The Consortium:

Are we Nation-States, or Federal Republic?

By Nicole Brams
Associate Editor

Just like the original American colonies, fiercely independent but willing to work together, the five self-assured undergraduate colleges and the two reticent graduate institutions in Claremont have formed an intellectual atmosphere often more like a thriving country club than a cluster of schools. With your magnetized ID card and account number, you can do just about anything.

A similar marketing strategy surfaces in each college’s admissions materials: this college is part of a unique arrangement of five independent colleges with strong linkages that offer the resources and facilities of a university. On paper, it’s brilliant. But how well does the consortium actually work?

“As well as it’ll ever work,” said Joe Cardoza, CMC Chief Investment Officer. “It’s a classic zero sum game. Whatever one college wins the other colleges lose.” But some feel the colleges have a more collective vision, at least at their foundations. "We are like America under the Articles of Confederation: a weaker central administration and sovereignty in the states," Scripps President Nancy Bekavac said in a L.A. Times article. Though as institutions of higher education the colleges share virtually the same mission, their distinct personalities can clash even before a conflict arises. We all know the stereotypes: Pomona kids are pale, pretentious bookworms, CMCers are all dumb conservative jocks, Scrippsies are either short-circuited insipid Barbies or intense feminists, Mudders are eccentric brain children destined to be mad scientists, and Pitzer kids are radical dirty hippies. And the graduate schools aren’t very important. To the typical Claremont undergrad proud of his or her school, it’s obvious these colleges won’t get along. These are clearly clichéd roles, but students agree they generally reflect the different atmospheres. The consortium’s organizational strength lies in the Claremont University Consortium, the central coordinating institution that James Blaisdell founded in 1925 to guide the development of his vision. Composed of directors from the joint services and undergraduate and graduate administrators, CUC’s Board of Overseers has led the establishment of four undergraduate colleges and the Keck Graduate Institute, as well as created joint services such as Huntley Bookstore, and helped develop intercollegiate facilities like Joint Science. Under CUC’s leadership, the colleges maintain a communication system based on monthly council meetings among main administrative representatives, such as the presidents, deans, and treasurers. These meetings provide forums to establish policy and discuss cross-registration, joint academic and social programs, and intercollegiate funding. “Here you have politics to the eighth degree,” said Debra Wood, Scripps Dean of Students. “You have eight presidents and CEO’s all within the same five blocks competing and collaborating with each other.” Largely unaware this governing network exists, many students are eager to point out flaws as products of cooperation barriers between schools.

The recent sequence of events beginning with the January cross burning illustrated how successfully the consortium comes together when faced with a common threat. However, when each college was informed and to what they level they were informed created deep conflicts at the administrative level about communication policy between schools. Though the colleges can act as one institution, they are not one institution. They are seven different institutions with different classes, different dorms, different students, and different SAT averages. Herein lies the root of the colleges’ conflicts: they may be “created equal,” but they are not the same.

Cross-Registering

The 5-C course catalog depicts the faculty, academic curriculum, and individual resources of each college as at your fingertips, but students testify that they are often shut out from classes at other schools. Though Pitzer, Scripps, and Harvey Mudd rarely restrict other students from their courses, CMC and Pomona frequently require signatures for outside students to enroll or even prohibit them from taking particular classes. A college may limit the number of outside students in popular classes or in courses for unusual majors such as CMC’s government concentration, but most of CMC's and Pomona’s restrictions fall within intercollegiate programs such as economics or psychology.

When an anonymous Scripps student attempted to register into microeconomics at Pomona because it wasn’t offered on her campus, she received permission but was told that “even if I were registered for the class, and there turned out to be too many people or there were Pomona students who wanted to add it, then I would be one of the first to have to drop it,” she said. “I told my advisor and he said that it was how Pomona operates.” She instead registered at Pitzer.

The deans of faculty regularly look at the problems cross-registering generates. They may increase class size limits, offer additional sections, hire more faculty, or create intercollegiate programs for particular concentrations when needed. For instance, able to offer richer programs by pooling resources, Pomona maintains a successful 5-C theater program, and Scripps leads an intercollegiate Music major.

“ Structural impediments can exist anywhere. Everyone wants to keep class sizes down to look good for the U.S. News college rankings. The Deans’ Council tries to work around those as much as it can,” Pitzer Dean of Faculty Alan Jones said. “Sometimes it’s the preference of the individual faculty and we help them understand that the strength of the consortium lies in academic cooperation….I think we have a commitment, at least at the dean’s level, to work against those barriers.”

The conflict lies in the uneven distribution of students cross-registering among the colleges. Pitzer and Scripps consistently export a much higher number of students to other colleges than they import, and Harvey Mudd and CMC are net exporters but the difference is smaller. Pomona imports far more students than it exports. “We are subsidizing those other students’ education. We are fulfilling our obligation and more,” said Pomona Dean Gary Kates.

The administrations generally want to facilitate registration as much as possible, but they do not want to develop their own programs for other colleges’ students. If classes with multiple sections became overcrowded with cross-registered students, is the home school responsible for hiring additional faculty?

“Why should we add more faculty to accommodate other colleges’ students? They should add more faculty,” said Kates. To distribute students more evenly throughout the colleges, Pomona is considering loosening policies that require its students to take their core requirements at Pomona.

William Brown, CMC Economics Professor, says that CMC economics restrictions exist because the faculty is stretched so thin that there isn’t enough room for CMC students themselves. “We do give preferences to CMC students first. The problem is not a consortium problem, the problem is that CMC does not have enough faculty to offer the classes to even CMC students…CMC kids want to take the best classes at CMC and Pomona kids want to take the best classes at Pomona.”

The colleges have recently converted to a new integrated database, called “CX,” that will dramatically increase the efficiency of intercollegiate data transfers, particularly during registration. Students can register online into any campus’s class without obtaining signatures and waiting for the registrars to transfer class data.

The Money

To designate each college’s financial responsibility for the different joint resources, the consortium uses formulas that the presidents and treasurers develop. The most basic formula combines a college’s three-year enrollment average--comprising about 60% of the formula--and the other 40% is based on student participation or use. Most formulas contain additional components particular to the resource.

“ The only real tension I feel is monetary tension because the schools look and feel a lot alike, but financially we’re very different,” said Scripps Dean Wood. Glancing at the relative sizes of the endowments reveals the truth of Wood’s statement: Pomona has (in millions) $1,002, Scripps $158, CMC $283, Harvey Mudd $163, and Pitzer $43. Such significant differences are bound to create friction.

“ It’s the students comparing themselves to others that creates frustration. Students think, ‘Why can’t you do that for me?’” said Wood.

Funding at the student level creates even more friction between the schools. Once a year, ASPC campus life staff, the 5-C Senate, and members from student groups applying for money come together to decide on each college’s contribution to the groups.

“ The tensions are pretty prevalent….Some colleges feel they’re contributing to the 5-Cs unequally. Pomona always thinks that they’re carrying too much funding,” said Warren Katzenstein, ASHMC President.

For some years now, Pomona and three other colleges have transferred funds to the ASPC office, which acts as the centralized distributor for student funding. CMC is the only exception. It withholds its funds and clubs must instead go through CMC’s reimbursement process. This structural difference has set CMC apart financially, and though ASCMC representatives explain the process each year, clubs often do not claim their funds from CMC.

“It destroys the continuity of the system,” says Katzenstein. “It’s not a big hassle, but we could all agree on one system.” ASCMC reasons that it can directly keep track of how groups spend their money, and that unspent money won’t disappear into the ASPC accounting system that rolls unspent money over into a general fund. “Once we put it in, how do you decide whose money that is?” said ASCMC President March Bathgate. He cited that about 15-25% of groups’ money goes unclaimed each year, providing ASCMC the flexibility to finance unexpected events and still plan social events towards the semester’s end. “That’s our budget cushion,” he said. He agrees that the CMC stereotypes only magnify this split in the system. “ASCMC runs itself like a business…That is what really distinguishes us, and therein lies some of the tension…It works out fine in the end, but we honestly operate in separate fiscal paradigms,” he said.

Another noticeable tension is the student perception that Pitzer still appears to be shaking off its reputation as the Claremont “mooch.” The administration, however, asserts that Pitzer fulfills its financial responsibilities to the consortium. “Just because we’re the youngest and least endowed doesn’t mean that we’re not an equal contributor at the five-college level,” Pitzer Dean of Students Jim Marchant said. “I know for a fact that Pitzer pays its fair share.”

Athletics

Developing a Division III sports program at a school with less than a thousand students that doesn't award athletic scholarships would probably create a program about the caliber of your average high school. Forming the joint athletic programs between Pomona and Pitzer, and between Claremont McKenna, Harvey Mudd, and Scripps, was one of the most ingenius collaborative initiatives of the consortium. But it remains questionable whether each school contributes equally to the programs.

Since 1998, about 75% of athletes on PP sports teams have been from Pomona, and only about 25% from Pitzer. Even though Pitzer is smaller, the percentage of Pitzer students participating in sports is about half of Pomona's.

Not only do Pomona students dominate the programs, they own the $16 million Rains Center that Pitzer students can use only if they play sports. Otherwise, a couple elliptical machines, two and a half treadmills, and a few sets of free weights await them in the Pitzer gym. It seems as though the existing distribution of control would create an underlying tension between the Pomona giant and the Pitzer runt. According to Coach Katsiaficas, relations between the two school’s athletes have remained tranquil.

“Simply because of the proximity of the campuses, because Pitzer students have to go over to Pomona’s campus, you can’t escape some of these perceptions,” said Katsiaficas. “But from a coach’s standpoint, we are 100% united.”

What Katsiaficias says might be true, but stereotypes don’t die easily. “Coach Caron was joking and said, ‘Some good news, today we got our $100 check from Pitzer so now we can buy your mouthpieces,’” Pomona football player Micah Pueschel remembers.

Claremont-Mudd-Scripps’ teams are also dominated by one college where the athletic facilities are located. CMC draws from its history as a haven for returning GI’s, while Scripps has focused on feminist achievement in the humanities, and Harvey Mudd’s philosophy was built from the tradition of scientific advancement, so that could explain the disparity.

Though Mudders comprise about 25% of CMS’ track, cross country and swimming sports teams, the remaining Mudd athletes dominate club sports like ultimate Frisbee rather than participating in CMS’ other varsity sports. Most choose club sports because the commitment won’t interfere with their workload. Their lower level of involvement in varsity sports reinforces the Mudd stereotype of a socially awkward Dungeon and Dragon champion.

“It’s something we refer to as the ‘Mudd Bubble.’ It does arise out of the workload we have….we’re so technically honed that our mindsets create a culture of its own where we don’t venture out much,” said ASHMC President Katzenstein.

Besides the difficulty with disproportionate participation, the existence of two opposing teams within the same consortium creates an unbelievable rivalry between the campuses, a rivalry that drives competition but has begun to threaten rapport between the teams. At the CMS-PP 2003 Homecoming, crowd tension escalated until a fight for possession of the CMS banner nearly transformed the field into a drunken Friday night bar brawl.

“I have been very impressed at the games by the student athletes on the teams. But it’s hard to control crowd behavior,” said Pomona-Pitzer’s Katsiaficas. “It seems to have become ‘cool’ to do that stuff, to insult and harass the opposing team.”

However, a healthy balance of competition and companionship exists among most of the athletes. “CMC is always #1, Pomona-Pitzer is coming in fourth. They’re like the little brother. They know they’re gonna get beat,” said John Bausch, CMS runner.

“ Since we know each other, we care more …Is it because we’re the younger school and we’re coming up and trying to achieve? Athletes look at multiple Claremont Colleges, and maybe the rivalry confirms our choices and biases,” said Mike Sutton, CMS Director of Athletics.

Though other students seem to identify the football team as the most recognizable face of CMC, CMS considered dropping the program no more than ten years ago. The team shrank rapidly as players quit because of the heavy commitment. Maintaining the team has required a concentrated effort at creating strong comradery among the players, and some students say the team’s omnipresence fuels after-game conflict. “Our players don’t understand that they’re the ambassadors for our college in addition to being athletes…A few strong opinions can do a lot to give the group a bad name,” Sutton said. “ The coaches are very concerned about football players as citizens at CMC, but I don’t think they’re thinking about them as citizens of the 5-C’s,” he said.

Students might feel otherwise, but compared to the northeastern Five Colleges, Incorporated, Amherst, Mount Holyoke, Smith, U. Mass Amherst, and Hampshire, the Claremonts are magnificently integrated. Even though there is support for academic and social collaboration at the northeastern consortium, a lengthy commute and virtually no shared facilities impedes the level of integration that exists at the Claremonts.

“ Very few take advantage of the consortium because it’s inconvenient….The Claremonts are much more interconnected, largely because of their physical proximity,” says Cricket Fisher, Amherst College student.

By throwing the students into each other’s paths on a daily basis, common 5-C facilities such as Honnold Library and inclusive spaces on the home campuses unite the Claremonts. Even if we don’t love each other, we at least have to share the same space.

However, it’s uncertain if the building boom at the colleges will interfere with this physical interaction. Scripps has just finished its new pool and the Performing Arts Center, Pitzer will soon begin its Master Plan, CMC will expand the athletic center and build a new campus center, and Harvey Mudd is constructing a new dining commons while Pomona is currently building science and psychology buildings. Will constant improvements gradually segregate the colleges by creating more self-contained environments?

It’s obviously time that Pitzer offer asbestos-free dorms for its students, while development is essential for the maintenance of Scripps’ Mediterranean sanctuary, and construction would seem only natural on Harvey Mudd’s engineering agenda. While these plans make necessary renovations or improve existing structures, it would appear that designing a larger, exclusive campus center might decrease CMC’s use of the other colleges’ common spaces. Dean of Students Jeff Huang says “increased self-sufficiency is certainly in mind,” and that “self-sufficiency might and might not work against the goals of the consortium.” Arguably, only Pomona could stand alone without the consortium.

But Pomona Dean Kates sees a need for the consortium despite Pomona’s autonomy, describing the colleges as “adult siblings.” Some lean on the relationship more than others, and the tensions are just as important as the teamwork. He says Pomona belongs to a consortium of its “biological” brothers and sisters, and a mental one with “chosen friends,” those being the nation’s top liberal arts colleges such as Amherst, Williams and Carleton. “ I always thought of it as a family,” said Dean Wood. “Within a family you get sibling rivalries and you get siblings ganging up on each other…but in the end there’s strength in unity.”