Your Cart is Empty
Charlie Yale
Daily Princetonian
It’s not often that an “F” on an essay draws national headlines. But I guess that’s this week’s fixation.
When students assume that grading is ideologically motivated and in bad faith — and when they choose to take these concerns straight to reactionary publications that have it out for higher education instead of engaging in productive dialogue with the members of the University community — our ability to have academically fulfilling conversations begins to slip away.
Roberto Lachner
Daily Princetonian
In a recent Opinion piece, Contributing Opinion Writer Vitalia Spatola takes on one of the more important questions Princeton students face: Whom should I date? I wholeheartedly agree your potential boyfriend’s or girlfriend’s values are of the utmost importance in making that decision. However, Spatola endorses a type of thinking harmful both to our romantic and non-romantic relationships, with deep consequences for civil discourse more broadly.
Haeon Lee and Nico David-Fox
Daily Princetonian
Two-thirds of grades awarded in Princeton undergraduate coursework in the 2024–25 academic year were A-plus, A, or A-, according to a Monday report distributed to faculty, a dramatic increase over the past decade.
Dean of the College Michael Gordin briefly discussed the report at Monday’s faculty meeting, expressing concerns about grade inflation and the allocation of A-plus grades. However, Gordin noted that grading is under the jurisdiction of departments.
Ava Johnson
Daily Princetonian
In his recently released book “Terms of Respect,” Princeton University President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 presents a strong defense of free speech on college campuses. He locates the roots of contemporary free speech doctrine in the Civil Rights Era and ultimately concludes that “students are getting free speech right.”
This is a commendable analysis consistent with Eisgruber’s public defenses of student speech. But his framework is often unfairly paternalistic.
Evan Goldstein and Len Gutkin
Chronicle of Higher Education
Robert P. George, the conservative legal scholar and moral philosopher, has spent the past four decades at Princeton University assiduously cultivating an ever-widening network of influence. For parts of the religious right, he’s an intellectual lodestar on issues including gay marriage, abortion, and stem-cell research. The Catholic journal Crisis once quipped that “if there really is a vast right-wing conspiracy, its leaders probably meet in George’s kitchen.”
Over the course of two interviews — the first conducted from his home and the second from his office on the Princeton campus — George discussed the risk of indoctrination from the left and the right, the need for a more ideologically diverse professoriate, and how academe made itself vulnerable to attack by the Trump administration. Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity.
By Robert P. George
The Wall Street Journal
The ideological partisanship, dogmatism and bigotry on display in our society today are to some degree the fruit of our educational system. Too many college classrooms have become indoctrination camps. Some students buy into the leftist ideology they’re taught and become its enforcers. Others react by embracing opposing forms of extremism. Either way, radicalism and animus replace knowledge and wisdom.
So what should we do? The answer isn’t complicated, but acting on it will take determination and courage. Colleges and universities must return to offering a rigorous liberal arts education that refuses to engage in indoctrination and challenges groupthink. College courses must actively cultivate the virtues of curiosity, open-mindedness, intellectual humility, analytical rigor and, above all, dedication to the pursuit of truth.
