October 13, 2025

 

American Association of University Professors Rejects Viewpoint Diversity, and a Faculty Member’s Response 

 

Excerpts (links in the original):

 

“The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) recently published an essay in its flagship magazine, Academe, titled ‘Seven Theses Against Viewpoint Diversity.’ Written by Lisa Siraganian, the J. R. Herbert Boone Chair in Humanities and professor at Johns Hopkins University, the piece makes a sweeping and unsettling claim: that efforts to foster intellectual diversity on campus are ‘anathema to academic freedom.’

 

“This was not an obscure post or a stray faculty blog entry. Academe is the AAUP’s most visible publication, read by professors, administrators, trustees, journalists, and policymakers nationwide. While the essay is not an official AAUP policy resolution, its prominent platform gives it influence and credibility. For many observers, publishing such a manifesto sends a message that the AAUP not only tolerates but amplifies these ideas.

 

“The stakes could not be higher. Public trust in higher education has collapsed. A Gallup survey conducted earlier this year found that only 36 percent of Americans express significant confidence in colleges and universities, with just 19 percent of Republicans sharing this confidence. The lack of ideological diversity on campus is one of the most pronounced and visible drivers of this crisis. By framing viewpoint diversity as illegitimate, Academe has chosen to deny what students, alumni, and citizens can plainly see: the narrowing of debate, the silencing of dissent, and the rise of an academic monoculture.

 

“Universities should be places of fearless inquiry, where multiple schools of thought collide in the pursuit of truth. Publishing an argument that openly rejects this ideal does not merely miss the point; it deepens the very crisis it claims to address. It substitutes orthodoxy for openness, ideology for inquiry, and isolation for engagement. To understand why this is so destructive, we must examine each of the essay’s seven theses -- and why they fail both as arguments and as a vision for higher education."...

 

[Followed by discussion of and rebuttals to these seven points made in the AAUP article:]

 

Thesis 1: Viewpoint Diversity Is Anathema to Academic Freedom

Thesis 2: Viewpoint Diversity as a Partisan Strategy

Thesis 3: Viewpoint Diversity Mistakes Politics for Expertise

Thesis 4: Some Viewpoints Are Too Dangerous or False to Include

Thesis 5: Viewpoint Diversity Justifies External Interference

Thesis 6: Viewpoint Diversity Distracts from Real Diversity

Thesis 7: Viewpoint Diversity Undermines Trust in Expertise

 

“The publication of ‘Seven Theses Against Viewpoint Diversity’ in Academe is more than just another faculty essay. While it is not an official AAUP policy, its appearance in the association’s flagship magazine signals that these arguments are gaining traction within influential corners of academia. When the nation’s most visible faculty organization gives prominent space to an essay that dismisses the very notion of intellectual diversity, it sends a chilling message to the public: that higher education’s leaders are comfortable defending an ideological monopoly rather than confronting it.

 

“Universities now face a defining choice. They can continue to retreat into insularity, denying what students, parents, and citizens plainly see. They can insist that one dominant worldview is enough and dismiss dissent as dangerous or illegitimate. They can ignore the plummeting levels of public trust and gamble that their endowments and prestige will insulate them from scrutiny.

 

“Or they can choose a different path: to reclaim the spirit of fearless inquiry and robust debate that once made American universities the envy of the world. This means more than vague calls for 'tolerance' or procedural neutrality. It requires tangible reforms -- transparent hiring processes, protection for dissenting scholars, deliberate efforts to foster debate across ideological lines, and a renewed commitment to institutional neutrality so that campuses remain open to all students and ideas."... 

 

Full op-ed by Stanford alum and Sarah Lawrence Prof. Samuel J. Abrams at Minding the Campus. 

 

NCAA Division I Campus Leaders Are Deeply Concerned About the Direction of Division I Sports

 

Source: Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics and Elon University Poll

 

Excerpts (links in the original):

 

“An overwhelming majority of NCAA Division I campus leaders express negative views about the direction of college sports, indicating that new rules and trends will disproportionately harm collegiate women’s and men’s Olympic sports. Those leaders are also concerned about the growing reliance on student fees and other institutional funding, and they are strongly opposed to the current athlete transfer rules.

 

“At the same time, these leaders strongly affirmed their unwavering commitment to the historic academic mission and standards of college sports.

 

“These findings emerge from a national survey of Division I leaders conducted in early August 2025 by the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics and the Elon University Poll. A total of 376 university presidents and chancellors, athletics directors, senior woman administrators and faculty athletics representatives responded to the survey, a 26% response rate that provides a statistically representative sample of these Division I leadership positions within a +/-4.4% margin of error."...

 

Full article here including detailed poll results and links to PDF copies of charts and data, executive summary and full report.

 

​Op-ed: Academia Is Broken; the Compact Can Help Fix It

 

Excerpt:

....

“This sort of proposal is not unusual. For more than 20 years, government mandates on a host of issues -- including diversity, discrimination and student discipline -- have been welcomed on college campuses because they fit within the prevailing partisan ethos. But this government mandate, intended to promote excellence in core academic pursuits and to protect free speech, is being met with prophesies of doom.

 

“As someone who played a part in the compact’s initial formulation, working alongside an administration working group, I would like to offer what insight I can into the motivation and need for the compact and to address its detractors.

 

“I am the product of and have long believed deeply in the promise of America’s institutions of higher education. At their best, colleges and universities instill curiosity, critical thinking and commitment to bettering ourselves and our communities. American higher education has, moreover, been an engine of opportunity to countless Americans who have acquired the skills to pursue meaningful work, support their families and drive American prosperity.

 

“But the system is broken. Over the past year, I have spoken with countless university presidents, directors and advisers; scholars and academics; and lawmakers, policy experts and activists. The one thing they all agree on is that our university system, which was once one of the nation’s greatest strategic assets, has lost its way.

 

“The evidence is overwhelming: outrageous costs and prolonged indebtedness for students; poor outcomes, with too many students left unable to find meaningful work after graduating; some talented domestic students and scholars have been crowded out of enrollment and employment opportunities by international students; and a high degree of uniformity of thought among faculty members and administrators, which can result in a hostile environment for students with different ideas.

 

“Critics have argued that it is not the place of the federal government to solve these problems. But without government involvement, reform will be difficult. Many colleges and universities, and especially some of the oldest and traditionally prestigious schools, are burdened with archaic governance structures that make self-reform all but impossible. This means that course correction must come from the outside.

 

“Given the enormous investment of taxpayer money, it is appropriate that the federal government be involved. The government should not be using public funds -- tens of billions of dollars annually in research funding, to say nothing of student aid -- to prop up a system that purports to educate American students and serve the public good but is all too often doing nothing of the sort.”...

 

Full op-ed by Apollo Global Management CEO Marc Rowan at NY Times.

See also "What President Trump Wants from Targeted Colleges" at WSJ including key deal points along with charts showing impacts at specific schools.

 

See also "MIT Rejects Proposed Compact" at WSJ: "In a letter to Education Secretary Linda McMahon Friday, MIT President Sally Kornbluth said the proposal -- called the 'Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education' -- would restrict freedom of expression and MIT’s independence. The proposal is inconsistent with the school’s belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone, she said."

See also NY Times: “'I am deeply committed to Dartmouth’s academic mission and values and will always defend our fierce independence,' Dartmouth’s president, Sian Leah Beilock, wrote last week. 'You have often heard me say that higher education is not perfect and that we can do better,' she wrote, 'At the same time, we will never compromise our academic freedom and our ability to govern ourselves.'”

​

See also our Back to Basics at Stanford webpage.

 

Other Articles of Interest

 

Don’t Let Polarization Undermine the Vital Role Colleges Play in the U.S.

Full op-ed by UC Davis Chancellor Gary May at Higher Ed Dive.

 

U.S. Colleges Feel the Pinch of Fewer Foreign Students and Fewer Dollars

Full article at Reuters. 

​

2025 Higher Education Trends

Full article at Deloitte. 

​

Can AI Help College Athletic Programs Win More Games?

Full article at Ed Tech.

 

Harvard Faculty Say Students Skip Class and Still Get High Grades

Full article at NY Times.

​

Samples of Current Teaching, Research and Other Activities at Stanford 

 

Click on each article for direct access; selections are from Stanford Report and other Stanford websites.

​

New Undergraduate Study Options Combine Data Science with Humanities and Arts

 

Breaking the Chronic Disease Cycle

 

Stanford’s Return on Investment Portfolio and Value of the Endowment

​

**********​​​​​