Washington, D.C. – Today, Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, a senior member of the Education and the Workforce Committee, asked Department of Education Secretary Linda McMahon about Harvard University's crisis of ideological diversity and the department's response to the challenges of AI technology.
Watch her full line of questioning here.
Read a full transcript of her line of questioning below:
Congresswoman Stefanik: I want to follow up on my colleague across the aisles, back and forth where you didn't have an opportunity to answer the question. As you know, I've been very engaged in leading this effort in terms of holding Harvard accountable. We saw the scourge of antisemitism after the Hamas attacks on October 7, and Harvard failed in every respect to enforce the rules to protect Jewish students. And over the course of our investigation, it was revealed that there was antisemitism deep in the office of DEI at Harvard for their failure to respond to Jewish students, and it highlighted this issue of a failure of ideological diversity. I wanted to add some more details to what you pointed out, less than 3 percent of the Harvard faculty are conservative, and this is a challenge in education writ large. According to the Harvard Crimson, as of 1989, the ratio was 2 to 1, liberal to conservative. By 2017 it was 5 to 1. And then as of 2023, it's 26 to 1. So when we talk about ideological diversity, it is a crisis at Harvard. Can you further elaborate on that?
Secretary McMahon: Well, just agreeing with what you said, when, by their own statistics, it is clear that they don't have diversity viewpoint, and I believe, and as I mentioned a little bit earlier, the fact that Harvard had already replaced its head, or looking to replace its head of Middle East Studies recognizing that they already had an issue. I think it's indicative that Harvard, even before we were initiating our job. Well, I actually think that we spurred them on. When we started putting teeth in what we were doing, they finally said, 'Okay, we're going to make some changes.' And they did do that shortly after we started our investigation.
Chairwoman Stefanik: And you're spot on, Secretary McMahon. Harvard has failed to save itself. They are responding to the exceptional work of this committee and the accountability measures that this administration has put into place. I want to thank you for your strong leadership. I want to thank President Trump for his strong leadership. I care deeply about this. As an alumna of Harvard and as the first member of my immediate family to have that opportunity, we want to make sure these institutions are excellent for generations to come. My follow up, which is on a different subject, this has come up in virtually every meeting that I've had, whether it's with university presidents, professors or students, is the challenge of AI and academic integrity in the classroom. Can you talk about the Department's approach in terms of how to harness the benefits of this technology, but also make sure that we are learning the basics in the classroom and have academic integrity?
Secretary McMahon: I think AI is probably one of the - it's so overwhelming with the abilities that it can bring, but it also has a downside in dangers. We want to make sure that AI is not, you know, leading to false essays or papers or studies that students are turning in. However, when I looked at K through 12 education, and I've seen some of the tutorial benefits for individual studies through AI, I think it brings so much to the table that we can offer students who are accomplishing more in the classroom, who or who aren't accomplishing as much by that one on one tutorial advantage. So I think we need to harness and capture those opportunities from AI, but at the same time, making sure we understand, and I don't think we even have this much of a handle on it yet, of what some of the dangers of AI can be. And I think that's what's incumbent upon us to look across the board at all of that.
Chairwoman Stefanik: Well, thank you for that. And my last question, and this is primarily for K through 12, and I think about this both as a policymaker, but as a mom as my young three-year-old, who is finishing pre K3 but screen time for our kids and the dangers of huge amounts of screen time, I want to credit my colleague, Kevin Kiley, who's host a hearing on this next week? Can you discuss the administration and the department's approach to tackling this very concerning issue that has had huge impacts on the mental health but also the focus of our kids?
Secretary McMahon: Well, and I do think this is really at state level, and there are governors who are, you know, promoting policies, or superintendents who are put in policies in their local areas that say, you know, 'bell to bell in schools, no devices.' So that students aren't distracted, you know, from what they're doing. I think parents at home need to look at the amount of screen time that their children. This is a great deal of parental responsibility as well. And we, you know, we've looked at different aspects, I've seen reports of more and more screen time, which then reduces your ability to focus and have attention for your subject. So while there is an entertainment value and information value to screen time, it's not always - I think less could be more.
Chairwoman Stefanik: Thank you so much, Secretary McMahon, for your service, for the tremendous work you're doing for students across the country.
###
