Special Issue: End of Neoliberalism

Policy Futures in Education

2020, Vol. 18(1) 90–116
Higher education after ! The Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
neoliberalism: Student sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1478210318767459
activism as a guiding light journals.sagepub.com/home/pfe

Rose M Cole
Curry School of Education, University of Virginia, USA

Walter F Heinecke
Curry School of Education, University of Virginia, USA

Abstract
Contemporary college student activism has been particularly visible and effective in the past few
years at US institutions of higher education and is projected only to grow in future years. Almost
all of these protests and demands, while explicitly linked to social and racial justice, are sites of
resistance to the neoliberalization of the academy. These activists are imagining a post-neoliberal
society, and are building their demands around these potential new social imaginaries. Based on a
discourse analysis of contemporary college student activist demands, to examine more closely
the ways that student activists understand, resist, critique, and offer new alternatives to current
(neoliberal) structures in higher education, it is suggested that student activists might be one key
to understanding what’s next for higher education in a post-neoliberal context. The activists’
critiques of the structure of higher education reveal a sophisticated understanding of the current
socio-political, cultural, and economic realities. Their demands show an optimistic, creative
imagination that could serve educators well as we grapple with our first steps down a new
road. Using their critiques and demands as a jumping-off point, this paper offers the blueprint
for a new social imaginary in higher education, one that is focused on community and justice.

Keywords
Activism, discourse analysis, higher education, neoliberalism

Corresponding author:
Rose M Cole, 1119 Leonard Street, Charlottesville, VA 22902, USA.
Email: [email protected]
Cole and Heinecke 91

Introduction and statement of the problem

Rolling back neoliberalism requires more than critique. It requires both a vision of what a
post-neoliberal society would look like and some indication of how to work toward
a post-neoliberal world. The pre-neoliberal welfare state fell short on this vision in terms
of issues related to diversity, racial, gender and socio-economic equity and social justice.
There is no going back, but only a re-envisioning forward. For two decades we have seen the
rise in social movements opposed to the ideologies and policies of neoliberalism. We have
also seen a rise in social activism about larger social issues dealing with neoliberalism,
income inequality, and related topics on university campuses. In addition, there has been
a rise in student activism related to the incursion of neoliberalism in higher
education, related specifically to cuts in state support for public education and rising tuition
fees, student debt, and issues related to racism and accessibility.
Current student activism is not just an exercise in critique; rather, it reflects a vision
forged in a praxis of ideas and action, a solution to the effects of neoliberalism, reinforced
by higher education, that transform individuals into isolated consumers who see themselves
as powerless (Nelson, 2008, p. xiv). This means that we might look to current social move-
ments to get some indications of possible destinations of a post-neoliberal society and first
step toward that destination. In these social movements we can begin to glean what kind of
post-neoliberal social imaginary will need to be developed. Student activism on campuses in
recent years provides fertile ground for investigating these issues.
Contemporary college student activism has been particularly visible and effective in the
past few years at institutions of higher education in the USA and is projected only to grow in
future years (Eagan et al., 2015). Almost all of these protests and demands, while explicitly
linked to social and racial justice, are sites (implicit or explicit) of resistance to the
neoliberalization of the academy. These activists are imagining a post-neoliberal society,
and are building their demands around these potential new social imaginaries. Building on a
discourse analysis of contemporary college student activist demands that examine the ways
student activists understand, resist, critique and offer new alternatives. To current neoliberal
structures in higher education, we suggest that student activists might be one key to under-
standing what’s next for higher education in a post-neoliberal context. The activists’ cri-
tiques of the structure of higher education reveal a sophisticated understanding of the
current socio-political, cultural and economic realities. Their demands show an optimistic,
creative imagination that could serve educators well as we grapple with our first steps down
a new road. Using their critiques, methods and demands as a jumping off point, we offer the
blueprint for a new social imaginary in higher education, one that is focused on community
and justice.

Neoliberalism and resistance at universities

Neoliberal ideology and unbridled capitalism are the scourge of our times. The disruption
by neoliberal hegemony poses threats to the future of humanity. Economic inequality,
environmental degradation, and the erosion of democracy are but a few of the symptoms
of the widespread adoption and implementation of neoliberalism. Neoliberalism, at once an
economic theory, a political ideology, and a set of policies, has had a totalizing impact on
national cultures. Brown (2016) argues that it has converted all “non-economic domains,
activities, and subjects into economic ones” (p. 3). It has reformed subjective identities into
92 Policy Futures in Education 18(1)

narrow market actors in a world of human capital. Individuals are transformed into a
member of a firm and a firm itself, generating “intensely isolated and unprotected
individuals, persistently in peril of deracination and deprivation of basic life support,
wholly vulnerable to capital’s vicissitudes” (Brown, 2016: 3). Additionally, as Newfield
(2011) argues, neoliberalism has engaged in the discrediting of social inequality by
promoting discourses of political correctness meant to undermine the new, more diverse
college-trained majority.
Perhaps nowhere has this been more clearly manifested than in the corporatization of
higher education. Colleges, universities, and entire systems of higher education have become
the target of neoliberal attacks from within and without. Universities, one of the last
bastions of social critique and innovation, have come under full-scale assault through
purposeful reductions in state funding, leading to the erosion of tenure and academic
freedom, rising tuition costs and the indentured servitude of student loan debt, the
implementation of academic capitalism and consequent corporatization of public universi-
ties (Giroux, 2002). Higher education is forced into a narrow job-training mission and away
from its traditional mission of preparing citizens for critical participation in the democracy.
Colleges and universities continue to be sites for contesting significant social problems
related to neoliberalism, such as inequality and racial discrimination. Student activism,
considered to be dormant during the 1990s and early 21st century, has increased in the
United States of America and globally, focused not only on social issues and access to higher
education but also on what the university could be (Haiven, 2014).1

A vision of the post-neoliberal

After the financial meltdown of 2007, pundits declared the neoliberal era had come to an
end; that deregulated capitalism was unsustainable. They were wrong. Neoliberalism has
proven to be more resilient for a variety of reasons but mostly because it is not simply a set
of economic policies but also a set of normative ideals, or a cultural construct. A generation
of policymakers and citizens has only known neoliberalism as “the common sense for
conducting and evaluating policy” (Cahill, 2011: 487). However, some argue that the
crisis of neoliberalism has opened up space to “. . .find within the present, elements of a
more hopeful future, and to forge alliances that can leverage neoliberal capitalism’s failure
into a different kind of world” (Carroll, 2010: 169). There are cracks in neoliberalism
that reveal its dysfunctional effects and offer opportunities for resistance and change
(Fear, 2015). However, challenging neoliberalism requires significant political mobilization
and social movements (Cahill, 2011: 490).
In thinking about a vision of a post-neoliberal or post-capitalist world, contemporary
student activism and college student protestors’ demands offer some inkling of what that
might look like. First, they present a world in which the neoliberal approach, which
transforms human beings and all matters social into market-based reasoning, is disrupted.
The movements and demands represent what Wendy Brown (2015) calls sacrificial
reasoning: “sacrifice” is a non-economic way of experiencing the world. The movements,
in pushing back against austerity and cuts in funding revive a notion of Res Publica: of the
people as a public body. The movements revive a sense of hope that things can get better,
that there is an alternative to neoliberalism.
Second, the students’ activism is a struggle for the post-neoliberal imagination and values
(Haiven, 2014:149). It becomes a constant reminder that this struggle is about process rather
Cole and Heinecke 93

than product or outcome. The protests over the purpose of higher education represent the
spark of life within an institution coopted by neoliberalism: “These movements both call for
and, in a small way, materialize an alternative social space where the radical imagination can
flourish, where we can ask deep questions about the nature of society and ourselves, and
where we can experiment with alternative forms of living” (Haiven, 2014: 150).

Connecting ideas and action

In taking the first steps toward reconceptualizing society, student activism and demands
move us to consider non-economic identity. Neoliberalism is not only an economic theory
related to class and income inequality but also an ideological and cultural construct that
normalizes market-based thinking.
That we should salvage from the past the idea that opening up higher education beyond
elites to public access was a major victory for democracy (Brown, 2015), but only a partially-
achieved victory because the demands illustrate that the project of diversity on campuses is
incomplete. We need to consider the role of race, diversity and justice in a post-neoliberal
imaginary. As Brinkman (2000, cited in Fischman, 2009) states, neoliberalism is a reflection
of the failure of liberal democracy which has been “mediated historically through the dam-
aged and burdened tradition of racial and gender exclusions, economic injustice, and a
formalistic, ritualized democracy, which substituted the swindle for the promise of demo-
cratic participation” (Fischman, 2009: 3).
The purpose of this study was to understand how recent student protests and demands
reflect a critique of neoliberalism, indicate resistance to neoliberal takeover of higher edu-
cation, and reflect a vision and an imaginary of moving beyond neoliberalism. It seeks to
understand how the pre-neoliberal welfare state was exclusionary as well as democratizing,
and how social theory is connected to social change. It asks what can be learnt about first
steps and possible destinations of a post-neoliberal higher education. Specifically, the study
seeks to shed light on the ways that contemporary student activist groups frame their
demands, understand the current contexts of higher education (both at their institution
and in solidarity with activist groups on other campuses), and construct understanding of
and resistance to dominant neoliberal narratives on campus. This study thus contributes to
the literature on campus activism by analyzing the most current discourses of student activ-
ist group demands. By mapping out what student activists are specifically asking for, one is
better able to understand the implications of their requests. In addition, a discourse analysis
of student demands provides for researchers to understand better the culture and social
relations of activist groups and institutions of higher education. Since 2015, student-led
campus protests have cut a swath across colleges and universities in the United States
of America.

Context of the study: overview of recent campus activism and protests

In the USA, public and private research universities, Ivy League and land-grant institutions,
and small liberal-arts colleges, from all geographic regions, have experienced student-led
activism and direct action, culminating with protests and lists of specific demands (Ellin,
2016; Pauly and Andrews, 2015; Wong and Green, 2016). UCLA’s Cooperative
Institutional Research Program (CIRP) annual freshman survey (Eagan et al., 2015)
suggested that the rate of student activism on college campuses would only increase.
94 Policy Futures in Education 18(1)

For example, the 2015 CIRP survey found that, compared to past cohorts, incoming stu-
dents “demonstrate stronger inclinations toward activism via intentions to join protests
while in college” and “report substantially stronger commitments to engaging with
their communities”, with an all-time high number of students indicating that “becoming a
community leader” is an essential or very important life objective (Eagan et al., 2015: 8).
Expertise and extensive use of social media and the Internet allow contemporary student
protestors to disseminate demands, plan and execute direct action, connect with other
protest movements (collegiate and national) and respond to national events more swiftly
and efficiently than ever before.
While there has been a significant history of student activism on college campuses begin-
ning in the 1960s (Broadhurst, 2014; Rhoads, 1998), the rise of neoliberalism beginning in the
1980s was also paralleled by a rise in activism that shifted from an anti-war focus to one on
“improving higher education access and campus climates for underrepresented and margin-
alized populations” (Rhoads, 2016: 194). As Rhoads stated, “Indeed, racial issues, including
the struggle for racial equality and opposition to difficult-to-extinguish racism, have come to
play a central role in contemporary student activism” (Rhoads, 2016: 195). By Any Means
Necessary (BAMN), which activated with regard to issues of affirmative action, and Occupy
Wall Street, against income inequality, have both been related to protesting about issues
related to the instantiation of neoliberal policies on college campuses.
Black activist and newly-minted professor Khadijah White illustrates how neoliberalism
and the struggle for racial equality are connected through the university protest movements:

I am also a member of the millennial generation – born after 1980 and coming to age in the wake
of the greatest recession in America since the Great Depression. As new workers, this generation
is faced with an economy that relies increasingly on more work for less pay, a fragmented and
tenuous labour force, and education, healthcare, and housing debts that far outpace their earn-
ings. Black millennials, in particular, still disproportionately bear the far-reaching consequences
of the 2007 Great Recession. And as neoliberalism takes its toll on the operation, expansion,
formation and cost of higher education, the hallowed halls of the Ivory Tower are also bearing
the brunt of these intersecting societal and economic shifts. In their search for opportunity and
success, millennials on campus have helped lead movements for economic and social justice
ranging from the Occupy movement in 2011 to the Movement for Black Lives today.
(White, 2016)

Recent student activism

Hunger strikes, sit-ins, walkouts, tent cities, silent protests at governing board meetings,
occupations of administrative offices, teach-ins, and marches have been part of campus life
at institutions such as Mizzou, Princeton, Purdue, Yale, Harvard, Duke, Georgetown,
Occidental College, University of Cincinnati, Ithaca College and Amherst College (to
name but a few). Specifically, this study encompasses 81 schools in North America (two
of which are in Canada) where student activists have coordinated/participated in direct
action protests and also submitted a list of demands to their institutions (see Table A.1 in
the Appendix).
The inciting events that sparked individual campus movements/protests have varied.
Some have been in response to incidents of campus racism or police brutality. Others
Cole and Heinecke 95

have been in response to administrators’ clumsy attempts to address climate issues or have
been focused on redressing perceived historical wrongs (re-naming buildings or spaces on
campus, for example). In some high-profile instances, for instance the University of
Missouri2 and Claremont McKenna College,3 upper-level administrators such as presidents,
chancellors and deans of students resigned. In the case of other schools – such as Princeton
University – administrators agreed to consider some demands, but others were rejected.4
A detailed overview of every campus protest is beyond the scope of this article, but the
outlines of what has transpired at many schools in the past year are crucial to understanding
student and activist demands.

Narratives of campus protest and student activism

There are many well-reported narratives of campus protests from national media outlets
(e.g., the New York Times, Atlantic Monthly, Huffington Post) as well as from publications
with more specific audiences (student and local newspapers, public radio stations, and the
Chronicle of Higher Education). Generally, the narratives begin with the protests at
Mizzou that were heavily influenced by the Black Lives Matter movement which coalesced
in Ferguson, MO after law enforcement killed Michael Brown, in August 2014.
Although this is an oversimplification intended to fit a myriad specific individual campus
protest movements, it does shed some light onto the major patterns that one can discern
from the contemporary landscape of student activism. For the sake of this study, we
highlight the major patterns that underlie recent protest movements: black activism and
direct action.

Black activism and direct action. First, there is a strong connection between these direct actions
on campus and national anti-racist initiatives like Black Lives Matter and the Black
Liberation Collective. The recent incidents involving the killing of young African-
Americans has had a significant impact on student activism “as colleges and universities
throughout the country have witnessed a rise in student organizing to address racism both in
terms of local campuses and the broader society” (Rhoads, 2016: 190).
Even if groups are not explicitly tied to Black Lives Matter (Jonathan Butler, the
graduate student who went on hunger strike at the University of Missouri, was a veteran
of the Ferguson protests), the rationale and demands are clearly influenced by national
anti-racist activism. This is clear from the lists of demands analyzed in this study – for
example, language related to demilitarization and institutional violence on campus and
neighboring communities is evidence of an approach to racist incidents consistent with
national activist groups’ (Black Lives Matter, Black Liberation Collective, etc.) broad,
holistic understanding of systemic, structural racist violence. A related pattern is the focus
on race and racism, even for intersectional student activist groups. Every document ana-
lyzed in this study clearly delineated an anti-racist agenda and accused institutions and
institutional actors of perpetuating structural racism. The national demands that frame the
list of student demands used in this study illustrate the underlying importance of direct
action and black activism to the current student protest movements. In order to be
included on the websites that host all of the student demands, groups had to submit
their documents via email or web form. Anyone can access the lists on either thede-
mands.org or blackliberationcollective.org/our-demands. Figures 1 and 2 show how the
demands are framed on each of the websites.
96 Policy Futures in Education 18(1)

Figure 1. Through its introductory statement and imagery (raised fist), the Black Liberation Collective’s
website frames the list of students’ demands as representing collective efforts by black students to address
systemic racism and inequities.

Figure 2. The Demands website (www.thedemands.org which includes exactly the same content and is an
affiliate website of the Black Liberation Collective) also frames student demands in the context of
Black activism.

Lastly, the lists of demands are prefaced by an overarching set of demands from the
Black Liberation Collective:

1. WE DEMAND at the minimum, Black students and Black faculty to be reflected by the
national percentage of Black folk in the country.
2. WE DEMAND free tuition for Black and indigenous students.
3. WE DEMAND a divestment from prisons and an investment in communities.
The themes and discursive patterns visible in this list are echoed by the student groups whose
words are in the results section.

Brief review of the literature

Student activism and resistance to neoliberalism
Slocum and Rhoads (2009) highlight student and faculty activism in the academy as
key tools for social transformation and resistance to neoliberalism. The vision here of the
post-neoliberal university was one of social transformation in which the university is not
Cole and Heinecke 97

centered on activities related to “immediate economic returns” (Slocum and Rhoads, 2009:
102). The university is focused on “social obligations” rather than revenue streams; it is
envisioned as engaging in modeling individual behavior “suggestive of a more community-
minded form of citizenship” (Slocum and Rhoads, 2009:102). The ethos of individualism
and consumerism is replaced with one of “collectivism”. Students had a vision of the uni-
versity connected to society and addressing society’s needs, a university divorced from
academic capitalism and acting as an agent of social change. The vision of the university
was connected to a vision of a “restructured society based on more democratic economic
practices. . .more politically engaged citizens. . . .” (Slocum and Rhoads, 2009: 99). Activists
held differing notions of the university’s role in intellectual transference. Some were focused
on more theoretical ideas about neoliberalism and on providing alternative visions for
economically marginalized citizens; others engaged in instrumental transference providing
direct services to marginalized communities; still others viewed the transference in terms of
collaborations between university and community social movements. They were seeking a
stronger relationship between university and society. This vision of the university was the
opposite of the neoliberal vision in that it was about creating a more democratic and
emancipatory university, one that does not live in a glorified past of exclusivity but,
rather, one that is more inclusive. Another vision includes a commitment to national and
local problem solving as further resistance to the role of universities in serving the interests
of globalization. Cabalin (2012) conducted research on student protests in Chile that
rejected the competitive and privatized nature of the current system of neoliberalized
higher education because of its effects on quality and equity. In doing so the students
demonstrate that a new social imaginary is possible (Hickel, 2012; Monbiot, 2016).5
Student activism in higher education has been a significant indication of resistance and
rollback to neoliberalism, a reflection of a vision or social imaginary about a post-neoliberal
society, and direction about moving beyond the pre-neoliberal welfare state that excluded
groups of people and denied access to racial and ethnic minorities and low-income citizens
(Carey, 2016).

Neoliberalism and activism centered on race, equity and access. In her examination of student
protest at one university, Carey found that, “Habits of whiteness, and the ways in which
they get (re)articulated through the lenses of neoliberalism and empire, are the very force
against which students mobilized and fought in their sit-in protest at Prolutum in Fall 2014”
(Carey, 2016). And again, as Robin Kelley (2016) observes, there lies a “tension between
reform and revolution, between desiring to belong and rejecting the university as a cog in the
neoliberal order. I want to think about what it means for Black students to seek love from
an institution incapable of loving them – of loving anyone, perhaps” (Kelley, 2016).
Diversity and inclusion become a checkmark that the university maintains in order to
maintain the status quo, and perhaps this raises a question that haunts this project: is
there another option?

As the groups and activists organizing around the call of #BlackLivesMatter targeted the sys-
tematic disenfranchisement of Black people, it was inevitable that their attention would turn to
university campuses, which are microcosms (and, in some cases, sources) of these larger societal
trends. From inside academia, they began to mobilize around and explore the question of how
to disrupt institutions that had been created, funded and organized primarily for the preserva-
tion of a white wealthy ruling class. (White, 2016)
98 Policy Futures in Education 18(1)

Universities have traditionally served as sites for the development of unhindered thought
about the nature and purpose of democracy – the democratic imaginary, so to speak.
They have served as sites for the preparation of active citizens for the USA’s democracy.
Under neoliberalism, this role has been circumscribed as universities have become more com-
mercialized and corporatized and as students have been captured by neoliberal discourse of
consumerism. As such, the university itself has become a battleground for the control of a
contested social institution. The forces of neoliberalism and democracy are clashing on uni-
versity campuses and student activism is the site for resistance to neoliberal ideology.

Activism and the purposes of higher education

Activism is a vehicle for student learning about the democratic process, citizenship and lead-
ership: scholars have argued that “an environment that supports activism is one that has
greater integrity and reflects the democratic ideals embraced by the United States” (Kezar and
Maxey, 2014: 31). Case studies of student activism in the late 1960s and early 1970s (in
particular the period of 1969–1970) centered on three themes: racial unrest, demonstrations
about academic and student life, and protests about US military policy (Astin et al., 1975).
Rhoads (1998) argues that “[c]ampus unrest of the 1990s may be seen as democracy playing
itself out in the truest sense, as marginalized peoples seek. . .a fair chance to achieve social,
political, and economic opportunity” (Rhoads, 1998: vii). Principled student activism can be
seen as citizen-engagement and an opportunity for meaningful, experiential citizenship edu-
cation, and organized dissent on campus can be understood as students showing they have a
deep understanding of democratic aims, processes and underlying principles (Hamrick, 1998).
More recent scholarship (Tsui, 2000) suggested that activism and a campus culture of socio-
political awareness builds critical thinking skills. What is unclear are the connections between
recent student activism and protest at United States colleges and universities centered on
racism, equity, and access, and resistance to and moving beyond neoliberalism.
Because case study research has been the norm for researching student activism and campus
protest movements in the United States of America, there may be some value in considering a
fairly broad swath of activism that has coalesced in the same time period and regarding the
same issues. Additionally, a discourse analysis that involves a cross-section of contemporary
student movements may provide for the identification of relevant patterns of meaning.

Conceptual and theoretical frameworks

One conceptual framework for this study is Van Stekelenberg and Klandermans’ (2013)
theoretical model of the social psychology of protest. The model integrates identities, griev-
ances and emotions of protestors as an explanation for why they protest. According to this
model, activist protestors must (a) identify as a member of a group with shared values and
principles; then (b) feel that the interests of the group and/or principles of the group are
threatened that leads them to feel (c) group-based anger to the point where they are (d)
motivated to take part in protest to “protect their interests and principles and/or express
their anger” (Van Stekelenberg and Klandermans, 2013: 897). This conceptual framework is
particularly useful in categorizing the types of demands and from where they stem.
Distinguishing between group values, group interests and group principles is one key to
understanding the broad range of demands shared by activist groups. Additionally, under-
standing the way that these groups organize and construct their group identity is also crucial
Cole and Heinecke 99

to understanding contemporary activism. Considering Van Stekelenbegy and Klandermans’

(2013) model of protest is key to understanding how student activists imagine a post-
neoliberal society because of the concept of “identity”. In the neoliberal university, identity
is defined in relation to students’ roles as consumers and potential members of the labor
market. Thus when a student activist identifies as a group in which individuals are divorced
from their market roles, students are rejecting the neoliberal university and circumscribing a
new identity/reality/society on their university experiences. Another related conceptual
framework is that of the neoliberal university versus the post-neoliberal university
(Brown, 2015; Haiven, 2014; Risager and Thorup, 2016; Zuidhof, 2015). Table 1 provides
an overview of the neoliberal and post-neoliberal universities’ social imaginaries:6
The contrast between the neoliberal university and the post-neoliberal university (or, as
Risager and Thorup, 2016 describe it, “A Different University”) is a key framework in our
discourse analysis and ultimate findings.

Research questions
This study was guided by the following research questions.

1. How do student activist groups frame their grievances and demands in the context(s) of
contemporary neoliberal resistance higher education?; and

2. What does current student activism mean for the post-neoliberal imaginary?

Methodology
Discursive analytic approaches uncover the constructive effects of language and will provide
for the investigation of the processes of the political and social construction of activist
groups and group grievances (Chilton, 2004; Fairclough, 1995). By uncovering the specific
ways in which student actors construct arguments, one may connect those arguments to the
wider contexts of higher education. Heracleous (2006) argues that there are three dominant
approaches to the study of discourse – interpretive, functional and critical: “not mutually
exclusive, but analytically distinct” (Heracleous, 2006: 2).
This present study’s mode of inquiry will be mainly critical but also somewhat interpre-
tive. In other words, discourse is conceptualized as communicative action constructive of
social realities (interpretive) but we are also strongly-oriented towards considering discourse
as “power knowledge relationships, constitutive of subjects’ identities of organizational and
societal structures of domination” (critical) (Heracelous, 2006: 2). For this study, we use
Fairclough’s (2003; 2005; 2010) method of critical discourse analysis (CDA) to “see” con-
structions of higher education in the demands of student activists.

Site and sample

This analysis is one part of a larger ethnographic study of contemporary student activism.
“The Demands” (accessed via thedemands.org or the Black Liberation Collective’s website)
were identified as a rich site of data and information for the study because of their explicit
link to 2015’s major campus protests (especially Missouri) and because student groups were
required to opt-in to share their demands. This suggested a willingness – even preference – to
100 Policy Futures in Education 18(1)

Table 1. Social imaginaries of higher education

The neoliberal university The post-neoliberal university

Purposes of Supply the private market with ideas Create a community of deep, demo-
higher education (knowledge) and labor (students) cratic learning; students examine
to succeed nationally in global social bonds, citizenship and
competition. responsibility; equip students with
the skills and knowledge needed to
re-imagine and re-make society.
Costs of higher education Are borne by individuals through Are shared by society as a public
privatized debt good (state funding)
Relationship to the state Locale for neoliberal reconstruction Locale for democratic renewal of
of the state. the state.
Utilization of knowledge Knowledge is “de-academicized”, or Knowledge is used to critically reflect
redefined in a narrow, economist on society. Knowledge is every-
understanding of utility and rele- one’s domain.
vance. Knowledge is
a commodity.
Temporality/the future Focus on seamlessly transitioning Focus on joy of participating,
students from the university to empowerment, and claiming own-
the labor force/market; recon- ership over academia and academic
structed temporality for all actors space and time. The time one
– an endless drive to do more, spends in the university is struc-
publish more, teach more, apply tured in a democratic and
more often for funding, all in a empowering way.
shorter period of time.
Relationship to the Casts the humanities as part of an University is a place of experimenta-
“real world” ancient, out-of-date “ivory tion with new forms of living,
tower” in which privileged people cooperation, society, imagining.
with no contact with reality con- There is no division between a
jure up useless theory or inter- “real world” and the university.
fere in the public debate;
university–business connections
are defined as conduits to the
“real world” for students, staff
and faculty
Power and governance Hierarchical power and governance Democratic models of governance
structures; university is divided and non-hierarchical distributions
into self-governing units which of power; focus on participatory
compete with each other and are and direct democracy, consensus
legitimized by this competition decision-making and horizon-
and fiscal constraints tal structures.
Role of students/ Students are defined as consumers. Students are democratic actors.
individuals Individuals are re-inscribed as The university acknowledges every
capital – with a potential to either individual’s knowledge and experi-
lie dormant and not circulate or ence. We all learn from one
be invested and circulating. another. Individuals do not exist
Emphasis on global competition. distinctly from the social and
public frame.
Cole and Heinecke 101

situate individual campus demands within the larger contexts of student activism.
Additionally, an initial examination of the schools represented in the list showed that the
final list represented a variety of institutional types and geographic areas (although concen-
trated on the US East and West Coasts).

Data collection and analysis

There were multiple phases of data collection to this discourse analysis. In the initial phase
of document collection, we used demands compiled by the Black Liberation Collective (on
the website www.thedemands.org). The list was last updated in December 2015. We cross-
referenced the list of demands to each school and verified the documents as much as possible
with each of the campus groups and schools affiliated with each separate set of demands. If
it was not clear what specific campus group made the demands via the original website, the
research team attempted to identify the group of activists through news articles, press
releases, or information on relevant websites. In addition, as part of this phase of data
collection the research team identified major characteristics of the school (using Carnegie
Classification and information made available by the colleges and universities themselves) as
well as whatever defining characteristics we could find of the activist group that wrote the
demands – for example, one of the lists of demands came from a partnership between
members of Black Students United, Voces Latinas and Students for an Inclusive Campus;
while another came from just a group of interested students; and still another was specific to
the Black Student Association. Fairclough’s CDA model (see Figure 3) posts three interre-
lated analytic processes tied to corresponding dimensions of discourse: text analysis, proc-
essing analysis and social analysis.

Figure 3. Fairclough’s CDA model posts three interrelated analytic processes tied to corresponding
dimensions of discourse: text analysis, processing analysis and social analysis (adapted from Fairclough, 2001
and Janks, 1997).
102 Policy Futures in Education 18(1)

Limitations
This study is limited in scope and methodology. By relying on self-reported lists of
demands through the Black Liberation Collective’s site, we may have missed critical
actions and demands by student groups that were not aware of the site, or that chose
not to participate but did circulate demands on their own campuses. Additionally, we
have limited information only about how and by whom each of the student group’s
demands were created. The demands show different levels of detailed engagement with
policies and campus climate: the University of Virginia’s Black Student Alliance demands
are 6300 words long, while Virginia Commonwealth University’s demands are expressed
in 88 words.

Results
Three discourses related to the post-neoliberal imaginary emerged from this analysis:
critique (alienation) of the current neoliberal university; resistance (revolution) to the
neoliberal university; and creation (remaking/rebuilding) of an intersectional, inclusive
community found in the imagined post-neoliberal university. Through their demands,
student activist groups positioned themselves as agents of change consistent with these
discourses (interestingly, these positions are sometimes incompatible with each other):
outsiders, victims, change-agents, protectors, creators, leaders, insiders. They positioned
institutions of higher education correspondingly within the neoliberal social imaginary: as
a dangerous environment, as a flawed community, as hostile territory but also as a
potential site of re-birth and revolution on a societal scale. These positions and dis-
courses were evident throughout the lists of demands for each school and were also
intertwined with each other. We would argue that an important finding, and one that
differentiates the creative work of contemporary college student activists from the work
of academics and researchers who consider similar structural issues and make similar
critiques, is that these students imagine a post-neoliberal educational context imbued
with a sense of racial justice, not simply class consciousness. Racial justice and inter-
sectionality are integral to the discourse of these student activist groups, and the
demands link issues such as the institutional marginalization of black and brown stu-
dents to the corporatization of the university. Finally, we argue that the sophisticated
understanding of contemporary college student activists of their institutions allows one
to discern a blueprint for the post-neoliberal higher education sector. We synthesize our
analyses of student activist discourse to propose the key cornerstones that would make
up the foundation of this new social imaginary.

Three discourses: critique, resistance, creation

In the following section, we outline our findings from the discourse analysis. We focus on
three discourses that surfaced from the lists of student demands: critique and alienation,
resistance and revolution, and creation.

Critique and alienation. First, we address the discourse of critique. The discourse of critique of
the neoliberal university is grounded in a sense of alienation and marginalization. While we
found that this discourse placed demands in the context of larger structural, institutional
and societal issues, the actual demands were focused more on meeting the needs of
Cole and Heinecke 103

individuals. The discourse of critique of the neoliberal university positioned the students
who were making the demands as outsiders or victims in an unwelcoming or dangerous
environment. It is more descriptive and reactive than prescriptive and creative.
The discourse of alienation makes sense in the context of current student protests and
in the United States of America (and US systems/institutions of higher education in
general). If one accepts the premise that protests in Ferguson and the emergence of
the Black Lives Matter movement influenced Mizzou’s hugely significant protests,
which in turn sparked a flame on campuses all across the USA, one can also see how
this discourse of alienation and marginalization is fundamental to the recent campus
protests movements and the demands student activists have made. Consider data from
the Atlanta University Center Consortium,7 where the student group

. . .wholly dedicates itself to the eradication of harmful practices that provide for the perpetu-
ation of these grievances.8 These harmful practices include but are not limited to: state violence
against black and brown lives, such as police brutality, erasure and reconstruction of history,
and allotment of resources; the exclusion of women, LGBTQIA, differently-abled, non-
Christian, poor and neurodiverse or mentally ill persons in addressing public issues; and the
upholding of respectability tactics in the wake of calculated, widespread targeting of black and
brown persons. (Atlanta University Center Consortium)

The above excerpt typifies the language related to alienation, marginalization and victimi-
zation in the body of demands. Intersectionality characterizes many of the instances of
alienation – authors of the lists of demands and grievances pay careful attention to inclusion
in the face of exclusion. It also hints at the ways that most of the documents included in this
analysis are heavily influenced by black activism – obviously, AUC is a consortium
of HBCUs, so the concept of respectability tactics is natural. However, as one of many
institutions with students who submitted demands based on contemporary activism, this
language is complementary to many of the other documents. The statement above also
shows the ways that discourse is nested within itself: AUC students position themselves
as “target[ed]” but also are fluent in the academic language of institutions and institutional
oppression – “state violence” and “allotment of resources”.
Another group of students from Atlanta (addressing their demands to Emory University)
demonstrate this same outsider/insider positionality, and anxieties about racial violence, as
well as their commitment to black activism as they bring professors into the fold of
their demands:

Black professors when in non-traditional or traditional disciplines must not be abused by the
overwhelmingly white academy. Professors, too, need protection for the violent, racist, and
sexist incidents that they endure from their white colleagues in their departments.

This discourse of alienation exists on a continuum from outsiders in an unwelcoming envi-

ronment to victims of violence in a dangerous environment. Language from the students at
UC Irvine is an illustration of this continuum:

The violence Black students face on and off campus has documented negative effects on our
physical, emotional and spiritual well-being. These are sources of stress and ultimately impede
on Black students’ success, academic pursuit, intellectual developments and required resources.
104 Policy Futures in Education 18(1)

Here, the discourse of alienation vacillates between sanitized (“documented negative effects”
on “well-being”) and rooted in threats (“violence Black students face on and off campus”).
The vast majority of this discourse, though, was expressed in language that focused on
marginalization in an unwelcoming environment, not victimization (in fact, this in itself
was an example of nested discourses: students were using insider coded language such as
“developing racial and intercultural competency training for all faculty and staff ” to address
their concerns as marginalized people). This excerpt from the source data also illustrates the
ways that the discourse of critique and alienation is focused more on the individual (it
describes structural injustices but demands individual solution).
In addition, about half of the times that word “violence” was used in the demands was in
relation to sexual assault and gender-based violence – another facet of being alienated from
broader institutional norms and culture, and another example of the student activists’
emphasis on intersectionality.9

Resistance and revolution. The discourse of resistance and revolution positions student groups
who made these demands as change agents in hostile territory. This discourse focuses more
on structural and societal issues. It also provides the foundation for the discourse of creation
of new communities.
Empirical evidence from all three discourses overlaps with this key finding. Specifically,
AUC’s and Emory’s concern for community members and black professors situates the
authors as protectors. A related pattern that emerged from the data was the focus on justice
for communities “adjacent” to the traditional college or university, including actual neigh-
boring communities (and the high schools within), classified administrative and custodial
staff (contracted and not), and members of the academic precariat. The demands placed on
UNC–Chapel Hill by its student activists – while incredibly specific, thorough (and ideal-
istic) –nonetheless exemplify the subjectivity of protectiveness and resistance.

We DEMAND a University and hospital-wide minimum wage of at least $25.00/hour that is

commensurate with the living costs of downtown Chapel Hill plus full benefits for all workers
regardless of temporary, permanent, part-time, full-time or contracted status. For a household
with a single working adult and three children $32.86 is the full-time minimum wage required for
a family to live decently in Durham/Chapel Hill. People should not be compensated for their
labor so that they can merely get by, but so that they can thrive. We DEMAND that an increase
in wages should never result in a cutting of hours. Workers must be paid enough to live, work,
and care for family in Chapel Hill as white supremacist, patriarchal capitalism has made housing
prices skyrocket and rendered the town unaffordable to one too many. . .We DEMAND that all
workers at the UNC system & UNC Hospitals have the right to unionize and collectively
bargain. We DEMAND that the UNC-System and UNC-Chapel Hill advocate for the right
to unionize and collectively bargain for workers on a state and national level. We DEMAND a
minimum compensation of $15,000 per course for all adjunct faculty.

At the most basic analytic level, a resistance to capitalism, neoliberalism and the corporat-
ization of the university is clear through the demand’s defense of unions, advocacy for a
living wage, condemnation of gentrification, and denunciation of white supremacy.
Cole and Heinecke 105

This is also where Van Stekelenberg and Klandermans’ (2013) model is most visible.
The social psychology of group protest is encompassed in each of the lists of demands.
Student activists identify as a member of a group with shared values and principles – in this
case, students define their “group” or community quite broadly. Furthermore, they define
themselves and their group in direct contrast to neoliberalism, asserting human worth as
something outside of their roles as cogs in the machine of the university. They then feel that
their interests and principles are threatened, which leads to group-based anger and a moti-
vation to take part in protest to protect their principles and express their anger. These steps
can be easily seen in the discourse of resistance – they are tools for resisting the current state
of their world and school.

Creation and remaking community. The last discourse – and most relevant for imagining a new
society, post-neoliberalism – is one of creation and remaking community. The discourse of
creation is grounded in the assumption (by and of student activists) that their flawed aca-
demic communities are worth changing, that they want to be insiders and leaders at their
schools. These demands focused on the heart of a university community: the curriculum and
the learning and living experiences. The discourse of creation and remaking community is
also rooted in democracy and democratic processes (not simply democratic ideals).
One striking aspect of the language in the demands included in this study is the depth and
breadth of knowledge of the academic and campus community and culture. Analytic coding
based on structural levels (rules, goals, policies, the environment, technology) revealed that a
majority of the actions demanded in the documents fell under this paradigm (507 instances,
with every institution represented and an average of more than six instances per document).
A surprising number of demands focused on issues such as departmental status, tenure-
homes, and operational budget. An equal number of demands centered on transparency
and accountability, via regular reports from administrators and actors within governance
structures to student constituencies and bias reporting systems. The last major pattern
within the structural paradigm was mandatory training and new curriculum requirements.
Activists used a variety of terms to encompass training, including: racial competence and
respect training; mandatory social justice workshops; critical racial sensitivity training;
racial competency training; an intensive university-wide training structure. . .on how to
interact appropriately with those from marginalized backgrounds; cultural competency
training; mandatory inclusive consent training; equity training; anti-oppression training;
mandatory intense inclusion and belonging training; and sensitivity training.10 Beyond
training requirements, the demands had an intense focus on new curriculum requirements
for multicultural or ethnic students courses. Students at the University of San Diego offer
an example:

We demand that an Ethnic Studies course be a core curriculum requirement for all students. We
also demand a rigorous reevaluation of the course that currently fulfill the core curriculum
diversity requirement, led by a board comprised of faculty of color who would be compensated
for this service.

Again, these were students who had an insiders’ knowledge of the university, recognizing the
realities of unpaid labor (especially likely to be demanded of faculty members from under-
represented groups), as well as an understanding of the role of curriculum committees. This
106 Policy Futures in Education 18(1)

was consistent across student groups. Demands placed on the University of Oregon, for
instance, included:

Commit to having Ethnic Studies 101 as a graduation requirement. The current multicultural
requirement is not enough. The ethnic studies specific requirement will require students to learn
about the importance of United States history in the context of social inequality and injustice, while
emphasizing the often-overlooked histories of African-American people as well as the histories of
other underrepresented groups in the United States. Ethnic Studies 101 is a critical course that
teaches students the importance of diversity in the United States. Without taking this course,
students are not sufficiently prepared with basic cultural competence skills to navigate the diversi-
fying world. We are committed to working with the Faculty Senate and implementing this demand.

A close examination of this language again reveals the tension between insider and outsider
status. It is clear that the authors of this document took Ethnic Studies 101 and found it a
meaningful (“critical”) experience. In the way that they frame the demand in institutional
terms, the language becomes awkward and unwieldy (“diversifying world”) but also shows
an important level of knowledge about how course requirements come into existence.
The symbolic frame of understanding organizations (Bolman and Deal, 2013) is also
worth considering here. Student demands related to the myths, legends, symbols and
heroes of their institutions were centered around “reclaiming” their school through remov-
ing, renaming, or offering guidelines for future naming/building opportunities. We posit
that these symbolic demands – ranging from the removal of Confederate monuments to the
renaming of an entire school – are another example of insiders using their status to become
more inclusive. Discursively, demands that are based on the symbolic frame of colleges and
universities are straightforward, as the following illustrate:

Rename Calhoun College. Name it and the two new residential colleges after people of
color. (Yale)

Give a name to at least half of as yet unnamed residence halls and academic building in honor of
social and political activists of color. . . (NYU)

The official name of the office should be: Mary Jean Price-Walls Center of Diversity. (Mizzou)

The immediate removal of Nathan Bedford Forrest’s name from Mifcrfddle Tennessee State
University’s ROTC building. (Middle Tennessee State University)

Name the new West Union “Abele Union” after West Campus architect Julian Abele. Erect a
statue in honor of Julian Abele. (Duke)

Change the name of Cutter-Shabazz Hall to Shabazz Hall. The building should celebrate
Blackness and human dignity, not the legacy of Victor Cutter, who was a corporate dictator
for the United Fruit Company in Latin America and the Caribbean. (Dartmouth)

While students’ understandings of academia, and their universities as establishments

of higher education, are not entirely realistic (or accurate), I would argue that instead of
dismissing this language as overly-idealistic, naı̈ve, misguided or idiosyncratic we
Cole and Heinecke 107

should consider how this shows a commitment to and understanding of the ideals of the
academy. In fact, focusing on curricular changes and requirements shows a nuanced and
sophisticated understanding of how institutions of higher education work. Students may be
asking a lot of their schools through these demands, but they are intent on building struc-
tures to keep themselves there. These documents are authoritative, meant to lead and
guide institutions into new, better eras.11 Activists are using these demands as a tool for
asserting belonging.

Summary of results
Using these findings of the discourse analysis, we now offer some indications of a new
social imaginary in higher education, one that is focused on community and justice. This
discourse analysis of contemporary college student activist demands illustrates the ways
in which student activists understand, resist and critique neoliberalism, and suggest some
ideas about the post-neoliberal imaginary. Their critiques of the structure of higher edu-
cation indicate a sophisticated understanding of the current socio-political, cultural, and
economic realities. Their demands reveal an optimistic, creative imagination that could
serve educators well as they grapple with taking the first steps toward this reality. Using
the students’ critiques, methods and demands as a starting point, this study offers a
potential blueprint for thinking about a new social imaginary in higher education, one
that is focused on community and justice. We summarize below four outcomes from the
analysis, and offer a graphic (Figure 4) that illustrates the ways that discourses inform the
theoretical frames on which we based our analysis.

1. The new post-liberal social imaginary in higher education will explicitly focus on racial
justice and racial equity and reparations. Student groups made these demands on many
different organizational levels, from specific budget requests and calls for reparation via
affirmative action to a focus on policing and criminal justice, as these demands from the
University of Oregon and the University of Cincinnati illustrate:

Commit to creating a Funding Resource and Scholarship initiative that is designed exclusively to
support and meet the unique needs of students that identify as Black/African-American.

a. The Diversity Excellence Scholarship is NOT enough.

b. Due to the state/national population imbalance, it is simply unfair for Black students to
compete with low income white students and students who identify as Hispanic/Latino
for the same scholarships. (University of Oregon)
The University of Cincinnati referred to individual cases of possible police misconduct:

Open investigation in Grant, Starling et al. case as a hate crime beginning with IOA (. . .),
Reopen investigation into the murder of Rick Dowdell (. . .).

Student protestors from Cincinnati then continued:

We also demand a recurrent substantial monetary allotment to go to all offices and initiatives
that directly support and impact the recruitment, retention, and matriculation of Black students
on this campus starting in the fiscal year 2017.
108 Policy Futures in Education 18(1)

Figure 4. The discourses of critique/alienation and resistance/revolution correspond to steps in the the-
oretical model of the social psychology of protest, but the creation/rebuilding community discourseis where
student activists articulate a new social imaginary of higher education that is postneoliberal, justice-oriented,
intersectional, democratic, and inclusive (adapted from van Stekelenberg and Klandermans, 2013).

2. The new post-liberal social imaginary will be intersectional and focused on

dismantling the kyriarchy, including issues related to living wage, actions against
sexual violence:

The university has come to understand the importance of addressing social issues as a means
of creating inclusive and safe communities. As seen through the “Can I Kiss You?” program-
ming during orientation week and the campus-wide effort to implement training in relation to
mental health, there is the capacity to prioritize large scale programming on anti-
oppression. (Guelph)

At the University of Kansas student demands included:

Remove all professors who assault, sexually harass, or engage in abusive relationships with
students. Apply this policy retroactively as well, specifically to Dr. [name redacted by the
Journal-World]. Immediate expulsion of those that commit sexual assault.
Cole and Heinecke 109

3. The new social imaginary includes a more democratic process of decision-making that
includes diverse representation of students and faculty. For instance, at the University of
Virginia student demands included:

Faculty and administrative search committees must be representative. Departments should not
move onto the next step in the faculty search process until its initial applicant pool is at least as
representative of each racial demographic as the national pool. The University should revamp its
implicit bias and diversity trainings. Currently the diversity-training module that search com-
mittee members must complete is inadequate. It often refers to the federal mandates regulating
hiring underrepresented minorities, implying that hiring minority applicants is at least in some
part due to legal obligation and not out of the necessity for academia and scholarship to include
diverse perspectives if it is to truly be excellent.

At Guelph University:

Simply posting that there will be community consultations is ineffective as it fails to account for
our existing alienation from the process as a barrier to participation. We wish to see proactive
outreach to campus organizations that moves beyond tokenism, as well as the establishment of
incentives to encourage students to actively be involved in this process. We expect to be involved
immediately and for this underrepresentation to be addressed by 2016-2017

4. The new higher education will be an inclusive community – encompassing not only those
who have access to it, but also those who work in it, live near it, rely on it as a space for
the public sphere, etc. This community is set up to support all of its members, including
supporting undocumented, first-generation students, African-American students; sup-
porting community-engaged scholarship and research; tenure for underrepresented fac-
ulty; community relations and opposing gentrification, etc. For example, Washington
University of St. Louis student demands included (our emphases):
• Revise curricula to require courses that address the social, political, economic, and history
and landscape of St. Louis.
• Incentivize community-based participatory research on the St. Louis region for faculty and
students by the establishment of awards or other forms of recognition for those whose
research directly benefits our local community.
• Widen the pipeline to higher education for local K-12 students, many of whom attend schools
with under-resourced college prep programs
• Revise protocol for future development on properties owned by the university in the greater
St. Louis area.

Discussion
Contemporary college student activism has been particularly visible and effective in the past
few years at US institutions of higher education and is projected only to grow in future years
(Eagan et al., 2015). Almost all of these protests and demands, while explicitly linked to
social and racial justice, are sites (implicit or explicit) of resistance to the neoliberalization of
the academy. These activists are imagining a post-neoliberal society, and are building their
demands around these potential new social imaginaries.
110 Policy Futures in Education 18(1)

The overlapping discourses of alienation, belonging and resistance show that student
activists occupy different positions (sometimes at odds with each other) in relation to
their schools. Ultimately, however, an analysis of these recent demands from campus
protestors shows that students are invested in their communities, and feel entitled to
meaningful, respectful experiences and interactions on their campuses. They have a knowl-
edge of their institutions (and higher education in general) that is impressive in its depth
and breadth and they have expectations that are lofty but which embody a new social
imaginary. They push back against the sense that neoliberalization and corporatization in
the academy are inevitable and irreversible, and they embody critical thinking and
civic engagement.
In doing so these activists are engaging in what Shahjahan (2014) refers to as “resistance
as subversion”, “resistance as opposition”, and “transformational resistance” focused on
new ways of being, knowing and doing in higher education. While faculty, staff and admin-
istrators may not be able to concede to all (or even the majority) of student demands, it
would be a mistake to ignore or dismiss them. In making their demands, students are
thinking about what could and should be, and translating those thoughts into concrete
actions. According to Monbiot (2016),

Those who tell the stories run the world. Politics has failed through a lack of competing
narratives. The key task now is to tell a new story of what it is to be human in the 21st century.
(Monbiot, 2016)

The new story includes a vision about human beings as social and unselfish, which counter-
acts the neoliberal definition of the human being as atomized and self-interested. According
to Monbiot (2016), “Hayek told us who we were, and he was wrong. Our first step is to
reclaim our humanity.” The BLM student demands are moving the post-neoliberal imagi-
nary in that direction. These protests are leading us from “There Is No Alternative” (TINA)
to “Another World is Possible” (AWIP). As Hikel noted, “The key point . . .is that the
neoliberal model was made – intentionally – by specific people. And because it was made
by people, then it can be undone by people. It is not a force of nature, and it is not inev-
itable, another world is possible” (Hickel, 2012).
The student protests and demands discussed here remind us that,

what peeks through the streets or in the occupied classroom. . .or in the day-to-day operations of
the university itself, is not the privatized university, or even the “public university” of old, but
rather the university to come, the university of the commons.(Haivens, 2014: 150)

The students represent an “imagination grounded in hope and resulting from cognizance
of the deep structures that underlie those institutions world-wide” (Mayo, 2014: 567).
They present a discourse that is an alternative to the current discourses of the entrepre-
neurial university, the competitive university, the research and development university, the
accountable university. These are discourses that are framed by economic thinking, an
imagination that counters this neoliberal thinking. While faculty, staff and administrators
may not be able to concede to all (or even the majority) of student demands, it would be a
mistake to ignore or dismiss them. With their demands, students are thinking about what
could and should be, and translating those thoughts into concrete actions.
Cole and Heinecke 111

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declare no potential conflicts of interest to exist with respect to the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.

Notes
1. Specifically, North American (non-USA), European and Latin American student activism has
focused explicitly on anti-neoliberal goals (resisting casualization of staff, rising tuition fees, polic-
ing of student resistance, “securitization” of university space in many countries espcailly since the
onset of the economic crisis in 2008). See: Bégin-Caouette and Jones (2014); Dean (2015);
Espinoza et al., (2016); Ibrahim (2011); Salter and Kay (2011); Smeltzer and Hearn (2014);
Solomon and Palmieri (2011); Somma (2012); Verkaaik (2015); Webb (2015); and Zuidhof (2015).
2. Protests kicked off at the University of Missouri after a series of disturbing racist incidents on
campus. Student activists’ attempts to confront University President Tom Wolfe at the homecom-
ing parade were not fruitful (Wolfe ignored them as his driver drove around them) and the ensuing
protests included a mass demonstration, faculty walk out, graduate student hunger strike, and a
larger strike by the University’s football team. The President and Chancellor resigned on 9
November 2015 and that same day the university’s governing board announced that a series of
diversity initiatives would go into effect within the next three months. The Mizzou protests have
been “attributed to sparking a wave of protests on campuses nationwide over racism on college
and free speech” and the movement led by Concerned Student 1950 (a group of black student
activists named for the year black students were first admitted to Mizzou) has been seen as hugely
significant: “The seismic nature of the movement leading to Monday’s announcement [of the
Board] cannot be overstated” (Horowitz, 2015).
3. In April 2015 a group of students from underrepresented groups wrote to the president with a list
of demands (mostly centered on greater faculty diversity and funding for multicultural services).
Months later, with the national movement prompting new attention on the racial tensions at
the school, protestors reissued the same demands in an open letter (Wong and Green, 2016).
Then, Mary Spellman, Dean of Students at Claremont McKenna College, responded to a
Latino student who had written an op-ed in the campus newspaper criticizing the campus for
its lack of support for marginalized students by pledging to better support students who “don’t fit
[the] CMC mold” (Watanbe and Rivera, 2015; Wong and Green, 2016). This sparked campus-
wide protests and on 13 November 2015 she resigned.
4. In the case of Princeton, the president agreed to consider and respond positively to some demands,
such as instituting a required diversity course and creating a cultural space for marginalized
students; but the proposed name change of the Woodrow Wilson School of International and
Public Affairs was rejected by the governing board and other students (specifically, the editorial
board of The Daily Princetonian).
5. Many studies on campus activism have focused on identity and development of activists them-
selves. Other researchers have systematically examined relationships that activists have with fac-
ulty, administration and/or institutions. The intersection of democratic theory and how student
activism relates to the overarching purposes of higher education is also an important facet of this
research. Much of the research on student activism has been based on case studies (see Astin et al.,
1975; Rhoads, 1998).
Development and identity of student activists. Past research has explored the ways that young
112 Policy Futures in Education 18(1)

female activists of color developed a path to activism, experienced marginalization, and created
safe spaces and concluding that student activists have a deep understanding of oppression
(Linder and Rodriguez, 2012). Linder and Rodriguez (2012) also argue that student activists
can provide rich, thoughtful descriptions and understandings of marginalization and
oppression if researchers are willing to capitalize on their expertise and willingness to engage.
Heinecke et al., (2016) found that minority student activism occurs within a university culture and
represents a claim for inclusion in predominantly white institutions dominated by cultures of
neoliberalism. Renn (2007) illuminated an involvement-identity cycle of LGBTQI college student
leader activists and found that increased leadership led to a more public LGBTQI identity and a
merged gender/sexual orientation identity. Another example of the activism and student develop-
ment lens is Biddix’s (2010) work on the ways that campus activists (especially women) relied on
technology to establish personal connections and promote deeper development with the cause
while grappling with the very real downsides of open online communication (harassment, bullying,
etc.).
Relationship between activists and institutions/administration. Kezar (2010) identified the ways
that student activists partner with faculty and staff and highlighted the ways that such partnership
can be supported and effective. The work that student activists do can also be linked to
some current trends in the academy like service learning and community-based action
research (Kezar, 2010). Research has also identified the specific ways that student activists see
administrators (as gatekeepers, antagonists, supporters or absentee leaders) (Ropers-Huilman
et al., 2005). Furthermore, this study (Ropers-Huilman et al., 2005) posited that student
activists often misunderstand the roles and responsibilities of administrators as leaders in
higher education.
6. This chart is a synthesis based on the concepts of: Brown, 2015; Haiven, 2014; Heinecke et al.,
2016; Risager and Thorup, 2016; and Zuidhof, 2015.
7. The Atlanta University Center Consortium (AUC Consortium) consists of four historically black
colleges and universities (HBCUs) in Atlanta, Georgia, including: Clark Atlanta University,
Spelman College, Morehouse College and Morehouse School of Medicine.
8. “these grievances” refers to an earlier paragraph detailing police brutality, disenfranchisement,
and erasure of individuals in the West End of Atlanta.
9. Thirty-three documents explicitly included “gender” as a key aspect in their demands.
10. Language from Yale, Wesleyan, Vanderbilt, University of Wyoming, University of Virginia,
University of Southern California, University of South Carolina, UNC-Greensboro, University
of Kansas, University of Baltimore, and Southern Methodist University.
11. Interestingly, a small portion (representative of 17 schools) of the analyzed demands specifically
reference alumni and alumni giving. Using Washington University in St. Louis as an example, we
would argue that this is just another facet of being a leader in a flawed community: Encourage
alumni to invest in social justice oriented programs, projects, and research. Create an option for
alumni to donate to this group of recipients in addition to specific programs within it.

References
Astin A, Astin H, Bayer A and Biscotti A (1975) The Power of Protest? San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Bégin-Caouette O and Jones GA (2014) Student organizations in Canada and Quebec’s ‘Maple
Spring’. Studies in Higher Education 39(3): 412–425.
Biddix JP (2010) Technology uses in campus activism from 2000 to 2008: Implications for civic learn-
ing. Journal of College Student Development 51(6): 679–693.
Bolman LG and Deal TE (2013) Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership (5th ed.)
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Cole and Heinecke 113

Brenkman J (2000) Extreme criticism. In: J Butler, J Guilaery and K Thomas (eds) What’s Left Of
Theory. New York: Routledge, pp. 114–137.
Broadhurst CJ (2014) Campus activism in the 21st century: A historical framing. New Directions for
Higher Education 2014(167): 3–15.
Brown W (2016) Sacrificial citizenship: Neoliberalism, human capital, and austerity politics.
Constellations 23(1): 3–14.
Brown W (2015) Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution. New York: Zone Books.
Cabalin C (2012) Neoliberal education and student movements in Chile: Inequalities and malaise.
Policy Futures in Education 10(2): 219–228.
Cahill D (2011) Beyond neoliberalism? Crisis and the prospects for progressive alternatives.
New Political Science 33(4): pp. 479–492.
Carey K (2016) On cleaning: Student activism in the corporate and imperial university. Open Library
of Humanities 2(2): e4. DOI: http://doi.org/10.16995/olh.92
Chilton P (2004) Analyzing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Arnold.
Carroll W (2010) Crisis, movements, counter-hegemony: In search of the new. Interface: A Journal For
and About Social Movements 2(2): 168–198.
Dean J (2015) ‘Angelic Spirits of “68”: Memories of 60s’ Radicalism in Responses to the 2010–11 UK
Student Protests. Contemporary British History, 1–21.
Eagan K, Stolzenberg B, Bates A, Aragon M, Suchard M and Rios-Aguilar C (2015) The American
freshman: National norms Fall 2015. Cooperative Institutional Research Program at UCLA.
Available at: http://www.heri.ucla.edu/monographs/TheAmericanFreshman2015.pdf
Ellin A (2016) Meet the new student activists. New York Times, February 7, 2016 edition. Available at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/education/edlife/the-new-student-activists.html
Espinoza O, Gonzáles LE and McGinn N (2016) The student movement in Chile and the neo-liberal
agenda in crisis. In: Fadaee S (ed.) Understanding Southern Social Movements (pp. 168–185).
Abingdon & New York, NY: Routledge.
Fairclough N (1995) Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Harlow: Pearson
Education Limited.
Fairclough N (2003) Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis in Social Research. London: Routledge.
Fairclough N (2005) Peripheral vision: Discourse analysis in organization studies – the case for critical
realism. Organization Studies 26(6): 915–939.
Fairclough N (2010) Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language (2nd ed.).
Harlow: Pearson.
Fear F (2015) Dearest Dorothy, who would have ever thought?!*. Future U. BLOG: Neoliberalism
Comes to Higher Education. Available at: http://futureu.education/uncategorized/neoliberalism-
comes-to-higher-education/
Fischman G (2009) Introduction. In: D Hill (ed.) Contesting Neoliberal Education: Public Resistance
and Collective Advance. New York: Routledge, pp. 1–8.
Giroux H (2002) Neoliberalism, corporate culture, and the promise of higher education: The university
as a democratic public sphere. Harvard Educational Review 72(4): 425–464.
Haiven M (2014) Crises of Imagination, Crises of Power. London: Zed Books.
Hamrick FA (1998) Democratic citizenship and student activism. Journal of College Student
Development 39(5): 449–460.
Heinecke W, Cole R, Han I and Mthethwa L (2016) Student activism as civic engagement. In: Mitchell
T and Soria K (eds) Civic Engagement and Community Service at Research Universities: Engaging
Undergraduates for Social Justice, Social Change and Responsible Citizenship. London, UK:
Palgrave-Macmillan, pp. 219–239.
Heracleous L (2006) Discourse, Interpretation, Organization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hickel J (2012) A short history of neoliberalism (and how we can fix it). New Left Project. Available at:
http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/a_short_history_of_neoliberalism_
and_how_we_can_fix_it
114 Policy Futures in Education 18(1)

Horowitz J (2015) Missouri’s hunger strike was the tip of the iceberg. Identities Mic. Available at:
https://mic.com/articles/128211/missouri-s-hunger-strike-was-the-tip-of-the-iceberg-here-s-what-
needs-to-happen-next#.PVQpl1J3X
Hunter DE (1988) Student activism: Growth through rebellion. In: KM Miser (ed.) Student Affairs and
Campus Dissent: Reflection of the Past and Challenge for the Future. Washington, DC: National
Association of Student Personnel Administrators, pp. 23–40.
Janks H (1997) Critical discourse analysis as a research tool. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics
of Education 18(4): 329–342.
Kelley R (2016) Black study, Black struggle. Boston Review 07 March. Available at: http://bostonre
view.net/forum/robin-d-g-kelley-black-study-black-struggle
Kezar A (2010) Faculty and staff partnering with student activists: Unexplored terrains of interaction
and development. Journal of College Student Development 51(5): 451–480.
Kezar A and Maxey D (2014) Collective action on campus toward student development and demo-
cratic engagement. In: C Broadhurst and G Martin (eds) “Radical Academia?” Understanding the
Climates for Campus Activists. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass, pp. 31–42.
Linder C and Rodriguez KL (2012) Learning from the experiences of self-identified women of color
activists. Journal of College Student Development 53(3): 383–398.
Mayo P (2014) Imagining the university. International Journal of Lifelong Education 33(4): 566–568.
Monbiot G (2016) Neoliberalism: The ideology at the root of all our problems. The Guardian, 15 April.
Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-
george-monbiot
Nelson C (2008) Resistance is not futile [Foreword]. In: M Bousquet (ed.)How The University Works:
Higher Education and the Low-wage Nation. New York: NYU Press, pp. xiii–xviii.
Newfield C (2011) Unmaking the Public University: The Forty-Year Assault on the Middle Class.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Pauly M and Andrews B (2015) Campus protests are spreading like wildfire. Mother Jones. Available
at: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/11/missouri-student-protests-racism
Renn KA (2007) LGBT student leaders and queer activists: Identities of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans-
gender, and queer identified college student leaders and activists. Journal of College Student
Development 48(3): 311–330.
Rhoads RA (2016) Student activism, diversity, and the struggle for a just society. Journal of Diversity
in Higher Education 9(3): 189–202.
Rhoads R (1998) Freedom’s Web: Student Activism in an Age of Cultural Diversity. Baltimore, OH:
Johns Hopkins University Press.
Risager BS and Thorup M (2016) Protesting the neoliberal university: The Danish student move-
ment ‘A Different University’. Interface: A Journal For and About Social Movements
8(1): 7–33.
Ropers-Huilman B, Carwile L and Barnett K (2005) Student activists’ characterizations of adminis-
trators in higher education: Perceptions of power in “the system”. Review of Higher Education
28(3): 295–312.
Salter L and Kay JB (2011) The UWE Student Occupation. Social Movement Studies 10(4): 423–429.
Shahjahan RA (2014) From ‘no’ to ‘yes’: Postcolonial perspectives on resistance to neoliberal higher
education. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 35(2): 219–232.
Slocum J and Rhoads RA (2009) Faculty and student engagement in the Argentine grassroots rebel-
lion: Toward a democratic and emancipatory vision of the university. Higher Education
57(1): 85–105.
Smeltzer S and Hearn A (2014) Student rights in an age of austerity? ‘security’, freedom of expression
and the neoliberal university. Social Movement Studies 14(3): 352–358.
Solomon C and Palmieri T (2011) Springtime: The New Student Rebellions. London: Verso.
Somma NM (2012) The Chilean student movement of 2011-2012: Challenging the marketization of
education. Interface: A Journal for and about Social Movements 4(2): 296–309.
Cole and Heinecke 115

Tsui L (2000) Effects of campus culture on students’ critical thinking. Review of Higher Education
23(4): 421–441.
Van Stekelenberg J and Klandermans B (2013) The social psychology of protest. Current Sociology 61
(5-6): 886–905.
Verkaaik O (2015) When participation begins with an occupation: some thoughts on the revolt against
the neoliberal university of amsterdam. Etnofoor 27(1): 143–150.
Watanbe T and Rivera C (2015) Amid racial bias protests, Claremont McKenna dean resigns. Los
Angeles Times, November 12, 2015. Available at: http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-
claremont-marches-20151112-story.html
Webb C (2015) Impatient for Justice. Jacobin. Available at: https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/12/
south-africa-fees-must-fall-jacobzuma-apartheid/
White K (2016) Black lives on campuses matter: The rise of the new black student movement.
Soundings: A Journal of Politics and Culture 63(1): 86–97.
Wong A and Green A (2016) Campus politics: A cheat sheet. The Atlantic Monthly. Available at:
http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/04/campus-protest-roundup/417570/
Zuidhof PW (2015) Towards a post-neoliberal university: Protest and complicity. Krisis: Journal for
Contemporary Philosophy 34(2): 49–55.

Rose M Cole is a PhD Candidate at the University of Virginia at the Center for the Study of
Higher Education. She received her Masters in Public Administration from West Virginia
University and worked for both the honors college and leadership studies program at that
same institution before pursuing her doctoral studies. Her research interests include glob-
alization, diversity and equity, and citizenship and civic engagement in higher education.

Walter F Heinecke, PhD, is an Associate Professor of research, statistics and evaluation at

the Curry School of Education at the University of Virginia. He received his doctorate from
Arizona State University in educational policy studies. He teaches courses in research,
evaluation and educational policy studies. He is the co-author of Political Spectacle and
the Fate of AmericanSchools and Educational Leadership in an Age of Accountability. His
research interests include policy implementation, diversity and equity in education and cit-
izenship, democracy and policy.
116 Policy Futures in Education 18(1)

Appendix 1

Table A.1. List of schools where demands where made, as considered in the present study. Available at:
www.thedemands.org
1 University of Missouri 42 Occidental College
2 Amherst College 43 Portland State University
3 Atlanta University Center Consortium* 44 Princeton University
4 ATLBSU 45 Purdue University
5 Babson College 46 Ryerson University
6 Bard College 47 Santa Clara University
7 Beloit College 48 San Francisco State University
8 Boston College 49 Sarah Lawrence College
9 Bowling Green State University 50 Simmons College
10 Brandeis University 51 Southern Methodist University
11 Brown University 52 St. Louis Christian College
12 California State University, East Bay 53 St. Louis University
13 California State University, Los Angeles 54 SUNY New Paltz
14 California Polytechnic State University 55 SUNY Potsdam
15 Claremont McKenna College 56 Towson University
16 Clemson University 57 Tulane University
17 Colgate University 58 Tufts University
18 Dartmouth College 59 University of Alabama
19 Duke University 60 University of Baltimore
20 Eastern Michigan University 61 University of California, Berkeley
21 Emmanuel College 62 University of California, Irvine
22 Emory University 63 UCLA
23 Georgia Southern University 64 University of Connecticut
24 Grinnell College 65 University of Cincinnati
25 Guilford College 66 University of Kansas
26 Hamilton College 67 University of Michigan
27 Harvard University 68 University of North Carolina at Greensboro
28 Howard University 69 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
29 Ithaca College 70 University of Oregon
30 John Carroll University 71 University of San Diego
31 Johns Hopkins University 72 University of San Francisco
32 Kennesaw State University 73 University of South Carolina
33 Lewis and Clark College 74 University of Southern California
34 Loyola University Maryland 75 University of Virginia
35 Macalester College 76 University of Wyoming
36 Michigan State University 77 Vanderbilt University
37 Middle Tennessee State 78 Virginia Commonwealth University
38 Missouri State University 79 Washington University in St. Louis
39 Northern Arizona University 80 Webster University
40 Notre Dame of Maryland University 81 Wesleyan University Demands
41 New York University 82 Yale University
*
Morehouse, Spelman, Clark Atlanta, ITC.