BY MATTHEW BOEDY
With organizational help from Washington Post humor columnist Alexandria Petri’s recent piece on presidential endorsements . . .
The Washington Post, among other major newspapers, is not endorsing presidential candidates this year.
And major universities are stepping back from issuing statements on matters of public concern.
Since the latter institutions are choosing silence, it’s been left to me, a lowly associate professor at a school you have never heard of to speak for all of higher education in America and make an endorsement.
If I were the universities, I would be a little embarrassed that it has fallen to me, a professor in a dying academic discipline, to make our endorsement. My opinion carries no weight, especially with people who don’t read the syllabus. Nor with the people who spy on the syllabus. Or even with donors who think they own the syllabus.
I am hopeful my endorsement will carry weight with people who don’t have a college degree, who haven’t set foot on a campus except for a football game. They work hard and want the best for their children. Those people pay taxes that support our public college system.
They should know that their collective efforts to educate their child and my child and the child down the street and across town and within metro areas and near fields of corn . . . these efforts matter and are successful. Certainly more can be done. But we here on campus can’t do it with you.
I did a quick Google search, and I am unaware of any university ever endorsing. But higher education leaders do claim to be bold, and some claim to disrupt the sector. I feel I am on solid ground doing this for the first time ever then.
Though there is of course a history of certain schools and certain leaders in academia organizing the vote. Yet Politico reports that presidents of HBCUs “usually key in galvanizing local communities . . . have stayed uncharacteristically quiet this election due in part to the candidates’ thin policy agendas and concerns about how their historically underfunded institutions will benefit.”
To be honest, predominantly white institutions like the one where I work have the same fears. Higher education is on the ballot this year, just not by name.
To be fair, though, speaking truth to power, no matter the cost, hasn’t been the role of universities for a while. We certainly go where the research takes us, and often our research has influenced policy and culture. But our impact in the halls of power has taken a beating in recent years because so many think negatively of us.
We still teach millions of students. Some more than others, some getting smaller by the day.
Like all social institutions, our campuses will look very different, depending on the outcome of November’s election. I care which kind of campuses will be around for my four-year-old and nine-month old when they are old enough to use the college-savings account I started by teaching extra during the summer.
I also care about myself. Did I mention my job security ain’t what it used to be?
I also happen to care about the people already on campuses. As the designated voice (by fiats of silence) for higher education, I have a lot of reasons for caring how the election goes. I think it should be obvious that this is not an election for sitting out.
If it’s not obvious to you, let me say that if this election were a course in my field of rhetoric, the syllabus would write itself. We have new variations on old themes.
But we also see history every day.
We also see economics, education, health care, psychology, and of course political science every day. We see critical thinking or its absence. We see good writing or word salads. We see analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, enthymemes, and of course memes.
We see a general education—a civic core curriculum, if you will—happening every day. And frankly, many people need more.
Maybe, though, more education isn’t the solution. You likely know many college graduates who have spread conspiracies or misleading information about the 2020 election, the pandemic, and the list could go on. That is not a good marketing campaign for our schools.
The alumni barbecue can be awkward. I went to one a few weeks ago. It all seemed surreal, all these people cheering on the same team, and yet we are divided as ever as a nation.
Maybe we need an education infused with values.
Many good values are named by higher education institutions. Some value diversity, collaboration, and community. At my school we value those along with integrity and engagement. This is why I am writing to you. To be transparent about my endorsement and to get yours.
Maybe you want me to endorse a specific person. Sadly, while I am free to do that as a citizen, because I have been using the desktop in my campus office to write this, I can’t. Governing is a nonpartisan act and, as an employee of the state, I can’t use state resources in a partisan manner. Which means, of course, I can’t tell students in my classes whom to vote for.
So who or what then am I endorsing? With the voice of all of higher education given to me by the powers that be not being interested, what am I actually saying?
I’m just a professor hoping you will read the syllabus. Which in this case is a ballot. I endorse the ballot. I endorse the question at the top and the questions throughout. They are choices within questions. One for me as a professor is what role does the civic core curriculum play in our homes, in our media, and in our other institutions.
If it sounds like I am about to start a lecture, be assured I am not.
I am keenly aware of what many people off campus think of professors, especially on the subject of professing too long. But I also think people want us to say what we really think.
That’s why I, an underpaid and overworked cog in the wheel of workforce development, am speaking as a citizen. I endorse your doing the same.
Contributing editor Matthew Boedy is the president of the Georgia conference of the AAUP and works at the University of North Georgia. He can be reached through email or his Twitter account @matthewboedy.
And if you wrote the piece, as I do my reply, on a computer that was earned through personal sacrifice and professional service and stewardship to higher education, but not through the employ of some institutional state arm, could you speak as a citizen then? Could you exercise our natural freedom of expression?
Is all this impotency really just the result of who pays you? Allow me to offer some relief: That paycheck you receive from the institutional employer – after applying for the position and striking and cursing for it – the one that is covered at the bank by the funding your employer receives from the taxpayers, take that public money and give it to the adult taxpayers we refer to as students so they can pay you rather some unnecessary, obstructive, destructive institutional middleman. Simple. Public. Cheaper. Freer. Personal. And so much more.
For instance, look at all the experience, talent, and qualification that Stanford (https://www.insidehighered.com/opinion/blogs/just-visiting/2024/09/25/tenured-stanford-faculty-vote-purge-their-ntt-colleagues) recently flushed from its Creative Writing program. These people cannot now contribute to higher education as they have for decades. Why? Because they are no longer employed by an institution. Money is not the problem nor who pays it. The problem is the unnecessary inheritance in the middle. Try some research: https://bit.ly/AofResPSA
I too speak as a citizen, but of the world, and as an academic, but not a faculty employee. Stop governing for the state and start governing (serving and stewarding) for yourself and the people. Then you can be as partisan as you like. You can be as free as you like.
Congratulations on what I assume is a call for sanity in education. At least in public education! (Yes, I am aware that was a fragment. I did it for rhetorical effect.) I applaud you and I hope your fondest dreams are realized – that there is actually education out there to be gleaned for your children. And may they be able to make choices in a clear-thinking way.