Signed, Sealed, Delivered
The backdrop couldn't have been more colorful—or fitting. A line of flags, more than 50 in all, had been placed on a stage behind a long, rectangular table, where Ronald D. Liebowitz and Steven J. Baker—the respective presidents of Middlebury College and the Monterey Institute of International Studies—were about to put pen to parchment, formalizing an agreement that makes Monterey an affiliate of Middlebury.
Taken individually, each flag represented the home country of the roughly 700 students at the Institute. Collectively, the flags stood as a reminder of what Vartan Gregorian, president of the Carnegie Foundation and president emeritus of Brown University, has called the Middlebury-Monterey partnership: "A great service to the nation at a time when America needs more knowledge of the world's cultures and languages."
Front from, from left, President Ronald D. Liebowitz and Monterey Institute President Steven J. Baker. Back row, Frederick M. Fritz, chairman of the Middlebury board of trustees, and Bernard H. Schulte, former chairman of the Monterey board.
Specifically, the affiliation brings together two institutions renowned for their expertise in international education—and extends Middlebury's reach in graduate education into the fields of international policy and international business.
Monterey has four graduate-level programs (the Graduate School of Translation and Interpretation, the Graduate School of Inter-national Policy Studies, the Graduate School of Language and Educational Linguistics, and the Fisher Graduate School of International Business), which should complement Middlebury's undergraduate program in international studies and its Language Schools and Schools Abroad.
Yet as Liebowitz remarked at the signing, "The affiliation will be, and should be, more than mixing and matching the apparent strengths of two institutions." The Middlebury president affirmed the institutions' shared values (promoting independent thinkers, commitment to service, global citizenry) and presented the argument that such affiliations, while rare, would become necessary in the rapidly evolving higher education landscape.
"As knowledge increases, and our pursuit of that knowledge takes increasingly complex twists and turns, collaboration will become essential; even those institutions with the greatest financial resources will find it difficult to do it all, and do it all by themselves. The diverse network of institutions that we must build in order to provide the quality of international education to which we aspire should mirror the diverse student body and learning environment we seek for our students," he said.
"Our relationship, one between two relatively small institutions, should serve as a model for other institutions of higher education interested in extending their reach in specific areas, in providing greater opportunities for their students and faculty, and in putting educational resources to their best and most creative uses."
Succeeding Baker as president of Monterey will be Clara Yu, a former vice president for languages and director of the Language Schools at Middlebury and founder of the National Institute for Technology and Liberal Education.
At the signing, Liebowitz called Yu "an institution builder" and touted her expertise in moving from an idea to its fruitful implementation, to "assessing its impact and value." "Her skills and successes," Liebowitz said, "are the reason why I and so many of my colleagues who have worked with Clara are so confident that the excellent work the faculty, staff, and students do here at Monterey will continue and will evolve in creative and imaginative ways."
Like Liebowitz, Yu has described the affiliation as more than the sum of its parts. "Our shared mission is to educate U.S. and international students who speak the languages of the world and who understand cultural differences and how to bridge them. Our goal together is to help build a safer, more just, and sustainable world."
In addition to the appointment of Yu, the affiliation established a new 13-member board of trustees; nine of the board members have ties to Middlebury, while the other four served on Monterey's previous board. William H. Kieffer III '64, a Middlebury trustee and former senior vice president of the Boston-based financial services group State Street Corporation, will serve as the chair of the Institute's board.
Riddle Me This: Who Am I?
This fall, Middlebury hosted a number of engaging lecturers who spoke on topics as varied as the hurricane Katrina disaster and the marriage of soul music and political activism.
From left, Isaac Hayes, Jill Abramson, Sam Tanenhaus, Jim Amoss and Billy Collins
Over the course of several months, the speakers filled lecture halls, auditoriums, and even Mead Chapel. Below, we've supplied the names of the speakers and clues to their identity. It's up to you to match them up. (The answers are at the botttom of this column.)
Sam Tanenhaus.
Billy Collins
Jill Abramson
Jim Amoss
Isaac Hayes
I. If you ask me, popcorn doesn't own the rights to hot and buttered.
My sister used to call me Bubba.
Cleveland and Hollywood both bear my mark.
I'm at home in a kitchen.
II. I work for an old gray lady.
Punch and Judy are familiar names at my place of employ.
If I were a member of a military company, I'd be a captain.
Given the choice of a red or black pen, I'd choose red.
III. I, too, work for an old gray lady.
Arts and letters are my gig.
One writer has called my fiefdom the Kremlin.
It is Proust I admire most.
IV. My city's nickname recalls rolls and the moon.
Back in the day, you might have called me an ink-stained wretch.
If I worked for a Fortune 500 company, I'd be the CEO.
Hell and high water didn't stop us.
V. I've worn the crown of Frost, Nemerov, Brodsky, and Dove.
The central theme of my work is ... death.
The academy finds my work accessible; the Times prefers hospitable.
Though I best it in age, the Empire Apple and I are both native sons.
Major Movement
The votes were in.
Months, even years, of lobbying efforts, debate, proposals, counterproposals, open meetings, closed-door meetings, letter writing, and opining had come down to what was written on a slip of paper, handed to the president of the College. Ron Liebowitz standing behind a podium at the front of a Bicentennial Hall classroom, glanced down at the white square, his face a study in coolness, betraying not a hint of what was written on the paper slip.
Though Associate Professor of Spanish Miguel Fernandez was speaking about a proposal to change language in the faculty handbook, most eyes in the room kept glancing at Liebowitz, who was patiently waiting for a moment to announce the fate of the American Literature and Civilization department.
After what seemed like an eternity, Liebowitz calmly announced that the faculty had voted to accept the Educational Affairs Committee proposal to create a new department and major of English and American Literatures and a new program and major in American Studies. The restructuring—affirmed by a vote of 101–41, with six abstentions—would end the College's 77-year-old stand-alone major in American Literature.
Liebowitz, echoing an earlier sentiment offered by Associate Professor of English Timothy Billings, expressed his hope that the faculty, which had endured a series of painful and contentious meetings, would be able to move forward and "continue to do what's best for our students and faculty."
In offering the proposal, the EAC argued that developments in literary studies had made it more "intellectually fruitful to study British, American, and Anglophone literature in proximity with one another, since questions of nationhood and nationality in connection with literature are now accompanied by aesthetic, theoretical, and political concerns that transcend national boundaries." A merged department, the committee stated, would bring the study of all literatures written in English "under one integrated and coherent curricular structure."
At an earlier faculty meeting, Professors John McWilliams and Stephen Donadio, both former chairs of the American Literature and Civilization department and vocal critics of the restructuring, had offered a substitute motion that would have maintained a freestanding major and department in American Literature. No coherent argument had been made for the termination of the department and major, they stated, and the process leading to the EAC's proposal was deeply flawed. The motion was defeated, 104–62, with three abstentions.
A minimum of 11 courses will be required for the new major of English and American Literatures, including at least two courses in American literature. McWilliams, in particular, has decried this two-course minimum ("To Merge or Not to Merge," spring 2005), yet authors of the EAC proposal have countered that it would be possible to fulfill requirements for the major by taking all but two classes focusing on American literature. "It is also perhaps worth noting," the EAC added, "that since the current English major does not require any American literature, the total number of literature majors studying American literature will increase." In the new major, all students will be required to take a course in American writers.
The American studies program will be governed by a steering committee comprised of the program director and faculty members affiliated with the program. Majors in American studies will be required to take a minimum of 12 courses and a one-semester essay or two-semester honors thesis.
During the December faculty meeting, Liebowitz addressed the president's role—both his and that of his predecessor, John McCardell —in the curricular debate, stressing that under the faculty's system of governance, it is the president's role to oversee discussions on curricular issues, not dictate outcome. "Our tradition and rules of faculty governance place curricular decisions in the hands of the faculty, as is appropriate," he would later say. "The faculty is charged with ensuring that the curriculum evolves over the decades to keep pace with changes in the intellectual landscape and in student interests. Here, an elected faculty committee worked carefully and responsibly for over a year before presenting a proposal that in the end won the support of a clear majority of faculty colleagues. I believe the final vote reflected the confidence of my colleagues in the soundness of that process, a confidence I share."
In 2004, the English department voted, 11–3, to move toward a merger, while the American Literature and Civilization department voted, 7–2, in favor.
What Bubble?
On the first day of the Tet New Year, January 30, 1968, Vietnamese communists launched what would be known as the Tet Offensive, a series of bloody battles in South Vietnam that brought the war into Vietnam's cities for the first time. Though a military defeat for the North Vietnamese, the Tet Offensive was a political and psychological victory, exposing the south's vulnerability and signaling to the world that the war was far from over.
That fall, there was no mention of Vietnam in the College's course catalog; in fact, there was no mention of Southeast Asia. There were political science courses on American foreign policy, the politics of modernization in the Near East, and the government and politics of the Far East (with an emphasis on China and Korea), but the day's greatest geopolitical conflict was not being examined in depth. Karl Lindholm '67, now an assistant professor of American Literature and dean of advising, had graduated the previous spring and recalls plenty of discussion and debate about the war in Vietnam—just not in the classroom.
"I can't recall one academic discussion or one seminar on Vietnam," Lindholm says. "We'd talk about [the conflict] all the time, but never in class. It seemed to me that the curriculum was so much more rigid then. Today, the mindset is different, more flexible, which allows for contemporary issues to breech those classroom walls."
Indeed among the courses being taught in 2005–06 are Science Demonized: Chemical and Biological Warfare, Political Islam, Jihad vs. McWorld: The Political Economy of Globalization, Geopolitics of the Middle East, and Anthropology of Human Rights. "The borders between disciplines have really become malleable," Lindholm adds, "which allows for a much more comprehensive response to current issues."
Last spring, 16 scholars from a host of disciplines converged on Middlebury for a symposium that tackled one of the most debated issues of the present day: "The Idea of Jerusalem." Over the course of three days, religion professors, professors of Middle Eastern studies, geography professors, archaeology professors, and political scientists discussed such wide-ranging topics as "One City, One God, Three Faiths," "Nationalizing Jerusalem: The Making of the Capital," and "Jerusalem in the Arts."
"Jerusalem is a microcosm of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict," Tamar Mayer, a professor of geography and co-organizer of the conference, explained one day this fall. "Most people look at the conflict as a black-and-white issue, but it's not. It's extraordinarily complex, and by using 'The Idea of Jerusalem' as a window into this world, we hoped to give our students a greater understanding of the complexity of the issue."
The Jerusalem conference was one of many symposia held on campus during the past year that brought current events to the fore. In October, a group of students organized a forum that addressed the business of news and how this business affects the quality of coverage; and the previous month, the annual Clifford Symposium dug into the hot topic of global warming.
"The various symposia are certainly a big part of this emphasis on current events," Lindholm said. But, he added, it's not just the topics that are having such an impact, but those in attendance—people like Bill McKibben (on climate change) and Frank Sesno '77 (on the business of news) —who are often major players in today's debates.
Among those present for the Jerusalem symposium was Sari Nusseibeh, president of Al-Quds University and Palestinian minister for Jerusalem affairs. During a panel discussion dedicated to "Thoughts on the Future," Nusseibeh addressed the hotly debated topic, "Can There Be Peace Without Negotiating Jerusalem?" At one point, during his speech, Nusseibeh held up his Jordanian passport and his Israeli identification card and said, "I'm asked all the time what my passport is, what my residence is, what my citizenship is . . . it's hard for a person in my position to try and describe the situation to myself, let alone to other people." Which is one of the reasons Mayer and Suleiman Mourad, a former assistant professor of religion, convened the conference—and an apt illustration of how much has changed in the past 30 years.
Survey Says
Last spring, the committee coordinating the College's strategic planning process surveyed the Middlebury community—faculty, students, staff, and alumni—to assess opinions on a variety of issues. More than 4,100 individuals responded, including 126 faculty members, 210 staff members, 394 students, and 3,400 alumni. (The surveys for the various groups were not identical, but they had a number of questions in common.)
What did we learn?
Academic Programs Rate High
Respondents believe that the quality of Middlebury's academic programs is the most important factor in making the College exceptional. All four of the surveyed groups rated academic programs first, followed by human interactions. Faculty put more emphasis on selectivity in admissions than other groups did, while extracurricular activities received a higher score from students.
The Ideal Middlebury Grad Is ...
Students, staff, and alumni said it's most important for graduates to be thoughtful, ethical leaders. Faculty ranked that choice second, giving a higher priority to producing graduates who are independent thinkers.
You're the Admissions Committee: Whom Do You Want?
All four groups rated "intellectual curiosity, engagement, commitment" first when considering qualities they'd like to see in a student applying to Middlebury. (Academic profile—test scores, high-school grades—ranked second.) All groups ranked "promise as an intercollegiate athlete" last among the six possible responses.
Money Matters
The first priority of students, staff, and alumni was to increase the financial aid budget. Faculty gave a slightly higher priority to improving the student-faculty ratio.
The Sports Factor
Students and staff generally felt that some consideration should be given to athletic ability, similar to that given to factors such as leadership, community service, and artistic talents. Faculty respondents were more inclined to substantially reduce consideration of athletic ability and to raise admission standards for athletes. (This question was not on the alumni survey.)
Top Priority
"Attracting the most talented and diverse student body" was the first choice of faculty. "Attracting the best possible faculty and staff" was the first choice of alumni. Staff and students gave equal priority to both of those choices. All four groups ranked other priorities, such as strengthening the curriculum and maintaining the beauty of the campus, far lower.
We Get Along Great! Says Who?
About 75 percent of staff said the relationship between the faculty and staff needed to improve, but only about 35 percent of faculty agreed.
(Un)Common Denominator
Should Middlebury continue to develop links between the curriculum and the Commons? Most staff members said that it should. Most students disagreed. Faculty members were evenly split: one third agreed, one third disagreed, and one third were neutral.
What's Next?
Dean of Planning John Emerson says that the survey results have helped the Planning Steering Committee in developing some overarching themes in the emerging strategic plan, which will guide the College over the next six to 10 years. In requiring people to choose from a list of priorities or values, Emerson noted, the survey gave the campus community a sense of the difficult task undertaken by the committee.
The new strategic plan will be presented to the president and the board of trustees this winter.
Will this be the 83rd Winter Carnival ... or the 72nd?
The 1943 program for the Winter Carnival related that Middlebury's first Winter Carnival was held in 1923, on the occasion of George Washington's birthday. However, the program also stated that it would not be accurate to date the origin of the event to 1923 since the festival did not become an annual event until the mid-1930s (1934 to be exact). Instead, those witty '43ers offered, "1931 is now generally accepted as the first Carnival, even though 1934 really was. Like most things of historical importance, origins of Carnival are shrouded in the mists of time." Confused?
The 1931 reference was tongue-in-cheek, and while Winter Carnival did not become an annual event until the '30s, the College still counts the 1923 Carnival in its official tally. Thus, the 2006 Winter Carnival will be Middlebury's 83rd.
Syllabus
Course
Katrina and Its Aftermath: A Service Learning Course
Instructor
Associate Professor Will Nash
Course Description
This course, about the unnatural components of the Katrina disaster, examines questions of urban planning, social justice, environmental justice, and educational policy; we will also consider the impact of the storm on New Orleans culture.
The heart of the course will be a weeklong service-learning trip to New Orleans, where students will participate in a public education project at Frederick Douglass High School and also engage in community relief efforts. In preparation for that week, students will read scholarly articles on the listed topics, extensive journalistic coverage from several sources, and Tom Piazza's Why New Orleans Matters.
Nash Says
Early in October, Deb Evans and I, as the faculty heads of Wonnacott Commons, worked together with Sujata Moorti, the Chair of Women's and Gender Studies, to facilitate an idea she had for a Hurricane Katrina teach-in. Our initial plan was to have one two-hour session devoted to a look at the "unnatural" elements of the natural disaster—the economic and social inequities, the racial intolerance, and the environmental justice issues that the storm brought to the nation's awareness. Because of the energy and interest that people had for this idea, our two-hour session evolved into a two-day symposium that blended the academic perspectives of historians, artists, political scientists, geologists, and chemists with students' stories of their experiences in and around the storm.
During this time, a Bread Loaf alumnus named Jim Randels, who teaches in New Orleans and directs a program called Students at the Center, contacted the College and arranged to visit campus and meet with people interested in his plans for rebuilding his program. After a few discussions, a winter term course seemed like a natural extension of what we all had been doing and wanted to do.
On Location
In New Orleans, the class will be assisting Randels and his staff at the center—most likely providing writing tutorials. In preparation, this class is spending the first two weeks of the term on campus, reading about the storm and its aftermath and also digging deeply into New Orleans culture. Says Nash: "My hope is that students will go to New Orleans with some sense both of what's been lost and of what the larger policy implications are in this isolated instance."