Middlebury Magazine » Political Science

Class Assignment: Give Away $100,000

Stephen Diehl — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 16:11:32 +0000

How hard could it be to give away $100,000? Just write the check, make someone’s day, smiles all around.

Of course, it’s not that simple. At least not if you’re weighing the countless factors philanthropists must consider, which is what a group of 25 Middlebury students did during a new J-term course titled “Philanthropy: Ethics and Practice.”

The money was real — $100,000 from the Texas-based Once Upon A Time Foundation, which has made similar grants to several colleges and universities to support the study of philanthropic giving. The class’s charge was to research nonprofit organizations that interested them, and allocate the funds by the end of the course.

Sarah Stroup, assistant professor of political science, guides a class discussion.

A faculty team of political scientist Sarah Stroup and philosophy professor Steven Viner served as facilitators, crafting the course to blend the mechanics of philanthropic giving with the ethical decision-making tools necessary for such important choices.

For the first two weeks, students delved into the intricacies of nonprofits and philanthropy. They split into five groups and compiled lists of possible organizations to support, then spent a week immersed in research on their prospective grantees, including phone conversations, meetings, and tours. They narrowed the field significantly with each group considering one to three potential organizations.

Sitting with Stroup and Viner, one student group described how they’d honed their list down to one local social services group — the Addison County Parent Child Center. They liked supporting an organization in the local college community and were impressed with the center’s results in reducing teen pregnancy. But will it persuade their classmates?

Students listened to detailed briefing papers from their classmates on each of the charities considered for grants.

“I feel like in order for them to keep providing help and education on a case-by-case basis, we need to address the issues of staffing,” said Luke Martinez ‘14. Martinez noted that most of the center’s funding comes mostly from Medicaid and the state, but those sources seem continually at risk as the country digs out of recession.

“That won’t be sexy to present in front of the class, but it’s the fact of the matter,” added fellow group member Emmy Masur ‘13.

Week four marked a transition to the hard work of narrowing the list even further in preparation to make awards. To help create a baseline of shared information about the charities, each student group presented a briefing paper that included background, structures and strategies, financial information, oversight and monitoring, evidence of impact, and reasons why to support them.

They narrowed the field to four finalists: Gardens for Health International, which fights malnutrition; Grassroot Soccer, which works to reduce HIV infection through education; and Schistosomiasis Control Initiative (SCI), which reduces parasitic worm infections in Africa, and the local Addison County Parent Child Center.

The class took numerous hand votes to narrow down the finalists, but struggled to reach consensus.

But along with a smaller field comes stronger advocacy from the student groups. When students had a chance to ask each other for additional information, there were sometimes testy exchanges as students slipped into the role of advocates. They all knew what was on the line for their charity and wanted to make a compelling case.

“I think we expected this,” said Stroup, “that as the decision moment came closer, students were not thinking about these questions in abstract terms. They were thinking about them in the particular context of the charities that they felt passionately drawn to.”

On the last day of class, the moment of truth arrives, when the class must decide — together — how they’ll parcel out the money. Everyone knows how much research and emotion the other teams have invested, but they really want their group to come out ahead.

Stroup and Viner, now in full facilitator mode, guide the students into a decision process that’s fair and logical. Viner has suggested a kind of “Robert’s Rules” system to keep the class on track. Trying to narrow the decision further, the class takes a series of votes: how many charities to fund, which are your preferred charities, if we vote for only three, what would they be, and so on.

Ian Stewart ’14 (center) broke through the stalemate by suggesting a paper vote.

Three solid hours of deliberation yields a stalemate, and a new group dynamic. Quite simply, it is difficult to sit in a circle of friends and peers, and tell them you don’t want to support their cause. Ian Stewart ‘14 proposes a solution that breaks the log jam: Each member of the class write on a piece of paper how much money they would allocate to each of the four groups and then tally the class average for each. It’s an imperfect solution — some groups get more, some less — but it nicely illustrates the need for compromise and progress. Gardens for Health and SCI end up with $35,000 each, while Grassroot Soccer and the Parent Child Center end up with $15,000 each.

With a decision finally made, the mood turned from tension to joy, exuberance, and relief. And despite all the wrangling that came before, the class seems satisfied that the will of the group was reflected in their decision.

Viner applauded the students’ efforts, especially their perseverance when it might have been easier to split the money evenly and call it a day. “That’s a sort of life lesson about us learning how to do good with our money,” he said. “These are difficult decisions, but there’s also an undercurrent of another sort of problem that arose, which is coordinating with others to come to a decision about how our projects will clash with, and come into tension with, other people’s projects even when they’re both good projects.”

“Our class introduced students to both ‘what is’ in the American nonprofit sector as well as to perhaps ‘what should be’ in terms of our responsibilities to others,” said Stroup, “and we hope that the conversations that we began over J-term continue as students grow as citizens and leaders.”

Professor Pundits: VICTORY…for Political Scientists

Stephen Diehl — Thu, 08 Nov 2012 17:37:58 +0000

It’s all about the data. Wrapping up their year-long series of commentaries about the presidential election, Middlebury’s Professor Pundits Matt Dickinson and Bert Johnson note that scientific forecasting models really do work to predict election results. Hear what the pundits have to say in their final commentary on the 2012 election.

Previous Professor Pundit commentaries

Professor Pundits: The Expectations Game

Stephen Diehl — Fri, 26 Oct 2012 19:07:10 +0000

We’re almost to election day. What could happen in the last few days to significantly change the trajectory of the race? Well, historically, not much. But then again, the unexpected doesn’t usually give much notice. Middlebury “Professor Pundits” Bert Johnson and Matt Dickinson fill us in on expectations, the electoral college, and what to look for on election night in their final pre-election installment.

Matt and Bert will host an election-night gathering at the Grille in McCullough Student Center. Please join them if you’re in town, or follow their live-blogging and tweets. On Twitter, Matt is @Mattdickinson44 and Bert is @bnjohns.

Previous Professor Pundit commentaries

Professor Pundits: Will Women Decide the Presidential Race?

Stephen Diehl — Thu, 18 Oct 2012 18:24:46 +0000

According to the latest polls, the presidential race is tightening and the gender gap is closing. Obama has held a strong lead among women voters, but that lead seems to be vanishing, and the reasons might surprise you. Middlebury professors Matt Dickinson and Bert Johnson discuss these issues, the electoral map and advertising strategy in the final weeks of the campaign. If you have questions about the presidential campaign, email Matt and Bert at pundits@middlebury.edu.

Previous Professor Pundit commentaries

Professor Pundits: Who’s Ahead? It’s Debatable.

Stephen Diehl — Thu, 04 Oct 2012 19:29:56 +0000

After weeks of build up, the first of three presidential debates is behind us. Who won? Both sides seem to think Mitt Romney clinched the debate. Will that give his campaign a boost? And why is it that the polls have showed Obama steadily inching ahead of Romney, yet political scientists consider the race a dead heat? Professor Pundits Matt Dickinson and Bert Johnson talk debates, ad strategy, and many other factors that will impact the election in these final weeks. If you have questions about the presidential campaign for the pundits, email them to pundits@middlebury.edu.

Previous Professor Pundits commentaries

Professor Pundits: Things That Go Bump…Or Not

Stephen Diehl — Fri, 07 Sep 2012 19:01:32 +0000

As political convention season comes to a close, presidential debate season begins. So, did either candidate get a “bump” from the conventions? In their newest installment, professor pundits Matt Dickinson and Bert Johnson say the whole idea of a bounce in the polls from the conventions may be a thing of the past. According to the pundits, several factors, including fragmented media coverage, are responsible for this trend. See what Matt and Bert have to say in the video below, and please send any presidential election-related questions to pundits@middlebury.edu.

Previous Professor Pundits commentaries

Professor Pundits: What Do You Get for $400 Million?

Stephen Diehl — Wed, 08 Aug 2012 13:56:53 +0000

In their latest video commentary, Middlebury political science professors Matt Dickinson and Bert Johnson look at the Obama campaign’s early massive spending spree — $400 million to date — mostly in battleground states. But despite the big spending, polls show a statistical dead heat between the two candidates. The pundits discuss this and more in their newest chat. And, as always, if you have a question about this presidential campaign for Bert Johnson or Matt Dickinson, please leave a comment below or email: pundits@middlebury.edu.

Previous Professor Pundits commentaries.

Professor Pundits: “Healthcare Ruling: Campaign Friend or Foe?”

Stephen Diehl — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 03:01:31 +0000

Despite Mitt Romney’s surge in fundraising immediately after the Supreme Court’s healthcare ruling, both candidates seem to be keeping their distance from the topic. But as our professor pundits Matt Dickinson and Bert Johnson point out, that does not mean the ruling won’t be important in this fall’s elections, though maybe not for the reasons you think. Join in the conversation with your comments below.

If you have a question about presidential campaigns, please email us at pundits@middlebury.edu. We’ll do our best to answer your questions in our next video or by email. And, follow the pundits on Twitter: @bnjohns and @mattdickinson44. Past episodes of the Pundits.

Professor Pundits: Watching Wisconsin

Stephen Diehl — Wed, 06 Jun 2012 19:20:33 +0000

Wisconsin’s Republican governor just survived a recall election. Will that have any impact on the presidential race in a state that has historically gone to Democrats? In their latest political commentary on the presidential race, the Professor Pundits offer differing views on the importance of Wisconsin events to the national political scene.

Got a question about the presidential campaign for the Professor Pundits? Send your questions to pundits@middlebury.edu.

Professor Pundits: Base Hit

Stephen Diehl — Thu, 17 May 2012 19:05:08 +0000

The Romney campaign reported today that their fundraising is nearly even with the Obama campaign, but also noted that 95% of contributors were small donors, a sign, our pundits say, that the base is getting behind candidate Romney. And what impact will President Obama’s recent pronouncement of support for same-sex marriage have on the campaign? The pundits talk us through it in their latest edition.

Got a question about the presidential campaign for the Professor Pundits? Send your questions to pundits@middlebury.edu.

Professor Pundits: And the winner is…

Stephen Diehl — Tue, 01 May 2012 14:59:08 +0000

With Santorum out and Gingrich close behind him, the Republican primary race is all but over. It may seem obvious now but, as our pundits point out, Romney was not always the clear choice. In this edition, Matt and Bert look back at the road to Romney’s nomination and discuss what the recent GDP report could mean for the general election.

Got a question for the pundits? Send it our way and we’ll do our best to answer online, or in our next video installment. Send questions to: pundits@middlebury.edu.

Professor Pundits: Why GDP is Catnip for Political Scientists

Stephen Diehl — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 14:34:44 +0000

Forget the polls and fundraising reports for a minute. Our pundits, Matt Dickinson and Bert Johnson, say the forthcoming GDP report may be the most important factor in the presidential campaign so far — especially now that the Republican primary seems to be winding down and attention turning to the general election. In their latest update on presidential campaign politics, the pundits discuss GDP, the Supreme Court, and why President Obama would show up in Vermont (the first presidential visit here since 1995).

Professor Pundits: Sorting Out Super Tuesday

Stephen Diehl — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 19:09:33 +0000

Trying to draw conclusions from this year’s Super Tuesday voting is tricky business. The only certainty is that there’s still a long road ahead for the Republican primary candidates. Middlebury’s professor pundits Matt Dickinson and Bert Johnson are back with an update about what happened on Super Tuesday and what it might mean going forward.

Professor Pundits: Big Win in Florida, But Challenges Ahead for Mitt

Stephen Diehl — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 21:17:53 +0000

Despite Newt Gingrich’s strong showing in South Carolina, Mitt Romney stormed back and took win-all Florida by a 14-point margin in the Republican primary race. Romney has momentum and plenty of cash, so what does he have to be worried about? Middlebury pundits Matt Dickinson and Bert Johnson can think of a few things.

Earlier installments:
Is Newt Shaking Up Political Science Wisdom?

Super PACs and South Carolina
Who’s Got Iowa Momentum (And Does It Really Matter?)
Gaffes, Grievances, and Godfather’s
The Professor Pundits

Professor Pundits: Is Newt Shaking Up Political Science Wisdom?

Stephen Diehl — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 22:15:41 +0000

Does Newt Gingrich’s convincing win in the South Carolina Republican primary upend some long-held ideas about what’s required to win? Our pundits, professors Matt Dickinson and Bert Johnson, take up this question and other election topics in our latest edition.

Earlier installments:
Super PACs and South Carolina
Who’s Got Iowa Momentum (And Does It Really Matter?)
Gaffes, Grievances, and Godfather’s
The Professor Pundits

Professor Pundits: Super PACs and South Carolina

Stephen Diehl — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 20:33:59 +0000

Professor Pundits is our periodic update on the 2012 presidential campaign with political science professors Matt Dickinson and Bert Johnson. In this edition: Bert was in both Iowa and New Hampshire and compares the style and substance of each of the leading candidates he saw. Bert recently offered in-depth observations of Iowa as a guest blogger in Matt’s “Presidential Power” blog. Matt looks ahead to South Carolina and the challenges the candidates face in that state. And both pundits discuss the major role Super PACs have played so far in the primary.

Earlier installments:
Who’s Got Iowa Momentum (And Does It Really Matter?)
Gaffes, Grievances, and Godfather’s
The Professor Pundits

Professor Pundits: Who’s Got Iowa Momentum? (And Does it Really Matter?)

Stephen Diehl — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 13:44:28 +0000

The Republican primary race has shifted momentum so many times, it’s hard to catch your breath. Since we last checked in with our pundits, profs Matt Dickinson and Bert Johnson, the primary campaign has been quite eventful, including Herman Cain’s exit and Newt Gingrich shooting to the top of the polls. Does the idea of momentum actually make a difference? Our pundits took up this question, but they don’t agree on the answer. Hear what they have to say:

Earlier installments:
Gaffes, Grievances, and Godfather’s
The Professor Pundits

Professor Pundits: Gaffes, Grievances, and Godfather’s

Stephen Diehl — Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:07:38 +0000

It’s been a rough few weeks for some Republican primary candidates, but a fascinating time for political observers. We checked in with Middlebury’s professor pundits, Matt Dickinson and Bert Johnson, for a rundown of the newest developments in the Republican primary, how “Occupy Wall Street” could impact the presidential race, and some of the more notable moments from the latest round of primary debates.

Earlier installments:
The Professor Pundits

The Professor Pundits

Stephen Diehl — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 15:50:33 +0000

For political junkies, it doesn’t get much better than the horse race under way in the GOP primary. And what about President Obama’s prospects? Will he be able to energize his base amidst the many challenges he’s facing? To help us get a handle on what’s behind all this wrangling, we asked Middlebury political scientists Matt Dickinson and Bert Johnson to share their thoughts on the campaign so far. Here’s what they had to say: