This article points to a report (58 page PDF) addressing a variety of issues facing "Wealthy selective private universities such as Yale" such as "cost, admissions, political homogeneity, self censorship, (and) grade inflation." According to the report, "universities exist to preserve, create, and share knowledge." It recommends a return to this foundational principle and suggest it forms the basis for all the recommendations in the report, but that relationship is hard to see. Indeed, from where I sit, there's noting in this foundational principle that recommends a path of being wealthy, selective or private, but that is essentially what Yale seeks to preserve. Don't get me wrong: the discussion is good, up to the point of the recommendations (which go off the rails and on their own tangent starting at recommendation 10 ('recenter the classroom')). Jeff Jarvis is unsparing in his criticism, saying it "prostrates itself before the cancel-culture trope," which it does, but the greater fault is that it never questions the fundamental elitism on which Yale is founded, and which lies at the heart of the mistrust it faces today.
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
