I rather see this as advocacy. If you strongly feel the need for change, you have to do that in addition to simply doing what they themselves can do.
People do it all the time. Take a look at open source advocacy for example.
Imagine this piece does its job and convinces a lot of people. "Indeed! We need more multicultural philosophy departments!" Now it's a policy debate. Which departments? Which coursework? Do we need to hire and fire to make this change? The question becomes: HOW WILL WE ALLOCATE RESOURCES DIFFERENTLY TO MAKE THIS CHANGE HAPPEN? Do we need to cut government funding from public schools that don't meet some percentage curriculum requirement?
The logical endpoint WOULD BE a dictate even if the op-ed is "just advocacy" right now.
That's the quote the article ends with. Seems like a threat and, frankly, out of place -- and, stronger, than 'advocacy'.