Established in 1832, Wabash College is a private liberal arts institution dedicated exclusively to undergraduate education for men. As one of the nation’s few remaining all-male colleges, Wabash upholds a tradition of academic rigor, personal responsibility, and close-knit community engagement. The college’s mission emphasizes the development of critical thinking, effective communication, and responsible leadership. The current President is Dr. Scott Feller. He has been president since 2020, and he has been with Wabash as a professor of chemistry and administrator since 1998. Wabash College is in Crawfordsville, Indiana, a community of 16,100 located 45 miles northwest of Indianapolis and 150 miles southeast of Chicago.
In 2022- 23, US News & World Report projects the total cost per year is $65,825 (tuition, housing, etc.) Net price after aid is $26,834
Curricula
Wabash offers a diverse array of academic programs across three divisions: Natural Sciences, Humanities and Arts, and Social Sciences. Students can choose from 27 majors, allowing for a tailored educational experience. The curriculum is designed to foster interdisciplinary learning, encouraging students to explore various fields and integrate knowledge.
A distinctive feature of Wabash’s academic program is the comprehensive examination that seniors must pass to graduate. This rigorous assessment includes both written and oral components, ensuring that graduates have a deep and thorough understanding of their chosen fields.
Strengths
Strong Alumni Network—Wabash boasts a dedicated and active alumni base that provides current students with mentorship, networking opportunities, and career support. The Princeton Review ranks Wabash fourth in the nation for “Best Alumni Network.”
Continuity of Leadership – Wabash has a history of stable and effective leadership, providing consistent direction and long-term strategic planning. This stability has contributed to the college’s strong institutional culture, financial health, and sustained commitment to academic excellence and student success.
Academic Excellence—Wabash’s commitment to a rigorous liberal arts education is evident in its comprehensive curriculum and the requirement that seniors pass comprehensive exams.
Financial Aid and Scholarships – Approximately 99% of Wabash students receive some form of financial assistance, making the college accessible to a diverse student body.
Personalized Attention – With a favorable student-to-faculty ratio, Wabash provides an environment where students receive individualized attention, fostering strong mentorship relationships and personalized academic guidance.
Weaknesses
Declining Enrollment– Over the past ten years, Wabash has experienced a slow decline in enrollment of 11%.
Geographic Isolation – Located in a small town in Indiana, Wabash may face challenges in providing students with access to urban amenities and opportunities that larger cities offer.
Niche Appeal: The college’s all-male atmosphere deters potential applicants from seeking a coeducational experience, potentially limiting the applicant pool.
Economic Impact
Wabash College plays a significant role in the local economy of Crawfordsville and the surrounding Montgomery County. As a major employer, the college provides jobs to faculty, administrative staff, and support personnel. Additionally, the presence of students and visitors contributes to local businesses, including housing, dining, retail, and services. The college’s events and programs also attract visitors, further stimulating economic activity in the region.
According to the Independent Colleges of Indiana, Wabash College has a total economic impact on the state of Indiana of $134 million and created nearly 1,000 jobs in the state. According to LinkedIn profiles, they have over 9,000 alumni, of which 4,500 live in Indiana, and 869 live in the Crawfordsville, Indiana area.
Enrollment
Wabash’s 822 male students come from 32 states and 16 foreign countries; 73% are from Indiana. 73% are White, 5% are international, 12% are Hispanic, and 10% are other minorities. President Feller stated: “Wabash in the future is going to draw more students from more different places,” We already have the highest number of international students in the history of the College. We’re going to draw our student body more nationally and more internationally. And our faculty and staff too. So we’ve got to make sure that when those folks come here, they find a welcoming community where they feel a sense of belonging. “This College is relational, not transactional.”
Degree Awards by Major
In 2023, Wabash College awarded a total of 175 degrees across various disciplines. The distribution of the disciplines is as follows:
This distribution reflects the college’s strong emphasis on the humanities and social sciences, aligning with its liberal arts mission.
Alumni
The majority of Wabash students enter graduate or professional school within five years of graduating. Each year, approximately 25-30 percent of Wabash graduates enroll in graduate and professional schools, including about 8-10 percent in medical and law schools and about 20 percent in other graduate arts and sciences programs. Among those entering the workforce, 31 percent begin careers in business, while nine percent work in government, social service, or teaching.
When reviewing LinkedIn alumni data, we found that Wabash College alums’ primary areas of study were Economics, Psychology, Political Science, history, and biology.
Wabash has produced numerous distinguished alumni who have made significant contributions across various fields:
Gov. Mike Braun is the current governor of Indiana, a former U.S. senator from Indiana, and a former businessman.
Jeremy Bird is the Executive Vice President of Driver Experience for Lyft.
Robert Dirks was a Renowned chemist and researcher in molecular sciences.
Dan Simmonsis an Award-winning science fiction and horror writer best known for the Hyperion Cantos series.
Endowment and Financial Grade
Wabash College’s endowment has maintained its endowment size over the past decade, reflecting successful fundraising efforts and prudent financial management. As of December 31, 2023, the endowment was valued at approximately $379 million, compared to $371 million in 2014. This growth demonstrates the institution’s ability to sustain financial stability while continuing to invest in its academic programs and student success.
Forbes, in 2023, gave Wabash a top 100 grade of an A+ and a GPA of 4.27. The top grade was Harvard A+ and a GPA of 4.50.
Why is Wabash College Relevant Today
In today’s rapidly changing educational landscape, Wabash College remains steadfast in its dedication to a liberal arts education tailored for men. The college’s emphasis on critical thinking, effective communication, and ethical leadership prepares graduates to navigate and contribute meaningfully to a complex world. Wabash’s strong alumni network and commitment to personalized education continue to offer students unique opportunities for personal and professional growth.
Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy, and formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on small colleges’ challenges and opportunities.
Dean Hoke and Kent Barnds Relaunch Acclaimed Series to Explore the Future of Small Colleges
Bloomington, Indiana – February 3, 2025 – Small College America, the podcast dedicated to exploring the strengths, challenges, and future of small colleges, is officially relaunching with a new season. The series is co-hosted by Dean Hoke, Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group and former President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators, and Kent Barnds, Executive Vice President for Strategy and Innovation at Augustana College in Rock Island, Illinois.
Both Hoke and Barnds are passionate advocates for small colleges, having graduated from Urbana University (OH) and Gettysburg College (PA), respectively. Their personal experiences and professional expertise have shaped their commitment to highlighting the vital role these institutions play in American higher education.
“The landscape for small colleges is shifting rapidly, and we believe now is the time to amplify the conversation about their future,” said Kent Barnds. ” Dean and I are both passionate advocates for these institutions because we’ve experienced firsthand the impact of a small college education.” Dean Hoke stated, “The first season of Small College America confirmed that there is a deep need for dialogue about the opportunities and challenges facing these schools. With this new season, we aim to engage with higher education leaders to explore innovative strategies that will help small colleges not just survive but thrive in an evolving higher education environment.”
The original four-part series first aired on January 10, 2023, and was hosted by Dean Hoke and Tom Davisson, who now serves as Charter Commissioner for the National Association for Academic Excellence (NAAE). The inaugural season featured insightful conversations with small college presidents, including:
Dr. Barry Ryan, Former President of Woodbury University (Burbank, California)
Stefanie Niles, President of Cottey College (Nevada, Missouri)
Ryan Smith, President of the University of Rio Grande and Rio Grande Community College (Rio Grande, Ohio)
Janelle Vanasse, President of Alaska Pacific University (Anchorage, Alaska)
The new season of Small College America will continue its mission of bringing critical discussions to the forefront by interviewing higher education leaders, policy experts, and innovators. The podcast will delve into the evolving role of small colleges, their economic impact, innovative strategies for sustainability, and how they can continue to provide a highly personalized educational experience.
Season Two will begin weekly on March 11th at 11AM Eastern. More details, including upcoming, will be announced soon.
For updates, visit [Podcast Website] or follow Small College America on [Social Media Links].
About the Hosts
Kent Barnds is the Executive Vice President for Strategy and Innovation at Augustana College, where he has been a senior administrator since 2005. A recognized thought leader in enrollment management and institutional strategy, Barnds is deeply invested in the success of small colleges and the students they serve.
Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy, and formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on small colleges’ challenges and opportunities.
As an undergraduate student, Lisa MacLeod wasn’t sure where her career path would take her. She majored in English literature and international relations with the aspirations of being a journalist or a State Department staffer and found herself back in academia not long after.
Lisa MacLeod, assistant dean of student success at Soka University of America
Lisa MacLeod/Soka University of America
Now, as the inaugural assistant dean of student success at Soka University of America since last fall, MacLeod is charged with breaking institutional silos at the California institution to improve student outcomes after graduation, working collaboratively across campus.
MacLeod spoke with Inside Higher Ed about her time thus far at the institution, a private liberal arts college, and her aspirations in the long-term.
Inside Higher Ed: What is your new role at Soka and how does it fit into institutional goals for student success?
MacLeod: One of the most important things [about my role] is that I am housed under the dean of faculty, so I’m not under the dean of students, which is very different from how a lot of schools have done this.
My top priority, luckily, isn’t getting students to graduate—because we already are doing that very well as an institution … I’m not just new in the job, the position is new at the university—so there’s some room for me to define what the position is.
I was asked to look specifically at advising. Right now, our program is all faculty individually advising students for academic advising. Career services and internships is the other side of the house, and historically, the two sides of the house don’t talk to each other very well. So looking at how we advise, but also thinking about, are there ways that we can integrate better, because we have lots of good things happening by different people. But do faculty know about that? Do they know enough about it to recommend it to students? Not so much.
The other thing is starting to integrate career readiness skills into the curriculum. This year, we are rolling out RATE (Reflect, Articulate, Translate, Evaluate), which was developed by the University of Minnesota for their liberal arts students.
We’re having our first cohort this coming semester—so beginning in February—of faculty fellows who have pledged to develop the RATE system into their existing course, and we’re supporting them with some training and other kinds of activities so that we’re very specific in the application. We’re not asking you to change your course. What we’re asking is that you make it more evident to students how they are developing career readiness skills in addition to academic and subject area knowledge.
Inside Higher Ed: You were a double major in college. While interdisciplinary learning can be an asset to students, sometimes academic departments can be more focused on helping students on a specific path within their discipline. Do you have any insights based on your experience as a dual major and helping students find their own path?
MacLeod: At Soka, we don’t have majors—everyone graduates with a major in liberal arts, and then within that, we have concentrations. Students here do have the opportunity to double concentrate, so they’re not taking as many courses as you would for a major, but there’s still some degree of specialty.
I encourage them to look at the whole course catalog and say, “Take the classes that really attract you, that are interesting, and you’ll figure out how they connect to each other if you look for it,” and to not worry about double concentrations. Or, you know, force yourself to take courses you wouldn’t otherwise.
Certainly, I encourage students, depending on what their interests are, if you’re going to go to graduate school, yes, take statistics, take a research methodology course. Do these kinds of courses that are skill building [so] you’ll have that [for] the next level of your education; they will have expected you to have that background.
But beyond that, I’m really focused on having students maybe try something they wouldn’t otherwise. I wish as an undergraduate I had taken an anthropology class, but it never occurred to me; it just wasn’t on my radar. Explore, because you don’t know what you don’t know, and to really find something that drives them, that they’re really excited about doing the coursework and learning more about that area. Because they’ll put more into it, and as they put more into it, they’re going to develop the liberal arts skills in the process. Whereas, if they’re forcing themselves to take a course because they feel they should take this course, they’re not going to have the same level of motivation. They’re not going to get the same out of it.
Inside Higher Ed: As you said, one of your priorities is advising, which is so important to the student journey. What does quality advising look like to you?
MacLeod: I think that quality advising really requires time and listening.
I always ask students to come in with kind of a worksheet: Where are you [in your progress] toward graduation? Where are you in terms of taking required courses? But I also ask them things like, “OK, this is a required course, but you have a selection of five different faculty members that might be teaching that course, and of course, they bring their skills and expertise and kind of personality in each course. Why did you choose that faculty member? If you’re interested in this, maybe this other faculty member—even though it’s the same requirement—might teach that course in a way that you would find appealing?” And directing them to resources, encouraging them to talk to faculty before they enrolled in the course if they have questions or concerns or if they’re not certain about something.
Then also asking them very blatant questions that I wish someone had asked me when I was an undergraduate. What are your plans after you graduate? What are you doing to achieve that goal? What information do you need to know, and how are you going to get it moving forward?
I took time off [after graduating] because I’d never had those conversations. Maybe people at the university thought I was having it with my family. My family may have thought I was having it with people at the university. I’m not sure where I lost the memo, but it just didn’t happen. Before, someone had always come along and said, “Apply for this,” and it was a very structured thing. That’s not how life after graduation works at all. So I ask those questions I wish someone had asked me.
Inside Higher Ed: What is student success to you?
MacLeod: It’s not for me to define for someone else what success looks like. I have my own ideas, but I think it’s wrong to impose that on other people, because success can look like so many different things.
In general, I feel that student success is they graduate from the program, and they feel good about that. That there’s not regret that they should have gone someplace else, but also that we’ve equipped them with the skills in their personal and in their professional life to face the challenges that will inevitably come and to be able to surmount them.
The first couple years after graduation for everyone is hard—that’s just kind of the nature of the beast—but that they are prepared for, that they can get through it, and know that there’s something on the other side. that they are confident in their skills, that they will figure it out and then end up on the other side in a career that they find fulfilling in some manner, being able to contribute to the community, if that’s their goal, in a way that is meaningful to them. And hopefully happy alumni that are talking to our current students that and sharing their experiences.
Inside Higher Ed: What are your long-term goals in this new role?
MacLeod: It feels like so much of academic life is keeping your head above water for now.
I think that in the long term, I’d really like to see a more collaborative campus culture, where faculty members are supporting each other in their endeavors, maybe a bit more. It’s not that my colleagues are unsupportive, but we don’t always ask each other or are aware of the ways in which our research overlaps and we could actually be doing more—whether it’s with our teaching or where we could be drawing more on each other’s skills and knowledge base.
I’m still really new at this … so I think right now my priority is still listening, rather than planning for the future.
Seeking stories from campus leaders, faculty members and staff for our Student Success focus. Share here.
Are many of the ills that plague American society caused by Ivy League admission policies?
That is the premise of David Brooks’s cover story for the December issue of The Atlantic, “How the Ivy League Broke America.” Brooks blames the Ivies and “meritocracy” for a host of societal problems, including:
Overbearing parenting
Less time for recess (as well as art and shop) in schools
An economy that doesn’t provide opportunities for those without a college degree
The death of civic organizations like Elks Lodge and Kiwanis Club
The high percentage of Ivy League graduates who choose careers in finance and consulting
The rise of populism based on “crude exaggerations, gross generalizations, and bald-faced lies.”
Brooks somehow left the decline of small-town mom-and-pop businesses and the popularity of reality television off his laundry list.
You may be wondering how the Ivies contributed to or caused all these problems. The essence of Brooks’s argument is that “every coherent society has a social ideal—an image of what the superior person looks like.” His hypothesis is that America’s social ideals reflect and are determined by the qualities that Ivy League universities value in admission.
One hundred years ago, the Ivy League social ideal was what Brooks terms the “Well-Bred Man”—white, male, aristocratic and preppy, athletic, good-looking, and personable. What was not part of the ideal was intellectual brilliance or academic prowess, and in fact those who cared about studying were social outcasts. Applying to the Ivies resembled applying for membership to elite social clubs.
That changed starting in the 1930s when a group of educational leaders, the most prominent being Harvard president James Conant, worried that the United States was not producing leaders capable of dealing with the problems it would face in the future. Their solution was to move to an admission process that rewarded intelligence rather than family lineage. They believed that intelligence was the highest human trait, one that is innate and distributed randomly throughout the population. Conant and his peers believed the change would lead to a nation with greater opportunities for social mobility.
Brooks seems far from sure that the change was positive for America. He acknowledges that “the amount of bigotry—against women, Black people, the LGBTQ community—has declined” (that might be debatable given the current political climate), but observes that the previous ideal produced the New Deal, victory in World War II, NATO and the postwar world led by America, while the products of the ideal pushed by Conant have produced “quagmires in Vietnam and Afghanistan, needless carnage in Iraq, the 2008 financial crisis, the toxic rise of social media, and our current age of political dysfunction.” Those examples seem cherry-picked.
In the essay, Brooks cites a number of troubling societal problems and trends, all supported with extensive research, but the weakness of his argument is that he tries to find a single cause to explain all of them. That common denominator is what he calls “meritocracy.”
Meritocracy, a society with opportunities based on merit, is an appealing concept in theory, but defining merit is where things get sticky. Merit may be similar to Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart’s description of pornography, in that you know it when you see it. Does merit consist of talent alone? Talent combined with work ethic? Talent, work ethic and character?
Merit is in the eye of the beholder. If I was admitted to an Ivy League university, it was obviously because I had merit. If someone else, especially someone from an underrepresented population, got the acceptance instead of me, factors other than merit must have been at play. If two candidates have identical transcripts but different SAT scores, which one possesses more merit? Complicating the discussion is the fact that many things cited as measures of merit are in fact measures of privilege.
For Brooks, Ivy League meritocracy involves an overreliance on intelligence and academic achievement, to the detriment of noncognitive skills that are more central to success and happiness in life. He argues that “success in school is not the same thing as success in life,” with success in school primarily being individual while success in life is team-based. He quotes Adam Grant’s argument that academic excellence is not a strong predictor of career excellence.
Ultimately, he argues that “meritocracy” has spurred the creation of “an American caste system,” one in which “a chasm divides the educated from the less well-educated,” triggering “a populist backlash that is tearing society apart.” Yet Brooks’s beef is not so much with meritocracy as it is with a mindset that he attributes to Conant and his brethren. He equates meritocracy with a belief in rationalism and social engineering that assumes that anything of value can be measured and counted. What he is criticizing is something different from meritocracy, or at least reflects a narrow definition of meritocracy.
Even if we don’t agree with Brooks’s definitions, or the implication that Ivy League admission policies are responsible for the ills of society, his article raises a number of important questions about the college admission process at elite colleges and universities.
First, is the worship of standardized testing misplaced? The SAT became prominent in college admission at around the same time that Conant and others were changing the Ivy League admission paradigm. They believed that intelligence could be measured and latched onto the SAT as a “pure,” objective measure of aptitude. Today, of course, we recognize that test scores are correlated with family income and that scores can be manipulated through test preparation. And the “A” in SAT no longer stands for aptitude.
Do we measure what we value or do we value what we can measure? Brooks criticizes the Ivies for focusing on academic achievement in school at the expense of “noncognitive skills” that might be more important to success in life after college, things like curiosity, relationship-building skills and work ethic. He’s right, but there are two reasons for the current emphasis. One is that going to college is going to school, so an admission process focused on scholastic academic achievement is defensible. The other is that we haven’t developed a good mechanism for measuring noncognitive skills.
That raises a larger question. What do we want the admission process to accomplish? The SAT is intended to predict freshman year college GPA (in conjunction with high school grades). Is that a satisfactory goal? Shouldn’t we have a larger lens, aiming to identify those who will be most successful at the end of college, or after college? Should we admit those with the greatest potential, those who will grow the most from the college experience, or those who will make the greatest contribution to society after college?
Brooks questions elite colleges’ preferences for “spiky” students over those who are well-rounded. Is a student body full of spiky students really better? An even more important question arises from a distinction Brooks made some years ago between “résumé virtues” and “eulogy virtues.”
Does the elite college admission process as currently constituted reward and encourage students who are good at building résumés? A former student attending an elite university commented that almost every classmate had done independent academic research and started a nonprofit. Do students aspiring to the Ivies choose activities because they really care about them or because they think they will impress admission officers, and can admission officers tell the difference? What is the consequence of having a student body full of those who are good at playing the résumé-building game?
There is one other issue raised by Brooks that I find particularly important. He argues that those who are successful in the elite admission process end up possessing greater “hubris,” in that they believe their success is the product of their talent and hard work rather than privilege and luck. Rather than appreciating their good fortune, they may believe they are entitled to it. That misconception may also fuel the populist backlash to elites that has increased the division within our country.
I don’t buy Brooks’s definition of meritocracy or his contention that the Ivy League “broke” America, but his article nevertheless merits reading and discussion.
Jim Jump recently retired after 33 years as the academic dean and director of college counseling at St. Christopher’s School in Richmond, Va. He previously served as an admissions officer, philosophy instructor and women’s basketball coach at the college level and is a past president of the National Association for College Admission Counseling. He is the 2024 recipient of NACAC’s John B. Muir Excellence in Media Award.
Rachel
Oglesby most recently served as America First Policy Institute’s Chief
State Action Officer & Director, Center for the American Worker. In
this role, she worked to advance policies that promote worker freedom,
create opportunities outside of a four-year college degree, and provide
workers with the necessary skills to succeed in the modern economy, as
well as leading all of AFPI’s state policy development and advocacy
work. She previously worked as Chief of Policy and Deputy Chief of Staff
for Governor Kristi Noem in South Dakota, overseeing the implementation
of the Governor’s pro-freedom agenda across all policy areas and state
government agencies. Oglesby holds a master’s degree in public policy
from George Mason University and earned her bachelor’s degree in
philosophy from Wake Forest University.
Jonathan Pidluzny – Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy and Programs
Jonathan
Pidluzny most recently served as Director of the Higher Education
Reform Initiative at the America First Policy Institute. Prior to that,
he was Vice President of Academic Affairs at the American Council of
Trustees and Alumni, where his work focused on academic freedom and
general education. Jonathan began his career in higher education
teaching political science at Morehead State University, where he was an
associate professor, program coordinator, and faculty regent from
2017-2019. He received his Ph.D from Boston College and holds a
bachelor’s degree and master’s degree from the University of Alberta.
Chase Forrester – Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations
Virginia
“Chase” Forrester most recently served as the Chief Events Officer at America First Policy Institute, where she oversaw the planning and
execution of 80+ high-profile events annually for AFPI’s 22 policy
centers, featuring former Cabinet Officials and other distinguished
speakers. Chase previously served as Operations Manager on the
Trump-Pence 2020 presidential campaign, where she spearheaded all event
operations for the Vice President of the United States and the Second
Family. Chase worked for the National Republican Senatorial Committee
during the Senate run-off races in Georgia and as a fundraiser for
Members of Congress. Chase graduated from Clemson University with a
bachelor’s degree in political science and a double-minor in Spanish and
legal studies.
Steve Warzoha – White House Liaison
Steve
Warzoha joins the U.S. Department of Education after most recently
serving on the Trump-Vance Transition Team. A native of Greenwich, CT,
he is a former local legislator who served on the Education Committee
and as Vice Chairman of both the Budget Overview and Transportation
Committees. He is also an elected leader of the Greenwich Republican
Town Committee. Steve has run and served in senior positions on numerous
local, state, and federal campaigns. Steve comes from a family of
educators and public servants and is a proud product of Greenwich Public
Schools and an Eagle Scout.
Tom Wheeler – Principal Deputy General Counsel
Tom
Wheeler’s prior federal service includes as the Acting Assistant
Attorney General for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Justice, a
Senior Advisor to the White House Federal Commission on School Safety,
and as a Senior Advisor/Counsel to the Secretary of Education. He has
also been asked to serve on many Boards and Commissions, including as
Chair of the Hate Crimes Sub-Committee for the Federal Violent Crime
Reduction Task Force, a member of the Department of Justice’s Regulatory
Reform Task Force, and as an advisor to the White House Coronavirus
Task Force, where he worked with the CDC and HHS to develop guidelines
for the safe reopening of schools and guidelines for law enforcement and
jails/prisons. Prior to rejoining the U.S. Department of Education, Tom
was a partner at an AM-100 law firm, where he represented federal,
state, and local public entities including educational institutions and
law enforcement agencies in regulatory, administrative, trial, and
appellate matters in local, state and federal venues. He is a frequent
author and speaker in the areas of civil rights, free speech, and
Constitutional issues, improving law enforcement, and school safety.
Craig Trainor – Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Office for Civil Rights
Craig
Trainor most recently served as Senior Special Counsel with the U.S.
House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary under Chairman Jim
Jordan (R-OH), where Mr. Trainor investigated and conducted oversight of
the U.S. Department of Justice, including its Civil Rights Division,
the FBI, the Biden-Harris White House, and the Intelligence Community
for civil rights and liberties abuses. He also worked as primary counsel
on the House Judiciary’s Subcommittee on the Constitution and Limited
Government’s investigation into the suppression of free speech and
antisemitic harassment on college and university campuses, resulting in
the House passing the Antisemitism Awareness Act of 2023. Previously, he
served as Senior Litigation Counsel with the America First Policy
Institute under former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, Of Counsel
with the Fairness Center, and had his own civil rights and criminal
defense law practice in New York City for over a decade. Upon graduating
from the Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law, he
clerked for Chief Judge Frederick J. Scullin, Jr., U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of New York. Mr. Trainor is admitted to
practice law in the state of New York, the U.S. District Court for the
Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, and the U.S. Supreme Court.
Madi Biedermann – Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Communications and Outreach
Madi
Biedermann is an experienced education policy and communications
professional with experience spanning both federal and state government
and policy advocacy organizations. She most recently worked as the Chief
Operating Officer at P2 Public Affairs. Prior to that, she served as an Assistant Secretary of Education for Governor Glenn Youngkin and worked
as a Special Assistant and Presidential Management Fellow at the Office
of Management and Budget in the first Trump Administration. Madi
received her bachelor’s degree and master of public administration from
the University of Southern California.
Candice Jackson – Deputy General Counsel
Candice
Jackson returns to the U.S. Department of Education to serve as Deputy
General Counsel. Candice served in the first Trump Administration as
Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, and Deputy General Counsel,
from 2017-2021. For the last few years, Candice has practiced law in
Washington State and California and consulted with groups and
individuals challenging the harmful effects of the concept of “gender
identity” in laws and policies in schools, employment, and public
accommodations. Candice is mom to girl-boy twins Madelyn and Zachary,
age 11.
Joshua Kleinfeld – Deputy General Counsel
Joshua
Kleinfeld is the Allison & Dorothy Rouse Professor of Law and
Director of the Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative
State at George Mason University’s Scalia School of Law. He writes and
teaches about constitutional law, criminal law, and statutory
interpretation, focusing in all fields on whether democratic ideals are
realized in governmental practice. As a scholar and public intellectual,
he has published work in the Harvard, Stanford, and University of
Chicago Law Reviews, among other venues. As a practicing lawyer, he has
clerked on the D.C. Circuit, Fourth Circuit, and Supreme Court of
Israel, represented major corporations accused of billion-dollar
wrongdoing, and, on a pro bono basis, represented children accused of
homicide. As an academic, he was a tenured full professor at
Northwestern Law School before lateraling to Scalia Law School. He holds
a J.D. in law from Yale Law School, a Ph.D. in philosophy from the
Goethe University of Frankfurt, and a B.A. in philosophy from Yale
College.
Hannah Ruth Earl – Director, Center for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships
Hannah
Ruth Earl is the former executive director of America’s Future, where
she cultivated communities of freedom-minded young professionals and
local leaders. She previously co-produced award-winning feature films as
director of talent and creative development at the Moving Picture
Institute. A native of Tennessee, she holds a master of arts in religion
from Yale Divinity School.
When tenured Millsaps College professor James Bowley sent an email sharing his opinion on the outcome of the 2024 presidential election, he didn’t anticipate it would result in his termination. But in a perfect storm of overreach and red tape, that’s exactly what happened.
On Nov. 6, 2024 — the day after the election — Bowley emailed the students in his “Abortion and Religions” class, canceling that day’s session to “mourn and process this racist fascist country.” With only three students in the class, Bowley got to know them quite well, including their political feelings, and knew canceling class would be best for those students. As Bowley told FIRE, “I just want to be caring and kind to my students, whom I knew would be troubled by the election.” Bowley wasn’t just trying to get out of work; he did not cancel the much larger first-year writing class session he taught that same day because he had no reason to know how those students felt about the election.
Two days later, Millsaps Provost Stephanie Rolph informed Bowley that he had been placed on temporary administrative leave pending review, for the bizarre offense of using his “Millsaps email account to share personal opinions with [his] students.”
That’s right: Millsaps didn’t take issue with Bowley canceling class (likely because they’d have to punish lots of people; professors cancel class for all sorts of reasons). The only cited reason was the use of his email to share personal opinions with students, which unsurprisingly is not an actual policy violation. That’s right: The college simply fabricated a policy violation so it could punish a professor for his speech. Frank Neville, president of the private college, has ignored hundreds of calls to reinstate Bowley, who was unable to do his job for over three months until yesterday, when he was eventually fired.
Welcome to Millsaps, a labyrinth of academic bureaucracy where personal opinions may not be shared.
Millsaps College president Frank Neville denied a committee recommendation and doubled down on Bowley’s leave being both justified and necessary, without explanation. (Barbara Gauntt / Clarion Ledger / USA TODAY NETWORK)
Professor punished without due process
Everything about Bowley’s treatment goes directly against Millsaps’ own fundamental principles of “freedom of speech and expression.” While Millsaps is a private institution not bound by the First Amendment, its commitment to free speech leads any reasonable student or faculty member to believe they are being promised expressive rights that align with the First Amendment.
Courts have recognized protection for a great deal of faculty speech on matters of public concern (say, apresidentialelection) because higher education depends on the wide exposure to robust exchanges of thoughts and ideas. But Millsaps’ actions here signal that it doesn’t take its own principles seriously and is making up its own standards for free speech and expression. That’s not okay with us — and it’s unfair to the students and faculty of Millsaps.
Not only did FIRE request that Millsaps drop the investigation and reinstate Bowley, but so did more than 100 students, reportedly, (pretty impressive for a college of only about 600) and over 500 alumni. And when Bowley contested the provost’s decision to place him on leave, a grievance committee made up of faculty members determined that Millsaps couldn’t identify a single policy that Bowley had violated. The committee recommended that Bowley be reinstated immediately.
FIRE remains by Bowley’s side, fighting for his return to teaching — and his right to share his opinions with students.
The grievance committee, like FIRE, also found that Bowley was not afforded proper dueprocess. Bowley was placed on leave before receiving a hearing and final determination. By doing so, the provost created an intermediary step in the process of dismissing a professor that exists nowhere in the handbooks — all without Bowley having any prior violations or disciplinary actions taken against him.
But Neville seemed unfazed by the calls from the Millsaps community and unconvinced by the facts presented to him. On Jan. 10, Neville denied the grievance committee’s recommendation and doubled down on Bowley’s leave being both justified and necessary, without explanation.
Calls to reinstate Bowley continued, this time reaching tens of thousands of people. But that still wasn’t enough. On Jan. 14, Bowley was told in a meeting that he was fired for not exercising restraint and not clarifying that his views were not that of the college’s. To be clear: The college fired Bowley for an offense – not clarifying that his views were not that of the college’s – of which he wasn’t accused. It’s no surprise that Bowley could not extricate himself from what Millsaps made into an impossible situation.
Ferris State cannot punish professor for comedic — and now viral — video jokingly referring to students as ‘cocksuckers’ and ‘vectors of disease’
News
It’s a joke, people. But violating faculty rights is not.
Even if the college had originally charged Bowley with not clarifying that his views were not that of the college’s, his email to his class still wouldn’t qualify. Whatever interest Millsaps may have in preventing faculty from purporting to speak on its behalf does not justify automatic punishment for simply not asserting that one isn’t speaking for the college. In fact, the Supreme Court has held that a teacher could not be punished for a letter to the editor he wrote in which he identified himself as a teacher at a certain school. Just because Bowley is identified as working at Millsaps (via his faculty email), doesn’t mean his speech is transformed into speech on behalf of the college.
Millsaps cannot overcome this principle just because it wants faculty to indicate whether views expressed “are individual or those of the institution.” Nothing in Bowley’s email can reasonably be interpreted as speaking on behalf of Millsaps, as it is commonly understood that when using their college email, faculty members are speaking for themselves rather than conveying that they speak for their employer. And here, Bowley was very clearly sharing an opinion – a criticism of an election outcome – that any reasonable person would understand as being his own opinion.
Bowley told FIRE yesterday: “I love Millsaps College and even more I love my students, but censorship by an administration by definition means that it is not education anymore; it is not a legitimate college.”
FIRE remains by Bowley’s side, fighting for his return to teaching — and his right to share his opinions with students.
As you prepare to take office for a second time, we know you have ambitious plans to address the nation’s challenges and build a more secure and prosperous America. Achieving those goals will require contributions from many areas of society, and we urge you to see the value in partnering with our nation’s colleges and universities.
Campuses across the country are deeply embedded in local communities and work every day to build their communities while meeting national needs. Let me share just three of many examples:
Many, including you, have criticized higher education in recent years. We know that we always have room to innovate and improve. But we also know a basic truth: higher education builds America. This has been understood by American presidents since the nation’s founding. That conviction inspired landmark legislation such as the land-grant acts of the 19th century and the GI Bills of the 20th and 21st centuries—measures that contributed to unprecedented economic and technological growth.
Study after study has documented the benefits colleges and universities provide to the workforce and the economy. For example, Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce found that less than a decade from now 72 percent of jobs in the American economy will require some level of postsecondary education or workforce training. Simply put, every pathway to expanding our economy and filling employers’ needs runs through colleges and universities.
The American Council on Education (ACE), which I lead, is the major coordinating body for the nation’s colleges and universities. Our members include community colleges, liberal arts colleges, regional universities, and research universities. They are public and private, large and small, urban and rural. Many have religious affiliations.
We have common-sense recommendations to help your administration and the new Congress deliver on the goals of all Americans: a safe and secure country, a prosperous economy with good jobs, and uncontested global leadership in developing new technologies. You can do that by extending Pell Grant eligibility to those who enroll in high-quality, short-term programs. You can do that by helping military service members and veterans further their careers through higher education. And you can do that by advancing research that saves lives and bolsters national security.
Our colleges and universities work on behalf of all Americans, from every walk of life and every political perspective. While you may not always agree with us on every issue, ACE and our members are committed to fighting for the policies, principles, and values that ensure our students, their families, and our nation will flourish. So while we may differ in some areas, we also know there is much common ground.
We are deeply concerned about the impact of proposed immigration changes on students, staff, and families, and appreciate your concern for those known as “Dreamers,” who came to the United States as children. As you stressed in a recent interview, these outstanding young people have made numerous contributions to America, and we must safeguard their futures in the only country they have ever known as home. Likewise, we fully agree that America benefits immensely by continuing to attract the brightest and most talented students from around the world to study, work, and innovate here.
We pledge to be accountable to your administration, Congress, and the public. If you, Secretary of Education-designate Linda McMahon, and others in your administration see areas where we can do better, we are eager to sit down and discuss them. We hope, in turn, to have the opportunity to demonstrate how the know-how and creativity that runs deep through our campuses can help you accomplish your most important objectives.
Our overriding goal is to provide more opportunity for all Americans. Like you, we are ready to get to work to deliver results. Together, we can build a better America.
If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.
September 6, 2022 by Dean Hoke – The percentage of students without a post-secondary degree in the United States has been a widespread concern for decades. Employment at a decent working wage did exist for those who did not have a degree however that world is quickly changing. This topic has been of interest to me for over 50 years because I am one of those who dropped out of college.
I started attending university in the Fall of 1968 and it took me until June 1975 to complete my bachelor’s degree. I attended two universities and dropped out twice before coming back and finishing. I thought in early 1969 when I left the university, I didn’t have the academic ability to get a degree and my university advisor certainly was not supportive and suggested I should go sign up for military service that day.
I did go back to another smaller university six months later and though I had pauses due to those challenges everyone has in life I finished with a bachelor’s degree six years later. Upon graduation, I started immediately after commencement at a small university in Kentucky as an admissions officer and completed my master’s in a relativity short amount of time while working.
With that in mind, I have always wondered how we get dropouts back to school and finish their degree. Employers, government, and adults all believe it’s needed, and it has financial benefits for all. Yet nearly 40 million people from the age of 18-64 started higher education and did not complete one degree. I am presenting my initial thoughts and I would ask for your thoughts on how to address this question.
US Labor Market
According to the Federal Reserve Bank of Saint Louis, the US Civilian Work Force from 25-34 as of June 2022 has the following educational attainment
The Harsh Facts on College Dropouts
American higher education overall has 39 million people with Some College, No Credential (SCNC) as of July 2020 according to the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. The most recent study dated 2017 shows the following:
30% of first-year students drop out before their second year of college.
58.5% of students who started in community college after 6 years have not obtained any degree or certificate (1,071,720 students from students starting in 2011)
32.6% of students who started at a four-year institution after 6 years have not obtained any degree or certificate. (730,556 students starting in 2011)
More than two-thirds of college dropouts are low-income students, with family-adjusted gross income (AGI) under $50,000.
Full-time employment reduces graduation rates.Students who work a full-time job during the school year are half as likely to graduate with a bachelor’s degree, as compared with students who work 12 hours or less a week. Every additional hour of work beyond 12 hours a week reduces graduation rates. Working a full-time job takes too much time away from academics.
The reasons why are not surprising but still distressing.
Source: Hanson, Melanie. “College Dropout Rates” EducationData.org, June 17, 2022,
Economic Impact
According to the 2020 US Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average wage earned by a person by education level looks like this.
One statistic that stands out is the percentage of the income difference between a 4-year degree vs a person with a two-year degree person is $19,288 a 38.5% increase.
As the United States’ employment needs quickly change, industry and government have a pressing need for more qualified workers. In the publication HR Drive titled“Employers are hiring, but 80% say they can’t find skilled candidates”More than 82% of employers said they’re actively hiring, despite predictions of an economic downturn, according to a survey of 150 HR leaders by Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc. 80% of the respondents, however, reported having difficulty finding workers, with 70% identifying skills shortages as the reason.
It is further reported that 43% of Challenger’s respondents reported that, although they have enough applicants, those applicants do not have the needed skills. Another 43% said they do not receive enough applicants, with 27% noting that candidates who do apply are not qualified. “The labor market remains tight and employers are reporting skills shortages in almost every area, including in STEM, data analytics, human resources, finance, and operations.
During the next decade, the need for people with advanced credentials will continue to rise. Corporations have made it clear there is a need for more qualified workers whether it’s via a traditional degree such as a bachelor’s or micro-credentials/badges which verify customized skills. A report by McKinsey projected that more than 100 million workers will need to find a different occupation by 2030. In the United States, for instance, customer service and food service jobs could fall by 4.3 million, while transportation jobs could grow by nearly 800,000. Demand for workers in healthcare and STEM occupations may grow more than before the pandemic.
Organizations use different techniques for reimbursing student employees. The most common include:
Tuition assistance/reimbursement (63%)
In-house training seminars (61%)
Attendance at educational conferences (51%)
Continuing education courses (50%)
Coverage for licensing courses and exams (44%)
Personal development courses (35%)
Looking at tuition assistance the concept by employers is not new and many have had some sort of program in place for well over 10 years.
The Society for Human Resource Management survey reports tuition assistance programs are an attractive recruiting measure, and most employees are aware of the basic benefit. However, less than 5% percent of employees participate. Of those who participate in the tuition assistance program more than 4 in 10 who are using the benefit to attend graduate school.
Large corporations such as Starbucks, Target, Walmart, and others have all implemented go-back-to-school incentive programs using various higher institutions schools with an emphasis on online degree institutions.
Example One – Starbucks
Starbucks was one of the early adopters. In 2014, Starbucks and Arizona State University (ASU) introduced the Starbucks College Achievement Plan (SCAP), which provided Starbucks’ U.S. employees the opportunity to earn their first-time bachelor’s degree with the company paying for 100% of their tuition.
in 2021, Starbucks modified the tuition reimbursement benefit by paying all tuition and fees up front, as opposed to reimbursing employees for their out-of-pocket costs later.
More than 20,000 Starbucks employees are currently participating in SCAP.
The number of employees finishing their undergraduate degrees through SCAP will reach over 8,500, with Starbucks setting a goal of 25,000 graduates by 2025.
There are more than one hundred different degree programs offered through the SCAP program, and Starbucks has employees enrolled in all of them.
Almost 20% of people who apply to work for Starbucks say that SCAP is a major reason for their decision.
SCAP scholars are retained by Starbucks for a 50% longer period than non-participants, and they are promoted at nearly three times the rate of those employees who do not participate
Example Two – Walmart
In July 2021 Walmart announced it will pay for full college tuition and book costs at some schools for its US workers, the latest effort by the largest private employer in the country to sweeten its benefits as it seeks to attract and retain talent in a tight job market.
The program includes 10 academic partners ranging from the University of Arizona to Southern New Hampshire University. Participants must remain part-time or full-time employees at Walmart to be eligible. They have recently dropped a previous $ 1-a-day fee paid by Walmart and Sam’s Club workers who want to earn a degree and will begin to cover the costs of their books.
Example Three – Target
Target in August 2021 announced a fund to support educational courses for its employees. It is similar to the Walmart program. Available to 340,000 full-time and part-time workers.
Cover the full cost of select undergraduate degrees, certificates, and certifications for its 340,000 U.S.-based workers.
Pay up to $10,000 each year for master’s programs at those institutions.
Allow participants to attend one of 40 partner institutions.
Invest more than $200 million within the next four years in the program
However, one of the issues employees are challenged by is tuition remission vs tuition assistance. It is difficult and a deterrent to potential participants to upfront costs.
Researchers who have studied tuition benefits, including Jaime S. Fall, director of UpSkill America at the Aspen Institute, and Kevin Martin, chief research officer at the Institute for Corporate Productivity, believe that frontline workers might be more likely to participate in these programs if companies moved from “tuition reimbursement” to “tuition assistance” models, where employers pay their portion of education costs upfront. Many lower-income employees—or workers of any kind—can’t afford to float tuition costs for several months while they wait to be reimbursed.
Despite these new and innovative programs, we still have millions who are not going back to school. While 80% of employees are positive about these benefits only 40% have made any investigation and only 2% have taken advantage.
Student Barriers include
Restricted options by degree, college choice, net cost, upfront payment before receiving reimbursement
Lack of knowledge of grants and loans by employers, government, and schools.
Student personal issues (living life and family issues)
Childcare options and cost
Fear of failure,
School too far away
The older you get the less likely you will return to school
Paths to Explore by Higher Education, Corporate, and Government
Each sector is aware of the challenge and trying different approaches to get students dropouts and get a degree.
Higher Education
Private and state-supported regional universities are an asset underutilized
Further development and refinement of quality online degree programs to encourage re-enrollment
Developing stronger retention programs to reduce the percentage of college dropouts
Expansion of Teaching and Learning Centers for their communities
Evening and weekend on-campus programs
Academic credit for life experience
More student-friendly transfer of credits to a new school
Easier for students with outstanding bills to send an academic transcript
Corporate
More generous funding for employees to return to school. Going above the $5,200 a year tax deduction
The movement to paying tuition in advance by the employer rather than paying tuition in advance by the student
Increasing the number of majors a company will financially support
Opening the door for employees to have a selection of more universities including accredited private institutions
An example is the IBM apprentice program which aims to hire more than 400 trainees each year, from software development to data science to human resources. The current estimated cost to the company is $65 million since 2018.
Improvement in communicating and encouraging employees to return to school
Government
Increased priority in developing joint partnerships that incentives employment and encourage dropouts to return to school
Increase current state and federal student grants program
Establish no-interest loans to encourage students who have previously dropped out to return to complete their undergraduate degree
Let me expand on the role of partnerships between government, Corporate and higher education. The development of regional partnerships between government, industry, and higher education is not necessarily new. It has been used with tier one institutions such as Ohio State, the State of Ohio, and local government to entice Intel to establish a major tech center in Central Ohio.
Another recent bi-partisan proposal was introduced in August, by Rep. Jim Costa (D–Fresno) and co-sponsored by Rep. Bruce Westerman, an Arizona Republican. The bill is aimed toward four-year regional public universities in distressed areas that could receive federal grants of up to $50 million for economic and community development efforts under newly introduced bipartisan legislation.
In a press conference at Fresno State to unveil new legislation that he will put forward to Congress that would benefit up to 174 universities, Congressman Costa stated “Universities like Fresno State and many universities throughout California, but throughout the country, support community development. “They represent constituencies where we have distressed communities. They support the workforce, leading to faster employment growth, along with a higher per capita income.”
Robert Maxim, a senior research associate at Brookings, a think tank based in Washington, D.C. is an advocate of this type of partnership. “There are way more regional public universities in the U.S. than there are R-1s, our view is that they are really good anchor institutions to route federal investment through. They are a set of institutions that have been historically neglected and deserve a bit more attention and support from the federal government.”
Conclusion
I believe we need to prioritize on the group with the best chance of returning and obtaining a degree, the 25-34 age group with some college but no degree. This is 5.7 million of the overall 39 million who started college but did not finish. While we should make available any current or new programs that encourage people to return to school the 25-34-year-olds are the most likely to go back.
The United States should emphasize the wider use of partnership programs with government and industry teaming up with state regional higher education institutions and local small town and private colleges and universities would be a valuable asset to all parties. These schools are scattered in smaller cities across America. Both regional state institutions and private schools come from the applied teaching traditions Many are in small towns and rural areas in which employees who wish to return for a degree have few options. The question of cost certainly exists but I believe some form of government/industry/university partnership can effectively address the cost issues. They have space and teaching knowledge and the ability to customize local solutions.
One final thought and that is the question of will. While cost is a significant issue government, industry and schools must work in unison to get students to return and complete their education. We must remember these are second or in some cases third-chance students. They have failed in their attempts for various reasons. However, these students must overcome the fear of failure. We must find ways to support and encourage these students to take that leap of faith and believe they can graduate.
Postscript:
Graduation day 1975
I have been asked why did I go back? I worked in a factory and my parent’s deli for 6 months I felt I needed someone to test me and determine what I should do for the rest of my life. I went to the state employment bureau in my hometown to be skills tested to learn what I was best suited for. After the tests, I sat down with a lady who read the results. She told me with a smile that scared me I needed to go back to college and get a degree. Seeing I was somewhat shocked by her recommendation she stated the test revealed my hand/eye coordination was horrible and if I worked in a factory as my father did, I would seriously hurt myself. I asked her about joining the military and she commented if you went into the military, it better be an officer working behind the lines in military intelligence because I was unlikely to be much of a decent front-line soldier. As you can see, I graduated, and my proud parents were there for the event. I later in my life suspected the lady at the employment bureau was trying to give me a slap of reality to grow up and use my brain.
Dean Hoke is Co-Founder and Managing Partner Edu Alliance a higher education consulting firm located in Bloomington, Indiana and Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. Dean received his Bachelor of Arts degree from Urbana University in Ohio, his Master of Science in Community Development from The University of Louisville, and a graduate of the Wharton School of Business Executive Management program. Since 1975 Dean has worked in the higher education and broadcasting industry, serving in senior leadership roles specializing in marketing, communications, partnerships, online learning and fund raising.
He currently serves as Chairperson Elect of the American Association of University Administrators , Franklin University and is Co-Host of the Podcast series Higher Ed Without Borders . Dean is actively engaged in consulting projects in international education, branding, business intelligence, and online learning leading projects in the United States, the Middle East, Africa, and Asia. Dean resides in Bloomington, Indiana
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)’s Rural Development and the University of Kentucky’s Community and Economic Development Initiative of Kentucky unveiled a free digital toolkit to help rural leaders build placemaking plans in small towns and communities across America.
If you are located in (or serve) a rural area and you are are looking for a free digital toolkit filled with amazing resources, please
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the University of Kentucky’s – Community and Economic Development Initiative of Kentucky just debuted their “Rural America Placemaking Toolkit“.
This toolkit is absolutely dynamic and I encourage academic and practitioners to utilize this amazing guide. It includes:
Creative Community Conversations
Community & Cultural Assessments
Public Spaces & Gathering Places
Cross-Sector Partnerships
Also, if you have a rural project that you would like to be considered for the toolkit, you can submit it here.
*The Rural Communication Institute actually plans to do this soon.
Think about sending this guide to a local mayor, commissioner, teacher, health worker, volunteer, etc.
It is an absolutely incredible resource.
Sincerely,
Dr. Jennifer Edwards
***
Professor of Communication
Executive Director of the Texas Social Media Research Institute & Rural Communication Institute
