In the past several weeks, there have been myriad opinions columns in The Herald discussing the idea of "Brown, Inc." The discourse so far has largely been centered around the economic consequences of this shift in University policy, showing how it is affecting and will affect the lives of students, faculty and other members of the Brown community. Detailing the economic consequences of University corporatization (namely, layoffs, hiring freezes and a blank check for Building Brown) is extremely important in understanding how this phenomenon is affecting the lives of those in the Brown community and Providence at large. However, I think the social consequences are equally important and deserving of analysis.
The corporatization of the University necessitates a cultural shift towards Darwinian competition. This is fairly self-evident to the nature of corporate structures. Starting from the top, where the University is now subject to the trends of free market forces, the effect trickles down from Corporation (wealthy men and women with little to no connection to the Brown community), to administration (a president who served on the compensation board at Goldman Sachs), to faculty (increased competition for tenure, coupled with less job security) and finally, to students. From conversations I have had with friends and from personal experience, it is clear that the sort of liberal, free-thinking philosophy Brown purports to have is quickly being replaced by the model we see at most other schools; stiff competition between students, resulting in a hierarchical classroom structure, which is not conducive to learning.
This trend of increased competition plays out in many ways for the student body, none of them being beneficial to our mental health or education. Since coming to Brown, I have been consistently surprised by the shame that seems to come with an academic struggle. As a disclaimer to this argument, I need to consider the possibility that my intellectual abilities are simply not up to par with the average Brown student. That being said, I think that the work here is often quite hard. Many times I have found myself confused or lost in a class, but simultaneously struck with an unfamiliar sense of insecurity. Again, although it is possible that I am alone here, after a number of conversations with friends, it seems that a number of us are in the same boat.
This sort of hierarchical classroom structure can only be attributed to competition, and is directly antithetical to our mission statement: "The mission of Brown University is to serve the community, the nation, and the world by discovering, communicating, and preserving knowledge and understanding in a spirit of free inquiry." Furthermore, I think this shift in academic competitiveness can be directly attributed to the advent of Brown, Inc. As our administration desperately tries to push us into the accepted linear progression of corporatization, we move further away from the values that make our school so unique and towards the archetypal, depersonalized education of a big research university.
In 1969, a group composed of students and faculty decided that a liberal arts education should be predicated upon one's ability to study what one wants, when one wanted. Moreover, they decided to made Satisfactory/No Credit a grade option for every class because they wanted students to be able to take academic risks. The New Curriculum was enacted then for the express purpose of institutionalizing a belief in educational purity and creating an environment where one studies only to learn about one's field of choice and its relation to the world around it.
There are some who would argue for this sort of academic competitiveness, stating that it sets standards higher and forces us to work harder. It is true that some enjoy and even thrive in this environment, but we must remember that in any competitive system, it is necessary for some to lose in order for others to win. If at the end of the day the goal is to impress employers and grad schools, then it makes sense to try and beat others out in any way possible. However, that's not what education here has ever been about. With no intentional grade deflation, "A" work at Brown is rewarded with its fair compensation, an "A," and I am afraid this is slowly and subversively slipping away from us under our noses.
I, for one, refuse to accept this shift as a natural progression. It seems screamingly obvious that in an age where college rankings reign supreme, Brown is not only accepting but encouraging this environment. However, it's not too late just yet. We can still refute this competition culture by fostering a new one (or in this case, an old one revived) where academic risks are encouraged, and failure doesn't signify a lack of intelligence but a willingness to challenge oneself.
Chris Norris-LeBlanc ‘13 is from Rhode Island, and can be contacted at chris.norris.leblanc (at) gmail.com.
