101619 by The Chicago Maroon

the chicago maroon — OCTOBER 16, 2019

“How is divestment from fossil fuels incompatible with the University’s principles?” continued FROM PG. 7

sustainability and tackling climate change, and so invests in programs, buildings, and energy sources that promote that agenda. This shows that, in practice, the rule against investment with political or social valence is both infeasible and (thankfully) not actually followed. Given the above, how is divestment from fossil fuels incompat-

ible with the University’s principles? If spending is speech, as the University’s anti-divestment arguments imply, then maintaining an endowment is always already political and investing is never neutral. On the other hand, if the University takes the position that spending is not speech and investment decisions are outside of the Kalven Report’s scope, then UChicago’s “principled position”

against divestment has no basis at all. There are certainly reasons to oppose specific divestment campaigns, but a blanket refusal to consider the impact of the school’s investment choices cannot be plausibly maintained on the basis of a commitment to free discourse. UChicago’s administration should have the courage to actually make viable and consistent arguments,

or it should accept that it already makes non-neutral investment decisions and should strive to do so in a coherent and ethical manner. Hiding behind the rhetoric of neutrality and academic freedom is cowardly and nonsensical. For a university that boasts commitments to truth and honest inquiry, UChicago’s blanket opposition to divestment is laughably hypocritical.

I call on the University to reexamine the implications of the Kalven Report and to develop an investment strategy for the future that can be coherently defended. At the very least, the University should be willing to explain its decision to be complicit in the steady wave of extinctions and societal disruptions that its investments help perpetuate.

As Tuition Soars, Quality of Education Declines Though UChicago Has Become the Most Expensive College in the Nation, Educational Support Systems Lag Behind By the maroon editorial board As of this summer, the University of Chicago’s total cost of attendance is the highest of any

college in the country. Tuition alone is $57,642, per the Office of Financial Aid’s website. Add in the $17,004 charge for living on campus, $1,800 for textbooks, and about $2,000 in personal

Lee Harris, Editor-in-Chief Elaine Chen, Deputy Editor-in-Chief Deepti Sailappan, Managing Editor Peng-Peng Liu, Chief Production Officer The Maroon Editorial Board consists of the editors-in-chief and editors of The Maroon.

NEWS

DESIGN

Tony Brooks, editor Miles Burton, editor Emma Dyer, editor Camille Kirsch, editor Tyrone Lomax, editor

Jessica Xia, head of production Suha Chang, head designer Claire Dennis, design associate Areeha Khalid, design associate

GREY CITY

Michael Vetter, chief financial officer Brian Dong, director of strategy Gianni LaVecchia and Kelsey Yang, directors of marketing Victor Doddy, director of development Jennifer Phu, director of operations

Alex Dalton, editor Avi Waldman editor VIEWPOINTS

Zahra Nasser, editor Meera Santhanam, editor

BUSINESS

ONLINE

ARTS

Firat Ciftci, software engineer

SPORTS

Editor-in-Chief: Editor@ChicagoMaroon.com Newsroom Phone: (312) 918-8023 Business Phone: (408) 806-8381

Jad Dahshan, editor Perri Wilson, editor Alison Gill, editor Thomas Gordon, editor Audrey Mason, editor Brinda Rao, editor COPY

Mohammed Bashier, copy chief James Hu, copy chief Cynthia Huang, copy chief Jason Lin, copy chief Olivia Shao, copy chief Kuba Sokolowski, copy chief

expenses, and a UChicago education costs $80,000: the most expensive in the U.S. While the College’s soaring sticker price reflects a larger, decades-long trend of rising costs at public and private universities nationwide, The Maroon Editorial Board is alarmed that UChicago tops the list. The cost of attendance has risen even as the University has expanded enrollment without improving key academic resources. The administration consistently reminds families of its generous financial aid packages, marginally increases Metcalf stipends, and assures low-income students that they will be socially and academically supported when they choose to attend this elite university. But as class sizes increase and dissatisfaction with academic advising remains widespread, higher tuition has not led to the hiring of more educators nor to markedly improved academic support for undergraduates, disproportionately affecting students from marginalized backgrounds. The undergraduate population has grown by nearly 700 students since 2015, from 5,860 to 6,552. Class sizes are likely to increase even further: As

Dean of the College John Boyer told a group of students last fall, the College is aiming for a student body of 7,000. Despite this growth, the University has not adequately expanded infrastructure to support students. This quarter, after the chemistry department consolidated two classes into one 303-student section, some Organic Chemistry students have to watch a live video stream of lectures from another room—even the famously large room in Kent Laboratory cannot seat so many undergrads. Students who want to watch lec-

tures on a screen have the Internet at their disposal. An outrageously expensive degree should guarantee, at a minimum, direct engagement with instructors. Livestreaming classes compromises students’ education by depriving them of the opportunity to ask questions and witness demonstrations firsthand (which is particularly important in the sciences). Moreover, it discourages students from attending class in the first place. Less face time with faculty is especially detrimental to low-incontinued ON PG. 9

JESSICA XIA