Recommendation to the Wilson College Board of Trustees

Dear President Mistick and Members of the Wilson College Board of Trustees:
(cc: Members of the Commission)

We offer the following recommendation, which is designed to ensure that the very best ideas are incorporated into plans about the future direction of Wilson College; the decision-making process is thoughtful, thorough, and unrushed; and the entire Wilson community comes together to help Wilson thrive.

We thank the members of the Commission on Shaping the Future of Wilson for their hard work and service to the College. Some of their ideas are excellent and are well-positioned to benefit Wilson.

This single recommendation is straightforward. When the Board of Trustees meets on January 13, 2013, to consider the recommendations of President Mistick and the Commission, we strongly encourage the Board to postpone for 3–4 years any decision that would alter the long-standing mission of Wilson as a liberal arts college for women. We understand that instituting transformative change will take time, and certain decisions must be made immediately. We endorse that. However, not all the decisions on shaping Wilson's future need to be made now. In particular, we urge you to table any vote about whether Wilson should become a coeducational institution.

The primary reasons for this recommendation are as follows:

• Critical decisions about Wilson's future should not be rushed. Members of the Commission have worked for many months to gather and assess information, develop ideas, and finalize recommendations about the future of Wilson. But the timeline for the Board to hear the President's recommendations and vote on them is extremely compressed. Board members have an enormous responsibility, and making crucial decisions in haste could be devastating for Wilson. Although some of the recommendations of the Commission could be voted on immediately (e.g., guaranteeing the tuition rate, implementing a student debt buy-back plan, developing a comprehensive marketing strategy, and initiating certain new academic programs), others warrant further, more in-depth analysis and consideration. By voting on Commission recommendations individually, phasing in their implementation, and delaying votes on other recommendations, the Board would be able to gather additional data as needed, assess the impact of new initiatives that have been implemented, and determine whether further changes are necessary. Again, we implore the Board to delay voting on any action that could change forever the core identity of Wilson as a liberal arts college for women.


• All decisions made by the Board need to be based on valid and complete data. Although the Commission and Stevens Strategy spent many hours gathering information, critical data are incomplete or inconsistent, which leaves the Board of Trustees with insufficient (and possibly invalid) information on which to base critical decisions about Wilson's future. For example:


1. No one has surveyed alumnae donors to see how many would continue to donate to Wilson if it became co-ed. How can the Board accurately weigh the costs and “benefits” of a decision to make Wilson a coeducational college if it does not have this critical information?


2. During the 2012 Reunion presentation to alumnae, data supplied by the Stevens group indicated that 4 percent of high-school females would consider applying to a women's college. That estimate dropped to 2 percent during the October and November public meetings. Which is it, 2 percent or 4 percent? The difference to Wilson is significant because it identifies the potential pool of women applicants (14,000+ each year if 2 percent is accurate; 28,000+ potential applicants each year for 4 percent).


3. A trend tracked by NCES over a 10-year period indicates that more women than men are enrolling in degree-granting institutions. “Since 1988, the number of females in post-baccalaureate programs has exceeded the number of males. Between 2000 and 2010, the number of male full-time post-baccalaureate students increased by 38 percent, compared with a 62 percent increase in the number of females. Among part-time post-baccalaureate students, the number of males increased by 17 percent and the number of females increased by 26 percent.” (NCES, Fast Facts on Enrollment. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). Digest of Education Statistics, 2011 (NCES 2012-001), Chapter 3). Shouldn't Wilson capitalize on this trend and market itself aggressively as a women's college?


4. Projections about male undergraduates likely to enroll at Wilson through 2018 (or 2020), the additional number of women likely to enroll if Wilson were co-ed, and the overall benefits to Wilson are fantastical. Wilson has a 30-year history of admitting men to the ADP program. How many men in the ADP program have graduated from Wilson? How many men (on average) enrolled each year? How many “additional” ADP women enrolled because the program was co-ed? How many of the male graduates have donated to the College? How do donations from alumni compare to donations from alumnae? Overall, how do Wilson's “real-experience” data compare to projections from the Commission? And if the 2020 projections presented by the Commission include data from the Stevens survey conducted earlier this year, the Board should be aware the survey was deeply flawed and the associated data are unreliable. (We would be happy to provide a detailed critique of the Stevens survey.)


• The Commission “process” did not function as advertised. If there was a mechanism for incorporating, exploring, and further developing ideas proposed during open meetings, and through letters and emails, it was not apparent. None of the “public” feedback has been utilized in a discernible way. Obviously, not every good idea can be implemented, but surely the Board of Trustees wants to consider options in addition to those developed by the Commission. Otherwise, why hold public meetings and invite feedback? Why invite communications via email, if ideas offered in those messages are not submitted to the Board for consideration? Also, although the College has issued many communications about the work of the Commission, its deliberations have not been “open” (Commission members were asked to sign a confidentiality agreement), and only recently did it become clear that a likely recommendation would be for Wilson to become a coeducational institution. By tabling certain votes, the Board would allow those who have made alternative proposals to provide additional, supporting material to the Commission and the Board, and also would give people outside the Commission part “ownership” in Wilson's future.


• Making a controversial decision that alienates many alumnae and donors is the last thing Wilson College should do. Alumnae contribute to the College in many ways, not the least of which is by donating money to Wilson. Although it is unlikely all alumnae will agree with decisions about Wilson's future, it is nevertheless important to ensure the continuing support of as many alumnae as possible. One of the most contentious and divisive issues now is whether Wilson becomes a coeducational college. We urge the Board not to make a decision that could significantly undermine Wilson's chances of attaining financial stability.

Instead, we suggest that the Board of Trustees consider each recommendation individually, gather additional data as needed, and prioritize which recommendations need to be implemented first. Please table any decision about coeducation at Wilson. Instead, do everything possible to ensure that Wilson College remains and thrives as a liberal arts college for women. This is the core identity of the College; it is what makes Wilson unique.

We all recognize that Wilson faces serious financial challenges, and it is imperative to increase enrollment. It also is imperative to act vigorously and effectively in other ways to increase revenue, e.g., through increasing the endowment; annual donations from alumnae, friends, and community businesses; foundation grants and gifts linked to specific programs; fundraisers targeted for specific purposes, etc. Also, not to be discounted are the enormous efforts alumnae and other volunteers would pledge—and deliver!—to help with student recruitment and retention, marketing, fundraising, etc. (See the enclosed statement, which more than 635 people have signed.)

If Wilson is to thrive, a majority of all constituencies—students, faculty, alumnae, administration, staff, and friends of the College—needs to support the College in every way possible. Wilson is too small for any of these groups to be divided and “conquered.” Please take the time to make the best decisions and, in the process, do everything you can to bring the Wilson College community together. All of us want Wilson to survive and thrive. We share common ground. In this spirit, we strongly recommend that the Board table any vote on the issue of Wilson becoming a coeducational institution.

Thank you for considering this recommendation.