It appears that being unrelentingly woke means that you need fewer dormitories. The University of Oregon is facing a major budget crisis and will cut $65 million from its budget and close dorms due to low enrollment. That growing crisis, however, did not stop Oregon from burning almost a million dollars fighting against free speech. It also did not induce its faculty to offer greater intellectual diversity and tolerance to prospective students. Oregon is a cautionary tale for a generation of academic social warriors, but also an opportunity for those who want to restore balance in higher education.
Oregon has long been an example of academic orthodoxy. While most state schools begrudgingly yield to First Amendment demands and offer better free speech alternatives to private universities, Oregon is known as a hardened silo for the far left in teaching.
We previously discussed how Portland State University Professor Bruce Gilley who was blocked from the Twitter account of the University of Oregon’s Division of Equity and Inclusion after tweeting “All men are created equal.” Oregon spent almost a million dollars fighting to bar such speech.
Such controversies have plagued the university for years, with no sign of self-examination by administrators or academics. The university was criticized for its monitoring of social media to punish errant thoughts or microaggressions. The law school’s law review was accused of anti-Israel discrimination.
The school previously gave special recognition to University of California (Santa Barbara) Professor Mireille Miller-Young, who criminally assaulted pro-life advocates on the campus of the University of California at Santa Barbara. At the University of Oregon, she was honored as a featured speaker at the University of Oregon’s Department of Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies. Part of its “black feminist speaker series,” Miller-Young’s work was highlighted by the College of Arts and Sciences and the Department of English to show “the radical potential of black feminism in the work that we do on campus and in our everyday lives.”
Now, the school is facing declining revenues and enrollments.
President Karl Scholz recently announced that this was due to lower out-of-state first-year enrollment, which means lower tuition revenue, increased costs, and a loss of grant funding.
Strangely, while closing dorms, the school is still building two new dorms.
Putting aside the school’s past budget judgment and discipline, the university’s reputation for intellectual orthodoxy deters many who do not want to pay tuition for their children to be indoctrinated or silenced. Even with plunging trust in higher education, administrators and faculty cannot resist the temptation to exclude opposing voices.
Oregon is not the only school facing such shortfalls. Some woke institutions have closed entirely. The irony is that faculty would seem to prefer to see their institutions die than restore balance to their departments. However, this may offer a real opportunity for legislators and donors to force real changes in the culture of these schools.
As I have previously written, parents and students who value free speech must increasingly look to public universities where faculty are subject to constitutional guarantees. Public universities may be the final line of defense for free-speech advocates.
We now largely have two systems of higher education for those seeking education with a diversity of opinions and viewpoints. Except for outliers like the University of Chicago and other private universities holding the line on free speech, the orthodoxy found at private universities remains a barrier to many conservative and independent thinkers.
If we are to protect these bastions of free speech, legislatures will need to play a more active role in addressing the exclusion of both faculty candidates and speakers on public campuses. Too many faculty members continue to take the view that citizens are a captive audience expected to continue funding their departments, while excluding conservative or dissenting views held by many, if not most, citizens in a given state.
If faculty members want to continue maintaining echo chambers for their own viewpoints, they should have to seek private donors to sustain such intolerance and orthodoxy.
Legislatures can demand evidence that schools are maintaining intellectually diverse faculties in determining the level of continued support from citizens.
When some of us have argued for such campaigns, academics hypocritically claim that we are calling for political litmus tests or hiring based on political parties. It is an absurd argument that I have previously addressed, including in my book “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
The call is for donors and legislators to withhold funding until they see real reforms, including greater diversity on faculties. They are not directing the hiring but looking at the results. The faculty members objecting to such calls have watched passively (or actively supported) the purging of conservative or libertarian faculty from universities and colleges.
When confronted by their own obvious ideological litmus tests, they shrug. Some acknowledge that their departments are overwhelmingly liberal, but insist that they just cannot find “competent” or “intellectually promising” conservatives. A few will admit that they do not believe that conservative views have a place in their departments.
It is impossible to deny the purging of faculties to create an academic echo chamber. If a large corporation effectively eliminated women or minorities while claiming no conscious discrimination, they would be trounced in court.
For years, I have raised concerns about the intolerance in higher education and surveys showing that many departments no longer have a single Republican as faculty members replicate their own views and values. There is no evidence that any faculty members (including those acknowledging the loss of virtually all faculty from the right of center) are honestly willing to reform their schools.
That ideological echo chamber is hardly an enticement for many facing rising tuition costs and relatively little hope of being taught by faculty with opposing views.
A Georgetown study recently found that only nine percent of law school professors identify as conservative at the top 50 law schools — almost identical to the percentage of Trump voters found in the new poll.
There is little evidence that faculty members are interested in changing this culture or creating greater diversity at schools. In places like North Carolina State University a study found that Democrats outnumbered Republicans 20 to 1.
As college and university presidents face these shortfalls, it is time for legislators and donors to demand real proof of diversity in hiring and a change in the culture of these institutions. Otherwise, schools like Oregon will continue to close dorms as they push wokeness over wisdom.
K12 and Higher Ed have long ignored the facts that they knew. Demography is destiny. There are fewer people in the pipeline but educators have pretended that enrollment would grow when the evidence suggested otherwise.
https://help.macrobond.com/tutorials-training/macrobond-analysis-user-guides/4-charting/types-of-charts/presentations/bar-chart/pyramid-chart/
We’ve all known for years that enrollment would decline.
So the solution to this drop-off is ‘mass deportations’..? Sounds badly timed.
Narrowing the field down to “Business Schools” (Not; Law, Medical, Health Sciences, Computer Tech, etc.)
Of Business Schools, what percentage of Conservatives are found?
A.I. ( List of higher education Business Schools in the US )
Higher education business schools in the US include hundreds of accredited institutions, spanning top-ranked national programs, specialized graduate schools, and large state systems. Explore detailed admission statistics and compare programs across the country using the U.S. News Best Business Schools Compass.
Top-ranked national business schools include:
Harvard Business School (Harvard University) – Boston, MA
Stanford Graduate School of Business (Stanford University) – Stanford, CA
The Wharton School (University of Pennsylvania) – Philadelphia, PA
MIT Sloan School of Management (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) – Cambridge, MA
Booth School of Business (University of Chicago) – Chicago, IL
Kellogg School of Management (Northwestern University) – Evanston, IL
Columbia Business School (Columbia University) – New York, NY
Tuck School of Business (Dartmouth College) – Hanover, NH
Stern School of Business (New York University) – New York, NY
Prominent business schools in the regional vicinity (Texas and the Southwest):
McCombs School of Business (University of Texas at Austin) – Austin, TX
Jones Graduate School of Business (Rice University) – Houston, TX
Naveen Jindal School of Management (University of Texas at Dallas) – Richardson, TX
Mays Business School (Texas A&M University) – College Station, TX
W. P. Carey School of Business (Arizona State University) – Tempe, AZ
Eller College of Management (University of Arizona) – Tucson, AZ
Major state university business schools across the US:
Haas School of Business (University of California, Berkeley) – Berkeley, CA
Ross School of Business (University of Michigan) – Ann Arbor, MI
UCLA Anderson School of Management (University of California, Los Angeles) – Los Angeles, CA
Kenan-Flagler Business School (University of North Carolina) – Chapel Hill, NC
Kelley School of Business (Indiana University) – Bloomington, IN
—
A.I. ( Percentage of Conservatives found in higher education Business Schools in the US )
Roughly 25% of university professors in higher education business schools identify as conservative, representing the highest concentration of conservative faculty among all major academic disciplines. While precise, uniform enrollment metrics on the exact percentage of conservative business students nationwide are not explicitly tracked, comprehensive longitudinal data reveals distinct ideological distributions within business programs.
Faculty Ideological Demographics
While the broader higher education landscape heavily skews liberal (averaging a 60% liberal to 12.5% conservative split across all fields), professional disciplines like business break the standard academic mold.
The Business & Health Field Peak: According to academic discipline data compiled by researchers, 25% of business and health sciences faculty identify as conservative. This stands in stark contrast to the humanities and social sciences, where conservative faculty routinely drop to under 5%.
The Moderating Core: The remaining business faculty is split between moderates/centrists and moderate liberals. Studies note that students in business are far more likely to be educated by moderate or right-leaning professors than students in any other major.
Student Ideological Shifts and Demographics
Comprehensive student survey data tracking over 300,000 students across 500 U.S. colleges indicates a strong correlation between business schools and right-leaning/conservative ideologies.
The Rightward Pull: Data published by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) shows that studying economics and business actively steers students toward more right-leaning and conservative political positions.
Economic vs. Cultural Conservatism: This rightward shift in business schools is predominantly driven by economic policy viewpoints (such as favoring lower tax levels, free markets, and corporate deregulation) rather than social or cultural issues.
Closing the Ideological Gap: Researchers concluded that if all college students majored in business or economics, the well-documented “college-to-noncollege” liberal ideological gap in the United States would shrink by an estimated one-third.
From a May 2026 report:
“In 2007, the United States recorded 4.3 million births. In 2022, that number had fallen to approximately 3.3 million — a 23% decline in a single generation’s birth cohort. Those children born in 2007 are now turning 19. They were always going to be the leading edge of the demographic wave that higher education forecasters have been calling the ‘enrollment cliff’ — and that cliff is no longer approaching. It has arrived.” https://degreecalc.com/blog/college-enrollment-decline/
This, compounded with the increasing polarization of higher ed. Contrary to what X/Geor/whoever/whatever-it-is-AI/ has said, enrollment in several religious and conservative colleges has dramatically increased. —But is that a good thing?
-Or do we want to develop students who have the courage of those convictions that they were raised with, to openly share space with, and maturely debate with, those with whom they may disagree, without fear of ridicule, ostracization, violence?
Where is our ‘well-seasoned,” “well-exposed,” “well-rounded” Man for all Seasons that we used to admire and emulate for balanced perspectives in politics, education, corporate decision-making?
“Research Finds Students’ Political Views Influence Their College Enrollment Decisions” https://www.future-ed.org/research-finds-students-political-views-influence-their-college-enrollment-decisions/
Lin, you’re certainly onto something with that demographic cliff. That would seem to be the real issue here. And it sounds like Oregon has failed to manage that demographic cliff.
That demographic cliff might also give us pause regarding mass deportations. Unless we’re getting rid of people strictly for the purpose of maintaining White dominance; a rather feeble strategy.
your sarcasm is noted, but too bad you failed to realize that the highest growth of student populations in higher education is in the Black and Hispanic categories. Don’t need no more illegals.
AND, from AI,
“Conservative-Friendly Elite Universities
“Some elite research universities have maintained a relatively stable presence of conservative professors, unlike many undergraduate colleges and non-elite research institutions. Here are notable examples:
Universities with Conservative Representation
University Conservative Presence Notes
Dartmouth Stable Known for producing notable conservative thinkers.
Yale Stable Has a history of notable conservative alumni.”
hey dummass – see Europe.
Lin,
Good point about the birth rate.
To expand on that, the birth rate for progressives is 1.6. The birth rate for conservatives is 2.4. The replacement rate is 2.1. So, progressives are non-breeding themselves out of existence while conservatives are on track to expand.
https://starkrealities.substack.com/p/conservatives-higher-birthrates-than-progressives
The original intent of a “well rounded,” educated college grad was once a well meaning and admirable goal. Now with the exploding costs of higher education, I question the value of having to take an humanities elective at, say, $500 a credit hour in Art Appreciation.
There are some interesting courses colleges offer. But given the option of taking just core, major related classes and cutting the student debt load by any degree would be a lot better.
And lets face, some of these courses are nothing but useless self-serving to keep some employed as they are not employable at all in the real or corporate world.
Lin and Upstate to expand further. Chassidic families have fertility rates of 6-7, and from my personal experience, they bring up well-mannered children.
S. Meyer: Good to know. (I am reminded of an early exchange with you regarding one of my favorite movies of all time, “The Chosen,” (about the endearing -and enduring- friendship between two youths, one whose father is a Zionist and the other’s father is a(n) Hasidic rabbi (I am not familiar with the spelling ‘Chassidic’)–and how they bridged that gap between their two upbringings. (I did not see the movie until years later, mid-90s, when I picked it up at the old Blockbuster’s.)
Lin, your spelling is fine. Chassidic with two or one s and Hasidic are both valid.
The movie was a favorite of mine also. I attend a Chabad synagogue, part of the Chassidic movement shaped by the late Rebbe, whose outward-looking philosophy stands in stark contrast to the insular world shown in The Chosen. The congregation is diverse. Jews from all backgrounds attend and create a wonderful environment. While the Chassidic rabbi strictly adheres to traditional laws and wears classic black attire, he is accepting of all.
There is a fabulous book, The Rebbi, written by Telushkin that all will find fascinating and informative, He advised the greats.
The amount of increase in religious based schools is microscopic compared to the total enrollment and enrollment decline.
When the economy is being destroyed a small portion of the population will seek solace from a silent and uncaring God, but will find, instead, charlatans pretending to know what the non-existent version of God they purport to represent.
It is worth noting that church membership in the US has been plummeting, probably faster than college enrollment.
The main story is that child care is too expensive so people have fewer children and college tuition is too expensive so fewer enroll; on the back end American companies have been off-shoring technical jobs to China and India, either as direct hires or by purchasing finished goods that were not engineered or manufactured in America. This has left a great number of college graduates facing far fewer job opportunities.
It’s a capitalist trifecta to destroy America and strip mine the wealth.
I grew up with three brothers. Played chess often. Argued issues all the time. Wanted to be right, but preferred to eradicate our own errors. The truth, reality, morality was the objective. Debated in high school in “the Bicentennial Youth Debates,” both sides of each question. Again, it was how to think and argue. To reach the best position. Went to college and then graduate school, then law school. Abortion was my foremost issue, concern. Argued it with everyone. My answer was, and still is, that “human life begins when conception occurs within a human womb.” It is then that the identity is formed, then that there is little more man can do but kill it to change its destiny. Then that it is blessed with the right to life and liberty. Then that it has “a life of its own.” Viability, dependency, disability, ethnicity, age, phenotype are all flawed arguments. Science, philosophy, “Vulcan” logic (haha!), religion, ethics all informed and dictated my position. Certainly society can permit abortion when circumstances require, just as society balances two lives by allowing the defense of “self defense.” But society should weigh two lives on the balance, not only consider the mother’s. I cared most about thinking right, not simply “being” right. Good thinkers don’t confuse good thinking with being good. Good thinkers’ identity isn’t shaken by changing one’s mind. Good thinkers know that their goal is the truth, that they are diminished by being unable to change their minds. What’s my point? Along the way I discovered that those on the other side were afraid to debate, didn’t know how to, were more interested in justifying themselves, not merely with defending their thinking. I never met someone on the other side who didn’t, in the end, forfeit the match. They could never accept defeat. It was somehow threatening. College was my first introduction to this sad psychological reality of the condition of most human beings. Colleges should be places that encourage debate, not stifle it. I went to the doctor for a checkup. Why did the computer tell my doctor that I, a male, needed a Pap smear? Because I had declined to answer the question “gender assigned at birth.” “Why didn’t you answer?” my doctor asked. “Because my gender wasn’t assigned at birth, it was identified,” was my answer. This rot is absolutely everywhere.
On the bright side of things, your doctor can give you an abortion if you ever need one.
Let’s see if the red states grow faster with abortion bans. Nothing like unwanted children to increase population. Never mind if they grow up poor never knowing their dads.
Universities should be forced to publish meaningful statistics about themselves beyond cost. For each department and major, how many people enrolling as freshmen end up graduating with degrees from that department? What percentage find jobs in that field and what is the average starting salary? How switch to other majors before graduating? How many go on to grad school? What is the average student debt carried by a graduate? What is their administrator to professor ratio? How many class are not actually taught by professors? Etc. Parents and students need to know what they are paying for and, more importantly, is it worth it? My bet is the results would be disappointing… for the schools.
OT but related to the absurd of the Democrats, Dems replace ‘mother’ with ‘gestating parent’ in latest woke rewrite of NY law
https://nypost.com/2026/06/03/us-news/dems-replace-mother-with-gestating-parent-in-latest-woke-rewrite-of-nys-law/?utm_source=referral&utm_medium=offthepress&utm_campaign=home
Higher education used to be the ticket to the middle class.
Now it is the ticket to years if not decades of debt and being forced to take useless classes. I am not talking about useless DEI classes but things like Art Appreciation, 17th Century French Literature, or The History of the Meal Worm Breeding Cycles.
Streamline the course studies to the major.
Engineering? Classes that are directly related to engineering. Same goes for anything medical, computer science, business, etc.
Cut down the number of classes, costs and time. Get rid of the useless electives.
Want to take a class on Art Appreciation, 17th Century French Literature, or The History of the Meal Worm Breeding Cycles? Have at it on your own time and dime. Colleges should not make it a requirement.
I live in Eugene and have observed this dreadful tyranny first hand, for decades. The harbinger of authoritarianism was and is still Prof. Jennifer Freyd’s fraudulent “research” designed to presume all male students to be rapists. She obtained national recognition by concocting a campus rape crisis which served as the tip of the “me too”/“believe all women” spear. He means was deceptively simple. She conducted federally funded survey studies collecting the incidents of sexual activity (including verbal suggestiveness) which occurred in the absence of formal, explicit consent.
Normal sexual engagement relies on non-verbal consent. This has been true since the beginning of time. By retroactively applying an abnormal and unrealistic standard to human sexual relations, “rape” is created by researchers and politicians – yes, the same ones who rationally demand that gay rights is founded in privacy and the right to be left alone by the government.
The sum of such “incidents” were transformed into presumptive sexual assault. So even discussing sex with a date became “rape” and was then used to justify repressive investigatory intrusions into the private lives of actually consenting students. Retroactive “rape” became official policy which drove an uncounted (and uncountable) number of male students to commit suicide. Others just dropped out. Admittedly, some were actually guilty of crimes against the women they were dating.
The Eugene Weekly published a cover story with the UO logo on its full-page front cover declaring “Rape U”. The newspaper was then owned by Art Johnson, past president of the Oregon State Bar, and his wife Anita Johnson who used the paper to promote Democrat politicians. Johnson’s law firm extorted over a million dollars from UO by dumping buckets of public shit over the heads of UO administrators. That was achieved by the newspaper threatening enrollment. Who would want to send their daughter to UO rampant rape were occurring under the noses of callous and indifferent administrators?
Johnson’s law firm was in conflict of interest for numerous reasons that the UO knew about. The conspirators were trying the case by headlines, literally. They did not disclose to the federal judge that they owned the newspaper which was publishing fraudulent research supporting the contrived “rape” of a Jane Doe who had had consensual sex with three black male basketball players. They were defamed and run out of town, with the help of the coach who was terrorized by defamatory media coverage led by The Eugene Weekly.
The Title IX lawsuit cited news sources including the New York Times, The San Francisco Chronicle, and The Boston Globe reporting public alarm over sexual assault on university campuses. Each of those newspapers relied on Johnson’s newspaper, which was working overtime to publish the fraudulent results of Jennifer Freyd’s concocted findings. In sum, a false allegation was exploded into a multi-million dollar lawsuit which never had any intention of going to trial, but rather was decided on the falsified weight of the fictitious evidence, as projected to be decided by an intentionally poisoned jury pool.
The Johnson law firm brought in, pro hac vice, the nationally renowned attorney John Clune who would go on to represent a second accuser of Brett Kavanaugh when he was nominated to SCOTUS. The firm, now Johnson Johnson Lucas and Middleton, touts Jennifer Middleton’s victory with Clune in their Title IX suit against UO by a student “who reported a gang rape by three members of the Ducks basketball team.”
There is the undeniable fruit of the illegal extortion of the University of Oregon and the taxpayers of Oregon. No trial meant no evidence was heard. The fact of the settlement was the coup de grace of the trial by headline. The firm, Middleton and Clune took their filthy lucre and leveraged it into new false allegation spectacles at the national level. Middleton additionally represented Freyd in her sex discrimination suit against the university, in which the Ninth Circuit was swayed by Freyd’s research subject matter – with absolutely no dissent as to the quality of that “research.”
Doubtless, the lower enrollment at UO has many factors, some being totally out of control of the courts or state government. But the salient truth is that those in power who could have stood up to confront the professional pack of jackals – when it mattered – were instead intimidated into silence by a bureaucratic apparatus backed by co-conspiratorial media organs that had the power to destroy their lives and reputations, as witnessed by the ruination of the three basketball players.
Parenthetically, the UO jazz studies program is a very good opportunity for music students. It has produced many successful jazzers, and award winning ensembles.
Breaking news LA Times: Lawyers at L.A. firm involved in $4 billion sex abuse settlement face state bar charges
The University of Oregon is the flavor of the day. What about the University of Pennsylvania (Professor Joe Biden and Ambassador Amy Gutmann), Harvard (atheist as head chaplain), and Yale (no registered Republican professors)? “Your child belongs to us” is a quote attributed to Adolph Hitler.
I am going to disagree with the good professor on this one. They want echo chambers. Let them have it. Let them tell the whole nation the kind of indoctrination camps they really are. Let them crank out DEI grads who go on to careers in . . . nothing.
Well, baristas.
Let the free market work. If people want to attend a college who see their students as “captive audiences” for mandatory DEI classes, have at it. Those who dont, will attend other colleges.
Another factor that needs to be taken into consideration is the declining state population.
The irony is this has been going on for decades with no problems. The only thing still a problem is conservatives whining about these schools being elite bastions of the left while avoiding them at the same time. It’s their avoidance all these years that created the ‘imbalance’ they complain about. It’s due to their own choice, not the schools.
That’s silly. Faculties have been purged of conservatives through discriminatory hiring practices. Conservatives are not to blame for that. You clearly have no clue what you’re even talking about.
Can you share the evidence of anti-conservative discriminatory hiring practices?
Cute. Can you prove there isn’t?
No. There is no irony here. Liberals like you can’t be trusted with power. You persecute and then blame the persecuted.
Professors make a big noise about Marx and Engels while jacking up tuitions and selling bogus degrees. They pander to foreign students and governments by parroting third-world agitprop and then charge them a fortune for a lame education. The price of a college education has risen much faster than medical costs for decades, and the course material just becomes more and more political dreck.
There’s a lot more wrong with higher Ed than just the intolerance and lies. It’s become the biggest scam in America. You need to open your eyes and stop covering for them.
JD Vance – Yale
Pete Hegseth – Princeton and Harvard
Scott Bessent – Yale
Won’t be sending their children there. People like you ruined it for everybody else. And they would agree with me.
How would you get the legislature to quit funding a university doing EXACTLY what the legislature wants them to do? They want socialism and will continue to fight for it. They taxpayers are the ones who ned to make a decision.
Professor Turley: “The irony is that faculty would seem to prefer to see their institutions die than restore balance to their departments.”
lin: “””Love means never having to say you’re sorry.”””
Is martyrdom becoming a part of leftist doctrine?
Even Goebbels would be ashamed at the lack of ideological diversity at America’s universities. The level of far-left Fascist orthodoxy is shameful to anyone with a conscience and the ability for introspection, which the left obviously lacks.
You mean Stephen Miller?
Only a mid-wit Dem would call a Jew Goebbels while supporting the guy with the Nazi tattoo.
HullBobby,
I think the Maine race is a example of the stupid and crazy that has taken over the Democrat party. That guy is the best they could come up with?
Yeah Upstate, they need to vote for the Nazi tattoo, port-o-potty perv, KiK texting, purple heart attacker in order to stave off the election of the right wing zealot…………………………………..Susan Collins?????
I hate to say it because I believe in higher ed, but may this come to many, many more institutions. They have become at best, exclusive clubs, to at worst, something that looks an awful lot like a cult, complete with purity tests. Enough.
Purity tests as in, “Who won the 2020 election?”
Why do Professor Turley’s trolls all have to have IQs below 70? Can’t we get at least one that makes sense and perhaps has a smidgen of wit?
This highlights the core flaw in Turley’s argument. While he laments a lack of viewpoint diversity and claims conservative faculty are being systematically purged, the data points to self-selection. Because the political right frequently frames higher education as an echo chamber for hostile ‘elites,’ fewer conservatives have any interest in pursuing academic careers. Conservatives are choosing to avoid universities entirely, meaning the imbalance is a result of their own career choices, not an administrative purge.”
https://thechristiantribune.com/enrollment-explodes-at-conservative-christian-schools/
https://www.thecollegefix.com/faithful-catholic-colleges-see-enrollment-boom/
First – You mistate Turley’s argument – something you do constantly.
You do not seem to grasp the difference between:
This is a mistake or a bad idea, and
This is or should be illegal.
I have no problem with truly private entities discriminating on the basis of race or politics or hair color.
That does not mean I think that such discrimination is not a bad idea.
But if you are only free to make good choices – you are not free at all.
With Colleges and Universities the problem is they are NOT Truly private.
They accept massive amounts of government funding and they are therefore bound to much the same limits with respect to infringing on rights as the govenrment is.
Do left wing nut universities purge conservatives and libertarians – absolutely.
Do conservatives and libertarians CHOOSE other colleges or even other professions – Absolutely.
People tend not to stay where they are not wanted.
Many of the institutions the left dominates – have never been attractive to conservatives or libertarians. But that does not explain 10:1 a shift over time from 6:4 to 10:1
As YOU note – there is a 1.6% decline in students going to college.
UOO has had a 10% drop in its student body in the past decade.
It has had an almost 10% increase in its admissions rate.
Thjat means there has been a 19% drop in applications – that is 10+ times larger than the drop in total college bound students.
UOO is a top tier college – it is also a public college which is usually cheaper and more attractive.
Notre Dame which is 20th ranked – compared to UOO 49th – so ND is in the top 2% of Colleges and UOO is in the top 5% – not a huge difference. ND has a 10% larger student body, and has one of the most selective addmissions in the country If you apply to UOO you have an 8:10 change of getting in, if you apply to ND you have a 1:10 chance.
ND is NOT seeing declining applications – UOO is.
Further ND has a huge amount of headroom – UOO has almost none.
If you only accept 1 in 10 applicants – when demographics change by a few percent – you can change to 1 in 9 and still fill the campus. Within some limits ND can grow by a factor of 5 and still have a lower acceptance rate and therefore protection from demographic drops.
I actually find it strange that UOO has an over 80% acceptance rate – top teir colleges are ALWAYS selective. Further a high acceptance rate means you are subject to demographic swings.
The colleges that should be massacred by even small demographic changes are the 3rd tier colleges – The colleges that are students choice when no one else will accept them.
Regardless the nuimbers do not support your claim – Students (or Parents) are choosing NOT to even Apply to UOO in very large numbers. The problem is actually about double the size Turley suggests.
As for the dorms issue, it’s more likely Professor Turley has no idea how university budgets work. He may be a professor at one, but that does not mean he’s privy to the inner intricate workings of college budgets.
Turley points to a seemingly contradictory detail to suggest financial incompetence: “Strangely, while closing dorms, the school is still building two new dorms.”
This reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of how university finances operate. Universities manage separate operational budgets (which pay for faculty salaries, departments, and daily services) and capital budgets (which fund long-term construction).
The new dorms are funded by restricted capital bonds and targeted private donations that legally cannot be repurposed to plug holes in the operational budget or pay for faculty. Older dorms are being closed or repurposed because they are structurally inefficient and expensive to maintain, whereas modern facilities are built to attract the shrinking pool of prospective students.
You gotta spend money to make money and that is true everywhere. You cannot attract new students with outdated dorms, right? It’s a competitive world out there and this is one way to attract new students.
Professor Turley should also have mentioned his own employer.
GWU’s total enrollment dropped from 25,939 students down to 24,500 students. This represents a net loss of 1,439 paying students (a 3.4% decline) in just a three-year span. Is it because it too is too woke?
Between 2018 and 2023, GWU’s total fall graduate student enrollment declined by 9.2%. That contraction has only deepened, with graduate headcounts dropping another 6%.
Just like the out-of-state tuition crunch hitting Oregon, GWU is experiencing a severe loss in full-paying international students.
GWU enrollment data revealed that GWU’s total international student population fell by more than 10%. The university enrolled 392 fewer international students in a single year cycle. Because international students typically pay the full cost of attendance, GWU officials explicitly noted that this decline directly damaged net tuition revenue.
GWU leadership—including President Ellen Granberg and the Interim Provost—officially instituted a 3% mandatory budget cut across all university operating units and enacted a pause on merit-based faculty salary increases.
Administrative notices explicitly warned the campus community of a prolonged hiring freeze and impending “reductions in the number of staff and certain faculty positions” to combat the revenue shortfalls.
Turley shouldn’t be worried since he has tenure, but it’s obvious even his own employer is having issues with enrollment and revenue.
“it’s more likely Professor Turley has no idea how university budgets work. He may be a professor at one, but that does not mean he’s privy to the inner intricate workings of college budgets.”
But apparently X/georgie has an idea how university budgets work. AND…although X/georgie is not a professor at one, he apparently IS privy to the inner intricate workings of college budgets.
Hilarious. “ROLF!” (X’s expression after he thought he learned a new acronym)
X, you sink deeper every day.
So? Is the information wrong? You haven’t shown it is.
“Is the information wrong?”
Per usual, your “information” about JT is neither right nor wrong. It’s utterly arbitrary — mad speculation concocted to smear JT.
The rest of your “information” is your daily AI carpet bombing — a pathetic attempt to make yourself appear authoritative.
ChatGPT at it again.
Thank you George. You are the best GOTV any conservative could ask for.
With respect to budgets – you know less than Turley.
While it is correct that capital improvements do not DIRECTLY come from operting budgets – that is universally true – not unique to univesities,
It is not correct that they are unrelated.
it is also incorrect to presume you know why old dorms are ebing vacated while new ones are built.
SOMETIMES new dorms are from Donations – but normally donations for buildings go to prominent things you can put your name on – and Dorms are low on the list.
The Demographic problem you note which is nationwide was also fully predictable.
it is Highly unlikely UOO would start a capital campaign for new dorms knowing they would need fewer later.
Colleges – and even public schools are very good at predicting student enrollment into the future.
When they fail it is NOT because of demographics – UOO knew it would face a shrinking pool of college students 18 years ago
when the birth stats for 2008 came out.
If UOO got “surprised” – that means something other than demographics impacted them.
With respect to dorms and other campus fascilities – the primary drivers ARE – the massive government subsidization of education – which has resulted in massive building campaigns over the past 40 years.
Capital funding is distinct from operating funding – BUT if you build it – you must maintain it and pay the debt service.
We have actually been through all of this in your idiotic claims regarding NYC housing.
Public or private maintance costs are real. Public or private the debt service on the purchase of an asset are real – UNLESS you steal the asset.
The next big driver of building programs is PARENTS – Government subsidies and loans have atleast partly divorced parents from funding college. As a result they want their students going to better more modern campuses – because THEY do not have to pay for them. MAYBE they cosign loans – though often not. But it is the student that has to pay for it.
Many of the worlds most prestigious colleges use dorms and other buildings that are centuries old.
Outside of bottom tier colleges which do not build for centuries – most college construction is intended to survive centuries not decades.
Further a top to bottom GUT of an existing building and rebuild leaving only the structure and facade is 15% cheaper than a new building.
A less drastic renovation is cheaper still.
The primary cause of failure in colleges is mismanagement – not politics.
That does not mean that ideology and management are not often linked.
Regardless it is extremely uncommon for a College Dorm in a college that has been arround for more than a couple of decades to be structurally unsound.
End Federal Aid to cities, states, non-profits and colleges
Outlaw Public Unions
Then see if Democrat fun areas can function. Spoiler…THEY CAN’T
They are basically set up, to GRAB other taxpayer’s money!
I believe ANY non-profit(basically all colleges) should be FULLY TAXED
if you can give people MORE THAN A $100k of benefit
YOU SHOULD PAY ALL TAXES!
Stop pretending they are doing a community service…they are LIBERAL MONEY MAKERS!
“The University of Oregon is facing a major budget crisis and will cut $65 million from its budget and close dorms due to low enrollment.” “President Karl Scholz recently announced that this was due to lower out-of-state first-year enrollment . . .” (JT)
On all such JT commentaries, there is this smear and lie by omission:
“JT is being disingenuous by ignoring that undergraduate enrollment nationwide is dropping.” (Over that last ten years, there was a slight decrease, and most recently an increase.) That alleged drop in overall enrollment is intended to refute JT’s claim that the University of Oregon’s massive shortfall is caused by its Woke policies.
The massive lie by omission, which triggers the smear of JT, is the failure to compare the U of O to its peer institutions. Both the University of Florida and University of Texas systems are experiencing a massive increase in their undergraduate applications and enrollments. Out-of-state applications for both systems are skyrocketing.
So, who is being “disingenuous?” And who’s right about the cause of the U of Oregon woes?
The surge in applications at flagship universities like UT Austin is heavily mechanical. UT Austin recently joined the Common App platform, allowing high school seniors to apply to dozens of schools with a single click. This drastically inflates total application numbers without changing the number of students the university can physically accept.
“. . . inflates total *application numbers* . . .” (emphasis added)
Both the U of Florida and the U of Texas systems have a massive increase in undergraduate *enrollments*.
Care to try again?
Application numbers does not mean enrollments. Easy peasy.
The issue is *enrollments* at U of F and U of T (which are increasing), vs at U of O (which is decreasing). Why do you keep switching the issue to applications?
That was a rhetorical question. Your obvious game is deflection.
I’m so glad to see you speaking out in favor of increasing DIVERSITY on campus, Professor. The only way to fight this monocultural thinking is to practice hiring that is representative of society – so selecting individuals to teach from differing segments of society (Republican, Democrat, rich, poor, black, white) and INCLUDING them all EQUALLY in the mission of education. In fact, we could actually name this initiative – something like INCLUSION, EQUITY and DIVERSITY – like IED or something. So refreshing to read you are in favor of this practice, Professor.
“. . . increasing DIVERSITY on campus . . .”
Nice equivocation.
Anon: You are conflating unconstitutional discrimination inherent in DEI (preferential treatment based on race, sex, sexual preference) with legal hiring of different ideological views.
“different ideological views.”=Left, Far Left and OFF the Charts Left.
“different ideological views.”=
That is tragically true.
A department chair told me: It’s okay to have different opinions on campus, as long as they fall within the academic norm — which was Castro and to the left of Castro.
Division, exclusion, and indoctrination will do it every time.
$65 Million?
Basketball coach $4 Million
Football coach $11 Million
if you cut THOSE two programs…that would be WELL OVER $65 Million for the coaches salaries and perks!
Guy, I usually agree with your DAILY rant about cutting funding but the football and basketball programs probably actually bring in money whereas the trans black woman’s gender studies doesn’t.