Aliana Thompson | Contributing Illustrator

Editor’s note: This article was edited on Sept. 26 to provide more context on the viewpoints of the task force based on Student Life’s reporting of the subject.

On Sept. 10, 2025, Student Life published an article revealing that WashU’s College of Arts & Sciences created a new task force to recommend a potential reconfiguration or combination of six departments: African & African American Studies (AFAS); Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies (WGSS); Jewish, Islamic, and Middle Eastern Studies (JIMES); Educational Studies; Global Studies; and American Culture Studies (AMCS). This task force, called “Social Transformation,” has not yet made reorganization recommendations but will send them to the chair of Arts & Sciences by mid-March.

We don’t yet know what this reconfiguration would look like if it went into effect. According to task force co-chair Shanti Parikh, the stated aim of the task force from the office of the Dean of Arts & Sciences is to consider how it could benefit the six departments by “reducing administrative burdens, fostering innovation, and strengthening visibility.” The administrators also justified the idea with the departments’ small sizes and shared focus on social and cultural issues. 

The Student Life Editorial staff believes that these six departments — and their academic independence — are imperative to the WashU community, especially given the Trump administration’s attacks on academic freedom, marginalized communities, and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). As such, we are skeptical of the University’s stated intentions due to their lack of transparency in this process so far.

To start, each of the listed departments that the administration is considering merging is crucial to education at WashU. Most of these departments revolve around or underscore minority cultures and histories. It’s critical that WashU provides and defends such spaces where students can study marginalized identities, histories, and cultures.

We must remember that many of these academic programs had to be fought for, including at WashU: it took an occupation of Brookings Hall by the Association of Black Collegians (ABC) for the administration to create the AFAS department. In broader terms, across the United States, there is a long history of universities suppressing the studies of the systems that keep them in power. According to members of the task force, the initiative was not created with the intention of cutting costs. However, it seems unlikely that funding had no part in the decision to create the task force right now. 

The timing of this initiative’s formation is not lost on any of us. The Trump administration has launched countless attacks against academic freedom and significantly cut funding from universities across the U.S. since taking office, largely for their participation in DEI programs or the emphasis on race in academic programs. These actions have also occurred among wider efforts against marginalized communities, such as mass deportations and the dismantling of civil rights protections. 

It’s very likely that the merging of these departments is a result of the Trump administration’s actions against universities. Nonetheless, neither the creators nor members of this task force said that it was erected as a result of the Trump administration. Combining the especially politicized academic departments under a different title appears as a way to hide them under a different name. The downplayed rollout of this initiative only reinforces that concern. 

Along the same lines, it seems unlikely that funding cuts had nothing to do with the creation of this task force. This raises the concern that a recommended reconfiguration would involve budget cuts from the departments.

To begin with, the force’s development was not released in an announcement by WashU, as other University initiatives have been, such as the committee to review DEI programs launched in May. Instead, it was only covered by Student Life. While we understand that projects need to be somewhat developed before their announcement, the initiative had no set announcement date to our knowledge. 

When Student Life released news of the task force, many students were taken by surprise, especially those majoring or minoring in one of the six departments. It has affected faculty too; in the Student Life article, AFAS and WGSS professor Marlon Bailey and AMCS Academic Coordinator Karen Skinner expressed “concern, fear, and unsafety” and “a culture of fear and immense stress,” respectively, among people in their departments. Among students and faculty, no one seemed prepared for this news.

This is not the first time that WashU has shrouded its decisions in secrecy, especially in the context of the Trump administration’s attacks on higher education. Just to name two examples from over the summer, McKelvey cut the Women in Engineering program with no notification to members of the group and DEI-related content was significantly changed on WashU websites.

In a Q&A with Student Life, Chancellor Andrew Martin said that the combination of these departments was not even “on [his] radar.” The considerations of this new task force should be on everyone’s radar, especially the chancellor’s. When Student Life asked the Dean of Arts & Sciences Feng Sheng Hu about the task force, he declined to comment. These responses suggest that there are no routes of accountability for this potential reconfiguration.

As this task force carries forth its considerations, we urge its members to display transparency about their decision-making process and implement clear pathways for the WashU community to provide feedback, which could include open meetings with the task force, visits to classes under the departments, or a form to provide feedback. In today’s political climate, we should be fighting to preserve and strengthen these six departments, not conceal or weaken them. If the task force ultimately recommends a reconfiguration or combination of these departments, students and faculty should be prepared to defend their value.

Staff editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of our editorial board members. The editorial board operates independently of our newsroom and includes members of the senior staff.

Sylvie Richards, Managing Forum Editor

David Ciorba, Senior Forum Editor

Amelia Raden, Senior Forum Editor

Dion Hines, Senior Forum Editor

Kate Theerman Rodriguez, Senior Forum Editor

Lyn Wilkins, Junior Forum Editor

Will Rosenblum, Managing Scene Editor

Sophie Schwartz, Junior Scene Editor 

Elizabeth Grieve, Senior Scene Editor

Sara Gelrud, Junior Scene Editor

Bri Nitsberg, Managing Photo Editor

Eran Fann, Photo Editor

Ella Giere, Photo Editor 

Grayce Cooper, Managing Social Media Editor

AnaElda Ramos, Managing Illustration Editor