Higher education at a crossroads

Breslin is the Joseph C. Paramountain Jr. Dean of Political Science at Skidmore College and “ “A Constitution for People: Imagine How Five Generations of Americans Will Rewrite the Nation's Basic Laws””

This is the latest in a series to help Americans navigate the difficult road ahead this election year. By highlighting the Constitution's components, principles, and story, Breslin hopes to remind us that the American political experiment remains, in the words of Alexander Hamilton, “the most interesting in the world.” .

Being at a crossroads can be very unsettling, but we always seem to be there. Politically, economically, socially, technologically, culturally, diplomatically, and morally, this moment will undoubtedly test our navigational skills and determine which path we should take as a collective. raises important questions about.

Higher education, my field of expertise, is at just such a crossroads. Last week, New York Times opinion columnist Pamela Paul (re)joined the chorus. Her thoughtful and provocative essays addressed the question of whether universities should “take a stand” on political issues. She flatly answered no.

It's not that simple. To be sure, university leaders are reluctant to take positions on issues that may offend some in our diverse communities, and for good reason. Reputations built over centuries are tarnished. Consider Harvard University. Millions and millions of dollars disappear overnight. Think of a pen. Applications dwindle, protests erupt, students feel unsafe, and campuses are traumatized. These are not enviable results. In this day and age, neutrality on the part of the regime is a rational and even wise choice.

Sign up for the Fulcrum newsletter

However, neutrality also has negative effects. There is considerable irony in an organization whose sole mission is to seek truth while remaining neutral to the pressing issues of the day. Careful consideration of good and bad ideas, controversial and settled principles is central to every school's curriculum. Indeed, the marketplace of ideas requires universities to be laboratories for rich debate. We seem to have forgotten that. The far right derides universities' important purpose of expanding student learning beyond white Eurocentric norms, and the far left closes campuses to conservative ideas and right-wing voices. No wonder so many people are calling on universities to provide a freer, more open and liberated public square.

Neutrality also has historically troubling elements. For most of American history, colleges (and later universities) have been responsible for developing the moral and ethical character of each student (first through religious instruction and later through secular “provocation”). did. Daniel Coit Gilman, founding president of Johns Hopkins University, wrote that universities should never be “simply places for the advancement of knowledge and the acquisition of learning.” It will always remain a place of character development. ” Teddy Roosevelt's words are even more important. “To educate the spirit, not the moral, is to educate a threat to society.” The university itself is dedicated to integrity, wisdom, common sense, rationality, respect, diversity, pluralism, and creativity, individualism, We have a responsibility to foster difference. That hasn't changed.

Perhaps most disturbingly, neutrality downplays the important responsibility of universities to develop serious citizens. Civic engagement occurs in universities. Quality education opens the eyes of students to injustice, prejudice, and inequality that stirs and awakens their souls. No other educational institution in America is more successful in aligning education with a common public purpose. No other institution is more effective in forming the habits of mind essential to self-governance. No other institution can so facilitate the search for truth and the associated realization of the common good. That's good.

Readers of this column will know that I inevitably look to the founding generation for inspiration. “People like George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, Benjamin Rush, Noah Webster, James Madison, and Thomas Jefferson had no regard for the principles on which the American Constitution was founded.” “Neutral.” It was formed and intended to be maintained as a. Rather than that, [their] This vision recognized the educational and potentially transformative ambitions of liberal democracy. ” The founders argued that an educated population was essential to realizing the promise of modern liberal democracy. Where were these Liberal Democrats educated? At university.

However, even if the Foundation does not have any special influence over you, consider the results of recent research on the threat of authoritarianism. The authors conclude:[h]Higher education promotes independent thinking, respect for diversity, and exploratory evaluation of evidence, all of which can counteract unquestioning obedience to authority. ” Even those with a more quantitative bent may be persuaded that “education enhances the benefits of civic participation” and is a powerful weapon against trends toward dictatorship.

None of this is simple. As we seek some kind of compromise, we may need to reinvent the modern university to become more aware of its influence as a moral authority. We may need to reimagine the concept of university. At Loco Parentis. While I do not subscribe to Paul's doomsday scenario in which universities are “putting their future at risk,” I do believe that universities are at a tipping point, a crossroads, and that we value these unique institutions. I admit that some of the features that are It has to change.

Perhaps Abraham Lincoln said it best. “The philosophy of one generation's schools will become the philosophy of another generation's government.” American colleges and universities have always been pioneers in the discovery and dissemination of truth, the very fuel needed for a strong and just democracy. I have been working as a. I think we can maintain that connection.