David Kanter | Preserving an independent curriculum

Now that the firestorm surrounding the Logan Hall-Claudia Cohen Hall Fiasco has died down, we can put the whole episode in a little bit of context.

Frankly, the name of the building won't compromise the quality of your Philosophy lecture in Logan/Cohen 17.

Those, however, who saw the name change as an example of the University giving into a powerful donor had a point. The lesson of greater import that I took from the ordeal is that we need to seriously consider the extent to which donors can influence our school.

I understand that this is a private University built primarily on the largesse of wealthy benefactors. Without the likes of Ronald Perelman, we wouldn't be able to enjoy such outstanding facilities, faculty and opportunities.

But I'm concerned about the extent to which donors can influence the University in light of recent reports that conservative-interest groups are donating money to colleges - both public and private - with the stipulation that they use the money as the groups see fit.

A recent New York Times feature piece on this phenomenon explains that these organizations, like the Manhattan Institute's VERITAS Fund for Higher Education, provide funds to schools in order set up academic programs that fit their ideological bent. VERITAS, for example, has contributed roughly $2.5 million to 10 campuses to support such programs.

These groups claim that they merely want to establish programs and centers on campuses across the country that emphasize the study of traditionally Western values and ideals.

The Manhattan Institute's Web site explains that the VERITAS-funded Daniel Webster Center for Ancient and Modern Studies at Dartmouth aims to offer "new courses in history, political science and related departments designed to supplement the focus of the current curriculum with more traditional subjects."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I interpret "more traditional" as a euphemism for "more conservative." Say what you want about the goal of "intellectual pluralism;" it seems that these organizations simply want to promulgate their conservative message on historically liberal campuses.

I take issue with this "donation strategy" because a university's curriculum should develop independent of the influence of any third party, no matter the political ideology of that group.

John Zeller, Penn's vice president for Development and Alumni Relations, explained to me that donors certainly reserve the right to restrict how their gifts are used and that the larger the gift, the more specific those restrictions become. The faculty, deans and provost, however, solely determine the University's curricular goals. "If a donor wanted to do something that was inconsistent with what [the University] wanted to do, we wouldn't accept it," Zeller told me.

In recent years, however, big money donors across the country have become more likely to tie stipulations to their donations. The Center for Excellence in Higher Education - a non-profit organization backed by a handful of powerful philanthropists - was founded last year to provide legal assistance in assuring that universities strictly abide by the terms of donations. One plank of CEHE's program aims to collect funds and then distribute them only when an institution is found to be "suitable to the interests and priorities of the donors."

As universities work harder than ever to raise money to remain competitive, I worry that they will make themselves "suitable" - against their students' better interests - in order to receive donations.

So even if our University has a fairly straightforward policy when it comes to dealing with individual or organizational donors, the Logan-Cohen ordeal taught us that administrators are willing to do some pretty unpopular things in order to satisfy donors.

Changing the name of a campus landmark really isn't all that bad, and I think we're all going to forget about that issue in the coming months.

But as the Making History Campaign shifts into gear, let's be vigilant and make sure that the University's race to raise funds doesn't result in sacrificing principles that could have actual, curricular consequences.

David Kanter is a College sophomore from East Falmouth, Mass. His e-mail is kanter@dailypennsylvanian.com. David vs. Goliath appears on Wednesdays.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.