This special edition is very near and dear to my heart, as it engages a topic that was one of my first change efforts in higher education. In the late 1990s, John Burkhardt and Tony Chambers led a national project (Kellogg Forum on Higher Education for the Public Good) focused on reexamining the charter between higher education and society—exploring higher education’s role in serving the public good. This project brought together intergenerational leaders across higher education from different institutional types, national organizations, and stakeholder groups to explore the current direction of campuses. The project was generated from Burkhardt’s experience as a program director at the Kellogg Foundation and through his conversations with leaders on campuses who expressed that something profoundly different was occurring, that leaders were being pressured to raise money, to compete rather than collaborate, and to focus on prestige, while broader social goals were being pushed to the side and long-held values, such as access, critiquing failing institutions, and developing citizens and leaders, were being ignored.
While the language for what was happening—neoliberalism and academic capitalism—was just emerging at the time, the Kellogg Forum staff were voicing concern about the push for higher education to be seen as an individual good, to take a more vocational and careerist focus, to import corporate and business models into campus operations, and to spend money to obtain the best students, creating a sense of competition between institutions.
This movement made stakeholders aware of this shift on campuses and reflect on what campus leaders and policy makers might do about it. Unfortunately, many campus stakeholders were not fully aware of, or did not comprehend the magnitude of, these changes. . . so creating a countermovement proved difficult. Because it did not face much resistance, this new charter is now deeply entrenched. And, as several articles in this special edition note, this lack of focus on where higher education is headed has left it vulnerable to deeper incursions, such as the ones we have seen this last year aimed at diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts; book bans; and academic freedom and tenure. In Florida, DeSantis has even usurped a state-run college (New College of Florida) aimed at fulfilling the neoliberal objectives that can serve as a model for building out more institutions with this new vision for higher education.
This special edition is a response to the recent escalation and shift in direction of higher education in serving the public good. And it is a plea for campus leaders and stakeholders to rethink their priorities, commitments, and values, so that, this time, we can mount a countermovement that can pivot away from this neoliberal vision for higher education. The authors in this issue represent key voices from across higher education, including representatives of organizations that serve on the Change advisory council—and each is committed to rebalancing higher education to serve the broader public good. These organizations are taking significant steps to activate this shift, with many of these actions being described in these articles. By bringing together their efforts in a single issue, the editorial team also hopes to signal the need for more coordination and strategic action among those dedicated to righting higher education’s direction.
In our discussions about how Change magazine might best help shape the future of higher education, the advisory council decided that we should engage the question of higher education’s role in serving the public good, taking stock of where we are now and where we need to go. And, as the article by Bush in this special edition says, “We, cannot run from the public good because it has been co-opted. We need to reclaim it.” This is the mantra I hope leaders take away from this special edition.
One commonality across all these articles is how higher education has always fallen short of serving the public good. The opening article by Harper and Saltmarsh focuses on how higher education can take three reflective pauses that focus on the stories we tell ourselves about our public good role and then taking a hard look at how this role has been largely unfulfilled. This article offers an invitation to recommit to a new charter that authentically serves a broad public good.
The articles that follow then explore key areas that need to be prioritized at this particular moment in history. Given the events of January 6, 2021, and the attacks on the fabric of our democracy, two articles (Bridgeland, Muñoz, and Allen; Paris and Schneider) focus specifically on the role of higher education in developing citizens, including ways campuses can lean into this work more effectively. These articles represent the efforts of two key organizations in higher education—the American Association of Colleges and Universities and the Center for Community College Engagement—who partner on two important national collaborations. The importance of democratic engagement as among the most critical priorities for higher education during a time of weakening democracy in our society is also noted by Harper and Saltmarsh, as well as by several other articles in this issue that center democratic engagement as their main focus.
Another set of articles focuses on the unfulfilled role for higher education to achieve equity and eradicate racism. Claville describes the Council for Higher Education Accreditation’s recent standard on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and the link between equity and excellence that should be part of quality assurance. The article by leaders within the National Association of Diversity Officers in Higher Education (Pickett and Truong) describe their antiracist framework as a way for campuses to explore and divest from institutionally racist practices. Last, Rall and Morgan, on behalf of the Association for Governing Boards, examine the ways boards need to be brought in more integrally to DEI work and how campuses can support board involvement in DEI efforts as part of their fiduciary responsibilities. All of these articles also make the link between DEI and the goal of creating a diverse democracy, where not only are historically marginalized groups not discriminated against, but also their interests and their sense of belonging are actively considered as critical to a healthy society and democracy.
Our last three articles take a more expansive view of serving the public good through improving access and success for students and communities. The article by Denley, on behalf of the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association, explores the role of states in supporting the public good with a particular focus on equitable student access, retention, and graduation. This article presents a framework to guide state policy actors that has proven successful in both Georgia and Louisiana. Bush, on behalf of the American Council on Education, writes about being president of College Unbound, an innovative higher education environment that has now become an institution. College Unbound is dedicated to student populations that have traditionally been excluded from or not successful in higher education—adult, low-income, and returning students. He calls out higher education for never living up to the promise of equitable student access and success and pushes higher education to be guided by new pillars of belonging, reparations, collective experimentation, and adaptation. He presses campuses to realize that serving the public good can only happen with ongoing adaptation to the needs of the public. The League of Innovation’s president, Glasper, provides a 21st-century vision of community colleges focused on supporting community health and well-being, building on their long-time focus on community engagement around economic and social development and bringing in new areas such as supporting basic needs. He also emphasizes how long-standing areas such as workforce development and democratic engagement need to be executed in more strategic, mutual, and community-informed ways.
A movement can only be successful if it is adopted broadly. So I hope this issue spurs readers to think about how you and your campus are—and could be—serving the public good. A movement needs to act strategically. Therefore, we also need you to consider supporting the efforts described in these articles. From wherever you sit, how can you help amplify and support the work outlined here and other similar efforts (e.g., Paradigm Project, Project Pericles—reviewed in previous editions of Change) to serve the public good?