The purpose of higher education can be distilled into two central facets: Developing a more complete knowledge of the world and principles that surround us, and reinforcing the type of critical thinking that separates the followers and leaders of our civilization.
In spite of this, state House members recently rescinded $70,000 in funding from two public schools — College of Charleston and USC Upstate — for assigning gay-themed books. This is a shining example of the kind of poor leadership that bogs down societal progress.
The House’s decision is not about money; it’s about sending a message.
Punishing a college over material that politicians deem inappropriate has a chilling effect that could sway professors the next time they’re planning their coursework. We don’t need faculty and administrators to second-guess their decisions. We need colleges and universities that are willing and unafraid to challenge their students.
But if we’re going to punish colleges for teaching material that some consider controversial, think of all the programs and classes that would need to be cut: religious studies, political science, economics, women’s and gender studies, among others. To strip this state’s higher education of its freedom to teach students using material that some might disagree with is to strip it of the hallmarks of education itself and endangers programs and courses across all disciplines.
If censoring principles and theories that clash with legislators’ personal beliefs is the new reality of public funding, why bother going to college at all? Challenging the status quo is how most breakthroughs are made.
What professor wants to move to a state where she can’t work and teach unencumbered by politics? What student wants to attend a university where his beliefs and his understanding of the world will simply be reinforced? And what company wants to relocate to a state that doesn’t support its colleges — a state apparently unwilling to fully embrace its burgeoning knowledge economy?
Ultimately, there is no reasonable explanation for actions like this, and we expect better from our public officials. It’s socially intolerant, and it’s a detriment to our education system.
Our leaders can still right this wrong: The state Senate still has a chance to reject the House’s short-sighted decision.
The damage of the House vote’s chilling effect will take longer to undo. But we expect the Senate to do what it can to start fixing it.