Comments for Wesleyan 2020

Comment on Wesleyan 2020 Update by Fred Taylor

Fred Taylor — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 21:05:33 +0000

Excellent update on the mission/challenges. Loved the “our enemy is complacency.” Always true. You have established a sense of measured urgency to fight compacency. Your efforts to “energize the distinctive Wesleyan experience” is working. Also like, be “the best institution we can be, by becoming our best self…” If I understand it (not sure) the phrase and comment about the shortcomings of “fabulous idiosyncrasy” is a gem. Great to be an alum and perhaps better to be a current student. Terrific job. Fred Taylor “63

Comment on Wesleyan 2020 Update by Josh '06

Josh '06 — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:15:48 +0000

Besides an opaque reference to “significant investments,” nothing is mentioned about new developments in science at Wesleyan. The University’s size and graduate school distinguishes its science departments from its peer schools (perhaps like no other academic program). Why does the Wesleyan leadership continually hide the sciences? It’s not a liberal arts education if the arts or social sciences are focused on to the exclusion of the natural sciences.

Comment on A Framework for Planning by Rick Garcia ’60

Rick Garcia ’60 — Fri, 18 Mar 2011 23:34:25 +0000

As I see we have to do a lot more with less money to regain Paradise lost. Maybe there is still plenty of room to improve what we have with what we got. For example we could advertise a lot more about our superb teachers. I believe undergrads approaching the 2020s will be looking more for teachers than scholars!. Sometime ago while Dr Butterfield was President we had a tutor system that worked very well. A good idea would be to enhance that system- intoducing students into a learning by doing scheme- thru something we may call a Peer Tutor System. With teaching research besides, Wesleyan could aim at becoming one of the top leaders in the country in university teaching science and technology Any comments? Rick Garcia Class of 1960

Comment on Preliminary Reflections On Planning by Joyce Topshe

Joyce Topshe — Wed, 05 May 2010 12:34:27 +0000

Goal 2, Objective 5 could be enhanced to promote an environmentally sustainable campus including: green buildings, sustainable landscapes, sustainable building operations, recycling, energy conservation, alternative energy sources.

Comment on Preliminary Reflections On Planning by Dave Koruli

Dave Koruli — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 17:44:06 +0000

I am pleased to see Wesleyan continue its commitment to graduate education. There is no question as to the purpose of the University is undergraduate education. However in my years at Wes, I found that the MS. and PhD. students were an integral and important part of the distinctive nature of the intellectual life of the school. Many think of graduate programs as a distraction of purpose, but in my experience they invigorated learning at the highest levels. This is why Amherst and Williams both have made provisions for graduate student interaction with their faculty at other large research institutions. Particularly in the sciences, these students are the repository for specific experimental and theoretical knowledge. They are responsible for challenges to the orthodoxy of faculty and serve to drive everyone to new questions and new modes of thinking. A small but excellent program of graduate education can be both financially responsible and distinguishing of the University community.

Comment on Wesleyan’s Endowment by Alex Snell '95

Alex Snell '95 — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 16:46:14 +0000

Thank you, Joseph, for your thoughtful reply. This article takes for granted that it is important to have a large endowment that is competitive with our “peers.” What benefits we might gain from diverting money away from current needs are unstated. If we took, say, Harvard as our example, it seems the larger the endowment, the larger the opportunity for the shysters running our absurd and fraudulent financial system to squander donors’ money.

Wesleyan need spare no expense to preserve the opportunity for any qualified US kid to earn an education that changes not only her life, but ours.

Comment on Wesleyan’s Endowment by Stephen McCarthy '75

Stephen McCarthy '75 — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 22:26:15 +0000

I really applaud President Roth’s efforts to address two difficult “generational issues” that have frustrated/plagued the University for the better part of 25 years – (a) enlightened gifting and (b) appropriate investment management. Yes, we need to continue to develop and enhance a culture of giving that regularly ranks us close to the top of our peer group (i.e. 57-60% participation rates for the ENTIRE growing alumni base) because all of us receive an outstanding education on which to build interesting careers in diverse fields! In addition, knowing the investment business as I do, we cannot cry over the spilled milk of endowment misallocation/underperformance from 1993-2008 (note: we clearly did not have the level of commitment to alternative investments in QUALITY hedge funds and private equity vehicles that our peer institutions had over that 15 year time horizon!). We have to trust in Michael’s leadership and look forward to significant improvement on both fronts – plus perhaps a transformational gift of $75-100 million from a few key alum – before we can have a level playing field in the endowment arena.

Comment on Wesleyan’s Endowment by Joseph Crivelli '87

Joseph Crivelli '87 — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 13:53:42 +0000

I agree that Wesleyan’s tuition is high, whether or not it compares to our peers’. Some of us dream of the day expendable endowment yields would cover all tuition for all students.

I do believe at some level it’s important to make very detailed comparisons with our peer institutions such as endowment giving and performances – or looking at the endowment resources made available per student (a simple calculation using the number of students). Some of these can also be misleading, however. Swarthmore, for example, has a long history of very conservative spending, raising questions for some professional foundations whether they should give to schools who keep more than they can. Also, they have many fewer students, and many more fewer from minority groups. It’s a different place. Amherst’s endowment, I recall reading, has a large percentage tied to its Folger Shakespeare Library. Ours may, in practice, be more evenly distributed among our library and other resources. And their student body character has also differed significantly from ours; so much so that you might join me in surmising that a large segment of our students — past and future — wouldn’t have chosen nor likely choose there to here. And if you look at how well we’re doing in attracting great students (faculty and administrators, too) year after year, the picture looks even better: the numbers keep going up, we keep bettering ourself. And in any practical estimation we’re a wonderful school. Students are treated to four years of a truly wonderful place to live and learn. In the end, I think we set our own standard and push its limits because its the right thing to do. Not so much because of how we measure up to others. We should continue to tap greater giving, of course, but ultimately because of all we do.

A final note, clever how the graph avoids Red for that low-lying line. But I wouldn’t have swapped colors with Williams for anything. We’re the Red and Black and darn proud of it!

Comment on Wesleyan’s Endowment by richard dranitzke

richard dranitzke — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 02:58:21 +0000

Something seems askance when lines that were so parallel for so long suddenly diverge. Because wae have no facts other than those given above, I cannot judge what factors caused this great disparity. As a Wesleyan alumnus it is more than discouraging to see that our endowment is half that of our peers. To correct the problem one must know the cause and President Roth’s explanation does not seem entirely plausable, unless Wesleyan took several multiples more from the endowment and/or received several multiples less in giving than our peer institutions. If either or both of these is the explanation, how do you account for such a disparity after so long a time with no disparity? Alumni and all other giving should be better handled than this was. Richard Dranitzke ’62

Comment on Wesleyan’s Endowment by Brendan O'Toole '97

Brendan O'Toole '97 — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 22:08:06 +0000

Having served on the Finance Committee of the Board from 95-97, I recall that the Board voted to change both the spending cap and the nature and balance of investment vehicles in the endowment portfolio at exactly the point on the graph where we depart most radically from our peer institutions. Both faculty members and both student members of the Finance committee abstained from voting on that proposal, as none of us supported those changes. Apparently, we had sounder fiscal foresight than the money managers on the Board at the time! Either that or those “alternative investments” really turned out to be dogs.

I am glad to see Wesleyan returning to a conservative policy in this area.