Spring Break
University criticizes Harper's article
by Miranda Neubauer
Senior Writer
News | 11/3/09
Posted online at 4:24 AM EST on 11/3/09
The University administration is considering what action to take in response to the article "Voodoo Academics: Brandeis University's hard lesson in the real economy" published in the November issue of Harper's Magazine about University capital projects. It allegedly contains factual inaccuracies, is "insulting" to the Brandeis community and is allegedly biased due to a conflict of interests on the part of the article's author, according to an Oct. 22 e-mail from University President Jehuda Reinharz to faculty.
"We recognize that the legal process for slander/defamation is an arduous task and one that is difficult to prove; however, we feel that some affirmative course of action must be taken to protect the reputation of Brandeis given that this article is likely to have circulation on the Internet far beyond the circulation numbers of Harper's," Reinharz wrote.
In the Harper's article, the author, Christopher R. Beha, criticized the University's multiple capital projects campaigns as unnecessary and stated that they contributed to the University's financial difficulties. Writing that the University's campus expansion is "growth for growth's sake" in order to compete with other institutions, Beha added that "such capital projects have become an essential element in the marketing ritual of college admissions."
Beha also attributed the higher cost of Brandeis' tuition, compared to those of other schools, to the number of capital projects the school has undertaken. Comparing $11,000 in-state school tuition to $39,000 in Brandeis tuition, he wrote that "what that $28,000 surcharge buys-the financial and social return on a degree from an elite private university-cannot be found in a classroom."
Reinharz's e-mail also states that Beha "openly admitted" that he got the idea for the article from conversations with his aunt, Ann Beha, the founder of an architectural firm that unsuccessfully sought employment by the University in connection with the plans for the new fine arts center in 2004. Reinharz writes that "according to [Vice President of Capital Projects] Dan Feldman's recollection, Ann Beha made derogatory comments to [Feldman] that implied that Brandeis had demonstrated a lack of judgment and made a poor decision in not hiring her."
"We recognize that the legal process for slander/defamation is an arduous task and one that is difficult to prove; however, we feel that some affirmative course of action must be taken to protect the reputation of Brandeis given that this article is likely to have circulation on the Internet far beyond the circulation numbers of Harper's," Reinharz wrote.
In the Harper's article, the author, Christopher R. Beha, criticized the University's multiple capital projects campaigns as unnecessary and stated that they contributed to the University's financial difficulties. Writing that the University's campus expansion is "growth for growth's sake" in order to compete with other institutions, Beha added that "such capital projects have become an essential element in the marketing ritual of college admissions."
Beha also attributed the higher cost of Brandeis' tuition, compared to those of other schools, to the number of capital projects the school has undertaken. Comparing $11,000 in-state school tuition to $39,000 in Brandeis tuition, he wrote that "what that $28,000 surcharge buys-the financial and social return on a degree from an elite private university-cannot be found in a classroom."
Reinharz's e-mail also states that Beha "openly admitted" that he got the idea for the article from conversations with his aunt, Ann Beha, the founder of an architectural firm that unsuccessfully sought employment by the University in connection with the plans for the new fine arts center in 2004. Reinharz writes that "according to [Vice President of Capital Projects] Dan Feldman's recollection, Ann Beha made derogatory comments to [Feldman] that implied that Brandeis had demonstrated a lack of judgment and made a poor decision in not hiring her."
Viewing Comments 1 - 7 of 9
David Palmer
posted 11/03/09 @ 7:36 AM EST
Brandeis administrators should stop trying to prevent criticism of this type. The fiasco around the Rose Art Museum speaks for itself - poor planning and an erosion of integrity toward the arts. (Continued…)
Sam
posted 11/03/09 @ 11:26 AM EST
As an '03 alum of Brandeis I believe that a large portion of the capital projects are at a minimum, misguided. The new "student center" is an absolute disgrace, a monolith of wasted interior space that houses more administrative offices than student facilities that does not fit in with the general look and feel of any New England school, let alone Brandeis. (Continued…)
Xy gote
posted 11/03/09 @ 12:34 PM EST
The final extinction burst of a failed, defensive, embattled captain at the helm of his sinking reputation... and the once fine institution he's financially gutted. (Continued…)
Gary Lander '67
posted 11/03/09 @ 2:06 PM EST
Are statements of opinion based on factual errors or that are insulting actionable as defamation in any jurisidiction where Harper's is distirbuted? I doubt it. (Continued…)
Danny B.
posted 11/03/09 @ 2:52 PM EST
So far, I agree mostly (if not completely) with all these comments. I'd just like to add a positive note: Jehuda will be gone, at least partially, by 2012, maybe earlier. (Continued…)
David Cutler
posted 11/06/09 @ 9:31 AM EST
Dear Miranda,
As a former News Editor of the Justice, I would like to commend you on a marvelous piece of reporting. I know how difficult this type of story can be, and you have done a truly wonderful job. (Continued…)
Alan Field
posted 11/06/09 @ 10:03 PM EST
As a Harper's subscriber, veteran journalist (and long-ago Brandeis grad), I was surprised and put off by the article -- not so much because it was highly critical of Brandeis but because it offers virtually no evidence to support its one-sided point of view. (Continued…)
Post a Comment