To the Editor:
I write as a retired Brown history professor (1972-2002) to congratulate you on your extraordinarily fine series concerning the transition of Brown from a place where the arts and humanities were central to the mission of the "university-college" — and where teachers were valued for their commitment to teaching — to a place where prestige and the drive for revenue (as from pre-professional master's programs) underlie a great deal of decision-making ("Mission Drift?").
Please figure out a way to bind and distribute these articles so as to ensure that the corporate leaders entrusted with selecting a new Brown president will begin to understand what a good university ought to be doing.
James Patterson
Professor Emeritus of History
* * *
To the Editor:
I applaud The Herald for its insightful and timely retrospective on Brown's transformation over the last decade. Many achievements have been undeniably positive. Adopting need-blind admissions and increasing commitments to financial aid have gone far toward expanding access to the highest ranks of American education.
But as the Brown community approaches the critical juncture of choosing a new president, we must carefully evaluate the new trajectory implied by a growing Graduate School, expanding professional programs and changing tenure review criteria.
Stasis for nostalgia's sake is unwise, and yes, all that money for financial aid must come from somewhere. But when faculty members are expected to spend more time on research and graduate education, they are less available to interact with undergraduates. Let's stop pretending there's no trade-off.
Brown still is, and must be, more than just another prestigious research university. The world has plenty of Yales, Columbias and Dukes. There are few other options for high school seniors who seek more campus opportunities than a liberal arts college but more individual attention than a typical research university.
Our next president must understand this and lead accordingly.
Nick Hagerty '10
