Photo credit: Andrew Jordan '11.

Over 300 students, faculty, staff and community members gathered on the Scripps College Bowling Green Tuesday evening for a candlelight vigil in remembrance of last week’s shooting in Tuscon that killed six and wounded many, including Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, a Scripps alumnae from 1993.

The vigil, dubbed a ‘circle of hope’ by Giffords’ alma mater, included a solemn violin performance, speeches by Scripps College President Lori Bettison-Varga and Scripps Associated Students President India Mullady ’11, and selected readings of student and alumnae letters to Gabby. Respecting Giffords’ Jewish faith and heritage, Claremont University Consortium chaplain Rabbi Daveen Litwin led attendees in a Hebrew hymn.

“It’s clearly been a tragedy for the country,”  Bettison-Varga told the Forum. “I don’t think we can really make sense of this.”

The event focused on support, healing and prayer, and contained no allusion to media accusations of  the shooter’s political motives or growing divisiveness. But according to Mullady and Bettison-Varga, politics has not corrupted discussion of the event at Scripps.

“Here the discussion has been strictly about the Congresswoman and the other victims,” Mullady said. “There might be separate talks about other things that have been going on, but that’s definitely not the emphasis.”

President Bettison-Varga agreed that concern for Gabby and other victims has thus far transcended other debates.

“It’s not about politics,” she said. “It’s about this woman doing something in the service of the country.”

In keeping with this spirit of not only college but national unity, Mullady focused on the broader impact of the shooting in her speech. “For me a focus was not just making it about Gabby Giffords,” she told the Forum. “It’s so rare that [the news mentions] the six names of all six people who died.   It’s important to realize the shooting was directed at Gabby Giffords but it had this resounding impact on the community, on the people whose lives were lost and the other people who were wounded.

Since the incident took place over Claremont’s winter break, the community initially connected on the web. Over one hundred “Letters for Gabby“‘  have been submitted to Scripps in the wake of the incident.

“There’s been a pretty big outpouring online,” said Mullady. “People are thinking about it and talking about it.”

Former Scripps President Fritz Weis CM’65 attended the service. Weis served as interim president at Scripps from 2007 until July 2009, and attended her commencement address to the college’s class of 2009.

The former president remembers a vibrant commencement speech that year, which many students thanked her for afterward. “Clearly she was very inspirational for all our students,” Weis told the Forum. “We were especially pleased to have her as our commencement speaker that year.”

“You could tell that she was still integrated to the Scripps community just by the way she addressed the students,” said Mullady, who also heard Giffords speak in 2009.

Bettison-Varga added: “We appreciate the support from everybody in the community, not just the Scripps community, but all of the Claremont Colleges. We’ve had words of support from everybody, and it means a lot.”

Claremont McKenna College was ranked #7 on the Kiplinger 100 “Best Values in Private Colleges” list, which was released yesterday.  In uncertain economic times, students are more concerned with choosing a college that is both affordable and will give them good job opportunities after graduating to pay back student loans, if necessary.  CMC’s high ranking on this list suggests students can get a valuable degree without breaking the bank.

Although CMC’s yearly costs total a hefty $53,625, average need-based financial aid is $34,276, and average debt at graduation is $9,259.

In contrast to other popular college rankings lists, including Princeton Review and U.S News and World Report, Kiplinger does not use student, faculty, or administrator surveys to compile its rankings.  The magazine’s methodology is based only on measurable factors, including admissions rate, graduation rate, and amounts of aid.  This relieves Kiplinger from some of the criticism levied at Princeton Review and U.S. News and World Report, whose controversial lists are based in part on subjective judgments of peer institutions or students.

You can view the full list here. All four other Claremont Colleges also made the list: Pomona (#2), Scripps (#25), Harvey Mudd (#27) and Pitzer (#50).

Claremont McKenna Dean of Students Mary Spellman has indefinitely suspended the registration of Thursday night parties, the Forum has learned. The policy will be re-evaluated at the end of September.

Among other events temporarily canceled is Thursday Night Club, or TNC, a longstanding weekly tradition at the college.

“If and when there is a TNC, it won’t be in North Quad, and that’s indefinite,” Associate Dean of Students Jennifer Maraña said, adding that the suspension is directed at Thursday night wet events.

A statement from the Dean of Students Office further explained the permanent move. “It is difficult to manage the distribution of alcohol in those residence hall areas.”

DOS made the decision after an incident occurred this past Thursday evening, September 9, during which three beer kegs were found by campus security. The college allows one keg to be registered for Thursday events, using a formula that balances the expected number of students attending with the number of those likely to be over 21 years old. Only one keg had been registered by the student government.

ASCMC officials admit to having purchased three kegs for the party, and say more than one has typically been purchased in the past. But campus security has never cared, and de facto policy has been to let additional kegs– for a group of students almost always larger than anticipated and registered– to go unnoticed.

Campus security for the Claremont Colleges changed heads this year, however, and has seen 80% of its staff replaced. New hires discovered the additional kegs being brought in by residents of the host dorm.

“Everything done on Thursday night was the same protocol we have followed for years,” Dorm Affairs Chair Alexander Reichert said. “So we’ve been living with this area of gray for a long time. Now DOS wants to make it more black and white.”

Spellman’s office denied this has been the case.

“Having more kegs at an event than what is registered is unacceptable,” the statement reads.

TNC, recently turned a CMC-only event, was suspended last spring under similar language and circumstances. The new tone from DOS follows incidents that have threatened other traditional CMC parties, such as the Senior Thesis Fountain Party and the Madrigal Feast.

Michael Wilner contributed to this report.

Princeton Review

The Princeton Review released its college rankings list August 1 and CMC took top spots in flattering categories, including Happiest Students (#2), Best Quality of Life ( #4), Best Career Services (#7) and School Runs Like Butter (#7).  The full lists are available here.

The Princeton Review book, which profiles the best 300+ colleges in its yearly publication, is a trusted staple for helicopter parents, prospective students, and college administrators.   But the unscientific methods used to create the venerated lists suggest our adoration may be misplaced.

The rankings are calculated by current student surveys.  Here’s Princeton Review’s official word on methodology:

“Most questions offer an answer choice on a five-point scale: students fill in one of five boxes on a grid with headers varying by topic (e.g. a range from “Excellent” to “Awful”). All of our 62 ranking lists tallies are based on students’ answers to one or more of these questions with a five-point answer scale. Some questions on the survey are open-ended and offer students the opportunity to answer with narrative responses.

Once the surveys have been completed and the responses stored in our database, we tally the results. Our methodology and the math by which we calculate our ranking results are quite simple. Each college is given a score (similar to a GPA) for its students’ answers to each multiple-choice question. These scores enable us to compare student opinion from college to college. They are the sole factors that determine which schools make it onto our 62 ranking lists.”

Of course, a rank near the bottom or the top of the pack has some truth to it.  Yes, our professors are accessible, perhaps too accessible when they wander through North Quad on a Thursday night.  But we’re #5 in “Lots of Beer” and UC Santa Barbara is #20?  Is our standing meant to imply that there is more beer consumed per capita at CMC than Santa Barbara? Anyone who believes that, to speak proverbially, clearly has had too much to drink.  That’s up from #13 since last year, but our alcohol policy has only become more restrictive.

CMC, at #8, outranked Scripps in the “Dorms Like Palaces” category.  If the category was “A Dorm is Like a Palace,” then perhaps CMC’s Claremont Hall could give Scripps’ GJW a run for its money.  But no one would doubt CMC’s founding fathers had utility, not luxury, in mind when designing North and Mid Quads.  Save a few hinges, the dorms could have been tipped on their sides and hosed down after a keg tap gone wrong.  Compare this to Scripps, where the sheer number of clinging vines may be enough to qualify it for a feature piece in Martha Stewart Living. The dorms also boast stained glass windows, coincidentally the window material favored by those who live in… palaces.

Forbes

CMC ranks between Harvard and Yale in the Forbes ranking.

The new Forbes Magazine college rankings were released on August 11 and soon became linked and liked all over Facebook.   The Forbes rankings system is its infancy–it’s only three years old–and the magazine is admittedly still working out flaws in methodology, which may explain dramatic year-to-year changes.  CMC moved from #27 in the “Best Colleges” list to #9 in the span of one year, placing it between Harvard (#8) and Yale (#10).

The rankings here are compiled from a combination of student opinions, including 17.5% from RateMyProfessors.com, and objective data, including alumni salaries from Payscale.com.

But the factors included range in legitimacy. Under “Postgraduate Success” is the outright absurd measure of listing of alumni in Who’s Who in America, featured only ten years earlier in the same magazine as “The Hall of Lame” for containing “a lot of relatively unaccomplished people who simply nominated themselves.”  This makes up 10% of a college’s score.

Since last year, they’ve dropped faculty awards altogether from consideration.  Previously, faculty awards made up 8.33% of the rankings.  They’ve included new variables to measure alumni success and default rates on loans.

U.S. News & World Report

The only rankings to get a school-wide email shout-out from President Gann, the U.S. News Rankings released yesterday are the gold standard in college rankings.  They’re also the most methodologically rigorous, incorporating objective measurements as well as subjective evaluations by students, peer institutions, and high school counselors.

The much-anticipated rankings varied only slightly from last year, despite changes in methodology that diminished the influence of ratings by peer institutions’ college presidents that attempted to quantify the reputation of the school.  In 2010, Claremont McKenna was ranked #11 on the list of best liberal arts colleges, a position shared with Vassar College.  In 2011, CMC retained its spot at #11 but has edged ahead of Vassar.   Pomona College, #6 last year, also remains at #6, suggesting to consumers that the methodological changes were not as dramatic as expected.

In 2011 the magazine placed more weight on graduation rates, increasing the measure’s weight from 5 percent to 7.5 percent of the final score.  High school counselors are now given a say and college officials’ opinions will receive less weight to accommodate them.

High honors or cheap sales?

“Top” liberal arts colleges formalized their objections to college rankings by circulating a petition in September 2007 agreeing not to use rankings in promotional material. Notable signatories included the presidents of Amherst, Carleton, Haverford, Wellesley and Pomona Colleges.

In a wide-ranging interview conducted last year by Forum Editor-in-Chief Michael Wilner, Pomona President David Oxtoby discussed his position on college rankings. Although he does think rankings in general have helped all liberal colleges by placing them among larger, well known schools including Ivies and public universities, he wished colleges and prospective students would place less faith in them.

“They have absurd claims to being scientific, which is really frustrating,” Oxtoby said. “On the other hand, the idea of protesting is a waste of time.  So I did not agree to the boycott. I think the reputational rankings are probably more valid that the rest of the survey components.”

He added, “I think we’re under-ranked. We should be higher.  In different ways, the other [Claremont] colleges may be under-ranked as well.”

President Gann had a different approach to the boycott, which she articulated in an interview with Inside Higher Ed.  Gann claimed that CMC only makes “very limited use” of rankings in promotional material, and that her objection to the boycott was the fundamental fissure it would create with the college’s core philosophy.   “Claremont McKenna College is very committed to free markets and individual choice,” she was quoted, “For-profit publications and rankings are what they are in our free-market economy.”

Staff Writer Sara Birkenthal and Editor-in-Chief Michael Wilner contributed to this article.

Emily Forden '10 prepares to execute Kyle Block in Roman ritual style.

The first, Jeremy Wolff ’13, introduced the impressive versatility of “circular thinking” in the design field. He raced through the slides at a lightning pace, inundating the audience with circular designs in everyday life and explaining their merits by using Bauer Center, Starbucks, and the Athenaeum designs as examples. Luckily his haste was matched by sharp wit and a strong ability to present alternative examples to the audience during the short Q&A.

The second presentation was by John-Clark Levin ’12 and Jason Soll ’12. The pair spoke about the underlying causes of poverty. Poverty, the two argued, is not a lack of money; rather, a lack of money is a symptom of poverty. With my personal political convictions, I’m inclined to agree with the general premises and most things the conservative pair might argue. Still, I didn’t understand their idea for a solution. Neither did Michelle Kahn ’12, Charlie Sprague’10 or Sandy Russell ’10, who all successively asked variations of the same question: what are you going to do about it? That was the idea the audience was expecting to hear, and didn’t. The guests were further surprised when an unrelated picture of Jason in a track suit appeared on screen, detracting from his presentation. Contrary to popular belief, including a picture of one’s biceps does little to strengthen an argument.

Next up were ASCMC veterans Eric Scott ’11 and Ben Kraus ’11, who presented their idea for the Improvements, Projects, and Actions Committee (IPAC), a committee of students designated to create and implement long-term goals to improve the CMC experience. Eric and Ben recovered flawlessly when some unforeseen technical difficulties erased half of their slideshow, inadvertently giving them an added opportunity to show their command over their subject and presentation. Josh Siegel ’10 “went there” and asked Ben if he would have created the Committee had he won his bid for ASCMC president. “No,” he responded, ”Not immediately.  But by October 2010 I would have figured out that it was necessary to create lasting change at CMC.”

Fourth was Emily Forden ’10, who encouraged active audience participation with a live demonstration of her thesis argument on the Roman torture method unassumingly called “The Sack.” Emily “executed” Kyle Block ’10 with the assistance of David Nahmias ’10 by stuffing Kyle into a maggoty cow’s carcass with a whole ark of dead animals. Then, Kyle was spoon-fed Ath dessert to ensure temporary survival. Kyle’s torture and death was a first for the Athenaeum, which previously claimed zero casualties in its 40-year history. Throughout the demonstration, Emily explained her historical interpretation of this Roman tradition and the purifying effect she believes it had on the collective Roman soul. Liz Johnson ’11 stepped up and asked the question everyone was wondering: “What are some other creative manifestations of Roman criminal justice?”  to which Emily replied, “They aren’t Ath-appropriate!” (If you liked Emily’s talk, then I strongly recommend any class by CMC history professor Shane Bjornlie.)

Roxanne Phen ’10 presented a condensed version of her thesis topic: changing the philanthropic landscape by introducing low-profit limited liability companies (L3Cs). Arguably the perfect pitch for a CMC crowd, Roxanne spoke about capitalizing on the benefits and flexibility of for-profit companies for non-profit purposes. For more on her presentation, Roxanne will be publishing a Forum article in the coming week.

Finally, CMC alum Alex Caldwell ’09 spoke about robots. I question the selection committee’s decision to include an alum when so many current students had applied to give talks. Nevertheless, the audience was undoubtedly entertained by Alex’s accessible presentation on our fast approach to the technical singularity point– a moment in time when robots will be able to teach themselves. Noting studies that argue against the ability of robots to ever make moral choices, Alex put forth his idea of  utopia as a day when human labor is rendered obsolete. In his Q&A session, Mr. Caldwell had to admit that, no, he had not seen WALL·E yet.

Voting by text message-- bringing democracy to the 21st century.

In the end, there could only be one. The audience voted by text message and the results were displayed live, yielding a dramatic dead tie between Jeremy and Roxanne. An instant runoff was held and Roxanne took the title of the first Athenaum VIP, solidifying her name on an Athenaeum plaque and snatching a coveted ticket to the head table for Mitt Romney’s talk on April 15.

Congratulations to the lovely Roxanne Phen and her winning idea on future philanthropic models, and to Carl and Michael for hosting a wonderful event and creating a new CMC tradition.   I predict it will become a part of CMC’s Athenaum culture and remain with us for quite some time.

I always attend speeches. I love a good election, and I like to see the candidates speak for themselves/make inside jokes about bias-related incidents/describe in detail how they’re going to distribute more “refreshments” than ever before.

If you weren’t at Snack last night to hear them, a lot of the speeches can be boiled down as such:

Chief complaint #1: No one knows where ASCMC money goes.   We need to put this on the online for everyone to see.

Chief complaint #2: Not enough event variety or creativity.  ASCMC doesn’t know what students like or need or want.  So I will somehow get in touch with you like no one ever has before.

Refreshing alternative: New ideas, I love CMC, vote for ____.

Wait did I miss something?  Since when has ASCMC been failing us? The speeches addressed concerns that I don’t think anyone actually has.  Many of the candidates decided to take the “gone Washington” approach and portray ASCMC as out of touch and corrupt. I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt… maybe in the semester I’ve been abroad ASCMC hasn’t been planning any awesome parties and instead has been pimpin’ out the board room. But they have and they didn’t. In fact, ASCMC does a great job and is not funneling away money to undisclosed locations. And actually, their financial transactions and their board meeting minutes are available online already (though no minutes posted since April… wear it, ASCMC?).

Some may say that I’m not being vigilant. But I think of this from a cost-benefits approach. I want my ASCMC to provide me with a great college experience during the hours that I’m not doing academic-related stuff.  That means generally warming my heart and soul with CMC pride. Apparently, I involuntarily contribute $235 to ASCMC every year.  Spend a few months in the real world or just one weekend in Vegas, and you’ll find that parties so excellent will cost you more than $235 in as little as one night. For $235, ASCMC provides me with yearlong entertainment. Let’s say I attend 30 events: parties, TV shows, Hub quizzes, etc. That’s under $8 an event.   I would definitely have paid  more to see one of my favorite mash-up artists like the Hood Internet  and astronomically more to get into a club in any city. Furthermore, in the time I spend scrutinizing ASCMC’s cash flow, I could instead be making money at my posh on-campus job, pitching ideas of my own, or simply enjoying what ASCMC has to offer.

ASCMC officials live in the world they create. It’s not like Congress where disproportionately wealthy white guys sit and debate the semantics of a welfare program they will never use. This is college. We’re one community. There is no North Quad vote vs. South Quad vote. CMC is pretty homogeneous personality-wise. Involvement in student opinion doesn’t get much more active than sending out a survey. If I don’t respond to your survey, it’s because I don’t have any ideas. I challenge you to suggest a vastly-superior method of tapping into our ideas.

How to win my vote? Cut the general negativity. Come up with some legitimate criticisms if you have some, but realize you run the risk of alienating the audience and wasting time. Blow my mind with new and exciting ideas that I cannot possibly wrap my mind around, and do it all in 60 seconds or less. The most successful speeches were the ones that did not try to give us things to worry about and instead filled our minds with visions of sugarplums and possibilities galore.

Editor’s Note: Because the ASCMC Constitution forbids candidates from online campaigning and the authors of comments cannot be exactly identified, we have disallowed commenting on this and all other election-related posts.

The sad truth is that things have not changed much when it comes to drunk driving.

Exhibit A: a real conversation I had with some 5Cers:

Me: DC is great because the public transportation system pretty much eliminates the need to drive from bars to home.
Other 5Cer: Oh, hahah, I drive better when drunk anyway.
Yet another 5Cer: Hahahahahah!  (not horrified).

Only mad men drink and drive, right?

This is absolutely heartbreaking.   Through alcohol education and increased legal consequences, we’ve changed most of the offensive Mad Men-esqe behavior.    Everyone reading this article knows the legal limit.   That leaves only social attitudes relatively unchanged since 1960.

The problem with drunk driving is that it’s hit or miss, no horrible pun intended. If you drink while pregnant, it will affect your child.   If you make sexually inappropriate comments to your secretary, it will affect your career.  But usually, drunk driving doesn’t have immediate consequences.  Most of the time people drive drunk, they don’t get in an accident or pulled over.  Importantly, the drunk driver saves herself the awkward prospect of either sleeping in her car or arranging alternative transportation.  Sadly, for most people, it takes a powerful emotional experience to realize that drunk driving is always a bad idea.

California produces conditions especially conducive to drunk driving accidents.   We have no public transportation, lots of suburban sprawl, and few sidewalks.    People love to exercise outdoors, so the roads are shared by drivers, cyclists, and runners.   In my hometown, drunk driving deaths were horrifyingly common.   A best friend’s mother, an Ironwoman champion and elementary school teacher, was struck on her bicycle as she trained in the afternoon after school got out.  She died four days later, leaving three young daughters, her husband, and our small town devastated.  A high school classmate is in Folsom Prison[*] for killing two former classmates and injuring two others on the Fourth of July.   All had just finished their first year of college at different UCs.

I thank God that Claremont’s drinking culture is always within walking distance.  I definitely don’t have enough confidence in my peers at the 5Cs not to risk their own lives and others on the road.  What do you think?

I got to look up at this every day-- the dome of the Capital building.

If you don’t know much about the program, here are the basics:  you work for 40+ hours a week at an internship of your choice.   You also take two seminar classes in the evenings once a week, usually on a Monday and a Thursday (no TNC, sorry). You write a semester-long research paper with minimal guidance on any topic under your major-related sun.[1] The internship, two classes, and paper total to a full semester course load.

I don’t think I need to tell government majors why they should do DC.  You applied to CMC because there was a Washington Program.  You’ve known you’ve wanted to work on the Hill/State Department/Human Rights Watch since your eighth grade field trip.  You read Politico Click religiously and you don’t plan on making a huge mistake. Seriously, this is your paradise.  You will love it.  Start working on your application NOW.

However, if the idea of casually bumping into John Boehner/Steny Hoyer doesn’t make you pee your pants, never fear.  I highly encourage non-majors to apply for the DC program.  Let’s face it.  Government spending amounts to +40% of GDP.   This means the government can wreak some serious havoc in your future career field, but you’re going to be a much more attractive job candidate once you understand how that works.

Sam Bastien, CMC ’11, is an economics-accounting major with a financial economics sequence.   After CMC, she hopes to work in finance, not government.  Attracted to the opportunity for work experience, she decided spend the fall 2009 semester on the Washington Program.

Most of her fellow bankers-to-be told her she was crazy.  “Some of the other economics majors questioned my rationale for going,” she told the Forum, “After all, I would fall behind in my finance classes.”

She got an internship at the Securities and Exchange Commission, where she was the only undergraduate intern.  “After the financial crisis, you have to realize that the federal government can make a huge impact in the world of finance if it chooses to do so.”  Her job focused on regulatory financial policy analysis and she was tasked with research projects on hedge fund legislation.  She attended House Financial Services Committee hearings and witnessed the “intense” testimony of Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner on financial services reform and TARP.

Abby Woodruff, also CMC ’11, is a dual psychology-government major.  In DC, she worked at the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, affiliated with the American Psychological Association.  DC may not be a natural choice for psychology majors, but Abby believes they should consider it, “If you want your research to affect change, you need to go out there and learn how change is actually made.”  Congress votes on bills with major social implications on a daily basis.  In order to create the best policy possible, committee members consider expert testimony from psychologists.  But after her time in DC, Abby noticed some of the shortcomings of the system, “There is a great deal of psychological research out there, but most of it isn’t being used. Lawmakers love to hear about the relevant research, but there aren’t a lot of people devoted to bringing it to policymakers in ways they can use it.”  For future psychologists, this step can be the key to helping people on a large scale.  It’s one thing to put your research in an academic journal to further future research, but it’s a whole different contribution to bring your research to policymakers and influence the way government affects our lives.

Any downsides?  Although Gov 20 is the only prerequisite, in reality Professors Spalding and Haskell teach the classes assuming you know more than “the basics.”  Since most of the program participants are government or international relations majors, they’re usually right.  But the limited class selection has discouraged some from applying in the past, and proved challenging to non-majors who choose to go in spite of this fact.

Looking back?  In the long run, missing out on a few finance classes was worth the valuable work experience.  Employers have rewarded Sam for her interesting, if unusual, choice.  Sam recently received a coveted summer job offer in Sales and Trading at RBC in New York, “My internship at the SEC and my research on hedge funds came up a lot in the interview.”