I read with interest Nathan Everly’s article, “Why doesn’t Wash. U. have more low-income students?” (Student Life, 9/19/07). I agree whole-heartedly. I challenge the University to improve its record, and to address better the needs and interests of its working class and immigrant students and faculty. Can anyone of limited means really afford to learn or teach here? How can we hope to compete with community colleges and Bible colleges, which charge low tuition, or no tuition at all? How can an upscale secular university such as Washington University respect the cultural values of its working class and immigrant students, many of whom are more traditional, and more religious, than most of its faculty and students?
When I was a graduate student at the University of Pennsylvania in the Department of Oriental Studies, I helped mediate a dispute over our name. Many Asian-American students were offended by our allegedly racist and “Orientalist” name, but what they really wanted was more Asian-American studies courses. They seemed to feel that we were an ethnic studies program with an offensive name, and if we only changed this we could better meet their needs. Some administrators apparently attempted to exploit this misunderstanding for their own purposes, to close down a department perceived to be too research-oriented and too little concerned with bringing in grant money. This was all done in the name of Edward Said and progressive values. We graduate students rallied to the defense of our teachers, who were always accessible to graduate students, and committed to graduate teaching. We negotiated a name change, to “Asian and Middle Eastern Studies,” and, more significantly, we read every Asian-American publication, and listened to the concerns of our student critics. They wanted role models. They wanted to discover their ethnic identity, and they wanted us to help them to do it. In response, we helped to organize an Asian-American Studies Program, for undergraduates, and we graduate students and faculty in the department formerly known as Oriental Studies were left in peace to do our research.
What has this to do with Washington University? Last year, students petitioned to support a popular teacher of African American studies. In past years, students have petitioned to support popular teachers of gender studies and religious studies. Last year students petitioned to put teaching before research, even as many faculty who do just that had their positions eliminated. What do all these cases have in common? Ethnic studies, women and gender studies and religious studies all help college students to define their identity: ethnic, sexual and spiritual. Identity formation is, and ought to be, one of the chief functions of an American college. Students have a right to complain when their courses, and teachers, do not help them to discover who they are, where they come from, what it all means and where they are going.
Immigrants, children of immigrants and the sons and daughters of the working class have very different needs and perspectives than the sons and daughters of privilege. Better representation of immigrant and working class students and faculty would add to the diversity of our community and enrich the educational experience of all. Why should some spiritualities, for example Pentecostalism, Fundamentalism or traditional Catholicism, be stereotyped and looked down upon, while upscale spiritualities, for example [post]-modernist [post]-Protestantism, theosophy/anthroposophy or perennial philosophy, be given more academic respect? Perhaps the discipline of Religious Studies is biased towards the latter, as many have argued. If so, maybe we should listen to all our students, and let them determine the needs of our Religious Studies program.
Perhaps we should listen to the needs of our Hindu students and have more Hindu-friendly courses. Perhaps we should have an Asian-American studies program, more courses on acculturation and immigrant experience and the experience of workers and peasants. Perhaps we should have a truly interdisciplinary and inclusive Ethnic and Civilizational Studies program, to coordinate all these efforts. Perhaps the College, and University College, should have more autonomy, so that their mission will no longer be subordinate to the mission of a graduate or professional school, or a national security agenda. Perhaps we should replace a selectively enforced “neutrality policy” with a “pluralism policy,” to give our students more choice in the fulfillment of all their requirements. Perhaps we should bring back the Ethics and Values requirement, for our own sake and the sake of our community.
Jerome taught Religious Studies at Washington University from 1999-2007. He can be reached via e-mail at [email protected].