PANIC: New Budget Cuts

There has been a lot of discussion the past week or two regarding the lack of "new student college deposits."

Vocabulary
New Student College Deposit - n - a $500 deposit that students pay to the school, showing their intent to attend St. Mary's. A student who makes this deposit generally attends the school, but some may "melt" and never attend.

The Issue
These deposits are a really good indicator of how many students are actually going to show up in August. This year the school got a lot of applications (in part due to the new Common Application, which makes applying to SMCM as easy as "checking a box") and the college accepted a good number of students. The issue is that not enough students have "accepted" St. Mary's as their choice, resulting in a lower than expected number of "new student college deposits."

Apparently this shortfall comes in the form of about 150~ less deposits than previous years (including last year, which already had a shortfall). The school was looking for around 124~ more in-state and 24~ more out of state students to submit these "new students college deposits," indicating their intent to attend SMCM.

The fallout
This represents, according to indicators, a budget shortfall of approximately $3.5Million.

(Math? 150~ x $23,000 = $3,500,000~)

This is, obviously, a lot of money. And it is going to have a big impact on several areas of campus (more on that later~) and departments and positions. Faculty and Staff had meetings this week where they were briefed with this new information, which has obviously upset many. The new budget (one where $3.5Million has been cut) is being taken to the Board of Trustees this Friday.

How did this happen?
Apparently (according to Anonymous [still don't know who that dude is but they seem to have a lot of opinions]) Urgo has blamed the lack of enrollment on "failures of facilities and faculty curriculum, but it has nothing to do with changes to admissions in the past two years." Could this be the ghost of Rich Edgar, haunting admissions and causing this to happen? Could this be the result of sacking Rich Edgar and Lisa Crowe last year?

"Failures of facilities and faculty curriculum" seems like a tough sell (hello, let's also take a moment to recognize that this quote may not necessarily be accurate nor correct). When students apply to a college, how much do they look into the specifics of the faculty and curriculum? I feel that there is only so much that a prospective student can know without actually sitting in on a classroom, which very few do (or maybe a lot do this, IDK). Does "the failures of facilities" refer to the various mold incidents over the past years (really decades...)? The "Mold Ship" got SMCM a ton of press #allpressisgoodpress.

What about admissions then? According to students working at the admissions office some "early admission" (I did this!) prospective students received their letters of admission until later than usual. Additionally, these students have stated that "counselors have been encouraged to go to private institutions rather than public."

But why? Could it be at the request of Maureen Silva, new (2010) Vice President for Advancement (AKA fundraising) for the college? It's no secret that more rich people go to private high schools, and rich people are probably more likely to give money to the college. Could this shift be part of this issue?

Theory: More public high school students view SMCM as a reach school, whereas more private high school students view SMCM as a safety school. This could explain the lack of students accepting their admission into SMCM. But this is just a theory, one based in stereotypes and assumptions.

Impact
So what does this impact? A lot of things. Less money means smaller budgets. According to the same Anonymous from above (who appears to be "in the know") and other "sources"the following may be cut

• No new staff positions
• No visiting professors
• No sabbaticals 
• Boyden Gallery will be closed 
• No cost of living adjustments for staff
• Staff job cuts
• Other cuts that will be made throughout the summer

 And a staff that once again feels like they have very little input.

Solution
Is there a solution? Maybe "don't fix what ain't broke" #southernsayings. 

The faculty is obviously upset. They want to delay the voting so that there can be faculty input.

Something clearly went wrong here.

You should be
Mad? Scared? Angry? Disappointed. This is all really disappointing and I hope it does not lead to further big changes. I really just want an explanation.

Note:
This is long. I did not proofread. Some of this information may be inaccurate. Comment with thoughts, corrections, etc. <3 br="">

Hawktoberfest Weekend

Hawktoberfest/Family Weekend is only a month away!  And I think they have a new logo for the event that combines the two 'events' well~

Very nice logo!  Simple and effective.  What happened to 'HAWKTOBER' though???  That is what it was called in 2009 and 2010...guess they changed it last year???  Hawktoberfest has a kinda 'Oktoberfest' font going on, whereas Family Weekend is more straight laced.  Which makes sense via one event is focused on drinking and watching soccer, whereas the other is focused on family events.

Speaking of which, I wonder what will the 'Hospitality Tent' be like this year???

Can u spot me ???

This is one of the best aspects of Hawktoberfest via it involves hanging out with yer fellow alumni/students/faculty [one year my Dad spent half an hour talking to my academic adviser and I found it kinda uncomfortable but also really funny and great.  One of those "St. Mary's" moments that you hear so much about, via a small school] and drinking a few beers.  In past years I believe the beer was free, and then the next year you had to buy a cup for the beer, and then the year after that you got a single free beer.  But looking at the verbiage for this year's event it would appear that all the beer will just be sold, via it says

 Faculty members will be serving as bartenders!  Food and beverages available for sale.

 Kinda unfortunate but also kinda w/e via I have a job so I don't really care as much.  Also for the registration of the event there is usually a section at the end where you can choose to donate some money BUT THIS WAS MISSING.  Maybe my memory is just incorrect and they never tried to ask for donations during Hawktoberfest registartion (but I kinda doubt that).  Could this be due to the Rich Edgar firing a few months ago, which caused many alumni to say that they would no longer donate?

Maybe the plan is to not push the issue of donations until alumni actually arrive and have had a few beers.  Most people are probably going to forget about the whole Rich Edgar thing by then, and actually being at St. Mary's will remind them of how great/cool/chill/etc. it is.  So IDK just a 'tinfoil hat' theory of mine~

Dude in the C-A-P-S CAPS CAPS CAPS hoodie talked to my 4ever~

Also this lecture by Cohen looks really great.  It combines his love of sports history with his love of politics

• "The Manly Sport of American Politics: How Our Entertainment Created Our Elections." Ken Cohen, History.  Goodpaster Hall 117

This mini-class will explore the relationship between sports and electoral politics in American History. From calling elections "races" to considering the "dark horse" to "punting" on an issue, Americans have come to talk about politics as if it was a sport. What does this mean, and why does it matter? You'll walk away from this course with a unique perspective on American politics, just in time for the 2012 elections.

So IDK maybe I will see yall at that lecture???  It's before the hospitality tent which is good planning.

Urgo Responds to Criticism EDITED/UPDATED

Urgo, a week later, sent out the following email about the Admissions changes:

Dear St. Mary’s College Community,

News of changes in Admissions and Financial Aid took many by surprise. I want to outline the reorganization of our admissions and financial aid functions and articulate why these changes will move the College forward in significant ways. The new strategy has necessitated a reorganization of positions, which included the departure of colleagues who have contributed a great deal to the College over the years. We will miss Rich Edgar and Lisa Crowe. I want to thank them for their hard work over many years in the service of St. Mary's, and wish them the best in their future endeavors.

For years, St. Mary’s College separated its admissions from its financial aid processes. In Admissions, we admitted students regardless of their financial profile and awarded merit aid to the highest achievers. Then, in Financial Aid, we distributed our limited budget for need-based aid equitably among accepted students who qualified, and capped the amount any single student would be awarded. These policies resulted in many students being left with a large gap between what they were awarded and what they could afford, and we lost many students whom we believed would benefit from  a St. Mary’s College education. 

We need to do better—and we will. 

In order to offer prospective students the opportunity to benefit from the St. Mary’s experience, we will integrate admissions and financial aid and, for this reason, the reorganization of these two divisions at the College is critical.

Under the guidance of our legislative charge to be “affordable to all and thriving on diversity,” we will admit students and strive to make their attendance at St. Mary’s College financially possible. Wherever we are able, it is our plan to offer larger grants and smaller loans to students with financial need. We are in the planning stages of a campaign to raise private funds to help us move toward the goal of placing St. Mary’s College within financial reach of any student whom we admit.

We will also continue to award merit scholarships in strategic ways. In 2012-13, students will be required to apply for merit aid, and scholarship applicants will also be asked to submit the FAFSA to determine if they might qualify for federal and state funds.

In order to achieve the best possible mix of students in our community, it is imperative that we select our classes from a broad and deep applicant pool. To date, our entering classes have been consistently strong. We must secure that strength going forward in an increasingly competitive environment.

We are casting a wider net for qualified applicants, revising recruitment materials, and stepping up fall recruitment travel schedules. We have streamlined the admissions process by becoming exclusive users of The Common Application. We’ve altered application deadlines, aligning them with other colleges in and out of state. Our applicant pool will be evaluated by committee to assure we continue to build the kinds of talented, quirky, independent-minded classes for which St. Mary’s has always been known, but which we risked losing without significant realignment of the Admissions and Financial Aid offices.

We’re not changing our end-goal, but our strategy is evolving. My commitment to you is to work to preserve what we hold most dear, and what we know as the essential spirit of St. Mary’s College. As always, I am available to discuss the reorganization or any other issues of concern.

This was a long email!  Let us ~analyze~ it.

Urgo states that "the news of changes in Admissions took many by surprise," which if we are to believe various rumors and comments on this 'student' blog would include Rich and Lisa themselves.  According to comments Rich had "and hour to clear out his desk" and "Lisa had no time to say goodbye to coworkers."  IDK how truthful these comments are, but that would be kinda 'shitty' if they are true.

So, according to Urgo this is all the result of decreasing number of applicants.  According to some INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM the 2016 class is comprised of LESS THAN 250 STUDENTS (usually it's like 400~).  Which is an absurdly low number.  Obviously something had to be done.  Urgo's first plan was to make St. Mary's less unique via jettisoning the old application and using the increasingly popular 'Common App'.  The Washington Post writeup covers this and explains it a bit (along with the whole situation, and links to SOMDnews.com but failed to reference this ever important 'student' blog) that basically you fill out on application and you can send that to lots of expensive fancy schools.  So, the idea was that by making St. Mary's, a college that is often described by many as being 'unique', less unique via a simpler application process more students would apply.  But clearly that didn't work since the incoming freshman class is UNDER 250 STUDENTS (btw this figure comes from a really reliable source). 

I would like to pause here because it seems like no one has even commented on the fact that perhaps applications are down BECAUSE TUITION HAS BEEN RAISED FOR FIVE OF THE PAST SIX YEARS.  And that tuition had doubled over the past decade.  Tuition has literally doubled over the past decade.

Okay.

Moving on, the 'mainstream' Common App clearly failed, so Urgo's next plan is to restructure how Financial Aid is distributed.  In the past St. Mary's used 'blind-based-need admissions,' meaning that you get admitted regardless of how much financial aid you need.  Which makes sense.  Actually I think I used the wrong term just now, but you should read the WaPo article for a fuller explanation.  Urgo wanted to change this system to 'need-sensitive' meaning that admission of a student will depend on the family's ability to pay for college.  I don't really understand this.  Are people's families actually able to pay for college, like...100k over the course of four years?  I thought everyone just took out loans that will stick with them for the rest of their life.  IDK.  Anyway, the idea is to admit people whose families can pay for college (is this a real thing?) and then to only admit some people whose families cannot pay for college.  By admitting fewer people 'whose families can't pay for college' they will be able to support those people better financially.

Okay, so the above got a little difficult to understand by the end because I forgot how to write coherently.  But the basic idea is, increase the amount of financial aid PER STUDENT that really needs it, and decrease the amount of financial aid going to other students.  So I THINK this means increasing for financial aid for really poor kids, and reducing financial aid for middle class kids who can't fully pay for college, via college is fucking expensive.  Which sounds okay, via getting more poor kids into college.  Also the total amount of financial aid money that is going towards 'need based' vs. merit is increasing from 25% to 50%, according to comments.

Sorry if none of the above made sense.  Some of my explanations may be way incorrect.  Anyway, it would seem that Rich and Lisa did not agree with this plan, and so they were sacked.  There are also allegations that the new VP Pat Goldsmith just wanted her own people in charge of Admissions and Financial Aid, and that she selected a friend for the job.  Who knows if those ~rumors~ are true though.

Okay so I think most importantly, what does this mean for the future of ~St. Mary's~ ???

I think that some people would agree that over the past few years as tuition rates have increased the number of really affluent students has increased.  I can honestly say that if St. Mary's cost what it does today, when I first applied, I would not have applied.  So, with the new system that gives financial aid for fewer people (but those that do get it will get a lot, which is great via supporting people who cannot afford college) I would imagine the number of 'affluent students' will continue to increase, similar to how nearby private liberal arts colleges (George Washington, Georgetown, American, St. John's, etc.) have lots of 'affluent students'.  Which in a sense is good for the school, via they will probably donate more.  And if the students are affluent/prestigious, then the institution will begin to be seen as 'prestigious.  The new policy seems like a deliberate effort to make permanent the changes that have occurred over the past few years, the increase in 'affluent students,' via pricing the college out of range of many students, those who can't afford the 15k+ tuition without any financial aid.

So IDK, that is my ~tin foil hat~ theory.  What do yall think ???  Any important points/issues I forgot to address?

Zylak Sacked

Gonna miss u Zylakbro.  Good times.  You were such a dad figure to me...coming around the night of Gala...taking pictures with us...reminding us not to get 'too crazy'.

Sry that the picture is so blurry via I don't have a $1,500 camera that the SGA bought me, unlike some terrorist news organizations.  But there he is...chillin with his bullhorn...posing for photos....gonna miss u dude.

As yall may remember, Zylak took over after the first new Director of Public Safety was revealed to not have the credentials he said he had.  He was a glorified mall cop, I believe.  So then the school went with former Sheriff Zylak.

So, earlier today the new Dean Ifill sent out an email regarding the Zylak removal.  Except Ifill seems to be incompetent when it comes to emails.  It was pretty entertaining.  Here is a transcript:

To the St. Mary's Community:

With the departure of David Zylak as Director of Public Safety, the College will immediately institute a search process for a new director. The search committee, drawn from our faculty, students and staff will be announced when it is confirmed.

I am pleased to announce that Melvin A. (Mac) McClintock will supervise the officers and staff of Public Safety on an interim basis. Mac has provided strong leadership as Assistant Director of Human Resources and as Affirmative Action/EEO Officer in the five years he has been at St. Mary's, following a distinguished 20-year career in the military.

With the assistance of the search committee and the participation of the larger campus community, we hope to appoint a new Director as soon as possible.

Sincerely,

Bert Ifill
Interim Dean of Students


From: Ifill, Roberto N
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 4:10 PM
To: Mercer, Sally; McClintock, Melvin A
Subject: FW: Draft statement on Campus Safety

Hello, folks. I will delete the reference to a specific timetable, and just need info on the number of years Mac has been here (I think it's been five, but I want to make sure). If there are no other changes, I would like to send this out on all campus mail on Monday afternoon. By the way, how did things go today?

Bert
From: Ifill, Roberto N
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 3:57 PM
To: Botzman, Thomas J; Urgo, Joseph
Subject: RE: Draft statement on Campus Safety
Consider it deleted. Mac can fill me in on his length of tenure at St. Mary's. I presume that, if it's good to go, I send it out on Monday?

Bert
From: Botzman, Thomas J
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 1:59 PM
To: Ifill, Roberto N
Subject: RE: Draft statement on Campus Safety
I would delete the final bold print. We can hope but probably shouldn’t promise that speed.

From: Ifill, Roberto N
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 12:14 PM
To: McClintock, Melvin A; Mercer, Sally
Cc: Urgo, Joseph; Botzman, Thomas J
Subject: Draft statement on Campus Safety

To the St. Mary's Community:

With the departure of David Zylak as Director of Campus Safety, the College will immediately institute a search process for a new director. The search committee, drawn from our faculty, students and staff will be announced when it is confirmed.

I am pleased to announce that Melvin A. (Mac) McClintock will supervise the officers and staff of Campus Safety on an interim basis. Mac has provided strong leadership as Assistant Director of Human Resources and as Affirmative Action/EEO Officer in the (number of) years he has been at St. Mary's, following a distinguished 14-year career in the military.

With the assistance of the search committee and the participation of the larger campus community, we hope to appoint a new Director as soon as possible (by the beginning of the academic year?)

Sincerely,
Bert Ifill
Interim Dean of Students

Okay so what happened was that Ifill sent out the email, along with the draft and discussion about the draft.  I don't know how someone makes this mistake.  And then he sent out the 'EMAIL RECALL' which you see every few months.  I don't think anyone understands the whole 'email recall' thing since...you can't recall an email.  I think it's an 'old people thing'.

Anyway, it doesn't really explain how/why Zylak left, if he was fired/sacked or if he left of his own accord.  He was a pretty chill dude.  Either way we now have yet another Directory of Public Safety!  That makes 4 in 2 years (I think) and soon to be 5 when they find the actual next director.

Also of interest is the July 6 (Friday) email where Ifill asks "By the way, how did things go today?" which I can only assume is referring to the whole sacking of Rich Edgar and Lisa Crowe.  It was sent less than an hour after the email announcing the departure of Rich.  INTERESTING.  Not much else to say about that.

So, another situation where we don't know the whole story, and thus can only speculate.  Here is my theory:

Actually I couldn't think of anything funny.  I'm guessing he left of his own accord.  Maybe he got bored with it, or it wasn't what he was looking for.  I feel like Sheriff and director of Public Safety are two very different jobs.  One deals more with 'law enforcement' and the other with 'college policy enforcement'.  The two have some overlaps, but in one realm having some weed can result in jail, and in the other it results in a slap on the wrist.

Anyway, good luck Zylakbro...gonna miss u and yer cool name.

Rich Edgar Follow Up, feat. PANIC

The recent post about Changes at Admissions (from a few days ago) resulted in a huge outpour of support for Rich Edgar, to the extent that a Change.org petition was created, asking that Rich be reinstated, which already has over 500 signatures.

Additionally, it seems that the removal of Rich and Lisa has sparked a PANIC among staff members, that they could be next.  This is evident from many staff members supporting the aforementioned petition, but not signing it to avoid being publicly associated.  And the following is a leaked (via Investigative Journalism ™) email which shows that the fear has even inhibited some staff members from initiating a going away party.

Faculty are generally safe from being fired, but staff are not.

That being the case, it would be helpful if one or two tenured faculty would sponsor a party for Rich and Lisa, determine a location, and then ask all of us  (staff included) to   bring little bits of this and that. I think so many of us would like to “be there” for Richard Lisa.

Are staff members overreacting, via this PANIC?  PANIC regarding whether or not hosting a party for Rich and Lisa could get them sacked as well?  Hard to say, but I don't blame them.  It seems pretty clear that this was done during the summer, weeks after Alumni Weekend so that students and alumni alike would have a diminished reaction towards the news.  The email above resulted in the following response

It's very sad that we have to fear being fired for attempting to honor respected and beloved colleagues, who have worked here for decades and deserve our support.  I suggest that one of the first things we take up in the fall is to rededicate ourselves to the "spirit of community" that is proclaimed in our mission statement.  A humane workplace is essential for all of us -- staff and faculty alike.

A response that is hard to argue with.  And granted, we don't know the whole situation inre: why Rich and Lisa were sacked, but any workplace where people are removed so easily is only going to create tension and PANIC among the employees.

Wonder what is gonna happen.  Lots of alumni in the comments on this blog and on the Change.org petition saying that they are gonna 'vote with their wallets'.

Also the bay net http://www.thebaynet.com/news/index.cfm/fa/viewstory/story_ID/28501 picked up the story...I think primarily using what I had already written.  And they referred to this as 'a student blog' LOLZ.

Changes over at Admissions

Some big changes going on at Admissions!  Here is an email that was sent out recently (actually IDK if it got sent out yet, found it on LinkedIn):

Dear Campus Community: 

Admissions at St. Mary’s College is in the process of launching an ambitious, national recruitment campaign designed to improve the quantity, quality, and diversity of our applicant pool, which has been shrinking in recent years. 

A bold campaign requires positions that are both thoroughly grounded in traditional best practices in admissions and financial aid and that are creative, innovative, and forward-looking. We’ve combined two traditional assistant director positions to create an Associate Director of Admissions and Financial Aid position. We anticipate the creation of one or two additional new positions that will create vital linkages among admissions, financial aid, and other key constituents. 

In the reorganization, two positions - the Director of Admissions and the office administrator - have been eliminated. Rich Edgar served St. Mary’s College of Maryland for 25 years, and Lisa Crowe gave St. Mary’s an astonishing 37 years. We thank them for their many contributions, and wish them well in future endeavors. 

Sincerely, 

Pat Goldsmith 
Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid

Didn't really know who Rich Edgar was so I used some Investigative Journalism™ to find out some stuff about him.  His name is 'Rich', which I imagine means that he is an affluent dude.  And his last name is Edgar...is he related to the Baltimore poet?  Maybe he was let go because of this morbid connection?  I found this small photo of the dude:

He is pretty attractive, so I don't think he was let go due to being ugly or anything.  I think I met him once, maybe.  Also he is an ass. coach for soccer.  Other bro that got 'let go' (read: fired?) was Lisa Crowe.  IDK who she is, but she worked here awhile.

So what caused this?  According to the email Admissions is tryna go in a 'new direction'.  Personally I think they should go in One Direction:

Unfunny jokes aside, it seems like they are tryna have a position that combines multiple roles and creates greater 'synergy' between offices.  Which makes sense I guess.

But also this could be another example of 'letting people go due to clashing personalities/visions' via the sacking of Bayless, repositioning of Officer Mary,  and others, which has been going on since Urgo took over.  My guess is a greater emphasis on positioning the school as a 'nice school' and moving away from the image of SMCM being a 'chill hippie school'.  As the institution becomes more expensive it will be vital to make it seem to be 'worth the money', and the easiest way to do that is to make St. Mary's seem like a serious institution.

It's the same thing that has been going on since the 90s.  President Lewis (or at least he was around when it happened) got the school to be an Honor's College, in part to help move away from the notion that St. Mary's was a hippie liberal arts school.  And Maggie did the same thing when she took over, working to rebrand St. Mary's as a fine institution of learning.  And it just continues to the most recent graduation, which banned the distribution of beer to graduates.

So, my guess is that St. Mary's will continue to brand itself more and more as a 'good school'.  And this is just another part of it.

It's no secret that the number of applicants to SMCM has steadily been on the decline.  It's almost as if raising tuition consistently for several years in a row has had a negative effect on how many students apply to and can afford SMCM.