Need-blind admissions

Editorial: Reforming advising

Students have consistently given poor marks to academic advising at Bowdoin, and with last fall's reaccreditation report finally mirroring the sentiments of disappointed advisees, the College has taken steps toward reforming its academic advising program. With the appointment of advising czar Steven Cornish as the associate dean for curriculum, the administration is looking to replace a hit-or-miss system with one that could offer overwhelmed first years better guidance. This change has been a long time coming.

Editorial: Art Museum Renovation

When the College unveils the newly renovated art museum this weekend, it will mark the end of an era that was frustrating, limiting, interminable?and completely worth it. Several years ago, when it had become obvious that the aging Walker Art Building would need to be renovated in order for it to remain viable, Bowdoin officials were faced with a decision: They could touch up the place just enough to get it up to code, or they could aim for something more ambitious?they could create a completely new space that would set a new standard for college-owned art museums.

Editorial

This piece represents the opinion of The Bowdoin Orient editorial board.

September 28, 2007

A Bowdoin education is priceless. Unfortunately, it is also pricey. This year's tuition and fees total $46,260. Last year, the median American household made $48,201, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Needless to say, in order to send their kids to Bowdoin, most families need assistance.

Bowdoin has done a good job keeping financial aid high on its list of priorities. College officials have pledged 30 percent of capital campaign funds to student aid, and President Barry Mills told the Orient this week that the College spends a significant amount of its yearly endowment draw on aid.

While we commend the College for its efforts to reduce the gap between what most students can pay and what they are required to pay, we believe that these efforts ought to be taken further: Bowdoin must turn what it guardedly calls a need-blind admissions "practice" into a need-blind policy.

We understand the argument against codifying need-blind admissions. An official policy would eliminate wiggle room in case the College finds itself with a budget deficit sometime in the future. A "practice," on the other hand, would allow Bowdoin to suspend need-blind admissions as a contingency without making significant sacrifices elsewhere in the budget. Once the College adopts an official need-blind policy, it will be very poor form to renege if the financial belt tightens.

The solution is simple: Once it is in place, don't touch the need-blind policy. Ever.

Some readers will call us na?ve, but we do appreciate the magnitude of this financial commitment. We also appreciate the magnitude of the message it would send?or rather, the enormity of the message the current semantics do send.

Bowdoin has practiced need-blind admissions for over a decade. During that time the size of its endowment has nearly doubled. Officials predict that the College will be able to continue its need-blind "practice" for the foreseeable future. So why is making need-blind admissions an official policy so important, if Bowdoin can afford to do it anyway?

It would at least show that our policies are as strong as our rhetoric. At his 2001 inauguration, Mills said that discontinuing need-blind admissions would "destine us to mediocrity." And yet now, $394 million richer, Bowdoin still finds it necessary to reserve the right to suspend need-blind admission in case it can't balance its budget one year?as opposed to, say, delaying plans for that $15 million hockey arena, that $12 million wellness center, or that $100 million satellite campus. What kind of a message does that send?

A mediocre one, at best.

Comments are permanently closed.