
Editorial: Indiana University, Ball State and Purdue are gutted without logic or thought
B.A. in French — dead, or in Hoosier political-ease, 'Suspend (with Teach-Out toward Elimination)/Written Commitment to Merge/Consolidate the Program before AY26-27.'
B.A. in Art History — dead. B.A. in Italian — dead. M.A. in Japanese — dead. M.A. in Theater and Drama — dead. M.A. in Chinese — dead.
That's merely a taste of the carnage announced Monday by the Indiana Commission for Higher Education (ICHE), as planned for one of America's great universities, Indiana University in beautiful Bloomington. Since there are 116 degree programs disappearing from Indiana's Big Ten flagship campus, and 222 across the Indiana University system from Indianapolis to Kokomo, we could have filled this entire space with a list.
And, believe us, we were sorely tempted.
But we'd have needed yet more space to include similar cuts at Ball State University, Indiana State University, Purdue University, Ivy Tech Community College and the University of Southern Indiana. Ball State is losing degree programs in philosophy, geology and German, to name but three.
All in all, public schools in Indiana are losing some 20% of their current degree programs.
What on earth happened? The cuts are the work of the ICHE, which would be better to call itself the Indiana Commission for the Gutting of Higher Education.
The ICHE is operating at the behest of the governor and the Indiana legislature, which cut 5% from its budget for higher education in its most recent two-year budget, even as it required schools to keep tuition and fees flat for the next year. At the eleventh hour, the legislature then also imposed a requirement that all programs meet new enrollment guidelines; degrees with just a few students now will be eliminated.
We're hardly reflexive defenders of all aspects of academe. We've called many times for keeping tuition more affordable and for public universities that take advantage of taxpayer dollars to fulfill their mission of excellent teaching and training, preparing students effectively for today's world and emphasizing critical thinking over indoctrination. We acknowledge that many of the programs on this list are small and thus relatively more expensive. And we're well aware of some of academia's loopier inclinations and the overly cushy gigs it sometimes provides those who are able to mow their lawn when most taxpayers are still behind their laptops or in their trucks. So stipulated.
Even so, while revolutionaries invariably favor an axe, this kind of wholesale carnage still is a shocker.
If you read the entire list, you'll likely be struck by how much damage is being done to education in the humanities and the arts. Surely, a determined Indiana student who wants to attend his or her state university should be able to study German, art history or dance, somewhere; if not in Bloomington, then where else in Indiana?
The answer for some, of course, will be out of state or at a private school; the humanities will continue to be protected in the Ivy League or at the University of Chicago. But that doesn't help a lower-middle-class kid with writing talent from Franklin, Indiana.
The ICHE cuts also don't recognize that some of these small degree programs are taught by faculty who work across several programs and most of them have curricula that overlap, too. In many instances, they simply are a means of offering students more choice at relatively little incremental cost within an academic department. And when it comes to doctoral programs, especially, they are small by design. Indiana doesn't need 50 doctoral students in astrophysics, but we'd argue that a robust program with five might just pay the state back its costs, should even one of them set up some kind of innovative shop in Indianapolis, or, 20 years later, teach an astrophysicist who does precisely that. This kind of one-size-fits-all metric is crude in the extreme. There are excellent programs that don't attract a crowd.
Moreover, degree programs go in and out of fashion. Business and finance degrees may be the hottest things now, but they won't necessarily stay that way.
Setting the philosophical justification for these changes, Indiana's Republican Gov. Mike Braun has called for more 'practical' degrees with direct applications to the workforce.
Sure. But who's to say right now what those degree programs will be in 20 years, especially as artificial intelligence threatens to reorder the demands of the workplace?
Those finance majors and accountants may find machines doing much of what they learned to do, even as degree programs like philosophy that promote critical and relative thinking suddenly have more applicability than now is the case. Indiana University-Bloomington should not be turned into a trade school with Division One football and basketball. The state, which long has been proud of IU, needs teachers, thinkers, artists, musicians and poets, too. And it sure as heck needs people with proficiency in languages and cultures other than English.
One final note. Christopher Rufo and other conservatives have led something of a revival of Western civilization-style instruction at campuses in Florida and elsewhere. They've argued that students should be debating, Sophocles-style, and reading Aristotle or Socrates rather than deconstructive or nihilistic texts emphasizing identity, post-colonial guilt and the like. We think students should read and think about all of the above, although we're all for the rise of classically based curricula, for those who choose such an education. We're all products of the liberal arts ourselves.
Yet in Indiana, those old-school, discursive classes are over-represented on the crudest of chopping blocks. If the legislature and the ICHE are really concerned about how the state's young minds are being educated, they should pack away their numbers nonsense and engage with the state's faculty on the future of Indiana's great state university.
Ideally before the best minds get the heck out of the state. Teachers and students.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNBC
2 minutes ago
- CNBC
Trump promised Ukraine 'security guarantees': Here's what they could look like
On the face of it, talks on Monday between U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and European leaders went well. The U.S. and Ukrainian leaders were pictured looking jovial and smiling together — a far cry from the extraordinary shouting match and public humiliation inflicted on Zelenskyy during his last trip to the White House in February. Monday's talks, which involved a raft of European leaders, appeared to make progress toward ending the protracted war between Russia and Ukraine, with Trump saying a meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Zelenskyy would be arranged, followed by a trilateral meeting that he would join. The most significant development result for Kyiv and Europe, however, was Trump's statement that security guarantees for Ukraine would be "provided" by European countries in "coordination with the U.S." Describing that as a "major step forward," Zelenskyy said later that the package of security guarantees for Ukraine — highly coveted by Kyiv's leadership and seen as a deterrent to future Russian aggression — will include a massive purchase of American weapons, with financing reportedly supported by Europe. The agreement would be "formalized on paper within the next week to 10 days," he said. As for what the security guarantees could include, the detail is still scant. Trump commented at a post-talks press conference that Europe would "take a lot of the burden" for these, but said the U.S. would help and would make it "very secure." In any case, security guarantees likely mean that Europe, and the so-called "Coalition of the Willing" of countries offering to oversee a peace deal, is on the hook to fulfill what they've previously promised. French President Emmanuel Macron hinted Tuesday that the "first security guarantee we are working on — and it is the most important — is a strong Ukrainian army, composed of several hundred thousand men, well equipped, with defense systems and higher standards." "The second is to have reassurance forces, the British, the French, the Germans, the Turks, and others ready to carry out these operations — not on the front line, not in a provocative way, but reassurance operations in the air, at sea, and on land. The goal is to send a strategic signal: peace in Ukraine is also our concern," he told French broadcaster TF1-LCI, in comments translated by NBC News. Jaroslava Barbieri, research fellow at Chatham House, told CNBC Tuesday that the overall mood from the talks on Monday was one of "cautious optimism," but there are many unknowns. "However, we have to say that the Kremlin's maximalist demands on Ukraine have not changed and so there's still a number of uncertainties about the security guarantees, the details, who is going to be doing what, if there are any troop deployments then where will they be stationed and for how long, which countries will be contributing?" she asked. European leaders have voiced misgivings over the lack of a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine before a peace deal is negotiated, but they seem willing to acquiesce, for now, with the end goal of peace and Ukraine and Europe's security in mind. Gabrielius Landsbergis, Lithuania's former foreign minister, told CNBC Tuesday that Europe still appeared to be struggling to be heard, saying the bloc had not yet found its strength and "ability to create leverage." "What came out of the meeting yesterday was that Europe was asking the U.S. yesterday to continue its assistance, to ask for a ceasefire, to assist any stationing of troops, and then some of the leaders were even saying, 'Well, some of the Ukrainian territories might be lost, but that's a reality.' Well, that doesn't sound like Europe finding it's strength," he said. "It's more like Europe agreeing that, 'we are in a very weak position and we have to please President Trump as much as we can and we have nothing to put on the table'," he noted. What's more, it's unclear whether the Kremlin will even agree to direct talks with Zelenskyy. Putin's presidential aide Yuri Ushakov stated Monday that Trump and Putin had discussed "that it would be necessary to study the possibility of raising the level of representatives of the Ukrainian and Russian sides," but that no firm decision was made. The proposed future summits between Trump, Putin and Zelenskyy would keep a process towards a possible resolution of the conflict alive, but it would still follow the Russian script of a no-ceasefire scenario, Holger Schmieding, chief economist at Berenberg Bank, cautioned. "Putin may already set difficult conditions for a meeting with Zelenskyy. And in a meeting with Zelenskyy, Putin's major goal may be to pin the blame for any failure on Zelenskyy instead of agreeing to a truce or a final deal. The outcome remains very uncertain," he noted.


Newsweek
2 hours ago
- Newsweek
'Nuclear Power': NATO Ally Issues Trump Credibility Warning Over Russia
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. French President Emmanuel Macron warned that the global credibility of the U.S. and its NATO allies is on the line in Ukraine, as President Donald Trump attempts to end the Russian invasion once and for all. There remain significant barriers to a settlement that ends the conflict, most notably on territorial control. Ukraine has consistently said it is constitutionally bound not to cede any of the fifth of its territory that Russia has seized. Kyiv and its European allies have urged Trump not to reward Russia for its aggression in Ukraine, saying it has broader consequences for security on the continent, fearing Moscow has similar ambitions elsewhere in the former Soviet sphere. "What's happening in Ukraine is extremely important for Ukrainian people, obviously, but for the whole security of Europe," Macron told NBC News's Kristen Welker in an interview after a multilateral White House meeting with Trump. "Because we speak about containing a nuclear power, which decided just not to respect international borders anymore. And I think it's very important for your country, because it's a matter of credibility. "The way we will behave in Ukraine will be a test for our collective credibility in the rest of the world." This is a developing article. Updates to follow.


UPI
5 hours ago
- UPI
Trump works to broker bilateral meeting between Putin, Zelensky
1 of 15 | President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine meets President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., on Monday. Zelensky was joined by European leaders as he met with President Trump in an effort to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. Photo by Aaron Schwartz/UPI | License Photo Aug. 18 (UPI) -- President Donald Trump spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday during a White House meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine and said he will arrange a bilateral meeting between the two, within the next two weeks. The call came during Monday's negotiations between Zelensky, Trump and European leaders, who had gathered to discuss ending the war in Ukraine. Trump said the future meeting would be followed by a trilateral meeting, involving the United States. On Monday night, the White House posted an Oval Office photo of Trump on the phone with Putin, as Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance looked on. Trump said Vance, Rubio and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff would be involved in coordinating the meeting between Putin and Zelensky. President Donald J. Trump on the phone with President Putin in the Oval Office. The White House (@WhiteHouse) August 19, 2025 In a post on Truth Social, Trump said he "had a very good meeting with distinguished guests," which included Zelensky, French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, as well as much of the European delegation and NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. "I called President Putin and began the arrangements for a meeting, at a location to be determined, between President Putin and President Zelensky," Trump said. "After that meeting takes place, we will have a Trilat, which would be the two presidents, plus myself. Again, this was a very good, early step for a war that has been going on for almost four years." Trump met with Zelensky earlier Monday afternoon to signal that the United States would provide Ukraine with "very good protection." "The security guarantees would be provided by the various European countries, with a coordination with the United States of America," Trump said. "Everyone is very happy about the possibility of PEACE for Russia/Ukraine." Macron called the U.S. commitment for Ukrainian security guarantees the "first and most important" outcome of Monday's talks. "Today, it was agreed that we will work with the United States of America on the content of these security guarantees and the cooperation that each party is prepared to provide," Macron said, adding that any meeting would have to take place under a cease-fire. "Call it a truce or a cease-fire, but we cannot hold discussions under bombs," Macron added. Trump told Zelensky at the start of the meeting: "I have a feeling you and President Putin are going to work something out. Ultimately, this is a decision that can only be made by President Zelensky and by the people of Ukraine working also together in agreement with President Putin. And I just think that very good things are going to come of it." By the end of the day, Zelensky told reporters he is ready for "any format" of a meeting with Putin and said he would also participate in a trilateral meeting if there is progress in the first one. "I believe unconditionally we should meet and think about the further development of this path of the war," he said. Zelensky told reporters that the security guarantees included plans for Ukraine to purchase $90 billion in American weapons through European funding. Zelensky also said he and Trump had a long discussion about a map in the Oval Office, showing Russian-occupied territories in Ukraine. Rutte said Ukrainian territory was not discussed during the broader Monday meetings. Zelensky arrived around 1 p.m. EDT on Monday along with several EU leaders. Trump and Zelensky sat in the Oval Office, mirroring their meeting earlier this year. This time, they avoided the dramatic shouting match from six months ago in the same space. During the February exchange, Trump and Vance accused Zelensky of being "disrespectful" toward the United States and the Trump administration. Zelensky was much more complimentary during Monday's meeting, immediately thanking Trump for his efforts to stop Russia's war. Vance, who was in the Oval Office, said nothing this time. The meeting came after Trump's summit with Putin on Friday in Alaska. European Council leaders are scheduled to meet via videoconference Tuesday to discuss the meeting. The council's president, Antonio Costa, called the conference, he announced on X Monday. "I have convened a video conference of the members of the European Council for tomorrow at 1 p.m. CEST, for a debriefing of today's meetings in Washington, D.C., about Ukraine," Costa wrote. "Together with the U.S., the EU will continue working towards a lasting peace that safeguards Ukraine's and Europe's vital security interests." European leaders, including Rutte, Starmer, Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, Finnish President Alexander Stubb and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, accompanied Zelensky to Washington for the talks.