Alienation and Relevance

There is a striking parallel between the crisis in government at the national level in America and the crisis in the universities. In both cases the institutional structure has recently increased gigantically in size and in the scale of operation. Along with this increase in size has gone a tremendous augmentation of power both real and potential. However, it is a characteristic of this power that it is diffuse and focused only with difficulty: that it is all but impossible to bring this power to bear effectively on the problems of the state and the university. The problems which bedevil both the state and the university are frequently not problems which can be solved by the application of power. Along with the augmentation of size and power has gone a singular inability to match commitments with resources so that the state and the universities in spite of megadollar budgets find themselves perennially impoverished. Finally, and most importantly, each finds itself alienated from its constituency. Each has discovered that it is increasingly difficult for it to project an objective which will move men to its single-minded pursuit. It is not that men no longer believe in government and education. Indeed, they believe passionately in both. It is rather that they no longer understand either the purpose or the designs of big government or big education. While the power of both institutions has steadily increased, their authority has declined. Ultimately authority is far more important to education than power, and power without authority in the state soon gives way to tyranny. This parallel between the state and the university is instructive.

What is necessary in order to restore the institutional authority of higher education? How can higher education regain the confidence of those over thirty and command the respect of those under thirty who listen with reluctance and dissent without debate?

ST

About the Author

Stephen J. Tonsor

Featured Tags

There is a striking parallel between the crisis in government at the national level in America and the crisis in the universities. In both cases the institutional structure has recently increased gigantically in size and in the scale of operation. Along with this increase in size has gone a tremendous augmentation of power both real and potential. However, it is a characteristic of this power that it is diffuse and focused only with difficulty: that it is all but impossible to bring this power to bear effectively on the problems of the state and the university. The problems which bedevil both the state and the university are frequently not problems which can be solved by the application of power. Along with the augmentation of size and power has gone a singular inability to match commitments with resources so that the state and the universities in spite of megadollar budgets find themselves perennially impoverished. Finally, and most importantly, each finds itself alienated from its constituency. Each has discovered that it is increasingly difficult for it to project an objective which will move men to its single-minded pursuit. It is not that men no longer believe in government and education. Indeed, they believe passionately in both. It is rather that they no longer understand either the purpose or the designs of big government or big education. While the power of both institutions has steadily increased, their authority has declined. Ultimately authority is far more important to education than power, and power without authority in the state soon gives way to tyranny. This parallel between the state and the university is instructive.

What is necessary in order to restore the institutional authority of higher education? How can higher education regain the confidence of those over thirty and command the respect of those under thirty who listen with reluctance and dissent without debate?