I want to express my concern about the direction that RPI seems to be taking in spending $114 million on an East Campus Athletic Village.

I am a member of the class of 1959 and the Palmer Ricketts Society. My oldest son, Steve, is also a graduate (Comp. Sci. ’93). He started a company that resided in the Incubator Center from 1993-1996. During most of the 1990s I was on the Board and the Executive Committee of the Rensselaer Alumni Association. I am Vice President of the Class of 1959 and will be involved in planning our 50th Reunion. Before moving to Vermont, I was active in the Northern New Jersey chapter of the RAA.

While there may be sound reasons for some upgrading of campus athletic facilities, the amount involved in the proposed project and the philosophy behind it should be re-examined.

Regarding the spending, how many scholarships to deserving students, upgrades of academic facilities, or hiring of top-notch professors would this money cover? I’ll leave it to President Shirley Ann Jackson and the Board of Trustees to figure that out.

However the important issue in my opinion is the overemphasis on athletics that this plan exemplifies. RPI is not The University of Notre Dame or the University of Michigan, where successful Division I football programs (most years—probably bad examples this year) can support a broad sports program. Schools like this have a better justification for their programs. The schools are big, the sports have real meaning to their alumni, and the recruiting of less-qualified student-athletes (or athlete-students) has a relatively minor impact on the quality of the overall student population. It is just unfortunate that the players do not get to share in the coaches’ paychecks.

Regarding the impact of college athletics on admissions, academic performance, and career paths, there are two excellent studies: The Game of Life by James Shulman and William Bowen, and Reclaiming the Game by William Bowen and Sarah Levin.

The second book is of particular interest as it deals with Division III schools, expands on the thesis presented in The Game of Life, and recommends changes in college athletics. Both should be mandatory reading for RPI’s Board of Trustees. Jackson might consider inviting Dr. Bowen, a former president of Princeton University, to speak to the Trustees on this subject.

I do think that there is a place for athletics in the college experience. However I think it has been given exaggerated importance and, to some extent, overshadows the real purposes of a college education, which I see as learning, personal growth, and finding a path towards a career and contributing to society. Athletics can certainly be a part of this, but it does not have to be at the intense level that pervades all divisions of NCAA sports. One of the points in the Bowen studies is that it is easier to get into quality schools as an athlete than as a legacy, not to mention a non-athletic student. When Myles Brand states that “These young men and women have participated in athletics in high school and they want the opportunity to do so in college,” he does not acknowledge that one of the major reasons for participating in sports in high school is to improve their chances of getting into an elite college. Ask any high school guidance professional about this!

When I attended RPI 50 years ago, its peer schools were MIT and Cal-Tech. Betweenhen and now a lot of ground has been lost and I know that Jackson is trying very hard to regain it. I have and will continue to support this effort, in particular with my 50th Reunion gift (which will specify support of academics). I just think that spending $114 million on athletic facilities is not the best way to do it.

I urge Jackson and the Board of Trustees to reconsider their plan.

Joseph A. Morein

ALUM ‘59