A bill currently before the Kansas House would ban required diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) courses at the state’s public colleges and universities. Supporters argue that institutions should offer “more diverse academic opportunities that are not against a student’s political, religious, moral or ethical beliefs.” On its face, this claim appears to champion intellectual openness. In practice, however, it misunderstands the purpose of higher education and deprives students of the rigorous learning environment that universities are designed to provide.

Higher education is not meant to function as an echo chamber for students’ pre‑existing worldviews. Its central mission has always been to expand knowledge, foster critical thinking and encourage engagement with complexity. College is one of the few structured environments where young adults can test their assumptions, encounter unfamiliar perspectives, and engage in reflection supported by research rather than insulated by comfort. Shielding students from ideas that challenge their beliefs undermines this mission entirely.

This understanding of higher education’s mission traces directly to our country’s founding. Several Founders explicitly argued that a democratic society requires citizens capable of reasoning through complex ideas. Thomas Jefferson, for example, maintained that education must cultivate critical thinkers who can meaningfully participate in civic life. He warned that democratic freedom depends on an informed, analytically capable public.

This civic purpose is not only a long‑standing academic principle — it aligns with public sentiment in Kansas. According to the 2025 Kansas Speaks survey, 55.8% of Kansans believe the primary goal of higher education is to create an educated citizenry, while only 34.1% say workforce development should be the dominant aim. These findings affirm that Kansans value universities as institutions that cultivate analytical citizens capable of democratic engagement, not as ideological safe havens designed to avoid friction with personal beliefs.

Courses addressing race, gender, culture and inequality play a crucial role in this intellectual development. They draw on decades of peer‑reviewed research in political science, sociology, psychology, history and education. Despite false reports to the contrary, DEI courses do not require students to adopt a particular political ideology; rather, they teach students how systems, data and lived experiences intersect to produce real‑world outcomes. Students are free to disagree with the interpretations presented, but disagreement is most meaningful when it emerges from informed engagement rather than avoidance.

Kansans also signal broad support for the underlying value of diversity in public life. The 2025 Kansas Speaks data shows that 59.8% agree that Kansas government becomes stronger when elected officials are more diverse, compared with only 8.2% who disagree. This belief — that diversity enhances institutional strength — undermines the notion that engaging with difference is inherently divisive or ideological. If diversity strengthens government, it follows that young adults benefit from learning how to navigate, understand, and appreciate diverse perspectives before they enter civic and professional life.

The legislators’ concern — that students should not be confronted with material that challenges their beliefs — reflects a fundamental misconception about what universities are for. Higher education does not exist to affirm; it exists to question. It does not exist to soothe; it exists to stimulate growth. Students will carry their political, religious and ethical commitments with them throughout their education, but the university’s role is to equip them with the analytical tools to understand those commitments in a broader context.

The Founders made clear that democratic governance requires citizens who are able to confront rather than avoid difficult questions. Jefferson and Adams both argued that education must develop citizens prepared for the moral and political complexities of republican life — not individuals shielded from discomfort. Their belief was that democratic institutions survive only when the populace can wrestle with complexity and evaluate competing claims.

Kansas should be investing in opportunities that broaden students’ horizons, not narrowing them. Intellectual diversity is not achieved by restricting academic content; it is achieved by engaging with it fully, especially when it invites discomfort.

— Alexandra Middlewood is an associate professor and chair of the Political Science Department at Wichita State University.