The free speech advocacy organization FIRE (Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression) creates an annual ranking of colleges from best to worst environments for free speech on campus. 2022/2023’s list, based on responses from 45,000 students at more than 200 schools, placed University of Chicago in the top spot, meaning the school “promotes and protects the free exchange of ideas” more than any other college on the list. Columbia University was dead last, with “by far, the lowest score,” and its speech climate rated as “abysmal.”
It is all so sad and abysmal but nonetheless that is surprisingly good news about Chicago - I didn't know! My HS age son has become interested in U Chicago and now I feel very excited by that possibility.
The loss of faith and prestige in the others for many of us is very real. I simply can no longer be impressed by anyone's Ivy credentials (including my own lol) when those institutions have so thoroughly discredited themselves on this issue.
Chicago topping the list is a bit misleading IMO. They have a great speech code, but the student responses to the campus environment survey are not very encouraging. FIRE highlights the following stats:
"42% of students say shouting down a speaker to prevent them from speaking on campus is never acceptable.
48% of students say they have rarely or never self-censored on campus.
32% of students say they are not worried about damaging their reputation because someone misunderstands something they have said or done."
This isn't to say that your son shouldn't go to Chicago. It's a great school and is probably the best free speech environment of any of the high prestige colleges. But it's worth knowing about before arriving on campus in my opinion. I wrote about this in post titled "A Grain of Salt for FIRE Free Speech Rankings" (linked in a separate comment here), and Eric Kaufmann takes a similar perspective in his recent Newsweek article.
The correlation between fealty to authoritarian edicts (including contravening the Nuremberg Code or the Helsinki Accords) and squelching critical thought, let alone avoiding debate, should surprise nobody.
The moniker “liberal” is so thoroughly inappropriate nowadays, we are living in patently Orwellian times.
I’d be interested in the list of institutes of higher education whose regents had the civil courage and integrity to stand up to the incessant gaslighting. As a minimum, that would be the ones which gave no recommendations whatsoever.
Academic social structures are about power and control. And that power, in order to be depressive in nature, has to include both control over a person's actions, as well as the authority to violate at will their personal boundaries. It's in the memetics.
I have a son that intends to go to College in USA. It’s gonna matter to make the choice of which one to go depending on the vaccine mandate policy they apply to their students. This madness has got to stop. They Know they are wrong.
"an annual ranking of colleges from best to worst environments for free speech on campus. 2022/2023’s list, based on responses from 45,000 students at more than 200 schools"
In fact, the student responses are a relatively small part of the ranking at the end of the day. FIRE's evaluation of written speech codes is doing a lot of the work (first link), which I think makes the connection with bodily autonomy somewhat less surprising (both are just indicators of schools that have more power to do things in a top-down fashion). Would be interesting to know the relationship between Covid restrictions and Eric Kaufmann's Viewpoint Diversity Index (second link).
Thanks for the article David. Honestly, it would be surprising if this were *not* the case. I think the common thread is irrational fear - in one case of a virus which for people of college age posed almost no threat, and on the other, challenging ideas or speech which are feared to cause 'harm'. Also, both cases seem to rely on a docility or lack of curiosity about the world in which it is ok for other people to set parameters for your life ( what you must believe / what you must put in your body ).
It is all so sad and abysmal but nonetheless that is surprisingly good news about Chicago - I didn't know! My HS age son has become interested in U Chicago and now I feel very excited by that possibility.
The loss of faith and prestige in the others for many of us is very real. I simply can no longer be impressed by anyone's Ivy credentials (including my own lol) when those institutions have so thoroughly discredited themselves on this issue.
Chicago topping the list is a bit misleading IMO. They have a great speech code, but the student responses to the campus environment survey are not very encouraging. FIRE highlights the following stats:
"42% of students say shouting down a speaker to prevent them from speaking on campus is never acceptable.
48% of students say they have rarely or never self-censored on campus.
32% of students say they are not worried about damaging their reputation because someone misunderstands something they have said or done."
https://rankings.thefire.org/rank/school/university-of-chicago
In contrast, Pepperdine does much better on these metrics, and is not even allowed a ranking:
52% of students say shouting down a speaker to prevent them from speaking on campus is never acceptable.
29% of students say they have rarely or never self-censored on campus.
24% of students say they are not worried about damaging their reputation because someone misunderstands something they have said or done.
https://rankings.thefire.org/rank/school/pepperdine-university
This isn't to say that your son shouldn't go to Chicago. It's a great school and is probably the best free speech environment of any of the high prestige colleges. But it's worth knowing about before arriving on campus in my opinion. I wrote about this in post titled "A Grain of Salt for FIRE Free Speech Rankings" (linked in a separate comment here), and Eric Kaufmann takes a similar perspective in his recent Newsweek article.
https://www.newsweek.com/polarization-about-get-lot-worse-students-are-even-more-divided-we-are-opinion-1749457
The correlation between fealty to authoritarian edicts (including contravening the Nuremberg Code or the Helsinki Accords) and squelching critical thought, let alone avoiding debate, should surprise nobody.
The moniker “liberal” is so thoroughly inappropriate nowadays, we are living in patently Orwellian times.
I’d be interested in the list of institutes of higher education whose regents had the civil courage and integrity to stand up to the incessant gaslighting. As a minimum, that would be the ones which gave no recommendations whatsoever.
Academic social structures are about power and control. And that power, in order to be depressive in nature, has to include both control over a person's actions, as well as the authority to violate at will their personal boundaries. It's in the memetics.
I have a son that intends to go to College in USA. It’s gonna matter to make the choice of which one to go depending on the vaccine mandate policy they apply to their students. This madness has got to stop. They Know they are wrong.
"an annual ranking of colleges from best to worst environments for free speech on campus. 2022/2023’s list, based on responses from 45,000 students at more than 200 schools"
In fact, the student responses are a relatively small part of the ranking at the end of the day. FIRE's evaluation of written speech codes is doing a lot of the work (first link), which I think makes the connection with bodily autonomy somewhat less surprising (both are just indicators of schools that have more power to do things in a top-down fashion). Would be interesting to know the relationship between Covid restrictions and Eric Kaufmann's Viewpoint Diversity Index (second link).
https://infovores.substack.com/p/a-grain-of-salt-for-fire-free-speech
http://www.sneps.net/viewpoint-diversity-ranking-of-leading-us-colleges
Thanks for the article David. Honestly, it would be surprising if this were *not* the case. I think the common thread is irrational fear - in one case of a virus which for people of college age posed almost no threat, and on the other, challenging ideas or speech which are feared to cause 'harm'. Also, both cases seem to rely on a docility or lack of curiosity about the world in which it is ok for other people to set parameters for your life ( what you must believe / what you must put in your body ).