Friday, November 3, 2017

An Open Letter to the UW-Superior Community

(Dear everyone: it has come to my attention that there are a lot of people reading this letter who may not understand what happened last week at UWS. You can find a good summary of the situation here and here. Here is the coverage of the student "listening session" from Friday. Thanks to everyone who has shared this post. Sincerely, Eric.)


First of all, I would like to apologize to my fellow faculty, to university and academic staff, and, most of all, to the students of UWS, past, present, and future. I feel that, in my role as a sociologist and as a department chair, I have not been as vigilant as I should have been.

This summer, as I participated in the Guided Pathways Task Force, I listened to the Provost’s idea that first-generation college students are confused by too many academic options, and that we should eliminate some low-enrolling minors (not majors, but minors) in order to streamline the process for them. I thought that it was a ludicrous argument – so ludicrous, in fact, that I did not take it seriously (see below). I thought that, in fall, people would see this recommendation, laugh it off, and forget about it.

I have come to realize, though, that not taking this idea seriously is the single biggest mistake I have ever made as an employee of UWS.

If you ask actual students who attend UWS what problems they face (and I have done this every time I teach my sociology of education course), they will tell you things like the following: there is no daycare on campus; I have to work two jobs to afford tuition; there aren’t enough scholarships; I cannot afford my books this semester. I think you get where I’m going with this. At no point in any discussion I have ever had with a student (first-generation or otherwise) have any of them hinted that having too many options was a problem.

As a sociologist, it shames me to admit that the intellectual foundation for the “too many options” argument comes from my own discipline, specifically Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital. I will argue below, however, that “too many options” is an intellectually bankrupt and ethically questionable way to use Bourdieu’s work.

The gist of the theory of cultural capital is this: Bourdieu claims that class divisions are not just economic in nature, but deeply imbedded in our constructed culture, which tends to be shared within classes. Working class people develop a culture that reinforces their working class status (such as learning the importance of deferring to authority, being on time, following orders, etc.), while middle class and elites learn how to be leaders. Cultural capital also manifests in our lives when we interact with institutions like the higher education system. It presents itself as a cultural unfamiliarity with what college is and how it works. If no one in your family has gone to college, you are entering a new world that you have to learn how to navigate.

It is possible that one manifestation of this cultural unfamiliarity with college may result in being overwhelmed by too many academic options. However, this is such a minor, trivial, and tangential aspect of the college experience for first-generation students that focusing on it to the exclusion of all other economic and cultural concerns that confront working-class students (such as having to work more than one job or not having adequate day care) is tantamount to criminal negligence. Further, solving this (questionable) problem by eliminating options is the most destructive way possible to help first-generation students. Bourdieu, were he alive, would be the first person to tell you that depriving working-class students of options is the worst possible thing you could do to their educational experience. It is an insult to their intelligence and an unconscionable underestimation of their abilities.

By the way – to my knowledge, no one from administration talked to our students about this. If they had, they would have discovered that not a single one of them had a concern about too many options. This, of course, is precisely why admin didn’t discuss this with our students.

Let’s not pretend any longer. This suspension/”warning” of majors and minors is not about helping our first-generation students who are too confused to take the right classes. This is about transforming the university. It is a declaration to our students that they don’t deserve a first-class education.

Of course, the easiest solution to this “too many options” problem, if it is indeed a problem (which it is not, as I have demonstrated above), is to identify first-generation students as they arrive on campus, target them with more intrusive advising, and see how it works. Again, “too many options” is not a problem, but we can indulge administration on this. I have suggested this advising-centered solution at a department chairs meeting this fall. Eliminating majors and minors for the sake of streamlining choices for students is like treating a toe fungus or a wart by chopping off your foot. Administration has damaged this campus irreparably. If this proposal passes, we will lose students. We will fail to recruit new students. Perhaps most importantly, we will provide the remaining students (and our alumni) with a degree that has less value and prestige.

This proposal is deeply irresponsible, both intellectually and ethically. It is based on a flawed operationalization of the sociological concept of cultural capital. The programs chosen for suspension and to be put on warning seem arbitrarily selected. Finally, it is disingenuous and cowardly. Administration is stating that this proposal will not lead to anyone losing their jobs, but they also state (and hope) that our work environment will become so abhorrent to us that we’ll choose to leave, then they won’t replace people who go. In other words, it’s an indirect way to eliminate faculty positions. Well, congratulations! Your efforts are going to pay off!

I would like to call for the Chancellor, Interim Provost, and any other administrator who was involved in crafting this proposal to do one of two things: either completely withdraw this proposal or resign immediately. If their solution to a non-existent problem is to destroy liberal arts on this campus, we need to prevent them from making similar reckless decisions in the future. They’ve proven themselves irresponsible with the power they currently wield.

I also urge students, faculty, staff, and alumni to reject this proposal and the manner in which it was presented to us. These are curricular matters that should be decided by us, the faculty, not administrators. And it is not something that administrators should present to us as an accomplished fact. Administrators gave us no warning, and they have refused to negotiate with the faculty.

Chancellor Wachter, Interim Provost Weissenburger: this is your legacy. We will always remember what you did on Halloween morning of 2017. I hope you are happy that you have played a prime part in the national trend toward dismantling higher education.

Sincerely,

Eric M. Edwards
Associate Professor, Sociology
Chair, Department of Social Inquiry
University of Wisconsin-Superior

17 comments:

  1. Dr. Edwards knows what he's talking about! He's absolutely one of the top 3 best professors I had the pleasure of learning from while studying at UW-Superior. I can almost picture him sipping away at a big mug of tea while crafting this. It's a shame to see that if the UW System isn't gutting programs with funding cuts, our own administration will. Protect what we have and expand options, if anything! Or, if there's such struggle to increase recruitment, maybe start by trying to fix some the most unattractive parts of our university at first glance to prospective students - for one, the lack of a football team. "Nice field, what's it for?"

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you Eric. Very thoughtful, important post. Only one correction--this is not a proposal, rather a fait accompli. Here's the feedback I sent to Faculty Senate Executive:
    Get a no confidence vote on the agenda NOW! Faculty Senate missed the last opportunity to bring a no confidence vote to the faculty (2 years ago?) when most other UW faculty senates did. Who knows, perhaps the current situation would be different had that vote been put to the faculty at that time.

    This latest move is another among multiple incompetent, unimaginative, and ignorant decisions made by our current administration that clearly demonstrate admin leadership's lack of trust in faculty and ignorance about the work we do and what our institution is about. They rely on fleeting, untested trends in higher ed (one size fits all) and unreliable research results that lack validity (e.g. program prioritization, prof'l advising model, privatization of services), rather than garnering the collective experience and knowledge of folks that have been a part of this great university a whole lot longer than they have. Their vision is short term gain and long term devastation. In leadership, this is both short sighted and cowardly.

    There is some satisfaction for me in the irony of them incompetently believing their decisions would let them control the message and they have now lost complete control of the message. The media coverage has been wide and far reaching (Journ Sentinel, City Pages, Chonicle of Higher Ed).

    Martha J Einerson
    Professor of Communicating Arts
    University of Wisconsin-Superior

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks for penning this. Total slap in the face to faculty, a brazen attack on liberal arts, and a huge insult to the intelligence of first gen students. A red herring for so many other issues.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thank you for this inspiring response to the dismantling of academic programs at University of Wisconsin--Superior. Your colleagues here at the University of Alaska Fairbanks are rooting for you!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I can't imagine my life today if not for the Comm Arts Dept of UWS. My time in Holden had a huge role in defining who I was to become. I understand streamlining, but this is not the way. UWS has a history of a great, highly respected news outlet right on the grounds - but you're going to eliminate the program that contributed heavily to the staffing of that station?
    I'm afraid I don't know enough about the other programs to speak to about them, but I know many Comm Arts alumni are as appalled as I am. Please reconsider.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I’m a 1995 Comm Arts (Mass Communications Major and Theater Minor) alum. This letter sums up quite well my feelings as well. It also deeply affects me since it’s a program I got my degree in that is subject to suspension. I work in higher ed in the Twin Cities st a private insitiution (Macalester), where we are adding money to the arts. We have rebuilt the Music and Studio Art buildings over the last five years and added faculty. We are about to begin to tear down and rebuild our performance Theater this month and upon completion add faculty. Quite the opposite of UWS. Seeing this move from UWS’ administrators does devalue my education. You need to have a world class program to recruit. Enrollment in these programs may be down, if they’re eliminated they can’t ever recover. Keeping them funded allows them to grow and get more students in the programs. Some of them are the most popular majors and minors out there now. My opinions are my own and not those of my employer.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks for your comments, everyone. If you want to know why tenure is important, I hope what I wrote above is a demonstration. It lets me write something like this without fear of losing my job.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thank you, Eric. It's refreshing to hear someone speak the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I am so disturbed by what has happened to the institution I attended and loved in the late 1950s. First, the attack on the custodial staff was appalling. Now the administration has compounded that error by attacking students and faculty. I am at once angry and saddened by what the administration has done.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I can see a total decline in enrollment. Nothing worse than "higher ups" making decisions and not evolving those who actually do the work or those who it effects.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Another example of 'higher ups" disconnect with resulting impact on the recipients. Out of touch with reality. How bizzare to make such change . Why would an interim position be given such power? Where are the Trustees? Sounds
    ethically skewed and WRONG!

    ReplyDelete
  12. I have been reading all the comments for all of this that other have wrote also. My daughter is a first generation student at UW Superior. This is her second year there. She is growing up so much and that is thanks to all that this school has for her there. She has wanted to go to college for school and she knew just what she want to do when she got there and it has not changed at all for her. It really upsets me when I read how they think that first generation students are next to stupid and they don't know what they want out of life. When there are many second or more generations that don't know what they want. I feel my girl is being signal out and some of her friends that all have plans for their life after UW Superior. Does it really matter if they take longer to finish their schooling if they want to take it all in. UW Superior has so much to give to the child that goes there and it is up to them if it takes longer then 4 years or not. When we went there for our tour of the school our tour guy was 30 years old and on his second time around at this school. He had gotten his first degree and once he was out in the job found out it was not what he wanted to do. And he has not the first generation his father and mother meet there at this school and I can't remember if it was his grandmother or grandfather that had gone to this school. I just hope the administration will see what they have done by this. My youngest was thinking about going to this school too in a few years but what she wants will no longer but there at this school. The arts of all kinds are important. I pray they will rethink they actions on this one.

    ReplyDelete
  13. The decision of the administration needs must be observed within its own capacity, whereon we can criticize it for its discrepancy. I have not had the chance to completely understand this decision, largely due to the decision being made in the wings of this nightmare performance, and the opaque reasoning provided for it thereof. As such, I request the administration and the victims of this treachery to firstly establish why this decision was taken, by whom, under what constraints, and what else follows this.
    If the University blatantly shows its victims such aloof behaviour, whilst plummeting our reputation and accountability, then the administration will find agents of this directive within the oppressed, returning the favor. Let this be an omen for the Chancellor and all her affiliates.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Dr. Edwards,

    Thank you for sharing your comments. Let me say from the outset that when I read the Duluth News Tribune article about the "suspended" majors and minors, I was shocked to see that the sociology major was on the list. I was even more flummoxed with the stated rationale that “First-generation college students are particularly susceptible to becoming overwhelmed by large academic program arrays.” Colloquially, what a lame excuse!

    I am the third of four generations to attend UW-Superior and have been exceedingly grateful for all my beloved institution of higher education provided me, both while as a student and as a parent of two children who attended. Although my claim to be the third of four generations, the time span between the first, my great-grandmother, Amanda Doriott (Kovsky) and my time at UWS was some 80 years. I had the privilege to attend with my father, Orlin Collins making him the second generation of my family to attend UWS. The contextual importance of chronicling these details is to underscore Dr. Edwards point regarding cultural capital and cultural unfamiliarity. By the time my father and I attended college, we were completely cultured in the working class given that we labored as auto and diesel mechanics all our lives. There had been no higher education academic pursuit by any who followed my great-grandmother and us, so we had no familiarity with college life and can genuinely be designated as first-generation students.

    The argument of “becoming overwhelmed by the large academic program arrays,” couldn’t be further from the truth. I started with the intention of studying medical technology in 1981, but soon gravitated to biology. By the time I had decided to change my major, I had experienced two other disciplines that drew my attention, which were computer science and sociology. After completing enough credits for a major in biology, circumstances lead to amass enough credits to obtain another major in sociology. The point is, that in spite my “first-generation” unfamiliarity, the array of programs offered at the time allowed me to explore my options and focus on two very different disciplines.

    Following graduation, I immediately entered the school psychology graduate program (a program lamentably cut a number of years ago) while my father continued his undergraduate general psychology studies. Life circumstances prevented him from graduating, but our time together on campus was precious. During our time at UWS together, we became cultured in academic life and loved it. The experience had generated a passion for higher education in both of us and for the next generation. All of his grandchildren have either attended, are attending, or will attend college, two of whom are my children, both graduates of UWS.

    It may be overstated to wonder what might have happened if the array of academic programs had not been available at the time I attended as a “first-generation” student, but once I started studying sociology, I fell in love with academe. An array of options is important to be able to encourage students to keep searching until they find the discipline that sparks their love of learning and investment into the cultural capital of higher education.

    Matthew C. Collins
    UW Superior Alumnus
    BS Biology/Sociology 1987
    MSE School Psychology 1989
    UW Oshkosh Continuing Student
    EdD Candidate Educational Administration 2017

    ReplyDelete
  15. Thank you for writing this. I got a very well rounded education from UWS 12 years ago. The idea of all these courses being eliminated from the college experience boggles my mind. Having such a diverse range of coursework is what prepares students for the real world and gives them a chance to make the most of themselves. "Short-sighted" would be an understatement. The decision is bad; the message and framing of the decision was worse. Perhaps UWS leadership could learn a thing or two from the Communicating Arts Department...

    ReplyDelete
  16. As a first generation student in the 80s who regretfully failed out, I can convey that it was not because of too many choices. It was for lack of guidance and connection to those choices. I would hope the guidance has improved since the 80s like it has in most universities across the country but reading this letter and comments, UWS seems to still be lacking in that department. I have a College freshman at Siena College, the guidance they receive is impressive to say the least. In fact, they do not choose their own classes the first semester. They are assigned based on their initial major/minor choice, a personal survey and an interview. They are then counseled through their future class decisions and their major/minor choices are re-evaluated each semester. It appears this administration should be spending their time and energy learning best practices from other Universities and working with the students and faculty on implementing the ones that would actually help the students raise their academic/intellectual levels instead of dumbing down the system. After all, isn’t that supposed to be the role of higher education?

    ReplyDelete