Our Common Bond

By Vince Frieden

Back row: Mary Witham Casner ’76 MS ’77 and Gary Goshorn ’73. Front row: Moe Griffiths ’56 and Cassie Kim ’92
Back row: Mary Witham Casner ’76 MS ’77 and Gary Goshorn ’73. Front row: Moe Griffiths ’56 and Cassie Kim ’92.

Gary Goshorn ’73 still remembers the day he fell in love with Miami University.

“It was midway through my senior year of high school, and my father and I had set out on a trip to visit five colleges. Miami was the second stop, and when we finished the visit, I said, ‘We can go home now.’ It was the only school I applied to, and 35 years later, it’s still the right decision.”

Such passion is common among Miami’s more than 180,000 alumni. Harnessing that passion has never been more important to the future of the university than it is today. Goshorn, who serves as president and chair of the Miami University Alumni Association (MUAA) Board of Directors, is working with the board’s 19 other members to spearhead that effort.

The members come from different decades and span the country, but they all share the common ground of Miami University and the rolling hills of southwest Ohio. Among them are Moe Griffiths ’56, who arrived on campus during the bustling post-World War II years; Mary Witham Casner ’76 MS ’77, who experienced the turbulent campus atmosphere of the early 1970s; and Cassie Kim ’92, a product of Generation X.

“You may have graduated 50 years ago, or you may still be a student,” says Kim, a sales manager from San Francisco. “No matter how different we may be, we all share that common bond in the experience we had at Miami and the loyalty we still feel.”

Miami’s is the fourth-oldest alumni association nationally, and it is facing a challenge unlike any in its history. With sweeping changes altering the face of higher education, alumni participation and giving have become leading priorities for university administrations — even factoring into the criteria for U.S. News & World Report’s annual college rankings.

According to Griffiths, involving alumni begins with reconnecting them to alma mater — no matter how long it has been since graduation.

“It took me 20 years before I made it back to campus,” the retiree from Auburn, Calif., says. “Since then, I’ve devoted a lot of my time and energy to Miami. Miami is more than an academic institution, it’s the place where I transitioned into adulthood. I want it to continue providing those same academic and social tools needed to succeed in the world.”

While the Alumni Association is encouraging all Miami alumni to journey back to campus during the Bicentennial year and reconnect, this is only part of the equation. Another factor in bridging the gap between a proud alumnus and an engaged alumnus rests in educating alumni about the challenges Miami faces.

“I don’t know that most alumni understand how little state support Miami receives today or how much it costs to run a university,” says Casner, a speech pathologist who reconnected with the university through the Washington, D.C., Alumni Chapter. “It takes money to properly fund programs, and it takes money to attract and retain good faculty. If a university doesn’t have financial support, it can’t operate at a high level.”

With the rising cost of tuition making national headlines, a major thrust of Miami’s Campaign For Love and Honor is to build the school’s scholarship endowment so it can provide more support for qualified students from all backgrounds. Another focus of the campaign is to provide the necessary infrastructure and opportunities to prepare students for an increasingly global and technological world. According to Goshorn, a high-school principal from Freetown, Ind., the changing world mandates that Miami keep pace.

“What it’s going to take to prepare the next generation of students is not the same as what it took even a few years ago. The demands of technology and the types of experiences students need to have are forcing universities into places they’ve never gone before. The new buildings on campus are larger and more modernized because that’s what students need.”

While some alumni may understand the need, they may underestimate the impact of even a modest gift. Kim points to the cumulative effect of many individuals coming together and contributing toward a common cause.

“I joke with my friends about how we can’t give enough to have a building named after us,” Kim says. “But every dollar counts. Just think how much books cost. I think it really hits people my age who are saving for their own children to go to college. Every contribution makes a difference.”

In his annual address last fall, President David Hodge laid out Miami’s objectives for the next century, including “providing the best undergraduate experience in the country.” Central to achieving those goals, he explained, is the need to “establish a culture of giving that ensures Miami’s success in the next century.” Currently, 17 percent of alumni contribute financially to the university on an annual basis. By increasing that total just 8 percentage points, Miami’s alumni participation rate would rank among the top 10 of all public universities nationally.

According to Casner, whose daughter, Sarah, graduated from Miami in May, it’s a small price to pay for what she’s already received.

“I am who I am because of what I learned, did, and experienced at Miami. Part of that goes into every aspect of my life … my job, how I raise my kids, my perspectives on the world. I am very fortunate that Miami is part of my life.”


Vince Frieden is a publications assistant in advancement services at Miami.

 

Tuition/Fees/Room/Board for In-State Students
A comparison of coming year’s fees with costs during graduation years of MUAA board members profiled in this story.
Year Tuition/Fees Room/Board Total

1955-56

$240

$302

$542

1973-74

$780

$1,305

$2,085

1976-77

$905

$1,490

$2,395

1992-93

$4,024

$3,620

$7,644

2008-09

$11,443

$8,998

$20,441

       
Percentage of Education Paid per In-State Student
Year Paid by state of Ohio Tuition/Fees
(paid by student)
Other (endowment/
aid/research grants)

1955

70.7%

25.5%

3.8%

1970

49.2%

46.3%

4.5%

1975

50.7%

43.8%

5.5%

1990

40.6%

53.2%

6.2%

2005*

16.4%

71.6%

12.0%

* Most recent data available. Data provided by Denise Krallman, director of institutional research at Miami.


.Back to the Miamian Magazine Summer 2008 Web page