Dartmouth alum Thurman Rodgers is unhappy with the direction the school is taking--and so he is petitioning to be made a member of the Dartmouth Board of Trustees. John Bruce has the details, along with some observations on what alumni can and should be doing to ensure that their schools continue to live up to their missions.

One thing is clear: higher education is not going to reform itself from within. There is simply no motivation to do so. The haves want to keep things as they are; the have-nots don't get a say in how things are run. If you are concerned about the state of higher education, if you believe that reform is necessary, if you read this site or other ed-blogs with a sense of horror at what the American educational system is becoming, then it is incumbent on you to act. How you do so is up to you. Rodgers' efforts are noble--but they are only those of one man. Imagine what an impact entire cadres of concerned, informed citizens and alumni could have.

UPDATE: A reader writes to caution me against "the type of academic reform represented by the likes of Thurman Rodgers," noting that

while I'm only familiar with the case via your blog (and its links), several things worry me about this type of person assuming a position of power at any university.

On his campaign page, Rodgers tells us that he's a CEO of a high-tech firm and not much more. What is telling is that his primary goal in seeking a Trustee position is to alter curriculum so that students can "assume their responsibilities in a 21st century information society."

This sounds to me like the absolute opposite of the liberal arts model that you seem to laud, and my experience in the California State University system and at USC suggests to me that people like Rodgers simply bring "business models" to higher education but little more. Students become "tuition-paying units" and what should be a sacrosanct institution (a university) becomes an "enterprise."

Now obviously what you deride every day cannot be denied, but I think that what Thurston Rodgers represents is simply a different kind of problem and not a viable solution.

At the same time, I think Rodgers' goals are quite reasonable, and I don't find them at all inconsistent with the goals of a responsible liberal arts education. Rodgers' platform urges Dartmouth to ensure that its graduates are competent writers and reasoners with solid grounding in history, economics, math, science and civics. Add a bit of literature to that and what you've got is a liberal arts education. In other words, what Rodgers believes will prepare students for adult life in the information age involves not a betrayal or replacement of the liberal arts curriculum, but a recommitment to it.

Rodgers also wants to see greater transparency in Dartmouth's governance, open debate about the school's goals and direction, and a repeal of the school's speech code. These are all unexceptionable demands that are both essential to the principle of free intellectual inquiry and absolutely consistent with the values of a liberal society.