This past week, our PLA class discussion was centered on the challenging and controversial choices universities must make when determining whether or not to accept gifts. One the one hand, schools don’t want to appear partial to certain political or social stances and want to avoid unwanted influence by outside parties, but on the other hand, free money! I was personally surprised by my classmates’ reluctance at accepting gifts in many of the scenarios described by President Barron. Many in the room seemed to agree that if a gift could lead to controversy, it should not be accepted. I disagree with this policy. In my mind, a gift is a gift. If the result of the gift is to help the university and no one is harmed in the process, I see the donor as irrelevant.
Especially in the modern day, nearly any action is going to offend someone. One can choose to either walk on eggshells their entire lives, or accept the fact that they will never be able to please anyone and just do what they think is most beneficial for their lives and the lives of those around them, as long as they abide by their personal moral standards. In the majority of the scenarios described, the gifts effectively served to improve and diversify and curriculum and offerings of the university. Penn State already has a wide variety of faculty and course opportunities; it isn’t as though students only have the opportunity to see one perspective. The addition of another expert, whether in Brahms, Catholicism, or free-market economics, will only allow students to gain more knowledge in an area that the donor apparently sees as underrepresented at the university. Though some of those topics may be unpopular, they are certainly good things of which to be cognizant, and an additional faculty would provide these opportunities. As long as the gift does not interfere with academic integrity or freedom, it is certainly not hurting the students. Any situation in which the donor simply wants to approve the results (new hired faculty) of their gift before they are implemented does not compromise academic integrity- the university still made the hiring choice, and the donor has no influence over the gift once it is hired.
In some situations, donors can cross a line. A previous Koch brothers donation to Florida State resulted in them paying a graduate student as an “Academic Programmer” for the Koch Foundation, as well as a faculty member. Both of these figures later had a say in donor negotiation and hiring processes, creating a clear conflict of interest. At George Mason University, the Mercatus Center, an economics research foundation, though somewhat independent from the University, is almost completely funded by the Koch Brothers, and therefore its academic freedom may be limited. In these cases, donations can be seen as detrimental to students, making refusal understandable, if not necessary.
When I was walking out of Willard several weeks ago, there were members of the student group Triota passing out condoms and candy to passerbys. Even if I didn’t agree with everything Triota stands for or the goals they were trying to accomplish, I was by no means going to turn down free candy. Could some say I am now associated with the group, or influenced by them, or somehow indebted to them? People can say whatever they want, but candy tastes good, no matter who it comes from. If others want to fault me for taking free candy, let them. It doesn’t change the fact that the candy helped me make it through a Friday afternoon on little sleep, and in all reality, receiving free candy from Triota had no impact on my perception of feminism or gender equality. Similarly, I think that universities should feel free to accept gifts regardless of the donor as long as the donation benefits the students and academic freedom and integrity are not violated.
Sources:
http://www.collegian.psu.edu/news/campus/article_94cb9588-eca4-11e4-b1e8-9fd323eba747.html
https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/10/spreading-the-free-market-gospel/413239/
Hi Paul,
I remember having this discussion last year as well, and I agree that many actions (or even inaction sometimes) have the possibility to offend someone. That being said, I vaguely remember our discussing the idea that there are some gifts that it may be against the best interest of a school or organization to accept. I would say that it is important for a large organization like an educational institution to have an idea of what their values are and who their most important stakeholders are when they are making certain decisions. One thing that was apparent to me when we spoke with President Barron about this issue is that he definitely considers the impact of his decisions on the student body and the Penn State community. If effects of a donation are particularly deleterious to either of those groups, then there would be discussion about whether one should accept that gift.
In the examples of music and the Koch brothers, I said in class that those gifts should be accepted because the main focus of the gift was about increasing the offerings of the university in a way that a donor felt to be lacking. To be honest, if I were to donate a whole bunch of money to sponsor professorships or whatnot, I too would want to have some say over exactly where all of it was going. Where I draw the line is if the donor’s gift also included restrictions on what the university does outside of their gift. because increasing offerings about one topic does not limit the university’s ability to give a wide range of viewpoints.
But then again, I also want to echo what other commenters have already said in how each donation should be judged on a case by case basis. As always, many of these decisions are not black and white, and the repercussions of each donation need to be considered each time an offer is made. Thanks for sharing your ideas with us!
Hi Paul,
Thank you for sharing! This reminded me of my class’s discussion of the same topic last year. Ultimately, I believe we all settled on an opinion similar to yours. It is critical for the University to have some basic ground rules when it comes to accepting gifts but as long as the gift does not harm the school it should accept.
One of my favorite aspects about this class last year was that in a world where everyone is so easily offended, the outrage of a few people does not drive Penn State’s decisions. Whether it is accepting donations, fraternity scandals, Paterno, etc. President Barron’s decisions are driven by what is best for the most people and the university as a whole not simply just reacting quickly to what the loudest and most upset group of people say. This way of decision making shows how strong of an institution we go to and is one of the many reasons why I am proud to go here.
I recall that same conversation from class last year. I also hold the opinion that in most cases a gift shoudl be accepted, even if the people giving the gift can be seen as controversial. In the Koch brother example I saw no reason for Penn State not to accpet the gift, as long as Penn State remians in control of the hiring/firing process for the postion created. It never hurts to expose students to different viewpoints and ways of thinking in class, escpecially in an upper level class that doesn’t have to be taken for graduation.
Paul,
I was actually sick and not able to attend this class discussion. I am happy I was able to read your post and get a general understanding of what was said during class. This does sound like a controversial and polarizing issue. After first reading your post, I agreed that a gift should be accepted “regardless of the donor as long as the donation benefits the students and academic freedom and integrity are not violated.” However, after some more thinking about what I was going to comment I came to the believe that a University has to be very mindful of who it accepts gift from due to public perception. I believe that since Penn State is a public university, it has to be careful who it accepts gifts from or else it could possibly bring unnecessary public scrutiny to the University which could hurt it in the long-run.
Hi Paul,
I agree with you in large part. I think that in most circumstances universities should accept all gifts offered to them. Especially at a public institution, such as Penn State, the university should not turn down gifts because of religious or political reasons. The only problem I can see is a situation similar to the one President Barron outlined where the donor has some sort of control over whom the university hires or curriculum for a certain program.
However, I did not have a problem with gifts for a particular position. President Barron’s examples for this were the university hiring a Brahms scholar for a heavily Beethoven department or creating a position for teaching Catholicism in the religious department. While I can see the argument against this, the gift is providing more academic opportunities, not limiting them. The only issue would be, as I mentioned above, if the donor seeks to have direct control over the hire. The donor has every right to make sure their gift for Brahms scholar, for instance, is filled by a Brahms scholar. The donor should not, however, have control over which Brahms scholar is hired. This should be left up to the university and the individual department.
Hi Paul,
I remember this issue being somewhat polarized when we had a representative who spoke about Penn State’s funds and the ethics of accepting a donation. This was our last class, but it was definitely a great end.
I agree with you that money is beneficial regardless of the prior intent, but I also think there is a limiting factor that enters this realm that people often forget. Often, the decision for proper donor fund allocation is served with multiple restrictions; contracts are often listed with places that the donor can and cannot place their money. Not always, but often.
Oftentimes, humanitarian agencies like WHO, USAID, and others provide grants for social ventures that have to be tied to restrictions, which eventually lead to increased costs on efforts that may not be directly related to the mission statement of the business. On a smaller scale, I served on a council last year that had similar restrictions.
I agree that accepting a donation is very easy, but not associating yourself to the group determines the reputation of the receiver. Penn State is always looked on grossly by the media, and representation matters. So, receiving donations, in my opinion, can only be assessed as a case-by-case basis. This was an interesting post!