"We believe that education works best when a school brings together the best students, regardless of financial background. Many of us, many of our classmates, and many of Duke's most accomplished alumni could not have attended Duke if it weren't for the University's commitment to financial aid-and without financial aid students, Duke would not be Duke. That's why we, the students of Duke University, would like to voice our strongest support for Duke's Financial Aid Initiative."
-The Petition
Associate Head Basketball Coach Johnny Dawkins asked all students to sign a petition over Thanksgiving break. And in all honesty, who can disagree with it? Who can actually say that she is against financial aid? More importantly, why would Duke find it necessary to ask the students (and involve Duke basketball) to endorse a plan that would supposedly benefit financial aid-something that so directly benefits the student body?
Aside from this being characteristically academic in that it calls for a consensus that financial aid is "nice" before President Richard Brodhead officially announces his Financial Aid Initiative Thursday, there is another, more troubling answer: Duke isn't going to do anything substantive to help financial aid and is trying to cover itself.
As I outlined in my Oct. 25 column, the goal of the Financial Aid Initiative is to get donors to further endow financial aid and "ensure" permanent support for it by shifting the long-term burden from discretionary funds to the endowment. This will supposedly guarantee that Duke can continue to "meet" the demonstrated financial need of its students, even though there was never any real threat to the operating budget's support (aside, of course, from eager administrators eyeing superfluous pet projects).
More importantly, this campaign to change the source of the financial aid budget will do nothing to actually increase it. Instead of preventing current and future Duke students from being burdened by five- or six-figures of debt after graduation, it will free up to $22 million per year of discretionary income to be used for something else. This campaign is an excellent opportunity to bolster financial aid, and Duke is about to squander it in favor of something we know nothing about.
What we do know is that the campaign's actual benefits to financial aid are at best indirect, dubious and intangible, and given that, Dawkins' letter should have read something like this:
"Dear [student]: May we please use you to legitimize our effort to shift the burden of funding financial aid away from the University? We need your support to convince donors that this campaign is really about helping you-the students-and not the institution. While you don't know what the ultimate outcome of this campaign will be (perhaps President Brodhead will provide some details on Thursday-hint, hint), for now just trust us and sign onto it. Here's a nice all-encompassing and unassailable statement for you to chew on-."
But instead of leveling with us, the administration is content to continually make flowery statements about financial aid, with Dawkins' e-mail being the latest (and greatest) example. This is a clear attempt to link the plight of the 40 percent of Duke students on financial aid with the ultimate effects of this campaign-things that, in the end, have very little to do with one another. These efforts have so far been successful and more than 1,800 students have affirmed their "strongest support for Duke's Financial Aid Initiative" and signed the petition.
This tried and true strategy has been used over and over again. Supporters of the Iraq war argue that supporting the war amounts to supporting the troops; opponents of social security reform argue that they are protecting the elderly; supporters of President George W. Bush argue that supporting him amounts to fulfillment of one's patriotic duty; supporters of public schools argue that supporting public education amounts to supporting the children; now, Duke is arguing that supporting the Financial Aid Initiative amounts to supporting financial aid.
And with each one of these assertions, there is the implication of the contrapositive. Who doesn't support the troops? Who doesn't support the children? Who doesn't support financial aid? As the initiative is currently framed, Duke can conveniently duck any potential questions about its ultimate goals or the motives behind it. This is, after all, a campaign "for the children," and who doesn't support the children? Come on, it's for the children!
All I can do is hope that, come Thursday, we'll get some actual information and be able to ask tough questions about what this will actually mean for us as students and for Duke as an institution.
Either that or Brodhead will have Coach K standing next to him.
Elliott Wolf is a Trinity sophomore. His column runs every other Tuesday.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.