Students met with University trustees November 11 in a forum designed to encourage open and transparent dialogue. The meeting resulted in a thorough discussion of several issues proposed by students that board members responded to directly.
A lengthy portion of the meeting centered on the establishment of an Endowment Advisory Committee (EAC). Given the recent decision to cut the University’s endowment spending rate from 7.4 percent to 5.5 percent per year, the board was very interested in a student-proposed idea on the subject.
Rob Weinstock ’06 outlined what he thought the benefits of an EAC would be, adding that such committees already exist at peer schools such as Williams and Vassar. According to Weinstock, the EAC would oversee the endowment and provide a direct link between students and the endowment, in order to demystify its role within the University. He also said that the EAC could incorporate a work-study position to allow students firsthand experience of investing on a large scale.
“The EAC would be able to explain better what the endowment is,” he said.
Trustees listened and discussed the matter with Weinstock and other students, questioning how students view the endowment and making clear that cuts must be made. The trustees explained how reducing the school’s reliance on endowment spending would have a positive effect on future of the University.
“The theory of the endowment is if you draw too much out, you are short changing future students,” said Trustee Kofi Appenting ’81, a vice chair of the board.
The discussion then turned to other campus issues. Students voiced concern over the status of gender-neutral housing, specifically for first year students. While some students seemed dissatisfied with the board members’ approach to gender-neutral housing, most saw the intrinsic value of any dialogue at all.
Issues of intellectual and political diversity on campus were also raised. Board members and students brainstormed ways of heightening and expanding the scope of political opinion on campus, and whether it was desirable to reach out to more conservative prospective students. It was suggested that conservative scholars might be brought to campus in order to better inform debate.
The environmental sustainability policy was also discussed. While the board maintained that it does not make policy, it encouraged students to get involved in making Wesleyan more environmentally friendly. Trustee Joshua Boger ’73 rejected a student suggestion of creating an administrative position to address environmental issues.
“Don’t you want the power in your own hands?” Boger said. “[An administrative position] tends to isolate the problem rather than integrate it. You should demand every administrator be involved.”
Despite the low student turnout, most trustees thought the meeting went well.
“[The forum] provides students an opportunity to interact very directly with board members,” said Trustee Bobby Donaldson ’93. “I very much appreciated the frankness and thoughtfulness exhibited by all the participants. I was particularly struck by the frank dialogue concerning the place of intellectual, class, and geographical diversity at Wesleyan.”
Trustee Leo Au ’71 expected students to advance other topics.
“I would have hoped for greater student participation and a greater number of discussion topics, but all in all, the meeting provided me with a broader sense of student concerns,” Au said. “I was somewhat surprised that longstanding concerns over course access, advising, senior housing, the quality of the food service and the ever increasing cost of a Wesleyan education were not brought up for discussion.”
Trustee members typically meet with students in one format or another whenever they convene on campus.
Leave a Reply