Losing Faith
What happens to society when universities, the supposed guardians of intellectual freedom, are seen as biased or political? In recent years, public trust in higher education has sharply declined.
According to a 2024 Gallup poll, confidence in American colleges and universities dropped by nearly 30% over the past decade.
Additionally, a 2024 report from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) found that 57% of students fear expressing their views in class, highlighting the climate of polarization on campuses.
This crisis reflects growing concerns about the politicization of institutions that were once seen as bastions of open inquiry.
Against this backdrop, just under 30 colleges and universities (including my alma mater, the College of the Holy Cross) in the U.S. have embraced institutional neutrality, a principle rooted in the 1967 Kalven Report. The report emphasizes that universities should steer clear of divisive political and social stances, focusing instead on their core mission: discovering, improving, and disseminating knowledge (Kalven Report).
While these commitments are a step in the right direction, they're not enough. For neutrality to thrive, faculty must also champion this principle within their departments and institutes and have their institutions' full faith and support to do so. And we must prepare our students to think critically before stepping foot on campus.
Shaping Campus Culture: Faculty's Role
Cultural change doesn't happen through top-down mandates—it requires collective buy-in. Faculty are the true custodians of university culture, far outlasting the short tenures of presidents and trustees. Their teaching and mentorship leave lasting impressions on students and are essential to fostering a culture of inquiry. If universities aim to teach students how to think—not what to think—this ethos must come from the faculty.
Faculty face increasing pressure from students and institutions alike. For example, in one ethics class, I posed a challenging hypothetical to illustrate the utilitarian principle: imagine you are hiding from Nazi soldiers, and there is a baby with you. The baby begins crying. Would you do whatever it took to silence the baby to save the group or risk everyone's lives by trying to comfort it? A student angrily shouted, "Don't you ever mention Nazi Germany! My grandmother was a Holocaust survivor!" before storming out and later demanding my termination.
This example reflects broader systemic challenges: faculty increasingly face emotionally charged reactions, requiring institutional frameworks to support academic freedom and nuanced discussions of complex topics. Unfortunately, this classroom experience is not unique. According to a Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) report, 52% of faculty fear negative repercussions for teaching controversial topics (2024 Faculty Report). Such pressures undermine intellectual discourse and discourage the exploration of complex, thought-provoking material. Universities must protect faculty members' freedom to engage with complex topics while fostering an environment of mutual respect.
Modern Relevance of Neutrality
Campus neutrality is not just a theoretical ideal; it is increasingly relevant in today's polarized climate. Consider the high-profile controversy at Stanford University, where student protests disrupted a federal judge's lecture. This incident and others like it underscore universities' difficulty balancing free speech with political pressures. Policies that promote neutrality create environments where diverse voices can thrive without fear of institutional bias. Internationally, universities like Oxford and Cambridge have faced scrutiny over speaker invitations, while Canadian institutions have debated free expression policies. These examples highlight the universal importance of neutrality in maintaining trust and fostering intellectual diversity.
Similarly, debates over mandatory diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) statements have raised questions about whether such requirements infringe on academic freedom or align with institutional neutrality. For example, some universities have implemented voluntary DEI training programs that support inclusion without mandating ideological conformity. This approach balances the goals of fostering inclusivity and preserving intellectual diversity. Institutional neutrality provides a framework where such debates can be navigated thoughtfully, ensuring inclusion and open dialogue.
Counterarguments and Responses
Critics of institutional neutrality often argue that universities are morally obligated to take a stand on critical social and political issues. They claim that neutrality could favor the status quo, perpetuating systemic inequities. While this perspective raises valid concerns, neutrality does not equate to inaction. Instead, it allows universities to focus on fostering evidence-based discussions and empowering individuals to advocate for change. Neutrality ensures that institutions remain platforms for diverse perspectives rather than endorsing specific positions that risk alienating segments of their communities. This approach strengthens intellectual rigor and creates space for actionable solutions to systemic challenges.
Another counterargument is that some issues—such as racism or climate change—are so universally significant that neutrality is untenable. However, even on such topics, universities are best served by facilitating rigorous, evidence-based discourse. Adopting institutional positions risks alienating community members with dissenting views, undermining the pluralistic ideals universities are meant to uphold.
Success Stories
Several institutions have successfully implemented neutrality policies, demonstrating their practical benefits.
The University of Chicago, for instance, has long adhered to the principles outlined in the Kalven Report, fostering a campus culture that prioritizes academic freedom and robust debate. A 2023 campus survey at Chicago reported a 20% increase in faculty and student confidence in the institution's commitment to free inquiry. Chicago recently received a $100 million anonymous donation to support the principles and practice of free speech on campus.
Dartmouth College's recent adoption of its Principles of Institutional Restraint provides a framework to guide departmental and administrative actions while respecting academic expertise.
Meanwhile, the University of North Carolina system has successfully implemented neutrality policies that clarify institutional boundaries and ensure administrative positions do not overshadow individual voices.
These successes enhance institutional credibility and serve as models for addressing declining public trust in higher education. Universities that embrace neutrality can demonstrate their value as unbiased spaces for inquiry, even in polarized times.
Student Benefits
Campus neutrality is vital to preserving the mission of higher education and is central to civil society. For faculty, it ensures they can teach and research freely without fear of institutional retaliation. For students, neutrality fosters a culture of inclusion where diverse viewpoints are valued and debated. One student from the University of Chicago shared in a recent survey,
Knowing that my institution remains neutral gives me the confidence to explore ideas without worrying about being judged or silenced.
Such an environment equips students with the intellectual humility and critical thinking skills necessary to navigate a complex and polarized world. By prioritizing open dialogue, universities can prepare students to engage constructively with societal challenges, reinforcing both academic excellence and democratic values.
Strategies for Restoring Trust and Relevance
To address these challenges, colleges and universities must:
Adopt Institutional Neutrality Policies: Implement guidelines such as those in the Kalven Report to ensure universities and departments refrain from taking political or ideological stances unrelated to their academic missions.
Foster Viewpoint Diversity: Develop hiring and promotion practices prioritizing diversity of thought, ensuring faculty represent a broad range of perspectives while maintaining academic rigor.
Limit Official Statements to Areas of Expertise: Restrict institutional and departmental statements to issues related to academic fields, avoiding unrelated political commentary.
Protect Free Speech and Academic Freedom: Create robust policies to safeguard free expression on campus and act decisively against disruptions that impede teaching, learning, and open dialogue.
Encourage Civil Discourse: Establish campus-wide programs, structured debates, and safe forums for students, faculty, and guest speakers to discuss contentious issues respectfully.
Enhance Faculty and Staff Training: Provide professional development on fostering neutral classroom environments, managing diverse viewpoints, and promoting free expression.
Promote Civic Education: Prioritize teaching American history, political institutions, and civic culture to instill a foundation of informed, engaged citizenship among students.
Strengthen Partnerships with Community Colleges: Build pathways that support seamless transitions from community colleges to four-year institutions, addressing disparities and broadening accessibility.
Increase Transparency and Accountability: Regularly evaluate campus climate and adherence to neutrality policies through surveys, focus groups, and public reporting to build trust.
Protect Dissenting Voices: Use anonymous voting for departmental statements and other measures to ensure that faculty, particularly untenured members, can freely express dissent without fear of retaliation.
Empowering the Next Generation
Institutional neutrality is a cornerstone for parents and educators seeking to equip the next generation with the tools for civic engagement. However, fostering these values doesn't start and end on a college campus. Stop relying on schools to teach your kids everything. Education begins at home.
Parents and K-12 programs can take proactive steps to inspire critical thinking and civic awareness in young minds:
Implement Speech and Debate Programs: Speech and debate classes improve students' critical thinking, communication, and analytical skills, leading to better academic and social outcomes. For example, students in debate programs are 15% more likely to report increased confidence and higher GPAs than non-debaters (National Speech & Debate Association).
Enrich Civics Education: Expanding civics courses in high schools can prepare students to be informed and engaged citizens. Studies show that students who take comprehensive civics courses are more likely to participate in elections and community initiatives (Hoover Institution).
Introduce Civic Duty Requirements: Replacing mandatory "volunteerism" in schools with structured civic duty programs, such as service-learning projects, can instill a sense of responsibility and community engagement. Research indicates these programs increase long-term civic participation (Education Commission of the States).
Promote Media Literacy: Integrating media literacy education equips students with the skills to evaluate information critically, a vital skill in the digital age. Research has linked media literacy programs to enhanced critical thinking and reduced susceptibility to misinformation (Journal of Media Literacy Education).
Discuss Current Events: Use news stories to spark government, policy, and ethics discussions.
Watch Documentaries Together: Choose films that explore social justice, democracy, and historical events.
Encourage Active Engagement: Parents can foster civic responsibility by encouraging teens to volunteer, engage in community projects, or discuss current events at home. Resources like iCivics.org offer interactive games and activities that make learning about civics fun and engaging.
Follow Platforms Like War Horse Reporting: War Horse Reporting, a nonprofit newsroom dedicated to exploring the lives of veterans and their families, provides compelling stories that bridge the gap between military and civilian communities. Their investigative work fosters empathy and a deeper understanding of civic responsibility. Encouraging teens to follow platforms like this helps build awareness of how policies impact individuals and communities.
Introduce Thought-Provoking Reading: Provide teens with books encouraging an understanding of government, democracy, and social responsibility. Here's a curated list to start:
Scholastic's Guide to Civics: How America Works: An engaging guide that helps students understand the workings of the U.S. government and how they can get involved.
On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century: A concise book offering lessons on defending democracy and recognizing threats to freedom.
March Trilogy: A Graphic novel memoir by the late Congressman John Lewis about his role in the Civil Rights Movement.
Stamped: Racism, Antiracism, and You: A historical exploration of racism in America with lessons on challenging and changing systems.
We the People: The Citizen & the Constitution (Level 3: High School): An in-depth exploration of the U.S. Constitution tailored for high school students.
Conclusion
The role of universities is not to take sides but to foster critical thinking, robust dialogue, and a commitment to intellectual rigor. Neutrality ensures that universities remain trusted spaces where diverse perspectives coexist, encouraging constructive debate rather than deepening divisions. As public trust in higher education continues to wane, institutional neutrality offers a powerful remedy—not as a retreat from engagement but as a framework for authentic, inclusive dialogue.
The potential impact of neutrality extends beyond the classroom, influencing the broader societal discourse. Universities can inspire other institutions to prioritize openness and pluralism by modeling civility, curiosity, and intellectual resilience. The task ahead is clear: higher education must lead by example, ensuring that the next generation is prepared not only to navigate a polarized world but to unite it.
The question is not whether neutrality is relevant—it is whether universities (and all of us) are ready to rise to the challenge. Let us embrace this opportunity to restore public trust, foster transformative learning environments, and reaffirm the mission of higher education as a cornerstone of democracy.
Works Cited
"College Presidents for Civic Preparedness." College Presidents Organization, 2024, https://collegepresidents.org.
Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. 2024 Faculty Report: Academic Freedom and Job Security. FIRE, 2024, https://www.thefire.org/facultyreport.
Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. The Academic Mind 2022: What Faculty Think About Free Expression and Academic Freedom. FIRE, 2022, https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/academic-mind-2022-what-faculty-think-about-free-expression-and-academic-freedom.
"Many Faculty Say Academic Freedom Is Deteriorating." Inside Higher Ed, 13 Nov. 2024, https://www.insidehighered.com/news/faculty-issues/academic-freedom/2024/11/13/many-faculty-say-academic-freedom-deteriorating.
Kalven Report: The University's Role in Political and Social Action. University of Chicago, 1967, https://provost.uchicago.edu/reports/report-universitys-role-political-and-social-action.
"Principles of Institutional Restraint." Dartmouth College, 2024, https://policies.dartmouth.edu/policy/institutional-restraint-statements-dartmouth-and-its-academic-units.
Vance, J.D. "The Universities Are the Enemy." National Conservatism Conference Speech, 2021.
"The Hidden Importance of Speech and Debate." National Speech & Debate Association, 2022, https://nwef.org/2022/02/07/the-hidden-importance-of-speech-and-debate.
Comments