How will the Wren Cross fiasco affect the future of The College?

Colleges and Universities A-Z College of William and Mary
1

<p>I didn't think it was THAT big of a deal but after reading this article: <a href="http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55316%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55316&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>the potential repercussions of the Wren Cross fiasco are seeming very severe.</p>

<p>I knew about the cancellation of the planned $12 million donation but... well here are some quotes from the article:
"'It will take a decade to repair the damage'"</p>

<p>"He said many of those signing the Wren Cross petition now have "turned their backs on the school forever" which indicates a serious failing in relations with alumni."</p>

<p>"'The school sustained serious damage to alumni relations, fundraising and reputation under the current Administration and is in serious danger of falling further in the rankings… The competition is coming up fast and it's all about money.'"</p>

<p>"He said, for example, while competitor University of Virginia saw undergraduate applications increase 10 percent, and Rice was up 15 percent, William and Mary's rose less than one percent. The academic performance of incoming students has dropped, and the law school fell four places, he said."</p>

<p>"'Nichol's loss of the McGlothlin $10-12 [million] bequest may keep the school from reaching the $500 [million] goal by the June 30, 2007, close,' Kyle said."</p>

<p>How much will the fiasco really affect the future of The College?</p>

2

<p>That sounds overly alarmist. Just because one person refused to donate doesn't mean that a huge wave will descend over alumni. As for the admissions problems, I feel that WM needs to find more students to apply. Its name isn't really out there, and when it is, its usually in a negative light. Keep in mind that Yale's early applications dropped close to 20% this year. It's fickle. Now, if it happens again next year, then you might have a story.</p>

3

<p>The thing about admissions is absurd, the stats didn't fall that much if at all. The Law School is 10X better than it used to be, and the fact that this is even being brought up on here is absurd.</p>

4

<p>first, I assume you are familiar with the source that you linked.</p>

<p>now onto the article... I believe the law school was previously tied with a few others, so the multiple place drop is not really accurate.</p>

<p>the performance of incoming students has not dropped. That is incorrect.</p>

<p>What I am really worried about is the word is that Nichol isn't planning on starting a new fundraising drive next year. We should always be in the middle of a fundraising drive.</p>

<p>Some people have withdrawn money, and it hurts. Nichol should not have arbitrarily decided to do that. Hopefully he learned his lesson. He's a good person, just jumped the gun a little on this move.</p>

<p>But yea, W&M will be fine.</p>

5

<p>Nichol shouldn't have withdrawn the cross. Even I was surprised that it would spark that much of a fiasco. But W&M isn't going to fall off the map because of this.</p>

6

<p>This is a lot of hype about nothing. Nichol took a strong principled stand and then worked to a fair compromise once the whiners kicked in. Jefferson would be very proud.</p>

7

<p>I'll bet the Brits thought pretty much the same thing when they read Jefferson's Declaration of Independence, though I'd imagine they used more elegant prose than "hype" and "whiners" - at the very least, it would've been "whinge." </p>

<p>What many found offensive wasn't so much the action itself, but the stealthy way it was done - he acted decisively, all right, after consulting with the only one whose opinions apparently merited consideration - his own. And he felt so strongly that it was a principled and righteous stand that he proudly failed to inform anyone what he'd done. </p>

<p>I think Jefferson would recognize this act of taking unilateral action, completely unfettered by any sense of obligation to discuss or solicit the views of or otherwise inform those who it might affect, as the actions of a tyrant, and was exactly what he was on about when he wrote King George his letter. </p>

<p>No, I doubt Jefferson would be proud...</p>

<p>Ok, histrionics and hyperbole aside, it was or should've been a small, nearly insignificant matter, and had he acted with even a little discretion and sensitivity, it wouldn't have been a problem, and certainly wouldn't have earned the College the surprisingly catchy, but not-very-flattering moniker of "Cross-Snatching College". The reaction was easily predictable, and easily avoided. So, damaging the College's reputation, honor, and finances for no benefit or reason isn't one of President Nichol's finer moments, no matter how much spin you apply. </p>

<p>Fortunately, he is a very smart and eloquent guy, with good intentions, and he'll repair the damage. And meanwhile, I'd gently suggest that those who "defend" the College by disparaging and engaging in ad hominem attacks upon those who were or pretend to be offended, (esp. those whose motives seem simply to be to continue to stoke this fire), are playing right into their hands.</p>

8

<p>Actually Jefferson would be somewhat disappointed in Nichol. Jefferson wouldnt have compromised. He would have told the "whiners" (best descriptive term) that this is America and not Europe and in this country the state cant tell you how to pray. Even if you are in the minority.</p>

<p>nonetheless, Nichol was definitely closer to jefferson when fighting the "United States of the Offended" people who complained.</p>

9

<p>Hmm...it's a church, I wonder why there would be a cross in there. Wow, that's so offensive. And it could have been removed for specific non Christian events, if requested. </p>

<p>Anyway, don't really want to start the debate again. I think everything will be fine, financially and otherwise!</p>

10

<p>no, its a chapel. Know the difference</p>

11

<p>The first (meaning, most accepted) definition from my dictionary:</p>

<p>chapel
1. Building for Christian worship, not a parish-church or cathedral, often without certain privileges normally those of a parish-church.</p>

<p>So even though it's not a church, it's still Christian in definition.</p>

<p>I don't think it's a big deal to have a cross in the chapel, but I also would not withhold my money from the school if they had fully removed it. I just think it was a controversy over something that wasn't a really big deal.</p>

<p>Now, if Dr. Nichols would get this up in arms over the low professor salaries, or the fact that the dorms are not all air conditioned, I could understand that.</p>

12

<p>Its not a big deal in reality but in principle it is a very big deal. The Chapel is available for all students (christian,muslim,Jewish,hindu) or its not. It shouldnt be available mostly to Christians but everyone else, make a request and we will squeeze you in. This is what Jefferson was most proud of, the religious freedom statutes of VA. For his alma mater to violate that would be embarrassing and intellectually dishonest.</p>

<p>BTW, according to Websters online dictionary-</p>

<p>chapel: a subordinate or private place of worship serving a residence or institution. </p>

<p>it doesnt have to be just for one religion like a church.</p>

<p>Also, I wish professors salaries would be raised as well. Let them sweat in the dorms. it builds character. (its official: I'm old now)</p>

13

<p>That's the thing, it was available to everyone, so no one's religious freedom was violated. The cross could be removed if requested. </p>

<p>Yeah, the a/c thing is stupid now: some freshmen dorms have it, some don't.</p>

<p>Back in my day, the only a/c was in the jock fraternity. It was amazing how every athlete at the College had asthma!</p>

14

<p>It was available to Christians as is. It was avaialble to everyone else by making a request to remove the cross. This is a subtle but very significant point. if I were Jewish and without advanced notice wanted to spend 15 minutes in prayer I couldnt use the chapel. Well I could use it but it would be very obvious with the cross at the altar that this wasnt "my place".</p>

<p>Now it is open to everyone at any time. Just like a chapel should be. Kudos to Nichol for strong leadership. If you ran the College by committe you would never accomplish anything.</p>

15

<p>Doctorb,</p>

<p>That's cool, I wasn't aware that it was that big a deal to get the cross removed.</p>

16

<p>doctorb,</p>

<p>i don't know the numbers, but i'd wager that less than 10% of the student population at w&m isn't christian. making silly concessions which have ill-affect for the whole for an extreme minority of a population is a little ridiculous if i say so myself.</p>

<p>with or without the cross, i doubt anyone just "pops into the chapel" for 15 minutes of prayer...</p>

17

<p>jags</p>

<p>In the 4 years I attended, I never went to the Wren Chapel, nor did I ever meet anyone who did, so I can see your point.</p>

18

<p>jags-</p>

<p>your point of view is very shortsighted. Whether it is 1% or 99% is completely irrelevant. Jefferson, Madison, and Franklin all fought for the rights of the minority. ESPECIALLY in religious matters (see letters to the Danbury Baptists). When you govern based on principles they must be followed even if it is inconvenient.</p>

<p>Also, If someone has suffered a loss, struggling through life, or maybe is Muslim and needs to pray at specific times of the day, the Chapel needs to be availablefor them to use. Just b/c you "doubt" it would be used on an impromptu basis doesnt mean it shouldnt be a welcoming place at ALL times for ALL students, not just the majority.</p>

<p>In fact, after 9/11 the Chapel was used widely by the student body and this is what spurred the decision by Nichol. Your comments are more "silly" then a bold and principled decision based on the writings of W&M's most prominent son.</p>

19

<p>how do they track random student use of the chapel? I doubt you have to swipe your ID to get in. As I'm not religious, I don't venture there.</p>

20

<p>For the record, I have a difficult time believing that more than 90% of William and Mary students self-identify as Christian.</p>