<p>bluebayou</p>
<p>I am neither running a political campaign nor trying to gain support. Who’s support would I be seeking and why? The elections are over – and the “alumni trustees” won. Despite a massive and unprecedented campaigned waged by the Board and the Administration to approve the revised constitution – a majority of the alumni remained unconvinced and the measure fell short by almost 20% of the necessary votes. </p>
<p>Those are the relevant facts. </p>
<p>I WAS trying to answer a question – perhaps too quickly – let me try again.</p>
<p>OP’s original questions – the important one first:</p>
<p>“Should this influence the decision of my child to apply to Dartmouth?”</p>
<p>No, I do not think this should influence the decision of your child to apply (or not to apply) to Dartmouth, because:
a. the time frame of any impact will not be until after your son has graduated
b. your son’s decision is not based on his or your history with the school – (and thus is not colored by expectations generated from such history)
c. Dartmouth provides and should continue to provide one of the best undergraduate educations available anywhere and this really shouldn’t change regardless
d. That said – Dartmouth is not for everyone. There are many aspects to consider in determining whether or not Dartmouth is a proper fit for your son. The trustee issue just isn’t one of them.</p>
<p>“Are these allegations correct? “ Yes</p>
<p>“Does increasing the size of the board to reduce the influence of the Alumni elected members muffle their voice and sweep this issue “under the rug”?” Yes</p>
<p>“Is this a real issue or is this a resistance to change and a desire to return to the “Animal House” days as others have stated?” </p>
<p>This is a real issue. The suggestion that the CEO of Cypress Semiconductor, Professors of Law at George Mason and UVA, and a Fellow at Stanford’s Hoover Institution are seeking a “return to Animal House” is absurd on its face. Two of these gentlemen were not even born when Chris Miller graduated in 1963. These are serious individuals motivated by concern for and love of Dartmouth. None of them needed the extra work, but, in the words of Rodgers, the Cypress CEO, they resolved to “do something or stop griping about it.” …and Dartmouth has (or had) a governance structure in which something could be done. </p>
<p>OP’s follow up questions: </p>
<p>“I understand the power struggle between the administration and the alumni over the control of the board. I see this as a symptom of a dispute over some underlying issues. I don’t understand those underlying issues.</p>
<p>What is “official Dartmouth” trying to do that the Alumni oppose?“</p>
<p>I’m not sure you do understand the power struggle between the administration and the alumni over control of the board. But then again, I’m not sure I do either. This is just MY take… and perhaps what I am having difficulty communicating.</p>
<p>Short answer:
I believe the major issue right now IS the power struggle over control of the board and the college’s governance structure. Compared to this, the “underlying” issues are but the splitting of hairs. </p>
<p>“The underlying issues”</p>
<p>I am not sure that everyone who is currently upset with the Board’s action agrees about the underlying issues. Those on both sides of the “issues” debate seem unhappy with board’s actions.</p>
<p>But as to what specific issues motivated the petition candidates to seek office. – </p>
<p>Here is a link to how those opposing the petition candidates defined the issues and positions.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.strongdartmouth.org/index.php?r=3[/url]”>http://www.strongdartmouth.org/index.php?r=3</a></p>
<p>Some quotes:</p>
<p>1) Undergraduate focus: The petition candidates suggest that there are efforts to transform Dartmouth into a research university at the expense of its undergraduate focus.</p>
<p>2) Faculty: The petition candidates suggest that Dartmouth’s commitment to teaching is waning, that too many Dartmouth professors see teaching as a burden to be endured in order to perform research.</p>
<p>3) Athletics: The petition candidates suggest that the College’s commitment to athletics is waning and that the teams and clubs are posting mediocre results.</p>
<p>4) Football: No reference to the petition candidates on this one, but I’ve got a guess – “The latest episode to enrage some alumni came last December, when a letter written four years previously by the dean of admissions, Karl Furstenberg, became public. Furstenberg had praised Swarthmore College’s decision to eliminate its football program, saying ''sadly football, and the culture that surrounds it, is antithetical to the academic mission of colleges such as ours."”</p>
<p>5) Fraternities and Sororities: The petition candidates suggest that Dartmouth would prefer to do away with fraternities and sororities, that there is a war against the fraternities and sororities.</p>
<p>…and here are some summary excerpts from the Boston Globe:</p>
<p>Both “ran on platforms that were scathingly critical of the administration, saying it has become too politically correct and has stifled fraternities, de-emphasized athletics, and shortchanged teaching in favor of research.
''Dartmouth’s leadership has turned its back on [its] great legacy," Zywicki wrote in his campaign statements. ''The administration has enlarged class sizes, starved the athletic program, and attacked the sororities and fraternities."</p>
<p>In separate interviews, Robinson and Zywicki said their dissatisfaction with the Hanover, N.H., college dates back many years. Zywicki, class of 1988, cited the late 1980s call of former president James O. Freedman to make a place for ''creative loners" on a campus known for its emphasis on sports and partying.
Freedman’s successor, James Wright, made waves a decade later when he initiated a crackdown on fraternities designed to ''end Greek life as we know it." His statement that ''Dartmouth is a research university in all but name" has also been pilloried by critics who prefer the traditional focus on undergraduate teaching.”</p>
<p>“Can you list some specific examples of actions that the administration has taken that reduce the quality of education or change the experience for its students?”</p>
<p>For me, it started with Freedman and his actions. I found his call for “creative loners” particularly objectionable. While it may have had some rhetorical purpose in articulating his vision, as a practical matter it was a horrible disservice to those who answered his call and found a poor fit.</p>
<p>It ends with this latest board action. </p>
<p>From Powerline again:</p>
<p>“Dartmouth alumni now face a choice that for some of us will be difficult and perhaps even “divisive” – whether to financially support a college that, due to distrust of its alumni, seeks to insulate its administration from their meaningful say.”</p>
<p>There – is that a more succinct and coherent answer to MidWestDad?</p>
<p>…and finally, speaking of analytical skills – I again ask about your post 23. In the scenario presented the number of faculty increased 11% + while overall expenses increased only 8.8%.</p>
<p>Perhaps it is my lack of the aforementioned skills, but your conclusion: “Another “mathematical conclusion” is that Dartmouth is paying the same professors 8% more relative to increases in other expenses… “ makes no sense to me. Huh? 
</p>