President's Message to Faculty and Staff
Loren Swartzendruber
August 20, 2004
Martin chapel
This morning I'd like to do three things. First, I offer some reflections on the mission of EMU, and second, I will attempt, very briefly, to describe "the state of EMU," as I see it. These are obviously reflections of my perspective--but, to quote what may have been the Apostle Paul's attempt at humor, if on some things you think differently, that too God will make clear to you! Or to me! Finally, I have the privilege of sharing good news that you should soon read about in the local and church press.
Here at EMU we have a statement that includes vision, mission, and values. In organizations like ours, a vision statement expresses "where we want to go," and a mission statement delineates "why we exist." Our vision statement, where we want to go, envisions a learning community marked by academic excellence, creative process, professional competence, and passionate Christian faith, offering healing and hope in our diverse world. To this end, we commit ourselves to: do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with God.
In a community like EMU we are painfully aware, sometimes on a daily basis, of our inadequacies and of our frequent failures to achieve our vision. There are abundant opportunities to practice the art of forgiveness and to experience the healing touch of God's grace. We should also celebrate those many occasions where the vision is realized.
Our mission statement expresses "why we exist:" EMU educates students to live in a global context. Our Anabaptist Christian community challenges students to pursue their life calling through scholarly inquiry, artistic creation, guided practice, and life-changing cross-cultural encounter. We invite each person to experience Christ and follow His call to: witness faithfully, serve compassionately, and walk boldly in the way of nonviolence and peace. I realize that presidents are sometimes mocked for repeating a mission statement ad nauseum--I was given this assignment by the planning committee and Dr. Waller provided the perfect segue yesterday by underscoring the importance of all of us knowing and embodying the mission.
As Pat and I have had opportunity to meet hundreds of EMU alumni in the past year, a constant and recurring theme has been the life-changing impact of the cross-cultural experience. Our graduates do possess a self-identity as global citizens. A significant number of our graduates leave this place to live and serve all over the world and in cross-cultural settings across North America. Our youngest daughter is just completing a year of voluntary service in Dallas , living in a Hispanic community, serving 160 patients who were homeless, are diagnosed HIV-positive and are in various stages of dying. When we visited her in December she gave us a message, "Tell my social work professors at EMU that they prepared me well for this assignment."
In April 2003 a major report, titled "Internationalizing the Campus," highlighted six U.S. colleges and universities, including EMU, that have done "a significant job of integrating global approaches to teaching into all aspects of campus life and learning." Three of the other universities in the top six were Yale, San Diego State, and Indiana .
EMU exists to challenge students through scholarly inquiry, artistic creation, and guided practice. We make no apology for setting high academic standards. Several weeks ago we spent a weekend in upstate New York . We met the parents of a fairly recent graduate who is now enrolled at Hershey Medical. The father told me that when she first arrived at Hershey she was somewhat intimidated by the "name schools" of her classmates. Within weeks she relaxed considerably, realizing that she had been very well prepared at EMU. Over the past 20 years I've heard various versions of that story from graduates of all of our Mennonite institutions.
There are no guarantees, however, that academic excellence will be sustained into the future. Past success cannot automatically be extrapolated into the future. There are some practical things we must seek to do to enhance our ability to deliver on this promise--to be a place of academic excellence. (More about that later.)
A significant advantage of a relatively small institution like EMU is that our students are afforded many opportunities to engage in artistic creation and guided practice. The personal relationships forged between professor and student provide unique possibilities for growth and praxis.
We invite each person to follow Christ and follow His call to: witness faithfully, serve compassionately, and walk boldly in the way of nonviolence and peace. Herein, I think, lies a particular challenge for us at this point in our history. For reasons that are perhaps understandable and even to be expected, we sometimes find it difficult to articulate clearly that we are followers of Jesus. It doesn't take a rocket scientist (why are they always the epitome of the most brilliant among us--why don't we say "an Old Testament scholar or a social work professor or a professor of medieval history??)--it doesn't take a rocket scientist to point out that at the heart of many conflicts in the world are religious differences and lack of tolerance. Therefore, it is not surprising that there are immense pressures to sublimate one's own spiritual roots in order to "maintain the peace."
There are two (or more) ironies in that approach. As I see it, our very deep emphasis on peace and justice, our commitment to a global perspective, are, in fact, deeply rooted in our understanding of what it means to be a follower of Jesus. Anabaptists have always known ourselves to be separate from the culture around us--we know we're different from the larger society. That sense of being "different from the world" didn't just grow out of nothing, and it is not simply a result of being better educated. If education alone were sufficient, why is it that the vast majority of educated people in our communities still do not share a commitment to nonviolence and peace?
There is another irony--this is one that I sometimes have pointed out to my fundamentalist friends who disagree with my understanding of the global church that rejects nationalism. If we are a people who choose to follow Jesus and if we believe that it is appropriate to witness to our faith (without coercion and in humility), how is it that it makes any sense to "bomb the hell" out of those whom we seek to love?
Ann Coulter made this statement shortly after 9/11, "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity." We should be vocal in our rejection of that approach--we should be equally careful to reaffirm our faith. Without a deep root system, the flower will soon lose its color and beauty.
Let me make one additional observation concerning the necessity of "being on the same page," with respect to each of us vis a vis the mission of EMU. All of us are aware, particularly in an election year, of how difficult it is to reach any sort of consensus when a large number of individuals are "one issue" voters. A recent letter to the Daily News Record illustrated the problem. A writer argued that citizens should not vote for John Kerry because he is opposed to gun control. Only one issue counts for him.
Others assert, I will vote for a particular candidate because he/she supports a "pro-life" position--or is "pro-choice." That would be like me saying that I'm going to oppose a particular candidate because he/she believes all golf courses should be closed--I realize that some of you may agree with that position! In my mind, a society comprising "individuals" who have little capacity to think about more than one issue at a time or cannot think of the "good of the whole" is going to be an increasingly paralyzed and fragmented society.
We have a similar challenge with respect to life at EMU. And, it is a challenge that comes to us both internally and externally. I've realized in recent years that there is a growing number of individuals who focus on one issue; any one of several could be named. Internally, it causes us to expend a great deal of energy that could better be put toward achieving the essence of our vision and mission. Externally, it is increasingly difficult to raise the funds needed for our growth and sustenance. Unfortunately, neither conservatives nor liberals, Republicans nor Democrats, male nor female, wealthy or not so wealthy, have a corner on this phenomenon. If every donor to this institution chooses one particular issue to focus on, we will not have any donors in short order and we'll have to close the doors. Pat and I contribute to numerous institutions, most all of them church sponsored, and EMU is at the top of that list. There are things that I don't agree with in every one of those institutions (including EMU!) but we continue to give because we choose to believe the larger good is being served.
For any group or organization to survive, or better yet, to thrive, it is imperative that those who affiliate with it grapple with what it means to be "yielded" for the better good of the whole. Anabaptists call it "gelassenheit," though that first implies "yielded ness to God and God's will." The fact is that any "community," even outside the church world, can only thrive if members of the community find a way to seek the common good. For each of us as individuals, that requires a certain level of "yielded ness." Please do not hear that as a call for no conflict or little dialog--any meaningful community will have both, but at the end of the day we all have to make decisions about our readiness to work for the larger good.
Now I'd like to focus a few additional comments on the state of the institution.
For EMU to continue expressing our mission and for us to achieve our vision we must continue to strengthen our financial base. And we need those resources for several reasons. One, to attract high quality and quantity students we must continue to improve campus facilities. And we cannot price ourselves out of the market. Two, we are not providing the level of salary and benefit support that we must in order to be fair to current faculty/staff and to attract new talent. (This is not to say anything negative about those who are joining us. It is just to acknowledge all of us are making financial sacrifices to be here--and there are limits to what is just and reasonable.)
With respect to University Fund contributions we are on the right trajectory with two record years in a row. (Incidentally, the DNR incorrectly reported that we surpassed our goal by $500,000--just one too many zeros!)
We are putting together the strategy and structure for a Comprehensive Campaign that will address numerous facility and program needs. We are contacting donor volunteers to serve on a Campaign Steering Committee and the silent phase of the campaign has already begun. Concurrently, during the fall term various groups on campus will be reviewing the needs and priorities for funding. Ultimately, the speed of progress will depend on donor response.
Two weeks ago Phil Helmuth and I participated in a conference sponsored by Gonser Gerber Tinker Stuhr, our fundraising consultant. All of the presenters, which included advancement officers, presidents, board members and consultants, suggested that for a campaign to succeed the president will have to invest up to 50 percent of his/her time in the effort. (Not amount of time off campus.) For that reason and to strengthen church relations, as we've announced earlier, Beryl Brubaker has assumed additional responsibilities as provost.
Our total enrollment picture for this year is yet a bit fuzzy, and that's always the case until students actually register for classes. Our first year number will be an increase over last year. That's good news. We budgeted for a slight increase in enrollment over last year; until retention numbers are known, and graduate numbers are counted, we cannot know how we will come out this fall. I believe that in budgeting for future years we should always start with a "no growth" model unless we graduate a particularly small class and the trend for new classes is rising.
We have engaged the services of Bob Bontrager as a consultant for admissions and some of you participated in a three-day workshop with him in early July. Several strategies have emerged from those discussions to be implemented during the upcoming recruitment cycle and for the years ahead. It is clear that we need to utilize the availability of new technologies to more effectively communicate with prospective students and their families.
Over the past several months I've read several books and materials on the "Millenial Generation," those who were born in 1983 and later. They are now our college students, and later will be our graduate students. It is a new generation, and like it or not, we must prepare ourselves to relate to them and to their parents. Perhaps we can do best by considering it a cross-cultural experience, particularly for those of us older folks who no longer have children at home. Read Neil Howe for an interesting perspective!
I am optimistic about the longer term; in the short run we will have to make some difficult decisions if we are to make gains in our salaries/benefits. Our ratios of employees to students are simply too high to sustain. We either stay at current levels and offer very little increases in salary (like we did this year) or we reduce numbers to fund greater salary increases. Enrollment increases would make some difference but higher numbers are no guarantee of financial stability. It is quite possible to grow an institution rapidly by granting large tuition discounts, and yet have less net revenue to work with. No president wants to report an increase in enrollment and a need to cut budget at the same time--and that happens frequently. When you read about a college growing dramatically--be aware that reporters don't generally understand higher education financing and often to not ask penetrating questions.
One of the many benefits to working in education, and there are many, is that one is never more than four months away from an ending or a new beginning. I am personally enthused about the beginning of this new year. I remind us all, particularly those of us who have been in education and/or at EMU for many years; each new student arriving this fall carries both fears and anticipation. Every parent who accompanies a child to Opening Weekend carries a wide range of emotions. We are entrusted with wonderful, yet frightening, responsibilities. I invite us each to enter into this year with the confidence that God has called us to this place for this time and for this mission: We educate students to live in a global context. Our Anabaptist Christian community challenges students to pursue their life calling through scholarly inquiry, artistic creation, guided practice, and life-changing cross-cultural encounter. We invite each person to experience Christ and follow His call to: witness faithfully, serve compassionately, and walk boldly in the way of nonviolence and peace.
Now for sharing some good news that is the direct result of your efforts. As of 12:01 a.m. this morning we have been allowed to share this! On Wednesday we learned that EMU is now ranked in the third tier of national liberal arts colleges, having moved up from fourth tier. Incidentally, there is no second tier. There are 110 schools in tiers three and four. This is the annual ranking by the U.S.News & World Report.
We are joining in tier 3, three other Virginia colleges: Emory and Henry, Hampton-Sydney, and Roanoke. Goshen College is also in tier 3. We do not know our ranking within tier 3 but have requested that information.
YOU MADE THE DIFFERENCE!
The ranking system is complicated and measures 15 indicators of academic quality. Each quality carries a weight.
The single most weighted indicator is a peer assessment score which is a full 25 percent of the ranking scale. Until 2001, EMU was ranked in the top 10 schools in the southern region. We chose, when invited, to be "compete" on the national level. In addition to stronger peer assessment, our average first year retention rate grew, and our percentage of full time faculty grew, our SAT/ACT scores increased.
We also appear on another list within this ranking that is a real concern. Of the 2003 graduating class we rank #1 in percentage of graduates who carry debt at graduation. In our tier, we rank 11 th in the country in average debt load. We will be sure to utilize this data in our conversations with donors about the real need to increase our funding for endowed scholarships and support of the University Fund.
In addition to thanking all of you for excellence, Shirley Yoder and I want to publicly thank Lynley Lapp, who labored over several months to compile the answers to 500 questions on the survey.
Thank you!
