In weeding through the opinion pieces over the last few weeks, it is easy to see that there are many areas at Dartmouth in need of better funding. Two pieces in particular stand out. The first was written by Welton Chang on Jan. 24 and is titled "Supporting Those Who Serve." Chang makes a strong and supported argument that there is not nearly enough funding for the ROTC program at Dartmouth, and it is floundering compared to its peers as a result. The second was The Dartmouth Editorial Board's "Verbum Ultimum" of Jan. 28, where the Board points out that there is a need for more professors.
"College searches for new director of Judicial Affairs" (Jan. 28) and "Kennedy announces new SEMP proposal" (Jan. 25) were also intriguing as a contrast to the aforementioned articles. Why is it that there is money available for a full-time position (and surely underlings galore) dedicated to the pursuit of keg policy? What gives the administration the idea that keg policy is something to be regulated at all? Where did the phenomenon of Linda Kennedy come from? Why is there a need for a director of Judicial Affiars? Do regular courts even need a director of Judicial Affairs? Whose brilliant idea was it to have people actually spend their money on social event management procedures (SEMP)?
Taking a step forward, one may then ask, are these positions so integral to the College that we cannot hire enough professors? Professors! People who teach! There are two and only two integral parts to an educational situation -- students and teachers. Dartmouth students don't pay 160 grand to line the pockets of bureaucracy. They are paying for an education provided by professors. That's $120,000 more than tuition at an expensive state school (like Cal-Berkeley or Michigan or UVA). That's $100,000 more than an American student would pay to go to Oxford. "Students find promises of small class sizes unfilled" (Feb. 3) points out that one of the big draws to Dartmouth is the allure of having more personal access to professors. Sadly, based on personal experience and national reports, this is untrue.
Are these administrative positions more important than adequately funding the ROTC program? No, not even close. It is an atrocity that the College does not support this program. Welton would not be unjustified in handing Director of Financial Aid Virginia Hazen a gun and saying, "Here, you go fight for my liberty then."
Lengthy administrator titles tend to carve up small pieces of the pie. This means that there needs to be even more administrators to deal with every other small piece. Why can't the college function with about 10 reasonably high-level administrators with modest staffs? Why don't we demand that administrators work longer than 30 hours per week? Before everyone screams about how hard they "actually" work, can we consider how many Dartmouth offices close from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m. for lunch. Is no one else perplexed by the idea that "no business can be done between 1-2, and we close at 4:00?" Are you closing an entire office at the one time when there usually is a break in the class day and expect to be considered serious people? Why can't the work week be bumped to 60 hours? We could eliminate half of the administrators and afford to pay teachers, or pay for student programs that deserve funds.
There should be a thorough review of the necessity of every office on campus. It should be done by consultants because the administration is far too block-headed, short-sighted and self-interested to make any reasonable decisions. Then James Wright ought to go Grim Reaper on some fools in the administrative tree, and not even hint at being PC about it. The one thing that still counteracts political correctness is money. He could have a free hand under the excuse of finances. What a legacy he could have! He would completely revolutionize Dartmouth and make it efficient. It might make him the best president in Dartmouth history.
But what kind of administrator would cut positions in the administration? Maybe the overall message then is to the trustees, the only people who actually have the power to change this cursed cycle. Please keep in mind during your next budget discussions that it would be a better allocation of funds to burn Parkhurst to the ground and use the saved money to pay Albert Einstein to teach me how to add and subtract.
