This week’s big news in the United States was the resignation of Dr Claudine Gay as president of Harvard University.

However, she is returning to a faculty position, so it is not as if she is out of a job.

The Libertarian site Reason posted ‘Harvard President Claudine Gay Resigns After Plagiarism Scandal’ and had this to say about free speech at the university:

… her brief tenure at Harvard has not been marked by some dramatic return to free speech principles. In 2023, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression ranked Harvard dead last on its college free speech list. Indeed, one might conclude that in order to restore free speech to Harvard, different leadership is sorely needed.

In any case, the plagiarism allegations had teeth. Reporters discovered numerous instances of Gay lazily copying other scholars’ exact passages without naming them and also failing to cite her sources. The political ideology of some of her accusers—including Christopher Rufo, a conservative writer and activist—makes no difference; Gay must be held to the same standards as other professors and students.

When Harvard’s governing board picks the next president, they should look for someone who both abides by principles of academic integrity and vows to improve the college’s free speech standing.

Intrigued, I found the FIRE survey of over 200 American universities and checked out Harvard, which is ranked ‘Abysmal’ for free speech on campus. That category must have been created for Harvard, because it is the only institution of higher education so ranked.

I commend the Survey to parents and students alike. It shows that, on average, more than half of college students are a) afraid of being misunderstood by classmates or faculty and b) self-censor before voicing their opinions.

It is a sad state of affairs, to say the least. When I was earning my undergrad degree over four decades ago, we were taught that those four years were to encourage us to broaden our horizons and to think differently. We never had problems with self-censorship, biased lecturers or cancelled speakers.

Then again, tuition was much less expensive then and students were hardly considered ‘customers’ in the way they are now.

It is a parlous state of affairs. It would be interesting to see what a similar survey in the UK might uncover.