Thoughts on thinkers, pro and con on Hillel article, mostly con on higher ed mistrust debate, and more.
The Power of Connection
In the Sep|Oct 2026 edition of The Pennsylvania Gazette, Julia M. Klein profiled three Penn powerhouse academicians [“Don’t Only Connect—Get Situated and Practice Agency”]. As an outsider looking in, my initial reaction was simple: Penn houses an extraordinary collection of bestselling authors. My wife and I frequently discuss the work of authors such as Angela Duckworth and Adam Grant, so reading about their stories was particularly engaging.
As I read on in Klein’s article, however, I found myself reflecting less on their individual accomplishments and more on their relationships. When I learned that Angela Duckworth had been involved in “wooing” Adam Grant to Penn, I was stunned that such a consequential connection began as a very real assignment. Likewise, as someone outside the psychology department, I never knew Duckworth had been Martin Seligman’s student in graduate school. What initially seemed like a “perfect storm” of talented Penn authors revealed something deeper: the power of connection.
Pulling back the curtain, I was struck by how mentorship, collaboration, and shared purpose helped shape careers that would go on to influence millions of readers. What I appreciate most is how these scholars align their efforts to work synergistically in parallel, elevating not only their own work but their respective fields.
I am currently an associate scholar at the Perelman School of Medicine, and I recently reached out to collaborate with a Penn philosopher. While I have led a multi-institutional collaboration before, this is the first project I have undertaken across disciplines, spanning rehabilitative medicine and philosophy. Seeing the interplay among the scholars profiled in Klein’s article has inspired me to pursue similarly meaningful collaborations and create outcomes that extend beyond any one field.
Patrick H. Pham GEd’26, Philadelphia
Well Done
Outstanding article by Julia M. Klein. Lots of food for thought. Well done.
Thanks for maintaining such high journalistic standards in these dumbed-down days.
Christian M. Coli W’96, Fremont, CA
Still Work to Be Done, but Cause for Hope
I was glad to see the extensive article on Hillel in the most recent edition [“A Haven at Hillel,” Sep|Oct 2026]. The Jewish community at Penn has contributed tremendously in so many ways to the University that an article like this was long overdue. One of the reasons that my time at Penn was so impactful was that Penn had such a vibrant Hillel, and no matter where you were within the Jewish community, there was something for you. The decrease in the Jewish population at Penn that has occurred over the past 10–20 years is distressing as is what happened at the University after October 7th.
I do know that Rabbi Gabe and the Hillel staff have been working with the University and others to correct many things that had made Penn not as welcoming to its Jewish students and staff. I learned about some of these efforts through emails and Zooms that were referenced in the article as I have always supported Penn Hillel and am a member of the Penn Jewish Alumni Network. I myself stopped doing alumni interviews after October 7th as I didn’t think I could recommend Penn to a prospective student. There is still work to be done, but I do hope that in a few years, Penn will once again have a sizable Jewish population and be the welcoming place for all Jews that it was when I was a student.
Judy Lobel C’88, White Plains, NY
Noticeably Zionist Slant
I like your magazine (I spent three years at the law school, 1966–1969). I read with interest your article on Hillel. I am from a Spanish family that has various indicia of being of Jewish background, although my family seems to have done a pretty good job of burying that connection somewhere in the distant past.
Anyway, I wanted you to hear (I am sure I am not alone in this) that your article on Hillel at Penn had a noticeably Zionist slant. How could such a long article about a service for Jewish college students not mention JVP (Jewish Voice for Peace)? It looks like Hillel is run as a service, not to all Jews, but particularly to Zionist Jews—who I suspect are by now a minority among Jews at Penn. Maybe you could run another article on non-Zionist Jews at Penn—and on Palestinians while you are at it.
Santiago Leon L’69, Miami
A Troubling Narrative
In recent years, American universities have been criticized for a lack of viewpoint diversity. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), which ranks universities on their commitment to free speech, ranked Penn near the bottom—227 out of 261 universities ranked. When universities become intellectual monocultures, ideas are less likely to be challenged, with consequences that extend well beyond the campus.
Against this backdrop, a careful reading of your recent article “Trust Issues” [“Gazetteer,” Sep|Oct 2026] leads to a troubling narrative: (1) Faculty who influence campus culture are overwhelmingly Democrats. (2) Those faculty nevertheless do not believe that this lopsided political environment affects the classroom. (3) Universities are failing to support democracy. (4) Academia has been unfairly targeted by its critics. (5) Criticism of academia is attributed to Republicans being racist.
Attributing Republican criticism of academia to racism is symptomatic of the intellectual laziness that pervades academic culture. The larger issue is not whether Republicans or Democrats are morally superior. It is whether universities are willing to examine themselves with critical standards.
Academia has not yet had that reckoning. Instead, it too often dismisses criticism rather than confronting the possibility that ideological homogeneity can produce institutional blind spots. Rebuilding public trust in our academic institutions requires universities to genuinely welcome intellectual disagreement—and to acknowledge that no viewpoint is entitled to immunity from scrutiny.
Mark T. Holtzapple Gr’81, College Station, TX
Elephant in the Room: Student Debt
“Trust Issues” offered an interesting discussion, but in my view the elephant in the center of the room was completely ignored.
Higher education as a thing for Americans can be traced to the GI Bill after World War II. The administration was concerned that, as happened after the first World War, returning veterans looking for nonexistent jobs would result in high unemployment and worldwide economic depression. Diverting returning veterans to college prevented the unemployment surge but also gave them educations that increased their earning power and careers that improved their work lives. Successive generations of college students expected similar benefits and found them. While they may have had loans to pay off, their improved expectations meant they could pay them off in a period similar to their time in school.
I was at Penn from 1965 to 1971. My last semester cost as much as my entire first year. Does anybody remember the graffiti from that time: Raise it another $100, Gaylord, we want to be first in the Ivies in something. Rising college costs have made the benefits the veterans experienced much more elusive. I don’t have statistics on this, but anecdotally I’m aware of a number of college graduates living in their parents’ basements, unemployed, absorbing groceries. Less visible is the enormous student debt they’ll be challenged to pay off. This situation has to promote distrust of academia, if not bitterness, among the students and their parents.
Bill Mosteller C’71, Fairfax, VA
Willful Blindness
Elaine Maimon’s flippant remark about faculty party affiliation, comparing it to a theoretical number of Republican bankers, completely misses the mark and is indeed an example of why there is loss of trust in academia. Bankers don’t teach or indoctrinate our youth. While their party affiliation may indeed have an effect on who they financially support, that is irrelevant to the discussion. Her willful blindness to the idea of bias is frankly shocking. There is plenty of non-anecdotal evidence, such as seminar topics, assigned readings, etc., that clearly indicate that political bias affects what the professors are presenting and teaching. Perhaps if the leaders can’t see the proverbial beam in their own eye, an outside intervention, even if forced by the government, is what’s needed.
Vladimir S. Yakopson C’00 CGS’01, Puyallup, WA
Get On with Solutions
“Trust Issues” is a collection of rambling and frustrating quotes and musings that gives me a headache. Enough with rehashing, reframing, and bemoaning the public trust challenge; get on with solutions. I want to hear definitive ideas from university administrators with skin in the game.
Mostly, I disagree with lumping all the schools within the university as one entity that collectively is or is not worthy of the public trust; the university is a collection of apples, oranges, and onions. The medical or nursing schools would certainly score differently than political science or philosophy in the opinion of “large segments of the US population” when judging trustworthiness and return on investment. So let’s ID the real weak links in the trust gap and address them. Where there is trust, build on it.
Relevant to the trust issue, I was surprised to read in the Wall Street Journal that struggling Syracuse University eliminated 90 majors. Where is Penn on this? I personally embrace the value of a liberal education with a Penn MS in anthropology (archaeology) to complement two engineering degrees—a plan for real ROI embellished with a strong dose of enlightenment.
William G. Stead CE’69 GCE’70 G’81, Chambersburg, PA
Whither the Ginkgos?
The welcome article “Planting Penn” by Trey Popp [“Arts,” Sep|Oct 2026] does not mention the ginkgo trees, which were very noticeable in 1967, when I began my time at Penn. Their aroma was undeniable and indescribable. Are there any still on the campus?
Harry Winter Gr’76, Tewksbury, MA
Trey Popp responds: I’m glad you welcomed my article about Penn’s tree canopy. There are indeed plenty of ginkgo trees still on campus. You can search for their locations at tinyurl.com/PennGinkgos. I’m not sure how many are female (which drop the odiferous fruits), but I’ll confess a preference for the males (which don’t)!
Road Less Traveled
In Mary Ann Meyers’ excellent history of the Leonard Davis Institute, “LDI and American Healthcare” [Jul|Aug 2026], she mentions that its founding director, Dr. Robert Eilers, “created an MBA major in 1970 … with the goal of training managers and analysts of healthcare systems.” As one of the early graduates of that program, my observation is that it has evolved over the years in a very different direction than Dr. Eilers intended. Most of its graduates have gone on to careers in businesses that provide products and services to healthcare providers rather than the direct management of healthcare facilities and systems. My own career in healthcare (and later public health) administration seems to have been the road less traveled among my fellow alumni.
Kevin McNally WG’76, Roosevelt, NJ
… Worth a Thousand Words
Thank you for the creative cover illustration on the USA 250th anniversary edition [May|Jun 2026]. At first, I found it interesting, then bold, then encouraging. Upon further consideration, it simply reflects insight. When independence from British rule was declared, the Founding Fathers also outlined the necessity of political separation, delineated foundational truths regarding natural rights, and described the purpose of government. They espoused principles to which a yet-to-be United States could aspire, and upon which this country could grow and flourish through the uncertainties of the future. These underlying principles were not intended as fleeting or momentary, but as fundamental to the vision for this country.
Adaptability is critical for survival; living things that might achieve the milestone of 250 years do not look or function exactly as they did at 25. The Gazette illustration is insightful for highlighting and tying together the significance of this country’s birth, its principles, and their inherent adaptability. As this nation has expanded, the adaptability of our principles has facilitated the 250-year viability of the Founders’ vision.
Any number of illustrative options might have been considered here: Independence Hall, a bald eagle, Revolutionary soldiers. All meaningful, but aspirational? I applaud my University of Pennsylvania for its continued efforts to be better, to explore ideas that can open minds, and to create thinkers who can respectfully and intelligently differ on the method, but not the direction intended by these founding principles.
British rule over this country was lost in 1776 when colonists took a stand that those here were best positioned and capable to self-govern. Much has changed in and around this country since then. Thank you, Gazette, for perhaps pricking our consciousness that continued progress as a nation, on our founding principles, is now a much more broadly shared responsibility.
Miguel Thames C’79, Philadelphia
Mill Creek Memory
“What Lies Beneath” [“Arts,” May|Jun 2026] brought back a memory from when I was a grad student in architecture in the early 1970s. I lived in what I recall was the Spruce Hill Apartments at, I think, 45th and Spruce. Everything is different now. But one morning about 4:30–5 a.m., the intersection at 42nd and Locust caved in, exposing a beautiful brick culvert about 20 feet or more in diameter. It was the undergrounding of Mill Creek. Ironically, this creek had its source in the cellar of my in-laws’ at the time on Broughton Lane in Villanova, just across the tracks from the Villanova parking lot. At other times I encountered the creek at, I think, the ford in Gladwyne, while it wended its way toward the Schuylkill.
It was lovely brickwork. The hole encompassed most of the intersection, and due to the early hour, no cars fell in and no one was injured.
I am an architect in Washington, DC, now, and for one of my projects I have had to engineer foundations to protect a similar 20-foot brick sewer (not a creek, a sewer), and it regularly brings back that memory.
Stephen duPont C’73 GAr’76, Washington, DC
Penn Publications Are the Best, US Healthcare Needs Reform
My connection to the University of Pennsylvania is through our daughter (Joanna Bergmann Gr’06). Through her degree, we receive The Pennsylvania Gazette and Penn Medicine Magazine. I write to tell all associated with either publication that the efforts, stories, articles, and appearance of both publications are superb. College magazines are valuable to the old and the young. I am in the former category. The information provided, the personal stories presented, and the sense of what is going on in your excellent university and fine medical school are especially appreciated by those of us who are so many years beyond graduation. I also read the publications from Harvard College and its Law School and publications from Colgate and Swarthmore. While they all have their merits, I believe the two Pennsylvania publications are the best from that notable group of universities. I thank you.
On a substantive point, I found “LDI and American Healthcare” [Jul|Aug 2026] both important and disheartening. It was President Truman who declared that adequate medical care for all Americans is a “right.” His efforts were thwarted, mostly by similar assertions to those still being made today. It took President Johnson to secure Medicare and Medicaid. Other presidents have also addressed our medical system. The article on the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics was hopeful in that LDI was created to address how our nation can achieve the goal, generally supported by all, of good medical care for all. The article sets forth many achievements in that direction by the LDI but, sadly, serves also to highlight our ongoing failures.
I believe LDI should focus on a system that works for everyone. It could be Medicare for All, or some system similar to other countries, or even a system unique to the United States. I would have liked to have read more of the efforts of LDI in that direction
To end on a lighter, yet serious, note, I find it unbelievable that our nation does not limit prescription drug advertising. We did once, yet business interests took over. The LDI needs to address those business interests and support and achieve efforts that reduce the importance of profit and enhance the importance of the interest we should all share—namely, to have a medical system that provides fine care to all at a reasonable cost, or no cost, to the patient. Only then will President Truman’s assertion be vindicated. A “right” will become more than simply a word.
Don Bergmann, parent, Westport, CT
