Why Universities are "Special" for Everyone and Not Just Universities

I just read a piece Lee C. Bollinger wrote for The Atlantic titled "Universities Deserve Special Standing" (free link article!). It's long and it gets into the weeds about universities and the First Amendment. Bollinger was President of Columbia University from 2002 to 2023, but I've also heard of him because he was once a local as President of the University of Michigan from 1996 to 2002.

Bollinger, who is a lawyer and a First Amendment scholar, argues that universities, similar to "the press," depend upon and are protected by the First Amendment to do their work, and the work of both universities and the press is what makes democracy possible in the first place. Here's a long quote that I think gets Bollinger's main point across:

So, here is my thesis: American universities are rooted in the bedrock of human nature and the foundations of our constitutional democracy. They are every bit as vital to our society as the political branches of government or quasi-official institutions such as the press (often even referred to as the “fourth branch” of government). Universities, as institutions, are the embodiment of the basic rationale of the First Amendment, which affirms our nation’s commitment to a never-ending search for truth.

In some ways, universities are a version of the press: They make a deep inquiry into public issues and are always on call to serve as a check on the government. But if their deadlines are far longer, the scope of their work and remit in pursuing truth reach to everywhere that knowledge is or may yet be. Their role in society touches the full panoply of human discovery, never limited by what may be newsworthy at a given moment. And, as many have noted in today’s debate over federal funding, the results of academic research and discovery have benefited society in more obviously utilitarian ways, including curing disease, cracking the atom, and creating the technologies that have powered our economic dynamism and enhanced our quality of life.

I agree with this. Certainly, there have been a lot of times when universities have failed at embodying the values of free speech and the search for truth or enhancing everyone's quality of life-- and the press has failed their "fourth estate" check on the government role often enough as well. But the principle Bollinger is trying to make here is completely true.

The problem here though is the "they" Bollinger is talking about are people like him, university faculty and administrators, and particularly those who are tenured. He's at best only talking about everyone else on university campuses-- students, and also the staff and the legions of non-tenure-track instructors who make these places run-- indirectly. He's talking about academic elites.

I suppose I'm one of the "theys" Bollinger is describing because I am a tenured professor at a university. Though besides being at a "third tier" university, I also have always felt that the institution that best protects my rights to teach, to write, and to say what I want without fear of losing my job is not tenure or "the university" as an institution. Rather, it's the union and the faculty contract.

In any event, arguing to anyone outside of the professoriate that universities (or university professors) are "special" and should be able to say or do anything without ever having to worry about losing their jobs in the name of the "search for truth" does not go over well. Believe me, I've offered a version of Bolliger's argument to my extended family at Thanksgiving and Christmas gatherings over the years, and they are skeptical at best. And these people are not unfamiliar with higher education: everyone in my family has some kind of college degree, and Annette and I are not the only ones who went to graduate school.

Besides, if you want to convince normal people that universities deserve a special place in our society, making the comparison to "the press," which the general public also distrusts nowadays, might not be the best strategy.

Like Bollinger, I have spent my professional life in academia, so I'm biased. But I do think universities as institutions are important to everyone, including those who never step on campus. For starters, there is the all that scientific research: the federal government pays research universities (via grants) to study things that will eventually lead to new cures and discoveries. That accounts for almost all of the money Trump (really, Musk) are taking away from universities.

More directly, large research universities (which usually have medical schools) also run large hospitals and health care systems, and these are the institutions that often treat the most complicated and expensive problems-- organ transplants, the most aggressive forms of cancer, and so forth. University-run healthcare systems are the largest employer in several states, and universities themselves are the largest employer in several more, including Hawaii, California, New York, and Maryland. (By the way, Walmart is the largest employer in the U.S.). And of course, just about every employer I can think of around here is indirectly dependent on universities. I mean, without the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor would not exist.

There's also the indirect community-building functioning of universities that goes beyond the "college town." Take sports, for example. I'm reluctant to bring this up because I think EMU would be better off if we didn't waste as much money as we do on trying to compete in the top division of football. Plus college sports have gotten very weird in the age of Name, Image, and Likeness deals and the transfer portal system. But it's hard to deny the fandom around college sports, especially living in the shadow of U of M.

And of course, the main way that everyone benefits from universities is we offer college degrees. Elite universities (like the ones that have been in the news and/or the target of Trump's revenge) don't really do this that well because they are so selective-- and they need to be selective because so many people apply. This year, 115,000 first-year and transfer students applied to Michigan, and obviously, they can only admit a small percentage of those folks.

But the reality is that only the famous universities that everyone has heard of are this difficult to attend. Most universities, including the one where I work, admit almost everyone who applies. We give everyone who otherwise couldn't get into an elite university the chance to earn a college degree. That doesn't always work out because a lot of the students we admit don't finish. But I also know the degrees our graduates earn ultimately improve their lives and futures, and our graduates.

I could go on, but you get the idea. I understand Bollinger's point, and he's not wrong. But academics like us need to try to convince everyone else that they have something to gain from universities as well.