Drinking Gee's Global Kool-Aid

On a non-descript Thursday afternoon in early April, Chancellor Gordon Gee told a more-empty-than-full Student Life Center-audience that Vanderbilt was going global, whether they liked it or not.

The Chancellor’s semesterly address to faculy and staff began with an awards ceremony, but soon escalated into an international Magna Carta for the University. The charge was not surprising in light of Gee’s track record with trans-departmental initiatives and “big idea” thinking. Through the Academic Venture Capital Fund (which has recently been recapitalized) and other such initiatives, Gee has forced departments into one sandbox and withheld funding unless they played nicely together. His love-affair with working together did not begin in Nashville; faculty and board members at Brown University scoffed at Gee’s proposed “Brain Sciences” initiative during his short tenure in Providence.   

Back in Nashville, one can only imagine the impetus for Gee and the gang suddenly discovering international programs. Gee’s faculty address seemed more like MSNBC afternoon coverage of a painfully slow news day more than a bold vision for the future. Faculty members are likely sick of hearing about the second-coming that is, and will be, “College Halls.” Likewise, topics like Vanderbilt Visions, the union negotiations, and the restructuring of competitive athletics have seemingly lost their luster. Their ambivalent-to-failed outcomes could not evoke the type of response from faculty members that kumbaya-singing of the greatness of the world could.

So, in this setting, Gee started handing out the global Kool-Aid:

“If the world is in turmoil, if countries are at war, we are not, and the limits to what we can be and do exist only in our minds. We are small and supple and independent, able to form our own alliances and relationships. For, like it or not, we are members of an international community, and universities know that this is not the time to close our borders, but to move across them – to render borders and boundaries irrelevant and obsolete . . . If our political entities cannot carry the American message of goodness and grace, it falls to American universities to do it.”

Turmoil? War? Oh, you mean under this fascist and corrupt government we have right now? Oh, Gee, you’re cleaver! Apparently, I also attend a “small and supple” institution, like a rabbit or small prairie-dog.

All kidding aside, after his declaration of succession from American foreign policy, Gee stated that the University’s goal should be to remove all barriers in the world. While this sounds innocent enough, shouldn’t the goals of an American university include preparing Americans to keep this nation the most free on prosperous on the planet? I thought American universities were supposed to be selfish in preparing as many young people to better the United States through innovation and competition, not to give a hand-out to the rest of the world and weaken our competitive advantage. 

Secretary-General Gee continued: “The International Office . . . is a centralizing and unifying hub through which Vanderbilt’s international collaborations and communications can now take place . . . Our current progress in internationalizing the university has brought us into university-wide institutional relationships with the University of Cape Town, the University of Melbourne and the University of Sao Paolo.”

Internationalizing the University? Is this really the best way to use scarce University funding? How do I know that funding is scarce? Well, Vanderbilt didn’t build any new dormitories between 1978 and 2005, had to delay “College Halls” due to budget constraints, and still can’t afford to pay its employees a “living wage” (which they shouldn’t, but I digress). 

University alliances, like those described by Gee at the address, are far more valuable to the lesser-known University with fewer resources. While The Times of London ranked the University of Melbourne as 22nd best in the world in 2006 (Vanderbilt ranked 53rd), neither the University of Sao Paolo or the University of Cape Town made the top 200. If Vanderbilt is to cement solid relationships which can benefit this University, it must only ally itself with institutions as good as or better than its current state, like Melbourne. Vanderbilt has neither the time nor the resources to be the world’s rising tide for higher education.

But there’s more: “We must remain strong and determined advocates of federal policies that promote international education. Vanderbilt will continue to press for visa procedures that facilitate access by foreign students and scholars, removing unnecessary disincentives to study at our nation’s great institutions of higher education. We will support congressional initiatives such as the proposed Paul Simon Study Abroad Act, which will significantly expand the opportunities for foreign study for U.S. students. And we will seek robust federal support for Title VI programs, such as the one behind our excellent Center for Latin American and Iberian Studies, which build understanding of other world cultures,” Senator Gee said.

While global alliances are one thing, lobbying the government to expend more tax money on funding asinine and unnecessary federal programs is another. After the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the Congress acted to strengthen visa requirements and increase enforcement. In the current global climate, educating students from nations with extensive restrictions should come second after protecting our national security. Gee and other collegiate leaders have signed petitions calling for such a loosening of these restrictions, as they clearly understand the level of security necessary to ensure safety far better than the decision-makers at the Department of Homeland Security who deal with visa infringement issues daily. Gee apparently wears as many different hats as he does bowties.

Support for the Paul Simon Study Abroad, named for the late Illinois Senator, is also interestingly troublesome. While Vanderbilt would love to have some of the financial strain of supporting a vigorous study-abroad program shifted to the Department of Education, is it really the role of the federal government to financially assist students so that they can tour the factory where Guinness is made or parasail on the Gold Coast? Such programs are fine if private individuals and educational entities deem them so, but federal funding of such “unnecessary” activities smacks of porky excess. 

Gee’s vision of every Vanderbilt student attaining a “boarder-less” experience is also idealistically worrisome. Will the University be forced to raise tuition even higher so that all students can take vacations for credit regardless of the ability to pay for them?

Increasing support for Title VI funding (in reference to the programs under the Title VI of the Higher Education Act) also places fiscal conservatives at odds with Gee and the Title’s supporters. President Bush has proposed a budget of $105.8 million for Title VI programs for the next fiscal year, the same as in fiscal-year 2007 and 2006. These millions fund 14 International Education and Foreign Language Studies programs which, according to the Department of Education, “support comprehensive language and area study centers within the United States, research and curriculum development, opportunities for American scholars to study abroad, and activities to increase the number of underrepresented minorities in international service.”

While the program originated in the late 1950’s to increase the number of students in area and language studies for defense purposes, the formalization of the program in 1965 under President Lyndon B. Johnson’s “Great Society” slate of initiatives recast the goals away from defense and security needs. While it is important for students to have such training, institutions of higher learning should incorporate area studies into the curriculum without the federal government bribing them to do so. 

Title VI funding for Vanderbilt’s Center for Latin American and Iberian Studies may include a national security aspect, but Gee labeled the funding as aimed “to support its outreach to Nashville’s Hispanic community and its development of new academic programs.” If Vanderbilt deems such outreach and programs necessary, it should fund them independently and not use tuition dollars to shake lawmakers and the DOE down for more cash. On a macro level, lawmakers must return Title VI to its national security roots for the program to remain viable and avoid its current wasteful state.

While learning about other cultures is essential to any well-rounded collegiate education, Vanderbilt should focus on developing its own programs without raising fees and that do not involve hand-outs from the government or to other international universities. The resulting tuition increases and redirection of funding from potentially worthy programs make Gee’s vision even more unsettling. 

The Chancellor has cleared the University for take-off, but regardless of the global destination, too many problems on the ground still remain to substantiate such a trip.