In light of Drew’s recent budget cuts and added expenses, many students are urging administration to be more transparent about budgeting. Already, students have been voicing dissent in regard to student life and concerns pertaining to the future of our institution.
Some students have even begun to fill out transfer applications. With Drew’s failing reputation, we can expect greater transfer rates and lower application rates. If our financial reputation is not transparently addressed, it is not only the student body, but the future of the university that is at risk.
Students on Yik Yak have voiced concerns that the school may be shutting down. One anonymous poster wrote, “Is no [one] else freaking tf out bc it really feels like we’re about to shut down?” The post received 25 upvotes from students who felt similarly. Given the closure of the University of the Arts in Philadelphia only last year, the possibility seems very real to Drew students – especially since the administration continues to keep us in the dark.
It is unlikely, however, that Drew will actually shut down.
It is a fact that Drew has had financial issues for a while. As a private institution, Drew relies on donations from various sources – especially alumni – for funds. Compared to other liberal arts schools, however, they receive a lot fewer donations. Drew’s endowment – its collection of donated assets – therefore is much less than that of other liberal arts colleges.
Moreover, on average, Drew gives out more scholarships to its students than the average liberal arts college. “Drew University offers an average school grant of $22,610, which is $8,811 higher than the average for private not-for-profit schools, which is $13,799,” according to PrepScholar. Although this is good for students and for the school’s reputation, it is not so good for the university’s finances.
Following past spending on campus renovations such as the construction of McLendon in 2009, the current administration is facing a desperate need to replenish the endowment. The Drew Forest and land sale was intended for this purpose; however, while the terms for the sale have been agreed upon, the transaction has yet to take place. This delay may be related to Trump’s efforts to freeze federal funding, though this is currently unconfirmed.
The delay of the forest sale explains the sudden cut in club budgets and the attachment of fees to what should be free campus amenities.
Before the spring semester began, a mass email was sent out to the student body with a new lockout policy. Any student who accidentally locks themself out of their room is now required to pay a $25 fine for Campus Security to come and help them get back in. This is automatically charged to our student account with no questions asked.
Similarly, a new policy has been implemented in the English department for both professors and students. Professors who require a course reader for their curriculum now need to send in the request before the semester begins so that it can be added to the student’s tuition.
We can only hope that the university and the Borough of Madison complete the Drew Forest transaction soon.
In the meantime, however, students are frustrated that despite Drew’s financial issues, money is being put into expensive renovations. Students feel that the expansion of the LIFE station and the addition of a do-it-yourself teaching kitchen space in The Commons are not necessary additions to student life on campus.
“Where is our money going?” asked one anonymous Yik Yak poster. Another responded, “To remodel Commons because that’s totally what we needed …”
When asking Gourmet Dining’s Resident Manager, Joseph Cavanaugh, about how they would respond to student criticism about these additions, he said, “We understand that change can be complicated, especially as we’ve faced some delays in our construction timeline.”
While campus additions are important in improving the quality of life on campus, many students would much rather their tuition money go toward things such as club funding, which they view as integral to student life.
Clubs are responsible for planning and administering student events. Cutting club budgets in half will presumably cut the number of campus events in half, or else seriously impact their quality and attendance. Student Government, for example, has voiced frustration at their inability to provide funding for all of the events that are pitched to them, given that their budget this semester is only $2,000.
Others would like to see Drew focusing its efforts on saving Sitterly House, The Other End and the Commuter Lot – spaces that will be sold when the Drew land sale is finalized – but serve integral functions for student life and are landmarks of university history.
Although we acknowledge the necessity of replenishing the endowment and budgeting spending, we believe that the Drew administration needs to adjust their budget according to student voices and needs.
Moreover, the administration needs to be transparent with the student body about the university’s financial situation and the reasons behind added expenses and budget cuts. When students learned that Drew was cutting funding for clubs in half, they experienced a wake-up call – many students had no idea that we are, and have been, low on funds. This realization has left students concerned about the future of the school they have invested so much time and money into.
With both their savings and their futures on the line, it is understandable that students are concerned. Now it is Drew’s turn to respond.
The lead editorial is a reflection of the collective opinion of the editorial board.
Featured image courtesy of Dee Cohen.
