The most visible stressors that top research universities, like Cornell, have faced over the past year have come from the federal government. The political, financial and media pressures that the current federal administration has brought to bear, as well as November’s agreement that Cornell reached with the government, have brought to the fore questions about the nature of university-government relations and their implications.
As with much of the work of the Provost’s Committee on the Future of the American University, it is helpful to situate the current moment within a broader historical context. Central to the federal administration’s critique of universities is the suggestion that the longstanding implicit arrangement between the federal government and universities, with its associated responsibilities and obligations, is no longer serving the public interest. Many of the fissures in this relationship did not emerge suddenly this past year but rather developed over a much longer period. As a result, they require careful consideration as to how they were formed, what they mean and how universities might work to address them.
While formal university-government relations date back to the 18th century, the contours of the modern relationship began to take shape in earnest in the mid-to-late 19th century, the era when Cornell was established as a land-grant institution. But it was not until the first half of the 20th century that the federal government intensified its financial support for universities, recognizing their capacity as powerful engines for addressing national priorities, such as defense and public health, in addition to promoting social mobility and economic progress. This was accomplished through dramatic increases in federal funding for research, as well as legislation that laid the foundation for tax-exemption, accreditation and federal tuition aid.
It was in this period that an implicit arrangement emerged between universities and the federal government. However, over the last several decades this arrangement has been taken for granted, and the mutual expectations are rarely explicitly stated or clearly understood. If we are to reimagine healthy university-government relations for the future, we must first articulate the key features of the current model, and to what extent the mutual expectations are being met today or remain appropriate for the future.
What are universities expected to deliver to the public in return for federal support? University obligations begin with deep and broad expertise. Universities are expected to make research outputs publicly available and help drive innovative solutions to complex societal issues and national priorities. But the obligations go well beyond research. Universities are also expected to mold educated citizens who can think critically, bring leadership across varied public and private settings and be productive members of a democratic society. Moreover, this education and preparation is expected to be accessible to all, adding personal and societal value through specialized workforce preparation, ideally resulting in social mobility and economic progress. Especially for land-grant institutions like Cornell, there is a mandate to “put knowledge to work” – that is, to directly engage with the public to improve the well-being of families, communities and organizations, such as the efforts of the Cornell Cooperative Extension. The work of universities is constantly evolving to meet the needs of the times.
Universities, too, have expectations of the federal government. First, and perhaps foremost, is freedom from interference on academic matters, as secured by the First Amendment. Independence from government control and intervention into what universities teach, study and discover is sacrosanct and has been a central feature of the modern university. Universities also expect that the federal government will provide the legal foundation to uphold civil rights and thereby enable broad and safe access to higher education. Moreover, to deliver on their end of the bargain, universities expect robust resource investment in the form of tuition aid, tax-exemption and funding for cutting-edge research and creative output.
This implicit arrangement between universities and the federal government is now at risk. There are notable public misgivings about the added value of a university education, particularly given the high cost of tuition, and there are questions about whether wealthy institutions with large endowments need federal money for their educational and research missions. Many have concerns as to whether universities are meeting their promise to produce balanced thinkers and leaders amidst an increasingly polarized nation. In the face of these critiques, which relate directly to the crisis of public trust as noted by FAU committee co-chair Adam T. Smith, we must be willing to reflect on them honestly and avoid a posture that is overly defensive or unduly conciliatory. This is, therefore, a time for digging deep into the key questions about the future of the university-government relationship.
The work of the FAU committee is motivated by the need to clearly define, and reimagine where necessary, core institutional features of higher education. As the only land-grant Ivy, how can we lean into this unique position as we refresh university relations not only with the federal but also the state government? As the FAU committee examines such questions, one idea is not up for reconsideration: our commitment to “...any person…any study” as we serve the public through our missions of education, scholarship, innovation and direct engagement.
Ariel Avgar PhD ’08 is a Co-Chair of the Committee on the Future of the American University and David M. Cohen Professor of Labor Relations. He can be reached at aca27@cornell.edu.
Praveen Sethupathy ’03 is a Co-Chair of the Committee on the Future of the American University and Professor and Chair of Biomedical Sciences. He can be reached at pr46@cornell.edu.
The Sun is interested in publishing a broad and diverse set of content from the Cornell and greater Ithaca community. We want to hear what you have to say about this topic or any of our pieces. Here are some guidelines on how to submit. And here’s our email: opinion-editor@cornellsun.com.
The Committee on the Future of the American University is a group of 18 faculty appointed by the provost to explore how the university can evolve to best serve future generations while pursuing its core mission of education, scholarship, public impact, and community engagement. They welcome ideas and feedback at fau@cornell.edu.
