Higher Education Under Attack: Attacks on the Humanities

As promised, here is the first installment of my short series on major trends in postsecondary education that appear to challenge its more idealistic and democratic spirit. As I mentioned in the introduction, this article from Harper’s outlines the attack on the humanities in great detail, and is worth a read. The attack on the humanities is arguably part of a bigger project to undermine the most sanguine and idealistic aims of higher education from its inception. It is based on the fervent belief that knowledge can serve the goals of social, political and economic development and provide the framework for a vibrant democracy and public sphere. Higher education has the potential to open young people’s minds to the world around them, to introduce alternative narratives of the past, present and future and to cultivate a love of learning and critical reflexivity that will serve them the rest of their lives. Across the globe, universities have often served as hotbeds of radicalism that foster revolutionary fervor or the belief in positive social change, creating frameworks for praxis.

At the heart of this romantic vision is the humanities, which continue the ancient tradition of creating spaces for independent thought and inquiry unencumbered by religious, state or economic pressures. While this romantic vision has often abutted against the reality of university funding and imperatives, the humanities have never been a major source of revenue and thus freed from some of the pressures associated with the sciences, medicine, law and business programs. The humanities are thus the location where some of the most radical and critical work is done in humanities, challenging conventional wisdom, entrenched ideologies and dominant discourse and narratives that shape the public sphere. Critical theory, cultural studies, critical race theory, literary theory, poststructuralism, postmodernism and other more critical theoretical paradigms have all emerged or been further articulated within the humanities, challenging deeply held beliefs and the propaganda strategies of government and corporations.

The humanities have also generally served as the foundation of ethical studies and political theory, shaping individuals that will go into other fields with the insights and inspiration of a more humanistic, collective vision of social rights and responsibilities. If one believes that democracy is an idea and an ideal that must be constantly cultivated and reaffirmed, then attacking the humanities merely serves to undermine the broader goals of the university and its vision of enriching the lives of the individual and society overall. While much work since World War II has shown us the limitations of Enlightenment beliefs about freedom, democracy and using science and reason to improve the human condition, it is still clear that rigorous intellectual work is at the heart of the struggle toward the common good. Without these tools, we fall further into the trap of a fragmented, atomistic world where greed and self-interest dominate cultural exchange and interaction.

It is also true that the humanities, and social sciences, have increasingly become one of the few places in the university, and the larger society, where conventional wisdom and hegemonic ideas can be challenged. While the humanities have more recently placed little currency on engaging in the public sphere, many scholars continue to do this work, challenging popular narratives, hegemonic ideologies and the rhetorical strategies employed by the media, politicians and the power elites. By pushing the humanities to the side, we eliminate one of the few spaces where ideas can be critically analyzed and challenged providing alternative ways of seeing and being in the world. Without a diversity of ideas and theories, we run the risk of reifying hegemony and ossifying the public sphere, making us less adept at adapting to an ever-changing world.

A fourth problem relates to the larger issue of the commodification of knowledge. Universities, like all education in the U.S., are increasingly seen as a means to an economic end. Rather than an institution that serves the lofty goals of preparing young people from their future social, political and economic lives, schooling is increasingly seen merely as a vehicle for training and sorting and providing for social mobility. Lost are the broader goals of education as a fount of freedom and intellectual growth, of balancing the interests of the individual with those of the community, state, nation and world, of inculcating hope in the possibility of change and of teaching the rudiments of citizenship and active civic engagement. When we commodify education, we make it merely about getting a good job in the future, teaching students that grades and degrees are more important than actually learning. This increasingly occurs from Kindergarten straight through to graduate school, undermining not only the ideas of growth and development but of learning in general. Schooling is just something you have to do on the way to future prosperity, not something to take seriously. This relates to the neoliberal agenda for education, cutting off the channels of dissent by tying it so closely to its economic imperatives that all else is lost.

Finally is the notion of creating well-rounded adults that understand our past, our cultural heritage and the key markers of our common cultural identity, fostering tolerance and cultural sharing, creative and critical individualism, the imagination and the belief in the democracy and social justice. By eliminating or curtailing access to these courses, we arguably only further narrow the curriculum and reinforce the notion of a self-interested population that magically maximizes happiness and freedom by orienting their behavior to the dictates of the market. Without a shared history, what does it even mean to be an American? Without an understanding of the arts and culture, can people enjoy these enriching activities? And without an understanding of the past and present, how can they make decisions to improve our future? At stake in the end, is the kind of world we live in and the ability to envision and struggle toward a better future.

I conclude with a recent example of the attack on the humanities, at one of the 17 University of North Carolina campuses – Elizabeth City State University (Inside Higher Ed). The historically black college that enrolls approximately 2,300 students has been for a long time, created 25 years after the Civil War with the explicit goal of “"teaching and training teachers of the colored race to teach in the common schools of North Carolina." But facing severe budget cuts, as are most publically-funded universities in the country, they are considering cutting degrees in physics, political science and, ironically, history.  These major are considered “low productive” by the central office of the UNC system, with 11 percent of all majors now in this category. That many are in the humanities is not surprising, given the lack of clearly transferrable job skills associated with these majors. But will classes still exist in these imperative departments in the future? Will they attempt to further commodify education by allowing students to skip their liberal arts requirements completely? Students may be happy, but this merely reflects the ways in which education has already become little more than a stopping ground on the road to future employment, perceived by many kids as little more than a necessary economic signal. Carol Geary Schneider, the President of the Association of American Colleges and Universities perhaps put it best, claiming “"Nothing is more fundamental than history to students' understanding of their roles and responsibilities as citizens of this diverse and still decidedly unequal democracy. Cutting out history means cutting out both memory and hope.” Unfortunately, this school is not alone as non-liberal arts schools across the country seek to place their energies in those programs that generate research funding and potential patents or intellectual property, leaving the humanities out in the cold as budget pressures intensify. Who is hurt beyond the humanities professors and staff that are losing their jobs? Arguably the whole country, its citizenry and our collective future. Who benefits? Corporations and the power elite. Who do you support?