The Case for Nathan Hatch

[RChildress107]

My overall impression of Hatch after his first eight years is wary optimism.

He has undeniably done some great things for the university. The ongoing facility improvements, the continued success and growth of the graduate schools, and the small jump in the rankings are all indications that Wake is moving in a great direction.

However, Hatch still (after 8 years) feels disconnected from the University. In and of itself that isn't a huge problem, but it causes concern among those who care about Wake Forest's connection with Winston-Salem (which isn't much better than Duke's relationship with Durham) and for those who would like Wake to be a feasible option for NC students who don't live in the I-85 corridor.

What is sad/frustrating is that those two objectives (improving community relations and maintaining NC roots) could be achieved without sacrificing growth.

Noone is suggesting that Wake Forest should return to 1930, 1960, or even 1990. There are those, however, who believe the University Leadership should be cognizant of Wake Forest's past as they guide her into the future.

There is a line at which prioritizing growth might mean sacrificing our mission. I don't know that I trust the current administration to recognize that line.

 

[Strickland33]

As someone posted earlier until at least the early-mid eighties. That accounts for about 80% of our history.

I still think that there is a difference between being committed and not possessing the prestige to be more expensive/exclusive. Was Wake out actively recruiting students from middle and working class families, or were there simply more students applying from those class brackets? It strikes me as a path dependent argument, on the one hand. And a fairly serious accusation of limiting access and/or intentional class-based exclusion, on the other.

 

[Caturdayredux]

I'm curious as to why people think Wake should cater to the lower/middle class. We aren't Harvard with a limitless endowment. This message board loves the idea that poor people are somehow better than rich people.

 

[Lohengrin]

My overall impression of Hatch after his first eight years is wary optimism.

He has undeniably done some great things for the university. The ongoing facility improvements, the continued success and growth of the graduate schools, and the small jump in the rankings are all indications that Wake is moving in a great direction.

However, Hatch still (after 8 years) feels disconnected from the University. In and of itself that isn't a huge problem, but it causes concern among those who care about Wake Forest's connection with Winston-Salem (which isn't much better than Duke's relationship with Durham) and for those who would like Wake to be a feasible option for NC students who don't live in the I-85 corridor.

What is sad/frustrating is that those two objectives (improving community relations and maintaining NC roots) could be achieved without sacrificing growth.

Noone is suggesting that Wake Forest should return to 1930, 1960, or even 1990. There are those, however, who believe the University Leadership should be cognizant of Wake Forest's past as they guide her into the future.

There is a line at which prioritizing growth might mean sacrificing our mission. I don't know that I trust the current administration to recognize that line.

What is "our mission" as distinguished from the mission of every other university? Just curious.

 

[Caturdayredux]

What is "our mission" as distinguished from the mission of every other university? Just curious.

This. Schools admit students who will be good alumni. That means admitting the best students as well as students who are well connected and/or wealthy. It's a balance and every school does it. Kids of alumni and rich people get a break just as athletes do but I don't hear anyone saying we should make it harder to get into Wake for athletes.

 

[RChildress107]

This. Schools admit students who will be good alumni. That means admitting the best students as well as students who are well connected and/or wealthy. It's a balance and every school does it. Kids of alumni and rich people get a break just as athletes do but I don't hear anyone saying we should make it harder to get into Wake for athletes.

I think there are those who question how balanced those two priorities really are, as well as how much we should try to be like "every school" (schools in our peer group).

 

[RChildress107]

I still think that there is a difference between being committed and not possessing the prestige to be more expensive/exclusive. Was Wake out actively recruiting students from middle and working class families, or were there simply more students applying from those class brackets? It strikes me as a path dependent argument, on the one hand. And a fairly serious accusation of limiting access and/or intentional class-based exclusion, on the other.

expensive/exclusive does not equal prestige and it certainly doesn't equal high quality education and vice versa. It's only a path dependent argument if you falsely believe there are two mutually exclusive paths.

and intentional or not access has been limited for a large swath of the population

 

[jhmd2000]

This. Schools admit students who will be good alumni. That means admitting the best students as well as students who are well connected and/or wealthy. It's a balance and every school does it. Kids of alumni and rich people get a break just as athletes do but I don't hear anyone saying we should make it harder to get into Wake for athletes.

I guess that is one way, and obviously that's the way things are going, but I wish Wake would take some of its considerable endowment and say, "Hey, if you're in the top 5% of your high school class and XY% percentile on your standardized test nationally, you're going places. The first place is at the end of Silas Creek Parkway, on us. We need you in Winston-Salem."

Give people of demonstrable ability something tangible to shoot for. I'd take those kids over almost anybody else, and it has NOTHING to do with growing the sports fan base.

 

[Say Hey Deac]

This message board loves the idea that poor people are somehow better than rich people.

Because the poor people grew up nourished and strong drinking breast milk and working in the fields, while developing street smarts and charm, whereas the rich drank inferior formula and stayed inside and never developed muscles or the ability the communicate. We want the poor because the poor are better.

 

[Deacfreak07]

I guess that is one way, and obviously that's the way things are going, but I wish Wake would take some of its considerable endowment and say, "Hey, if you're in the top 5% of your high school class and XY% percentile on your standardized test nationally, you're going places. The first place is at the end of Silas Creek Parkway, on us. We need you in Winston-Salem."

Give people of demonstrable ability something tangible to shoot for. I'd take those kids over almost anybody else, and it has NOTHING to do with growing the sports fan base.

Wake's endowment is not that large compared to peer institutions. The early 21st Century was not kind to us.

 

[Strickland33]

expensive/exclusive does not equal prestige and it certainly doesn't equal high quality education and vice versa. It's only a path dependent argument if you falsely believe there are two mutually exclusive paths.

and intentional or not access has been limited for a large swath of the population

One side of the argument is path dependence (i.e. the school's policies have cultivated a situation in which, with greater prestige, has come the acceptance of more wealthy students from other regions, at the expense of the same proportion, as in past decades, of local students who may not be able to afford the school). The other is intentional closure/exclusivity (i.e. hyperbole: Wake has made a concerted decision to accept more of one student over the other for the purpose of making the school more elite and less socioeconomically diverse). I'm not a Wake alum, but I don't think I would feel very comfortable making the latter argument if I was...

 

[Strickland33]

Wake's endowment is not that large compared to peer institutions. The early 21st Century was not kind to us.

More than $1.5 billion less than NYU and BU and $500 million under Tufts, just for reference.

 

[RChildress107]

What is "our mission" as distinguished from the mission of every other university? Just curious.

IMO, the mission of Wake Forest is to put its motto into action. A large and primary part of that is educating its students (for an excellent take on this aspect of Pro Humanitate check out this article about Dr. Powell's comments from Convocation a couple of years back). Another part of that is maintaining a culture of service among our staff, students, and alumni that extends from the quad to the corners of the earth.

Any move up the rankings, any growth of the endowment, any fundraising campaign, should be made with a furtherance of our motto and our mission in mind.

 

[West End Deac]

Again, antagonisitic. "If Wake doesn't think they need them." Please. Wake needs smart, intellectually curious, engaged students. We have a robust financial aid program. Is it as strong as Harvard's? Duke's? Vandy's? No. Why? We don't have the money. A nice chunk of the new campaign is designed to close the gap. My point? Hatch, Kersh, others in the adminstration - they "share your concern" (as condescending as it may be). There is a lot of gift in our financial aid packages. A lot. Would it be great if there were more? Of course - hopefully one day there will be.

How about starting a thread on public vs. private college education? I sense this is your larger point, that private college education, at WF or anywhere else (because let's be real here - there are dozens upon dozens of schools in the US that cost $60k, + or - $5k), isn't worth it.

If not, how about reading http://college.wfu.edu/magnolia/. It's an inkling of what WF is doing for "them." Recognize that assembling a community of scholars from diverse experiences is a complicated process and that the people you call out are, at their core, educators, who want a community of students from all walks of life.

I obviously have a point of view, which is that Wake should be vaguely aware of the people it is turning off at $60,000.00 a year. If "Wake" doesn't think they need them, fine, but I think they're wrong. I'm trying to get a sense if others share my concern.

 

[jhmd2000]

Again, antagonisitic. "If Wake doesn't think they need them." Please. Wake needs smart, intellectually curious, engaged students. We have a robust financial aid program. Is it as strong as Harvard's? Duke's? Vandy's? No. Why? We don't have the money. A nice chunk of the new campaign is designed to close the gap. My point? Hatch, Kersh, others in the adminstration - they "share your concern" (as condescending as it may be). There is a lot of gift in our financial aid packages. A lot. Would it be great if there were more? Of course - hopefully one day there will be.

How about starting a thread on public vs. private college education? I sense this is your larger point, that private college education, at WF or anywhere else (because let's be real here - there are dozens upon dozens of schools in the US that cost $60k, + or - $5k), isn't worth it.

If not, how about reading http://college.wfu.edu/magnolia/. It's an inkling of what WF is doing for "them." Recognize that assembling a community of scholars from diverse experiences is a complicated process and that the people you call out are, at their core, educators, who want a community of students from all walks of life.

I promise I'm not trying to poke the bear, but FFS, $60k is a lot of money. How else to respond to that? If you're going to talk about "a special place" (and I wouldn't be having this argument if I didn't think we should), why take false refuge amongst what other schools do? Bottom line is this: I'd trade the Class of 2014 version of Ed Christman for ten 2014 Ty Kraniaks, but if I'm 2014 Ed Christman, I'd shy away from a place where I'm almost guaranteed to be surrounded by 800 Ty Kraniaks (who, for all I know, might be fine people on an individual basis, but as a subset of the population are missing out on what's it like to have come up without privilege).

You follow?

 

[RChildress107]

One side of the argument is path dependence (i.e. the school's policies have cultivated a situation in which, with greater prestige, has come the acceptance of more wealthy students from other regions, at the expense of the same proportion, as in past decades, of local students who may not be able to afford the school). The other is intentional closure/exclusivity (i.e. hyperbole: Wake has made a concerted decision to accept more of one student over the other for the purpose of making the school more elite and less socioeconomically diverse). I'm not a Wake alum, but I don't think I would feel very comfortable making the latter argument if I was...

I understand the two different arguments and don't believe that either is correct.

I think a more likely scenario is that Wake Forest has not made a concerted decision or effort to help middle class families (especially those from NC) afford to come to Wake. I think this decision is independent (though not unrelated) from the school's prestige.

I do however think that Wake has made a concerted effort to target wealthy kids from the Northeast without exhausting the potential students from slightly less wealthy families in NC and the south.

 

[West End Deac]

I follow that you have little respect for the WF undergraduate population and that you think small classes and being taught by professors only in an intimate environment is not worth $60k. Am I missing anything?

I promise I'm not trying to poke the bear, but FFS, $60k is a lot of money. How else to respond to that? If you're going to talk about "a special place" (and I wouldn't be having this argument if I didn't think we should), why take false refuge amongst what other schools do? Bottom line is this: I'd trade the Class of 2014 version of Ed Christman for ten 2014 Ty Kraniaks, but if I'm 2014 Ed Christman, I'd shy away from a place where I'm almost guaranteed to be surrounded by 800 Ty Kraniaks.

You follow?

 

[jhmd2000]

I follow that you have little respect for the WF undergraduate population and that you think small classes and being taught by professors only in an intimate environment is not worth $60k. Am I missing anything?

I think small classes being taught by professors in an intimate environment is a great thing, and it shouldn't be limited to a small subset of the population.

 

[West End Deac]

Fixed it to reflect what you really think. I'm not sure I could ever convince you that you are wrong, though I would welcome the opportunity to share my thoughts with you (we are both gardeners, after all . . . work the earth, drink some beer, solve the world's problems).

I think small classes being taught by professors in an intimate environment is a great thing, and THAT WF SHOULD NOT BE LIMITING IT TO A small subset of the population.

 

[Caturdayredux]

I stopped reading when someone claims BU is a peer institution. You people are so LOWF it's funny.