An examination of our institution’s purpose in the context of the liberal arts institution and higher education in general is a necessary prerequisite to an informed and honest discussion about need-blind admissions. We believe such a discussion must take place before any decision is made. We also believe that such a discussion has not yet taken place. Until it does, we must reject the notion that this has been a fair and open discussion in which student voices are not only heard, but listened to.

It is no wonder that we as a community have been overwhelmed and confused by the sheer amount of information flying our way: so many letters, so many speeches, so many meetings, it’s enough to make one crazy.

Even as we are wondering how to deal with the giant tangled mess we see sprawled before us, real decisions are being made before our very eyes. A few weeks ago the Alumni Board endorsed the Resource Planning Committee’s recommendations, and this past Wednesday, the faculty did the same. Winter break is nearly upon us, and with it time when the trustees themselves will decide on the fate of our school.

This realization leads us to the inevitable conclusion that unless we are able to get a firmer grasp on this debate in a short period of time, the opportunity to have a voice in it will have slipped away and we will be left with the knowledge that such an important decision was made without any sizeable student input or examination. In our view, this possible outcome is unacceptable, and must be struggled against with the utmost vigor.

How, then, to proceed? A group of us (mostly students with a few dedicated alums and faculty members thrown in) have congregated into a loose sort of rag-tag crazies who have trouble getting other work done due to incessant talking and thinking about the broader implications of this pressing issue. Calling ourselves “Defend Need-Blind Admissions at Macalester,” or DNBAM, we have come together to discuss our common concern about the possibility of need-blind admissions being done away with here at Macalester.

We do not purport to speak for anyone other than ourselves, and strive our hardest not to inadvertently co-opt anyone’s beliefs or views on this issue. At the same time, our concerted effort to share our collective understanding has at its root the conviction that the beliefs informing our understanding are beliefs shared by a large portion of the Macalester community, and that through discussion and sharing information we can come to some sort of common understanding as a collective whole.

Our ultimate goal is to call a student assembly where we discuss the hell out of this issue and then try to reach consensus as to what we should do as a student body. We plan to publish a report in the next two weeks that outlines our understanding and beliefs about the broader context and implications of the issue, a response to the RPC report, an examination of Macalester’s finances, and ideas about how to proceed.

In the coming weeks, we urge all of you who are interested in getting involved in this report and the issue in general to contact one of our members. We have divided writing the report among several people:

1) Jesse Mortenson is illustrating the insufficiency and flaws in the RPC report (jmortenson@macalester.edu).

2) Michael Eastwood is presenting an alternative stance towards finances, raising money, etc. (meastwood@macalester.edu).

3) Seth Schlotterbeck is examining the broader context of class exclusion in academics, rising education costs, the ethical question, and where Macalester fits into all of this (sschlotterbe@Macalester.edu).

4) David Boehnke is working on a possible addendum of creative, relatively un-explored ideas for how to improve education at Macalester without spending millions of dollars (submit ideas to dnbam@yahoogroups.com or dboehnke@Macalester.edu).

Thank you for your time. Together we can make our voices heard.