- Pomona used to stand out among its east coast peers for being laid-back and humble. The California attitude was one of the highlights. That culture is pretty much gone now. Ever since admissions launched a campaign to reform the “narrative of ease” attitude attributed to Pomona, and the administration has worked to cap the number of A’s being given out, there is now a more noticeably serious and competitive vibe at Pomona. The students don’t feel quite as happy, friendly, or inclusive. There’s a newly emerging culture of misery poker where students are faced with the pressure of leading immensely busy lives in every aspect, and our pre-professionalism has skyrocketed. In just one year, the demand for our internships programs have gone up by ~70%. Our athletics programs are now ranked top 25 in DIII, and they get better each year. The quirky reading rainbow logo has been replaced for a more corporate one, and derpy Cecil has been tossed aside for a more masculine one. All of these things honestly happened suddenly, but it is clear that Pomona is changing. The Forbes ranking played a huge role in this, as Pomona is now not just a hidden gem, but a supposed peer of the Ivies. I don’t have a problem with an institution becoming better. But I do worry that we’re losing some of our character. What distinguishes Pomona today? It’s hard to subjectively answer.
On the point about grade inflation, Pomona used to have a pretty serious case of it. Some 63% of grades given out were A’s or A-'s, the highest of our peers. The school now asks faculty to write explanations if they give out more than 50% A’s or give out any grades of an A+. Students now have to take a survey detailing the number of hours they put into a class Many faculty members have re-calibrated expectations in the last two year, leading to increased academic rigor. I think this on paper sounds like a good thing, but it has the effect of increasing competitiveness. I’ve heard rumors that hard caps may be coming, but I don’t know how accurate they are.
- This is a problem at every school everywhere, but for how much word you hear about Pomona’s administration supposedly “running like butter” or being so receptive/available, I’ve found myself -as a student leader on campus- to have a disappointing experience. There is a recent article on the student paper called “The Avatar Cycle and Institutional Knowledge”, which I think sums the situation well. In a nutshell, much of the activism and efforts to improve Pomona are led predominantly by students, who are not compensated for their efforts. Many of the administrators promise to listen, but there’s this sense you get that it’s just out of courtesy more than any serious effort to engage. Students know that not all of their demands will be met. They know that there are financial and administrative challenges to facilitating certain things. They know they may not have all the answers. However, they’re frustrated that the onus falls to them in building strategies to improve Pomona. What is the purpose of administrators earning hefty salaries each year if they’re not doing much of anything to support students on campus?
Much of the critique lies in the short term actions that administrators take, rather than the development of long term ones. For instance, there was a crisis in which our mental health facilities had a 5 week waiting period for appointments. Pomona, to its credit, worked to provide off-campus mental health support and fully fund co-pays. But the situation should never have gotten so awful in the first place. Nearly 20% of Pomona students book an appointment with the counseling center. This has been consistently the case (actually, the numbers have been increasing) for the last few years.
- Radical leftism by a vocal minority on campus has made the experience worse for everyone. I’m left leaning myself, and even I am turned off by the things that have happened. Just recently, Heather MacDonald was prevented from speaking at Claremont McKenna by a group of students who weren’t willing to let anyone into the talk. There are certain students at four of the schools- Pomona, Pitzer, Mudd, and Scripps- who have taken to calling students “shady people of color” and maintaining lists of people who don’t align with their political leanings. They are the most vocal and keen to constantly attack groups on campus, and they target the more inclusive/tolerant left leaning individuals as “traitors” or “anti-black” for not following their violent approaches. The great thing at Pomona and the other 5C’s is that the vast majority of students are willing to hear out dissenting arguments and engage with ideas without shutting them away, but those few students have stifled a lot of meaningful discourse from occurring. There is blatant white shaming on Facebook communities, and certain students disparage the challenges experienced by their peers simply because those peers are white or rich. It’s the same individuals who do this all the time, and no one holds them accountable. I’m a low income student of color. I think people from all walks of life can experience challenges anywhere they go, and as such deserve compassion and respect, not dismissal. Mental health in particular affects people from all walks of life. We’re all part of a residential community where we nurture and care for each other. Let’s work toward supporting and building ourselves up, not knocking others down. There’s an article to check out on this topic too: “Where Claremont Leftism Falls Short: We Need Action.”, which highlights some of the hypocrisy of student activism.
Sorry this has all gotten so long. I just thought to be as thorough as possible, though I’m aware it could be taken as rambling at some points. I realize many of these points are subjective and may be seen as positives by some people. I know many of these issues are affecting other schools. My points are not to draw comparatives, but to share my own experience, and some parts of the Pomona experience I found challenging. I’d be happy to elaborate or specify if something is unclear.