Traitorous Education

In which a retired professor, a consultant, and a media executive present a birds-eye view of the cratering of academic standards and some ideas about what can be done, centering on an excerpt from their hopefully-forthcoming book. But first, some introductions…

---

Martin Heesacker is a Florida licensed psychologist (PY4611), board certified in counseling psychology, and professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Florida. He is a co-author with Sasha Monaco and Brian P. Higley of the 2024 children's book STEAM Team/WATER Workbook, which helps children and their adult partners learn and implement principles of personal effectiveness.

Dr. Brian P. Higley has taught and consulted at various universities and colleges across the nation. His main focus has been the development of H2O-centered education (HCE), an evidence-based approach to education that emphasizes the integration of learning science into the practice of classroom management. To read an article on HCE from the Journal of Education, click here. To watch an interview about HCE, click here. Dr. Higley can be reached at: brianh@tbb2excellence.com.

Valeria Prudnikova is a Client Success and Partnerships Executive at USA TODAY Co., working with Top Workplaces, companies that listen to their people and put them at the center of decisions to build cultures where teams and performance thrive, all over the country. Previously, she served as a Program Manager within the United Nations, supporting organizational inclusion, innovation, and effectiveness. She holds a master’s degree in international affairs and a bachelor’s degree in psychology.

Lee’s notes:

1. This essay refers to a book that is written but not yet published.

2. As some of you may know, UCSD has been wracked by a (lack of) math preparation scandal for its incoming classes. The short version is this: UCSD has long been a top science U; it admitted students with A’s in high school courses in calculus; and many could not do basic middle school level math. And this story reports that Berkeley has been admitting a higher proportion of students from a high school where few students meet basic state math standards than from another high school where literally 100% hit the top score (5) on the national AP calculus exam.

   Add to this the abandonment of SAT scores by many colleges (which does now seem to be reversing) but also the ongoing abandonment of the GREs for admissions to graduate schools. Then throw in massive grade inflation, and some woke shibboleths, such as the ideas that objectivity and merit are racist, and that “equity” has often been interpreted to mean mandating equal grades and disciplinary actions across groups, or at minimum, no failing grades (whether these problems are primarily vs. merely partially woke-induced is beyond the scope of my intro here).

   Putting all that (and much more) together, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that we have been through an era that looks a lot like a long, slow collapse of rigorous academic standards. Not complete collapse, perhaps, but bad enough.

If you lived here, you’d be home now. Oh, wait…

In this guest essay, Brian, Marty, and Valeria do not address UCSD, Berkeley, or GREs. Instead, they provide insiders’ testimony regarding these types of collapsing standards they have witnessed in their careers.

---

Traitorous Education

Brian Higley, Martin Heesacker and Valeria Prudnikova

This article was written because of Lee Jussim’s very favorable email reaction to being sent a copy of our book, Traitorous Education (excerpts shared below with very minor edits). Traitorous Education is a first-person account of about 20 years’ worth of Brian Higley’s experiences as a college/university faculty member faithfully implementing the science of learning, growth, and change (also known as the scholarship of teaching and learning), only to find his efforts rebuked, rebuffed, and undermined by many students and—on a much more alarming note— various administrators and fellow educators responsible for effective education of students.

From Lee’s email (March 29, 2025):

OMG. Here is a lesson I learned in elementary school… if you are browsing through books looking for one to read, do this. Open the book to 1-2 sections in the middle and just start reading. You will usually be able to tell right away if it is a good book. That lesson has proven true my entire life, which is why I remember it still. So, I did that.  Went to: Chapter Five (School #2): “What’s Your Plan to Ensure that Everyone Gets at Least a C in Your Class?” It was gripping. I almost couldn’t stop reading it…” (personal communication to Martin Heesacker and Brian Higley, March 29, 2025).

Lee was so enthusiastic about our book that he invited us to write a piece about it for Unsafe Science and here we are. Along with sharing Brian’s experiences at various schools across the country, Traitorous Education also unpacks the many logical fallacies infecting our education systems that allow traitorous education (i.e., education that runs counter to what Brian refers to as “the science of life, liberty, and happiness pursuit”) to exist and flourish. The book discusses this well-established science, science that we argue is the bedrock of a truly effective education system. The book also describes how this science is consistently ignored by, attacked by, or unknown to many administrators, educators, and students in higher education. Education systems that run on fallacies (e.g., appeals to emotion, anecdotes, tradition, authority, and the bandwagon) rather than learning science (e.g., the science of self-efficacy, self-determination, life change, and reasoned action) betrays and defrauds students, demeans higher education, and harms our entire culture.

In our book, we argue that American education should center around providing students with the tools necessary for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Education is traitorous when it does the opposite (e.g., conditions students to be anxious, dependent, and incompetent) and thereby infringes on their opportunities to fulfill their fundamental and inalienable rights. The final section of Traitorous Education focuses on practical methods of replacing traitorous education with education excellence (i.e., education that is aligned with the science of life, liberty, and happiness pursuit). This article will center around three excerpts from this book (one from each co-author). This first excerpt was written by Brian Higley, the first author of Traitorous Education. It describes his experiences with resistance to the implementation of the science of life, liberty, and happiness pursuit at one of the schools featured in the book.

The actual denim jacket of Catherine Salmon, who will soon be inducted into the American Academy of Sciences and Letters

Brian’s Excerpt from Chapter Five of Traitorous Education

While teaching during my first semester at School #2, a group of students seemed to struggle with not only basic learning-related activities (e.g., reading the textbook, coming to class, discussing the content of the course), but also with some of what I consider to be basic social norms. For example, I had to remind one student on multiple occasions that he could not just start yelling at me in class when he was upset by something. I told him I was happy to address any of his barriers to learning, but I was not willing to be yelled at when he encountered them.

The students who were not struggling in class (with either basic learning activities or social norms) often seemed to be quite upset—and even embarrassed—by the behavior of some of their classmates. The actions of the students who had trouble with some of the basics of classroom participation even caused a few of their fellow students to apologize to me on a variety of occasions. One even went so far as to say that she felt sorry for me for having to deal with such consistently disregardful behavior. The students who did not consistently yell or act in extremely dismissive ways told me they could not believe what they were witnessing in class on a daily basis. 

As someone who had previously co-facilitated a batterer’s intervention program—and been in rooms filled with domestic violence perpetrators who were forced to come to “class” or go to jail—I was used to managing tough (and even abusive) conversations. Many members of the class I was teaching at School #2 were often more psychologically brutal than the members of the batterer’s intervention groups I helped to lead a few years before. The organizational consultant in me wondered if the school’s (written or unwritten) policies encouraged this sort of behavior or if I just happened to be encountering a significant number of troubled students in this particular class. Was I just unlucky this term, I wondered, or was something strange going on with the entire school? Were other classes more “normal” with regard to student behavior than mine (e.g., less yelling in class and more discussion of course-related content)?  

I believe I may have received the answer to my questions in the form of an email from the Chair of the department at around mid-semester. The email noted that there were quite a few (well-earned, it seemed to me) failing grades in my class and included a request for my plan to ensure that all of my students would receive “at least a C” in my course. The Chair seemed confused and even a bit angry at me when I informed her that I had no such plan.

I could not, I was surprised to have to explain, guarantee that all students would earn a C (or any other grade) in any of my courses. I informed her that, as always, my plan was to provide each student with a variety of routes to success throughout the term, then give them the grade (from A to F) that they had actually earned according to the policies outlined in the syllabus. The Chair’s response to this plan made it clear that following through with it would essentially serve as my resignation letter. So, after turning in my grades at the end of the term, I immediately (and happily) began looking for another school to work at the following semester.

---

This second excerpt is a commentary at the end of Chapter 5 by the second author of Traitorous Education, Martin Heesacker. Brian’s excerpt focuses on the struggle in higher education between grading based on student performance vs. grading based on student preference. This commentary focuses on the fact that even high performing students internalize the fallacious belief that “Everybody has won, and all must have prizes” as the Dodo famously announced after the Caucus Race in Lewis Carroll’s 1865 children’s book Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland. And when those high performing students become teaching assistants, they are unfortunately tempted to yield to student preference, even though they, themselves, have been performance oriented.

Marty’s Commentary on Chapter Five of Traitorous Education

This chapter [Chapter 5] focuses on the many fallacies that can lead educators to fail to hold students accountable and the damage this can cause students, educators, and the culture at large. I thought I would add another example of the damage associated with such fallacies and accountability-related failure here. In my large-enrollment undergraduate class in the psychology of personal growth, I have weekly meetings with my teaching assistants. At Florida, undergraduates nearly all graduated in the top 10% of their high school class. Many come with high school grade point averages over the maximum 4.0 because they take college courses while still in high school, and those college courses come with an additional 1-point GPA boost. The point is these students generally expect to receive good grades in the present (and future) because they have all received good grades in the past. This irrational expectation—good grades in high school do not guarantee good grades in college—can tempt educators (and administrators) to avoid upsetting students by giving them higher grades than they actually earn. This temptation seems to be something my TAs struggle with as well. When they are grading students who are not doing well (e.g., failing to turn in assignments on time), the TAs often seem even more distressed than the struggling students. They will ask me questions like these:  

• “What should I do so they make good grades?” and  

• “Should I call them or email them?”  

After giving certain students the low grades they have earned, my TAs will often say something like, “I feel so bad for giving this person a zero or a low grade.” I used to respond by asking them what led them to feel bad about giving students the grades they have earned. I no longer have to ask this question because across many semesters, their answers are the same: they feel bad giving students the bad grades they have earned because all students are, in my TAs’ minds, supposed to make good grades.  

To help liberate my TAs from this irrational belief, I explain that if the grade in a UF class is not based on the student’s actual performance in class, then the grade is not valid. If the grade is not valid, “successful” completion of that course is meaningless. Completed courses are required to earn a UF degree. If course completion is meaningless, so is the degree. So, if students do not receive the grades that validly represent their performance in their courses, no matter how low or high they are, then the business of granting valid degrees is essentially over. This is because under those conditions, the degrees would cease to be an accurate indicator of enhanced competence in the field. Thus, the meaning and value of every degree ever conferred by UF, past, present, and future, would be diminished. So, the cost of giving certain students better grades than they earned includes a reduction in the value of degrees earned by everyone who ever has—and ever will—graduate from UF. Invalid grades and meaningless diplomas are so costly to an entire culture—who wants to go to doctors whose grades in school were not based on their actual performance in their classes for example—that I believe it would be better to shut down schools than give out unearned diplomas.   

Finally, I share with my distressed TAs that I know bad grades in college are indeed painful. However, they are a relatively low-cost way to learn about personal accountability and consequences early enough in their lives to avoid even more painful consequences later in life (e.g., job loss, divorce, adverse health outcomes, financial ruin, and imprisonment).

---

This third and final Chapter 5 excerpt is another commentary that appears at the end of Chapter 5 but this time by the third author of Traitorous Education, Valeria Prudnikova. Brian, Martin, and Valeria represent three different academic generations. Martin is now a professor emeritus and mentored Brian as a master’s and doctoral student many years ago. Brian is an active faculty member, and Valeria is pursuing her doctoral degree. Brian and Martin mentored Valeria in her undergraduate years and have continued collaborating with her through her completion of a master’s degree and up to the present. What makes Valeria’s comment different is that she has experienced this challenge of performance versus preference as an undergraduate and graduate student, as a teaching assistant, and now as a colleague and co-author. Her multi-lens perspective adds real value to the other two excerpts.

Valeria’s excerpt draws on several conceptual frameworks to examine personal growth, excellence, and relational responsibility. These include the hero’s journey, a model for personal growth and transformation popularized by Joseph Campbell, which describes how individuals separate from unhelpful patterns, engage in challenging learning and transformation, and ultimately return to their communities with new skills and perspectives. The excerpt also references the equality wheel, a relationship framework from the Duluth model that illustrates how growth is supported through connections grounded in mutual respect, trust, shared responsibility, and honest influence. Additionally, Valeria engages with the concept of “the downside of being an expert,” a term discussed in the podcast series Journey Into Excellence (2020, Episode 1), in which Jack Malcolm reflects on how expertise, while valuable, can inadvertently lead to complacency, closed-mindedness, and resistance to new perspectives.

From The Orwelexicon

Valeria’s Commentary on Chapter Five of Traitorous Education

This chapter focuses on the many fallacies that can lead educators to fail to hold students accountable and the damage this can cause students, educators, and the culture at large. Reflecting on my own journey, finding a mentor has been incredibly important. Dr. Brian P. Higley and Dr. Martin Heesacker have served as those fellow journeyers/mentors who emphasize that the path to personal growth and success is not a solitary one, but rather a shared experience. We, as fellow journeyers, are interconnected and influenced by the people around us. By recognizing and embracing the presence of fellow journeyers, we can foster a sense of community and inspire one another to excel and overcome challenges along the way. Drawing strength and inspiration from those who have embarked on similar paths or have achieved excellence, we can gain valuable guidance and encouragement. Shared experiences and mutual support are vital as they provide insights that help us navigate our paths. As we pursue our respective journeys, the mission activation of H2O-centered excellence encourages collaboration, empathy, and support among individuals.

Dr. Higley, Dr. Heesacker, and I often discuss the profound impact of relationships on the hero’s journey, a model for personal growth and transformation popularized by Joseph Campbell that describes how individuals separate from unhelpful patterns, engage in challenging learning and transformation, and ultimately return to their communities with new skills and perspectives. Within this journey toward H2O-centered excellence, fostering healthy connections plays a significant role. We also often discuss the equality wheel, a relationship framework from the Duluth model, further illustrates how growth is supported through connections grounded in mutual respect, trust, shared responsibility, and honest influence. Together, these frameworks emphasize that sustainable excellence is not achieved in isolation, but through relational environments that allow individuals and groups to thrive collectively. These relationships serve as powerful catalysts for personal growth and fulfillment. By nurturing respect and support, individuals build a strong sense of community, and creating such relationships not only enhances personal well-being but also contributes to a broader culture of excellence within communities and organizations.

The chapter also addresses the topic of “the downside of being an expert,” a term discussed in the podcast series Journey into Excellence (2020, Episode 1), where Jack Malcolm reflects on how expertise, while valuable, can inadvertently lead to complacency, closed-mindedness, and resistance to new perspectives. Applied to the hero’s journey towards H2O-centered excellence, this concept highlights the importance of balancing expertise with humility and a continued openness to learning. It sheds light on the potential pitfalls of expertise, such as complacency, closed-mindedness, and reluctance to embrace new perspectives. While expertise brings valuable knowledge and skills, balancing it with humility and a growth mindset is crucial. The hero’s journey towards H2O-centered excellence requires openness to continuous learning, challenging one’s own assumptions, and adapting to new circumstances. Viewing expertise as a steppingstone rather than an endpoint allows for discovering new possibilities, breaking through self-imposed barriers, and continuing the quest for growth and personal transformation.

In summary, true excellence is rooted in an unwavering commitment to personal responsibility. As illustrated in this chapter’s examination of classroom dynamics, institutional expectations, and the consequences of avoiding accountability, there is transformative power in acknowledging one’s role in shaping their journey and the impact of their decisions on personal growth and the world around them. Accepting personal responsibility is critical to achieving excellence and embodies the values of H2O-centered excellence, which stress interconnectedness, adaptability, and continuous improvement. By internalizing this principle, we embark on a heroic path of self-discovery, learning from mistakes, making informed choices, and positively contributing to our lives and the greater community.

---

Commenting

Before commenting, please review my commenting guidelines. They will prevent your comments from being deleted. Here are the core ideas:

1. Don’t attack or insult the author or other commenters.

2. Stay relevant to the post.

3. Keep it short.

4. Do not dominate a comment thread.

5. Do not mindread, its a loser’s game.

6. Don’t tell me how to run Unsafe Science or what to post. (Guest essays are welcome and inquiries about doing one should be submitted by email).