In the 1740s, when Benjamin Franklin established the “Public Academy of Philadelphia” — the University of Pennsylvania’s 18th century name — he set out to do something new. Rather than following Harvard’s model of preparing elite citizens for the clergy, Franklin asserted that Penn’s guiding principle would be that knowledge should serve society, connecting the theoretical and the practical, career training and preparation for living a responsible civic life.
Listen to the audio edition here:
Today, we are in need of another revolution in higher education. And it’s not only because colleges and universities are under unprecedented attack.
This week the Department of Education released a “Call to Action.” — a letter from Education Secretary Linda McMahon urging some reforms prominent in the headlines (slowing tuition hikes and reforming admissions). But it also emphasizes items from President Trump’s favorite hit list — hiring conservative faculty members and cracking down on protests.
This latest attempt at federal control of U.S. higher education has the endorsement of four university presidents representing AAU (American Association of University) institutions: Washington University of St. Louis, Arizona State University, University of Kansas, and Johns Hopkins University. These four, and AAU in general, do not represent the full range and scope of higher education. They are all large, prestigious research universities with their research funding under Trump’s Sword of Damocles. Trump’s strategy is to use these AAU presidents to legitimize a new version of his “compact,” which was widely rejected last year.
Even without this new compact on the table, it has become imperative for higher education to outline a way for reform that reflects the full variety of colleges and universities. To protect enduring values, higher education must take to heart the truth in criticisms and institute transformative change to fulfill its original purpose in a democracy: to prepare citizens to participate in the life of the mind, the strength of the economy (including household budgets), and the wellbeing of the nation.
Never has it been more important for a Philadelphia higher ed constitutional convention to model paradigmatic change. “To accomplish these aims, higher education must change the way we change,” says David Scobey, director of Bringing Theory to Practice at Elon University.
Unity, first of all
This past spring, I was privileged to participate in the first of a special speaker series marking the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, sponsored by Penn’s Perry World House. The series looks back to decades earlier when Franklin initiated the first revolution in higher education. At the May forum, the panelists talked about the need for universities to articulate accepted values and principles. These can be summed up as: the search for truth, teaching students, and the discovery of new knowledge through research.
A strength of U.S. higher education is its variety and diversity, but from community colleges to the Ivy League, the fundamental values and principles are the same. While we may hold these truths to be self-evident: Current public attitudes indicate a need to come together and clearly communicate our unified commitment to these ideas.
A recent Gallup/Lumina poll indicates that loss of confidence in higher education is currently bipartisan. Republicans and their MAGA base have expressed distrust in higher education for the last several years. Since last year, Democrats’ confidence in higher education has also plunged — by 11 points. Only half of those surveyed feel comfortable with colleges and universities today.
How can we expect families to trust us, if we don’t give high priority to teaching their children?
Having spent my life in universities, I felt smacked in the gut by this survey. We have to go beyond clearly articulating our values. We have to stop defending the status quo. We must institute reforms that will better enact our principles.
It may not be feasible to bring together colleges and universities, public and private, across 50 states. But we could start in Philadelphia by convening the presidents of all campuses in the metropolitan area to publish a Declaration — not of independence, but of principled unity. They could then go on to outline the categories of reform necessary to turn principles into classroom realities.
The first step could be a higher education constitutional convention. It would have to be convened at a high level, perhaps by Mayor Parker or Governor Shapiro. It could be arranged by Penn through the Netter Center for Community Partnerships, through the Perry World House (which sponsored the May 14 forum), and/or through Penn President J. Larry Jameson’s office.
It’s important that the convention include all local higher ed institutions, from Community College of Philadelphia to Moore College of Art & Design to Temple University and Penn. Widespread change requires widespread cooperation from all types of institutions, just like our American revolution required states and individuals from varying perspectives to come together in principle.
The first reform: affordability
The Gallup/Lumina report indicates that lack of affordability is the primary cause of lost confidence in higher education. There is no question that this nation’s approach to financing higher education is broken — and has been broken for a long time. A democracy cannot assume that higher education is strictly a private good, available only to those who can afford it or are willing to take on life-long debt to pay for it. We must affirm that higher education is a public good requiring public support. Societies with an educated populace are healthier, more economically sound, more productive, and more civic-minded. Despite the blatant attempts by MAGA to vilify scientists, experts, and professors, these facts remain.
For decades we have been tinkering around the edges of our unworkable system of student debt. We need transformative change. According to SHEEO (State Higher Ed Executive Officers Association), state governments allocate $133.9 billion to fund U.S. higher education, while federal and local governments contribute $100 billion more. We should be smart enough to figure out how better to use that $234 billion annual investment to support higher education for all students without requiring crushing debt, leading to delayed home ownership and to other limitations on life choices.
Rahm Emanuel, former Chief of Staff to President Obama, has proposed a “grand bargain” to address affordability. He calls for universal free tuition for families earning under $200,000 annually; inflation caps, limiting tuition increases to the rate of inflation for students from families earning over $200,000; streamlined loans, cutting administrative costs by 10 percent; easing expensive federal income verification rules for federal student loan applicants (these rules have just been increased and tightened by the Trump administration); accelerated degrees, allowing students with substantial high school credits to complete a bachelor’s degree in three years instead of four. While I have serious questions about some of these proposals, especially the three-year degree and the inadequate provision for families with annual incomes slightly exceeding $200,000, these ideas are worthy of discussion at the Philadelphia higher education constitutional convention.
The second reform: honor and reward teaching
It’s important to rethink college teaching and assign it a central role. That does not mean setting up a separate teaching corps with no research expectations. Research, especially when done in partnership with undergraduates, is essential to good teaching. The creation and dissemination of knowledge are integrally connected.
Higher ed violates its core principles by separating teaching and research. How often in my academic career did I see release from teaching as a reward. It’s essential that full-time, fully committed professors teach undergraduates. I was gratified to read, for example, that Penn professor Emily Wilson not only writes highly acclaimed translations of The Iliad and The Odyssey, but she teaches them to undergraduates.
To protect enduring values, higher education must take to heart the truth in criticisms and institute transformative change to fulfill its original purpose in a democracy.
First-year courses in particular are in need of reform. They are the gateway to college study, to the life of the intellect, and to civic engagement. These courses should be assigned to the most highly experienced faculty members, not to overworked and under-compensated adjuncts. If the part-time instructors are excellent and dynamic, then make them full-time.
Students and their families care about inspiring classroom experiences. Career training and preparation for a responsible civic life depend on excellent, committed teachers. The reward system at too many colleges and universities ignores that reality and undervalues this essential component of higher education. How can we expect families to trust us, if we don’t give high priority to teaching their children? By demeaning the teaching mission, many academics have earned our reputation for snobbism, and it’s killing us.
The third reform: connect the hand and the mind
We hear too often that college is not for everyone, and that many students want to work with their hands. Good for them! I’ve written before that we should not create a conflict between the hand and the mind.
Kudos to Rowan University and its partnership with Philadelphia’s IBEW Local 98 for enrolling electrician-apprentices to earn college certificates and degrees while completing their training. Apprentices, based in the Philadelphia Naval Yard, balance full-time work, union training and university courses.
At the three universities I led — Governors State, University of Alaska Anchorage, and Arizona State University West Campus — we encouraged students who had studied trades in community college to transfer with two full years of credit to complete their bachelor’s degrees in just two more years. The higher ed constitutional convention might consider making this inverted baccalaureate normal. Of course, doing so would involve addressing the hidden toxic enemy of higher ed reform — snobbism.
The fourth reform: connect research to local problems
University researchers should be in constant dialogue with community leaders, developing research projects that directly address the needs of the community. Clean air, trash collection, streamlined government? Academics have expertise in many areas that can directly benefit their neighbors. We see them out in the field through some professional schools, like teaching and medical programs.
But a higher education revolution calls for this problem-solving partnership to be across the curriculum, and as a partner to City Hall and other public entities. One local example shows how this can work: In the first Kenney administration, six city departments started working with volunteer researchers from Penn, Swarthmore, Temple, Princeton and Drexel in the Philadelphia Behavioral Science Initiative. The teams helped answer questions like: How do you communicate with residents the best way? Or, how can you get more residents to take advantage of cost-saving measures?
The fifth reform: do more for Philly students
Every Philadelphia college and university should have a special obligation to Philadelphia students. Some of this is happening through free college preparation programs in the summer and, in Penn’s case, during the school day. But more must be done. While I am opposed to property taxes for colleges and universities, they must invest more dollars in the students who live here because they live here.
Here’s a revolutionary idea. What about a cooperative approach to college admissions? For example, Philly students rejected by Penn could be offered accelerated admission to another Philly-based institution. Colleges and universities should be doing more cooperating and less competing. After all, the shared goal is to serve humanity.
In unity there is strength — and creativity.
Elaine Maimon, Ph.D., is the author of Leading Academic Change: Vision, Strategy, Transformation. Her long career in higher education has encompassed top executive positions at Governors State University (IL), University of Alaska Anchorage, and Arizona State University West Campus, as well as distinction as a scholar in rhetoric/composition. Her co-authored book, Writing in the Arts and Sciences, has been designated as a landmark text. She is a Distinguished Fellow of the Association for Writing Across the Curriculum.
MORE FROM ELAINE MAIMON
