Talk:Hillsdale College

Funding
" Since 2007, Hillsdale's entire operating budget, including scholarships, has come from private funding and endowments" - What about student tuition ('private funding' might include it, but does the average reader think so?)? According to the college's information, tuition and costs are "Tuition* $29,590 Room $6,200 Board (Knorr Family Dining Room) $6,300 General Fees $1,312 Total $43,402" (https://www.hillsdale.edu/admissions-aid/financial-aid/tuition-and-costs/). 2600:6C67:1C00:5F7E:AC39:F311:DC1E:D05F (talk) 14:55, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * This has not been addressed, three months later. Kdammers (talk) 20:33, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Where are the archives for this talk page?
Every now and then Lowercase sigmabot III archives older discussions, currently into Archive 2. But there is no listing or mention of archives in the yellow section at the top of this talk page. Where are they? Milkunderwood (talk) 21:46, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Should be visible now. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:18, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Source for claim that "nearly 80% of the colleges founded before the Civil War were forced to close."?
It seems implausible to me that this is true, and google and ChatGPT find only mention of some such closures, mostly in the South.

"Hillsdale survived while nearly 80% of the colleges founded before the Civil War were forced to close." 2601:18D:8902:7F30:A493:5C05:383A:4D0B (talk) 11:46, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

No mention of the endless tv commercials?
Probably what drives most people to this entry. 208.125.68.34 (talk) 16:10, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Has their recent advertising been described or discussed in published secondary sources? If so, please provide examples so that we can discuss inclusion in the article. SPECIFICO talk 23:57, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Here you go, SPECIFICO:
 * https://www.salon.com/2022/03/15/how-this-tiny-christian-college-is-driving-the-rights-nationwide-against-public-schools/
 * https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/04/10/the-christian-liberal-arts-school-at-the-heart-of-the-culture-wars 2600:1700:B210:1540:8DC3:D54C:530B:398B (talk) 09:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Precisely why I investigated Hillsdale. Their ads make them look like some kind of cultish alt-right degree mill. Turns out they've been around since the mid 1800's and Pat Sajak is on their board? Bizarre. 2600:1700:B210:1540:8DC3:D54C:530B:398B (talk) 09:43, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Conservative donors
Upon reviewing the three sources cited for the lead statement that Hillsdale relies on donors' contributions, I saw that the sources pointedly state that the donations are from politically conservative donors. I adjusted the lead text to conform to that statement, as verified by the cited sources. The prior version was reinstated with an edit summary that appears to reject the statements of cited RS.

We are here to convey what our cited RS say. Please undo your removal of the verified text. SPECIFICO talk 15:02, 29 December 2023 (UTC)


 * I think that is the story of detail that should be in the body, not the lead. How did the sources decide the donors were conservative?  Are 100% conservative?  How much emphasis was place on that fact on each of the articles?  If the source articles don't provide evidence for the claim then it probably shouldn't be in the article lead.  If they do provide evidence then those details should be in the body and then we can decide if they should also be in the lead. Springee (talk) 16:12, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree with Springee. This is the lead, not the body.  We've already established that it's a conservative school in the lead do we have to add that descriptor again?  I also agree that the sources cited support that conservatives donate to the college but that's their focus - that's it's a conservative school.  Should we be surprised that conservatives donate to conservative causes?  Further, we don't delineate the political leanings of other schools that take donations so why do we need to do that anyway, regardless of what sources say?  Is it relevant to the article?  Dbroer (talk) 16:49, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The function of our lead sections is to summarize the article content. This is highly significant, as we know from the somewhat unusual 3 in-line sources cited within the lead. The political conservative nexus of the funding is a central point of the cited RS references. Hence, yes it warrants just a few words in the lead to accurately and clearly reflect our sources for this content. SPECIFICO talk 17:15, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I disagree that it's "highly significant" in the lead. I also disagree that it's unusual.  It's a conservative school.  It would be unusual if it's donators were liberal/progressive.  Conservative donators would be expected, particularly since we've already established that it's a conservative school.  The sources are there to support the fact that school doesn't take federal funding.  The political leanings of its donators is immaterial in my opinion, particularly in the lead.  If you could expand on why it's highly significant and unusual, I might be open to your viewpoint but I just can't see why it would be in the lead.  Dbroer (talk) 17:42, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * According to RS -- which does not cover the political, religious, social, or other views of colleges' donors -- the political part of "political conservative" is significant. That is the point of the cited sources. Have you read them recently? They are about how Hillsdale is expanding its political profile and its presence in Washington, DC. SPECIFICO talk 18:04, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Apologies for the delayed response. I was spending time with family.  I hope you had a nice New Years.  The paragraph in question in the lead specifically talks about how Hillsdale relies on private donations because it doesn't take federal funding.  It says nothing about Hillsdale expanding its political profile and presence in Washington.  The references are there to support the text - that they rely on private donations.  I have read them and they do support that.  The fact that they are conservative donors belongs on the body.  We could also expand on the political profile allegation there but the lead already states that the school is conservative and there's no need for double adjectives in a summary.  You're making a valid point but I think we're just objecting to having the descriptor twice in the summary.  Hopefully that clarifies my stance at least.  Dbroer (talk) 16:39, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Best wishes to you too. The source - as I said above - says "political conservative" not conservative. That source and many others address the recent politicization of Hillsdale in concert with other politicization of education in the US. Politico is about the college that wants to take over Washington. I believe there are also sources that name some of the activist political conservatives, but I do not have them at hand. Here is some further reading.  SPECIFICO talk 21:06, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Why no mention of Gov. DeSantis the use of Hillsdale as a model for revamping Florida's New College?
I think some mention of the Florida Governor Ron DeSantis' desire to turn Florida's New College into a "Little Hillsdale" should be noted in this article. This created a huge controversy when New College's president and board were replaced by the DeSantis administration.1 (1) Can Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis re-create Michigan's Hillsdale College in his state? (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/education/2023/01/15/what-hillsdale-college-florida-gov-desantis-wants-replicate/11048401002/) 50.227.29.35 (talk) 12:27, 19 March 2024 (UTC)