A Storm Brews at UW-Madison Over Dean’s Remarks
The University of Wisconsin-Madison finds itself embroiled in a significant public controversy surrounding Associate Dean Percival Matthews. Reports indicate that Matthews previously described former President Donald Trump as a racist and co-authored an academic paper asserting that the American education system, even mathematics itself, is ‘inherently violent’ toward Black students. This revelation, brought to light by Fox News, has reignited long-standing tensions within higher education regarding the delicate balance between academic freedom and a university’s public image and institutional values.
The Facebook Post That Sparked Outrage
Matthews, who holds the dual role of associate dean for the Office of the Dean and professor in the Human Development Area at UW-Madison, first drew widespread attention following a series of past social media posts and scholarly writings highlighted by Fox News Digital. In a notable January 2018 Facebook post, Matthews directly implied Trump was a racist, stating, ‘What’s on my mind? This: When you get a guy in the ultimate seat of power with a history of racist endeavors who makes not-even-veiled racist comments that a decent portion of the people continue to defend, you’re left wondering what’s left to do.’ He further引用 civil rights leader Malcolm X, suggesting that ‘frustration was fueled by a bald-faced… denial of an undeniable and obvious truth.’ These comments resurfaced years after his initial post, despite his subsequent appointment in April to a newly created role as ‘special advisor for access and community,’ aimed at fostering an inclusive environment at UW-Madison.
Challenging ‘Violence’ in Mathematics Education
Beyond his social media activity, Matthews’ academic work has also come under intense scrutiny. In a research paper co-authored with Pooja Sidney, an associate professor at the University of Kentucky, Matthews argued that systemic educational inequities in America disproportionately marginalize Black students, particularly within mathematics. The paper asserted that this ‘exclusionary narrative continues into the higher grades, with Black children routinely being shut out of advanced mathematics courses despite meeting achievement standards,’ while ‘more privileged White children are sometimes tracked into advanced courses despite failing to meet those standards.’
One of the most contentious sections of the paper posed a provocative question: ‘How can a Black scholar work to improve a system through rigorous empirical research when that system is arguably inherently violent toward Black children, even the ones who excel at all the tests?’ These statements, while grounded in critical race theory, have fueled intense debate. Critics question whether such framing implies hostility toward traditional educational benchmarks or simply serves to highlight deep-seated structural inequities within the system.
Reflections in the Wake of George Floyd’s Murder
Matthews’ writings from 2020 further amplified public discussion. In the aftermath of George Floyd’s murder, he made a Facebook post stating, ‘A legitimate (adv) use of violence can legitimate (vb) use of violence. There are a number of ways to read that sentence.’ In another post from the same year, he wrote, ‘And people are surprised that Minneapolis is burning?’ These comments were interpreted by some as justifying public unrest, while others viewed them as a sociological reflection on the collective anger and racial injustice prevalent at the time, as reported by Fox News.
The University’s Stance
In response to inquiries from Fox News Digital, the University of Wisconsin-Madison publicly distanced itself from Matthews’ personal posts, though without issuing a reprimand. John Lucas, assistant vice chancellor for public affairs and institutional communications, stated, ‘UW-Madison supports free expression and doesn’t comment on the personal social media accounts of its students, faculty or staff.’ Similarly, the University of Kentucky’s office of public relations and strategic communications emphasized faculty independence, asserting that ‘The university wouldn’t have any comment on a faculty member’s scholarly work, which is protected by academic freedom and does not represent any university stance.’
Academic Freedom, Responsibility, and Public Trust
The controversy surrounding Percival Matthews’ remarks has reopened a critical debate within academia: How much caution should educators, particularly those in leadership roles, exercise when their personal expressions might be perceived as reflecting on institutional values? Critics argue that comments like Matthews’ risk exacerbating ideological divides and eroding public trust in higher education as an impartial space. Conversely, defenders maintain that confronting systemic racism, even within fields like mathematics, is a legitimate and necessary academic pursuit, informed by data and lived experiences.
As American universities increasingly navigate the complex interplay of politics, race, and public accountability, the Matthews controversy serves as a poignant example of a broader national struggle. It underscores the ongoing challenge of balancing the fundamental principle of academic freedom with the expectation of impartiality and public trust from institutions of higher learning. Ultimately, the discussion extends beyond one professor’s words, raising fundamental questions about the limits of free thought and its impact on the very fabric of public confidence in academia.