Notes From the Desk: Politicizing higher education

I would like to continue the discussion my friend, Jeff Garofano, began in his Nov. 12 op-ed on the role of politics in our Middlebury education. In his piece, Jeff argues that institutions of higher education should remain as apolitical as possible. He takes Stanley Fish’s view that universities are “not to be in the social justice business.”

My sense is that both Jeff and Stanley Fish make important points but they neglect to address the fundamental roles of higher education in our society — many of which are decidedly political. American colleges and universities would be more effective institutions if they would acknowledge their political nature.

The most common argument for the apolitical nature of institutions of higher education is that students should pursue learning for learning’s sake. This is an important concern. Pure intellectual inquiry is essential to both personal well-being and to a good society.

It is important to remember, however, that creating a sphere that is outside the political is an inherently political act; it is a statement against overarching and extremist political ideologies. In fact, I would argue that creating a sphere for pure and free inquiry is one of the most important political acts of liberal democracy. In this way, contemporary institutions of higher education have an inherently political nature as institutions of liberal thought.

Naturally emanating from the present-day university’s role as a democratic institution should be an imperative to spread the opportunity of free intellectual thought to as many people as possible.

Historically in America, education has spread liberal values by increasing social mobility. Horace Mann, an important figure in the growth of public education, advocated for state-run schooling in Massachusetts because he saw it as “a great equalizer of the conditions of men.”

While promoting social mobility is an important political goal of education, an equally important goal should be to generate civically minded citizens. This is especially the case with Middlebury College, which hopes to educate tomorrow’s leaders.

Disenchanted individualists could argue that Middlebury College is a private entity and has little social imperative. I would remind these people that Middlebury is a non-profit institution, but more fundamentally, I would question this person’s values.

The student body, faculty and staff of Middlebury should work together to limit this individualistic way of thinking both in higher education and in society more generally. Middlebury College should be explicit in acknowledging its political nature.

An integral part of the college curriculum and the general culture of the College should thus be to engage with civic values.

Specific examples of how this could occur in the College community include an open discussion on ethically investing the College’s sizeable endowment, a community service requirement and community-led social justice initiatives that could create results in the mold of the campaign for carbon neutrality.

Beyond this, our classrooms should also be direct in addressing political questions.

To be clear, the metaphor of the College providing a “toolbox” for forming opinions that Jeff used in his Nov. 12 op-ed has value. The basic idea behind this toolbox metaphor is that professors should provide students with the tools to develop their own convictions instead of indoctrinating.

Aside from instilling basic political values such as tolerance and liberal thinking, I do not want professors to impose values onto us. In recent American history, indoctrination from professors has ranged from neo-Marxist frameworks of consciousness-raising on the left to closed-minded Cold War patriotism on the right.

On the other, however, I do not think there should be a dogma of political correctness that prohibits professors from at times sharing their political convictions. An integral part of developing our toolbox should be learning how to evaluate positions. We as college students should be mature enough to view our professors’ political beliefs within a larger context.

A more politically aware College must therefore walk a fine line. The idea is to encourage the College community to be more politically engaged while at the same time fostering critical thought.

Middlebury could do a better job of fostering a more politically active and mindful student body. It could also come closer to fostering intellectual inquiry for its own sake. Ultimately, these two ends are closely related in the present national and international context. A space for pure intellectual inquiry requires a political context, and in turn, creates political imperatives.