“Don’t be fooled [by ‘Ask Dartmouth’ and other administration publications]; be aware: The bureaucrats inflate these numbers all the time. Vox of Dartmouth routinely places new faculty ‘In the Spotlight,’ highlighting all the great professors we gain each year. And all the great professors we lose? Slipped somebody’s mind. Also, annual turnover in visiting faculty is high — over 20 in some years. Though visitors’ appointments are temporary, each is technically an added faculty position. They can thus be included in vaguely worded counts.”
–The Dartmouth, Apr. 16, 2007
available at http://thedartmouth.com/2007/04/16/opinion/priorities/print/
“Dartmouth talks a great list. Its promotional materials inevitably convey the image that small classes and close student-faculty interaction are top priorities. But Dartmouth . . . is never particularly candid about how it spends its money. And there is reason to believe that to the people who control how the dollars get spent, ensuring small classes is not a priority at all.”
–The Dartmouth, Apr. 16, 2007
available at http://thedartmouth.com/2007/04/16/opinion/priorities/print/
“Administrative priorities are a big deal, and to many alumni, our current ones are all wrong. Smith advocates a very critical revamp of the College budget. Any candidate who does that is worth at least a second look. Every dollar spent on construction, sustainability, or administrators to pester students about water pong is a dollar that could be spent on, say, reducing class sizes or making international admissions need-blind. (Earmarked alumni gifts are a notable exception.) Setting budget priorities straight is Smith’s real platform, the part too often obscured by political fog. If Smith will move to revamp the budget to ‘keep Dartmouth a College’ and ‘invest in excellence, not bureaucracy,’ well, you can’t argue with that.”
The Dartmouth, Mar. 27, 2007
“Demonization of petition candidates has been rampant. Regarding the now-defeated Alumni Constitution, Peter Fahey ‘68, a former trustee himself, alleged that a “radical minority cabal” (guess who) is trying to “take over the Board of Trustees,” which “could well lead the College into a downward spiral” (”Five Reasons to Vote, and Vote ‘Yes,’” Sept. 21). President James Wright put it more subtly, but no less clearly, when he addressed the Alumni Council on Dec. 1, 2006. In his speech, he expressed doubt that the College would be able to maintain its stature, or even continue its operations, if any more petition candidates are elected. It is embarrassing that such politically motivated alarmism comes from such powerful offices.”
The Dartmouth, Mar. 27, 2007
“[T]he consensus-driven approach to decision making employed at Dartmouth often provides senior leadership with a single position reached by compromise rather than providing several well-reasoned options to consider. Ultimately, the consensus-driven approach leads to delays, changes in decisions as a result of additional analysis, and can cause runarounds.”
–January 2007 Report from the Working Group on Administrative Communications and Culture, page 10
