CMC’s administrative overreach has reduced students from “responsible leaders” to coddled dependents.
5C students at the now-canceled McKenna Palooza concert in 2019 (credit: Glen Matheny)
“Responsible Leadership.” The phrase appears in Claremont’s promotional materials, nearly all of President Chodosh’s speeches, and in a litany of emails from administration. CMC aims to develop responsible leaders through a liberal arts education, but it’s our view that more of this learning must happen outside of the classroom. Growing regulation of student interactions and behavior undercuts CMC’s leadership mission and sends a clear message: CMC no longer trusts its students.
The administration’s perspective is understandable. It’s true that many students arrive on campus having been coddled by institutions which shielded them from risk and discomfort. And the school certainly has an interest in shielding itself from liability and its students from harm.
But the school’s policies produce harm rather than reduce it. The more responsibility that the administration assumes, the less responsible students must be for themselves. Behavioral and social norms increasingly flow from the administrators to students rather than from upperclassmen to newcomers. Andrew Winssinger ‘22 said that prior to the pandemic, “campus norms were [inculcated] by students rather than faculty or DOS.” We are no longer responsible leaders, but coddled dependents. This is the consequence of what the New York Times calls “soft paternalism,” and it permeates into every aspect of student life.
The expansion of CMC’s administration has allowed for the implementation of overbearing measures. Since the resignation of Dean Spellman in 2015, the number of administrators has grown 11.58% while the student body has grown 2.7% in the same time period. Most of this administrative growth happened in the Dean of Students office, which increased from 12 to 18 members (and now sits at 21). Administrative overgrowth is not unique to CMC but uniquely harms CMC’s ability to fulfill its mission of producing responsible leaders.
For example, in the first month of the fall 2024 semester, alcohol-related transports went up dramatically from the rates seen in previous years. Under pressure from the new fire marshal to decrease the amount of incidents on campus, the school moved to end the long-standing alcohol policy and no longer serve alcohol to students under 21 or without a valid government ID. The original policy aimed to discourage binge drinking before events, so the change suggests that concerns over liability now outweigh those related to student drinking behaviors. The decision to alter the policy after years of acceptance highlights a shift in the school's prioritization of legal risk.
After the pandemic, the administration took several steps to restrict parties and student events. An alumna from the class of ‘23 felt that “the Dean of Students preyed on our lack of institutional memory [after COVID] to make the social changes they wanted to see.” For example, any events recently have been CMC-only, or CMC-plus-guest. In the past, events hosted by CMC and ASCMC were open to students across the 5Cs, fostering community within the consortium. An alumnus from the class of ‘23 noted that “students were given a pretty big amount of freedom to throw social events during my time, but it became a lot more regulated after COVID. Wristbanding was only a thing for big events during my first year but definitely became a bigger thing later.” In shifting toward CMC-only events, the administration unduly narrows the social experiences of their students, creating an environment that limits students’ ability to develop relationships beyond CMC’s campus.
With 5C events, too, students have noticed the increased strictness. In conversations with alumni, almost all noted the humorously dubbed “January Scripps” incident on Halloween in 2022. After getting wristbands, students stood in a line for up to 45 minutes before the group got tired and stormed the party, knocking the surrounding fences down. One alumna suggested that “students wanted to have a social life with inclusive, accessible parties, and instead the colleges made it incredibly unbearable and frustrating to go to school-sponsored functions.”
So too, there has been a greater tendency to shut down parties which have more than 100 or so attendees, even when those parties are orderly. The administration assumes that by keeping events smaller and contained, the administration can control potential risks and liabilities. The net effect of these policies is that CMC takes away students’ agency. Students no longer take responsibility for their or their peers’ behavior since the college will take measures to guide us toward proper action or restrict the ability to act irresponsibly.
Bureaucratic oversight of student-life extends beyond social events. DEI training, while well-intentioned, leads to structured interactions between students. Students are given frameworks and guidelines for discussing sensitive topics, and they lose the opportunity to engage in open, unscripted dialogue with peers from diverse backgrounds. Instead of facilitating heartfelt understanding, then, the highly mediated approach stifles communication.
Other well-meaning initiatives like the Open Academy and the Kravis Lab for Civic Engagement further exemplify CMC’s desire to oversee students. These programs subtly imply that students cannot or should not engage in free speech except in the bosom of an administrative initiative. Efforts to guide interactions between students removes the impetus for students to develop the ability to navigate difficult situations independently.
Though potentially trivial, even the campus’ topographical development mirrors the administrative shift toward soft paternalism. After numerous renovations on campus, students now have less social space than before. Concrete and careful landscaping replaced the green spaces on North Quad. Gravel and glass overtook the grass in Mid Quad. Both once served as important areas in the center of our living spaces – not just for parties but for impromptu social gatherings day-to-day.
CMC doesn’t have to abandon its supervisory role completely –that’s an undesirable and unrealistic ask. But right now, CMC shields its adult students, and then acts surprised when they struggle with real-world challenges by themselves. Molly Luce ‘23 emphasized how “holding onto the stricter policies left the CMC community… a more clique-oriented, less spontaneous, and overall less friendly place.” If the school really wants to “prepare students for thoughtful and productive lives and responsible leadership in business, government, and the professions,” then independence is a necessity.
Comments