For the second time, Claremont McKenna has claimed the top spot in the rankings. Speech controversies at the highest-rated schools are rare, and their administrations are more likely to support free speech. The schools that improved their score the most, including Dartmouth College and Vanderbilt University, worked to reform their policies and recently implemented new programs that support free speech and encourage open discourse.
166 of the 257 schools surveyed got an F for their speech climate, while only 11 schools received a speech climate grade of C or higher.
Only 36% of students said that it was “extremely” or “very” clear that their administration protects free speech on campus.
A record 1 in 3 students now holds some level of acceptance – even if only “rarely” — for resorting to violence to stop a campus speech.
53% of students say that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a difficult topic to discuss openly on campus. On 21 of the campuses surveyed, at least 75% of students said this — including 90% of students at Barnard.
For the first time ever, a majority of students oppose their school allowing any of the six controversial speakers they were asked about onto campus — three controversial conservative speakers and three controversial liberal ones.
Based on your personal experience, what schools should would you recommend / not recommend when it comes to free speech?
Up at the top as always. But you never hear about it because it’s not an aspirational school.
But here’s a secret: some of the best students in Michigan turn down U of M for Michigan Tech. Why? Because for top students it’s often free. And it’s a great education. So its grads are highly sought, because employers know it.
It actually attracts top students from the entire area (MN, WI etc.) because even OOS, with merit it can end up being less than $20K. It’s so remote you can barely get there. But once you do, it’s an outdoor paradise.
According to my second year student, UChicago lives up to its stated principles on free speech and fosters an atmosphere of civil yet challenging dialogue amongst students in and out of the classroom.
It’s worth noting that while Claremont McKenna is ranked #1 by FIRE, that’s a relative ranking and FIRE still gives CMC an overall grade of B minus. FIRE | Claremont McKenna College
In a message to the college community today, Middlebury’s new president Ian Baucom singled that he will follow UChicago’s Kalven principles while he’s in office.
In the message I shared on my first day as president, I committed to working with you to help Middlebury meet our moment. Doing so includes knowing when I should refrain from speaking and when, as president, I have a duty to speak. On those questions, as I shared, I take my broad guidance from the University of Chicago’s Kalven principles. In almost every situation springing from topical or political matters, I will not speak on behalf of Middlebury, so that every member of our community can feel free to do so, unfettered by an official institutional position and without fear of sanction. To repeat the words of the Kalven Report: “The university is the home and sponsor of critics, it is not itself the critic.”
I believe absolutely in that commitment and will uphold it.
As I also shared, the corollary to that principle is too often forgotten. As the report continues: “From time to time, instances will arise in which the society, or segments of it, threaten the very mission of the university and its values of free inquiry. In such a crisis, it becomes the obligation of the university as an institution to oppose such measures and actively to defend its interests and its values.”
Yesterday, tragically, was such a day and such a time, and I feel my obligation to speak.