Enrollment plummets at the University of Missouri; is Evergreen State next?

Most of us are familiar with the troubles that started at the University of Missouri in Columbia in 2015, which included accusations of institutional racism, of anti-Semitism, and incidents like the football team refusing to play unless the college President resigned, the kicking off campus of an Asian reporter who was trying to cover racial protests (he had every right to be there), and the infamous “call for muscle” by journalism professor Melissa Click, who asked for help to heave that journalist out of the way (Click was later fired).  As the New York Times recounts in the article below, the troubles at Missouri are continuing—in the form of decreased enrollment.

As the Times reports, enrollment at the school has fallen by 35% in the last two years, though it was growing before 2015. That’s a severe hit, both financially and in reputation to the college known as “Mizzou.” Black enrollment is down 42%; white enrollment down 21% (black students made up 10% of the 2012 freshman class, and just 6% last fall).

What’s the reason for the drop? First, the disparity between blacks and whites suggests that blacks don’t want to send their students to a school perceived as ridden with racism, though Mizzou has enacted reforms including mandatory diversity training, and much of the black protests at Mizzou seem to have been reactions not to any institutionalized racism at the college, but to unrest growing among blacks throughout the U.S. The reason for the drop in white students isn’t clear, but here’s one clue:

By sheer numbers, the drop in white students has caused the greatest damage, since they make up a majority of those on campus.

Tyler Morris, a white student from St. Louis, said he was afraid of being stereotyped as a bigot if he went to Missouri. So he decided to go to Missouri Valley College, “just down the road” in Marshall.

“The discrimination wasn’t against white people, but I didn’t want to be that person who I guess was stereotyped because I was white,” he said.

Insofar as there really was “institutionalized racism” at Mizzou, and I’ve seen no evidence of that (though there were isolated incidents of racism reported by students), then the diversity training should help fix that. But what is going to fix the hiring of Regressive ideologues like Click, and the atmosphere that makes students feel like bigots simply because they’re white?

This is eerily reminiscent of The Evergreen State College, where Regressive ideologues dominate the faculty. Click would be a perfect fit there! I wouldn’t want to send my kid—if I had one—to either of these schools, or to places like Brandeis or Middlebury College where Regressivism is growing. I’m not sure that enrollment at Evergreen State will drop since it already accepts nearly every applicant (I believe its acceptance rate is about 99%), but surely parents with highly qualified kids don’t want them to go to a college where they’re indoctrinated from their first arrival on campus, and where the campus is policed by thug students with baseball bats, looking for those whose ideology is impure.

Let this be a lesson to schools like Evergreen, Middlebury, and their ilk: if you propagandize the students to the extent that they themselves become your weapons, suppressing dissent and trying to oust professors for thoughtcirme, then you’ll lose enrollment and the very students you want to retain. Those are the students who come to college to learn how to think rather than instinctively nurse at the teats of postmodern professors.

h/t: Michael


  1. Mark Reaume
    Posted July 10, 2017 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

    Apparently Jordan Peterson is working on a program where you can input a University course description into a form and it will analyze the text, university and professor to determine whether it is infected by post modernism. His goal is to reduce the enrolment rates to these courses.

    I have my doubts that this will be successful since those that would use it would probably not be the type of person to go into those fields in the first place. I hope I’m wrong.

    • Posted July 10, 2017 at 4:22 pm | Permalink

      A simpler method is to search for the words “discursive” or “journaling”.

      • Posted July 11, 2017 at 11:41 am | Permalink

        “Discursive” maybe. Journalling is actually not a bad idea in some contexts – getting students to write is often a difficult thing. I regard it as the humanities version of a lab report.

        (It does create a lot of work for those responsible for grading though.)

        • Diane G.
          Posted July 11, 2017 at 2:21 pm | Permalink

          When one of my kids was complaining about having to journal in middle school, I suggested that perhaps the teacher was only concerned that they write and didn’t pay much attention to what they wrote. I suggested he put a “and how are you, Mr. Wilson?” in one entry and, indeed, it was never remarked on.

          (We were quite fond of Harvey.)

  2. meetoo
    Posted July 10, 2017 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

    Like Mizzou, Evergreen’s rate of acceptance is over 90%. You’d think that institutions drawing from such a small number of applicants would know not to downgrade their brands.

  3. Nicholas K.
    Posted July 10, 2017 at 1:19 pm | Permalink

    Whatever became of Prof. Click? I know she was hired at Gonzaga for a term, but I don’t believe she was offered a tenure track position there.

    • Nicholas K.
      Posted July 10, 2017 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

      Answered my own question. She is listed as a lecturer at Gonzaga.

      • BJ
        Posted July 10, 2017 at 4:33 pm | Permalink

        Pretty unbelievable, huh?

  4. darrelle
    Posted July 10, 2017 at 2:21 pm | Permalink

    I am a bit surprised that there are no stories about parents of students at Evergreen causing trouble for the school, like suing them, for various reasons. I know I would be pissed if my child were being harassed by a mob of baseball bat wielding students and the administration were negligent in allowing it to happen or do anything about it once it did.

    I’d also be pissed if my kid’s education was disrupted as has happened at Evergreen. The kids are at a disadvantage because they have may have fallen behind a semester due to disrupted classes and if they may feel compelled to find another school which is a chore.

    I’d also be pissed to find out how compromised with POMO and related bullshit the education my kid was trying to get from an accredited state school might be. Besides the damage that would cause to my kids education a university education is not cheap.

    So, I’m a bit surprised I’m not coming across stories of parents suing the school, or if that is not a legal option raising a ruckus in some other way.

    • Posted July 10, 2017 at 4:26 pm | Permalink

      How many of those parents must be self-loathing, white-guilt-ridden worms just like that castrato, President Bridges?

      • Posted July 11, 2017 at 7:20 am | Permalink

        “Castrato?” Seriously? I love this website because I don’t have to worry about reading Pepe, Kekistan, and cuck references here. Let’s try to keep this comment section a little classier than Gad Saad’s Twitter feed.

  5. Reginald Selkirk
    Posted July 10, 2017 at 2:53 pm | Permalink

    Poll: Republicans think higher education is hurting the country

    • Posted July 10, 2017 at 4:20 pm | Permalink

      Eats into their vote count, for sure.

    • BJ
      Posted July 10, 2017 at 4:34 pm | Permalink

      Well, most of the POMO-ridden higher education is hurting the ability of generations to think critically and be productive members of society, so they’re not entirely wrong.

    • biz
      Posted July 11, 2017 at 8:48 am | Permalink

      They may be correct, probably for some incorrect reasons.

      If we consider the -totality- of tertiary undergraduate education in the US, which includes such things as
      – POMO departments
      – easy majors and courses such as “How to Watch Television”
      – acceptance rates well over 70% at some campuses
      – giant lecture halls full of uninterested students who the College Board itself has declared to be below the “college ready” cutoff on the SAT
      – the enormous amount of student debt and public expenditure
      – the very high percentage who do not complete a degree in 4, 5, or 6 years
      and, probably most importantly,
      – the legions of students and families who view the primary purpose of their undergraduate years to be social rather than academic, with intense partying and equally intense following of college sports,
      then on balance, in totality, the whole thing may indeed be an overall negative for society.

      That is not to say that higher education does not serve an absolutely essential function, because it certainly does. We couldn’t have engineers, scientists, doctors, humanists, and professors without it. But let’s face it – nationwide probably 3-4 times as many people are pursuing a bachelors degrees as should be. So for the majority of people, college education in its present form may indeed be doing net harm.

  6. Posted July 10, 2017 at 4:19 pm | Permalink

    FYI, 12% of Missouri’s population is black. Nationwide, 18% of blacks receive bachelors’ or higher degrees, compared to 28% of the general population.

    So 10% of the Mizzou student body would be expected.

  7. BJ
    Posted July 10, 2017 at 4:32 pm | Permalink

    You’re correct that there really never was any evidence of systemic racism at Mizzou. The protests were over three incidents: one student reporting that a group of people who didn’t even belong to the school body shouted a racial slur from a truck; the famous poop swastika (could be a hoax meant to “start a conversation” or get the administration to meet student demands, and even if it wasn’t a hoax, the symbol involved is just as much a sign of antisemitism, which nobody cared to even bother mentioning because…well, we all know why); and I can’t remember the third incident. Also, the supposedly “oppressed” black student who led the protests is the son of a man who made $8.4 million in the previous year (2014) alone as the executive vice president of a large railroad company. Additionally, one of this student’s examples of the administration’s racism was his (and his supporters’) claim that the school president purposely tried to run him over, but video came out of the student actually jumping on the hood of the car with his body while the president moved at one MPH through a crowd of students berating him and trying to prevent him from driving away (I believe this was during a school parade which quickly devolved into protests against the administration).

    While there may not be systemic racism at the school, the protests and constant statements and demands from the students at the time could certainly do a good job convincing people that there is. I guess that’s what happened with the enrollment for black students, and for white students, well, you mentioned in your write-up why they might not want to attend.

  8. GM
    Posted July 10, 2017 at 5:15 pm | Permalink

    No offense towards anyone working or studying there, but let’s face it, these are not top-tier institutions.

    Which is why they suffer such enrollment declines — people don’t seem them as irreplaceable options.

    I am much more worried about the Yales, Stanfords and Berkleys of the world, where no amount of insanity will cause an enrollment decline simply because of the stature of the institutions.

    Which means that that lunacy will continue to fester unchallenged there, and it will continue to slowly take over the institutions.

    And because of how much influence those institutions have, the SJW madness will accordingly spread its tentacles wider and wider in society.

    • BJ
      Posted July 10, 2017 at 5:27 pm | Permalink

      I agree completely. In addition to what you wrote, prestigious institutions like these pushing such views and philosophies give them legitimacy, and having postmodernist, regressive professors allows those professors to write articles and be interviewed with the byline of “Professor Y, Yale Professor of Very Stupid Studies” and similar. (I wasn’t going to say Professor X! He’s better than that)

      You can also add Brown, Harvard, and Tufts to your list.

      • Travis
        Posted July 10, 2017 at 11:13 pm | Permalink

        With the rise of anti-SJWs and smack down (to some degree) of SJWs and feminists in the public sphere, I actually fear more that since these are merely the symptoms, they will hide away while the cause remains untouched or unnoticed by 95% of people, and ~90% of anti-SJWs. This means the pomo profs and the feminist legislators will continue to churn out garbage and will do so unchallenged

        • Bruce Gorton
          Posted July 11, 2017 at 4:13 pm | Permalink

          The big thing I worry about is that they will lead to the humanities continuing to be underfunded.

          Which means that the obscurantist crap that all too often passes for academic work in those fields gets a free pass, because far too many of the intelligent people who would make real contributions to those fields or at the very least translate them into readable English have left for more fertile pastures.

          Which means that the people who are left are often the ones who are happy to be big fish in small ponds, rather than involved in fields where people are likely to actually read and criticize their work.

          And those fields, like them or lump them, dictate a hell of a lot of society.

          Underfunding them just means that a lot of crap ideas remain unchallenged and become the pop consensus, such that you have the current war on science, a president who believes in “alternative facts” and entire industries based around selling conspiracy theories.

          There needs to be an academic house cleaning, for all of our sakes, but it isn’t going to happen without some serious funding to make it happen.

          • Diane G.
            Posted July 11, 2017 at 8:44 pm | Permalink

            So true! Well said.

            I can see how it might set a bad precedent, but I almost think the rest of the faculty (science, engineering, any humanities disciplines that haven’t been pomo corrupted, etc.) need to weigh in as well. They’re also hurt by the bad reps of their institution, not to mention adroit at pointing that the emperor is naked.

  9. biz
    Posted July 10, 2017 at 5:26 pm | Permalink

    It is pretty straightforward to see why enrollment is down at Mizzou.

    It is a middling state school where being the flagship campus carries no cache over more accessible regional campuses. It routinely ranks low academically and accepts more than half of applicants. The dorms and facilities were recently ranked in last place among peer institutions.

    Literally the only reason to go to this school is social. It provides the opportunity to live away from home for a while and party and follow sports. But now the impression has gotten out that the campus is full of conflict, and on top of that that the football team hates the place and the students. So, given that the only reason to go there is social, this change in perceived atmosphere has a devistating effect on enrollment.

    • jay
      Posted July 11, 2017 at 8:58 am | Permalink

      In my opinion, the LGBTqwerty crowd has become one of the most powerful and potentially dangerous pressure groups in the current scene.

      (Though I wonder whose heads would explode if a Muslim Baker refused to do a gay wedding cake)

  10. Diane G.
    Posted July 11, 2017 at 2:53 am | Permalink


  11. Robert Bate
    Posted July 11, 2017 at 6:48 am | Permalink

    There has been a lot of outrage lately, spurred on by the rise of viral media, and not so much fact checking from those of us troubled by a perceived assault on free speech on US college campuses. The reported drop in new enrollment, at Evergreen and Mizzou, also seems to be entirely due to the media coverage and public perception of the events at these colleges and not to the facts on the ground.

    At Evergreen, for instance, one professor took issue with a change in a school tradition which sought to highlight racial disparities. There was to be no enforcement of the new tradition, everyone was free to attend classes as usual that day and, in fact, everyone mostly did just that. Apparently a few very vocal protestors tried to disrupt this professors classes and this video of a somewhat messy discussion with the prof https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTnDpoQLNaY went viral. Subsequent to this, outside alt-right protestors clashed with outside leftist anarchist protestors and it was this activity which forced the relocation of graduation ceremonies and the high levels of security.

    The original protest with the professor, and activities like it, are nothing compared to the campus protests of the late 60s and early 70s when we shut down campuses, but you’d never know it from the grandstanding on social media. The students on these campuses are still basically teenagers struggling to make sense of their world (as they always have), a world very different than the one we, who grew up in the 60’s, struggled with.

    I have friends who’s daughters attend schools as diverse as U Chicago and Bard College and, from what these young women report, it is still quite possible to gain a first class education unencumbered by threats to open inquiry, and that the issues gripping our imaginations are tangential at most to life on campus these days.

    • biz
      Posted July 11, 2017 at 7:50 am | Permalink

      A “somewhat messy discussion with the prof.” Is your post a joke? Your description of the events at Evergreen is completely at odds with reality, a reality that has been documented repeatedly on this blog.

      • Robert Bate
        Posted July 11, 2017 at 1:58 pm | Permalink

        Did you watch the video?? Only maybe 6 kids visible and by the voices it would be hard to say there could be more than 20. That was the event. The rest was media inspired and definitely alt right and anarchist outsiders were involved. Yes messy discussion, Hitch was definitely not there.

        • Posted July 11, 2017 at 4:41 pm | Permalink

          The messy discussion was followed by a police warning to the prof that he should not return to Evergreen because they cannot guarantee his safety. Which sounds quite like the police acknowledging that the campus has been taken over by thugs, and that these thugs will be allowed to reign.

          • BJ
            Posted July 11, 2017 at 5:24 pm | Permalink

            And the police said the student mob (which turned out to be carrying basebal bats and tasers, and roamed the campus for weeks without any punishment or even attempt to stop them as they harassed and assaulted fellow students) was searching car to car for someone, likely Weinstein.

        • BJ
          Posted July 11, 2017 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

          The rest was media inspired? If that’s the narrative you’re trying to push, no wonder you didn’t even try to address any of the other things done by these students (and the faculty).

          By the way, when those “alt-right” protesters showed up for a couple of hours one day weeks after this incident, they were entirely peaceful. The only actual violence and verbal abuse that occurred came from the students who confronted them, one spraying two of the “alt-right” people with mace.

          Good gourd. At least you’ve made it abundantly clear that you have no intention of discussing this in good faith.

    • BJ
      Posted July 11, 2017 at 10:10 am | Permalink

      Ah yes, a messy discussion. That’s all it was. And lets leave out the roving mobs intimidating and assaulting people based on their views of the situation and skin color, the President telling police not to protect the professor from harm, the students driving that professor not only off campus but out of the state completely (as well as his wife and children, because they were all threatened with harm), the nearly 100 professors on campus who demanded Weinstein be investigated and fired for having the temerity to tell the rest of the world what happened, and everything else.

      Your comment seems completely trustworthy and not at all driven by a political agenda.

      • Robert Bate
        Posted July 11, 2017 at 2:11 pm | Permalink

        BJ, please watch the original video linked above to see the original incident. The letter by about 50 other professors came after Weinstein went on Tucker Carlson and the alt-right came to Olympia to punish the students and try and start some rioting. The letter was not an attempt to punish him for his views.

        • Posted July 11, 2017 at 4:45 pm | Permalink

          By now, the original incident has about as much importance in the context of Evergreen as the assassination of crown prince Franz Ferdinand had in the context of World War I.

          • BJ
            Posted July 11, 2017 at 5:20 pm | Permalink

            Ha, good one. Not to mention that the original incident has been seen by all of us many times, and it doesn’t look like a “messy discussion,” it looks like a group of students barging in on a class to put the professor through a struggle session filled with accusations and abuse.

            Imagine if a group of right-wing students did that to a professor on any campus in the country. Would they get away without even a slap on the wrist like these students did? Not to mention all the other, far nastier things for which they weren’t punished.

            • Robert Bate
              Posted July 12, 2017 at 1:14 pm | Permalink

              Messy indeed – no punches, a few people yell for him to resign (big deal), and it seems to have lasted little more than 10 minutes. That was 5/23 over 2 months from the email exchange between Brett and Rashida Love, event organizer, regarding the Day of Absence/Day of Presence and the classroom confrontation was part of a larger protest regarding race and diversity at Evergreen.

              4/12&14 Dau pf Absence, Day of Presence (the issue BW most notably took issue with)

              5/23 Confrontation with BW

              5/24 occupation of part of the library and President Bridges offices, a discussion devolves and shouting can be heard – no theft or damage of property or person.

              5/25 Weinstein goes on Tucker Carlson and the issue goes national. At this point the alt-right social media lights up and lefty anarchist also become involved.

              5/30 Weinstein’s Wall Street Journal article.

              6/1 A lunatic calls the local 911 and claims to be headed to Evergreen and says he is prepared to kill people although there is no mention of specific targets. The College is shut down immediately for at least two days of classes.

              6/16 Commencement is relocated to a secure site, a stadium 30 miles away in Tacoma, due to worries of security stemming from the 911 call and other chatter.

              There were a few other less notable events, a swastika graffitied outside a lecture hall, a trans student trying to stop an unidentified man from grafting over anti-Weinstein graffiti, the alt-right/anarchist altercation.

              A result of all this publicity is that many people’s lives have become uncomfortable. There seems to have been threats made to many people around this issue though I can’t find any credible reports only vague allegations. The most credible threat was the 911 call.

              It wasn’t ever really much about Weinstein in the first place. His job isn’t threatened and his speech was never curtailed at all. People disagreed with him in a way he and others didn’t like but his rights were’t infringed in any way.

              • BJ
                Posted July 12, 2017 at 7:59 pm | Permalink

                Once again, it’s all the things you left out (you know, the biggest things, the things that make your narrative crumble, the things that to which you’ve continually refused to respond in the previous comments, which anyone here can see) that makes your agenda and complete refusal to act in good faith clear as day.

                You are unbelievable. Quite literally.

                I have nothing more to say to you because you are engaging in utter intellectual dishonesty. All you do make points, see people debunk those points with factual information, and then ignore that factual information completely because it puts the lie to your narrative. Then you post some more things (conveniently leaving out the bulk of what has happened at the school because all of it makes your narrative look like a lie — because it is a lie) for everyone to answer as if nothing has been said to you. You have no interest in engaging anything anybody else says, because you have no interest in anything beyond pushing your own agenda.

                Absolutely nothing worthwhile can come from talking to someone who has no intention to have a discussion and to do so in good faith. You just want a soapbox to spread your story. None of us need be a part of that. Goodbye.

              • Robert Bate
                Posted July 13, 2017 at 8:35 am | Permalink

                BJ is the pot calling the kettle black in this instance. He never responded once to my points substantively. To be clear, I don’t think the protesters at Evergreen are angels and that there hasn’t been bad behavior, I just don’t think it in any way warrants the moral outrage from the left (I understand it from the Fox right.)

                Points I haven’t addressed:

                1. Brett Weinstein claimed he was told by cops they couldn’t protect him, the administration somewhat confirmed this by saying “it might be best to stay off campus for a day or two.” Doesn’t sound like there were threats of violence only the possibility of more protests.

                2. Vigilantes with baseball bats patrolling the campus. Later, after Tucker Carlson and the 911 death threat, there was a small group with BB bats patrolling that got much media attention, this was not bands of roving Maoist purity police. The alt-right was threatening to come to campus looking to pick a fight and there were many threats over social media. The “vigilantes” didn’t come after BW and, to tell the truth, it seemed pretty lame really.

                3. The apparent leader of Patriot Prayer, an outside alt right group, claimed he was pepper sprayed and he does appear to have something that got in his eyes which may have been another irritant; and a can was thrown at him hitting him on the head. This was during a confrontation with leftist Anti-fa counter demonstrators. The Anti-fa was not even necessarily Evergreen students though it is quite possible some were. Before the one possible Pepper Spray incident, Patriot Prayer was indeed pelted with tons of Silly String (the horror!) And again, this was later after Tucker Carlson and the 911 death threat.

                This is now an old thread and I’ll let it go but I think people need to do some more fact checking and engage in a little more skepticism.

  12. Posted July 11, 2017 at 7:25 am | Permalink

    “I’m not sure that enrollment at Evergreen State will drop since it already accepts nearly every applicant ”

    Maybe I’m missing something, but it seems to me that enrollment would be more likely to drop if it accepts nearly every applicant. If applications drop, enrollment will necessarily drop if acceptance is ~100%. If a school only accepted 10%, say, and applications dropped by 50%, they could maintain the same enrollment by increasing acceptance to 20%. If they already accept almost 100%, they can’t maintain enrollment if applications drop. Am I wrong somewhere?

    • BJ
      Posted July 11, 2017 at 10:42 am | Permalink

      Not wrong at all.

%d bloggers like this: