Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

An open letter to President Leebron and the Board of Trustees on the future of Rice

Published: Wednesday, May 23, 2012

Updated: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 15:05

There were five hours to go until the end of the College Battle giving campaign when I read the email. Upon reading it, I found that my beloved Brown College was in the embarrassing position of last place. I hadn’t planned to give this year, despite having given the first few years after graduating, but last place? For a moment, it became a matter of pride. I clicked the link to donate. And then I was reminded why I hadn’t planned to give this year and why I hadn’t given last year.

I was greeted by an incredibly slick website. Portraits of students and profiles from each of the colleges and a video where “Brown” says it’s not just about winning, but about “supporting Rice’s great college experience.” Oh, really?
I don’t recognize some of the “great college experience” at Rice anymore. Vastly improved media image and campaigning, increased national prominence and an unprecedented building spree are all well and good, but they point to where I feel Rice has gone wrong in the last 10 years or so. One of the reasons I went to Rice was because I felt the institution was focused on what should be the most important thing at any college: undergraduate education.

Yet since I matriculated, it seems President Leebron and the Board of Trustees have focused more and more on Rice’s image, national recognition, ranking and fundraising, rather than on education. This makes for a lot of good things: There are much nicer facilities on campus than when I was a student. Rice now has a coherent brand and image, unlike the unfocused and cobbled-together media image we used to have. Prospective student applications are up, and money is pouring in for the Centennial Campaign. Every month in the @Rice email bulletin, I read about the most recent research accomplishments of the faculty or how much more has been done with the Vision for the Second Century. But how important are these things, really?
I’m much more concerned about the following: The increase in the student body has not been matched by a commensurate increase in faculty size. Class sizes have exploded. Despite the building spree on campus, I’m told students now regularly don’t have seats at the beginning of the semester in the larger introductory courses. Despite the addition of two new colleges, there isn’t enough bed space on campus for everyone who would prefer to stay in the colleges - by a wider margin than in the past. The cost of attending Rice has shot up. Though we are still ranked as having one of the best values in the country, the cost to attend Rice is now much more in line with the Ivies than with low-cost state colleges. This is hardly in line with our history of being an inexpensive place to get an excellent education. (How many current students know Rice used to be free?) Ironically, despite all these efforts, Rice’s ranking remains unchanged.

And apparently, the character of the student body has shifted subtly toward a “shots shots shots” culture (to quote a student from a Thresher article that was published Dec. 1, 2011) that needed to be contained such that the Alcohol Policy was suspended for nine months. A conversation with my parents about this some months back ended with this comment from my father: “The type of students they were recruiting before were the type that were looking for a bang for the buck, the best value in education, and were smart. Now they’re just recruiting the rich kids.” I can’t help but think he might be right. What I read and hear about the campus culture today doesn’t sound like the culture I remember. Has anyone considered what kind of students we’re attracting these days?
Given all of this, I put the following question to the president, the board and students alike: What has happened to the focus on undergraduate education, which was both the reason Rice was founded and the means by which we gained a proud, yet humble, national reputation for excellence in the first place?
So, despite the fact that it means I will not be helping Brown out of last place, despite the fact that it means I will not be helping Rice’s alumni giving percentage, and despite the fact that I am gainfully employed and much more able to give this year than in the past, I will once again decline to do so. I didn’t go to Rice because of brand-new buildings, slick marketing, the wet campus or its fundraising prowess. I didn’t go to Rice because of the research credentials of its professors, its national ranking or because it aspires to be “the Harvard of the South.” I went to Rice because it was focused on its students and their education, not money, prestige or appearances.

I believe that focus has been lost. Rice shouldn’t aspire to be like the Ivies. Rice shouldn’t be part of the national trend of college tuition rising disproportionately relative to other goods and services. William Marsh Rice left an endowment for a free institute of higher education in order to repay the community in which he made his fortune. We should be fighting to preserve that historic mandate and character, not pursuing other visions. David Axel is a graduate of Brown College, class of 2006.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

23 comments

David (Lovett '86)
Fri Nov 2 2012 22:09
Thank you for giving voice to what I have felt for some time. I just got hit up by the Annual Fund, and I turned them down, for many of the same reasons. I came from a blue collar family, and Rice allowed me to get a world-class education at an affordable price. Now I'm an attorney, and I doubt I could afford to send my kid to Rice if she were to be accepted. Even adjusted for inflation, the cost of attending Rice today is about four times as much as it was when I was student. Rice used to promote social mobility; it used to reach out to the kids that the Ivy League overlooked. Now it caters to the rich. William Marsh Rice, a poor kid who made good, is surely turning over in his grave.
Kenny
Mon Oct 8 2012 17:02
Thank you for writing and publishing this article. I read it again this semester and it still rings true as Rice continues to make poor policy decisions. I hope that the administration will calm down after the Centennial buzz fades away and go back to focusing on the student experience. I am happy to celebrate such a wonderful academic institution, but I would like to do without all the corporate involvement and overt usages of the 100 years as a fundraising mechanism (did no one else think it was supremely tacky to have Coke / Fiat / etc. around on parents weekend? or find the fundraiser owl to be at all menacing?).
Anonymous
Wed Jul 11 2012 02:36
as i read the letter to Leebron and the Board of Trustees and the following responses, I can;t help but compare this to the nitpicking and nagging and complaining that Congress and many "middle-class" citizens and the benefits they were so used to. Quit bi**chingand be glad of what you have. All of you have no idea of what the word gratitude mean. Also , KTRU ??? really??? How many of you actually listened to it? 40 percent of the time i swear i heard a cat going through garbage disposal as the programs.

P.S. the greater threat is not from the outside , but from within....looky looky here

Bill Wilson, BCB staff
Thu Jul 5 2012 10:11
As a 30-year staff member, I have recently confronted the same dilemmas and reached the same conclusions about donations to Rice. The student concerns - tuition, endless construction, pursuit of image over substance, and KTRU - have their counterparts among staff. I remember Axel for his articulate and creative commentary on the Binding of Isaac. Rice needs more leaders of his moral and intellectual caliber.
Anonymous
Sat Jun 30 2012 13:50
While David makes some valid points, overall I think the op-ed comes off as the complaints of an "old man" complaining about "the good old days". I think it is wrong to think that Rice students today are receiving an educational experience that is any worse than what David had having graduated in 2006. Class sizes are still relatively small and the quality of students admitted as measured by their GPAs and SAT scores is still high.

And the current administration is absolutely right to focus on "Rice's image, national recognition, ranking, and fundraising". Since I myself graduated, I've gone on to do bigger and better things, and attend "better" universities outside of the country. What I have learned is that practically no one has heard of Rice. If you think our name recognition (and by extension, the value of our diplomas) is low in the American northeast, wait until you leave the country! Like it or not, this stuff *really* matters, and as a university, we ignore it at our own peril.

Judy Ragland Lloyd, Jones '68
Thu Jun 28 2012 16:40
Here's a perspective from an older alum, class of '68, who entered Rice as the last class to attend tuition free. Yes, I was VERY fortunate to not have to pay tuition for my four years. I was fortunate to have smaller class sizes and to have received a tremendous education. But times do change. I look at the current situation not as a comparison to almost 45 years ago but to what a similar education would be compared to a large public university today. Rice students still enjoy smaller class sizes, a smaller, more close knit student body, and outstanding instructors. We still have a college system that is the envy of many other schools. I was a commuter student living in Houston, but felt fully integrated into campus life through my affiliation with Jones. Yes, the cost of higher education has risen dramatically over the past several years at Rice, as it has at all institutions of higher learning around the country. This is especially true at state-supported universities where the economy crunch has forced states to cut back on support to higher education in order to balance state budgets. If I were considering a college education today, I would not be able to afford Rice without a scholarship. It is still a school worthy of my support for providing that student aid to the best and brightest who wish to attend and who are seeking a unique education experience over what a public university can provide.
Archi '10, '12
Thu Jun 28 2012 02:56
I've been an undergrad architecture student at Rice for the last 6 years and I fully agree with Axel's op-ed.

Rice's locked-in tuition based on a student's matriculation year was one thing that drew me to the University, especially since I planned for 5 years. Little did I know, that even though I was in the last class to have this guaranteed tuition rate for all years of attendance, my tuition would rise more than 31% by the time I graduated. From 2006 to 2012 my annual tuition and fees (excluding room and board) rose from $26,974 to $35,453. After being told upon Matriculation that my tuition would stay stable, my parents and I felt repeatedly and unfairly gouged over the next 5 years.

Rice has taken the attitude that if something does not cost alot, it will not be valued. On the contrary, I value my education not based on what it cost, but based on what I learned. Raising the cost of the education, but lowering its quality only makes me value it less.

Tom Bisciglia
Wed Jun 27 2012 15:23
I'm usually bad at predicting the future or reading true intentions, but I distinctly remember learning about the additional colleges and thinking, "Uh oh - Rice is looking to increase enrollment" - completely contrary to the vision of the school and what made it so special for me. To learn now that, in fact, the administration has done exactly that makes me feel justified in withholding contributions every year but one since I graduated. That trend will not be reversing itself as long as the present decision trends continue (or as long as I remain cheap). Get it together, Rice. I have been extolling your virtues to my kids and grooming them to consider enrollment someday, but I may have to rethink that if things continue at this pace. Not that Rice wants them if they're not considering domestic students as valuable in the first place...
LA Jones '07
Tue Jun 26 2012 16:23
Well-written article, David. If class sizes really are increasing that much, that makes me sad. I went to Rice because it offered a top-notch education, but more than that it offered a chance to get to know my professors and engage with a thoughtful, close-knit student body. I have been very disappointed with Leebron's presidency and frankly won't be giving any money until he leaves. The first straw was most of the Hispanic Studies faculty leaving for UT my senior year because the administration wanted to cut down the program. I ended up graduating with a dual major in Hispanic Studies, but without one of the required classes because no remaining faculty member was qualified to teach Spanish linguistics. The second straw was selling KTRU's transmitter. Volunteering at KTRU was one of my best, most formative experiences at Rice and it makes me sad that Rice's administration no longer seems to listen to its student body.
Stretton '12
Mon Jun 25 2012 17:50
While I agree with just about all of the complaints against Leebron and Co. in this article, I'm in a position to say that the undergraduate population still flourishes, despite the administration's best efforts as it sometimes seems. I believe that many of the issues with the undergraduate culture were brought about by a simple lack of upperclassman leadership. It's up to the kids there now to be role models for incoming freshmen, and how well they do that job is influenced directly by the quality of the masters and RAs. Whether or not you choose to give to the Annual Fund probably won't influence that very much, although I'm still inclined to make restricted gifts to support only financial aid in hopes that each incoming class will be able to bring in more people like Tsz.
Faust '09
Sat Jun 23 2012 05:48
It's at a point now where if i were now making the choice of where to go to college, I don't know if i'd pick Rice again. I chose the school because it was unabashed and weird and didn't *need* to be an Ivy--now I'm not sure I can say that anymore.
Anonymous
Fri Jun 22 2012 10:12
I see Rice overly concerned about their "international" reputation. They are bypassing very well qualified American students to expand their overseas population in the undergraduate classes. Children of alumni who are well qualified are not being admitted. While an international student body is one thing, they are undermining their base and creating resentment among the alumni. I have not increased my husband's and my contributions due to an underlying resentment at weakening the undergraduate experience, which is the core of what made Rice so special in the past.
Ania (Brown '98)
Thu Jun 21 2012 13:12
Disappointing that recent students aren't chiming in with their perspective on the current student experience.
Tsz Wong
Sun Jun 17 2012 20:07
Rankings should be taken with a grain of salt, which is one thing I would like for Rice to not use in its fundraising efforts. The criteria US News uses is ridiculous, especially the surveys they send out to administrators and high school counselors since many of them don't bother replying or are biased. Readers should also be cautious with Shanghai's "Academic World Rankings." Heavily relying on the number of alumni winning Nobel prizes or Fields medals is an inaccurate measurement of a school's overall quality. Forbes is worse - they judge schools based on RateMyProfessor.com opinions.
Anonymous
Sat Jun 16 2012 19:49
Maintaining the value of a Rice diploma should be a top priority. Maybe money is a part of that. But I have a distinct memory that Rice was actually ranked higher 25 years ago when tuition was under $10k on the level of a public university like UT. Things like hosting a G7 summit will do more for the school's reputation, including international recognition, than growth just for the sake of growth.
D.O. Class of '00
Fri Jun 15 2012 09:11
I remember the big fundraising campaign to build more colleges. A lot of alums, including myself, were worried that this meant they would be expanding the size of the school, (and the small community atmosphere was one of the things that had drawn me to Rice in the first place). They sold it to us by reminding us that not all students were guaranteed on-campus housing, and promising us that the purpose of the new colleges was to allow everyone on campus and that the student body wouldn't expand.

Then they broke their promise, expanded class sizes, and now a lower percentage of students can live on campus than before the colleges were built. At that point, I swore I'd never donate again to Rice, and I haven't.

Rice was always the best in the country at what it did, but it will never be as good as Princeton at what Princeton does. Instead of turning it into a second rate Princeton, we should be focusing on keeping Rice a first rate Rice. Leebron has been terrible for the school, and I fully endorse everything David Axel says in this Op-Ed.

Doug Mischlich SRC '84
Thu Jun 14 2012 11:26
What an excellent statement by David Axel...."it seems President Leebron and the Board of Trustees have focused more and more on Rice's image, national recognition, ranking and fundraising, rather than on education." My opinion: When I was at Rice, Rice did what Rice thought was best and not what some national ranking thought was best. This though process and leadership made Rice as a very UNIQUE university and provided a high quality education. Did Rice make the national rankings 30 years ago? The answer is "WHO CARES." (the answer is also "yes" but that was not the focus). The Rice-of-old created its own standards and made its own decisions. Today's Rice follows the national rankings and images to make Rice's decisions. That's not leadership, that's follow the leader....follow someone else's standards. In the very recent past Rice would set its tuition rate to make #4 best-bang-for-the-buck....that's not leadership. RICE: stop trying to meet national rankings and start making decisions based upon what RICE thinks is good. RICE: Stop increasing enrollment to be like other / larger schools. RICE: Stop creating a PR image and start letting the real face of Rice University show through.
Bryan Guido Hassin '01
Thu Jun 14 2012 03:27
And by *offer* I obviously meant *author* - chalk it up to late night / early morning writing (which probably affected many of my Rice HW assignments too!)
Bryan Guido Hassin '01
Thu Jun 14 2012 03:23
I second what Tsz said. As humans we fear change and we always long for our alma mater to remain the [often idealized] snapshot of our own amazing time there. I remain very closely connected to Rice and I view its current state much more positively than does this offer. Regardless of differences in opinion, our beloved institution will transcend the roller coaster of yearly trends and successive presidents. The way to foster a better Rice is not to "take your toys and go home." Rather it is to become more involved, make your voice heard, and help Rice grow/evolve in an ever more dynamic world.
Anonymous
Wed Jun 13 2012 13:41
Outstanding essay! I attended Rice 81-85 because I wanted an excellent education and had very little money to pay for it. I honestly think I did get an excellent education, and am grateful for that. If Rice truly is changing direction, then I agree with you that it should change back. We don't need another glamorous expensive school; we need a school that values education and opportunity above all else.




log out