Questioning the Higher Education Establishment

"So that's how it is," sighed Yakov. "Behind the world lies another world." Bernard Malamud

The Higher Education Inquirer has published a number of articles about how US higher education works and the institutions, organizations, and individuals it serves. 

We have written about US higher education in a number of ways, discussing the history, economics, and underlying ideologies (e.g. neoliberalism, white supremacy) and theories making it what it is--an industry that reinforces a larger (and environmentally unsustainable) economic system and an industry that produces too many unneeded credentials--and soul crushing student loan debt. 

We have listed the myths that US higher education perpetuates and the methods it uses to disseminate them. We have examined a number of higher education institutions and their categories (including university hospitals, state universities, private colleges, community colleges, and online robocolleges). We have investigated several businesses associated with higher education, some nefarious, many profit driven, and a few (like TuitionFit and College Viability App) driven by integrity and values. And we have followed the struggle of labor and consumers. HEI has even created an outline for a People's History of US Higher Education.

But we haven't examined higher education as part of the establishment. Like the establishment that students of the 1960s talked about as something not to trust. The trustees, endowment managers, trustees, foundation presidents, accreditors, bankers, bond raters, CEOs and CFOs who make the decisions that affect how higher ed operates and who at the same time work to make consumers, workers, and activists invisible. 

To say we cannot trust US higher education administrators and business leaders may sound passe, or something that only extremists of the Left or Right might say, but it isn't, and more folks are seeing that. 

Examining US higher education needs to be assessed more deeply (like Craig Steven Wilder, Davarian Baldwin, and Gary Roth have done) and more comprehensively (like Marc Bousquet), and it needs to be explained to the People. It's something few have endeavored, because it isn't profitable, not even for tenure in some cases. 

Without our own sustainable business model, the Higher Education Inquirer will continue writing (and prompt others to write) stories significant to workers and consumers, the folks who deserve to be enlightened and who deserve to tell their stories. 

And as long as we can, the Higher Education Inquirer will ask the Establishment for answers that only they know, something few others are willing to do. 

Can the newly formed PA Board of Higher Education do much for the People?

In 2024, Pennsylvania has formed a state Board of Higher Education. Can the organization create value for all its citizens and improve the Quality of Life for Pennsylvanians, or is it just another layer of bureaucracy whose major role is to maintain the status quo? 

The Pennsylvania Board of Higher Education is composed of 21 members, representing postsecondary education, government, business, labor and students. Some schools like Penn State, Pitt, and Temple each have a representative. Other institutions, like the state's 15 community colleges and 10 PASSHE schools are represented by one person.

The University of Pennsylvania ($20.9 billion endowment and 1,085 acres of urban property), Carnegie-Mellon University ($2.7 billion and 157 acres of urban property), and other elite private schools are not represented and stand apart from the oversight.

What's the Mission?

There is no mention about how this new Board can make a difference. No progressive ideas or policies have been introduced other than that the organization seeks to ensure that there is no undue competition among the schools. 

Wealth and Want in PA Higher Education 

Pennsylvania has more than 150 colleges, universities, and technical schools. They are all connected by a harsh economic system that promotes increasing wealth and want. Pennsylvania's immense wealth is illustrated in a handful of elite and brand name colleges and universities primarily in and around its two major urban areas: Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. And wealth is demonstrated in their endowments and real estate holdings. 

University of Pennsylvania: $20.9 billion and 1,085 acres of urban property

Pennsylvania State University: $4.44 billion and 22,484 acres of property statewide

Carnegie-Mellon: $2.7 billion and 157 acres of urban property

Thomas Jefferson University: $2.3 billion and 100 acres of urban property

Swarthmore: $2.2 billion and 425 acres of suburban property

Lehigh University: $1.8 billion and 2350 acres of suburban property

Bryn Mawr College: $1.6 billion and 135 acres of suburban property

Villanova University $1.5 billion and 408 acres of suburban property

University of Pittsburgh: $1.1 billion and 132 acres of suburban property

Drexel University: $1.1 billion and 96 acres of urban property

Lafayette College: $1 billion and 340 acres of suburban property

Bucknell: $1 billion and 450 acres of suburban property

Duquesne University: $1 billion and 50 acres of urban property

Temple University: $750 million and 115 acres of urban property

Haverford University: $643 million and 216 acres of suburban property. 

Washington and Jefferson: $380 million and 60 acres of small-town property

Widener University: $90 million and 216 acres of urban property

The differences between life outside of Penn, Temple, and Drexel and other parts of Philadelphia (North and West Philly) are stark.  And the Philadelphia suburbs that include some of the elite schools are reflective of wealth, power, and prestige. Scenes of wealth and want are also apparent in and around Pittsburgh. 

State universities outside of these urban and suburban areas, aside from College Park, have been declining for more than a decade. The Community College of Philadelphia, a career lifeline for the working class, has one of the lowest graduation rates in the US. The same goes for Harrisburg Area Community College. Pennsylvania also has Lincoln University and Cheyney University of Pennsylvania: two Historically Black Colleges and Universities that have been historically underfunded and serve as lasting symbols of resistance against white supremacy, an ideology still deeply embedded in Pennsylvania's society and economy.

PA Economy: Growing Inequality and Rural Decline 

Pennsylvania's economy is diverse yet unsustainable. It consists of traditional industries such as manufacturing and agriculture as well as healthcare, energy, technology, and education. Healthcare (reactive medicine) and energy (fossil fuels), in particular, are expensive for the state and expensive the planet. 

The problems in Pennsylvania's higher education system extend beyond the schools represented in the new Board. These economic and social problems are persistent and worsening for the working class. Pennsylvania's population is stagnant, increasing slightly in urban areas and declining in rural areas. 

There is also a demographic cliff with Baby Boomers reaching their 80s (and greater disability) and fewer children being born in the Commonwealth. Children living with Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed (ALICE) families is 41 percent.  

Savage Inequalities in K-12 Education

Pennsylvania has some of the widest education gaps in the country. A national study found Pennsylvania at the bottom of all states in school funding fairness. Among the 50 states, Pennsylvania ranked 49th in the Black-white opportunity gap, 50th in the Hispanic-white opportunity gap, and 49th in the gap between students from low-income families and their wealthier peers. 

Unequal Wealth Distribution 

Pennsylvania is one of the most unequal states in the country, with the top 1% of earners making 21.7 times more than the bottom 99%. 

The richest people in Pennsylvania are Jeff Yass ($29B), Michael Rubin ($11.5B), Victoria Mars ($9.7B), Arthur Dantchik ($7.3B), Thomas Hagen ($5.2B), Jeff Lurie ($4.9B), Maggie Hardy ($4.1B), Mary Alice Dorrance Malone ($3.7B), John Middleton ($3.7B), and Thomas Tull ($2.9B). 

The average income of the top 1% is $1,100,962, compared to $50,830 for the rest of the state. Income inequality in Pennsylvania has been worsening since the 1970s. The richest 5% of households have incomes that are 11.7 times larger than the bottom 20%. 

Over half of Pennsylvania's wealth is concentrated in six counties: Montgomery, Allegheny, Bucks, Chester, Delaware, and Philadelphia. The wealthiest county is Chester, with a median household income of $104,161 in 2020. 

Regressive Tax Structure 

Pennsylvania has a flat tax rate of 3 percent, and its corporate tax rate is a flat 8.49 percent and falling. The combined state personal income tax and local earned income tax led to Pennsylvania having the 18th highest income tax burden. Pennsylvania ranked 25th for its total per capita property tax burden. New Jersey, New York, and Maryland had a higher tax burden in both comparisons.  

Mass Incarceration for Social Control, Deaths of Despair

Pennsylvania has the highest incarceration rate in the Northeast and the second highest rate in the country when including people on probation or parole. And its correctional system spends nearly $3 billion annually. Black adults make up 46% of Pennsylvania's prison population, even though they only make up 11% of the state's population. The flip side of the coin, deaths of despair (suicide, drug overdoses) are common among the working class in rural and urban areas.  

Related links:

"20-20": Many US States Have Seen Enrollment Drops of More Than 20 Percent 

College Meltdown: NY, IL, MI, PA, VA hardest hit

“Intellectual Hick”: Sorting Out Our Complex Identities (Robert Jensen)

I am from rural America, sort of. I’m an intellectual, sort of. I’m certainly on the political left, but some comrades believe I’ve turned conservative.

Like many people, I don’t fit easily into conventional labels used in today’s polarized political debates. To understand me—and anyone else—takes some sorting out. Here’s how I sort myself out.

I was born in North Dakota and grew up mostly in the big city of Fargo (well, it’s the largest city in the state). I never lived in a rural area, but I was a part of a larger rural culture, in which most everyone had some connection to the countryside through family, friends, or business. After living in several big cities during my professional life, I now live in northern New Mexico outside the small town of Taos, in a county with a smaller population than the university where I used to teach. Recent imports like me live alongside farmers and ranchers, interacting regularly through the acequia irrigation system.

I’m not rural, but I like to think I understand rural.

I started my professional life as a newspaper journalist before earning a PhD and becoming a professor at the University of Texas at Austin. But once I secured the guaranteed employment that comes with tenure, I walked away from the scholarly world of academic journals and conferences. I continued to teach but wrote for a general audience, immersing myself in a variety of community organizing projects.

I was an intellectual by profession, but I never really wanted to be part of formal intellectual life.

I’ve met intellectuals who assume rural life is bereft of intellectual activity. And I’ve met rural people who assume that intellectuals are condescending and annoying. There’s a kernel of truth in both assumptions. Since moving to a rural area, I have fewer opportunities for certain kinds of intellectual engagement; I don’t go to as many scholarly lectures as I did in Austin. At the same time, I don’t find myself wishing I was back in a faculty meeting and dealing with academic status-seeking. But I’ve met too many smart rural people and too many wonderful professors to fall back on stereotypes.

As I explain in It’s Debatable: Talking Authentically about Tricky Topics, perhaps most important to my identity is that I’m a radical. My politics are based on a critique of systems and structures of power that create impediments to meaningful social justice and real ecological sustainability: patriarchy, white supremacy, capitalism, First-World domination, and the worship of high-energy/high-technology gadgets in an industrial worldview. But how I apply these analyses make me both a part of the left and alienated from the left.

Let’s start with patriarchy. I was first politicized by the radical feminist movement to challenge the sexual-exploitation industries (pornography, prostitution, stripping—the ways men buy and sell objectified female bodies for sexual pleasure). That form of radical politics goes to the heart of systems and structures of male power. I also embraced what is typically called a radical analysis of racism, economic inequality, and imperialism. I thought that this kind of consistent critique—going to the root of problems by focusing on systems of power—was what it meant to be on the left, but over time I realized that most of my left comrades didn’t much care for radical feminism. Over time, more and more leftists not only rejected the critique of the sexual-exploitation industries but celebrated “sex work,” sometimes even portraying it as liberating.

When I started offering a critique of the ideology of the transgender movement, an analysis rooted in that radical feminism, I found myself not only disagreeing with left comrades but effectively being banished from left organizing groups. I learned quickly, starting in 2014, that a radical feminist critique of trans politics was unacceptable, even seen as a sign of closet conservativism.

But that shunning didn’t mean I wanted to find a home on the right. Conservatives weren’t much interested in a feminist critique of male domination—many on the right see patriarchy as the “natural” state of human societies. Conservatives might share a concern about the sexual-exploitation industries and transgender ideology, but for very different reasons than feminists.

Meanwhile, my focus on ecology and a deepening critique of technological fundamentalism—the belief that more technology can solve all ecological problems, including those created by previous technologies—has put me at odds with both right and left. Those who believe in the miracle of the market usually dismiss any talk of ecological collapse because free enterprise will save us. My left friends take environmental degradation and climate change more seriously but routinely argue that a more participatory democracy in a more socialist economy will save us.

Across the political spectrum, it’s hard to find anyone who agrees that a sustainable human future requires us to put dramatic limits on our consumption of energy and material resources, while we also dramatically reduce the human population. Conservatives often believe that is what leftists are secretly planning for, but I meet very few leftists who advocate those goals. The majority of left environmentalists I meet believe that renewable energy, combined with amazing yet-to-be-invented inventions, will allow us to dodge collapse.

I think I am making consistent and coherent arguments. But many of my left friends think I have abandoned left politics, even though we still agree on many issues. Conservatives will accept my political positions that seem in line with their own, though typically they aren’t interested in the radical analysis behind those positions.

I have changed my mind about specific policy proposals over the past four decades—as new information and insights emerge, reasonable people should adapt. But my analytical framework remains unchanged. I focus not merely on individual choices but on how systems work, and I don’t ignore the data that suggests collapse is all but inevitable on our current trajectory.

This leaves me largely in agreement with left comrades, but dealing with uncomfortable tensions when we disagree. Meanwhile, I’m at odds with right opponents most of the time, and when there is apparent agreement on policy there is an uncomfortable tension underneath.

How do I sort out all these political tensions, and sort out myself? To friends, I have started describing myself as an “intellectual hick.” I have no problem defending my intellectual contributions but also am happy to be living at a healthy distance from official intellectual spaces. Even with neighbors who don’t agree with my politics, our shared interest in caring for the land and water creates deep bonds.

How I label myself is less important than realizing that we all would benefit from sorting out ourselves. Once we critically self-reflect about our identities and ideas, it’s a lot easier talking with others about how they have sorted themselves out.

This article first appeared in Dissident Voice.  

Robert Jensen, an Emeritus Professor in the School of Journalism and Media at the University of Texas at Austin, is the author of It’s Debatable: Talking Authentically about Tricky Topics from Olive Branch Press. His previous book, co-written with Wes Jackson, was An Inconvenient Apocalypse: Environmental Collapse, Climate Crisis, and the Fate of Humanity. To subscribe to his mailing list, go to http://www.thirdcoastactivist.org/jensenupdates-info.html.

Methods of Student Nonviolent Resistance

Resistance has been an essential part of democracy. And the Higher Education Inquirer has reported on a number of nonviolent actions taken by college students and workers across the US. We have also recognized the brutal physical and economic violence that has been a part of US history and social structure and a major contributor to the ineffective counter-violence that has sometimes resulted. 

According to the Albert Einstein Institution, "far too often people struggling for democratic rights and justice are not aware of the full range of methods of nonviolent action. Wise strategy, attention to the dynamics of nonviolent struggle, and careful selection of methods can increase a group’s chances of success." 

Nonviolent strategies include three broad categories: (1) nonviolent protest and persuasion, (2) noncooperation (social, economic, and political), and (3) nonviolent intervention. 

A list of 198 Methods of Nonviolent Action is posted on the Brandeis University website. The list is based on Gene Sharp's Methods of Nonviolent Action (1973), but this document is not exhaustive.  Strategies and tactics may need to change with what works in these times: with new technology and greater understanding about how humans think and behave.

 

Historical Examples

Nonviolent protests for justice and democracy and against white supremacy occurred at Shaw University (1919), Fisk (1924-25), Howard (1925), and Hampton Institute (1925-27).  

In the early 1940s, James Farmer, a Howard Divinity School graduate, with students from the University of Chicago established the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), an interracial group focused on nonviolent direct action for civil rights. 

The 1960s were recognized for student activism, including the formation of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), at Shaw University. This organization, and people like Ella Baker, were an essential part of the civil rights movement. 

In the 1970s and 1980s, divestment campaigns were an important part of the campaign against South African apartheid. Protesting for divestment against private prisons has also occurred on US campuses.  

Most recently, there were a number of campus occupations to protest the destruction of Gaza and the mass killing of civilians. And protests about climate change have been visible on a number of campuses for years. In these cases, we can expect more serious conflict to occur if these issues are not sufficiently addressed. 

As always, we appreciate your comments and constructive criticism.  

Related links: 

Black Study, Black Struggle (Robin D.G. Kelley, Boston Review)

A People's History of Higher Education in the US? 

Student Activism 

Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee

Modeling civil unrest in the United States: some historical cases (Bryan Alexander)

One Fascism or Two?: The Reemergence of "Fascism(s)" in US Higher Education

US Higher Education and the Intellectualization of White Supremacy

Democratic Protests on Campus: Modeling the Better World We Seek (Annelise Orleck)

HurricaneTWOU.com: Digital Protest Exposes Syracuse, USC, Pepperdine, and University of North Carolina in 2U edX Edugrift

Wikipedia Community Documents Pro-Palestinian Protests on University and College Campuses

Rutgers University Workers Waging Historic Strike For Economic Justice (Hank Kalet)

University of California Academic Workers Strike For Economic Justice (November 14 to December 23, 2022)

Terri Givens and “Radical Empathy: Finding a Path to Bridge Racial Divides”

I Went on Strike to Cancel My Student Debt and Won. Every Debtor Deserves the Same. (Ann Bowers)

DEBT STRIKE! (Debt Collective)