Canary: Higher Ed Issues Landscape Report 07/01
July 1st, 2024
What we're watching
Free speech and surveillance
The conversation around free speech on campus is developing in multiple directions. Three stories last week give communicators and administrators a look ahead at what could be coming.
1 - Columbia University placed three administrators on leave pending an investigation into a private exchange of text messages. The administrators allegedly made disparaging comments about a panel discussion on antisemitism that took place on campus in May.
“Columbia College is attending to this situation with the utmost seriousness. We are committed to confronting antisemitism, discrimination and hate.” - Columbia spokesperson. (NBC News )
“I deeply regret my role in these text exchanges and the impact they have had on our community . . . [I am] committed to learning from this situation and to the work of confronting antisemitism, discrimination and hate.” - Josef Sorett, Dean of Columbia College. (NBC News )
2 - An untenured professor, who criticized UNC administrators for secretly recording his classes, will not have his contract renewed, despite having taught on campus for 18 years.
In April, UNC informed economics instructor Larry Chavis that the university had received concerning reports related to his conduct during classes, some of which had been recorded and reviewed without notice. Chavis then took the matter to the press, raising eyebrows among faculty and forcing UNC to clarify its position.
"Regarding the general topic of filming classes, the University does not have a formal policy but follows applicable laws. Protecting the principles of academic freedom and freedom of expression are among the most important responsibilities we share, in addition to assuring student success and well-being in the classroom." - UNC statement (ABC 7 )
3 - A new law in Louisiana specifically excludes criminal acts from free speech protections, undercutting campus free speech policies that protect acts of civil disobedience.
“What we need on college campuses is education, not activists.” - Sen. Valarie Hodges, R-Denham Springs (Louisiana Illuminator )
“Criminalizing free speech is not the answer,” - Professor Pablo Zavala, Loyola professor (Louisiana Illuminator )
Foreign students at U.S. universities
Foreign students and foreign funding at U.S. universities are growing topics in higher education — and ones that cut against the grain of partisanship.
For example, Former President Donald Trump said at a recent event , “If you graduate or you get a doctorate degree from a college, you should be able to stay in this country.” His campaign later walked back the quote.
Meanwhile, at a Council of Foreign Relations event, Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell said he “would like to see more Chinese students coming to the United States to study humanities and social sciences, not particle physics."
Trust and Protest
A new poll from SimpsonScarborough broke down the extent to which recent protests have harmed trust in higher education. The research suggested that Ivy League schools had taken the biggest reputational hit.
However, big publics like UCLA and UT Austin have also featured prominently in the public imagination of the protests, most likely due to social media capturing acute moments of unrest on campus.
Most notably, the research suggested that parents were twice as likely to say they were highly familiar with recent protests than prospective students.
“The campus protests and Capitol Hill testimony were not just news events. Prospective students and, especially their parents, were paying attention.” (SimpsonScarborough )
Budget news continues to roll out
At the University of Colorado, regents approved a budget with tuition hikes of 3% (for in-state students) and 4% (for out of state students.) University leaders had warned of a larger hike earlier in the year and praised state lawmakers for boosting funding by $30 million.
“A direct result of that investment from the state is our ability to keep tuition in check.” - University of Colorado chief financial officer Chad Maturano. (CPR )
At West Virginia University, regents voted to increase tuition by nearly 5% while also cutting numerous majors from regional campuses.
“These tuition and fee increases are necessary to cover increased costs due to inflation and to continue to invest in excellence within the institution’s core academic mission.” - WVU 2025 fiscal plan (WBOY )
At the University of Michigan, regents approved a $2.9 billion budget that included a 2.9% tuition increase for in-state students (4.9% for out-of-state students.) However, the budget also included $390 million in financial aid.
“63% of our resident undergraduates do not pay the sticker price. 31% of our undergraduates pay no tuition at all, and the average cost for a family with an income of $120,000 or less is lower than it was a decade ago, after adjusting for inflation.” - Provost Laurie McCauley (The Michigan Daily )
In an interview with state media, Chris Kabourek, chief financial officer and interim president at the University of Nebraska, spoke candidly about the system’s finances, claiming “the status quo isn’t working” and the universities’ rankings were “not where we want them to be.” He also commented on spiraling administrative costs even as programs are being trimmed.
“Some of it is, when I first started, we paid a president $200,000. And now we’re paying the president a million dollars.” - Chris Kabourek (Flatwater Free Press )
According to a new analysis by S&P Global, a combination of spending down HEERF funds, high inflation, and a rise in discretionary spending are increasing the financial pressure on universities.
“S&P Global Ratings has observed institutions with weaker financial positions--often smaller, private colleges and universities--being disproportionately challenged.” (S&P Global )
领英推荐
Admissions
A year ago, the Supreme Court struck down race-conscious admissions practices.
Last month, Legend Labs looked at how that decision had impacted the conversation around admissions. Today, we supplement and update that analysis.
The conversation that wasn’t
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Students for Fair Admissions vs Harvard/UNC (SFAA) dominated news headlines and faculty lounges when it came out last June, Many universities issued statements to clarify that while they would comply, they remained committed to cultivating a diverse student body. However, conversation around affirmative action in admissions then dropped off precipitously — and stayed low all year.
Additionally, data and analysis from Common App and others suggests that the court decision has had little impact on applications.
“We also do not observe any meaningful deviations from historical trends with respect to students’ college application behaviors across racial/ethnic groups.” (Common App )
“FAFSA simplification may have big effects on enrollment this year, especially for low-income students—which means it’ll be difficult to determine what’s responsible for any changes in racial composition.” (James Martin Center for Academic Renewal )
There are several potential explanations for the lack of conversation — or behavior change — in regard to admissions:
“The higher admissions landscape experienced significant adjustments and complications this year . . . With all this, we were especially impressed with the accomplishment, resolve, and ambition demonstrated by the students who committed to the Class of 2028.” - UPenn Dean of Admissions Whitney Soule (The Daily Pennsylvanian )
Despite the lack of conversation around admissions and affirmative action, university reputations remain vulnerable due to a lack of trust and understanding around admissions practices.
Liberals are more likely to see legal compliance with SFFA as over-compliance, with the growing trend among elite universities to bring back standardized tests compounding this view. Meanwhile, conservatives, hostile to DEI and skeptical about the sincerity and extent to which universities are complying with SFAA, have begun to advocate for robust state laws that would more forcefully prohibit race-conscious admissions, scholarships, and support programs.
“We pay lip service to the goal of equity and fairness, but we know that the college admissions process will continue to send the wealthy and powerful to schools created to educate the wealthy and powerful so that they will continue to be wealthy and powerful.” - Nick Chiles, (Hetchinger Report )
“Because we can’t trust colleges to voluntarily comply with?SFFA, there’s a need for transparency when it comes to the admissions process. To this end, lawmakers should require that colleges transparently report data on applications, admissions, and their selection criteria and allow third parties to audit their processes” (James Martin Center for Academic Renewal )
In addition, legacy admissions are unpopular on both the right and the left but remain in place at many universities. This is leading to greater legislative scrutiny of legacy practices. For example, a proposed law in California would prohibit universities from “giving preferential treatment to applicants because of their family ties to donors or alumni.” Such a law is already on the books in Virginia.
“Many [universities] have doubled down on legacy preference and other mechanisms of exclusion that drive the massive wealth disparities on these campuses.” - Evan Mandery (Politico )
The admissions conversation is similar to others in higher education (for example, those around endowments or budget cuts) in that a lack of understanding in processes has led to a lack of trust in outcomes.
?? What we’re reading
Over the last few months, college and university presidents have been given an Ivy League-quality education in jawboning. . . Some resigned shortly thereafter. Others were propelled into disaster. Regardless of where one stands on these presidents and their decisions, we are witnessing the power of the bully pulpit. . . This sort of behavior rarely receives the public attention that comes with a new law or executive order, but it is no less damaging, and it can be even more difficult to combat.
Times Higher Education: For the future of higher education, we need to educate the whole student
“I am advocating an approach to undergraduate education that is developmental and transformational. . . These practices are currently reserved largely for the most privileged students: . . . the opportunity to engage in guided research and supervised internships and participate in a learning community with dedicated faculty mentors, professional advisers and rich co-curricular activities. I believe such experiences can be scaled.”
Inside Higher Ed: The FAFSA Broke Me
“In a typical year, I would estimate that the prepared families I assist are able to submit the FAFSA 95 percent of the time. In January of this year, I would estimate that fewer than 33 percent of the prepared families I assisted were able to actually submit the form. Often times, I had no explanation for families, as the form would be taken off-line, be beset by technical glitches, or would lose a student’s progress.”
#?? Trending on Social This Week
Sources:
Legend Labs is a brand and communications consulting firm for the digital age. We help ambitious leaders create, grow, and protect their Legends. This analysis of reputation-related trends in higher education features insights from Meltwater and direct social media & web analysis.
For more information, email us at [email protected] .