- Messages
- 33,243
War on Universities, Lawyers & Expertise
- Thread starter nycfan
- Start date
- Replies: 917
- Views: 28K
- Politics
—>
- Messages
- 33,243
“… ASU officials have no problem being alone or in a group working with the administration; they believe this would position ASU to help redesign what they see as a flawed system—and capture as much support and money from the federal government as possible, people familiar with the matter said.
“There’s always opportunity,” Crow said in an interview. “And there’s opportunity now.”
In recent months, ASU has communicated with the White House on a new financial-aid idea, offered to help vet international students and scrambled to calm Trump officials in the wake of Charlie Kirk’s killing.
Crow’s efforts have won praise at the top levels of the Trump administration. “I’m incredibly impressed with a lot of the work he’s done,” said Secretary of Education Linda McMahon, whom Crow has hosted on campus. “I think he’s a really smart guy.”
Crow’s critics argue university presidents must defy Trump and build strong alliances or risk their independence. “Safeguarding the well-being of one institution at the expense of the future of higher education writ large doesn’t work,” said Todd Wolfson, president of the American Association of University Professors. “I don’t think anyone who makes that call will be covered in glory when we look back at this moment in 20 years.”…”
JCTarheel82
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 2,051
Arizona State is basically a glorified community college so this checks out.
- Messages
- 1,355
My dear (93 y/o) mother the guidance counselor at the local community college from it’s inception after Drumph was elected in 2016 and I asked what do you think said that everyone was complaining about the cost of education and now they can find out what ignorance costs?”
I found this similar “Gemini” info with a quick AI search:
The cost of ignorance is immeasurable, encompassing missed opportunities, financial mistakes, legal consequences, and harm to reputation
. It can be seen as the difference between where you are and where you want to be, as knowledge and informed decisions are the tools for personal and professional growth. While education requires an upfront investment, ignorance carries a permanent and often higher price through potential loss and stagnation.
So apparently AI agrees with mom’s point!
I found this similar “Gemini” info with a quick AI search:
The cost of ignorance is immeasurable, encompassing missed opportunities, financial mistakes, legal consequences, and harm to reputation
. It can be seen as the difference between where you are and where you want to be, as knowledge and informed decisions are the tools for personal and professional growth. While education requires an upfront investment, ignorance carries a permanent and often higher price through potential loss and stagnation.
So apparently AI agrees with mom’s point!
Mulberry Heel
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,439
So much of Trumpism is about pure selfishness and total lack of empathy - "As long as me and my family are doing well I don't give a shit about you or your family. And I ain't willing to spend money or taxpayer funds to help you in any way." And that's the bottom line.
- Messages
- 33,243
In a dramatic shift, Americans no longer see four-year college degrees as worth the cost
The latest NBC News poll shows two-thirds of registered voters down on the value proposition of a degree. A majority said degrees were worth the cost a dozen years ago.
Poll: In a dramatic shift, Americans no longer see four-year college degrees as worth the cost
The latest NBC News poll shows two-thirds of registered voters down on the value proposition of a degree. A majority said degrees were worth the cost a dozen years ago.
www.nbcnews.com
gtyellowjacket
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 2,589
That is pretty stunning and seems to go against the empirical evidence although maybe changes in the economy haven't shaken out yet.In a dramatic shift, Americans no longer see four-year college degrees as worth the cost
The latest NBC News poll shows two-thirds of registered voters down on the value proposition of a degree. A majority said degrees were worth the cost a dozen years ago.
Poll: In a dramatic shift, Americans no longer see four-year college degrees as worth the cost
The latest NBC News poll shows two-thirds of registered voters down on the value proposition of a degree. A majority said degrees were worth the cost a dozen years ago.
I do think the university system as a whole is going to have to make some significant changes to lower prices. Something closer to high school with fewer amenities and a larger focus on teaching instead of subsidizing research.
Mulberry Heel
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,439
I wonder how much of that change in perception is due to the economic factors mentioned - constantly rising tuition and dwindling federal loans and other ways to pay the tuition, changing job market - and how much is due to the right wing's massive assault on public and higher ed generally. There seems to be a disdain in many quarters now for universities and liberal ed in general, even though (of course) the people like Miller or Chris Rufo leading this assault will no doubt move heaven and earth to send their own kids to prestigious universities when they're old enough. Rufo, btw, is married to a Thai immigrant who came here illegally - just more evidence of the gross hypocrisy of these people.In a dramatic shift, Americans no longer see four-year college degrees as worth the cost
The latest NBC News poll shows two-thirds of registered voters down on the value proposition of a degree. A majority said degrees were worth the cost a dozen years ago.
Poll: In a dramatic shift, Americans no longer see four-year college degrees as worth the cost
The latest NBC News poll shows two-thirds of registered voters down on the value proposition of a degree. A majority said degrees were worth the cost a dozen years ago.
- Messages
- 3,614
Even the way the question was framed is based on the presupposition that college is nothing more than a trade school. Getting an well-rounded education and "specific job skills" training are two different things.In a dramatic shift, Americans no longer see four-year college degrees as worth the cost
The latest NBC News poll shows two-thirds of registered voters down on the value proposition of a degree. A majority said degrees were worth the cost a dozen years ago.
Poll: In a dramatic shift, Americans no longer see four-year college degrees as worth the cost
The latest NBC News poll shows two-thirds of registered voters down on the value proposition of a degree. A majority said degrees were worth the cost a dozen years ago.
donbosco
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 5,283
*****************************************
On Friday President Bienen informed the Northwestern community that he had signed an agreement with the Trump administration. Early reports and news media on “the deal” have focused on the $75 million payment the University will make, with little attention to parts of the deal that are of much greater concern to many of us across the university. President Bienen claimed that under the agreement, "Northwestern runs Northwestern. Period." That claim rings hollow. The deal infringes academic freedom and threatens student welfare, as we will detail below.
We acknowledge that our Board of Trustees extended bridge funding that has kept research afloat and protected graduate student careers during the long suspension of grant reimbursements to the University. We also note that the university has agreed to pay the tribute demanded by the Trump government to restore the delayed funds. At the same time, we lament that many activities within funded research, and indeed whole grants, were terminated by the government on political grounds. Generally, those grants intended to benefit the health, well-being, education, or workforce development of underrepresented groups–a core part of what Northwestern is.
1. Controlling Admissions. Nothing could be more central to a university running itself than selecting its students. The deal requires Northwestern to implement a strictly "merit based" admissions process. This mandate is followed by a discussion of race and racial proxies, in case its target was not clear.
The deal requires Northwestern to turn over to the government a host of quantitative information about its applicant pool and admissions process. But as admissions officers are well aware, decisions are best when based not exclusively on attributes such as test scores and class rank, but also on applicants’ written expression, activities, and interests, and on a holistic assessment of whether they will thrive at Northwestern.
The government's plan is clear, and malicious. If our admissions decisions do not align with their numbers-only measure of "merit" they will allege illegal racial preferences. In fear of renewed penalties, Northwestern can be pressured to admit fewer students of color, first generation students, and others who have less benefit of prior educational privilege.
2. Placing students at risk. The University has long recognized that student protest is part of learning and claiming voice. The deal removes our community’s ability to debate and adjust policies as the University and our students negotiate the fraught constitutional tension between expression and disruption.
The deal requires NU to "cooperate with local, regional, and federal law enforcement ... to prevent and investigate violations of law or Northwestern’s policies and ... to intervene in violations while they are occurring ... so that violators can be apprehended and face appropriate discipline."
Universities have been rocked and shaped by student protest across the decades. Dissent is a fundamental right within a democracy. Confrontations with police put our students in danger. Northwestern running Northwestern would allow us to balance policy enforcement with safety considerations. Requiring police intervention to enforce our rules is acceding to the harsh and often violent disciplinary impulses of the Trump government.
The deal specifically calls out and reneges on the Deering Meadow agreement, a signed internal-to-the-University pledge to our own students, that ended the 2023 Deering Meadow encampment for Gaza without police involvement. Northwestern's home-grown prohibition on "3d speech" (tents) -- except for one at the Rock -- now cannot be changed by Northwestern without DOJ approval. It's hard to believe, but the deal makes Northwestern's policy about tents on campus literally a federal issue. Multiple aspects of student speech, student discipline, and student-university relations now require an OK from the federal government.
3. Targeting transgender healthcare. The deal includes that the University will prohibit hormonal interventions or transgender surgeries on anyone under 18 years of age. We have witnessed with horror how our government has sought to prevent gender-affirming care across the country. It is unconscionable that Northwestern now agrees to be an enforcer of that cruelty, not under any law but as part of a transactional accommodation to recover withheld funds.
This part of the deal presumably targets gender-affirming care provided by MDs in NU's Feinberg School of Medicine, including the Gender Pathways program for adolescents. Northwestern may “run” what care is left in the wake of these prohibitions, but it is far from the autonomy that President Bienen claims we retain. The medical care of trans youth, like the medical care of anyone, should be determined by patients and their providers–not by the federal government.
4. Governance of faculty hiring. In his November 28 email, Bienen expressed that “As an imperative to the negotiation of this agreement, we had several hard red lines we refused to cross: We would not relinquish any control over whom we hire, whom we admit as students, what our faculty teach or how our faculty teach." However the deal insists that NU may no longer require a diverse set of candidates in faculty hiring. Also the deal undoes the Deering Meadow agreement's hosting of Palestinian visiting scholars. If Northwestern runs Northwestern, we can formulate our own hiring procedures consistent with law, invite and host our own visiting scholars, and keep our promises to our students.
The issues highlighted above stand out to us as among the most blatant examples of how the agreement denies Northwestern the institutional autonomy to which it is legally entitled. There are more. “Northwestern runs Northwestern” is an empty claim to those of us in the University community—staff, faculty, students, and alumni—who have watched Northwestern so quickly abandon its principles in the face of the Trump administration’s attack on higher education, with so little discussion or consultation with the many of us who work every day to improve, build, care for, create, and run the University at all levels, and who remain committed to the values that should define Northwestern.”
On Friday President Bienen informed the Northwestern community that he had signed an agreement with the Trump administration. Early reports and news media on “the deal” have focused on the $75 million payment the University will make, with little attention to parts of the deal that are of much greater concern to many of us across the university. President Bienen claimed that under the agreement, "Northwestern runs Northwestern. Period." That claim rings hollow. The deal infringes academic freedom and threatens student welfare, as we will detail below.
We acknowledge that our Board of Trustees extended bridge funding that has kept research afloat and protected graduate student careers during the long suspension of grant reimbursements to the University. We also note that the university has agreed to pay the tribute demanded by the Trump government to restore the delayed funds. At the same time, we lament that many activities within funded research, and indeed whole grants, were terminated by the government on political grounds. Generally, those grants intended to benefit the health, well-being, education, or workforce development of underrepresented groups–a core part of what Northwestern is.
1. Controlling Admissions. Nothing could be more central to a university running itself than selecting its students. The deal requires Northwestern to implement a strictly "merit based" admissions process. This mandate is followed by a discussion of race and racial proxies, in case its target was not clear.
The deal requires Northwestern to turn over to the government a host of quantitative information about its applicant pool and admissions process. But as admissions officers are well aware, decisions are best when based not exclusively on attributes such as test scores and class rank, but also on applicants’ written expression, activities, and interests, and on a holistic assessment of whether they will thrive at Northwestern.
The government's plan is clear, and malicious. If our admissions decisions do not align with their numbers-only measure of "merit" they will allege illegal racial preferences. In fear of renewed penalties, Northwestern can be pressured to admit fewer students of color, first generation students, and others who have less benefit of prior educational privilege.
2. Placing students at risk. The University has long recognized that student protest is part of learning and claiming voice. The deal removes our community’s ability to debate and adjust policies as the University and our students negotiate the fraught constitutional tension between expression and disruption.
The deal requires NU to "cooperate with local, regional, and federal law enforcement ... to prevent and investigate violations of law or Northwestern’s policies and ... to intervene in violations while they are occurring ... so that violators can be apprehended and face appropriate discipline."
Universities have been rocked and shaped by student protest across the decades. Dissent is a fundamental right within a democracy. Confrontations with police put our students in danger. Northwestern running Northwestern would allow us to balance policy enforcement with safety considerations. Requiring police intervention to enforce our rules is acceding to the harsh and often violent disciplinary impulses of the Trump government.
The deal specifically calls out and reneges on the Deering Meadow agreement, a signed internal-to-the-University pledge to our own students, that ended the 2023 Deering Meadow encampment for Gaza without police involvement. Northwestern's home-grown prohibition on "3d speech" (tents) -- except for one at the Rock -- now cannot be changed by Northwestern without DOJ approval. It's hard to believe, but the deal makes Northwestern's policy about tents on campus literally a federal issue. Multiple aspects of student speech, student discipline, and student-university relations now require an OK from the federal government.
3. Targeting transgender healthcare. The deal includes that the University will prohibit hormonal interventions or transgender surgeries on anyone under 18 years of age. We have witnessed with horror how our government has sought to prevent gender-affirming care across the country. It is unconscionable that Northwestern now agrees to be an enforcer of that cruelty, not under any law but as part of a transactional accommodation to recover withheld funds.
This part of the deal presumably targets gender-affirming care provided by MDs in NU's Feinberg School of Medicine, including the Gender Pathways program for adolescents. Northwestern may “run” what care is left in the wake of these prohibitions, but it is far from the autonomy that President Bienen claims we retain. The medical care of trans youth, like the medical care of anyone, should be determined by patients and their providers–not by the federal government.
4. Governance of faculty hiring. In his November 28 email, Bienen expressed that “As an imperative to the negotiation of this agreement, we had several hard red lines we refused to cross: We would not relinquish any control over whom we hire, whom we admit as students, what our faculty teach or how our faculty teach." However the deal insists that NU may no longer require a diverse set of candidates in faculty hiring. Also the deal undoes the Deering Meadow agreement's hosting of Palestinian visiting scholars. If Northwestern runs Northwestern, we can formulate our own hiring procedures consistent with law, invite and host our own visiting scholars, and keep our promises to our students.
The issues highlighted above stand out to us as among the most blatant examples of how the agreement denies Northwestern the institutional autonomy to which it is legally entitled. There are more. “Northwestern runs Northwestern” is an empty claim to those of us in the University community—staff, faculty, students, and alumni—who have watched Northwestern so quickly abandon its principles in the face of the Trump administration’s attack on higher education, with so little discussion or consultation with the many of us who work every day to improve, build, care for, create, and run the University at all levels, and who remain committed to the values that should define Northwestern.”
If my child was going to need to take out significant loans to attend college, I think I’d discourage it at this point. Historically, the value has been worth the cost, but I’m not so sure that will be true looking forward.
Mulberry Heel
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,439
I still think a college education will be an advantage moving forward in many fields. What will matter is what people choose to major in. And certainly going heavily into debt isn't a smart move if you're going into a field where the pay isn't going to be exceptional. And I do think that at least some of the current disdain for higher ed is political and a reflection of the GOP's war on higher ed.
- Messages
- 3,474
Agree on all counts. Would even add that the pay of amjor is not a big deal. In many jobs a degree is a degree
The big debt is a problem
donbosco
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 5,283
The Origin of Student Debt: Reagan Adviser Warned Free College Would Create a Dangerous "Educated Proletariat”
In 1970, Roger Freeman, who also worked for Nixon, revealed the right’s motivation for coming decades of attacks on higher education.
theintercept.com
Yeah, I don't disagree with you at all. What I think is challenging is choosing what to major in. I'm not sure if many of the lucrative fields (finance, engineering, computer science) will still be lucrative in 10 years. You could borrow $125K to attend UNC and major in finance only to see the field be virtually obsolete by the time you reach 30, due to AI and offshoring. And this is coming from someone in finance.
Mulberry Heel
Inconceivable Member
- Messages
- 3,439
I think our coming crisis over AI is going to go way beyond just the value of a college degree. If it abolishes even half the number of jobs many say it will we're going to face our greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression, as where are all these millions of displaced people going to work to survive? The poverty rate will soar as there simply won't be nearly enough middle-class jobs to sustain our economy. People can't buy products if they don't have a decent-paying job. If AI does half of what many say it will I think it's going to force everyone to take a major look at the "advantages" of technological progress versus maintaining a stable and healthy economy, as well as lead to a humanitarian crisis.
Last edited:
Agreed. And I think that’s why I wouldn’t recommend my child to borrow significant money to attend college at this point. Take a gap year or two. Explore. Go to Community College. Let’s see how this all shakes out.
The calculus certainly changes if there are grants involved, or if parents can afford to cover tuition. Perhaps we assume debt will go away too if we reach AGI, but that’s a risk.
The calculus certainly changes if there are grants involved, or if parents can afford to cover tuition. Perhaps we assume debt will go away too if we reach AGI, but that’s a risk.
Ddseddse
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 1,198
I've posted this before, because it has such a powerful explanatory power over much of what you see in everyday life (at least in my opinion).The Origin of Student Debt: Reagan Adviser Warned Free College Would Create a Dangerous "Educated Proletariat”
In 1970, Roger Freeman, who also worked for Nixon, revealed the right’s motivation for coming decades of attacks on higher education.
But the section on the what is required to cater to an educated populace vs. what it required to cow an uneducated populace is very relevant to this discussion.