Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree that Bard has been on a notable upswing. That's why the Epstein tie with the college President is especially terrible.

No upswing. It was merely hanging on and now future is uncertain

Bard has been on an upswing in the sense that it now has the funds to pursue its mission. This position contrasts with that of, say, 2016, when this article was written:

Bard College faces liquidity (and strategy) questions https://share.google/f2tKPs03etcRx5PtK

Sounds like around $200m of matching donations are pledges, which still need to come in. See article for Botstein’s take on how much is needed

https://www.timesunion.com/education/article/bard-college-created-first-ever-1b-endowment-21311074.php

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Between that and the Soros donation that makes up over half of the school's current endowment, I'd avoid. Performative wokeness out the wazoo.

What's wrong with Soros?

They never elaborate, just use Soros as a boogeyman for their antisemitic posture by implying things without any specific detail.

Disliking a person who happens to be Jewish isn't antisemitic. Israel doesn't even like Soros.

But you are antisemitic.

Anonymous wrote:From all the details and emails I've seen, it just looks like Botstein was getting strung along with vague donation promises. Nothing untoward seemed like it went down, other than revealing the gross business of colleges and other nonprofits having to suck up to donors.

Inclined to agree.

Not to mention, problematic Neil Gaiman is a prof. Oof

Regardless of how/when Botstein exits, the transition will be painful (founders' transitions always are, and many institutions do not navigate it successfully, especially when you have a strong cult of personality around the founder, which Botstein basically is, at least for this version of the college). Could be extremely rocky for the institution. It could be fine, but that will require serious intentional work and a Board that is eager to move into the future, not just extolling the virtues of the past.

From all the details and emails I've seen, it just looks like Botstein was getting strung along with vague donation promises. Nothing untoward seemed like it went down, other than revealing the gross business of colleges and other nonprofits having to suck up to donors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree that Bard has been on a notable upswing. That's why the Epstein tie with the college President is especially terrible.

No upswing. It was merely hanging on and now future is uncertain

Bard was definitely not hanging on as evidenced by increasing endowment over one billion and surpassing 100's of other schools in terms of ability to pay for teachers, new facilities, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree that Bard has been on a notable upswing. That's why the Epstein tie with the college President is especially terrible.

No upswing. It was merely hanging on and now future is uncertain

Bard has been on an upswing in the sense that it now has the funds to pursue its mission. This position contrasts with that of, say, 2016, when this article was written:

Bard College faces liquidity (and strategy) questions https://share.google/f2tKPs03etcRx5PtK

If he has been president for 50 years, time to send him off to retirement or to his next gig and find someone new.

Anonymous wrote:Agree that Bard has been on a notable upswing. That's why the Epstein tie with the college President is especially terrible.

No upswing. It was merely hanging on and now future is uncertain

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Between that and the Soros donation that makes up over half of the school's current endowment, I'd avoid. Performative wokeness out the wazoo.

Reputations like these limit opportunities for graduates, as many employers aren't looking for wildly liberal employees who may fail to adapt to much of the working world. Safer to attend a reputable institution without a reputation for extreme bias, right or left.

It’s going to be tough to avoid all those right-wing colleges because both of them are pretty nice.

Agree that Bard has been on a notable upswing. That's why the Epstein tie with the college President is especially terrible.

Free fall? Bard has been on a notable upswing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Between that and the Soros donation that makes up over half of the school's current endowment, I'd avoid. Performative wokeness out the wazoo.

Reputations like these limit opportunities for graduates, as many employers aren't looking for wildly liberal employees who may fail to adapt to much of the working world. Safer to attend a reputable institution without a reputation for extreme bias, right or left.

stfu and crawl back under your rock. You are just asshat butthurt about imaginary "wokeness' whatever that is....

Strike a nerve, eh? Pay a lot for higher education with a poor ROI if you like. Many people prefer value for money over reinforcement of their existing political biases.

O you didn’t strike a nerve. You are just nonsensical and annoying.

Anonymous wrote:Yikes! I was literally planning a college visit for my DD (huge into music and liberal arts and wants a small school but with access to big city, not too competitive). I think the school will probably go into free fall. Trustees need to act quickly and decisively and find a proven leader with excellent crisis management.

Free fall? That seems dramatic. According to the school newspaper, only 8 people turned up at a protest demanding his resignation. There will be an investigation and likely he will step down but if he has been there 50 years presumably some succession planning was already in the works. We have a tour booked over spring break and still plan to attend.