Whom Should Berea College Serve – Final Report | GSTR 210, Papers of History of Education

Download Whom Should Berea College Serve – Final Report | GSTR 210 and more Papers History of Education in PDF only on Docsity!

Whom Should Berea College Serve By Kwadwo Juantuah CPO 813 Florence Essay Contest

WHOM SHOULD BEREA COLLEGE SERVE?

The question of whom Berea should serve is extremely important, especially in contemporary times when there is no more slavery and the number of Hispanics in the United States gradually constitutes a significant minority. To answer this important question, there has to be an understanding of why the college was founded and what its mission is. There has to be an objective study of what has already been said and done about whom Berea should serve. It is only then that the question of who is to be served can be reasonably answered. When the analysis is done, it is clear that Berea should have a specific focus of primarily serving promising young people, across the United States and the world at large; students who would otherwise not be able to afford a college education or have the opportunity to get a good college education anywhere else. A study of Berea’s history shows that the question of whom Berea should serve did not have a simple answer, even from the time the school was founded. Who to admit was one of the first problems that the college faced (Fairchild 15). This was during the time of slavery and the main issue was whether blacks should be admitted to the college or not. Finally, a decision was made that, “If anyone made in God’s image comes to get knowledge which will enable him to understand the revelation of God in Jesus Christ, he can not be rejected [from the college]” (Fairchild 15). This pronouncement was heavily criticized by the local people, a majority of whom were slave-owners. In addition to this criticism, there were several riots and negative propaganda against Berea and many of the founding fathers were

act as guideline principles for Berea. The question of whom is to be served is currently answered by the first commitment; “To provide an educational opportunity primarily for students from Appalachia, black and white, who have great promise and limited economic resource” (GSTR 210 20). The first Commitment thus seems to answer the question of whom Berea should serve by merging the idea of educating blacks and whites with Frost’s approach of “educating poor White Appalachians.” Why then should the topic of whom Berea should serve be explored again if there is a well defined answer? It is because the answer still has some ambiguities. Moreover, the world is changing at such a fast rate that Berea has to come up with new answers in the context of the modern world, its challenges and opportunities. The first Commitment as it stands now affirms Frost’s vision of making Berea serve primarily students from the mountain region. Recent statistics from the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment (OIRA) at Berea show that over the period between 1996 and 2005, 77% of the graduates were from In- territory^1 , 17% from Out-of-territory and 6% international students (Mission Indicators Report 2005). Kentucky alone represents on average 42% of the student body from 1997 to 2006 (Institutional Research Factbook 2006). Over this same period, the average number of African American students has been an average of 16%, the same percentage during Frost’s administration (before the Day Law).

(^1) Ohio, Virginia, Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina and North Carolina – and all of Kentucky. (^) In-Territory is defined by OIRA as students who come from much of the Appalachian region – West Virginia, parts of

There would not have been a problem with the geographical distribution of students if all applicants had the same chance of being admitted or if there was a tangible reason why students from the In-territory region should be given preference over those from other regions. Apart from the fact that it is only students within the In-territory region who are actively recruited by Berea, these students are those who have the relatively easiest chance of getting into Berea. The acceptance rates into Berea have many implications, one of which is that relatively lower standards may be offered for students from the In-territory region as compared to other peers. For example, an international student who only has a 6% chance of being admitted will obviously have to better fit Berea’s requirement of a potential good student than an In-territory student who has a 41% chance of being admitted (Institutional Research Fact Book). Therefore, there has to be a good reason why Berea’s mission is to serve “primarily [for] students from Appalachia” (“Rewriting the Great Commitments” 210). As has already been discussed, this shift in focus of the school from interracial education to education of students from the mountain region occurred during the time of President Frost. The shift in emphasis occurred against the will of the founders, particularly Fee, who spoke openly against the changing the school’s mission to serve whites primarily. Quite disappointed, Fee wrote in “a Negro newspaper in Lexington: ‘I have no sympathy with the policy that would bring in from North or South a white majority. Such a policy would not meet the design of the founders of the institution' “(qtd in Nelson 72). It is therefore clear that the current policy of having white students as a majority at Berea does “not

Sinclair Peck when she wrote that, “There was no statement made in this document as to any specific area or region or group of people that this institution [Berea] was to serve” (13). It is therefore troubling that in this era of advanced technology and relatively efficient transportation systems, the school will choose to limit itself to a specific geographic region. There would not have been a problem if Appalachia was the only poor region in the United States that needed the golden opportunities offered by Berea. Unfortunately, this is not true. The latest data from the website of the United States Census Bureau show that states such as Texas, New Mexico, Arkansas and Mississippi are among the poorest in the United States with about 15% to 19.3% of the population in poverty. These states are not included in Berea’s In-territory while parts of Virginia, North Carolina and Georgia, states that have lower poverty levels, are counted as part of Berea’s In-territory. In fact, for the 2006/2007 academic year, only 8 students were admitted from Texas, 3 from Arkansas, 1 from Mississippi, and none from New Mexico. This compares with 63 students from Virginia (one of the states with the lowest poverty levels), 78 from North Carolina and 50 from Georgia. Meanwhile, North Carolina and Georgia are in the same category as Oklahoma and Arizona where no students were admitted for the 2006/2007 academic year. This is clearly an inequitable distribution, that could be said to border on injustice. The injustice is further deepened by the fact that technology has made it possible to recruit

students from these equally poor backgrounds but they are left out just because they do not fall within the In-territory region. This problem of unequal representation and unequal opportunity to those who most need Berea is best reflected in the fact that even though minority groups, like the Hispanics, whose population in the United States is gradually growing, they are hardly ever mentioned in Berea’s official statistics. The current data available shows that only 4% of the student body as at 2006-2007 year represents other minority groups in the United States apart from African- American. Therefore, placing emphasis “primarily on students from the Appalachian region” does not follow the advice of President W. J. Hutchins who said that “Berea should serve the poor but promising” (qtd in Morgan 157). An implication of this focus is that standards could be lowered for students from the Appalachian region such that an In-territory student who is relatively less qualified than an Out-of-territory student will gain admission to Berea just because of the person’s geographical location and not for the individual student’s accomplishment, potential or promise. Furthermore, one could argue that this policy of exclusively focusing on students from in-territory could be an incentive for people in the Appalachian region to remain poor. This is because one of the biggest expenses of a parent’s life is his or her children’s education. If the only condition therefore to get free education is to remain below a certain income level, what is the incentive for such a parent to earn more? Berea’s mission of serving poor students and

what is thought of as a formal education. It is looking for the self-reliant and the self sustaining student who knows what he wants and is willing to pay the price to get it. (Morgan 158) Morgan goes on to write that, “It [Berea College] is seeking young men and women whom poverty and hardship do not deter. It is engaged in the business of helping them make their educational dollars stretch just as far as it is humanly possible to make them go” (158). He finally concludes that, “Berea College then is definitely seeking those who really need it from an economic point of view” (160). This means that Berea’s primary objective should be to serve as many students as it possibly can who need it “from an economic point of view” without any limitation to geographic boundaries or race. It would not be fair to conclude this paper without addressing potential problems that could arise with the opening up of Berea to everyone. The first problem that could arise is financial difficulty due to shortage of money as a result in the shift of the emphasis of the school from serving students primarily from Appalachia to serving poor students from all over the United States. This, however, would not be a problem since most of the sponsors of Berea do so because they understand the people of Appalachia are impoverished and need help. Expanding the scope of students to all poor students in America therefore should not be a problem. It could actually help the school raise more funds. The other potential problem that could occur is with the issue of diversity and setting up of quota for certain students. A typical example is the question of what should be done if all those who qualify to enter Berea in a given year are

whites or blacks or even Hispanics. Even though this could be a real problem the possibility of having only one particular type of student group is almost negligible if Berea is well advertised so that students of every demographic type are made aware of the opportunities that Berea has to offer and are encouraged to apply. That is why this paper does not limit the description of the kind of student that Berea should serve to quantitative terms such as having specific test scores or Grade Point Average (GPA). Berea should serve the most economically challenged student of great promise who would make the best of what Berea has to offer. This means that applications to Berea should be evaluated on an individual basis and the criteria of whether or not students have promise should be determined based on each individual student’s background and how he or she has tackled challenges faced. This means that being poor is not the only criteria for admission. Therefore, if two students, both below the poverty level, apply to Berea and the one who is relatively richer has greater promise that student should be admitted even though he or she is relatively richer. That way, students will not feel a need to exploit their poverty but rather work hard to improve their situation. If Berea is well advertised to the country and the world at large, there will not be any need to establish quotas because the sheer number of applicants to the school will make it possible to have every kind of student. The commitment to poor students will make sure that the minority in American society are well represented since they often constitute the poor in society.

In summary, evaluating the founding of the college and the purpose for which it was founded, examining the history of the college and whom it has served, and comparing the results of such an analysis with present day Berea shows that Berea as it stands today has strayed from its primary objective by focusing “primarily on students from Appalachia.” Berea should therefore have a specific focus of primarily serving promising young people, across the United States and the world at large; students who would otherwise not be able to afford a college education or have the opportunity to get a good college education anywhere else.

WORKS CONSULTED

“Rewriting the Great Commitments.” GSTR 21O Writing Seminar II: Identity and Diversity in the United States. Littleton, Massachusetts: Tapestry Press, LTD, 2006.

Baskin, Andrew. “Introduction.” GSTR 21O Writing Seminar II: Identity and Diversity in the United States. Littleton, Massachusetts: Tapestry Press, LTD, 2006. 1-2.

Frost, William G. “An Educational Program For Appalachian America (1896).” GSTR 21O Writing Seminar II: Identity and Diversity in the United States. Littleton, Massachusetts: Tapestry Press, LTD, 2006. 47-59.

Fairchild, E. H. Berea College, An Interesting History. Cincinnati: Elm Street Printing Company, 1883.

Fee, John G. The Autobiography of John G. Fee, Berea, Kentucky. National Christian Association, Chicago Illinois, 1891. 25 Feb 2007. http://docsouth.unc.edu/fpn/fee/fee.html

Baskin, Andrew. “Berea College: A Commitment to Interracial Education within a Christian Context (1991).” GSTR 21O Writing Seminar II: Identity and Diversity in the United States. Littleton, Massachusetts: Tapestry Press, LTD, 2006. 108-128.

<http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/saipe/maps/iy2004/Tot_Pct_Poor2004. .pdf> 2007.

Peck, Elisabeth Sinclair, Emily Ann Smith, and Elisabeth Sinclair Peck. Berea's first 125 years, 1855-1980. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky. 1982.