September 30, 2009
To the Editor:

Though apparently distressed about the welfare of the college, the writer of the Forum article, “Guilford accepts questionable grant” (September 25, 2009, page 9) makes unwarranted claims and proposes a course of action that, if taken, could damage those the writer is attempting to protect.
Faculty members decided that the college should apply for the grant after concluding that developing a new course assigning portions of Ayn Rand’s book, Atlas Shrugged, would be consistent with content and concepts currently taught in other courses. By receiving the BB&T funds, the college will not be accepting finances in return for teaching material that would not otherwise have been taught, as implied by the Forum article. In the recent past, the college has declined an invitation to seek much more substantial funding from another source when faculty in the affected department determined that the proposed new program was inconsistent with their goals.
Corporate donors have already funded endowed professorships held by Guilford faculty. Faculty development is endowed through funds from a foundation established by corporate money. Contrary to projections in the Forum article, no faculty member holding an endowed chair has been asked to alter what she or he teaches to match donor expectations.
Since Guilford is a teaching and not a research institution, there are relatively few opportunities for faculty and staff to secure outside support. In reality, the lion’s share of the BB&T grant will support students involved in Principled Problem Solving initiatives. It would be better to encourage faculty and staff to seek external grants than to suppress their efforts. Because our focus is on teaching, not research, the acceptance of such funding is unlikely to draw Guilford into an “academic-industrial complex.”

Adrienne Israel
Vice President and Academic Dean