Contradictory Views of Higher Education at Adelphi University

The Clue to Becoming Strong in the Face of an Overpowering World

Task:

The clue to becoming strong in the face of our overpowering and infinitely complex world is deliberately to fit select aspects of the world into your own educated world view; into your construct; into your own determination of who you are and what the lasting pursuits of your lives will be. That is how human beings have dealt creatively over the millennia with their vulnerabilities and fragility, and that is how they have made, despite their limitations, lasting and powerfully significant civilizations.

These are contradictory views of liberal education.  Diamandopoulos conceives of education as the means to power and wealth (“The clue to becoming strong….”).  His advice, to “fit select aspects of the world .  .  .  into your construct,” evokes that “narrow, practical purpose” that Levermore admonishes his students to forsake as an end in itself.

During Diamandopoulos’ decade as president, Adelphi ran ads in major publications celebrating Harvard as the “Adelphi of Massachusetts.” Harvard epitomizes the contradictions in our universities.  The pride of classicists and humanists, Harvard is also the biggest recipient of Olin money among U.S. colleges and universities.

Harvard, the first university in this country to offer elective courses, retains its reputation for innovation.  At the same time, Harvard represents the status quo. Richard Nixon and Joseph McCarthy may have castigated Harvard as the “Kremlin on the Charles,” but its degrees are credentials of privilege.  (Trumpbour, 1989)

At Adelphi, the Harvard analogy existed for some as an image of excellence; for others, as a demonstration of the fatuous distortions wrought by power.  Diamandopoulos’ years at Harvard, where he obtained his degrees in philosophy, seem to have added to his sense of destiny and self-importance.  “Without elites, without a meritocracy,” said Diamandopoulos, “there is no democracy.” (Eakin, 1995)

This notion of meritocracy, writes John Trumpbour, editor of How Harvard Rules, is “a convenient rationalization for entitlement to power, status, security and personal gain.” (Trumpbour, 1989)

Adelphi had never aspired to be Harvard until Diamandopoulos and his friends came along.  The trustees betrayed Levermore’s legacy by shortchanging the kind of students that Adelphi had traditionally served.

As long as universities are run by trustees culled from the ranks of big business, the community of scholars will exist as image rather than substance.  The success of Adelphi will depend on whether its new trustees see its faculty and students as partners in a shared adventure.

The first actions of the trustees were encouraging.  They promptly fired Diamandopoulos, froze tuition, named faculty leaders as deans, and dropped the attempt to decertify the union.

Financial problems remain, since the old trustees squandered millions of dollars of university funds on their legal expenses.  The Attorney General has filed suit to recover the funds.  The union agreed to allow the administration to lay off tenured faculty in case of financial need. Fortunately, the drop in enrollment in the aftermath of the Adelphi controversy has not been as steep as anticipated.

Despite a decade of pillage, Adelphi has survived.  In this instance, it appears, “the lengthening view” has reclaimed precedence over an education of entitlement and privilege.