Literature Department Questions Day Grant
Ilan Wurman
Last Updated: 12/3/07 Section: News
- Page 1 of 1
9/28/07
After yesterday's announcement that Claremont McKenna College would receive a $200 million private grant to create a graduate program in finance, the Claremont Independent obtained a letter written by the literature department to President Gann expressing concern over the use of the grant money.
While many faculty and students support the grant, some worry that the $200 million, which amount to nearly half of CMC's current endowment, will undermine the school's mission.
"The mission of the college states that we are a liberal arts college that emphasizes government and economics," say the literature professors in their September 17th letter. "A gift of [this] magnitude risks forcing the focus of the college almost exclusively on economics and, in this particular case, on a particular program within economics, namely finance."
"Given the size and scope of the liberal arts environment of CMC, it seems highly unlikely that such a program [Master of Finance] could be created without focusing most of the college toward that program," the letter adds. "That is not the mission of this college. That would, in effect, distort the college into a single focus trade school. And it is not clear that we would be able to pull it off. We would be neither a liberal arts college nor a trade school but instead an ineffective, unbalanced hybrid."
However, the donor, Robert Day, argues that his grant will make a positive contribution to the school. "This is not to turn the college into a trade school; it's to emphasize leadership," he told the Chronicle of Philanthropy.
President Pamela Gann echoes Day, claiming that the program will advance the mission of the college. In a press release from September 27th, she says that "this tremendous gift advances into the 21st century the legacy the founders gave to CMC, combining the study of liberal arts, economics, and leadership as the best preparation for business innovation, entrepreneurism, and leading complex modern organizations."
Gann has not commented on the academic nature of an education in "leadership." But she does explain that the program is an "innovative vision...designed to educate some of the most talented young people in the world today with the best possible curriculum, internships, and leadership development for preparation to lead in a fast-changing world."
Still, the literature department feels this "best possible curriculum" devalues the humanities. In their letter, the literature faculty pose the question to Gann, "What, precisely, have you or the development office done or planned in a specific for the campaign for the humanities or for the Department of Literature?"
"If Robert Day cannot be convinced to distribute some of his gift to other areas of the college, we believe it is because you are not showing enough leadership to convince him that it is worthwhile to do so," they write.
Indeed, while Gann's administration has pursued growth in departments such as psychology, religious studies, and modern languages, the literature department has lagged behind. The CI previously reported (Dec. 2006, April 2007) that under Gann's tenure the literature department grew by only 14 percent, from an average of 8.6 to 9.8 full-time faculty members. Only the government department has a lower growth rate in terms of faculty hires.
And the literature professors seem to have picked up the slack: using the classroom full-time equivalent measurement, which counts the number of classes taught in each discipline, the number of literature classes grew by 40.9 percent over the same period--the second highest of any department.
"We argued that the grant might--because of its size in relation to the college the endowment of the college (480 million dollars)--distort the culture of the college," Robert Faggen, chair of the literature department and principal author of the letter, told the CI. "There are no plans right now for development in the humanities. There has been no serious interest in fundraising for the humanities. That is seen as 'off-mission.' To me, that is an unfortunate and unbalanced view of any liberal arts college."
Michael Wilner and Charles Johnson contributed to this report.
After yesterday's announcement that Claremont McKenna College would receive a $200 million private grant to create a graduate program in finance, the Claremont Independent obtained a letter written by the literature department to President Gann expressing concern over the use of the grant money.
While many faculty and students support the grant, some worry that the $200 million, which amount to nearly half of CMC's current endowment, will undermine the school's mission.
"The mission of the college states that we are a liberal arts college that emphasizes government and economics," say the literature professors in their September 17th letter. "A gift of [this] magnitude risks forcing the focus of the college almost exclusively on economics and, in this particular case, on a particular program within economics, namely finance."
"Given the size and scope of the liberal arts environment of CMC, it seems highly unlikely that such a program [Master of Finance] could be created without focusing most of the college toward that program," the letter adds. "That is not the mission of this college. That would, in effect, distort the college into a single focus trade school. And it is not clear that we would be able to pull it off. We would be neither a liberal arts college nor a trade school but instead an ineffective, unbalanced hybrid."
However, the donor, Robert Day, argues that his grant will make a positive contribution to the school. "This is not to turn the college into a trade school; it's to emphasize leadership," he told the Chronicle of Philanthropy.
President Pamela Gann echoes Day, claiming that the program will advance the mission of the college. In a press release from September 27th, she says that "this tremendous gift advances into the 21st century the legacy the founders gave to CMC, combining the study of liberal arts, economics, and leadership as the best preparation for business innovation, entrepreneurism, and leading complex modern organizations."
Gann has not commented on the academic nature of an education in "leadership." But she does explain that the program is an "innovative vision...designed to educate some of the most talented young people in the world today with the best possible curriculum, internships, and leadership development for preparation to lead in a fast-changing world."
Still, the literature department feels this "best possible curriculum" devalues the humanities. In their letter, the literature faculty pose the question to Gann, "What, precisely, have you or the development office done or planned in a specific for the campaign for the humanities or for the Department of Literature?"
"If Robert Day cannot be convinced to distribute some of his gift to other areas of the college, we believe it is because you are not showing enough leadership to convince him that it is worthwhile to do so," they write.
Indeed, while Gann's administration has pursued growth in departments such as psychology, religious studies, and modern languages, the literature department has lagged behind. The CI previously reported (Dec. 2006, April 2007) that under Gann's tenure the literature department grew by only 14 percent, from an average of 8.6 to 9.8 full-time faculty members. Only the government department has a lower growth rate in terms of faculty hires.
And the literature professors seem to have picked up the slack: using the classroom full-time equivalent measurement, which counts the number of classes taught in each discipline, the number of literature classes grew by 40.9 percent over the same period--the second highest of any department.
"We argued that the grant might--because of its size in relation to the college the endowment of the college (480 million dollars)--distort the culture of the college," Robert Faggen, chair of the literature department and principal author of the letter, told the CI. "There are no plans right now for development in the humanities. There has been no serious interest in fundraising for the humanities. That is seen as 'off-mission.' To me, that is an unfortunate and unbalanced view of any liberal arts college."
Michael Wilner and Charles Johnson contributed to this report.
Be the first to comment on this story