- Cornell University has started a campaign to raise $5 billion by 2026. So far, the university has raised $2.6 billion.
- Creighton University is starting a campaign to raise $650 million by 2024. The campaign has already raised $450 million.
- Emory University has launched a campaign that will run until 2036, the year of Emory’s bicentennial, to raise $4 billion. The university has raised $2.6 billion so far.
- South Dakota State University has launched a campaign to raise $500 million. The university has raised $340 million so far.
- Susquehanna University has started a campaign to raise $160 million. The campaign has already raised $140 million.
- University of Wisconsin at Eau Claire has started a campaign to raise $125 million by 2026. The university has already raised $70 million.
- Albertus Magnus College is starting a B.A./B.S. in interdisciplinary studies.
- Franciscan University of Steubenville is starting a B.S. in mechanical engineering.
- Limestone University is starting a bachelor of science in nursing.
- San Francisco State University is starting a B.A. in bilingual journalism.
- Wayne Community College, in North Carolina, is starting an associate degree in artificial intelligence.
- William Peace University launched a bachelor’s degree in esports and gaming administration.
- Kalamazoo College has started a campaign to raise $150 million by 2023. It has already raised $108 million.
- Piedmont Virginia Community College has started a campaign to raise as much money as possible, with no deadline. The college raised $10.2 million in the silent phase.
- Texas State University has launched a campaign to raise $250 million. It has already raised $172 million.
Raising the Goal
- University of Delaware, having already met the $750 million target set by the university in 2017, has set a new goal for its campaign: $1 billion.
- Southern Arkansas University raised $29.7 million in a campaign that started in 2016. The original goal was $22.3 million.
- Bard College is starting a master of music in instrumental arts.
- California State University at San Bernardino is starting an M.S. in national security intelligence analysis and cybersecurity.
- LIM College is starting a B.B.A. in the business of cannabis.
- Maryville College is starting a master of arts in teaching.
- University of New England is starting a B.A. in criminology.
- University of the Cumberlands has added a new online project management certificate program.
- Wesleyan University is starting a minor in human rights advocacy.
- Cedarville University launched a campaign to raise $125 million, probably by 2024. The university has already raised 76 percent of the total.
- Kent State University is starting a campaign to raise $350 million by 2024. The university has already raised $272 million.
- University of North Carolina at Greensboro has launched a campaign to raise $200 million. The campaign has already raised $113 million. No end date has been set.
- Yale University has started a campaign to raise $7 billion over five years. Thus far the university has raised $3.5 billion.
- Caltech has raised $3.4 billion in a campaign that started in 2016 with a goal of $2 billion.
- Missouri University of Science and Technology raised $423 million in a campaign that started in 2016. The original goal was $150 million.
- Ohio Wesleyan University raised $238 million in a campaign that started in 2014 with a goal of $200 million.
- University of Pennsylvania raised $5.4 billion in a campaign that started in 2018. The original goal for the campaign was $4.1 billion.
In their new book, The Ph.D. Parenthood Trap: Caught Between Work and Family in Academia (Georgetown University Press), Kerry F. Crawford and Leah C. Windsor review the many impacts of parenthood on professors. They cover practical issues such as breastfeeding, and the more philosophical, such as trying to find work-life balance. Crawford, an associate professor of political science at James Madison University in Virginia, and Windsor, a research associate professor at the Institute for Intelligent Systems at the University of Memphis in Tennessee, answered questions via email. And one question they answer in their author biographies: Crawford has three young children and Windsor has two.
Q: Many of the trends you discuss are bad, but some people say, “Well, it was worse when I got my Ph.D.” How do you answer them?
A: One of the bright spots of the book is that there is near-unanimous agreement that things are better now than they were 20 or 30 years ago. There are some fights that we don’t have to fight anymore -- like quantifying and proving the fact that women are tenured and promoted at lower rates than are men. Many colleges now do implicit bias training for hiring and promotion and tenure committees, for example, and the Me Too movement has exposed some egregious behavior by senior faculty in the discipline. Some traditionally male-dominated organizations, like the Society for Political Methodology, have taken deliberate steps to increase equity at conferences, such as requesting that chairs and discussants call on women+ [a term that includes trans women and those who are not on the binary for sexual identity] first during the question-and-answer period of panel presentations (since research shows that women+ and men tend to participate at roughly equal rates when women+ are called on first).
However, we still have a very long way to go. Most advocacy has been by women for women, and men need to be included in the solutions, because equity is not just a woman’s problem. In our book, we address the lower-order processes that lead to the more obvious higher-order processes (such as pay gap and disparity in service assignments). We need to focus on mentorship, especially by enlisting the “young, woke and tenured” men faculty who are uniquely situated to change departmental and institutional cultures. Women+ (and BIPOC, first-generation and LGBTQIA+ scholars) still face more issues than do men in academia. Many institutions still do not have paid parental leave. Women+ especially are unduly burdened during family formation -- in our book we talk about the invisible challenges of miscarriages, fertility treatments and the physically demanding years of sleep deprivation with young children at home. We argue that academia is more like a game of chutes and ladders than a linear pipeline that “leaks” women+. Mentorship helps. Knowing the hidden curriculum rules of the game helps. And transparently communicated and equitably applied policies certainly help.
Q: How much are the problems parenthood problems vs. motherhood problems? Do new mothers and fathers have the same sets of problems?
A: In writing our book, it became evident that gender bias is the problem. Women+ and men who go against gender norms are both penalized. Hard-bargaining, determined women+ are still considered aggressive -- a negative personality and work trait. Men who are active “primary parents” -- picking up kids from school, being the principal caregiver or even an equal caregiver -- also report feeling penalized and concerned about their research productivity and teaching evaluations. Single parents of any gender have to make it all work without a partner to pick up the slack. Same-sex or queer couples face discrimination in family formation and parental leave at work and carry the burden of societal discrimination and the threat of erosion of their legal rights. So these are very much parenthood problems that apply to people of all genders.
However, the gender double bind -- the phenomenon that says women and men should behave according to traditional gender roles -- still works against women more than men. Women who bring their children to meetings are considered unprofessional, while men are considered doting, sensitive fathers. Women+ who become pregnant and give birth face a range of physical and emotional experiences that men do not face, such as the very real hormonal changes associated with pregnancy and postpartum. Women who choose to pause the tenure clock face backlash, as if that year should be filled with increased research productivity.
On the other hand, men have the opportunity to abuse parental leave and use it for getting ahead on research, or going on the job market to move to a better institution, simply because they do not face the same postpartum physical demands and recovery process that women who give birth endure. Men are praised for parenthood, while women are penalized. There are many opportunities that actively involved parents of any gender miss out on because of caregiving responsibilities, especially when children are young. Still, conferencing and networking while pregnant or with a breastfeeding infant is incredibly challenging, and these are burdens that pregnant and lactating people uniquely face. Parental leave is often negotiated informally and with some variation across faculty who take leave; women+ who tend to be assigned online courses or departmental/university service responsibilities that tend to be lower profile than those that men fulfill. Decent accommodations for parents, and especially for women+, often depend on sympathetic supervisors and colleagues, rather than on sound, equitable policies.
We also highlight families that grow through adoption, which is how many academics have become parents. We feature several vignettes in our book from academic parents who adopted children, and the special challenges they faced in that process. Graduate student women+ parents are likely the most disadvantaged in the family formation process, as few programs provide health insurance, and they are often told to delay parenthood until posttenure. Our survey of academic parents shows that while this is common advice, it’s rarely followed. We say, bring children into your family when it is right for you.
Q: One of your chapters is on breastfeeding and lactation. What are the trends in this area?
A: Breastfeeding and lactation are much less taboo today than in the past, and women+ are more likely to ask for and receive certain accommodations. Lactation rooms and stations are increasingly common on campus. Many survey respondents reported being given time during on-campus job interviews to breastfeed or express milk. However, women+ reported having many more challenges than successes in feeding their babies.
Conferences and job interviews are largely inhospitable environments for lactating women+. The mechanics of expressing milk can be complicated: some women+ do not respond well to breast pumps, and going too long without expressing milk can be a serious health hazard, resulting in a breast infection called mastitis. It’s tough to travel with an infant (or multiple children) in tow, and women+ often bring family or sitters to conferences so they can participate in professional events while simultaneously tending to their children. This means higher costs, extra luggage, divided attention and lots of snacks. Even if children stay at home, women+ still need time to express milk, which takes away time from networking. Several years ago, a woman made the news for pumping milk in the hotel lobby when she was refused accommodations.
Breastfeeding and lactation are tied up in the notion of professionalism. Academia still considers intellectual masculinity the professional standard -- professors should wear blazers with elbow patches and spend their days reading and thinking in their offices. Exposed breasts for the purpose of sustaining young children are considered unprofessional. Women+ are still advised to remove wedding bands for job interviews and not disclose pregnancy or children. There are success stories of women+ interviewing while visibly pregnant -- but this is certainly not the norm. The unencumbered scholar is considered the ideal, so many women suffer through job interviews with morning (or all-day) sickness, or engorged breasts from not expressing milk. In our book, we argue that academics are allowed to -- and should have -- lives outside of academia. It is not unprofessional to be a parent.
Q: You talk about “work-life balance.” Is it really possible in academe? Especially for those up for tenure?
A: We call it the work-life myth. There’s no balance -- there’s just whatever rises to the top of the list of priorities for that day. We asked our survey respondents to choose three of the following -- sleep, work, family, friends, exercise -- and they overwhelmingly chose the first three, especially new parents. It’s difficult to feel like you have a good sense of balance when the early years of parenthood are filled with constant change and development. Parents often put themselves last, forgoing sleep or socializing in order to do what needs to be done. Leah’s family has a saying: you do what you have to do before you do what you want to do.
We think a better way of framing work-life balance is work-life boundaries. It’s virtually heretical to keep a 9-to-5 schedule in academe and not work evenings and weekends. There’s so much humblebragging, especially on social media, that is really unhealthy for academics generally, especially about working late into the night or on the weekends. Before the pandemic, the two of us did not work evenings or weekends, except for some special occasions like grading final exams or proofreading book manuscripts. Working all the time or idiosyncratically is not a model to be emulated. It is not sustainable, and it is built on the patriarchal assumption that the scholar is a man who has a support-wife at home. The era of the “absentminded professor” is over. Efficient is the new cool.
Q: What are some things colleges can do to help parents on their faculty?
A: In our book, we provide a list of suggestions at the end of each chapter aimed at individual faculty, department/unit heads and deans and other administrators. In our faculty survey, we found that while over all things are much better than several decades ago, one of the overwhelmingly frustrating trends is that faculty do not know what their department’s, college’s or university’s policies are. Knowledge is power. However, it is a two-way street. Policies about parental and bereavement leave, for example, should be equitably distributed and transparently applied. These should be communicated to all faculty during job interviews and not just at employee orientation. They should be easily and ubiquitously accessible.
Colleges and universities should provide health insurance for graduate students and contingent faculty. They should provide lactation rooms in every building and accommodate teaching schedules so that lactating women+ will have adequate time to express milk. Colleges and universities should also provide affordable on-campus childcare -- this is one of the hugest burdens for academic parents. Because we are often not able to choose where we live as academics, we end up far from family, friends and support systems that are crucial for the well-being of parents and children during the early years. Paid parental leave is essential, and supervisors should ensure that men use this time for parenting, not publishing.
Colleges and universities should mandate implicit bias training to ensure that hiring and promotion decisions, campus policies, and day-to-day interactions make the academy a more welcoming, inclusive, equitable and accessible place for all scholars at all ranks.
We recognize that colleges and universities operate with resource constraints, so one of the key takeaways is that administrators and department heads should listen to their faculty and students. Ask in ways that facilitate honesty and openness and find out what needs exist on campus that could be met with the resources available. Throughout the pandemic, faculty parents bemoaned the emails from their administrators about wellness, self-care and restful breaks between semesters; these messages, while perhaps well intended, signaled a complete lack of awareness for the realities of parents navigating the COVID-19 pandemic with children in tow. Signaling concern for and commitment to retaining faculty and student parents doesn’t have to be incredibly costly, but it should be intentional.
Anna Maria College
- Karin Ciance, nursing
- Melissa Martiros, music
- Marc Tumeinski, theology
- Fadi A. Bardawil, Asian and Middle Eastern studies
- Susanna Caviglia, art, art history and visual studies
- James Chappel, history
- Anna Cieslak, finance
- Lawrence David, molecular genetics and microbiology
- Emily Derbyshire, chemistry
- Ofer Eldar, law, economics and finance
- Tarek Elgindi, mathematics
- Jordan Etkin, business administration
- Gina-Gail S. Fletcher, law
- Gustavo Furtado, Romance studies
- Rong Ge, computer science
- Lauren Ginsberg, classical studies
- Polly Ha, history of Christianity
- Amanda Hargrove, chemistry
- Sharique Hasan, business administration
- Stacy Horner, molecular genetics and microbiology
- Jeremy Kay, neurobiology
- Matthias Kehrig, economics
- Adam Levine, mathematics
- H. Timothy Lovelace Jr., law
- Brian McAdoo, earth and ocean sciences
- Steven Malcolmson, chemistry
- Matthew Masten, economics
- Devon Noonan, nursing
- Miroslav Pajic, electrical and computer engineering
- Jay Pearson, public policy
- Marcos Rangel, public policy
- Galen Reeves, electrical and computer engineering
- Karin Reuter Rice, nursing
- Deondra Rose, public policy
- Shitong Qiao, law
- Gregory Samanez-Larkin, psychology and neuroscience
- Ryan Shaw, nursing
- Candis Watts Smith, political science
- Sophia Smith, nursing
- Lucia Strader, biology
- Jessi Streib, sociology
- Anna Sun, religious studies
- Brittany Wilson, New Testament
Seton Hall University
- Jennifer D. Oliva, law
- Cara Blue Adams, English
- Jessica Cottrell, biological sciences
- Sara Fieldston, history
- Jason Tramm, communication and the arts
- Lori Wilt, nursing
- Iona College raised $154 million in a campaign that started in 2015 with a goal of $150 million.
- New York University School of Law has raised $540 million in a campaign. The campaign started in 2017 with a goal of $450 million.
- Virginia Wesleyan University has raised $167 million in a campaign, exceeding its goal of $125 million.
- Youngstown State University has raised $126 million in a campaign that started in 2014. The original goal was $100 million.
- Buffalo State College, of the State University of New York, has a new master’s degree in dietetics.
- Campbellsville University is launching a school of chiropractic medicine.
- College of Saint Benedict, in partnership with Saint John’s University of Minnesota, is starting two doctor of nursing practice programs, one in family nursing and one for leaders in the field.
- Purdue University Global is starting a master of science in data analytics.
- Syracuse University is starting an online certificate of advanced study in sport analytics.
Robert’s Rules of Order was first published in 1876. And today it continues to influence many organizations that use the book, including colleges, universities and academic organizations. Princeton University Press has just published the original book along with an essay by Christopher P. Loss, associate professor of education and history at Vanderbilt University, under a new title, Robert’s Rules of Order and Why It Matters for Colleges and Universities Today.
Loss responded to questions about the book via email.
Q: How did this book come about? How did you get interested in Robert’s Rules?
A: My first exposure to Robert’s Rules was in high school speech and debate. I’ve encountered it many, many times since, especially working in higher education, where it is frequently, if not always effectively, used. I’ve written about the history of higher education and democratic citizenship and done some work on the history of print culture and learning, but a study of Henry Martyn Robert and his rules didn’t occur to me until Peter Dougherty, of Princeton University Press, pitched me the idea. After doing some digging, learning about Robert and his family, and figuring out how I might connect Robert’s Rules to our current crisis of democracy, including the challenges now confronting American higher education, I agreed to take it on. I’m glad I did. The book combines my essay on the history of the rules and its place in American life with a copy of the original rules, published in February 1876. Only 4,000 copies of the first edition of Robert’s Rules were printed. After all these years, it’s wonderful to have the original text back in print and available to readers. It’s a fascinating work of real historic significance.
Q: How did Robert’s Rules reflect the history of American higher education, particularly in terms of organization?
A: At the time Robert’s Rules was published in 1876, American democracy was in trouble. The presidential election that year ended up a mess. Reconstruction was ending. Class strife and stratification were rising. Fierce struggles for immigrant, women’s and African Americans’ rights were being waged. And many Americans wondered whether political, economic and social justice were even possible anymore. It was, in other words, a time not unlike our own.
Major Henry Martyn Robert, of the Army Corps of Engineers, wrote his book to try and save democracy. He wasn’t so interested in formal political institutions, which seemed hopelessly corrupt, but in helping what he called “ordinary societies” -- and the ordinary people who participated in them -- learn about democratic deliberation. Today we know these societies as the associational or voluntary sector, and Robert’s intended audience was the hundreds of thousands of Americans who joined the voluntary sector in the late 19th century. Women’s clubs, fraternal organizations, ecclesiastical bodies, veterans’ groups, professional associations and, significantly, colleges and universities were just some of the organizations that turned to Robert’s Rules. Although there were other guides from which to choose, his offered the best road map to small-d democracy: the majority rules, the minority must be heard and respected, cooperation and decency must prevail, and the interests of the whole must outweigh those of any individual.
Q: You note that Robert’s Rules was embraced by American higher education at a time when “white male privilege” dominated student and faculty life. Why shouldn’t Robert’s Rules fade away with white male privilege?
A: American higher education in the late 19th century in many ways reflected the intellectual and social interests and sensibilities of white men like Henry Martyn Robert, West Point Class of 1857. Some would argue it still does. At the same time, the higher education sector was far more institutionally diverse than is often recognized and included liberal arts colleges and a mix of public as well as private Black-serving institutions and women’s colleges and normal schools that also used Robert’s Rules. For example, Howard University was an early adopter, and women’s organizations were and remained among Robert’s most devoted followers. American higher education, like our nation, had to work hard to realize its democratic potential in the 20th century, and it turns out that Robert’s Rules played a key, if surprising, role in that still-unfinished process.
Q: American higher education has changed dramatically in the years since then. Why use Robert’s Rules today?
A: There are times when structured deliberation of the sort that Robert’s Rules provides is not just helpful but, I would argue, necessary. Governing boards, faculty senates, department meetings, student government, clubs and organizations, for example, operate best when basic deliberative procedures are followed. I understand that some people find Robert’s Rules fussy and overly formalistic. But that’s only true when the rules are clumsily or sporadically deployed. A seasoned parliamentarian can stimulate participation and improve decision making in deliberative assemblies by ensuring that everyone is heard. If you don’t believe me, take a deep breath, close your eyes and think about the last faculty meeting you attended. Enough said.
Q: Many associate American campuses with uncivil debate. Could Robert’s Rules change that?
A: Uncivil debate has always been part of campus life. There’s no getting around it: passions flare; shouting matches sometimes occur. Most of the time the disagreements are minor and the exchanges healthy -- a good sign that our colleges and universities are actually doing their job. But, lately, and again, this isn’t new, some of these protests and hecklers’ vetoes have become so hostile that they silence speech altogether and thus imperil the exercise of freedom of thought that is central to the academic enterprise. All ideas should be welcome, even unorthodox ones, and put to the test in the court of informed, fact-based, mutually respectful deliberation. Given the shaky ground of our democratic institutions and current challenges to scientific authority, I think higher education has an obligation to be far more intentional about modeling civil discourse and upholding democratic norms and practices on a day-to-day basis. In the aftermath of Jan. 6 and the continuing challenges of the pandemic, it’s never been more important.
That said, Robert’s Rules can neither heal our polarized politics nor guarantee that common decency and mutual respect will always prevail on our campuses. That will take a lot more than reading Robert’s Rules. It will require a renewed commitment to our nation’s democratic principles -- and to one another -- to solve all the problems that now confront us.