Universities’ DEI focus inflates degree costs, but fails to meet expectations
The University of Florida recently announced its decision to put an end to the bureaucracy surrounding diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) on campus. This move sets an example for other universities to follow.
Last May, Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed Senate Bill 266, also known as the anti-woke law, which prohibits the use of federal or state funds for discriminatory initiatives like DEI programs. Following suit, Texas Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed a similar bill into law for the Lone Star State.
In compliance with Florida’s anti-woke law, the University of Florida, the state’s largest public university, has made the decision to terminate all DEI staff, close down its DEI office, and suspend DEI contracts with external vendors. The university plans to allocate its $5 million annual DEI budget to a faculty recruitment fund. Ben Sasse, UF’s president and former Republican senator from Nebraska, believes that a university’s core mission is “to prepare for life and thoughtful citizenship and engagement and caring about the good, the true, and the beautiful.”
Unfortunately, many colleges and universities across the nation continue to prioritize DEI over education. According to a 2021 report by the Heritage Foundation, significant resources have been dedicated to establishing and operating DEI bureaucracies in higher education. For instance, in 2021, the University of Michigan had 163 DEI employees, which is 14 times more than the staff assisting students with disabilities. Virginia Tech had 83 DEI staffers, surpassing the number of history faculty by two-fold, indicating where the school’s priorities lie.
Since the release of the Heritage Report, the DEI bureaucracy has continued to expand and become more costly. The number of DEI staffers at the University of Michigan has grown to 241 in 2024, resulting in a cost of over $30 million for the 2023-2024 school year. Similarly, Ohio State University has seen an increase in DEI employees from 88 in 2018 to 189 in 2023, costing taxpayers $20.38 million annually.
High DEI Salaries, Low-Value Degrees
Some DEI officers at major universities receive exorbitant salaries. For example, Robert Sellers, Michigan’s former vice provost for equity and inclusion and chief diversity officer, earned $431,000 annually. Open the Books, a federal spending watchdog, estimates that in 2023, the pay and benefits for the University of Virginia’s senior associate dean and global chief diversity officer, Martin N. Davidson, amounted to $587,340, while Kevin McDonald, vice president for DEI and community partnership, received $521,905.
The entire DEI bureaucracy at UVA likely costs taxpayers $20 million per year, which could instead fund the tuition and fees for 1,000 in-state students. This costly bureaucracy contributes to the inflation of college tuition, which has increased at an average rate of 12 percent annually between 2010 and 2022, surpassing the inflation rate of any other consumer good or service.
The excessive spending on DEI has diverted valuable resources that could have been used to support students’ academic pursuits and improve educational outcomes. The Wall Street Journal reported that nearly half of college graduates in America end up in jobs that don’t require a college degree or college-level skills. Considering the average student loan debt of around $30,000, these underemployed graduates have a valid reason to demand a refund from their schools. College administrators are likely aware that they have sold an overpriced and under-delivered product to American parents and students, which explains their reluctance to measure their schools’ performance based on graduates’ employment in their respective fields.
Recently, leaders of several Pennsylvania universities, including Temple and Penn State, participated in a state assembly hearing on college funding. During the hearing, Pennsylvania’s Democrat Governor Josh Shapiro proposed a $30 million increase in funding for the universities, to be distributed based on performance. Rep. Jesse Topper, R-Bedford, a ranking Republican member of the House Education Committee, questioned the university leaders about measuring graduates’ employment in their fields and whether it should be a part of evaluating their schools’ performance.
One of the university leaders responded by stating that working in the industry associated with one’s degree is not necessarily an indicator of a successful college education. However, if a car salesman told customers that a car costing $50,000 only worked half the time, customers would walk away, and the car company would go out of business.
Families Should Vote with Their Feet
It is time for colleges and universities to refocus on their core mission: education. A crucial step in this direction is dismantling the expensive, ineffective, and often harmful DEI bureaucracy on campuses and reallocating the funds to provide a better education for young people. Unfortunately, most institutions will not voluntarily dismantle the DEI bureaucracy. Therefore, Republicans in state legislatures should follow the examples set by Florida and Texas and work towards ending DEI in higher education through legislation. Meanwhile, families should make their voices heard by choosing to send their children to colleges and universities that prioritize academic pursuits over DEI.
With the combined efforts of political and market forces, American higher education can finally rid itself of the DEI bureaucracy and recommit to teaching the knowledge and skills necessary for thoughtful and productive citizenship.
rnrn
Why is it important for universities to be transparent about their spending and ensure funds are being used effectively and efficiently
D, raised the question of whether performance metrics should include graduates’ job placement rates and earnings. This suggestion was met with resistance from university leaders who argued that such metrics would disproportionately affect schools that serve underprivileged populations. However, Topper pointed out that measuring job placement rates and earnings is a fair way to assess a school’s effectiveness in preparing students for the workforce.
It is clear that there is a need for a shift in priorities within higher education. Instead of pouring excessive funds into DEI bureaucracies, universities should focus on providing students with a high-quality education that prepares them for successful careers. This does not mean disregarding diversity, equity, and inclusion, but rather finding a balance between these initiatives and academic excellence.
The University of Florida has set an example by redirecting its DEI budget towards faculty recruitment. By investing in hiring top-tier professors, the university can ensure that students receive a robust education from knowledgeable and experienced instructors. This is a step in the right direction towards prioritizing education over bureaucracy.
Other universities should follow suit and reevaluate their approach to DEI. Rather than creating bloated DEI offices and hiring unnecessary staff, funds should be allocated towards improving curriculum, supporting student success services, and investing in resources that enhance the overall educational experience. Students should be equipped with the necessary skills and knowledge to excel in their chosen fields, and universities should bear the responsibility of providing them with that foundation.
Furthermore, it is crucial for universities to be transparent about their spending and ensure that funds are being used effectively and efficiently. The excessive salaries of some DEI officers, as highlighted earlier, raise concerns about the allocation of resources. Students and taxpayers have the right to know how their money is being spent and whether it is truly benefiting their educational experience.
In conclusion, the University of Florida’s decision to prioritize education over bureaucracy in the realm of diversity, equity, and inclusion is commendable. It serves as a reminder to other universities that there needs to be a balanced approach to these initiatives. Investing in faculty recruitment and enhancing resources for students should take precedence in order to provide a high-quality education and improve graduates’ outcomes in the workforce. It is time for universities to reevaluate their spending, be transparent about their allocation of resources, and prioritize the core mission of education.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...