Five ways colleges could course correct in 2024


End grade inflation, obey the law, freeze hiring of critical studies professors, and more

Maggie Kelly - Assistant Editor

January 2, 2024 


American colleges and universities are among the world’s richest and most powerful institutions. They can afford to do what they want, even if it violates common sense, standards of excellence, or even sometimes the law.


But legislators, donors, and alumni can still make a difference, and students and their families can vote with their wallets and feet — they could support schools that have made common-sense reforms toward restoring their status as centers of learning and scholarship.


Here are five improvements higher education institutions should make in 2024:


Put a freeze on hiring critical ‘studies’ professors 


Race, class and gender are important but often reductive ways of understanding the world. Academia’s emphasis on politicized views of these topics isn’t doing much good for their students or the general public.


More than 400 colleges in the United States offer a major in ethnic, cultural minority, gender, or group studies, according to U.S. News and World Report.

According to a 2017 academic journal article by Boston University religion Professor Anthony Petro, the identity politics of the 1960s and later “informed” the new “studies” departments like “ethnic studies” and “gender studies.”


This prompted a boom in hiring professors devoted to those topics, as John Ellis, professor emeritus of German literature at the University of California, Santa Cruz, wrote in his 2020 book, “The Breakdown of Higher Education.”


Due to these departments’ roots in political activism, their students are encouraged to think of race, class, gender and related topics in political terms as a clash between the oppressors and the oppressed.


For example, ethnic and Middle Eastern studies departments taught students to think of Israel as a colonial oppressor, Steven Hayward wrote in October in The New York Post.

The academic institutionalization of identity politics is linked to its tendency to see sexism and racism everywhere. On Dec. 26, The College Fix collected 72 things higher ed declared racist in 2023, and there were no doubt many more.


Ellis wrote that identity politics has a “habitual focus on grievance rather than knowledge.”


Schools should hire scholars, not activists.


Stop preaching on public affairs


Universities are not churches; they do not need to pontificate on affairs that don’t directly concern them.


Colleges faced widespread criticism for their initial non-response to the Hamas terrorist attacks on Israel, and rightly so. Yet they wouldn’t be hypocrites if they hadn’t issued so many self-righteous pronouncements on topics such as Donald Trump’s election or Black Lives Matter.


The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression wrote, “When colleges adopt official institutional positions on issues outside their mission, they risk establishing a campus orthodoxy that chills speech and undermines the knowledge-generating process.”


Universities should follow the University of Chicago’s 1967 Kalven committee report on the university’s role in politics, which states that “the university is the home and sponsor of critics; it is not itself the critic.”


Princeton political science Professor Greg Conti wrote correctly Dec. 28 in Compact that “university leaders must recognize that an organization that pontificates about everything can be trusted about nothing.”


Give students the grades they deserve


Nearly 80 percent of grades given at Yale University in 2022-23 were an A or an A-, according to a faculty report publicized Nov. 30 in the Yale Daily News. 


Yale is not unique. The Harvard Crimson reported in 2023 that most universities have inflated grades since the 1980s, according to retired Duke Professor Stuart Rojstaczer’s research at gradeinflation.com.


Ending grade inflation would require students to spend more time studying and less on uninformed activism. It also might require faculty to focus more on scholarship and less on politics.


It would also produce graduates more prepared for the demands of the workplace and the rest of adult life.


Giving students grades they deserve requires teaching them serious content. Colleges must return to basic subjects like English composition, science, math, and American history in their introductory and required courses. They should teach these classes as comprehensively as possible with minimal bias.


A good start would be mandating a course for college students on American institutions and ideals and requiring students to pass a civics literacy test as a graduation requirement, as recommended by a policy report from the James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal. Colleges can make students pass the test required to become a citizen of the United States.


Setting high standards would also require colleges to uphold integrity throughout their institutions and especially at its highest levels, which Harvard for one has failed to do in the case of President Claudine Gay, now under fire for dozens of instances of plagiarism.


Talk less about diversity and more about excellence


Ellis wrote, “If you were to examine any speech made by a university president fifty years ago, you would find that the word ‘excellence’ occurs with great frequency.”

“If you made the same examination now, you’d find that ‘diversity’ had taken its place,” he wrote.


In the past several decades, administrative offices focused on “diversity, equity and inclusion” have proliferated, as The Fix has extensively documented. For example, in 2023, Oklahoma public universities were scrutinized for spending $83.4 million on DEI, The Fix reported.


In her 2018 book “The Diversity Delusion,” Heather Mac Donald lists all the diversity offices on the University of San Diego campus alone; the list takes up half a page.


However, excellence is the proper goal of the university. No other institutions have the same power to educate young adults without strong pressure to serve a cause or meet a bottom line. Higher education should cherish this opportunity, not exchange it for dubious political objectives.


Maintain order and obey the law


Colleges say they want to help students from difficult backgrounds, whose families may have sacrificed most for their education. Those students, as well as others, deserve to learn without frequent distractions by protesters and riots. They need a study space, not a battlefield.


Students have the right to protest in public forums, but colleges have the prerogative to prevent trespassing and enforce decorum rules for spaces like libraries and dorms.


The Fix reported in November that eight Harvard undergraduates face university-enforced consequences for occupying a campus building during a pro-Palestinian protest – even after a top administrator gave them Twizzlers and burritos while they camped inside. Disciplinary measures like these are a good start.


Universities also must follow this year’s Supreme Court rulings banning affirmative action, not least because violating the law destroys credibility.


In October, The Fix reported that Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine explored ways to “work around the [Supreme Court] ruling on affirmative action” while creating a scholarship program, according to public records documents obtained by anti-woke medical nonprofit Do No Harm.


Even more, universities in Florida and Texas must obey laws passed in 2023 to rein in DEI on public campuses and enact post-tenure review.


Universities’ wealth and power should not put them above the law.



https://www.thecollegefix.com/five-ways-colleges-could-course-correct-in-2024/


The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.



June 29, 2026
As America commemorates 250 years of independence, we reflect on the enduring principles of liberty and learning that have defined Davidson College for nearly two centuries.
June 21, 2026
By Todd Zywicki The Wall Street Journal June 21, 2026 Auburn University is known for its agricultural and STEM programs, its flight school and athletic programs. But the land-grant university recently became notable for another reason: The board of trustees is taking control of the school back from its faculty. The board began seizing the university’s academic programs—including curriculum, course offerings, degree requirements and academic credentials—at its June 5 meeting. The board also dissolved the faculty senate and replaced it with an advisory council to the president, which includes two faculty members from each of the university’s colleges and additional members appointed by the president. The board’s assertion of authority mirrors incoming mandates by the Alabama Legislature restricting the role of faculty senates in the state’s public university system. Predictably, Auburn’s faculty has responded with howls of outrage, decrying these intrusions on the faculty’s authority over academic operations. How could outsiders appointed through a political process have the expertise to make such delicate decisions? I’ve been a professor at a state university for almost 30 years, and I am sympathetic up to a point. But before becoming a professor I was a bankruptcy lawyer. And bankruptcy law teaches an important lesson for how academia can respond to this moment. Bankruptcy gives businesses an opportunity to admit mistakes, reform and emerge stronger. Successful enterprises don’t need bankruptcy lawyers. But when an enterprise loses its way, it goes into receivership. Most universities aren’t financially bankrupt but have lost their mission and direction. Society has long recognized certain institutions’ authority to manage their own affairs. Two notable examples are licensed professionals—such as doctors and lawyers—and universities. Universities, even state universities, have run their enterprises with minimal external oversight. Faculties enjoyed substantial rights of self-governance because they committed to higher standards than those required by ordinary jobs. Professors would establish and maintain standards of scholarly integrity, freedom of speech and inquiry, and rigorous dedication to merit-based assessment of research in specialized areas. They policed their own house, enforcing norms of truth-seeking, maintaining scholarly integrity and rigor, and ensuring that students emerged with basic knowledge, employable skills and civic competency. But over the past several decades, commitment to those values collapsed. Surveys by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression consistently reveal fear among students and faculty around expressing unfashionable ideas. Universities have seen shout-downs, cancellations and even violence against speakers. Merit and quality yielded to “diversity” and “equity.” Truth-seeking has been displaced by faddish theories and ideologically charged teaching and research. Professors design esoteric departments and teach niche classes to cliques of activist students while the needs of other students and taxpayers for real education go unaddressed. Like companies I represented, universities have lost their way. And many have proved either unable or unwilling to self-correct. When that happens, it is appropriate to put institutions into receivership until they reform and rededicate themselves to their mission. At Auburn incoming students must now take certain required civics and history courses to master basic competency in U.S. history and government. To ensure the classes actually meet that objective, professors will have to make their syllabi publicly available. In the classroom, instructors will be expected to stick to the matter at hand and avoid free-ranging political punditry. Just as other companies can learn from the ones that go bankrupt, other institutions of higher education can learn something from Auburn: Fix what’s broken, or someone else might fix it for you. Mr. Zywicki is a professor at George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School. He was a Dartmouth College trustee, 2005-09. https://www.wsj.com/opinion/bankruptcy-and-higher-education-4c2b178e
June 19, 2026
By the Editorial Board The Wall Street Journal June 19, 2026 The Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling against racial preferences is turning out to be a landmark with profound consequences as its influence spreads. On Thursday the famously progressive Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled unanimously that a state program that issued scholarships based on race violates the U.S. Constitution. Justice Annette Ziegler wrote for the court that the Constitution requires “that every person ‘must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual—not on the basis of race,’” and that the state cannot “use race as a factor in affording educational opportunities among its citizens.” That must have been painful for the activist liberal majority on the court. In a concurrence, Wisconsin Chief Justice Jill Karofsky took some shots at Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College (2023) before acknowledging that “I am bound by the precedent set forth in SFFA” and other Supreme Court rulings “when interpreting the Fourteenth Amendment.” The case was brought by the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty against a 1985 Badger State law that reserved need-based scholarships through a grant program for “Black American,” “American Indian,” “Hispanic” and some Southeast Asian undergraduate students enrolled in Wisconsin’s private and technical colleges. Last week the Iowa Supreme Court ruled that a scholarship program earmarked for black University of Iowa students studying physical sciences was “impracticable” under SFFA. State governments would be wise to repeal these discriminatory grant programs, or the courts will do it for them.
Show More