photo by: Mike Yoder

A decorated Rock Chalk cap is surrounded by other decorated caps during the University of Kansas commencement ceremonies Sunday, May 14, 2017 on the KU campus.

University leaders have been told a lot recently.

In February there was a “Dear Colleague” letter from the U.S. Department of Education that was a little light on the “dear.” The letter to university leaders across the country said they had “toxically indoctrinated” students with the idea that the United States had been built upon “systemic and structural racism.” It said universities were “smuggling racial stereotypes and explicit race-consciousness” into training programs and were basing student and employee discipline upon it.

Universities were told to stop all that and more.

By March, the directives turned to dollars. The Trump administration told schools there would be new limits on how they could use federal research dollars to pay for overhead costs such as lab maintenance, utility bills, equipment purchases, and salaries for administrators who support research activities on campus. At KU, the change — which is being challenged in court — would create a $30 million to $40 million budget problem, if it applies only to National Institutes of Health grants. The number would be significantly larger if it ultimately applies to all federal research funding the university receives.

By last week, the directives essentially told universities to start saying some goodbyes. The Trump administration announced that approximately 1,500 employees at the U.S. Department of Education — about half of the agency’s entire workforce — would have their jobs terminated. That’s the key agency that universities deal with nearly daily on issues ranging from student loans to civil rights.

When Kansas’ higher education leaders gathered in Topeka on Wednesday for their monthly meeting at the Kansas Board of Regents, they hadn’t yet come to terms with what those widespread federal layoffs would mean for their schools.

“It is really a wait-and-see game right now,” Fort Hays State President Tisa Mason told the Journal-World in a brief interview.

Add it all up, and university leaders have been told a lot in a short period of time. Nonetheless, some would like to be told more about one topic, even if the news might be tough: Do Americans want wholesale changes to higher education?

If the answer is yes, University of Kansas Chancellor Douglas Girod said universities had better get busy figuring out how to create it.

“I think, in part, we have to understand what it is America wants from higher education,” Girod said in response to a question about how the higher education community and the Trump administration could better work together. “If that has pivoted and changed, then we need to do so as well.”

“We are a public entity. We are a tool of the public enterprise. We are not independent. We are funded from multiple sources. We are here to help serve the needs of the country. That is where part of the conversation needs to be had and if people feel like we are not living up to that.”

photo by: Ashley Golledge

University of Kansas Chancellor Douglas Girod chats with the participants of an annual march across campus in celebration of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Tuesday, Jan. 21, 2020, in Strong Hall.

Mason also said that higher education leaders need to be open to hearing about change that the public may be seeking in universities.

“I think it takes a lot of patience and conversations,” Mason said. “At a root of a lot of challenges there are shared perspectives and opportunities to work together.”

A key strategy going forward, she said: “Not taking a defensive position as much as a reflective one.”

None of that means university leaders agree with everything that is being said about higher education. As university presidents met on Wednesday, it was clear that they didn’t agree with all the assessments in the Feb. 14 Dear Colleague letter from the U.S. Department of Education.

Several leaders, including Girod, said they were having legal counsel review the letter and a “frequently asked questions” document that arrived several days after the letter to be sure that any actions the universities take as a result of the letter are in compliance with the U.S. Constitution, particularly the First Amendment.

For example, the letter says it is a form of discrimination when DEI programs “teach students that certain racial groups bear unique moral burdens that others do not.” While the belief is undoubtedly controversial to some, does the First Amendment allow a university to tell employees they can’t talk about the subject on campus?

The FAQ document that followed the letter provided more guidance on that topic and others. It said the U.S. Department of Education doesn’t have any authority to exercise control over the curriculum of a school. But it also says the First Amendment doesn’t allow schools to “create hostile environments through race-based policies and stereotypes.”

That leaves universities much to interpret. Some presidents this week said they were focusing on interpreting the new rules rather than fighting them. Universities also were directed to begin talking with each other about how they are changing operations to meet the new directives. Blake Flanders — president and CEO of the Board of Regents — told the university CEOs that consistency in practices across universities would be important. Some university presidents agreed that a coordinated review among all the state’s universities would be important, so as to avoid one school having a policy significantly different than another.

“Ultimately, we don’t want to be pitted against each other,” Pittsburg State President Dan Shipp said during the meeting.

Conversations about race and diversity, however, are only part of the conversation that higher education needs to have with the American public, Girod said. When asked what issue was really weighing on his mind the most, he said the proposed changes to how research funding could be spent are the ones that would be “devastating” to the university and would require a complete reorganization. KU has estimated that about 5,000 employees — roughly one out of every three on the KU and Medical Center campuses — have a portion of their salaries funded by research dollars.

The time to hear from the public on the future of research activities at universities is drawing short, though. Universities already are starting to take actions that will be difficult to quickly reverse. Johns Hopkins University — the country’s oldest and largest research university — has announced 2,000 job cuts due to anticipated losses in federal funding. Closer to home, Kansas State has announced nine job cuts, and KU has said it is considering a hiring freeze, which is an action multiple research universities across the country have taken.

But Girod said the impacts will stretch beyond just current university employees. Research universities often make decisions about how many graduate students — especially doctoral candidates — to accept each year based on the amount of research a university undertakes.

Girod contends that the caps on how research funds can be spent ultimately will result in less research being done at KU and elsewhere because the universities won’t be able to find the money in their own budgets to pay for the needed administrative and overhead expenses that no longer could be funded with federal dollars. Less research, he said, will mean fewer people on campus. That doesn’t just include employees but also would include reduced numbers of graduate students on campuses.

“Unfortunately, those people are the next generation of scientists,” Girod said. “There is a long-term hazard here of losing a generation of scientists.”

Fort Hays State University President Tisa Mason

But you also don’t have to look far to find large segments of the American population who believe the real hazard is that universities are creating a generation of students who discount traditional American values, are hostile to free speech, and are intolerant of conservative perspectives.

Mason, the president at Fort Hays State, said she believes higher education can make inroads with that segment of America and others if it focuses on lives changed rather than policies debated.

“At the end of the day, it is all about human lives and helping people have an opportunity to have more doors open for them,” Mason said.

The approach, she said, will require universities to “stay calm and thoughtful.”

That’s not to say, however, those are the only emotions allowed.

“Angst is a real emotion,” Mason said. “We need to understand that and work with it. I think it is very valid to be anxious.”