Opinions

If you would like to submit a supportive letter or essay, please email us.

Why We Fight

by Marla Custard, NC ‘90 (written in May 2006)

To the Nay Sayers:The “Renewal Plan” was presented by President Scott Cowen to the Board of Administrators as an all or nothing vote in December, a period of dire distress with an uncertain future regarding cash flow, physical repairs and the return of students and faculty. However, there are elements intentionally included in this plan which the administration admits have no relation to the university’s financial renewal.

The all or nothing vote that was presented to the board was designed as such to eliminate discussion. Cowen admits under pressure that he DID NOT WANT deliberation. This admission was recently made in our joint meeting of the Newcomb Dean’s Advisory Council (DAC), the Newcomb Alumnae Association (NAA) and Newcomb in New York (N in NY) on Monday, March 13th.

We all recognize the President’s valiant efforts following the ravages of Hurricane Katrina. He reached out to academic institutions nationwide and salvaged his students’ semester of education, he continued paying faculty and staff in the face of zero cash flow, he addressed the university’s cash flow and debt rating crises, and he speedily restored the campus for its re-opening in the Spring semester. He has earned deep respect for his inspired leadership in the months immediately following this catastrophic event.

But for all the bravery and ingenuity that Cowen exhibited post-Katrina, such valiant acts do not give the president of this university the license to function entirely in a vacuum and bypass the consultation of the people he is hired to serve.

In actuality, the university’s jeopardized bond rating was the genesis of the president’s “Renewal Plan” in December and the plan began simply as a tool for the bolstering of the university’s position with Wall Street’s Standard and Poor. Cowen’s obstinate promotion of his flawed “Plan” - unchanged from its inception - is most disturbing for those of us intimately familiar with the plan.

It is noteworthy that the Faculty Senate, Dean’s offices, student government, alumnae/i, and other community stakeholders were not consulted either at the time of the drafting, or PARTICULARLY in the following months of Spring as it became apparent that certain radical changes in the Renewal Plan, like eliminating Newcomb College, were in no way related to financial peril or survival of the university.

Serious repercussions of the administration’s persistent bulldozing of this Plan are becoming self evident as each week passes.

Approximately four thousand female applicants have withdrawn their applications in the past two months - since the announcement of the elimination of Newcomb College. (YJ)

Faculty who returned in good faith to support Tulane are now leaving the university in an unprecedented exodus as a direct result of this administration’s disregard for standard American University due process. Where as there was only one (1) non-returning faculty on Jan 1, there are now somewhere in the realm of sixty (60) non-returning faculty after this semester - of their own choice, NOT in any way related to cut backs. It is an alienation and loss of this university’s finest asset.

So serious is this violation that it has incurred active concern by the AAUP, American Association of University Professors, and an on-campus inquiry over the largest de-tenuring of faculty in American University history.

The closing of the oldest women’s coordinate college in America is noteworthy enough to have attracted the attention of the New York Times, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Fox News, LA Times as well as New Orleans’ own Times Picayune.

As publicly acknowledged by the university administration at the Town Hall Forum on January 27th, there is NO financial advantage for Tulane University with the dissolution of Newcomb College. The dismantling of Newcomb is not about money, it is strategic.

Some protest that the protectors of Newcomb College are selfish–that we are dragging precious energy away from the task at hand of rebuilding Tulane. But in fact, those who have continually met with the Task Force and the Administration -students, alumnae, and faculty - believe more than ever, after such arduous efforts, that the preservation of Newcomb College is CRITICAL to Tulane University’s economic survival.

Here is why:
The administration has, on numerous occasions in our meetings, admitted that Newcomb College is the university’s STRONGEST undergraduate unit–financially self-sustaining, in programming and in alumnae identity and affiliation, and honors accrued by its student body. In the entire undergraduate student body Newcomb’s SATs are second only to Engineering.

The university has admitted that the elimination of Newcomb College is about the FAILING of the men’ Paul Tulane College to provide as strong a set of programming and community as Newcomb College has provided for itself. THAT is their definition of a “unified undergraduate experience” lowering the bar for all.

I find this logic to be appalling. Not just for Newcomb College’s sake.. but for the sake of the university: remove the strongest unit to make the weaker unit look less weak?!?!

The number of women seeking admission to Newcomb College had continued to climb annually; 53% of the applicant pool to Tulane University are women. These women are among the best and brightest in the nation as evidenced by their scholastic achievements and continuing graduate degree achievements and career successes.

What has been done here in the “Renewal Plan,” the elimination of Newcomb College - is COMPLETELY different than the closing of other women’s colleges. NEVER in American academic history has a women’s college been eliminated in its PRIME, such as Newcomb College.

Women’s colleges, such as Radcliffe, which did not originate as a self-sustaining college, have been eliminated for descending enrollment and financial insolvency. The comparison of Radcliffe and Newcomb is factually incorrect and has been misrepresented by this university. If you ask Linda Wilson, the president emerita of Radcliffe, I think she will agree that Radcliffe and Newcomb are very different collegiate entities. It’s not just about some girls’ school closing. There is far more depth to this.

The coordinate college system of TU is not only unique, it sets Newcomb College and Tulane University apart from their competitors in providing an intimate support structure for young women - as well as exceptional leadership opportunities in the Student Senate and Fellowes Programs -within a co-educational university.

I do NOT see Scott Cowen’s plan for mediocrity and alienation of its greatest assets, its faculty, students and alumnae, as a sound vision of renewal but rather the act of unbridled arrogance.

We are all working to preserve not only this 120 year old legacy for women but also for that of Tulane University. The outpouring of concern of alumnae is not just that of some selfish group.

Having devoted the entire past several months of my life and resources, having put my family and personal career on hold to investigate the matter of the supposed renewal plan - in its entirety — for both Newcomb College and Tulane University– having heard the lies, dishonesty, absurdities, incongruent and irrational reasoning that the administration has continually relied upon in past months in lieu of a qualitative proposal, to admonish those of us who have worked so tirelessly to help this university -

My answer to those “nay sayers” is this:

I invite you to come participate in the process, day in and day out, 24/7, to fly across the country weekly at your own expense. Come join us for countless hours of research, dialogue and meetings. And THEN tell me that preserving Newcomb College has little to do with the preservation of Tulane University. Then tell us that we should not make every effort to save Newcomb College.

I am not a former member of the Council, I am a very active Council member. And I, too, am disgusted by the ongoing dissention…. but for very different reasons, apparently, than those who say, “just let it go.”