Administration breaks silence that followed Fuqua faculty rebuke over Kunshan

Please scroll down to an earlier post today, liberating two more Kunshan-related documents.

Search words: Duke University Kunshan

✔✔✔ Five days after the faculty in the Fuqua Business School shot down both proposed degree programs in Kunshan, putting a pall over the entire China Initiative, we have the first reaction from Allen Building.

Not from President Brodhead. This initiative is, by his own statement, the biggest strategic move for Duke since James B. Duke offered Trinity College big bucks and a plan to become a university. So you would think he might pop up.

Not from Peter the Provost, nor from Dean Blair Sheppard of Fuqua, who stood silent during a meeting which established that he has virtually no support among his colleagues.

Rather, the university announcement comes from mouthpiece Michael Schoenfeld.

"The faculty committees will be working over the summer with various university officials responsible for operations, finance, etc. to refine their proposals for further review in the fall."

And "This does not affect the schedule for the opening in fall 2012, and indeed will result in an even better program."

Mike, if you would like to read the documents, send me an e-mail and we'll provide them. There is not much hope for the Master of Management Studies degree, even less for an Executive MBA. Ever.

As for opening in 2012, get real. The Fuqua faculty won't meet until the fall, the Academic Council after that.

Just more evidence of the disconnect between Allen Building and the reality of the Kunshan Folly. We can only be thankful the Fuqua faculty stopped a train wreck.

The quotes are from an e-mail Schoenfeld sent the Monday edition of the on-line "Inside Higher Education."

Fact Checker reported the rebuke last Thursday morning. Until today, no one else has. No local papers. No press releases from Duke. No article in the on-campus official Duke Today. Nothing on the new Duke China website. No Chronicle. (The Chronicle story last Thursday was written before the Wednesday faculty meeting, and not updated)

More later.


  1. Actually, the Chronicle ran a story June 2, which indicates that "due to a lack of significant market research, however, faculty members chose to postpone the vote, possibly to August or September." It paints a much more rosy picture of the situation...all they need is research that supports their plan and they're back on track. Too bad none of the research they've conducted to date supports the initiative.

  2. Yes, but the Chronicle story on June 2nd did NOT include any information flowing from the decisive June 1st faculty meeting.

  3. nor does the chronicle have any reporters who do an ounce of actual investigative reporting...


Please send comments directly to Duke.Fact.Checker@gmail.com if you want a response. The on-line form is anonymous and we cannot get back to you.

We hope with transfer to a new website in the near future to have open discussion. FC also welcomes Guest FC columns, a complete essay that will be posted just like our own.