U Magazine, Winter 1987

"The interest of the Univer– sity in voluntary activities stemsfrom its concernfor the value ofaltruism... There are values we think are not only important, but critical , to the survival ofa free society .Altruism is one of them."

,

pation in federal grant and loan programs. And it is the middle income student who has been squeezed out by federal financial aid . I strongly disagree with the posture that it's unwise for the federal government to invest in the education of its young people. It's short-sighted. It's a narrow view. And , ultimately, it can waste human resources. We are provid– ing an educational experience for young people on the basis - on the predication - that they will be greater contributors to our society because of that education. To deny aid den ies the principle. The withd rawal offederal support, though , ifyou look at the numbers, is not as disastrous as it would have been if Congress had not acted as it has over the past several years. The administration has followed the policy of disengaging the federal government from its involvement in higher education. Congress has not. So there has not been the disaster that would have occurred had the Congress not held steadfast in its insistence that we continue to invest in education of young people. At the state level, for the past several years there h a s been a steady increase in the support of both public and private institutions which has been a healthy counter– balance to what we have been experiencing at the federal level. I think the federal government hoped this would occur. But California is the anomaly. This funding shift is not occurring in other states . Most are not keeping pace at all because their state budgets are devastated due to poor economic conditions. So the use of public funds in education is a very serious matter. It's particularly serious for those of us in the private sector because there are no guaranteed subsidies of any kind in this state for private higher education. Is private higher education a good investment for both the federal and state governments? The answer - very definitely - is yes. There are all kinds of facts and figures that demonstrate this . In USD's case, we are educating people at a cost of about $55 million per year. About 75 percent of that money comes from private sources. The rest comes from government sources. None of our funding comes from the diocese. We educate students and the government pays for one fourth of the cost. I would say that is a reasonable buy. IfUSD were not here, all of that cost would have to be susta ined by federal and state sources. So I think it is a good economic move for govern– ment to involve itself in supporting the students who attend private institutions from a purely economic point of view.

dimension is the international dimension. We want our students to acquire a global view during the time they matriculate here. These four dimensions, in combination, differentiate us from other colleges and un iversities. You might find one or two at another campus. But when you put the four in combination you have an educational experience that is indeed unique. Q : How do you respond to the Carnegie criticism of the emphasis on careerism in universities today? A : I know that the largest enrollments in the country are in business administration. I come from that background, and there isn't any doubt in my mind that business administration is a career-oriented program. It is prepar– ing people for a career in the economic sector of our society. To the extent that we exclude general education in providing career education, we're wrong. Th e primary emphasis needs to be in the liberal arts at the under– graduate level. But it's entirely possible to have a first-rate school of business administration, a first-rate business curriculu m and still give full credence to liberal arts at the undergraduate level. I think there are schools that do this. And we're one. We believe in it. But I do suspect that over time, many universities have shortchanged liberal arts. That is a serious mistake because we know that students going into b u s iness , for example , may change careers several times before they settle into one which is going to be their life career. Given that, you can see the essential purpose of having a good general education. Leaming something of the history of mankind, something of the way we think , something of critical analysis before you involve yourself in a specific career program is a very significant part of undergraduate intellectual formation. Q: Federal funding for student aid is shrinking. With the new tax law, predictions are that private g ifts to institutions of higher learning will decline. Could you summarize just how serious the funding situation is from those two angles ? A : The funding situation is serious. What you have described in terms of federal cutbacks is accurate in the s ense that there has been an increasing pressure on middle income students which has reduced their partici-

9