GRANT LEA & MARC CHOQUETTE
>Contributor & Perspectives Editor
With yet another year drawing to a close, it seems appropriate and entirely necessary to assess Pepperdine’s standing among the most important people on campus — its students.
Students stand to benefit the most or suffer the worst from the school’s reputation and, unfortunately, the campus has been markedly devoid of a substantive discussion of our school’s future promise, current ambitions, and growth policies. Perhaps it is time for such a discussion to begin, involving concerned students, faculty members and administrators.
Knowing this school is one of Christian foundations, many students choose Pepperdine because we feel as though a liberal arts education that fosters critical thought and logic need not be divorced from a regimented structure of faith. We learn the two are not mutually exclusive and that a nexus exists between those two institutes that can enhance them both, transcending the realms that either could achieve when existing under ideologically solitary conditions.
Thus, the growing indifference of these very same students has become dangerous, threatening the school’s reputation. In order for administrators to stave off the invariable loss of talented and capable individuals, there must be serious attempts to implement policy that is congruent with the demands of the faculty and students. The school cannot continue to thrive with a reputation of academic excellence if the only answer is more of the same.
Following even a cursory evaluation of the student body’s opinions, it is fair to conclude that a principle concern is our noticeable decline from #47 in 2002 to #55 in 2008 on the nation’s pre-eminent university ranking list, U.S. News and World Report. Acknowledging that the list is extremely arbitrary, a higher ranking yields a much greater number of applicants and is the source of school pride. I understand that many argue against these rankings by saying they are biased against small schools that cannot possibly compete with the larger institutions. However, those are the rules by which the game is played, and other small schools are achieving by the very same measures of success. For many, the recent downward shift in movement on that list alludes to the major issues that must be addressed. One of the most prominent sections of the criteria for judgment is alumni contribution rate, a field in which Pepperdine has continued to perform poorly.
According to the more recent of accounts, Pepperdine’s average annual contribution rate of 16 percent is below many public institutions. UC Davis and Pepperdine have approximately the same rate. This is a major concern when one considers that alumni contribution rates are generally much higher for private schools than they are for public (the logic being that the latter receives much of its funding from state budgets, and does not need a similarly high rating as do their private counterparts). Additionally, private institutions typically maintain much higher rates because they court current students and alumni with a greater sense of urgency. Currently (according to SGA representatives who wish to remain anonymous), the Senior Class Challenge, which aims to achieve a 30 percent (reduced from 60 percent) contribution rate from the graduating class, has had nearly no participation, earning a meager $100 despite months of publicity. As stated by several SGA officers, the Seaver Class of 2008 has not reached any of the established goals and is not likely to do so. Other reports that have suggested otherwise contain information that is just wrong. Obviously, the poor contribution rate is a red flag that deserves serious attention.
Another sore subject for Pepperdine students is convocation. It is true that students agree to attend 14 convocations a semester. However, the most recent shift in language describing it is of great concern. As many have witnessed, the convocation office has decided to change the title to “Chapel.” Ostensibly, it is just a name change. But, this simple act speaks volumes about the school’s direction and does much to characterize our school as an extremely conservative Christian college that emphasizes religious doctrine over education and not the leading academic institution that Pepperdine students expect. It is a dangerous trend that may pervade into other areas of the school. The next step is the required weekly Chapel services that loom on the horizon, and should that happen, Pepperdine would be irrevocably cast as a strictly Church of Christ institution, alienating 80 percent of the students who are not of that specific denomination.
The main problem, from the perspective of a graduating senior, is that the administration is completely indifferent to the experience of the Pepperdine student and continues to implement policies (academic and long-term development) that are not only detrimental to the school but exist in contention with the original purpose of this organization. True, Seaver is a Christian college; however, it is first and foremost a college that emphasizes the pursuit of knowledge and truth above all else. The administration needs to reach out to the students to incorporate them in the policy formation and implementation process, going beyond those who serve on similar, more controversial organizations such as Pepperdine Ambassadors’ Council. One glaring example of the school’s negligence is the complete failure to reach out to the largest faith group on campus, the Catholic students, who remain disgruntled because of the poor treatment and lack of recognition suffered at the hands of the administration.
This discussion is critical to every individual who is attending, has attended, or intends to join the Pepperdine community, as we are directly impacted by the policies it enacts. Our reputations are based firmly in that of the larger institution, and our school should be making all efforts to benefit its students through the enhancing of its reputation. Currently, as we stand, we will inevitably inherit a devalued diploma. In 10 years when I apply for a competitive position, I do not want to have to explain the fate that has befallen my school nor my decision to enroll in it.
Pepperdine is at a crossroad. The two paths that can be taken are clear and the fates at the end of them are obvious. We can no longer expect to be highly regarded among campuses in America if we are not willing to challenge the administration on its current positions and policies. Ultimately, this is OUR school — not President Benton’s nor the Board of Regent’s. We are the ones who stand to suffer the consequences resulting from poor management. Therefore, we must see it as our moral right and obligation to right the course of Pepperdine University, and to resurrect the vision of an elite and nationally competitive university that continually strives to advance.
04-10-2008