Bureaucracy raises the cost of higher education while clamping down on speech
FIRE CEO Greg Lukianoff on free speech survey: Harvard earned their spot
FIRE president and CEO Greg Lukianoff dissects a survey on free speech on U.S. campuses which also marked Harvard as the worst school for free speech.
Ignited by Hamas’ terrorist attack against Israel, divisive domestic conversations about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have driven a new wave of campus censorship. But the problem of stifled speech on campus for both students and faculty has been around long before Oct. 7.
According to a forthcoming survey developed by our organization, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, about 1 in 10 college students say they have been threatened with disciplinary action – or worse, actually disciplined – for their speech.
Our 2022 survey of college faculty yields similarly depressing results. About one in six professors report that they have either been threatened with punishment or actually investigated for their academic freedom or free speech.
Students demonstrate in support of Palestinians and for free speech outside of the Columbia University campus on Nov. 15, 2023, in New York City. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
The common, but rarely discussed, thread linking this oppressive atmosphere on campus is college and university administrations. And as long as censorial administrators have disproportionate power over higher education, this problem will continue.
CLASHES OVER ISRAEL-HAMAS WAR SHATTER STUDENTS' SENSE OF SAFETY ON US COLLEGE CAMPUSES
In the student survey, which was conducted by College Pulse between Sept. 5 and Oct. 20, students answered questions about their experiences with speech and the disciplinary process. Three percent said they had been punished for their speech, and 6% said they had been threatened with punishment.
Consider the scope of that number extended out to the larger student population. Given the total undergraduate population of the country, that’s well over a million students being threatened (or worse) by campus bureaucrats for their speech. It means a student is roughly as likely to face disciplinary censorship as they are likely to be left-handed.
And what kind of speech can get you investigated according to the study? For a New York University student, it was participation in a pro-Palestinian group. For a University of Pennsylvania student, it was expressing the opinion that the U.S. was right to have invaded Iraq. And for a Drake University student, it was simply being overheard by fellow students telling a professor about her mental health.
The survey also revealed that students should watch what they say in their most private of spaces. Of those who were threatened or disciplined, a quarter faced punishment for speech in their dorm room. That disturbing focus on living spaces isn’t unusual. For all of FIRE’s 24-year existence, "residential life" administrators who run the dorms have been major enforcers of university speech codes.
While the situation is clearly very bad for students, for professors it’s even worse. Given that faculty political diversity has never been lower, with some departments having left-leaning supermajorities and others having no conservative faculty at all, one would think that professors would not be targeted as often. And one would be wrong.
Since 2014, as Lukianoff and Rikki Schlott explain in their new book "The Canceling of the American Mind," we know of over 1,000 attempts to get professors sanctioned for their speech or research.
About two-thirds of those attempts were successful, resulting in some form of punishment and almost 200 fired professors. This number dwarfs any period in U.S. higher education history since the early 1970s, when the Supreme Court cemented freedom of speech as a right on college campuses and academic freedom as a special concern within that right.
Facing a cancel culture that targets both students and faculty, how did administrators respond? With transparent political litmus tests that enable and encourage the purge.
More than half of the large universities in the country require "diversity, equity, and inclusion" statements, which are often vague and nebulously defined political litmus tests pressuring professors to adhere to the dominant ideology on campus. Wherever they appear, from student admission to faculty post-tenure review, these requirements reinforce the ideological status quo, suppress viewpoint diversity, and increase the risk that what passes for curriculum today will be dogma tomorrow.
One place those litmus tests appear is in the hiring of more administrators, and make no mistake: At most schools, administrators, not faculty, decide what happens, when it happens, and how much to spend in doing it.
PROFESSOR WHO PRAISED HAMAS ‘RESISTANCE FIGHTERS’ ON GLIDERS NO LONGER EMPLOYED BY EMORY UNIVERSITY
Yale has a one-to-one ratio of administrators to students, with Harvard not far behind. At the U.S. News & World Report’s top 50 schools in the country, there are three times as many administrators and non-instructional staff as there are faculty, according to a recent report from the Progressive Policy Institute.
Once again, one might well think that hiring would slow down, giving the looming "enrollment cliff" – the demographic shift where the college-age population shrinks due to lower birth rates. But that’s never stopped colleges before. From 2015 to 2018, when enrollment and instructional employees declined, administrative staff grew over 6%. The surge in non-teaching positions is one of the primary reasons why the cost of educating a single student has gone up so dramatically over the past several decades.
Making matters worse, many of the new administrators consider policing the speech of students and faculty part of their job. Indeed, DEI administrators have been involved in some of the highest-profile cancellations, including federal Judge Kyle Duncan at Stanford this year, Harvard professor Carole Hooven last year, and University of Central Florida professor Charles Negy in 2021.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
And if administrators are part of the Bias Related Incident team at a particular college, part of their job is to police speech on campus, often investigating anonymous reports of students or professors engaging in allegedly offensive speech. A study released this year by North Dakota State University found that nearly two-thirds of students favored reporting professors who engaged in "offensive speech," made up of statements of opinion – or even fact – the students didn’t like.
The situation for free speech on campus has gone from bad to grim over the last decade. It will be no easy task to fix it. But one of the first steps to both a freer and less expensive college experience is to dramatically decrease the campus bureaucracy, eliminate positions that exist to police speech, and make sure every university employee is informed that their job is to protect free speech and academic freedom, not to squelch it.
Greg Lukianoff is president and CEO of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) and the co-author, along with Rikki Schlott, of the new book, "The Canceling of the American Mind: Cancel Culture Undermines Trust and Threatens Us All—But There Is a Solution."
Adam Goldstein is vice president of strategic initiatives at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE).
