Letters to the Editor

11/12/09 6:00pm

Merger to benefit all departments

To the Editor:I have become increasingly frustrated while on leave in Germany with the tone of the discussion of a possible merger between Rice and the Baylor College of Medicine. From my viewpoint, some of the opponents are using scare tactics, misleading statements, exaggerations, unfair insinuations about the motivation of the administration and dismissal of carefully crafted reports, authored by Rice and BCM faculty, on the extent and variety of potential inter-institutional collaborations involving faculty, students and various programs.

For more than a century, the Rice trustees have been careful, cautious and prudent stewards of the university's finances, and they are not about to rush into any endeavor that would put Rice's endowment or its annual budget needs at a risk, and they - most of whom are Rice graduates themselves - certainly will do nothing to jeopardize Rice's traditional core mission. The merger will happen only if they are absolutely convinced that the necessary financial and other safeguards are in place. No one advocates a merger unless stringent terms, defined by Rice, are met.

---

---

The trustees and administration believe, as do I, not only that the entire university's research profile and national ranking would be strengthened by a well-executed merger, but also that a number of teaching and programmatic advantages would come to a wide range of disciplines and departments across the university, including religious studies, philosophy, sociology, psychology, economics, health policy studies and even courses and faculty in art history, English and history. Of course, there would be significant enhancements to a broad spectrum of programs and departments in the natural sciences and engineering. The Humanities Department would clearly not be the major beneficiary of a merger, but it would still profit. Not every individual faculty member and not every department has to be advantaged for a merger to bring very important benefits to the university as a whole. And strengthening a university is not a zero-sum process. Enhanced reputation and increased philanthropic opportunities, which are strongly anticipated, suggest university-wide improvements.

This is a critical moment in Rice's history that demands careful, informed, accurate and thoughtful discussion, not fear-mongering and false characterizations. It is simply untrue that the administration has not sought to keep the faculty informed and consulted. At the beginning, the president met with the deans, then small groups of faculty over lunch, then department chairs, then with schools, then with the individual departments and then initiated two plenary meetings open to the entire faculty (fewer than 10 percent of whom attended). Perhaps this communication process could have been improved, but in my 27 years at Rice it was the most comprehensive effort to communicate with the faculty I have ever seen.

The humanities would gain far less if, as some opponents of the merger propose as an alternative, Rice simply invested several hundred million dollars in a half dozen or so science or engineering programs at Rice. Not only would that be neither cost effective nor transformative, but it would also leave the humanities and social sciences out almost entirely. I believe the most vocal opponents of a merger are aware that most faculty members have not had the time, interest or inclination to follow the possibility of a merger carefully. They are, in my opinion, attempting to shape the debate by use of fear and misrepresentation. I ask everyone in the Rice community to reject this kind of conversation and approach the issue of a possible merger with BCM with the seriousness, candor, informed attention and open-mindedness it deserves.

John B. Boles

History Professor

Online Comment of the Week

In response to "Rice-BCM merger to promote research," Nov. 6:

Professors West and Smith were entirely correct in their assessment of the proposed merger's benefits. Bold steps must be taken if Rice is to become a true tier-one institution with broad international recognition. Thankfully, the current administration is already taking actions to achieve this goal, notably by increasing undergraduate enrollment (and therefore, the number of Rice alumni) and by stepping up recruitment of international students.

However, more significant actions must be taken. Acquiring the Baylor College of Medicine will lead to an almost immediate increase in Rice's profile and standing in international university rankings. Of course, the merger poses short-term administrative headaches and risks. However, given that a large proportion of BCM students are themselves Rice graduates (myself included), and that there are numerous Rice alums working at BCM as physicians and researchers, the proposed merger would not precipitate an inter-institutional culture clash. On the contrary, acquiring a top medical school staffed by like-minded students and researchers would do nothing but enhance Rice's long-term academic mission.

Douglas Mata

Wiess '07

---