Financial pressures at the University of Chicago are raising big questions about the university’s future and maybe that of American universities more generally. A paper by Cliff Ando has raised those questions and opened up a recent debate at the university’s Hyde Park campus.
In his paper Ando “ uses public financial data to lay bare the risks to which university leadership exposed the community in a rush of leveraged investments over the last 15+ years. Other data (regarding salaries, research expenditures, and building maintenance) are adduced to demonstrate that the benefits of this investment were not symmetrically distributed across the university. At the same time, the measures taken to address earlier liquidity crises have negatively and disproportionately affected, and continue to affect, core functions of the central divisions of the university. The paper advances an interpretation of these long-term choices and urges that faculty must fight to ensure that the next years restore a more balanced, more equitable, and more historic sense of mission.
An overview is available in the Chicago Maroon. At the core of the debate is debt, a lot of it taken on when interest rates were low, and now coming home to roost as interest rates rise. But that brings to the fore whether Cjicago will continue its historic role as a flagship of humanistic education.
Thanks to David Derbes for calling this matter to my attention.