In 1959, C.P. Snow, in his book The Two Cultures, described universities as polarized and isolated camps of the humanities and the sciences. Traditionally, law had been a field for students of literary abilities who received their undergraduate training in the humanities, often in history or English literature. To this very day, admission to law school in the United States is largely based upon grade point average and performance on a standardized exam, the Law School Admission Test, which assesses applicants鈥� ability for critical reasoning, reading comprehension, and persuasive writing. Judges can still be heard to joke in unbuttoned moments that, had they been better at science, they would have gone to medical school. Snow鈥檚 The Two Cultures still lingers over the legal profession, and Holmes鈥檚 prediction has not been fully realized.

Disincentives to enroll in STEM courses create a serious problem for law-school education.To be sure, for lawyers involved in patent law, membership in the patent bar requires an undergraduate degree in science or engineering. Otherwise, applicants to law school need not take any courses in science, mathematics, or statistics. The rigor of such courses, and perhaps steeper grading curves, are substantial disincentives for undergraduates bound for law school to take them.

These disincentives to enroll in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) courses create a serious problem for law-school education. The basic law degree, the Juris Doctorate, follows upon a three-year academic program. Law schools face significant pressure to include clinical courses to prepare students for trial and appellate work, as well as for counseling clients. There is a core curriculum, which will be tested on the bar examinations and which must be taught. Law students have little time and opportunity to extend their basic education in the STEM disciplines while pursuing the J.D.

For almost 10 years, I taught a course in statistics and probability in the law at the Columbia Law School. The course is an outlier; only a handful of law schools offer such a course, and none requires an undergraduate course as a prerequisite. And yet, statistical issues, as Holmes predicted, have become omnipresent in the law. Civil cases involving claims of discrimination, election irregularities, antitrust, securities fraud, product disparagement, trademarks, class actions, deceptive advertising, environmental damage, health effects, and many other areas regularly involve statistical evidence. On the criminal side, virtually all forensic analyses, including DNA testing, require application of scientific and statistical principles.

To be sure, lawyers will have some access to expert witnesses, either to guide them or to testify for them, but lawyers must have sufficient scientific and statistical acumen to make careful choices in selecting their witnesses. Perhaps more important, lawyers must be able to take those technical concepts and calculations and present them effectively to lay judges and jurors in advocating for their clients. Correlative to their duty to advocate zealously, lawyers also have a duty of good faith and candor toward the tribunal. Lawyers without STEM training are at serious risk of failing their clients, their obligations to the court, and their duty to the public.

There seems to be no lack of examples of scientific and mathematical illiteracy among lawyers, but two high-profile instances may be helpful to illustrate the seriousness of the problem. Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz was a member of O.J. Simpson鈥檚 defense team in what was perhaps the highest-profile murder trial of the 20th century. Simpson faced several damning pieces of evidence in his trial for the murder of his former wife, Nicole Simpson, including a well-documented history of having physically abused her. Dershowitz notoriously argued that, since fewer than one in 1,000 abused married women are subsequently murdered by their abusive spouse, Simpson鈥檚 history of abuse was legally irrelevant. Dershowitz鈥檚 stunning error was to ignore the obvious; Nicole had been murdered. Elementary probability theory emphasizes the conditional nature of many probabilities. Given that the victim had been physically abused by a spouse and had been murdered, the probability that Nicole Simpson had been murdered by the abusive spouse was actually greater than 80 percent. The principle of charity requires us to conclude that Alan Dershowitz advanced his argument out of ignorance and not out of a malevolent intent to deceive.

Effective and ethical advocacy of scientific and statistical issues is now an indispensable desideratum in the American legal system.A similarly fallacious distortion of probabilities occurred on an even larger scale in 2020, when the attorney general of Texas, Ken Paxton, sued the states of Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Michigan to overturn their election results. With the support of 17 other state attorneys general and 126 members of Congress, Paxton sought to file a complaint directly in the Supreme Court. Candidate Donald Trump, represented by John Eastman, sought to intervene on the side of Texas.

The Texas lawsuit turned in large part on a statistical analysis conducted by an econometrician, Charles Cicchetti. That analysis assumed that voters had the same party preferences in both 2016 (Clinton vs. Trump) and 2020 (Biden vs. Trump) and that the distribution of votes counted before 3 a.m. on November 4, 2020, was the same as those counted after that time. Given those assumptions, Cicchetti calculated that the probability that Biden had defeated Trump in the four contested states was less than one in a quadrillion. In advancing these calculations, Cicchetti showed two utterly irrelevant (and uninteresting) conditional probabilities. The assumption that party preferences and votes are immutable is, of course, stunningly stupid. If it were true, the Federalists would still control the White House. We have elections precisely so that citizens can update and change their preferences. When a null hypothesis is meaningless and absurd, we should not be surprised that statistical tests reject it with a high level of statistical significance. Furthermore, the electorate is not static. People die, and young people come of voting age. Aliens become citizens and are thus eligible to vote. Turnout varies from election to election. In 2016, roughly 60 percent of eligible voters participated, whereas, in 2020, the turnout increased by 10 percent, with 66 percent of eligible voters participating. Similarly, there is no basis to assume that late-counted votes have the same partisan distribution as early-counted votes.

Although Cicchetti鈥檚 analysis was both silly and irrelevant, Paxton went further by misrepresenting Cicchetti鈥檚 calculations, which were conditional probabilities. In the Texas , Paxton dropped the antecedent conditions and expressed the probabilities as absolute: 鈥淭he probability of former Vice President Biden winning the popular vote 鈥� is less than one in a quadrillion.鈥� Although lawyers have a duty to advance their clients鈥� causes zealously, they also have an ethical responsibility to act in good faith and to eschew invalid data and arguments, even when those arguments involve scientific and statistical evidence. The California State Bar brought disciplinary charges against Mr. Trump鈥檚 lawyer, John Eastman, for his role in developing Trump鈥檚 strategy to retain office, including misrepresentations of Cicchetti鈥檚 statistical analyses. Earlier this year, a judge ordered that Eastman be disbarred, a judgment that is now on appeal to the California Supreme Court.

Effective and ethical advocacy of scientific and statistical issues is now an indispensable desideratum in the legal system. Law schools cannot fully address the need. Undergraduate students with degrees or even minor concentrations in the STEM disciplines have an important opportunity to step into the breach鈥攖o fill a social and political need while enjoying a fair prospect for material and spiritual success.

Nathan Schachtman is a practicing lawyer who has defended against claims of health effects in products-liability litigation for over 40 years.聽

The post STEM-ing the Tide of Scientific and Mathematical Illiteracy in the Law appeared first on 好色先生TV. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.

Why this decline? It seems as though more and more college graduates, like numerous high schoolers regarding college, have adopted the view that graduate school simply isn鈥檛 worth it. This diminished interest can be explained by a number of factors.

More and more college graduates have adopted the view that graduate school simply isn鈥檛 worth it.The current plays a significant role in students鈥� decisionmaking. Low unemployment rates paired with a high number of job openings mean two things for college grads who are deciding between graduate school and a job. First, because workers are in high demand, graduate degrees are seen as less important by employers seeking candidates to fill certain positions. Second, high demand for employees means that college graduates have the opportunity to begin their careers immediately, rather than spending years and thousands of dollars on graduate school. Together, these factors deter students from attending grad school and push them towards the job market. Julia Kent, vice president for best practices and strategic initiatives at the Council of Graduate Schools, , 鈥淭he choice became, 鈥楧o I go to graduate school or do I look at some of these very good opportunities?鈥� Many of them chose to go with the money.鈥�

At the same time, traditional graduate programs are being snubbed in favor of alternatives that are less costly and less time-consuming. An increasing number of college graduates are realizing that, for them, attending graduate school makes little financial sense. The Foundation for Research on Equal Opportunity has that 鈥渘early half of master鈥檚 degrees have a negative financial return,鈥� while many programs 鈥渄o not increase lifetime earnings enough to be worth it.鈥� Although grad students comprise only around of borrowers, they鈥檙e responsible for almost of federal student borrowing. It appears that, for many students, attending graduate school entails spending thousands of dollars for an education that will hardly pay for itself in the future. Thus, instead of the traditional grad-school route, students are turning towards more affordable, time-efficient options.

Many universities, recognizing this, now offer master鈥檚 programs and MBAs online, providing students with more flexibility. Other non-university options, such as career training, bootcamps, and internships, are also as grad-school alternatives. Given the existence of these more efficient options, it is unsurprising that the general public鈥檚 enthusiasm for graduate school has waned significantly.

In response, universities are strategies to entice more grad-school applicants. For them, falling interest has significant financial consequences. But it has positive implications for many of the individuals foregoing grad school to begin their careers. Most will achieve a much higher ROI on their time and money by immediately entering the workforce rather than attending a traditional program. A graduate degree is hardly necessary for many professions; humanities degrees in particular are usually necessary only for the rare individual pursuing a career in higher education. Thus, for the vast majority of graduates, it is better to work one鈥檚 way up from an entry-level position鈥攅arning experience, connections, and a salary at the same time鈥攔ather than attempting to 鈥済et ahead鈥� by spending time and money on grad school.

For universities, falling interest in graduate programs has significant financial consequences.The drop in enrollment also provides financial benefits for those who do choose to attend grad school. Lower demand for graduate education means lower prices and fewer loans for the students who must attend graduate school for their careers (such as those pursuing medicine), meaning they鈥檒l have an easier time paying for their education.

The phrase 鈥渇alling graduate-school enrollment鈥� sounds, at first, like another item on the laundry list of America鈥檚 pressing issues. In reality, however, it is a sign of positive change. As more and more college graduates realize that graduate school is not necessary for a flourishing career, they鈥檒l turn to alternatives that save them time and money yet still allow them to gain experience and social capital. Universities, as expected, are worried about declining interest in their many graduate programs; yet, for college graduates, the financial and career benefits of lower grad-school enrollment rates are undeniable.

Sophia Damian is a student at Wake Forest University and a 2024 Martin Center intern.

The post Graduate Enrollment Is Softening? Good. appeared first on 好色先生TV. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.

If you were an academic on the job market during the past decade, you couldn鈥檛 escape this ubiquitous requirement. It seemed nearly every job opening, from assistant professor of history to dean of an engineering college, asked applicants to write a statement discussing their experience with DEI and their commitment to advancing it. In some cases, hiring committees reviewed the diversity statement first, before even considering a candidate鈥檚 scholarship and teaching. At UC Berkeley, up to 75 percent of applicants were from consideration based on their diversity statements alone.

Why the backlash against diversity statements now, especially from the liberal bastions of elite academia?The first half of 2024 saw a cascade of diversity-statement cancelations. The trend started with state legislatures that acted to ban the requirement in state universities. Legislators in Idaho, Utah, Alabama, Kansas, and Indiana all measures to end the practice in hiring and admissions. These states followed the lead of Florida, Texas, Missouri, and North Carolina, which had adopted similar policies.

Then, in May, became the first elite private university to end the practice in question. Less than a month later, also announced that applications for tenure-track positions would no longer require diversity statements.

Why the backlash against diversity statements now, especially from the liberal bastions of elite academia? An observer could fairly ask, 鈥淲hat took so long?鈥� Ultimately, the diversity-statement requirement clashed too jarringly with values that academics still profess to defend, even if their actual commitment is questionable: academic freedom and free expression. As Randall Kennedy, a Harvard law professor and self-described 鈥渟cholar on the left committed to struggles for social justice,鈥� , 鈥淒EI statements 鈥� essentially constitute pledges of allegiance that enlist academics into the DEI movement by dint of soft-spoken but real coercion: If you want the job or promotion, play ball鈥攐r else.鈥� Kennedy argued that the diversity-statement requirement 鈥渋mplicitly discourages candidates who harbor ideologically conservative dispositions鈥� and 鈥淸weeds out] candidates who manifest opposition to or show insufficient enthusiasm for the DEI regime.鈥�

If a liberal Harvard law professor recognizes the danger these statements pose to academic freedom and free expression, surely many other non-conservatives see the problem. A 2022 by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) found that 56 percent of 鈥渕oderate鈥� (read: leftist) faculty agreed that the diversity statement was an 鈥渋deological litmus test,鈥� and a sizable minority of 鈥渓iberal鈥� (read: left of Mao) faculty (26 percent) also endorsed this judgment.

Diversity statements thus made a relatively uncontroversial target to demonstrate liberal concern for the excesses of DEI without opposing DEI altogether. The statements smacked of , which recalled McCarthy-era requirements that academics denounce communism. Liberals could safely oppose diversity statements while maintaining the importance of the larger DEI project. As the Washington Post editorial board , 鈥淒EI programs can have an important place. They should not be abolished or undermined鈥攁s red states such as Florida and Texas have done.鈥� Diversity statements, however, 鈥渁dvance their declared objectives at too high a cost.鈥�

Diversity-statement bans may leave the DEI regime largely intact.Thus, the canceling of diversity statements, while welcome news for higher-ed reformers, provides an opportunity for the higher-ed establishment to declare 鈥渕ission accomplished鈥� while leaving the DEI regime largely intact.

Furthermore, despite on-the-record avowals from schools that they have abandoned diversity statements, disturbing reports indicate that some of these same institutions are burying diversity-statement requirements within the application process, away from online application systems that the public can scrutinize. The Goldwater Institute, where I work, published a in 2023 that revealed that over 80 percent of faculty openings at Arizona State University (ASU) required diversity statements. In response to this report, the Arizona Board of Regents declared that henceforth all faculty openings in the Arizona public-university system would not include diversity statements. But David Glasser, a reporter for the College Fix, that a list of second-round interview questions for faculty candidates at ASU鈥檚 New College of Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences included the following query: 鈥淎SU is committed to advancing diversity and equity and providing opportunities to students in traditionally disadvantaged groups. What experience do you have with doing this in your current position? How do you hope to translate that experience for our student demographic in particular?鈥�

Almost certainly, other institutions are adopting the same strategy: insist publicly that diversity statements have no place in hiring while continuing to engage in ideological DEI screening by other means. Merely eliminating a formal diversity-statement requirement will do very little to free campuses from DEI鈥檚 grip. Higher-ed reformers must seek to roll back the DEI regime on all fronts.

I would argue for three key measures. First, those with oversight responsibility for public universities should use subpoenas and open-records requests to ensure that hiring committees are not hiding DEI statements and questions anywhere in the process. As shown by ASU鈥檚 scofflaw behavior, this scrutiny is necessary even for institutions that have disavowed diversity statements. For private institutions, boards of trustees and alumni groups must demand fidelity to a stated policy that prohibits diversity statements. This requires informed trustees and alumni who are willing to question administrators rather than simply rubber-stamping their policies.

Second, state legislatures that have not already done so should adopt the Goldwater Institute and Manhattan Institute鈥檚 that abolishes DEI bureaucracies. Crucially, this reform contains language that would expressly prohibit diversity statements and the hidden diversity question that ASU asked of candidates. The reform states that no public institution shall 鈥済rant preferential consideration鈥� to a job applicant 鈥渇or opinions expressed or action taken pertaining to another individual or a group of individuals in which the institution鈥檚 consideration is based on race, sex, color, ethnicity, gender identity, or sexual orientation of those other individuals.鈥� In other words, a hiring committee cannot give a candidate a leg up because the candidate commits to serving a particular identity group. Of course, institutions could ignore this prohibition, but at least the law would provide a means to act against the discrimination that diversity statements encourage.

Reformers should use open-records requests to ensure that hiring committees are not hiding DEI questions anywhere in the process.Third and finally, state legislatures and boards of state universities should adopt Goldwater鈥檚 , which addresses the prevalence of DEI mandates in graduation requirements. The ideological litmus test in diversity statements has contributed to an extremely , with 60 percent of American faculty identifying as liberal or far-left and only 12 percent identifying as conservative or far-right. This imbalance leads to general-education programs and core curricula that require activist DEI courses but lack basic education in American history and civics. A recent by Speech First found that 67 percent of major universities require DEI courses. The Freedom from Indoctrination Act prohibits public institutions from imposing these DEI graduation requirements on students. And, importantly, this policy also requires institutions to include instruction in American civics as part of their general-education programs. A course that fulfills this civics requirement must include 鈥渁n understanding and appreciation for the basic principles of American constitutional democracy and how they are applied under a republican form of government鈥� and 鈥渟ignificant use of the nation鈥檚 essential founding documents,鈥� such as the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Federalist Papers.

This curricular reform addresses two issues with diversity statements and their consequences. First, the policy prevents the faculty and administration, many of whom remain loyal to DEI, from forcing students to sit through just to graduate. Second, the civics requirement will necessitate hiring faculty to teach the course. Although by no means guaranteed, the requirement that students read the important founding documents will likely attract teachers less inclined to the activist tenets of DEI than those in other academic fields. This curricular requirement could work in tandem with the establishment of centers of excellence that promote understanding of Western Civilization and American principles, such as the University of North Carolina鈥檚 new School of Civic Life and Leadership. Eventually, perhaps, these reforms could work to reduce the severe ideological imbalance we currently see on campus.

Moves against required diversity statements are welcome developments, but simply removing these statements from the formal hiring process will do little to roll back DEI and restore institutions of higher ed to their foundational missions. Higher-ed reformers must keep up the pressure to confront DEI in all forms, including within the hiring process and the curriculum.

Timothy K. Minella is a senior fellow at the Goldwater Institute鈥檚 Van Sittert Center for Constitutional Advocacy. He advances policies and ideas that promote constitutional principles in education and public life.

The post Diversity-Statement Bans Don鈥檛 Go Far Enough appeared first on 好色先生TV. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.

In 2012, UNC-Chapel Hill and Duke University began paving the way for online education in North Carolina, using Online Program Management (OPM) partners to reach students at home.

In the past decade, North Carolina has come closer to realizing the large potential benefits of flexible online learning.Duke University has partnered with Coursera, a massive open online course (MOOC) provider, to broaden its offerings beyond what would be practical to operate on campus. In 2023, Duke a milestone of 10 million enrollments worldwide since launching. Today, students, staff, faculty, and alumni have access to thousands of free courses and specialization programs.

Meanwhile, UNC with OPM provider 2U from 2012 until 2014 in a multi-university called Semester Online. Pre-pandemic, large numbers of students were not yet ready to take courses online, but many were. Starting in 2016, UNC to offer a Coding Boot Camp through 2U鈥檚 Trilogy Education Services, which remains successful. Today, according to UNC Online, 2U more than 46 million people across 230 businesses and institutions of higher education. 2U continues to education opportunities to UNC students.

In January 2020, UNC-Chapel Hill鈥檚 objectives for student success in its included choosing an 鈥淥nline Program Management partner to fast-track the digital residential and non-residential needs of UNC-Chapel Hill.鈥� UNC鈥檚 idea was to 鈥渆xpand digital technologies to increase access and opportunities for all North Carolinians and beyond.鈥� Expansion was the right concept for UNC. Other North Carolina universities have done similarly.

The environment for online education has changed significantly since 2012, not just because the pandemic response required online courses to grow quickly and exponentially. For one thing, the U.S. Department of Education has sought to interfere with and regulate a wide variety of partnerships between universities and 鈥�,鈥� leading to uncertainty in the online-education space that has inhibited innovation, ultimately hurting students. The department鈥檚 effort is part of a against for-profit actors of all kinds in education.

Here is what a 2018 alumna of a 2U-partnered UNC program argued in a March 2023 against the department鈥檚 third-party servicer interference:

2U supports UNC鈥檚 ability to deliver their top-ranked MBA in an online format, which enabled me and thousands of other students to advance our careers without having to move or quit our jobs to earn an advanced professional degree.

Without this program, I would not have been able to earn an MBA at all. [鈥 My experience at UNC with 2U was overwhelmingly positive. UNC was transparent about 2U鈥檚 role as a technology and OPM partner. At no point was there doubt about the quality of the experience or the role 2U played in helping deliver this top-ranked program. [鈥

Because of the revenue share model used by UNC and 2U, 2U was incentivized and invested in seeing students not just enroll but also complete their online programs.

UNC produced a confidential audit of the partnership in March 2024. The Wall Street Journal reviewed it and various concerns. UNC ultimately ended some of its 2U contracts. But the director of UNC鈥檚 Master of Public Administration (MPA) program described only positive experiences in a recent , pointing instead to UNC鈥檚 internal capabilities to support its own programs now:

When we decided to move into the online space it was still an emerging area, and we did not have the expertise and experience to build the program that we needed. [鈥 We have enjoyed a robust, decade-long partnership benefiting students who need the flexibility of an online MPA. 2U brought significant expertise, capacity, and technology to this partnership. Working with 2U allowed us to create an exceptional online experience. I believe that, had we tried to do that work alone, we would not have been able to overcome the hurdles in entering online education.

We are at a different point in time now, one in which we have an opportunity and the skills and resources internally at the School of Government that can support a transition in the operating model of the online format.

A large institution is better poised than a small one to bring its online program management in-house. Yet UNC maintains relationships not only with (now owned by 2U) but also with Coursera, which partners with businesses and universities and has partnered with UNC . UNC also received from K16 Solutions to facilitate the shift of its learning management system for online courses from Sakai to Canvas by Instructure.

Other universities in the UNC System have OPM or other third-party partners. UNC Charlotte鈥檚 partners with 2U. UNC Greensboro鈥檚 Esports program for high-school students delivered by , which has 16 or so educational institutions as clients. Across North Carolina, the provider Ed2Go (owned by Cengage Group) is partnered with , North Carolina , , , and more. An exception is UNC Wilmington, which offers online bachelor鈥檚 and MBA degrees. UNCW provides its offerings entirely in-house and uses outside vendors only for some marketing services.

The Department of Education has sought to interfere with and regulate a wide variety of online-learning partnerships.A third change from 2012 is that the UNC System has developed a centralized, home-grown OPM affiliate. In January 2022, the UNC Board of Governors provided on (PKH), a public-private partnership (PPP) incorporated as a nonprofit organization to provide OPM services. As with many OPMs, PKH鈥檚 optional services for UNC System universities now include not just technology but also support for marketing, enrollment, and student advising. (See p. 20 of the Board of Governors presentation for a list of of OPMs.) PKH鈥檚 original financing model was a revenue-sharing plan like those that for-profit OPMs often use, but 鈥渢he project dropped the model鈥� in 2023 due to the pending Department of Education interference. Instead, journalist Pam Kelley , PKH 鈥渨ould charge campuses fees for services.鈥�

For its part, Duke University鈥檚 boasts more than 70 and provides anyone at Duke with free access to more than 2,000 Coursera courses overall. It makes sense for even the largest universities to be on joint platforms so that students can earn sub-degree credentials from institutions that may offer instruction in topics not available at their own colleges.

The life cycle of an online education facility can be short. As in the examples above, Duke has experimented with different ways to serve online students and course creators. In 2016-17, Duke launched Open edX with a company called OpenCraft. The facility became known as . It functioned not as 鈥渁 tool to fill in the gap between Sakai and Coursera [but] a tool to help fill in the gap between the for-credit course and the MOOC.鈥� Whatever that meant in 2019, it seems quaint today. Today, , the latest iteration of Duke-based services, has called for 鈥減roposals to support Duke faculty incorporating generative AI鈥� into their courses.

Online education continues to evolve rapidly. Smaller universities can keep up by finding technology partners to provide OPM services. Regulators, though, cannot keep up and should not try. The best thing for regulators and legislators to do is stay out of the way and let facilities鈥攑ublic, private, for-profit, non-profit, or PPP鈥攁dapt, fail, or succeed on their own merits.

Adam Kissel is senior fellow at the Cardinal Institute for West Virginia Policy. Jenna A. Robinson is president of the James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.

The post Online-Learning Partners Can Help North Carolina Students appeared first on 好色先生TV. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.

Leftist control of higher education has become so totalitarian that even a hint of deviance is viewed as a mortal threat.I will be spending my 2024-25 sabbatical as presidential scholar-in-residence at New College. My own experience since President Richard Corcoran announced the appointment in February confirms the desperate need for such measures. The announcement has so far brought a in Inside Higher Ed and a flurry of records requests to my home institution from The Guardian newspaper.

Most telling for me, however, was a little exchange I had on X with one Eric Nemarich, a doctoral student in history at Harvard who taught a class at New College in fall 2023 on the medieval Mediterranean. Nemarich posted a reply to an I wrote on my New College plans, titled 鈥淲hy I Am Joining the Reconquista.鈥�

A little history. The archetype of a reconquista (literally, 鈥渞econquest鈥�) was the Christian retaking of the Iberian Peninsula from Muslim armies that had conquered it between 711 and 718. The reconquest battles began almost immediately but accelerated after the so-called Al-Andalus became an independent Islamic caliphate in 929, cut off from international support. After the caliphate collapsed in 1031, the Christian kingdoms of the north mustered. The first major victory came in 1064. A papal council in 1123 declared that retaking Spain was just as important as retaking the Holy Land. By 1249, most of the Muslim rulers had been driven out.

Nemarich commented on X that my use of the term reconquista was out of date. Modern academics no longer thought of that period in Spain in terms of a 鈥渞econquest鈥� but, rather, as a peaceful and tolerant era that was unfortunately disrupted by Christian and North African ruffians. On this view, the paradise of convivencia (living together), as it is known in historical circles, existed among the followers of the three Abrahamic, monotheistic religions as a result of enlightened Islamic leadership. The real tragedy was the Reconquista itself, which brought to an end an era of multicultural tolerance and scientific and artistic progress.

Nemarich related how he had instilled this correct perspective into his New College students by adopting the 2002 book The Ornament of the World: How Muslims, Jews and Christians Created a Culture of Tolerance in Medieval Spain by the late Yale professor Mar铆a Rosa Menocal.

I am not one to gainsay the right of professors to teach whatever perspective in whatever way they prefer. The Menocal book, and the convivencia interpretation, are certainly well within the bounds of reasonable scholarly perspectives. What does amaze me, however, is when scholars deny the possibility that their topic could be approached in any other way.

The job of scholars is to deploy logic and evidence, not character assassination.Menocal鈥檚 book was a stroke of good timing. It came out just as American academics were in damage-control mode following 9/11 and trying to paint Islam in as favorable a light as possible. It was also widely criticized. Anna Akasoy, then a postdoctoral fellow at Oxford and now a professor at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, called it a 鈥渢endentious selection of historical material and perspectives鈥� and an example of 鈥渦sing history in political debates.鈥� In other words, Menocal鈥檚 book was what we might call the NPR version of medieval Spain. Indeed, NPR interviewed her on Fresh Air, where the host gushed about this hitherto unknown story of Islamic greatness and Christian barbarity.

I replied to Nemarich on X that I believed the concept of the Reconquista was grounded in solid realities of medieval Spain. The best scholarly treatment of this perspective had been offered by Dario Fernandez-Morera of Northwestern University in his 2016 riposte to Menocal, The Myth of the Andalusian Paradise: Muslims, Christians, and Jews under Islamic Rule in Medieval Spain. Fernandez-Morera argued that Islamic armies had conquered a flourishing civilization and had imposed a repressive and intellectually stagnant theocracy in its place, with a daily diet of beheadings, impalings, crucifixions, and rapes.

Fernandez-Morera鈥檚 book, like Menocal鈥檚, was favorably reviewed in many academic journals, I pointed out. Nemarich was having none of it. The book was 鈥渘ot taken seriously鈥� by reputable scholars, he insisted. He cited the politics of the Middle East Quarterly鈥檚 editorial board, a body made up of centrist and conservative scholars, as grounds for dismissing the substance of their positive review, an approach that, if adopted by conservatives such as myself, would allow us to shrug off the significance of 99 percent of academic research. The job of scholars is to deploy logic and evidence, not character assassination, I noted.

鈥淐an you even hear yourself?,鈥� I asked. The Harvard history department has apparently trained out of its graduate students the ability to consider any academic viewpoints outside of the contemporary leftist mainstream. This was a reminder to me that the intellectual-capture problem in higher education goes deeper than the elimination of non-left perspectives. Rather, it is a trained incapacity of most scholars to even recognize that there are different perspectives. Menocal鈥檚 book represented The Truth, Nemarich was saying, and alternatives like Fernandez-Morera were False.

I suggested that New College students who had taken Nemarich鈥檚 class should rush to the library to sign out Fernandez-Morera and judge for themselves. 鈥淭he New College library does not carry it,鈥� Nemarich replied. Of course it doesn鈥檛!

Turning young people into calculating sycophants of their professor鈥檚 ideological bias is the saddest spectacle of all.I am not one of those scholars who imagine a Socratic paradise in higher education where all viewpoints are offered in every classroom and students are encouraged to seek truth with their open-minded professors. I do believe, however, that professors should be self-aware enough to recognize that their truth is someone else鈥檚 falsehood (even in the sciences, where debates on fundamental issues rage on) and to have the courage and integrity to accept this, even if they do not teach it. What is most galling about many leftist scholars who pretend that reasonable alternative viewpoints do not exist is not the ideological capture at work but something more basic: intellectual shallowness. The most important implication of this insight is to work tirelessly with university leaders to cultivate gardens of viewpoint diversity within every department.

This little exchange is a stark reminder of why New College, like virtually every other institution of higher education in the United States, found itself in a state of intellectual involution circa 2023. If students in Nemarich鈥檚 classroom knew they would be met with a barrage of 鈥淚鈥檓 a Harvard graduate student, I know there is only one Truth here!,鈥� they would almost certainly zip their mouths and write course essays pandering to Nemarich鈥檚 Menocalian viewpoint. Surely, turning our young people into calculating sycophants of their professor鈥檚 ideological bias is the saddest spectacle of all.

There is, of course, a direct parallel in this debate to the reforms at New College itself. Was New College before 2023 an Evergladian convivencia where an enlightened leftist faculty encouraged wide debate and multiple perspectives? Did the Marxists insist on giving space to Milton Friedman, Samuel Huntington, and Bernard Lewis? Or was it in fact an intolerant place with ritualized stonings of non-left viewpoints that was reconquered for good reason? The growing nostalgia one sees for the New College of the past reads much like the myth-making done by Menocal. But the myth of the novum collegium paradise seems as tendentious as its Andalusian counterpart.

Bruce Gilley is a professor of political science at Portland State University and the author, most recently, of The Case for Colonialism.

The post Defending the Reconquista at New College appeared first on 好色先生TV. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.

The school proposes to cut the following programs:

• Ancient Mediterranean Studies (degree program and academic department)
• Drama (degree program and academic department)
• Philosophy (degree program and academic department)
• Religious Studies (degree program and academic department)
• Language concentrations (French and German)

Looking at the ledger, these cuts make sense. Student demand for the programs is low. And over the past five years, UNCA has lost 25 percent of its enrollment. Serious academic program review is one logical response to such losses, since instructional spending comprises a large part of UNCA鈥檚 budget. (UNCA鈥檚 other steps to address its budget woes, including the comprehensive review of staff positions and the creation of a budget task force, are commendable.)

However, these proposed program cuts simply paper over deeper problems at the struggling university. The UNC System鈥檚 2022-2027 Strategic Plan, 鈥�,鈥� calls for 鈥渆xcellent and diverse institutions鈥�:

The University鈥檚 constituent institutions are individually distinct and mission-focused and collectively comprise an inclusive and vibrant System that is committed to excellence and the development of a diverse community of students, faculty, and staff.

But UNC Asheville鈥檚 unique mission has been eroded. Its new identity as a 鈥渓iberal arts and sciences鈥� institution makes it less distinct, not more so. UNCA added sciences to its mission in July 2022. It now offers majors in New Media, Atmospheric Studies, and Environmental Studies. Nevertheless, in the past two years, enrollment has continued to decline. Offering enticing new majors is just poaching students from existing departments, not creating more demand for the university as a whole.

If UNC Asheville wants to survive, it must find ways to distinguish itself.UNCA now touts 鈥渞elationship-driven education鈥� and 鈥渟mall class sizes, close collaboration, and high-impact experiences鈥� as selling points. But these aren鈥檛 enough to make up for a curriculum that is almost indistinguishable from that of most other UNC schools. To be sure, the school still its humanities program 鈥渁 hallmark of UNC Asheville.鈥� But a school that eliminates philosophy and classics isn鈥檛 taking humanities seriously. (In fact, the words 鈥渓iberal-arts curriculum鈥� were also victims of the 2022 mission-statement revision.)

Other institutions in the system offer real distinctives. Several are historically black universities. Many now advertise extremely low tuition through the NC Promise Program. UNC-Chapel Hill is the flagship. NC State has a world-class engineering program. Compare UNCA鈥檚 generic values of 鈥渄iversity and inclusion, innovation, and sustainability鈥� to Western Carolina鈥檚 鈥渞obust connectedness with surrounding communities in Southern Appalachia.鈥� Or App State鈥檚 鈥渞ural mountain heritage.鈥�

These are real reasons for students to choose one school over another鈥攖o see a school as unique. In an environment where too many schools are chasing too few students, universities must make themselves stand out.

If UNCA wants to survive as an institution, it must find ways to attract students鈥攚ays to distinguish itself amongst its competitors and peers. Its current plan is a tacit acceptance of decline that merely stanches the bleeding. It鈥檚 not too late for UNC Asheville to reverse course鈥攖o lean in as the only dedicated liberal-arts institution in the state. It should do so.

Jenna A. Robinson is president of the James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.

The post UNC Asheville Should Start Over appeared first on 好色先生TV. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.

Anthropology is a wondrous field with research that takes us from the depth of the , where Napoleon Chagnon conducted his groundbreaking research on the 鈥渇ierce people鈥� (the Yanomami), to the , where anthropologists discovered tattooed ice mummies of the Iron Age buried with their horses. In order to draw conclusions about their discoveries, anthropologists integrate, form bonds with, and converse with those whom they are studying. They also practice archaeology, one of the four subfields of anthropology, which includes, in its data, structures as grand as the Giza pyramids in Egypt and the found in Idaho鈥檚 Buhl Burial, which is over 10,000 years old.

Anthropologists have abandoned their desire to understand others, and identity-politics activists have hijacked the field.Archaeology is the science of what鈥檚 been left behind. Physical anthropologists, now often called biological anthropologists, look at fossils such as those of our nearly two-million-year ancestors to reconstruct past lives鈥攖he lives of those who couldn鈥檛 leave a written record. All of these aspects of traditional anthropology, and the many more I haven鈥檛 covered, are fascinating, data-driven, and reveal clearly why anthropology is a true social science.

Anthropologists have provided us with better ways to extract DNA from badly deteriorated human remains. Techniques used in Neanderthal studies are now employed in all sorts of fields, including . Anthropologists have also helped us understand the origins of diseases, for example through their work on the (like mad cow and Kuru) tied to cannibalism. Anthropologists have brought us together by figuring out , thereby explaining away discriminatory myths about human differences.

Throughout the U.S., biological anthropology has been a popular choice for students looking to fulfill their science general-education requirement. Cultural anthropology and archaeology often fulfill other general-education requirements, too. Thus, in the U.S., many students of all majors take at least one anthropology class.

For all these reasons, anthropology is exceedingly important, but it has fallen into disrepute. Today, anthropologists have abandoned their desire to understand others, and identity-politics activists have hijacked the field. This can be clearly seen in the many identify groups, which I call 鈥渘eo-tribes,鈥� present in anthropological associations, such as the American Anthropological Association, the Society for American Archaeology, and the American Association for Biological Anthropology. Consider, for example, the following, all of which are now present in the discipline:

• Women in Archaeology Interest Group
• Biological Anthropology Women鈥檚 Mentoring Network
• Association for Queer Anthropology
• Queer Archaeology Interest Group
• Association of Latina/o and Latinx Anthropologists
• Association of Indigenous Anthropologists
• Association of Black Anthropologists

Across the pond, the British Association for Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology lists 鈥淏lack Archaeology Organisations鈥� that include

• Decolonise British Archaeology
• The Society of Black Archaeologists
• Academics for Black Lives
• Aspire Black Suffolk CIC

I wasn鈥檛 aware of this neo-tribal takeover until 2020, when my book (coauthored with James W. Springer), , came out. The book focused on the problem of anthropologists losing skeletal collections to repatriation ideology and laws. Repatriation ideology is 鈥渁ny ideology, political movement, or law that attempts to control anthropological research by giving control over that research to contemporary American Indian communities.鈥� It exists because of a postmodern agenda that focuses on the perceived victimhood status of a given narrator, rather than on whether the narration is accurate. Postmodernists, after all, do not accept the concept of objectivity or truth.

Repatriation ideology focuses on the perceived victimhood status of a given narrator, rather than on whether the narration is accurate.Since the publication of Repatriation and Erasing the Past, I have been on the receiving end of multiple cancelation attempts, including one to try to de-publish the book itself. Another one occurred over a talk I gave to the Society for American Archaeology that questioned the validity of repatriating collections based on indigenous creation myths (rather than on scientific evidence). More recently, the talk I had planned to give to the American Anthropological Association on the validity of the sex binary was canceled, as well, as was the entire panel including four other anthropologists who assert that sex is binary, biological, and a necessary component in understanding human nature, culture, and behavior. I wrote about these cancelations in my latest book: .

Throughout each attempt to cancel me, the aforementioned neo-tribes reared their ugly heads. These neo-tribes were upset because I had dared to question the validity of victims鈥� narratives. If one victimhood narrative is questioned, could the neo-tribes鈥� other narratives鈥攁ll of which are based on identity politics and victimhood status鈥攂e questioned, as well?

And so the cancelations rolled in. The British Association for Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology wrote a to 鈥渆ncourage the University of Florida Press to withdraw from sale and digital access 鈥楻epatriation and Erasing the Past鈥欌�� and hoped 鈥渢hat the Press [would] act, and use this moment to highlight the work of our BIPOC colleagues.鈥�

Responding to our talk at the Society for American Archaeology, the Queer Archaeology Interest Group that the Society for American Archaeology should 鈥渄evelop an environment not of tolerance, but of genuine inclusion, in which no member feels marginalized for their identity or ideas (provided that they are in keeping with the Society鈥檚 stated ethics and goals).鈥�

In the course of my American Anthropological Association cancelation, the organization itself put out a entitled 鈥淣o Place For Transphobia in Anthropology: Session Pulled from Annual Meeting Program.鈥� In it, they wrote, 鈥淲e are committed to upholding the value and dignity of transgender people.鈥�

Unfortunately, the neo-tribes of anthropology are ruining anthropological research by looking at the past through their neo-tribal lenses. For instance, queer archaeologists look for evidence of nonbinary individuals at each site. They do this by forgetting that sex is the independent variable, and artifacts are the dependent variables. As I explain in my for the Archives of Sexual Behavior, you cannot determine sex or gender with artifacts. You determine sex with bones, and the artifacts may reveal what sexual divisions of labor existed, whether grave goods were sorted by sex (or another grouping such as class or age), and how people treated the dead. A female with a 鈥渕ale鈥� artifact is no less a female than a female buried with what we may assume is a 鈥渢ypical female鈥� artifact. Yet, for queer archaeologists, the purpose of examining the past is to validate their behaviors and beliefs, not to understand past peoples.

For queer archaeologists, the purpose of examining the past is to validate their behaviors and beliefs, not to understand past peoples.In the black archaeology and anthropology neo-tribes, there is a movement to get an 鈥溾�� passed鈥攖o stop the study of past black lives. Furthermore, professors who use human remains in forensic classes have been under attack. As reported by , on April 26, 2021, the Association of Black Anthropologists, the Society of Black Archaeologists, and the Black Bioanthropology Collective wrote a letter stating that they 鈥渃ondemn鈥� the treatment of skeletal remains from the (a tragic case where the government bombed a black cult that was terrorizing the neighborhood they lived in). The same day, the professor who taught the class in question, Janet Monge, was locked out of her laboratory and all curation spaces. She is currently suing the university and claims that these actions were the result of retaliation by an unprincipled black student who was caught cheating, plagiarizing, and stealing DNA samples.

The problem goes beyond one case. The University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology has skulls of African origin that were collected from Cuba back to Cuba. Ironically, these skulls were not from Cuba in the first place but ended up there as a result of the ! This truth doesn鈥檛 matter, however, as long as it is the neo-tribal victim narrative that is acted upon.

Neo-tribes so far don鈥檛 seem to be engaging in intra-tribal warfare; rather, they are supportive of each other. This may be because of the intersectionality of identity politics鈥攎any people belong to multiple neo-tribes. This focus on identity politics and intersectional allyship may be why progressives are okay with (and actively engage in) ad hominem attacks on individuals but get upset when anyone criticizes a neo-tribal member. The neo-tribes are allies, making any one of them a formidable enemy.

For instance, in the letter against my Society for American Archaeology talk, the Black Trowel Collective that it 鈥渟tands in solidarity with our Indigenous colleagues to condemn the platforming of openly anti-Indigenous scholarship.鈥� The Biological Anthropology Women鈥檚 Mentoring Network the use of 鈥淐ite Black Authors鈥� databases and recommended that anthropologists should donate money to the Black Lives Matter movement.

Neo-tribes are activist organizations, using anthropology to push their political agenda rather than to understand the past or others. This couldn鈥檛 be made clearer than it has been in recent job ads, such as one from Albion College. For a visiting professor of biological anthropology, Albion College a person who 鈥渨ill actively promote diversity, belonging and equity in all of their interactions with others on campus, especially historically marginalized students, faculty, and staff (e.g., those who are first-generation, low-income, undocumented and DACA, LGBTQIA , BIPOC, [or] religious minorities).鈥�

Anthropology is becoming an activist field rather than a scholarly endeavor. The neo-tribes are taking their shovels and burying science. And this decay is spreading through all of academia.

Elizabeth Weiss is professor emeritus of anthropology at San Jos茅 State University. She is on the board of the National Association of Scholars. Her latest book is .

The post The Neo-Tribes of Anthropology appeared first on 好色先生TV. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.

However, to thoughtfully answer the question, one must ask, 鈥淩epresent the diversity of the state in terms of what? Ethnicity? Gender? Sexual orientation? Economic class? Viewpoint?鈥�

Depending on their politics, different groups want some types of diversity at UNC but not others.Depending on their politics, I鈥檇 assert that different groups want some types of diversity at UNC but not others. I imagine those on the left desire ethnic diversity but would be reluctant to bring in large numbers of conservative professors to increase the UNC faculty鈥檚 political diversity. Meanwhile, those on the right would likely hesitate to surrender trustee and governor board seats to liberals, given that they see those bodies as balancing the faculty鈥檚 politics.

To further the discussion, consider a few facts.

1. From a gender standpoint, is 60 percent female, 40 percent male.
2. From an ethnic-orientation perspective, compared to the , has a higher percentage of Asian students, is roughly on par for percentages of white and Hispanic students, and has a lower percentage of black students.
3. In terms of , 60 percent of UNC students come from families in the top-20-percent income bracket. Twenty-seven percent come from families in the top-five-percent income bracket.
4. Where viewpoint diversity is concerned, North Carolina is a purple state with a divided electorate of conservatives, liberals, and moderates. However, UNC鈥檚 faculty is much more liberal than is the state ( per one study), and UNC鈥檚 undergraduate student body is at a . However, has more conservatives than liberals.

Consider this. To achieve diversity, is it wise or feasible to do the following?

• Change UNC鈥檚 admissions process to target a 50-50 male-female split and ensure gender equality and diversity?
• Significantly amend UNC鈥檚 admissions policy to guarantee an equal proportion of liberal, moderate, and conservative students?
• Drastically alter UNC鈥檚 hiring and retention policies to enable a one-to-one ratio of liberal and conservative professors?
• Change the Board of Trustees鈥� appointment policy to achieve a balance of liberal and conservative trustees?
• Address ethnic imbalances given the recent SCOTUS decision on affirmative action?
• Force students into certain fields to ensure demographic balance in the humanities, STEM, and every other field and sub-field?

Obviously, to do the above would be either unpalatable, illegal, or both. Yet many continue to say that UNC must exactly represent the diversity of the state. Let us take a step back and consider the issue thoughtfully, starting with the mission of Carolina.

UNC is one university out of 16 in the North Carolina public-university system. In addition to those 16, North Carolina has 58 (yes, 58!) community colleges. UNC is not just one post-secondary option out of 74 but the flagship university of the system. If we think of all 74 institutions arranged in a pyramid, UNC would sit at the apex. UNC, with 30,000 students, makes up only about 3.5 percent of the roughly 850,000 post-secondary students in North Carolina. And, don鈥檛 forget, only 38 percent of North Carolina high-school students , so already the group that has a chance of entering in the first place does not map onto the rest of the state.

Flagship universities are by design exclusive, not inclusive.Within a state鈥檚 public-university system, different institutions have different roles. UNC鈥檚 role is that of a flagship university. Flagship universities are usually the first established public university in a state, a leader in research, the host of a broad portfolio of graduate programs, the possessor of large endowments, the host of a medical and law school, and the beneficiary of top-notch national sports programs. Entry into these universities is merit-based, so not everyone gets in. They are by design exclusive, not inclusive.

UNC鈥檚 acceptance rate is roughly and , making it extremely competitive to enter. Carolina is among the in the United States. Based on its role, it is not surprising that UNC does not precisely represent the state鈥檚 population. More broadly speaking, it鈥檚 not reasonable to expect most organizations to closely match broader society.

The reality is that UNC鈥檚 role exists within a system of institutions. UNC鈥檚 mission is distinct within the UNC System: to create the next generation of leaders for the state, the nation, and the world. That is the same role that is replicated at every flagship university in every state in the union.

Given the above, it鈥檚 not surprising that UNC doesn鈥檛 exactly mirror the diversity of the state. To be clear, different types of diversity are important, and each has a role to play. In fact, UNC鈥檚 stated mission is 鈥渢o serve as a center for research, scholarship, and creativity and to teach a diverse community of undergraduate, graduate, and professional students to become the next generation of leaders.鈥�

However, while this means that our community should be diverse and reflect many of the segments of North Carolina, it is not possible for UNC to closely mirror the diversity of the state in every metric.

How, then, should we think about the diversity question? Knowing that perfect mapping with N.C.鈥檚 demographics is not in the cards, are there some types of diversity worth pursuing more than others?

Let us start with the traditional role of the university, the pursuit of truth and knowledge. This is important because, to quote former Harvard president Larry Summers, 鈥淎 world better understood is a world made better.鈥� Only through faculty training students to fearlessly pursue truth and knowledge, and through faculty doing so themselves, can that happen. By exposing students to ideas, teaching them that real-world problems are complex and require trade-offs, instructing them on how to perform research, and educating them to communicate clearly, universities can help society solve its problems and thus improve our state, nation, and world.

Viewpoint diversity is the diversity that is most fundamental for a university to pursue its mission.To fulfill this mission, then, universities such as UNC must also promote free expression, viewpoint diversity, and constructive dialogue. Without access to, or knowledge about, different views (which can be heard and tested only in an environment of free expression and constructive dialogue), students will have a warped view of the world and support incorrect conclusions and actions. Therefore, viewpoint diversity is the diversity that is most fundamental for a university to pursue its mission. That is doubly true of a flagship university such as UNC, which has the role of producing tomorrow鈥檚 leaders, those who will set the course for the future. This does not mean that other types of diversity are unimportant. It does mean that they should not be prioritized over viewpoint diversity.

In the past, UNC and other universities, in the pursuit of identity diversity and social justice, have unfortunately strayed from the pursuit of truth and knowledge. That is the wrong path. We do not want to end up with universities at which everyone looks different but thinks the same. To meet its obligations, the institution must change.

The good news is that UNC has taken many steps in the right direction to return to the path of pursuing truth and knowledge. With the adoption of the Chicago Principles, research on student free expression, the creation of the Program for Public Discourse, the founding of the School of Civic Life and Leadership, the adoption of institutional neutrality, and other such steps, UNC has taken major strides and become a leader other universities can follow.

UNC will never mirror the demographics of North Carolina, nor should it aim to do so. However, it can still be a diverse community while aspiring to fulfill its mission as a flagship university. It can do so by exposing its leaders of tomorrow to a diverse set of ideas and giving them the opportunity to discuss and explore so they can pursue truth and knowledge. By doing so, it will help them better understand the world so they can make the world better.

Mark McNeilly is a professor of the practice at the UNC Kenan-Flagler Business School. The views expressed are his own and are not meant to represent the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill.

The post UNC鈥檚 Diversity Challenge appeared first on 好色先生TV. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.

Schools of education are hardly the only discipline where leftist, critical ideology has become indistinguishable from professional standards. Sociology so corrupted. English, . Gender studies was with such corruption. States have the ability to defund such disciplines. They can also dishonor corrupt disciplines by removing them from general-education curricula or subjecting them to program review. States have readily available levers to deal with the corruption of schools of education, since the certification of teachers directly affects the efficacy of their public schools. Many states have already exercised such power and now schools of education to eschew 鈥渨hole language鈥� approaches to reading and, rather, to adopt 鈥渟cience of reading鈥� or phonics approaches.

States have readily available levers to deal with the corruption of schools of education.The move to deny certification to colleges that persisted in teaching ineffective whole-language policies awoke states to their plenary power over teacher-certification programs. Florida recently passed , and henceforth the state will not certify teacher programs that 鈥渄istort significant historical events or include curriculum or instruction that [teach] identity politics鈥� or are 鈥渂ased on theories that systemic racism, sexism, oppression, and privilege are inherent in institutions of the United States and were created to maintain social, political or economic inequities.鈥� Instead, certified programs 鈥渕ust afford candidates the opportunity to think critically, achieve mastery of academic program content, learn instructional strategies, and demonstrate competence.鈥�

As we demonstrate in our Claremont report, the elementary-education major in UF鈥檚 College of Education runs afoul of this Florida law. Our report provides ample receipts for this claim, including syllabi in the elementary-education major, course descriptions, course learning outcomes, assignments, and reading lists. In response, UF鈥檚 outgoing faculty senate chair, Danaya Wright, a constitutional law professor in UF鈥檚 Levin College of Law, that 鈥渉aving your course [syllabus] put on some website is a form of harassment for faculty. Your syllabus is out there [and] you鈥檙e getting targeted.鈥� She also advises faculty senators to 鈥渢alk with your colleagues, provide resources, and try to be a little bit proactive.鈥�

We鈥檙e not sure what is more concerning: that the leader of the UF faculty senate (who happens to be a law professor) views our expos茅 as a form of 鈥渉arassment鈥� or that she appears to be advising faculty to 鈥渂e proactive鈥� by hiding the details of their curricula. Professors need to learn the reality that they don鈥檛 get to pick and choose which laws they want to adhere to in their classrooms. Laws requiring all professors to post all syllabi and required readings online would not be a bad way to deal with such a situation.

Implementation of 1291 started on July 1, and Florida鈥檚 Department of Education will now write a rule to flesh out how schools of education can retain the privilege of certifying teachers. Regulating schools of education is vulnerable to the same that plague efforts to rid schools of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion offices. Old practices will get renamed. Old positions will be relabeled. Yet Florida鈥檚 law has a hard edge to it. Florida鈥檚 Department of Education could prevent uncompliant schools of education from certifying teachers. This would not immediately end such schools, but it would stress them. The law also allows honest administrators a chance to point teetering or fallen schools of education away from corrupt, critical pedagogy and toward standards-based education.

Regulating ed schools is vulnerable to the same whack-a-mole shenanigans that plague efforts to rid schools of DEI.Toward the goal of guiding honest administrators, the following might inform Florida鈥檚 regulators as they write a rule enforcing HB 1291. Teaching strategies derived from 鈥渃ritical race theory,鈥� 鈥渃ulturally responsive pedagogy,鈥� 鈥渞estorative justice,鈥� 鈥渢ransformative social and emotional learning,鈥� and other derivatives of critical pedagogy must not be used in required classes; instead, required classes must emphasize cultural literacy, the comprehensive history of education and its related philosophies, content instruction, cognitive theories of learning, classroom management, and delivery of content derived from Florida鈥檚 state standards.

HB 1291 could be a kill shot for schools of education that, when they can no longer certify teachers, will simply die on the vine, their classes unattended and their positions well-nigh useless. Such hopes, while understandable, do not apply to schools of education at the most elite universities like UF. UF鈥檚 College of Education is above all a graduate institution. According to UF鈥檚 Institutional Planning and Research , the College of Education grants at least two graduate degrees for every bachelor鈥檚 degree each academic year. In 2023, for instance, students earned 449 graduate degrees but only 207 bachelor鈥檚 degrees from UF鈥檚 College of Education. In 2017, UF granted 481 graduate degrees but only 90 undergraduate degrees.

There is a terrific incentive for colleges of education to focus on graduate education. Advanced degrees for teachers mean raises, promotions, and more opportunities. 鈥淚n many school districts, earning a master鈥檚 degree comes with a raise,鈥� according to Florida State University鈥檚 . 鈥淗aving a graduate degree may help you find a new position or take on more advanced roles in your current district.鈥� In the case of UF, the institution has a online graduate program in education and has enrolled teachers from across the country for advanced degrees.

Elite universities earn untold money focusing on graduate degrees. School districts across the country pay full freight for advanced degrees for their K-12 teachers as part of continuing education. Graduate programs are designed to offer just such continuing-education programs鈥攐ften offering online programs that allow schools of education to gain a nationwide market for their online services. Thus, graduate programs in education become cash cows for colleges of education like the one at UF.

HB 1291 could be a kill shot for some schools of education.To get a sense of the curriculum that UF鈥檚 College of Education is using to shape the minds of its graduate students, we analyzed the output that serves as the culmination of every graduate program: student dissertations. UF鈥檚 College of Education has, according to , granted 248 research degrees and doctorates since 2019. One hundred thirty-nine of the 248 dissertations had publicly available abstracts and tables of content, which we surveyed for a social-justice framework. Fifty-five of those 139 dissertations took social-justice ideology as a hallmark in their analysis鈥攁bout 40 percent. Nineteen of the 31 dissertations concerned with curriculum and instruction were so infused (61 percent), as were 12 of the 27 in higher-education administration (44 percent), half of the 22 in educational leadership, half of the 10 in school psychology, and six out of the 15 in counseling and counselor education (40 percent).

In 2023, UF鈥檚 curriculum and instruction department approved the following woke dissertations:

• 鈥�: Masculinity and Gun Violence in American Higher Education,鈥� written by an academic-success coordinator in Virginia.
• 鈥�: How First-Generation Latine Parents in West-Central Florida Experience Ethnic Nullification through History Curriculum [sic],鈥� written by someone who aims to be teaching high-school history in Gainesville.
• 鈥�: Teachers鈥� Beliefs on Differentiating Reading Comprehension Assessments for English Language Learners,鈥� written by a school counselor in Marion County, Florida.
• 鈥�: Students鈥� and Families鈥� Perceptions of Advanced Placement Coursework in a Title 1, High-Minority High School,鈥� written by a New Mexico high-school teacher who 鈥渞eturned to school to learn how to use education for social change.鈥�
• 鈥�: A Latinx Woman Teacher鈥檚 Lens,鈥� written by an Atlanta elementary-school teacher.

This flavoring of dissertations illustrates what over 40 percent of the graduate and terminal degrees look like in UF鈥檚 College of Education.

Dissertations in critical pedagogy are capstones of course experiences that emphasize the same critical pedagogy. Courses for the program within the curriculum and instruction department, for instance, include 鈥淟anguage Arts for Diverse Learners in Early Childhood,鈥� 鈥淭eaching Multiliteracies鈥� [sic], 鈥淢ulticultural Literature for Children and Adolescents,鈥� 鈥淟iteracy, Family, and Culture,鈥� and 鈥淟iteracy, Culture, and Politics.鈥�

The pervasive influence of schools of education suggests that this fight is more necessary than most people know.Regulating schools of education for purposes of continuing education might just need to accompany regulating them on matters of certification. Using advanced degrees as a stand-in for increased competence for purposes of salary raises or career advancement should not be considered automatic. Indeed, school districts should embrace signifiers of merit that do not require increased credentials. Plain old time served would be better than credentialism.

In any event, only Florida is taking on the tall task of regulating schools of education as certifiers of teachers. Florida is undertaking this task after years of opening up alternatives to traditional schools of education. Florida鈥檚 de-regulation has proven wildly successful. Now, nearly 40 percent of teachers are certified through means that do not include schools of education. This number also shows why de-regulation is not enough, since around 60 percent still come through traditional schools of education. New Right politics demand joining the fight for these institutions so that they can be restored to usefulness in our country. The pervasive influence of schools of education suggests that this fight is more necessary than most people know.

Scott Yenor is senior director of state coalitions for the Claremont Institute鈥檚 Center for the American Way of Life and a professor of political science at Boise State University. Steven DeRose is an executive in investment banking who has done extensive reporting on DEI in Florida higher education.

The post Florida Fights Education-School Radicalization appeared first on 好色先生TV. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.

Strictly in terms of a monetary return on investment, college has been a wash for the average graduate since the 1990s.The Chronicle article is not as full-throated as the headline might suggest, however. The authors are in the unenviable position of having to acknowledge the ugly reality of the state of higher education while still affirming its worth. Though they dismiss most of the skepticism about college鈥檚 value as 鈥渉ype,鈥� they also take on three 鈥渟ubstantive鈥� notions: the 鈥渋llusory鈥� college wage premium, the vanishing wealth premium, and the risk of non-completion.

Unfortunately, since these complaints are real, they have their work cut out for them.

The college wage premium, the notion baked into the American mind that college graduates make a million or so dollars more in their lifetimes than do mere high-school graduates, is the topic of Ohmann and Shor鈥檚 Is College Worth It?, published in April of this year by Johns Hopkins University Press. Though most dissatisfaction with college comes from the political right, Ohmann and Shor critique college from a left-leaning perspective, concluding that 鈥淐ollege pays off for some but not for most, making the college premium both true and false, real and illusory, accessible and restricted at the same time, depending primarily on race, class, and gender.鈥� In the authors鈥� view, college 鈥渃onfirms existing inequities while presenting itself as an open ladder to be climbed.鈥� Put bluntly, 鈥淭he [college] premium privileges the already privileged.鈥�

The college wealth premium, coined and studied by the aforementioned 2019 St. Louis Fed study, is the idea that, in addition to a significant average-income premium, the net worth of college graduates ought to be appreciably greater than the net worth of high-school graduates. Yet this benefit 鈥渉as declined 鈥� noticeably among all cohorts born after 1940.鈥� Of course, mere economic data can鈥檛 factor in other important improvements associated with a college education, such as health and quality of life. But strictly in terms of a monetary return on investment, college has been a wash for the average graduate since the 1990s.

Finally, these meager returns apply to those who are able to finish college. At least a third of students who enroll in college after high school, thus assuming its increasingly higher costs, never finish. They get next to no return at all on their investment, and many are saddled with debt. The real chances of non-completion are not factored into the notion of the college wage premium. A by Third Way shows that, when this risk is factored in, the odds of college paying off are little better than a coin flip鈥攁nd as bad as a coin flip for some of the most popular majors.

College 鈥渟kepticism鈥� is in the best interest of many prospective students and ought to be amplified rather than muted.Levine and Pardue offer solutions to these three problems: 1) choose a worthwhile program at a worthwhile institution to realize the wage premium, 2) understand that the ROI of a degree is in individual and societal intangibles, not in net worth, and 3) note that the risk of not graduating is eliminated if you graduate. This kind of sales pitch isn鈥檛 likely to pack classrooms.

The authors also protest that the cost of college is perceived to be higher than it is. Prestige pricing, the inflated sticker price of tuition before financial aid, is partially to be blamed for this perception. Yet, in the same breath, Levine and Pardue acknowledge that college is still too expensive even after financial aid, which prohibits many low- and middle-income students from attending. Defying economics, they claim that college being too expensive is a problem of 鈥渁ccess, not worth鈥� and call for more federal funding.

The overall tone of their confused Chronicle piece is that college鈥檚 value proposition is under an unfair attack from skeptics. But are college skeptics raising their concerns in bad faith? On the contrary, their 鈥渟kepticism鈥� is in the best interest of many prospective students and ought to be amplified rather than muted. Levine and Pardue ought to thank skeptics for pointing out college鈥檚 glaring problems, because that is the first step towards addressing them.

Britton Sprouse is a Marine veteran, a graduate of St. John鈥檚 College, and a 2024 Martin Center intern.

The post College鈥檚 Value Is an Increasingly Hard Sell appeared first on 好色先生TV. Martin Center for Academic Renewal.