LAST WEEK, a debate exploded over Bob Sweeney's nomination to live on the Lawn. Though few people have made the point, the Sweeney controversy really isn't about Sweeney at all. It's about the University's decreasing competitiveness vis-à-vis peer institutions, mainly due to a strain in funds. This has led to slower development, less competitive salaries, higher student faculty ratios, etc. While this problem can be addressed in many ways, by far the easiest way is to encourage class givings.
The arguments in favor of class givings are commonsensical and manifold. First, and by far the most compelling, is that class givings is the easiest way to boost our U.S. News & World Report Rankings. There are many valid arguments against the U.S. News Rankings -- I find myself sympathetic to most if not all of them. However, whatever you may think of the rankings, the fact is that they are perceived as important, and they do tacitly influence the pool of faculty and students considering our University.
At the same time, the cost to you as a student is almost nothing: $10. Of course many give more, and you should consider giving more, but it is not the amount that matters in the U.S. News Rankings: it's the percentage of the class that participates. Thus, in the context of class givings, the University benefits more if 90 percent of students donated $10, rather than receiving a larger amount from a smaller percentage of students.
There are, of course, more moralistic approaches to class givings. Our four years here have been made possibly the generous donations made by the alumni that graduated before us. The tuition paid by students doesn't even cover one-third of each individual's education costs, and the state only covers 10 percent. In other words, our University's fate is tied directly to the generosity displayed by its students and alumni.
This demonstrates, in the least obligating sense of the term, a moral responsibility to "give back." Ross Baird, Fourth Year Trustees president, often refers to it as "giving forward," a concept that correctly implies we are investing in the future of our institution. Our educational experience, as well as the wonderful four years most if not all of us have had or will have here, is made possible by the generosity of those who came before us. Because of them, we have unforgettable memories and a degree that carries a lot of weight when we apply for jobs. It's rather obvious that we, in turn, have some sort of a responsibility to make sure that the next rounds of wahoos have similar opportunities. The easiest way to do this is by class givings.
Finally, there is an element of self-interest inherent in class givings and giving forward. If projections are correct, it is not infeasible that our University will slip out of the top 30 schools within the next decade. The central problem is money, which individuals such as Bob Sweeney are working hard to address. At the same time, there are easy ways to help, and class givings is the easiest. Class givings is one of few programs where donating $10 actually makes a visible difference -- considering that we often find ourselves tied in rankings with schools like Michigan, every additional class givings donator makes a real difference. It's like voting in an election where you already know the two candidates are tied. The self-interest is, of course, in the value of the degree you hold. If our University slips in rankings, so does the value of our education in the job market. The implications are obvious.
In response to fiscal threats, the University has taken defensive steps in order to protect our reputation. In turn, some of these steps have evoked anger from the students and sometimes justified claims that the Board of Visitors is "selling out." While Bob Sweeney is no doubt a valuable asset to our community, I agree with protesting students that a Lawn pavilion is not an appropriate reward given his non-academic position. However, we must also realize that money and education are inextricably tied, and that to preserve our village we must preserve our purse. The Sweeney debate will and should continue, but we can't afford to lose sight of the larger problem.
The problem is not the Board of Visitors or their decisions, but why they are forced into making certain decisions that are consequently seen as "selling out." Simply put, the problem is nothing less dramatic than saving our University. And as far as I know, everyone, even the few that did not enjoy the University, found their niche here and have something to be grateful for. Look back at your four years, find the club or department or scholarship that you think is most important and, for your part, give $10.
Sina Kian's column appears Tuesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at skian@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
PARTING SHOT: No man is an island
By Ava MacBlane | YesterdayRetirement, as you can tell, has been treating me well. When people ask me now if I miss it, I laugh and tell them some things I definitely don't miss. But I don't always get to tell them about the things I really do miss.
PARTING SHOT: You never know unless you try
By Lexi Baker | 2 days agoMy time at the University was shaped by the people who showed me grace and kindness and by those who had confidence in me, even when I struggled to have it in myself.
PARTING SHOT: A love letter to Cav Daily and Connection
By Ava Proehl | 2 days agoMy time here taught me to look for the genuine, human connection in every moment.
