“We should streak in front of a tour.”
“We should wrestle in front of a tour.”
“At Wesleyan they actually organize groups of students to streak in front of tours,” said Matt Baum ’10, a streaking enthusiast. “They want to attract only the most liberal students who will be comfortable with that sort of thing.”
What an ingenious technique for student-body-mediated admissions, I thought.
These days, I hear a lot of grumbling about the current administration’s policies: it’s hard to get permission to live off-campus and you can’t apply for it after the specialty housing applications are due; the food is poisonous and they won’t let us off the meal plan; the Res Life Office as a whole makes terrible decisions which seem to have neither rhyme nor reason; the college spends money on superfluous landscaping improvements; they won’t let us have a senior speaker; they don’t care about student government, they are too freaked out about our drinking culture; they won’t even let us throw a decent party – the list goes on.
While many may dismiss these complaints as inevitable (and many of these complaints are doubtless uninformed), there seems to be a general discontent among the student body. Students feel patronized and dismissed by the administration. I don’t remember such feelings on campus during my freshman year. The first inklings began with the administration’s first criticisms of the campus’s alcohol culture. I look around our campus on Thursday and Saturday nights these days and remember how exciting it used to be. By the way, haven’t transports increased since freshman year? And aren’t some of our most well-loved and successful students, also binge drinkers by official standards? It’s these same students – SGA representatives executive board members, national prize winners, double and triple majors and student advisory board chairs from whom I hear consistent complaints regarding the administration.
The problem, as far as I can tell, is that the administration seems more interested in building a brand than in improving the student experience. The flashy camel logo, the variations on the college seal, new walkways, a revamped CamelWeb – are all improvements with no practical value to us, the students. They are more concerned about bad press than with bad student experiences. Thus, we have new logos, but not enough money to keep employing some professors.
The administration has practically expunged all traces of the senior speaker’s plagiarism at last year’s graduation, and has chosen instead not to have a senior speaker at all.
Did they ask the students what they wanted? Did they ask the students what they thought was important? No. Do they care? Leo won’t even take five minutes to ratify a commitment to shared governance with the president of the student body. I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt and say maybe.
On the other hand, can I really blame the administration for its emphasis on attracting better students over coddling current ones? The American educational system is as entrenched as any part of our national culture. Students transfer because things are absolutely miserable or some extraordinary circumstance forces them to leave the college, not because the college is ignoring them.
The challenge for the administration isn’t making us happy, it’s attracting a better student body. So we get flashy new logos and walkways, scandals are avoided or kept secret and every year we get an email from President Higdon about how great the incoming class is. And from our numbers, apparently things are getting better. Every year we hook a better, faster, stronger and statistically superior freshman class.
I don’t doubt these statistics, but what I ask is, are we attracting the students we want? Are we improving the image of the school not for the public or the average prospective student, but only for our future Goldwater, Fulbright and Winthrop Scholars? For our prize-winning students? Or, looking even further ahead, people who are going to be leaders in our society, future politicians, entrepreneurs and doctors? We should also desire students who understand and care about the mission of this college.
Of course, the administration has funded lots of new things, including the Women’s Center and the LGBTQ Center, but then again, they only seem interested in funding things that advance a certain image of the college rather than the broadest desires of the student body. They didn’t pay any attention to the fact that by renovating the basement of Burdick for the Women’s Center, they displaced the Martial Arts, Belly Dancing, Ballroom Dance and Wrestling Clubs, some of which are very active on campus.
They seem to have a vision of where they want to take the college, a vision in which we had no say: a vision we don’t seem to share.
Maybe it hasn’t occurred to them that our desires aren’t going to change anytime soon, and that maybe fulfilling those desires is what will really make this place a better institution.
Maybe they don’t understand that the best and brightest of our students come here not for the beautiful campus or new facilities, nor even for the small class sizes and personal
relationships with professors, but to join a community where the opinions and desires of students are respected and where we have a voice in our education: a voice that is heard and heeded.
I agree wholeheartedly with this article, especially your last part about students coming here for community and shared governance.
“but what I ask is, are we attracting the students we want?”
How about making more athletes tour guides to forward a certain image? We are trying to attract more athletically oriented, business oriented students because from a strategic standpoint these students tend to donate more to their colleges. However, as a former women’s college with no football team, we will never be a hyper-masculine athletically oriented school (because of competition from schools that actually fit that bill). We should reinforce our strengths of community, shared governance, and creativity–these are the only things that make us unique. Further, great students frequently transfer away from Conn–we have a retention issue and it’s because of the substance that is ever more being replaced by flash.
Hopefully the better students in the incoming classes will use their strong minds to create entertainment and community independent of the administration–I have faith in Conn students and my enjoyable social experiences at Conn never relied on the institution.
Great article. Seems like it is one of many in the Voice lately that are justifiably critical the the way in which the college is spending money and directing their energies toward a blander, less dynamic, more academic while less intellectual, college atmosphere.
Well written. Couldn’t have said it better.
I agree wholeheartedly with your article, and would like to add another opinion.
I transfered from Conn last year because, even though I loved the school for many reasons, I felt that Conn was better on paper than it was in person. Many of the things that originally attracted me to the school turned out to be facades. The academics were negatively impacted by underfunding. I was ignored by administrators and neglected by my dean and by ResLife. Frankly, this past year has shown me that Conn lacked the ability to satisfy someone who will actively pursue things that they want or argue an issue that they find important.
A well written piece, and Mr. Stillman is certainly entitled to his opinion.
As a member of Lee’s first class at Connecticut College, I feel as though his leadership is unprecedented and needed more then ever. Anyone in the Classes of 2010 and later, will never know the campus under the “Norman years”, where to put it politically correct, things got out of control. There was financial stability during an economic recession, which is something that unfortunately did not occur at many elite school across the country. Current students argue that the college is more focused on its image then its students. I would lend the argument for that being the case under the Fainstein presidency. There was absolutely no shared governance, president’s office hours, or recognition of student achievement. In 2004, the original centennial strategic plan called for renovations of faculty offices before that of student residence halls. What image does that convey?
If Lee didn’t care, he wouldn’t visit Harris, attend sporting events, or open his home to students. The current assortment of Camels do not know how closed the campus was during the years under Norman Fainstein, and that there are many more options now then a decade ago. Lee has allowed CELS to flourish and grow incredibly, ask your friends at other schools if they are guaranteed a $3,000 stipend after their Junior Year, I doubt many will say yes.
Connecticut College must build a brand in order to compete among the NESCACs and other elite American colleges and universities. If we do not define ourselves through a both a physical and commercial image, how will we as alumni be able to compete? We can not rely only on our wit to get through the complex and intense reality of the job market. Image is everything in 21st century America, and a name and brand for your alma mater will get you much farther in life then you realize today.
In the three years since I received my diploma, I have watched the construction of a new athletic center, seen a library get renovated, modifications to residence halls that resulted in energy savings, and an increase in the amount of financial aid offered to incoming students.
I ask Mr. Stillman the question now, does the current administration care more about its “image”, or the students? It demonstrates that we are financially stable and are able to take on cosmetic work required to preserve the campus and the integrity of programs that ultimate contribute to additional revenue for the college. The administration wants us to do well because they believe in us. That is the message I think Lee Higdon and the administration want to send to you.
“Image is everything in 21st century America, and a name and brand for your alma mater will get you much farther in life then you realize today.”
I didn’t realize that was why people came to connecticut college. For me it’s what I gave up in the hope of attending a college that cared more about its students than its image. But i agree with Guest that a lot of outlets for student opinion are for appearances only. Napkin notes like such a good idea on the tour but try to get something accomplished using them and you’ll feel like Tim Robbins writing letters in the Shawshank Redemption. The same goes for presidential office hours and meet and greets: they’re a good way to work on your networking skills, but try to address an important issue thats been on your mind and its like talking to a spokesman for a cigarette company (an obvious exaggeration but im hard pressed for metaphors).
alumnus i respect your opinion, especially about the comparison to the Norman years, which many of us aren’t really familiar with. But I don’t think we should stop sharing our opinions and settle for what we have just because things are better than they were. We should strive to better ourselves as a school, even if it means criticizing the current agenda of a man who got us where we are. Image is important, but not if it comes at the expense of student participation, freshman retention rates, and overall student happiness (which im sure also has an indirect effect on GPA).
People have been complaining about student apathy on campus and i think its partly because more and more people have thrown in the towel because they’re sick of being ignored. Thank god for the Voice.
I understand your opinion “Conn Student ’12”, because I see a lot of me as an undergraduate in you. I think it’s important to speak out if you think something isn’t right, but at least know that you now have the opportunity to speak. However, Camels also have a reputation to be complainers, and make mountains out of molehills. If you don’t agree, I suggest you google Conn and the screw a lightbulb joke.
There will always be people who transfer out of Connecticut College and students who are unhappy. But it’s the same everywhere you go. If we lived in a utopia, life would be so blase. I learned more from my negative experiences at Connecticut College then I did from the positives. The bad grades made me work harder, and the PICA rejection ultimately led down a different career path (which is probably for the better). Was I upset and angry at the time, of course! Five years later, I’m appreciative for what I’ve been able to do as a result of those failures.
Long story short, Connecticut College taught me the value of perspective. Look back to those who attended Conn in 1986 during the second Fanning Takeover and they will tell you that the school has grown by leaps and bounds. The administration has room for improvement, just like you and me. Life could always be worse, but if you don’t make lemonade from lemons, life will always be sour.
I graduated in 2006, so I tend to agree more with Alumnus. I too recall the widespread unpopularity of President Fainstein. Since graduation, I have watched as Lee Higdon breathed new life into the school and actually interacted with the students. Have I felt that at times that his use of school funds was not what I would have chosen? Of course. But I also recall that by far the most disappointing factor of my Conn experience had nothing to do with the school administration and everything to do with the student body. The overwhelming attitude of the students was negative and whiny. It was difficult at times to enjoy the school because fellow students were always complaining.
On the other hand, I have noticed the obvious branding of the school over the past year or two. I don’t particularly care for the new camel, and I’m seriously sick of being hit up for donations.
I’m just wondering, what is it about Conn that makes it always somehow subpar?
the other thing they need to realize is that when they start cutting things the students want (like the TNEs and FNLs and all the sweet dances we had when I was a freshman), and then turn around and immediately ask me for a donation while handing me my diploma, Im not too compelled to throw money their way after $160,000+ didnt seem to be enough for them.
in other words, keep the students happy and when we’re alum we may want to give back or something
RE this point:
“I don’t doubt these statistics, but what I ask is, are we attracting the students we want? Are we improving the image of the school not for the public or the average prospective student, but only for our future Goldwater, Fulbright and Winthrop Scholars? For our prize-winning students? Or, looking even further ahead, people who are going to be leaders in our society, future politicians, entrepreneurs and doctors? We should also desire students who understand and care about the mission of this college.”
you will learn more about leadership from leading a group of streakers to harrass a tour than you will from four years of studying hard to conform to how you think society wants you to be. Conformity is for the follower, not for the leader. A leader must live in his own reality, look at Barack Obama, case in point. Barack you are my idol!
to clarify I agree with the article whole heartedly, just amplifying on a point raised
Ahh short term memories are great. Anyone remember Claire Guadiani? The student body at Conn has a great deal of power compared to other institutions – I’ll take J board and student Gov and bet that you won’t find that at any state run institution. Its wonderful to see that Conn still attracts vocal outspoken students who are not afraid to voice their opinion – but when the biggest concern is the displacement of the karate and belly dancing club from the Burdick basement I have to give a chuckle. I guess no one remembers the New London development corporation, Pfizer, good old Claire, and the resulting supreme court eminent domain case: Kelo v. The city of New London. Those were the good old days, check out that history if you want an example of some truly shady unethical behavior by a CC president. I can assure you that as an administrator Fainstein and Higdon contrast very sharply with the likes of Claire Gaudiani.
Continue to Rage against the machine, but remember these people absolutely have the student’s best interest in mind – present, past, and future. As an alum, I’m glad to see the level of communication with the alumni has improved greatly under president Higdon. It was non-existent under Fainstein.
I agree with this article entirely. Especially with our honor code, students are accountable to students more than they are to the administration. The school needs to understand that they are accountable to the students, and need to support and encourage them, and help them in all endeavors while at college. What they often do though seems to be plainly targeting and tearing down students they may not particularly like, or who they feel could negatively impact the college’s image in some unclear way.