Wesleyan v Oberlin v Brandeis

circuitrider
Fri, 15 May 2015 23:19:52 +0000

@monydad

By contrast, according to these links, if I skimmed them correctly,Wesleyan and Brandies seemed to have suffered from suboptimal endowment growth along the way, due to ill-timed expansion strategies and/or sub-optimal endowment investment, use or financing strategies.

I can’t speak for Brandeis, but, I for one would hate to revert to the “old” Wesleyan of 1965, the peak year of its endowment per student. True, it was per capita the “richest college in the country” for about two decades (mainly due to a constant stream of income from “My Weekly Reader”). But, that was cold comfort to 1,500 guys with virtually nothing to do on a Saturday night - no music scene to speak of, very little in the way of dance or theater. Wesleyan had sports. And, students could bar hop downtown (thank goodness, for the 18 y/o drinking age!) But, that was it. In short, it was a typical little ivy.

No one was thinking, “Oh, wait. we need to keep our endowment numbers up so that we can remain at the top of the USNews poll” - there WAS no USNews poll. The money was there to achieve certain strategic goals, mainly, the creation of what would be the equivalent of a Seven Sister college out of virtually thin air. The alumni were not going to dig deep into their own pockets so long as the college had the reputation it did for vast wealth. Even so, it would take an entire generation before that image was eroded.

In the meantime, the place is harder to get into now than at any time in its history; its faculty has done nothing but gain in stature (stem cell research, a shared Nobel Prize, 14 NIH CAREER grants in the last ten years, the only LAC in the country to receive NIH backing for a pre-doctoral training program) and the students rarely want to leave campus.

I’m not sure which part of that I would want to give back.