Activism on path to continue

I continued to visit questions about activism in relation to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and the continuing war between Israel and Hamas over the last year. As campuses open for the 2024-25 academic year, activism on these two topics is likely to continue and may accelerate and spread to other issues. Although proposed as competencies that college presidents should possess in order to handle current campus dynamics, the ability to build trust, resilience, communications savvy, team building, emotional intelligence, courage, and resource management are likely to be helpful in managing protests and crises as well as be broadly applicable to daily campus management.

Communications management is essential when the waters are turbulent. With the inevitability of disturbances continuing, campus leaders should clearly communicate what qualifies as violations of policy, advocate for restrained freedom of expression, and should streamline bureaucracy by forming a small crisis team ready to go into action.

Interest in the U.S. Presidential election in academic circles rose to a new level when President Biden stepped aside to make way for VP Kamala Harris as the Democratic Party nominee. The American Council on Education took out a NYTimes ad to assert the value of higher education leading up to the national election. Although 8% of new youth voters say they won't cast a ballot, the stark contrast of possible Harris v. Trump presidencies has animated many younger voters. The proportion of students in college who plan to vote surged after Harris replaced Biden at the top of the ticket with Harris leading Trump by a whopping 38 points. To counter the youth movement, voter suppression laws have been enacted in 27 states. Text messages to potential youth voters in Wisconsin threatened out of state students with fines and jail time and misinformation could dampen the prospect of students voting in Pennsylvania. Removal of on-campus voting at Purdue University sparked outrage across campus. A Student Voice survey indicated that 38% of students plan to vote and that institutions could accommodate this number or larger through a number of strategies. Election stress is a prominent feature for everyone, sparking calls to support well-being in an anxious time.

Youth vote and appealing to those who value higher education is critical as the potential authoritarianism of a 2nd Trump U.S. Presidency looms. Both Trump and Vance have amped up their rhetoric by painting higher education as part of the "evil within" that they will attack. Former Secretary Voss under Trump, who resigned in protest of his role in the January 6 insurrection, renewed her connection by donating to Trump's campaign and said she would return in his administration if she was free to abolish the Department of Education. The rise in negative sentiment toward higher education, and elite institutions in particularly, appeals to the reactionary MAGA base and has been used to woo Jewish voters who have been persuaded that anti-semitism is rampant and unaddressed by education leaders. European university leaders warn that the U.S. is importing bad models that restrict academic freedom as institutions thread the needle between public opinion fueled by complaint-based politics versus the long-standing commitment to free inquiry.

Central to the difference is Trump's accusations about border security and what he declares as a failure of the Biden/Harris administration. Undocumented students know that they are particularly at risk because immigration is so clearly a mobilization tactic among Trump supporters. With these dynamics so obvious, campuses need to find a way of portraying and educating students about immigration over history and in the present day. Opposing immigration is integral to white Christian Nationalism, a view that the U.S. is a refuge for white citizens who came to America to establish a Christian nation. By contrast, the United Methodist Church advocates the inclusive and compassionate mandate of Christianity and denounces political violence and authoritarianism.

Activism is dependent on campuses being able to create a culture of free expression. Heterodoxy in viewpoint, especially related to history that may include reprehensible moments, may need to be part of the mix. While recent reports indicate tensions about student speech, 70% of students indicate that they are comfortable in expressing their views. The American College Student Freedom, Progress, and Flourishing Study examined perceptions of viewpoint diversity, how college shapes students' learning, capitalism and socialism, and the Israel v. Hamas war. As an indicator that tolerance for different views is fragile, the report found that 71% support reporting professors for offensive comments and 56% support reporting fellow students, these percentages down only 3% from the previous assessment. PEN America noted encroachment through 29 legislative proposals designed to dismantle institutional autonomy, much of it focused on DEI or seeking to usurp control of curriculum from faculty.

Diversification in higher education is advocated by many in the general population, including 77% who believe that historically underrepresented groups should have access to study beyond high school. When this general sentiment is disaggregated, 91% of democrats and 62% of republicans agree. As conservative attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion have spread throughout the country, the links between diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and anti-immigrant rhetoric is clear. Discourse around these two issues feed into accusations that higher education is hostile to conservative points of view. 

The Heritage Foundation launched a new rating system to serve conservative students and families in selecting colleges "prioritizing freedom, opportunity and civil society." The rankings, using a green and red light signal as indication, placed New College of Florida at the top and Harvard at the bottom. The red light institutions presumably "exhibit a pervasive hostility toward diverse viewpoints and lack robust core curricular requirements." Unveiled divisive activism such as this are likely to drive students with different political perspectives even further down their rabbit holes.

The tension between those who advocate and oppose a continued focus on diversity and inclusion highlights the importance of addressing the perception that DEI advocates are hostile to other perspectives. "What's next for DEI" suggested four central concerns including; DEI advocates are perceived as incurious, are progressive activists, patronizing, and have adopted the role of language police. Fair or not, these perceptions must be addressed if a meeting of the minds is ever to become possible.

Creating a climate that supports the free expression of diverse views is challenging, as demonstrated in this compilation of cases. Research conducted by FIRE documented increasing partisanship and difficulty in expressing opinions, specifically related to the Hamas v. Israel war. Differentiating activist speech v. deliberative dialogue may help to clarify the purposes and potential impact of approaching expression in different ways. Yale University's neutrality directive is an apparent attempt to reduce institutional statements that reflect partisan perspectives; although some view the statement as vague, supporters assert that the goal of neutrality will foster more deliberative conversation. Bridge USA convened constructive dialogue at Georgetown University including pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian participants that resulted in active debate but managed to keep everyone in the room and reduced intolerance. The tensions of free speech and demonstration have been met by claims of police brutality on one end and campuses walking back restrictions on where speech and protest is possible on the other.

The election of Todd Wolfson to be President of the AAUP signals the possibility of the organization becoming more politically active. Wolfson made it clear that he would lead a national movement to restore respect and confidence in education. His political perspectives are also nuanced around his identity as an American Jewish intellectual who has expressed pro-Palestinian sympathy. Having led unionization efforts at Rutgers University, Wolfson exclaimed, "All those who care about higher education, academic freedom and the future of democracy should prepare for the fight ahead by organizing their campus communities." Wolfson expressed disappointment and pledged that there is no way for AAUP to remain neutral in the face of Trump's victory in the 2024 election.

Preparing the campus through new student seminars, such as that of USC, could help. Professors at Harvard protested new policies against chalking and other expressive acts as inhibiting free expression. Two dozen Harvard faculty were suspended from the Library for mimicking a previous student protest. Some faculty are withholding political comment in the run-up to November balloting as Republicans persist in legislation that attacks "wokeness" in higher education. The House of Representative legislation is likely to complicate free speech as well as make it more difficult to protect students from harassment, which is ironic in the face of Republicans threatening accreditation be revoked over accusations of anti-Semitism.

An October 7, 2024, collection of pictures from the previous year and essays reflected how tumultuous the past year has been. Educational leaders offered opinions that demonstrated that how to proceed is very unclear. Institutions have been damed if they do and if they don't in responding to protests that turned to demonstrations that led to accusations of tolerating both anti-Semitism and anti-Islamic sentiments. Citing tensions over DEI and the Hamas attack on Israel and its retaliation in Gaza and the West Bank, educational leaders expressed the need to free higher education from the tightening vice of partisanship. John Dewey's time-honored "admonition that threats to democracy are only successful when breeding hate, suspicion and intolerance becomes a substitute for 'giving differences a chance to show themselves'" may be more important now than ever.

Campus responses to observances of the October 7 1-year anniversary of the Hamas attack proved to be challenging. The University of Maryland chose to allow only University-sponsored events rather than risk what would happen if protest groups staged events to observe the anniversary. Maryland's decision was criticized for limiting pro-Palestinian expression as well as other forms of dissent. Maryland's approach was blocked by a Federal District Court ruling, a decision the University will follow even in the face of safety concerns that "remain a source of ongoing attention and focus." While honoring the court directive Maryland's Governor expressed that the pro-Palestinian demonstration was inappropriate.

The University of Michigan student government withheld student activities fee allocation in order to pressure the University to divest from support of Israel. The Michigan student organization funding was later restored even in the face of severe backlash from pro-Palestinian groups. This is a new strategy that could take hold at other campuses. If it does, it could become a new spark for pro-Israel groups to claim anti-Semitism as well as serve as fodder for criticizing the liberal take-over of institutions.

Arrests at Michigan's activities fair, disruption of Pomona's opening convocation, the arrest of 3 protestors at the University of Chicago, and Temple University's suspension of Students for Justice in Palestine for disrupting a job fair are examples of the variety of ways campuses are experiencing protests. Cornell banned 4 students from campus for 3 years for disrupting its career fair. Two Columbia University demonstrators were arrested when they protested at the main gates to the campus and a pro-Israel assistant professor was barred from campus. Career fair disruption is another way to press divestment by pressuring companies with ties to Israel.

The focus on divestment in military support to Israel appears to be having little impact on most campuses. Brown University and Chapman University rejected divestment demands. However, the resignation of a Brown University board member over the prospect of a divestment vote demonstrates that in some cases, protest pressure works. Both Columbia and Brown received commendation letters for a coalition of Attorneys General for not divesting in Israel. Brown suspended Students for Justice in Palestine after they protested the University's decision not to divest.  Higher education in Gaza has been effectively destroyed. Protests among Israeli universities demanding that the government negotiate for a cease fire and return of hostages has seriously impacted educational progress there as well.

Litigation accusing numerous institutions of tolerating anti-Semitism will be a focus in the media. Columbia University is particularly visible, especially after an internal task force report alleged "serious and pervasive problems." House Republicans used October 7, 2024, to remind institutions that they would be held accountable for not addressing anti-Semitism and followed up with a 325 page report claiming that universities needed to restore order. The focus of these efforts is to draw attention to presumed illiberal progressivism that is asserted to have become dominant in higher education.

New York Governor Hochul called private and public university representatives together to prepare for the potential of continuing campus unrest. With New York centered due to the demonstrations at Columbia and the diversity of the state's population, it may become a bell-weather indicator for other state officials. There is much to be said for advanced preparation that focuses on deescalation at the same time that it maintains a commitment to free expression.