America’s national obsession with raising our “educational attainment” level leads politicians and bureaucrats to focus on the silliest of things. Lately, that has been college accreditation.
A new report by the National Association of Scholars, “Inside Divestment: The Illiberal Movement to Turn a Generation Against Fossil Fuels,” is welcome because it shines a light on the excesses and especially the anti-intellectual nature of this campus phenomenon. Students, parents, alums, professors, and administrators should pay close attention to the report, just as miners needed to pay attention when their canaries started going unconscious.
It is extremely wasteful to lure students into high-cost degree programs with easy-to-get government loans, then saddle the taxpayers with the unpaid balance when the student later defaults or manages to qualify for loan forgiveness. That artificially inflates the demand for college credentials and helps to accelerate the constant increase in the cost of higher education.
University presses exist to publish scholarly books and journals that might not be published by a for-profit publishing house due to the small market for most academic books. Therefore, they require subsidies from willing donors and/or presumably less willing taxpayers and students. But as Milton Friedman often pointed out, “No one spends other people’s money as carefully as he spends his own.” That applies just as much to book publishers as to everyone else.
How much “privatization” have we actually had in higher education? In one sense, none, because no state-owned college or university has been sold off to private investors. But on the other hand, there has been quite a bit, since to a considerable extent, governmental funding for higher education has been replaced by private funding. In Privatization and the Public Good, Matthew Lambert, vice president for university advancement at William & Mary, gives us an approved “establishment” view of the privatization phenomenon in which it is perceived as a great threat.
William G. Bowen and Eugene M. Tobin, both former college presidents (Princeton and Hamilton, respectively) grasp the crucial fact that the good old days of higher education are gone. In their new book, Locus of Authority, they tackle the traditional shared governance system (that is, the division of responsibility between the administration and the faculty). That system needs to change because it is getting in the way of the flexibility that is now essential.
It is common knowledge that students who have amassed large college debt burdens cannot discharge those debts through bankruptcy. That “knowledge,” however, is not really the case—the laws are written to permit discharge of student loan debts in some cases. And, with the federal government pushing for broader interpretations of those laws, they are now an incentive for students to amass debt and then dump it on the taxpayers.
If you think that universities are not making the best use of endowment funds, you should look to persuasion rather than government regulation. There are many ways of trying to convince presidents, trustees, and other college leaders that they should change their approaches to the use of their endowments; that would be vastly better than turning to a recently proposed federal mandate.
In trying to avoid liability for “sexual harassment” under Title IX regulations, many schools have gone way too far. They have allowed hyper-sensitive or vindictive students to use the regulations as a weapon against anyone whose speech offends or annoys them.
People in and out of the academic world have been pointing to a glaring defect in our education system for many years. That defect is the failure to teach students to write competently. Unfortunately, it’s hard to see how colleges will break their bad habit of allowing students to coast through with miserable writing skills. Despite the presence of a few traditionalists and reformers, academic writing instruction still seems to be heading in the wrong direction.