measures available to university authorities. This dynamic has revealed the fundamental weakness of the university's ability to compel compliance, particularly when confronted with determined and ideologically motivated student activists.
Furthermore, the protests have laid bare the shortcomings of university leadership in grappling with the delicate balance between individual rights and collective security. Caught between the demands of free speech and the need to maintain a safe and orderly environment, college presidents have struggled to find appropriate and proportionate responses, often resorting to either heavy-handed crackdowns or ineffectual negotiations.
The View:
The underlying problems plaguing American universities run far deeper than the current culture-war battles over free speech, representation, and global politics. As Rosenberg, argues, the structural and systemic issues embedded within the very fabric of these institutions are the root cause of their inability to adapt and change in the face of pressing challenges. The siloed nature of academia, where faculty members identify more with their academic disciplines than with the institution itself, has fostered a culture of inefficiency and dysfunction. The shared governance model, which grants faculty a significant say in the decision-making process, has effectively turned universities into political entities akin to city governments, where consensus-building is prioritized over decisive action.
Tenure, the hallmark of academic freedom, has become a double-edged sword, protecting not only the ability of faculty to engage in rigorous inquiry but also their own vested interests in preserving the status quo. Rosenberg rightly questions the rationale for granting lifetime employment guarantees to professors, a privilege not extended to other professionals who serve the public good. The fixation on the handful of elite institutions, such as Harvard, has also distracted from the real challenges facing the majority of American universities, where affordability and effectiveness in student outcomes remain the primary concerns. The emulation of the practices and policies of these prestigious universities by less-elite institutions has done little to address the pressing problems of high costs and low graduation rates, particularly among underrepresented groups.
These systemic issues are further exacerbated by the university's inherent resistance to change, a characteristic that Rosenberg likens to the paralysis of government institutions. The very structures designed to preserve the stability and longevity of these institutions have, ironically, become the primary obstacles to meaningful reform and adaptation. Ultimately, the anger directed towards American universities, whether from politicians, donors, or the general public, is justified, but it is often misdirected.
The real problems plaguing these institutions go far beyond the current culture-war battles, and addressing them will require a fundamental rethinking of the university's governance, incentive structures, and underlying purpose. Without such a profound transformation, the decline in public trust and confidence in higher education is likely to continue unabated.
TLDR:
American universities are facing intense scrutiny and waning public trust, with anger directed at them from various stakeholders, including politicians, donors, and the general public.
The problems plaguing universities run much deeper than issues like diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) or free speech, and are embedded in their very structure and governance model.
Universities are highly siloed, with faculty more loyal to their academic disciplines than their institutions, making effective collaboration and decision-making extremely challenging.
The system of shared governance and tenure grants faculty extraordinary power to resist change, preserving the status quo and preventing universities from adapting to new realities.
While the focus is often on high-profile incidents at elite institutions, the more pressing issues are the unaffordability of higher education and the poor completion rates, especially at non-elite schools.
Meaningful reform is necessary, but the inherent resistance to change within the university system makes it an almost insurmountable challenge.
The anger directed at universities is largely justified, but it is often misdirected towards the wrong problems, distracting from the core structural issues that must be addressed.
Insights From:
The Real Problem With American Universities - The Atlantic
Escalating protests expose three fault lines on American campuses - The Economist