Your Cart is Empty
Ryan Quinn
Inside Higher Ed
Excerpt: Ever since Harvard and Columbia Universities refused to accede immediately to all of the Trump administration’s demands to change their policies, federal officials have cut off billions of dollars in funding and deployed other heavy-handed approaches to extract compliance.
But when the administration wanted to alter policies at the U.S. service academies, it simply commanded the changes. The orders were a reminder of how differently service academies operate compared to civilian institutions—and an early example of how the Trump administration could win its war against what it dubs DEI faster at these academies than at private or public state universities.
Comments will be approved before showing up.
I recently listened to Ross Douthat’s interview with the philosopher Jennifer Frey. She is a serious thinker and an unusually courageous academic entrepreneur. What she built at the University of Tulsa before it was dismantled is exactly the sort of thing more universities should be attempting. Yet almost every argument she offered for the humanities is, I think, completely unpersuasive to anyone not already on our side of the table.
This report presents findings from a national survey of 1,959 law school faculty at 192 American Bar Association (ABA) approved law schools in the United States, conducted by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE). As one of the largest surveys of law faculty on free expression and professional norms, the data reveal a profession that strongly endorses free speech principles while struggling to live them out in practice.
I just returned from the University of Wyoming, where I debated the President of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) Todd Wolfson over the need for colleges and universities to maintain institutional neutrality. The debate was organized by the Steamboat Institute and was live-streamed.
The formal question presented for debate was: “Is institutional neutrality necessary to preserve the university as a forum for open inquiry rather than an actor in political disputes?” I spoke in favor of institutional neutrality while Wolfson argued against it as a necessary component to higher education.
