WashU Arts & Sciences held a forum to discuss the University and Vanderbilt’s Report on the State of Scholarship in the Humanities on Sept. 16. The report, which alleges an overpoliticization of humanities departments, has drawn significant controversy. Faculty and students, including myself, filled the room, excited to have the chance to express concern over the scholarship and validity of the report.

Provost Mark D. West opened by stating that the talk was meant to spark constructive dialogue about the report within the institution. He and Stephanie Kirk, director of the Center for the Humanities and the moderator of the forum, declared that, despite original arrangements, Chancellor Andrew D. Martin would not be present. 

The U.S. Department of Education revealed later that night that Martin was instead at a meeting with U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon and the heads of the Gephardt Institute as a part of McMahon’s Returning Education to the States Tour. This information was not announced at the forum.

There were no reports about the meeting from any national or St. Louis news outlets. I reached out personally to Kedra Tolson, the associate vice chancellor of university communications, and was told that “during her time on campus, McMahon learned more about the university’s commitment to student success and the local community. She also attended a public health panel discussion that explored the ways WashU is addressing access and affordability of healthcare for rural residents.” The specifics of the conversation have yet to be revealed.

I know that WashU’s administration is made up of very intelligent people, so I also know that our administrative leaders understand the power of communicating with their community. They purposefully kept McMahon’s visit from faculty, students, and media outlets. While I understand why WashU wouldn’t want media attention in such a matter, I can’t respect their consistent lack of transparency.

It’s important for WashU administrators to be clear about their intentions with this meeting. Hosting Linda McMahon — who is trying to get rid of the Department of Education — here sends a message against the academic freedom that WashU claims to support. Talking to her instead of attending a talk that would force Chancellor Martin to confront the reality of the Humanities Report sends the message that he cares more about grazing elbows with federal officials than tending to the members of his university’s community. Administration’s persisting silence amplifies these messages, and I doubt WashU wants that. 

It’s quite convenient, too, that this meeting was scheduled at the same time as the forum about the humanities report.

If Chancellor Martin had attended the forum as expected, he would have heard the concerned yet firm voices of his students and faculty. Now we can only hope that Martin will watch the recording of the forum as we were promised. But how resonant will our words be through computer speakers?

It’s been a full day since that meeting happened, and WashU administration has not yet made a clear public statement on the visit. We must not be deafened by this silence. Since WashU Vice Chancellors and Provosts alike emphasize their availability to students, email them and ask:

What was being said during that meeting that they didn’t want us to know?