It certainly hasn't been the best of times lately. In Haiti, a devastating earthquake left behind widespread death and destruction. Closer to home, a staggering budget shortfall put many staff positions at risk. In light of these troubles, Dartmouth students began two impressive campaigns: one that helped raise over $200,000 of aid for Haiti, and another that brought campus-wide support for staff whose jobs were threatened. These two causes have generated a lot of attention on campus but perhaps a little too much.
Often there comes a time when a cause becomes so popular that we are willing to throw our support behind it simply because it's fashionable, without giving much thought to exactly what, if any, long-term benefits our actions will have. In their eagerness to jump on the bandwagon, people can easily lose sight of their initial goals and develop a mentality that simply having popular buzzwords like "Haiti" or "staff" in the title of an initiative automatically makes it effective.
The College administration has been guilty of such a fault. In its desire to contribute to the popular support of Haitian victims and our own staff workers, Parkhurst appears to have not honestly evaluated whether its actions will produce meaningful benefits. College President Jim Yong Kim may advocate a meticulous decision-making approach, but the College has recently implemented two flawed programs the acceptance of temporary Haitian students and the establishment of a Financial Hardship Fund that may seem all fine on the surface, but in reality do little more than unnecessarily drain resources.
The College's decision to admit two Haitian students whose university was destroyed by the earthquake ("Haitian students study at College," March 30) seems like a meaningful deed at first glance. But the students have yet to be told exactly how long they are allowed to stay here, and it may be as short as one term. These two students are not here to have a typical study abroad term, and instead this will give them a fleeting taste of our privileged academic environment before returning to their impoverished country. Their goal is to continue their education until their university is rebuilt and to gain useful skills that will ultimately help those back home something that is likely to take much longer than a term to achieve. Even if the administration eventually decides to let the students stay longer, the lack of a clear timeframe from the beginning prevents them from having an organized plan of what they wish to achieve here and making the most of their experience.
The administration's second program, a Financial Hardship Fund that will assist staff members who have lost their jobs ("College accepts public gifts to new aid fund," March 29), is similarly shortsighted. The fund may be a kind gesture, an opportunity for the people who support staff to put their money where their mouths are, but it's an empty one nonetheless. Given the current recession, it is unrealistic to think that the Fund will receive enough money or last long enough to provide any significant long-term support to laid-off workers. What's more, with no required proof of financial need and money awarded on the "honor system," according to Office of Human Resources benefits manager Alice Tanguay, there will be opportunities to cheat the system and prevent the money from going to those who need it most. The extra money could instead be used on something that produces longer-lasting and more significant benefits for all laid-off staff, such as an outplacement service program that helps former employees find a new job or get trained in a new skill.
Supporters of the College's current initiatives may argue that doing something is better than doing nothing. Allowing students from Haiti to stay for one term is better than leaving them in Haiti without facilities, just as providing some money to laid-off staff is better than no money at all. But given the present budget problems, the College is hardly in the position to throw around excess money and resources for temporary programs. Don't get me wrong. I'm all for contributing to needy causes even if we might be cash-strapped ourselves. Since we are so short on money, however, every dollar we spend supporting Haiti victims and laid off workers should help produce sustained, meaningful benefits. This means that before investing precious resources into an initiative, the College needs to make sure that what it's doing is truly worthwhile.
