In an earlier post I referenced Christian Smith’s astute article “Higher Education is Drowning in BS” in The Chronicle of Higher Education, in which he outlines the various turds on the higher ed poop pile. He cites among others the outdated tenure system, needless (and useless) jargon, and the state of denial concerning ongoing funding. His article has drawn considerable attention for its perspicacity and forthrightness.
But perhaps the most astute observation comes when Smith steps back from the dung heap and looks at the big picture, or mound, as the case may be. His spot-on analysis is simple. American higher education today embodies the very problems that “it was intended to transcend and transform.” He lists unreason, duplicity, and an inability to comprehend the big picture, as examples of these ills.
I think a closer, more specific look is in order here. America is in the throes of a cultural shift that is characterized by the “Me Too” movement, an overhaul of our political system, and a call for accountability in all sectors of society, including higher education. So it is that we see college sports programs forced to defend academic transgressions and exorbitant budgets that pay fired personnel millions of dollars. And we find senior administrators resigning or being fired in the face of personal misconduct or complicity with that of other colleagues.
Smith also makes clear (correctly) that the problem is systemic. Michigan State is a symptom, not a disease. Higher education is rife with similar examples. But he also points out that self-correction is not in the interest of the status quo. The privileges and perks that have become common abuses are now part of the fabric of higher education. So if change is to come, it will most likely come from the outside. Those who created the mess are not likely to muck out the stalls.
A response to Smith’s piece authored by Clara Lovett makes this point poignantly. She sees no solutions offered in Smith’s diatribe (in his defense, I don’t think that was his intent). In any event, she offers what she calls “three practical steps to start digging out” of the BS. She proposes three “compacts,” all led by higher education insiders. The outcomes of these pacts would be:
1. A ban on institutional rankings
2. A reduced production of Ph.D.s
3. A reaffirmation of tenure
If we try to match these outcomes with the societal issues currently plaguing higher education, we see a total disconnect. These outcomes are all inward-focused on ways to preserve the status quo, not fix it. Institutional rankings and the number of Ph.D.s being turned out are irrelevant to, well, anything, but certainly to any significant societal issue. And hanging on to tenure is a misguided attempt to preserve an outmoded piece of a system that was built centuries ago and that has little significance today. (By the way, I earned tenure at Temple University). These proposals tinker with things that are of importance only to the self-interests of higher education.
In short, Lovett is proposing to add to the heap. Looking to the people who got us into the mess to now resolve it is a form of denial. Her proposal is not so much about digging out of the pile, as it is about digging in the heels of the status quo and preserving a rapidly eroding legacy. There is an old joke about a little boy digging through a large pile of manure in hopes of finding a pony. The higher education compost heap holds no such promise.
