Currently browsing the archives for August 2003

The guide to course selection

The guide to course selection for first years makes for interesting reading, albeit with a greater than reasonable number of typos. (Not that Blogs without spell-checkers should be the first to throw stones.) Alumni from the 80’s will recall a similar document from that era (perhaps just for the math department), which began: “This document, like all of Gaul, is divided into three parts.” Reading that, as a high schooler with some Latin classes, was my first concrete indication that Williams would be a place that took the life of the mind serious.

However, there are some problems with the guide. It claims that:

There are no ”guts” at Williams, but courses have different paces and
intensities of work.

This is, of course, ludicrous. There were and, no doubt, are plenty of guts at Williams. Perhaps the largest category would be the infamous “non-major” science courses. These are courses which are in science departments but which are so easy that they can not be counted toward the major requirements for that department. Note that in easier departments (english, political science and so on) there are no “non-major” courses. Although it is difficult to know for sure from a distance, I would wager that all of these courses are guts. At least one of them has been a gut from more than 15 years!

For the most part, the Williams curriculum is serious and excellent. These non-major science courses are perhaps the biggest single problem.


WSO (Williams Students Online) now

WSO (Williams Students Online) now has a blog section. Try as I might, I can’t find anything that interesting to link to within it. This isn’t to say that there aren’t interesting Ephs in the land of the Blogs. Daniel Drezner ’90 has the most widely read Eph blog that I know of. His focus is on “Politics, economics, globalization, academia, pop culture… all from an untenured perspective.” I can’t say that I read any other Eph Blogs regularly, but a quick search reveals a some of them.


Louise Gluck, Pulitzer Prize winner

Louise Gluck, Pulitzer Prize winner and senior lecturer in English, has been named the country’s poet laureate. Here is the article in the NYT. The college’s announcement notes that:

Louise Glück has taught at Williams College since 1983 and teaches courses in the writing of poetry and in contemporary poetry as the Margaret Bundy Scott Senior Lecturer in English. She lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts.


1) Why isn’t Gluck a professor, as opposed to a lecturer? Perhaps there is no meaning to the difference in this case; perhaps, in the eyes of the English department, you need a Ph.D. to get the title of professor; perhaps it is just a function of her arrangement with the COllege.

2) However accomplished Gluck may be, how is it that she is able to live in Cambridge and teach in Williamstown? Of course, there are all sorts of good reasons for such an arrangement, but, in general, it must be much harder to have a substantive connection with the students when you live 3 hours away from them. The Miami Herald describes the set up as one in which Gluck teaches one semester a year and drives up once a week to Williamstown. That seems reasonable enough. Gluck (presumably) enjoys doing some teaching and the (few) students in her class (presumably) get a lot out of the experience.

The NYT excerts one of her poems as:

I’ll tell you something: every day

people are dying. And that’s just the beginning.

Every day, in funeral homes, new widows are born,

new orphans. They sit with their hands folded,

trying to decide about this new life.

Then they’re in the cemetery, some of them

for the first time. They’re frightened of crying,

sometimes of not crying. Someone leans over,

tells them what to do next, which might mean

saying a few words, sometimes

throwing dirt in the open grave.

And after that, everyone goes back to the house,

which is suddenly full of visitors.

The widow sits on the couch, very stately,

so people line up to approach her,

sometimes take her hand, sometimes embrace her.

She finds something to say to everybody,

thanks them, thanks them for coming.

In her heart, she wants them to go away.

She wants to be back in the cemetery,

back in the sickroom, the hospital. She knows

it isn’t possible. But it’s her only hope,

the wish to move backward. And just a little,

not so far as the marriage, the first kiss.

Alas, the Kane girls only get rhyming poetry read to them, so we’ll be sticking with Emily Dickinson.


The Class of 2007 Arrival

The class of 2007 arrived yesterday. You too can relive your College years by checking out the main information site. Don’t forget the schedule of events here. Assuming that they are on track, the first class meeting has just finished and students are heading back to their entries. Note that they sang “The Mountains” — the Blog gets results! ;-)

Alas, there are still some glitches. The transportation advice is unchanged from last year, but, presumably most of the incoming students should be better informed.

Most amusing part of the site are the excerpts from the “Bell Book” — which I do not remember from 19 years ago —- on Freshmen life. My favorite entries were:

Common Room (com’on Eileen) n. a much loved and used room that will replace the old family den, living room or room that you generally hung out in before you came to college. As relaxation spaces go, it is the best. With your help, it is usually replete with your favorite curl-up-and-nap-couch, some primary-colored bean bags, an outdated TV (with SEGA and VCR attached), several outdated issues of Glamour and school-issued Lava lamp (I jest).

The Log (a rustic gathering place) n. an incredible log-cabinish space on Spring Street which is filled with old pictures, dark wood, food, and large, crackling fires (in the fireplace). Home of the “Log Lunch,” a Friday event involving soup, bread and a guest lecturer speaking on some interesting topic like “Biking up Mt. Everest Barefooted” or “Recent Trends in Rainfall at Hopkins Forest.”

But the whole thing is quite amusing.


Here is a snippet from

Here is a snippet from the US News homepage about Williams being ranked the #1 liberal arts college in the country. I am looking for an on-line version of the main write-up, but haven’t found one yet. Please send us your links. One number that jumps out at me is the 7% of classes with more than 50 people. At Williams, there should be no such classes. Indeed, it is hard to come up with a more inefficient method of knowledge transfer than a large lecture. There is no meaningful interaction. One size must fit all. But all this is a topic for a longer post.


It is nice to see

It is nice to see that US News has ranked Williams #1. Of course, a lot of this ranking, especially the year to year changes, is little more than marketing hype, but it does seem to have an effect on applicants decision-making.


Marc Lynch, Assistant Professor of

Marc Lynch, Assistant Professor of Political Science, scored a coup recently in getting an article published in Foreign Affairs. For an untenured professor, this is a marvelous addition to the CV. The article summary notes:

The Bush administration’s tone-deaf approach to the Middle East reflects a dangerous misreading of the nature and sources of Arab public opinion . Independent, transnational media outlets have transformed the region, and the administration needs to engage the new Arab public sphere that has emerged.

We first blogged about Lynch here.


Sad to note the passing

Sad to note the passing of Kirk Varnedoe, class of 1968 (I think). [Full disclosure: Varnedoe was also my brother’s wife’s cousin, although I never met him.] The NYT noted:

Kirk Varnedoe, the articulate, courtly and wide-ranging art historian who as chief curator of painting and sculpture at the Museum of Modern Art helped to reshape the museum’s collection and philosophy and in so doing created a broader public understanding of modern art, died yesterday at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in Manhattan. He was 57 and lived in Manhattan and Princeton.

The jury for the MacArthur Foundation Fellowship noticed these qualities, too, and granted him one of its genius prizes in 1984. Among other things, he used the grant to write a history of modernism, “A Fine Disregard: What Makes Modern Art Modern.” He borrowed the title from a plaque near the Rugby School in England honoring William Webb Ellis, “who, with a fine disregard for the rules, invented the game of rugby.” Mr. Varnedoe, a rugby player and avid athlete, proposed Ellis’s mad dash with the ball as a metaphor for artistic innovation. It was an anti-Hegelian, anti-Marxist position, wherein art was regarded not as an inevitable unfolding of progressive events but as a variety of inspired inventions by remarkable and imaginative people. It was also, importantly for Mr. Varnedoe, a visceral and immediate experience.

I believe that Varnedoe played rugby at Williams, but can’t confirm that. Certainly. “A Fine Disregard” would make for some excellent rugby t-shirts, right up there with “Nihil in Moderato” — or whatever the Latin is for the late 1980’s motto of “Nothing in Moderation.” For Eph’s, the nice part of the obituary is:

He became one of many museum professionals to have graduated from Williams College, where, he recalled, Lane Faison Jr. was one of the professors who opened his eyes to art history. “You were encouraged to believe that you should look hard at paintings and that what you had to say about them would be worthwhile,” Mr. Varnedoe said, “which in a sense was a false hope, because many people had said thousands of things about these pictures before. But it was very salutary.”

Although the only thing (my fault and my loss) that I remember about Art History 101 is “soaring verticallity”, the same sentiment that Varnedoe expressed about art history at Williams in the 1960’s certainly applied to philosophy at Williams in the 1980’s. Other nice appreciations of Varnedoe can be found here and here.


Regular blog readers will have

Regular blog readers will have noticed that we have cleaned things up a bit on the blog, mainly by re-organizing the description section to the right. The main new addition is a set of Blog Highlights. Anyone with suggestions for items to include in the highlights should let us know.


Michael Lewis, chairman of the

Michael Lewis, chairman of the Art Department, has an article in the Wall Street Jornal on memorial designs for the World Trade Center. Lewis suggests that:

Perhaps the greatest threat to the memorial is that it will be too laden with visual imagery: the slurry wall, the sunken pit, even twisted shards of the buildings themselves. The site should be allowed to speak for itself. It should be enclosed in such a way that its immense scale can be grasped in its totality, giving the visitor an abstract impression of the magnitude of the attacks and of the tragedy. It should be a solemn enclave, screened from the bustle of the city–perhaps through an arcade, which defines space without blocking it.

Above all, the World Trade Center Memorial must be lapidary, a useful term that literally means the terseness appropriate to carving on stone. It would be wrong to communicate anything other than the simplest of declaratives: We mourn, we persevere, we continue.

It may be that we cannot take the true measure of 9/11 until a generation has passed. After all, the monuments to Lincoln, Washington and Jefferson on the Mall came at least a half century after the deaths of their subjects. We should not be bullied by well-meaning intentions into something we will regret. In that case, it would be better not to build at all.

But if we are to build, we should agree on first principles. We cannot go too far wrong if we pledge ourselves to no violence, no swagger, no clutter, no despair.

Some on the Right don’t like the way that Lewis looks at things. James Bowman, in the context of an article on war and masculinity, writes:

By coincidence, I notice that one of the “four cardinal principles” enunciated by Michael J. Lewis, head of the art department at Williams College, in the Wall Street Journal for the memorial to the victims of September 11th at the World Trade Center site is that it must portray “No violence.”

The memorial must not perpetuate the violence of the attacks, nor imply it by fractured form. It must heal the wounds, not pick at the scab. Most of us experienced 9/11 on television and have a storehouse of visual horror to draw on. As vivid as those visual images were, they have no place in this design.

Ah, yes. Shades of the “cycle of violence” that those Middle Eastern primitives, unlike our very clever American columnists, haven’t the wit to escape from. It’s all very well their taking the high moral ground about somebody else’s quarrels, but I wonder if the widows and orphans of 9/11 will be equally keen on refusing to “perpetuate the violence of the attacks”? They, at least, will be harder to persuade that “violence” is not a perpetual feature of the human condition — like the masculine virtues (and vices) which it has always elicited.

I would guess that Bowman more misunderstands Lewis than disagrees with him.


Although this blog is often

Although this blog is often guilty of focussing on the more Googliable people and events in the wide world of Williams, we (try to) never forget that, more important than being a rockstar or CEO or gubernatorial candidate is the simple act of motherhood.

Congratulations to Gilli (Ladd) Lautenbach ’89 on the birth of her twins!


This web page has interesting

This web page has interesting material on the Williams class of 1863 on the occasion of their 40th reunion in 1903. Seems like the class historian did a pretty good job of summarizing 40 years of living. Here is a representative example:

WELLMAN, son of Joshua Barnard and Lucy Hough Wellman, was born November 14, 1838, in Cornish, New Hampshire. He prepared for college at Kimball Union Academy, Meriden, New Hampshire, and entered our Class at its formation, in 1859. On account of a serious difficulty with his eyes he was obliged to give up study, and he left our Class in April, 1860. He returned to his home in Cornish, and devoted himself to farming. Though his eyesight improved after a time, his eyes never became strong, and he was obliged to follow out-of-door occupations. He did such literary work as was demanded in the management of a county newspaper, and was at times in the service of an organization known as the Patrons of Husbandry. In August, 1862, he enlisted, as a nine months’ volunteer, in the Sixteenth New Hampshire Infantry and served as sergeant. There is a report that he taught school in 1865. In 1866 he married Miss Carrie M. Powers, of Windsor, Vermont. There was one child by this marriage, a daughter, now living in Sullivan County, New Hampshire. After farming some years on the home farm in Cornish, Wellman sought a larger field in the West. This was about 1870, and he established himself on a large farm or plantation in Jericho, Cedar County, Missouri, where he seems, according to his report in 1883, to have attained a success very satisfactory to himself. But evidently he has sought other fields in which to glean, as the Class circular sent to this last address was returned unclaimed, and Mr. Wellman’s present address is unknown.


1) 100 years later, we at the Williams Blog are still trying to figure out where are classmates ended up!

2) Reading through these, you can’t help but be struck with the high mortality rates in this era, both for the graduates and their children.

3) I tried to identify famous alumni but didn’t find much. (Suggestions are welcome.) It was interesting, however, to note that the Williams preference for alumni children has an established pedigree, seen here with the son of Mark Hopkins.

4) There is a great undergraduate thesis in history to be written about this class and the times that they lived through.


Bill Simon ’73 is running

Bill Simon ’73 is running for governor of California. The New Yor Times summarized his candidacy thus:

Mr. Simon, 52, knocked off the White House’s preferred candidate (Richard J. Riordan) in the primary and then went on to lose to Governor Davis in November. He does have some things going for him. He is a millionaire businessman. He undoubtedly has learned a lesson or two from November. And he insisted last year that Mr. Davis was not being truthful about the state’s budget woes. He was proved to be right.


1) I think that I need a job as a “millionaire businessman.” Why didn’t Fatma Kassamali tell me about this career path at OCS? ;-)

2) Why the NYT doesn’t mention Simon’s Williams degree as a key advantage is beyond me.

3) Despite having opinions on many topics political, we at the Williams Blog have no idea what the best strategy would be for Simon. Since there are only 6 weeks left till the election, readers should send in their suggestions soon . . .


Bill Simon ’73 is making

Bill Simon ’73 is making news with his decision to enter the California governor recall election. Simon’s father, also William E. Simon, served as Secretary of the Treasury, in the mid 70’s. You can read about the father here. Alas, he passed away 3 years ago, but, by all accounts, he would be pleased with his sons place on the political spectrum.

It was just last year that Simon lost the regularly scheduled governors election to Gray Davis.


Just to prove that we

Just to prove that we cover the full spectrum of post-Williams career paths, here is an announcement about the appointment of Jeffrey Stiefler as president, chairman and CEO of Digital Insight. For those who don’t follow eFinance that closely, Digital Insight is:

Digital Insight® Corporation (Nasdaq:DGIN) is a leading eFinance enabler for visionary financial institutions. Through its comprehensive portfolio of outsourced, Internet-based financial products and services built upon the company’s unique architecture, Digital Insight moves banks and credit unions beyond Internet banking to become the trusted transaction hub for their retail and commercial customers.

Translation: They create software that helps small banks and thrifts provide services like internet banking. I have my doubts about the short term prospects of Digital Insight. There stock was up a bit to 20.36 on news of Stiefler’s appointment. If the stock is above 20 a year from now, I would say that he has done a fine job.

I could only find one minor reference to Stiefler at the Williams web site, as chair of planned giving for the class of 1968. The class-warriors among you (and those involved with major gifts at the alumni fund) will be interested to note that Stiefler was paid a ton of money while he was president of American Express in the mid 1990’s. (This is a matter of public record because of the SEC filings that American Express made at the time.)

I don’t know anything about Stiefler activities at Williams, or even if he was at his 35th reunion last June.

In any event, it is pleasing to see the broad spectrum of activities — from rock-star to CEO — that Williams graduates are engaged in.


Nice article in the New

Nice article in the New York Times about Fountains of Wayne, on-the-rise rock band led by Chris Collingwood and Adam Schlesinger, both ’89. My favorite part:

“They are in the mid-30’s and don’t look, sound or dress particularly cool, which makes them very cool in a way,” said Craig Marks, editor of Blender magazine, which bestowed five out of five stars on the band for its latest album. “They understand the middle-management dance of fear that so many people are doing in a downsizing era.”

I will try this theory on my seven year old daughter (i.e., Dad is cool despite his sound and dress). I don’t think that it will work as well for me as it does for Chris and Adam.


Rodney Cunningham ’88 wonders if

Rodney Cunningham ’88 wonders if there is a blog devoted to just news about the class of 1988.

As best we can determine, there is not, but we would be happy to link to one if there was. Please let us know.

Of course, we still intend to publish any and all information about the Williams class of 1988 that we come across, along with anything and everything Williams related.


Jason Law sent in this

Jason Law sent in this note on on the GAP donation:

I’m a current student that visits your blog occasionally–just wanted to comment that either a) there is some kind of precedent for this sort of thing, or b) there are other items you would raise issue with. For example, check out this nearly year-old article about the new Williamstown Elementary School.

The article is an interesting read, although, like many Record articles, it sometimes reads as more editorial than news — not that there is anything wrong with that!
Note that it appears that the total budgetary outlay is somewhere in the $2 million dollar range (albeit over a decade). Hmmm. Our hypotheticals from yesterday no longer seem so outlandish. Highlights from the article include:

“I think it’s tremendously exciting,” Ouellette [vice president for administration and treasurer at Williams] said. “Projects of this nature usually are defeated at meetings due to the high burden on tax payers, but because of the College’s help, it passed the first time out.”

In other words, the tax payers in Williamstown would not spend their money on the project, but, if the College is going to foot the bill, then why not?

Overall, the College’s reaction to the elementary school has been quite positive. Faculty members with children who reside in the town are pleased that their young children will have the opportunity to attend this facility and taxpayers are pleased that the project will have a low impact on their property taxes.

Everybody wins! Of course, the losers (those who would have benefited if this money had been devoted to another purpose) do not appear in the article.


Jocelyn Shadforth ’88 was kind

Jocelyn Shadforth ’88 was kind enough to send in these comments on the Mount Greylock contribution:

I wasn’t going to jump into this fray, but, considering my lack of any other substantial blog contributions, perhaps I can offer an alternative view.

Unfortunately for my soon-to-be incoming first-year students in PSC 101 (they like to be called freshmen), I’ve been reading a lot of Robert Putnam this week. (For the non-social scientists out there, he’s the guy with the “bowling alone” thesis, arguing that the decline in civic ties, voluntary associations, etc. has led to greater difficulty in achieving common goods as well as increased atomization in our society.) I don’t mean to sound as if I buy his argument lock, stock, and barrel. (I found his book on civic association in Italy to be a far more convincing piece of work). At the same time, though, I prefer to think of this as simply a College investment in what Putnam refers to as “social capital.” The relationship between town and gown is a constantly shifting one, and it seems that the College is jumping in at a time of need, probably for both altruistic as well as instrumental reasons. Despite our, in my opinion, well-targeted scorn at figures like Chief Zoito and his tailgate hijinks, the community of Williamstown provided an often unheralded contribution to our safety and well-being. The teachers getting these raises staff the town boards, attend the town meetings, and volunteer at the hospital, fire department etc. One of my favorite memories of senior year was Spring Weekend when it seemed everyone jumped in to help build the children’s playground. Students and faculty gave of their time in recognition of the town and the College’s interdependence. While the form of the gift may be different in this case, I think the spirit is the same

As far as the money goes: I’m sure we all have different lists of priorities for our donations. (Why is dept x hiring this year and not dept y? I didn’t get tutorials; why should they?) The bottom-line for me is this: When I read the Chronicle of Higher Ed, I don’t see scandalous stories about Williams. Instead, I see articles about how the College leads the rest of the country in changes regarding financial aid policy to benefit as many students as possible. I have colleagues who seek me out to express their admiration for my alma mater when they read about Williams, its programs, and its values. And, you know what, I think most of them would nod approvingly over this too.

Also, while I’m sure the College contributes mightily to the town’s welfare in other ways, such as tourism, cultural events, etc. let’s keep in mind that it also owns large parcels of land that are tax-exempt. Since most school funding comes from property taxes, a one-time gift of $250K seems to be a reasonable response to a local funding emergency that many communities are also experiencing.

Anyway, that’s my “observation,” for what it’s worth. In the best liberal arts tradition, I argue, not to infuriate, but, hopefully, to learn and to teach. :)


1) I am not sure that there is anything here that I disagree with, but I sure do miss arguing with my political science professors, so . . . ;-)

2) Personally, I don’t think institutions like Williams should be exempt from property taxes, but, to the extent that this is a justification for the donation, then the size of the donation might be better matched to what Williams would actually pay if it were not tax-exempt. I have no idea what this might be. Also, shouldn’t the donation then go to the town so that the citizens of Williamstown could decide how they want to distribute the money?

3) As always, we at the blog stand second-to-none in our love of Williams and praise of all those associated with it. Indeed, the alumni association is a great example of Putnamesque social capital at work.


Nepotism to Me

In regard to the post below, a correspondent sent in the following:


I enjoyed your editorial on Williams’ gift of $250k to Mt Greylock. This sounds like nepotism to me. Morty and a number of other faculty members elect to send their kids to Mt Greylock — rather than dish out substantial private school tuition. Why not subsidize Mt Greylocks’ quality of education using OAM (other alumna money) rather than personally paying tuition at private schools? Hmmm…how convenient. I would rather see this $250k be used to subsidize tuition for low-income Williams students.

Anonymous (I’d like my kids to attend Williams some day…)


1) It’s not an “editorial”, just an observation.

2) I am more charitable then this writer in assessing the motives of Morty and other members of the administration. (Does anyone know the person who is in charge of this sort of giving at the College?) Then again, what was that Madison quote that I leaned about in Political Science 101? “If men were angels . . .”

3) I want my kids to attend Williams some day too! Perhaps there is a lesson for me in this writer’s discretion . . .


Your Alumni Fund Donations at Work

In the “Your-Alumni-Fund-Donations-at-Work” category, it is intersting to read this article in The Transcript. The Greylock Assistance Project (GAP) seems to be private effort to raise money for public school related activities at Mount Greylock High School. Such efforts are common in Massachusetts and help to provide extra funding for things like sports teams, drama and even teaching positions, especially for towns in which a majority of voters don’t want to raise as much in taxes as some citizens think should be spent on the schools. So far, so good. We then read that:

A one-time, $250,000 gift from Williams College given earlier this year is expected to restore 5.2 of the 10.8 teaching positions cut from the fiscal 2004 budget.

The gift from Williams also made it possible for GAP to focus its fundraising efforts athletics and activities, GAP Ad-hoc committee member Lisa Hiley said.

The money raised by GAP for the fall means that football, soccer, cross-country running, extra band activities, the Shakespeare and Co. student production, as well as academic clubs such as the Junior Classical League will be offered to students.

This is somewhat troubling. Why is Williams College giving money to Mount Greylock High School? The latest mailings from the alumni association certainly don’t highlight this use of our contributions. Is Williams really so flush with cash that it can afford to give to other causes, however worthy? Of course, the counter-argument is that Williams is an important part of the local community and that part of being in a community is contributing to the local institutions. This is perfectly reasonable. I certainly feel better about Williams giving to Mount Greylock than giving to some, equally deserving, school in California.

But there is also the potential for a conflict of interest. Who decides where the college donates money? Senior members of the administration. Where do the children of senior members of the administration go to high school? For at least some, the answer is Mount Greylock. Indeed, we can read about the exploits of Matt (son of Morty) Schapiro on the Mount Greylock tennis team here.

So, is it any wonder that Morty Schapiro and other senior people at the college might think that the worthy goal of providing a better education at Mount Greylock High School is worth hundreds of thousands of dollars of the College’s money?

Followers of recent financial scandals on Wall Street will note the similarity to the case of Jack Grubman and Citigroup and the 92nd Street Y. You can read many of the details here, but the relevant part of the puzzle was the alledged use of Citigroup’s corporate philanthropy to facilitate the educational goals of star employee Jack Grubman. The basic claim is that Citigroup gave money to an elite Manhattan pre-school in order to better the odds of admission for Grubman’s twin children.

The central problem for both Citigroup and Williams is that any act of philanthropy is a) good in and of itself; b) potentially useful to the larger goals of the insitution (Williams benefits from having better faculty and better faculty are more likely to come to Williams if the local school system is good); and c) potentially beneficial to specific senior employees with decision-making authority over the philanthropy (Morty Schapiro benefits if his son’s tennis team has nicer facilities).

Of course, we at Williams Blog Central think highly of Morty Schapiro — and not just because we want a job from him some day! — so it is out of the question that Williams might have given to Mount Greylock for reason c). But the conflict of interest doesn’t go away just because one has faith in the specific people involved. If you disagree, ask yourself how things would change if Williams gave $250 thousand every year, or how about $2.5 million, or even $25 million. Whatever the amount, reasons a) and b) would still be true.

Perhaps the safest policy would be for Williams to give no cash contributions of any kind. This doesn’t prevent Williams from being a good neighbor (letting the Mount Greylock tennis team use our courts for its big tournament, for example), but it would certainly decrease any potential for problems.

If it were me, that $250,000 would have instead gone to merit scholarships for under-represented minorities. Surely that is a better use of the College’s limited resources . . .