Last week, The Herald reported that the long-planned master's degree curriculums for mid-career professionals will likely be launched in fall 2013. The proposed program of study, called the Professional Executive Master's Program, would offer courses taught by Brown professors to busy professionals in a manner easily adaptable to work schedules - largely online.
Given that the University has long prided itself on retaining its undergraduate focus in the face of the emphasis on graduate research common in other elite universities, we question the compatibility of this program with Brown's character as an institution. Especially in light of President-elect Christina Paxson's reaffirmation of this commitment, we hope that the University will reconsider its plans to bring these master's programs to fruition.
The primary reasons given for the implementation of this program do not justify tarnishing both the value of a Brown degree and - more importantly - the ethos of the Brown academic culture. According to Provost Mark Schlissel P'15, financial motivations are a "significant" reason behind the program, and Executive Vice President for Planning and Senior Advisor to the President Richard Spies claimed that, through this program, "we can benefit ourselves."
These administrators should be commended for their remarkably candid comments. But though the University's financial situation has been the subject of much debate recently - whether in discussions about tuition increases, the state of our endowment or the University's commitment to Providence - sacrificing Brown's identity as an undergraduate institution is not worth the funds these programs would bring in. And we ought to be suspicious when the University adds new educational programs solely because they are lucrative.
The master's program will also take faculty and administrative attention away from undergraduates. Schlissel cited the fact that the master's classes will take place at different times than undergraduate classes as proof that the advanced degree program "doesn't take away from the effort that our faculty are spending educating our on-campus students." At the same time, just because professors presumably will not compromise undergraduates does not mean their attention would not shift focus. We worry that it is altogether too likely that the program will cause the strong relationships Brown boasts between faculty and undergraduates to be further eroded.
Though it is true that the program expects to enroll at most 20 master's students at its inception, we believe this could be the start of a transformation into a graduate and research-heavy institution like Harvard. The University's explicit comparisons to schools like Harvard, Dartmouth and Columbia in the justification they have offered for these programs, exacerbates our concern that they would come at the cost of what sets Brown apart from these other, lesser institutions.
We urge Paxson to speak out against the program and uphold her professed value for the undergraduate college experience. The program's earliest start date has already been pushed back from 2012 to 2013, and the faculty still has to vote on whether or not to approve these programs next month. We hope that between now and then, the Brown administration will come to its senses and reiterate its commitment to the happiest undergraduates - for now at least - in America.
Editorials are written by The Herald's editorial page board. Send comments to editorials@browndailyherald.com.
