From regular "chat sessions" about our social lives, to heady discussions on our universe's constant state of flux, to pseudo-debates on political issues, my friends and I have conversations that cover it all. I recently observed, however, that when we talk about Dartmouth (read: the ways in which we directly interact with the institutions of the College), our conversations frequently progress down a familiar path and come to a familiar conclusion. We always tend to end with a comment along these lines: It just doesn't make sense to create the type of complex administrative bureaucracy that Dartmouth utilizes, especially when so many of the administrators seem clueless about the process of enacting effective policies.
As I think more and more about Dartmouth's bureaucratic structure and the administrators themselves, I find myself asking: What is the job description for an ideal Dartmouth administrator? I ask this question about everyone from President Wright down to the assistants in sub-offices of second-tier deans, because all of these people are making decisions that dictate so much of our daily lives as undergraduates.
In order to be an administrator at Dartmouth, an individual must understand that he or she must balance two wholly different labels. One is the role of an accessible school administrator; the other is that of a policy-maker. It is my experience that at Dartmouth we have too many that fit the mold of the former, and not enough of the latter -- perhaps a reflection of Dartmouth's balancing act between liberal arts college and premier university.
To demonstrate this concept, let's consider a common example that is close to the heart of any frat boy or (local) sorority girl: kegs. Through anecdotal experience, I have found that a standard administrative response to the keg question might read as follows: "The decision was very complicated, but one of the main goals was to eliminate the binge drinking associated with kegs."
As any clear thinker can see, this logic is faulty at best. Yes, kegs may be a cultural symbol for college parties, but such a symbology will take us only so far in creating College policy. Put simply, kegs are an undeniably more economical method for purchasing beer for both our wallets and Mother Nature. Further, kegs do not promote the rapid consumption of alcohol; in fact, it is the opposite -- just ask any student over the age of 21 who has had to wait in line at the bar of a keg party. My purpose here isn't to fight the trite battle over kegs, but rather to use this specific policy example as a reflection of the shortsightedness that occurs.
So what is the solution? The knee-jerk answer is to call for a streamlined bureaucracy composed solely of former policy-makers and economists, rather than individuals whose resumes are filled with experience in education administration. This solution has also been implied by many of the disillusioned alumni over the past month. Perhaps this option is a good one -- who wouldn't want to live under the auspices of a well-oiled, economical, technocratic bureaucracy? I wouldn't!
Running Dartmouth requires something other than near-perfect policies; it requires personality. Our institutional culture sets us apart from many of our peers. Many of us become infuriated with some of the garbage that gets spewed out of the administration because it conflicts with the dynamic traditions that characterize Dartmouth. But if we move too far in the direction of corporate efficiency, we would run into precisely the same problems of losing our traditional culture. Regardless of what I think about the decision-making abilities and expertise of some lower-level administrators, it is nice to have "quirky administrator x" I can approach with concerns, as opposed to just being directed towards "policy z."
Our answer, then, is not to abolish the bureaucracy, but it also must not be to let it stand idle. Polarizing events such as the current alumni governance controversy can force us towards either extreme, but both are misguided. Ideally, we could find competent people who are proficient in analyzing policy and not too far removed from the reality of college life, but these people aren't easy to find. The next best thing we can do is eliminate some of the positions on the bottom that serve merely as safety valves for decreasing accountability, while replacing some upper members of the bureaucracy with people who are a bit more corporate-minded. Efficiency from the top will filter down and monitor lackluster performances, with laid-back attitudes at the bottom maintaining the minor daily inefficiency that contributes to the New England charm.
Efficient yet accessible -- that seems like a good Dartmouth to me.