While doing research for one of my independent studies, I came across an article on JSTOR entitled “An Individual Manifesto” by Roy P. Fairfield. While this article has nothing to do with my actual course of study, Fairfield’s writing style and message kept me reading.

The article discusses the “triple-headed specter” haunting American higher education: conformity, anti-intellectualism and mediocrity.

As I continued reading, every point he made reminded me of SMU. It’s not that there is anything particularly wrong with SMU as much as there is something wrong with how the American university system works.

The creative and the intellectual impulses of each individual student, professor and administration member are reduced to a conglomerate of opposing forces. There seems to be a continuous, three-sided battle: students vs. faculty, faculty vs. administration, students vs. administration and, on occasion, they two team up against the other. These battles played out over the previous week during the SMU Ice Apocalypse 2011 debacle.

The students come to a university for a certain reason, and it is usually not to learn. The professors come to a university for a certain reason, and it is usually not to teach. I am not sure why the administration comes to a university, but it seems to be to try to make this dysfunctional system hold itself together – or a paying job in these “tough economic times.”

How do we remedy this situation? My favorite part of Fairfield’s article was his ten-point proposal to make university life more individual, more intellectual and less mediocre. SMU would be wise to listen:

1. “We must respect and honor the educational heretic” (233). Don’t promote the professors who follow all the rules; find the few that break the rules, collaborate with students and are innovative even when it isn’t good for their career. Appreciate the few students who prefer the library, who stay up all night discussing philosophy, religion, politics and who strive to make SMU an intellectual haven.
2. “The intellectual life needs a model on every campus” (233). Don’t be afraid to reward those students who make an effort to not conform, but to be intellectual, and to shun mediocrity with free printing at the library, adequate study and discussion facilities, more books, etc..
3. “Every campus should create a committee whose major function would be never to meet” (233). Don’t waste our professor’s times with complicated, inefficient and often useless committees. Appreciate individual noninvolvement.
4. Five new courses should be required of every college student. Oneness 1301-1302: every first-year must find a quiet spot in which to study alone for nine hours a week. Silence 2301-2302: Taken by sophomores, this will counteract the boisterousness of campus social life, which the sophomore is often found. Whyness? 3301-3302: Taken in the junior year, this course develops a healthy skepticism about finding the ultimate answers to many questions. Why Whyness? 4301-4302: Taken during senior year, this class will prepare the student for graduation and assessing future aspects of his or her life. Anti-Senioritis 4312: Designed for those who flunked Whyness? and Why Whyness? to cure senioritis – the “inflammation of the ego.”
5. Faculty members and administrators must either counsel individual students in the above courses or take one of these classes.
6. Every group at SMU, including the board of trustees and faculty, should meet to question the basic assumptions upon which it is founded. Existence should be questioned.
7. “It is further recommended that every board and committee immediately vote themselves out of existence whenever such action will not seriously threaten the continued existence of the university” (234). Simplicity is key.
8. “Every student, administrator, professor and trustee…should immediately increase his [or her] reading, studying and thinking by 25 percent.” Please. Unfortunately, a 25 percent increase of zero continues to be zero – this must be remedied.
9. Increase student-faculty discussion by each group at SMU curtailing its activity by 50 percent. In addition, 10 percent of all football proceeds should be diverted to pay for these informal gatherings.
10. “Every student, professor administrator and trustee should take an Annual Controversy Proficiency Test” (234). Those committed to the education process should demonstrate awareness of the alternative viewpoints on the key issues affecting our world.

SMU cannot afford any kind of hypocrisy, individual or institutional. We must all disunite, become intellectual heretics, and value individualism to make SMU a leading education institution.

Jordan Johansen is senior history, music and anthropology triple major. She can be reached for comments or questions at [email protected].