Failing on every front, is higher education still sustainable today?
This latest headline from trouble-plagued Harvard puts higher education's problems in a nutshell.
Not only do many Americans believe higher education is elitist, but increasingly they're concluding it's also not very good at its job, or even harmful.
Advertisement
And with reason.
Gino, a Harvard Business School behavioral scientist who studied (of all things) honesty, was stripped of tenure and fired because of academic dishonesty, the first Harvard professor so treated since the 1940s.
Investigators found problems with several of her more famous studies were the result of research misconduct.
Advertisement
Nor is she Harvard's only problem child: Claudine Gay had to step down as the school's president amid her own plagiarism scandal.
And these problems are rife throughout the academy. A Smith College commencement speaker this year even had to surrender her honorary degree when it turned out her speech had been stolen.
It's not just about copying. There's also a widely acknowledged 'replication crisis': Scientists publish papers reporting results, but it's increasingly impossible for others to reproduce those results, leading to what some have called an existential crisis for research.
Advertisement
We're told cuts to federal spending on higher education will imperil research, but such claims would be more troubling if the 'research' were of more reliably high quality.
It's an open secret that the pressure to produce a constant flood of papers that are publishable and, better yet, interesting enough to spark headlines leads to corner-cutting, 'data torture' and overclaiming — or, sometimes, outright fraud.
The result is an expensive self-licking ice cream cone of grant applications and publications, but the actual contribution to human knowledge is often lacking.
Of course, research isn't the only justification for higher education; we had colleges and universities long before professors saw academic publication as the major goal of their jobs.
Advertisement
Higher education was long justified as a way to promote our society's values and instill knowledge.
College grads were supposed to understand philosophy, government, literature and human nature in ways that people without such a higher education couldn't.
They were supposed to gain a deeper appreciation of our society's roots and purposes, and an ability to think critically, and to re-examine their views in the face of new evidence.
This is one reason for the requirement that military officers have college degrees — a requirement that probably should be rethought: Does anyone seriously believe this is what colleges and universities teach now?
An overriding theme at elite colleges — and by no means limited to them — is that Western culture is uniquely evil, white people are uniquely awful, and pretty much any crime is justifiable so long as the hands committing it are suitably brown and 'oppressed.'
Meanwhile, numerous universities face federal civil-rights investigations for allowing and in some cases promoting antisemitism and violence against Jewish students.
We've seen riots, violence, Jewish students surrounded and attacked on campus or forced to hide out in attics as mobs rampage through buildings.
The notion that our colleges and universities are encouraging students to follow their better instincts seems unsustainable.
Advertisement
And how are schools doing at inculcating actual, you know, knowledge?
Not so well. In a recent study, Richard Arum and Josipa Aroksa found there's not a lot of learning going on: 45% of students 'did not demonstrate any significant improvement in learning' over the first two years of college; 36% failed to show any improvement over four years.
The reason: Courses aren't very rigorous, and not much is required of students.
Then we see things like UCLA Medical School's notorious dumbing down of admissions in the name of 'diversity.'
Advertisement
Though racial preferences are outlawed in California, UCLA has made its minimum requirements much less demanding in order to promote minority admissions.
The result: Up to half of UCLA medical students fail basic tests of competence.
The public has noticed, which is why higher education, whose position seemed unassailable not long ago, is facing successful assaults from both the Trump administration and the market.
Advertisement
As one wag put it on X: 'Harvard is quickly realizing that nobody outside of Harvard cares about Harvard.'
Or, if they do care, they want to see it turned upside down and shaken hard.
As evolutionary biologist Thomas Ray observed, 'Every successful system accumulates parasites.' American higher ed has been extraordinarily successful, and it has been parasitized by grifters, political hacks and outright terrorist sympathizers.
Advertisement
Now that it's lost public sympathy, it can expect a stiff dose of the salts. Good.
Glenn Harlan Reynolds is a professor of law at the University of Tennessee and founder of the InstaPundit.com blog.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
3 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Hardcore birders and casual sparrow spotters: Science needs you
LOS ANGELES - Attention would-be warbler watchers and pigeon peepers: Ornithologists at UCLA and the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County are recruiting volunteers for Project Phoenix, a multiyear citizen science initiative investigating birds' response to wildfire. The team is seeking volunteers in California, Oregon and Washington to collect data from July through November, the duration of the official West Coast fire season. Volunteers need to choose a comfortable, familiar spot - a backyard, a balcony, a favorite local park - and spend 10 minutes there each week noting any bird activity they hear or see. They then enter their observations on the online platform eBird. No bird knowledge or expertise is required, said program director Olivia Sanderfoot, a UCLA ornithologist. Beginners especially are welcome, in fact, as they're more apt to notice common species and behaviors that longtime bird watchers might overlook. "Whether you are an expert birder who has been birding your whole life or you have never thought about birds, you are welcome to join Project Phoenix," Sanderfoot said. "We want this program to be accessible." This is the third consecutive year of the study, which began in 2023 with about 300 volunteers tracking bird behavior over a three-month period. The study aims to understand the effects of wildfire smoke on birds, an understudied component of the ever-expanding Western fire season. The more data volunteer observers gather, the better ornithologists can understand how fires affect these animals and what steps can be taken to help them. Participants can commit to the whole season or just a few weeks. Researchers will cross-check volunteers' notes against fire and smoke distribution data to look for patterns in animal behavior. For those who struggle to tell a bushtit from a barn owl, the team has assembled resources to help distinguish between common local species and can answer individual questions via email. Volunteers' notes are also reviewed by a team of expert birders before being passed on to researchers, who will follow up with further questions about any highly unusual birds or behavior noted. What may feel like casual observations to a backyard birder are actually valuable data points, Sanderfoot said. From the first two years of project data, scientists have already noticed that the presence of soot particles - a major component of wildfire smoke - changes the probability that certain bird species will be observed in a given area, Sanderfoot said. The reason why isn't yet clear. Are scrub jays showing up in parks where they typically aren't spotted? They may be relocating to avoid sooty skies. Is the action at a backyard feeder getting surprisingly heated? It's possible that birds aggravated by smoke are becoming more territorial. Scientists want to know if birds are actually flying to new locations when air quality declines, or if they are changing their behaviors in ways that make them harder or easier for human bird-watchers to spot. "These are the hypotheses we are hoping to test with the data we collect in 2025," Sanderfoot said. "The more people we have engaged, the more likely that we will have people in place to capture these impacts where they occur. It requires people power." Signups are at The bird-watching is also fun, volunteers said. "I've enjoyed being able to slow down and just stop to observe for 10 minutes," said Carrie Brown-Kornarens, a Los Feliz ceramicist and wildlife enthusiast who has volunteered for Project Phoenix since the study's launch. "Staying in one spot brings the birds to you, and it's a peaceful experience." Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
New York Post
17 hours ago
- New York Post
US states with the highest dementia rates revealed — did yours make the list?
Home is where the heart is — but it also might be where your memory slips away. A sweeping new study found that dementia rates vary drastically across the US in ways that can't be explained by traditional risk factors. The research suggests that where you live could play a significant role in whether you develop the memory-robbing disease later in life, opening new doors for targeted prevention efforts. 3 One in 10 Americans ages 65 and older is living with dementia. Getty Images/iStockphoto Dementia is a growing public health concern that affects more than 6 million Americans and causes over 100,000 deaths each year, according to the National Institutes of Health. Looking ahead, researchers predict new dementia cases in the US will double over the next 40 years — increasing from roughly 514,000 in 2020 to nearly 1 million by 2060. That means Americans over 55 face a 42% lifetime risk of being diagnosed. But could your zip code hold the key to lowering those odds? Dementia hot spots Researchers at UC San Francisco (UCSF) analyzed health data from more than 1.2 million veterans aged 65 and older, courtesy of the Veterans Health Administration. Over an average of 12 years, the team tracked who developed the disease — then compared the numbers by location. The Mid-Atlantic had the lowest dementia rate, with just 11.2 cases per 1,000 people annually. But other parts of the country saw significantly higher risks: The Southeast — Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama and Mississippi — had a 25% higher dementia diagnosis rate compared to the Mid-Atlantic. The Northwest and Rocky Mountains were 23% higher. The South saw an 18% increase. The Southwest trailed with a 13% higher rate. The South Atlantic and Midwest regions were about 12% higher. The Northeast and Great Lakes had a 7% increase. Notably, the regional differences couldn't be explained when researchers factored in common risk factors like age, race, heart disease or rural versus urban living. 3 The biggest risk factor for dementia is aging, but where you live also might play a role. Monkey Business – The study does have some limitations. The authors only looked at veterans, who are mostly male and may not reflect the general population. This group also faces unique risks, like traumatic brain injury and PTSD, which could impact their odds. Still, the results were clear: where you live matters. 'The study underscores the need to understand regional differences in dementia and the importance of region-specific prevention and intervention efforts,' Dr. Kristine Yaffe, senior author of the study and director of the Center for Population Brain Health at UCSF, said in a statement. Next, the researchers aim to uncover what's driving these geographic gaps. 'Quality of education, early life conditions and environmental exposures may be key factors,' said Dr. Christina Dintica, first author of the study and a UCSF postdoctoral scholar. Fight back against forgetting While UCSF digs into why some places have higher dementia rates, you don't have to wait to protect your brain. 3 Lifestyle changes like more physical activity could help prevent dementia. Kay Abrahams/ – Studies suggest that nearly 45% of dementia cases can be prevented or delayed — with experts outlining five simple steps you can take right now to lower your risk. First, get moving. Regular physical activity doesn't just keep your body in shape — it sharpens your mind too. Aim for 150 minutes of moderate aerobic activity a week, plus muscle-strengthening sessions twice weekly. Beyond exercise, managing your health is crucial. Preventing or controlling diabetes is key because too much sugar in your blood can damage vital organs — including your brain. Along those lines, keeping your blood pressure under control is equally important. High blood pressure harms blood vessels and cuts blood flow to the brain, increasing your risk of stroke and memory loss. Your hearing also plays a role. Taking steps to prevent hearing loss — or getting treatment if you already have it — matters because hearing loss can make your brain work harder, draining resources needed for memory and thinking. Finally, try to limit or avoid drinking and smoking. Excessive alcohol can cause high blood pressure and brain injury, while smoking increases the risk of dementia, including Alzheimer's disease.
UPI
18 hours ago
- UPI
Nation's top climate science assessments removed from federal websites
The vital climate science information offered guidance to communities on the climate risks they face, as well as how to plan for and safeguard residents from climate-related disasters like floods and wildfires. File Photo by Jim Ruymen/UPI | License Photo WASHINGTON, July 1 (UPI) -- The Trump administration has quietly shut down a major federal website that hosted congressionally mandated national climate assessments, which were the U.S. government's preeminent reports on climate change impacts, risks and responses. The disappearance Monday of the U.S. Global Change Research Program's website marked an unexpected loss in public access to the most crucial source for climate-related science. Also missing was access to previous National Climate Assessments, which are robust scientific evaluations used by lawmakers, scientists and the public to understand and mitigate climate change trends. Climate scientists condemned the missing access to the vital climate science information, which offered guidance to communities on the climate risks they face, as well as how to plan for and safeguard residents from climate-related disasters like floods and wildfires. Rachel Brittin, the former deputy director of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association's external affairs office, said the removal of the website "silences scientists" and "blinds decision-makers." "Americans deserve facts -- not censorship -- when it comes to preparing for a changing world," Brittin, who served during the current Trump administration, said in a statement to Medill News Service. Patrick Gonzalez, a climate change scientist at UC Berkeley and co-author of the third and fourth National Climate Assessments, criticized the Trump administration for "suppressing the science of human-caused climate change because they are afraid of the facts, which disprove their erroneous opinions." None of the five previous iterations of the assessment was available through the Global Change Research Program website as of Tuesday afternoon. Clicking on the 2023 Fifth National Climate Assessment produced an error message. Archived versions of the assessments were buried deep in the Environmental Protection Agency website, but only via the agency's search engine. They also could also be accessed through the Wayback Machine, a non-profit Internet archive. Some climate scientists downloaded copies of past assessments and uploaded them to their own websites after the site went dark. The White House did not respond to a request for comment concerning whether the assessments would be available again online. In 1990, Congress passed the Global Change Research Act, which mandated the federal government to create the Global Change Research Program and require a report every four years on the current state of global climate change. The National Climate Assessment qualified as a Highly Influential Scientific Assessment, which Congress mandated in 2005 be publicly accessible. President Donald Trump targeted the Global Change Research Program in the past. Trump removed Michael Kuperberg, the former executive director of the program, from the position in November 2020. Former President Joe Biden reinstated Kuperberg as head of the program in July 2021, where he oversaw the fourth and fifth editions of the National Climate Assessment. In April, scientists working on the Sixth National Climate Assessment were relieved from their duties. In the dismissal email, the administration said "the scope of the [National Climate Assessment] is currently being re-evaluated." On June 23, the Trump administration released a memorandum directing federal agencies to incorporate "Gold Standard Science" tenets into their research. In an executive order in May, Trump decreed that science must be "reproducible" and "skeptical of its findings and assumptions," among other descriptors. The administration referenced the memorandum to justify deleting another high-traffic federal website for climate change information. redirected users to the NOAA website as of June 24. In the same executive order, Trump said previous administrations "promoted scientific information in a highly misleading manner." The executive order also said that federal decision-making under this standard would use the "most credible, reliable and impartial scientific evidence available."
