Posted on 10/28/2010 3:01:47 AM PDT by reaganaut1
Nonprofits have long used the honor roll, a list of benefactors prominently displayed, to inspire others to make gifts.
In the last school year, seniors at Dartmouth College and Cornell University turned that tactic on its head, creating a sort of dishonor roll of peers who failed to donate to the class gift.
At Dartmouth, the lone student in the graduating class who held out, Laura A. DeLorenzo, was excoriated in the student newspaper and on The Little Green Blog, a student Web site, which also ran her picture.
Raising the stakes for the student fund-raisers was the potential of $100,000 more that the Class of 1960 had promised if every senior participated. In a statement on the blog, Ms. DeLorenzo said she resented the pressure that gift apparently had created.
“My decision not to donate to Dartmouth reflects my personal conclusion that the negative aspects of Dartmouth outweigh the positive, and nothing more,” Ms. DeLorenzo wrote. “Where other people choose to donate their money is their decision and I fully respect their right to make it.” She could not be reached for comment.
Carolyn A. Pelzel, senior vice president for advancement at Dartmouth, said the university trained student volunteers who managed the fund-raising effort, adding that the publication of Ms. DeLorenzo’s name was “highly inappropriate.”
At Cornell, pressure to contribute to the senior gift was applied through the sorority system, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education, which reported on the issue in its latest edition.
Erica Weitzner, a Cornell graduate who is now in medical school, said she received two or three phone calls and a few e-mails from sorority sisters saying they knew she had not donated.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
That may well be.
But it wasn't the student who was in control of the situation. The donor who decided that unanimity of participation was so important is the one who decided to withhold the donation. This donor could have simply decided that 99% participation was good enough.
It's the donor who was attempting to control this girl's life, even if it is only to the extent of extorting $1 from her. She is praiseworthy for having resisted.
In this case the student decided her statement was important. Other students responded with a public statement of their own.
I have a feeling the class of 60 possesses the wisdom to fully understand the particulars of the situation and chose to reward the 99% for their effort.
Anyway, what is your opinion of the student not kicking in a buck for the financial aid of others if she received financial aid herself? We know, of course, she would never recommend any one going there, but just to show a magnanimous spirit.
I feel like I got a better deal at a state school...
Once again I think that there is confusion over who should determine where the money goes. If the student accepted aid from some very generous donor, then perhaps she should return any unneeded funds to that donor. It shouldn't be her place to identify some other student to receive aid that was directed to her.
If she received grants or awards, the 'very generous donor' would be Dartmouth and it's alumni, and they may be generous to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars.
I don't think Dartmouth or its alumni are interested in reimbursement, either. Just a buck right now as an indication of appreciation for their support is sufficient.
Since Dartmouth grads are in the top 5 of the college ROI list I'm sure many of them will volunteer to repay with interest later on, perhaps even on their 50th reunion.
I think the 50 year class reunion coincides with the graduation. There is a lot of tradition involved, and there is a strong bond amongst the corresponding alumni classes.
I gather the graduated class was zealous, perhaps overzealous, in pursuing donations. I'm pretty sure, however, that only a dollar donation was sufficient and that it was prominently communicated as being sufficient.
I think her public statement upped the ante and other students responded. Thus the controversy.
I do scratch my head over the anti-ivy sentiment in this thread, or with the argument that they are stuffed full to the brim with liberals. Ivies seem to be supportive of their students, and, for sure, not every one is paying $50K a year. That's due in part to private party contributions such as those discussed here.
I question, therefore, why this student is reflexively held up as an icon of one standing upon their principles without first questioning if she had availed herself of support from the very system she is criticizing.
An unfortunate situation for all. The school didn't deserve the negative publicity, and it will be just a blip on the radar screen for them. I think the student hurts herself here, though. I don't see this as a resume enhancer. Dartmouth grad on the resume certainly looks better to me than her version of Dartmouth (even though it sucks) grad.
If it were my child I would tell her to divvy up the buck and button it until graduation is over. That's out of respect for the campus atmosphere for the returning alumni.
I understand what you are saying. But I think there is an issue that needs addressing by the University. The heavy-handed demand for 100% participation is very similar to what I have seen happen in the workplace with United Way campaigns.
As a manager at the time I felt that participation was expected, but I resolutely refused to donate a dime that might make its way to an anti-gun group. I found that the policy, as it had been modified to suit people such as myself, permitted me to select a particular organization from a lengthy list. I found a deserving Scout organization in another state that sent me an individualized thank-you for several years.
I don't doubt that the student in this example did a service for her university if they modified their heavy-handed approach. It isn't "charity" if it is extorted from the "charitable", anymore than the massive federal handouts are charity. They are extortion plain and simple. If you don't choose to participate, people with guns will appear and take you to prison. The punishment at the university was less, but still punishment.
I agree with you.
I think the 100% participation expectation will be changed. I know people who felt the push was too much, even if a small donation would have sufficed.
This situation was a lose/lose for both the student and the school. This won't happen again.
The alumni coming back after 50 years is a wonderful experience to observe. That's why I said in this case the student should have bucked up and chipped in. I was upset that the ensuing controversy may have affected that experience for them.
I appreciate that you write without finding it necessary to include a knee-jerk bashing of Ivies.
Dartmouth, in particular, is embedded in the daily life of rural New Hampshire. Dartmouth maintains an excellent research hospital in Hanover, as well. There are people at the school and hospital who have helped me, my loved ones and athletes I've coached tremendously. Good people, IMHO, and I owe them.
Even though I don't live in that area any more, if I feel their place of employment is the cause of their being ridiculed by people painting with a broad brush I will defend them, because, as I said, I owe them that.
Again, Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.