<p>Interesting article on large donations to liberal arts colleges. Discusses capital campaigns at Williams, Middlebury, and Claremont McKenna College.</p>
<p>thanks for posting this arcadia. having visited all 4 LACs mentioned in the past year, I can report that as a "consumer" the capital spending surrounding these big donations does indeed make for good impressions (although CMC's donations mentioned haven't been made tangible quite yet)...the new buildings and infrastructure at Middlebury, Williams & Colgate resulting from some of the mentioned mega-gifts are world-class. I was just at Colgate this weekend admiring their new Ho science center. Although harder to "see" the gifts for faculty and financial aid enhancement should most definitely strengthen these already strong institutions. Go LACs!</p>
<p>In the case of my alma mater, it is money that they don't need, and use mostly (according to their own data) to further subsidize the education of high-income students who could just as well pay for it themselves. I don't think it strengthens them - I actually think it weakens them, making them even less clear-thinking about the public service they think they are providing. The percentage of students receiving need-based aid hasn't changed in years; the increase in financial aid, in the main, reflects greater subsidy of a higher list price. </p>
<p>But I honestly can't say that I think the donors would have likely spent their money better elsewhere.</p>
<p>Thank heavens they have a $1.9 billion dollar endowment they can use for fecal cleanup:</p>
<p>Think they are linked?</p>
<p>(Paresky, for those who don't know, is the new megamillion dollar student center. Guess they were just breaking it in? Or maybe there is a new measure: fecal matter per dollar of endowment.)</p>
<p>"Roughly 60 percent of students said they had seen drunken students vandalize College or personal property. Undesirable consequences also included sexual assault and particularly unruly behavior </p>
<p>For many, this behavior has prompted disappointment and negative responses. “The College is comprised of smart and talented students who could be working on projects, initiatives or further learning in their free time instead of drinking,” said Seth Izen ’08, a member of the Committee on Undergraduate Life. </p>
<p>“It saddens me that a great deal of student productivity and education beyond classroom assignments is lost because of the prevalence of drinking.” </p>
<p>(from the Williams Record, following the publication of the College's own student survey.)</p>
<p>mini: I'm honestly not surprised, given your track record and bitterness, that you would paint the entire student body with a broad stroke -- but you betray your background in critical thinking and analysis with such an agenda. And some students question whether it should all automatically be pinned on Ephs: many students from other colleges, and locals, have been on campus over the past several weekends. And for those who do not follow the links, there have been a handful of pooing incidents -- the vast majority on campus think one is too many.</p>
<p>"to further subsidize the education of high-income students who could just as well pay for it themselves."</p>
<p>So do you think every college/university should be charging $80,000 per year?</p>
<p>"So do you think every college/university should be charging $80,000 per year?"</p>
<p>Amazingly, my guess is that there are plenty of schools who could call in that price tag, and it might not matter that much since they are already way out of the reach of everyone except the very wealthy (for whom the sky is evidently nearly the limit).</p>
<p>"So do you think every college/university should be charging $80,000 per year?"</p>
<p>YES! Absolutely. No question about it. Every PRIVATE college that spends $80k per student should be charging $80k per student for those who can afford it, and heavily subsidizing those who cannot. </p>
<p>"mini: I'm honestly not surprised, given your track record and bitterness,"</p>
<p>That's why I made it a point to quote the college's own officials themselves, and let others come to their own conclusions. </p>
<p>"While we acknowledge that unhealthy drinking patterns are common at schools across the nation, we know that custodians cleaning up 24 biological messes – including six involving feces – in less than two months is not. Director of Campus Life Doug Schiazza’s recent survey of peer institutions confirmed this reality. Staffers at one other NESCAC school expressed shock at even being asked about the topic, and were only able to recall a single case of bio-cleanup on their campus."</p>
<p>""Miles noted that because the bio-cleanup incidents have occurred all over the campus, the inability to target the problem’s source heightens the frustrations related to the issue. “These have been in every neighborhood in every kind of building,” Miles said. “I can’t say that there’s a pattern, because it’s been all over campus, which in some ways is more disturbing.”</p>
<p>If you've got an issue, take it up with Campus Life. Williams is indeed #1. (Would you like the data on the number of WILLIAMS students hospitalized with alcohol poisoning in the past month?)</p>
<p>You would think with a $1.9 billion endowment, and a great psychology problem, this wouldn't be all that unresolvable.</p>
<p>"Would you like the data on the number of WILLIAMS students hospitalized with alcohol poisoning in the past month?"</p>
<p>It doesn't particularly concern me, but I do recall someone (a student possibly?) wondering what it is -- so you might as well go ahead and post it for others to see, since it won't be otherwise published.</p>
<p>"the College's own student survey"</p>
<p>Is this the survey that was conducted in 2004?</p>
<p>"in every neighborhood" -- keep in mind that there are four neighborhoods, and many dorms are not included in the bio-cleanup list.</p>