Last week, The Herald ran a four-part “Mission Drift?” series surveying the major changes of President Ruth Simmons’ tenure and the noticeable lack of philosophical discussion surrounding those changes. For Herald articles, the four series stories feature an unusually broad scope and unusually pointed analysis, and they’ve garnered a lot of feedback.
Most of the feedback has been positive. Some has been neutral. Some students have noted their surprise at what they consider the opinionated nature of the pieces. The degree of analysis and the strength of the conclusions certainly represent a departure from The Herald’s usual style, which tends toward straight reporting. The departure is intentional. The editors felt that condensing the last decade of University history in a useful and meaningful way required a significant amount of analysis and explanation, rather than just the presentation of bare facts. We hope our analysis has been helpful, and we consider it fairly conservative. We welcome alternate interpretations. Continue Reading