Chicago Police Dept. crime reports by area in map form can be found at http://12.17.79.6/ctznicam/ctznicam.asp?cmd=addr
For the IIT area, enter 3300 South Federal Street or Beat #2113
For the University of Chicago area, enter 5801 South Ellis Ave.
For citywide comparison go to
http://www.chicagocrime.org/map/
I also have a crime map for the Shimer College area not available online, but it seems that documents cannot be posted on this site. The map (from '99, but themost recent I could find) is posted on the Shimer intranet, and I'm sending a copy to Sarah Kimmel.
My analysis:
All three of the schools are in "Fort Apache" locations: with a relatively low crime rate on campus & immediate vicinity, but with high rates if you wander off in any of several directions. It seems that at IIT the biggest security risk for students is the EL line and the Comiskey Park station. But IIT provides a 7-day per week shuttle service to various stops in & near the Loop, which runs fairly often and till fairly late (http://www.iit.edu/directory/shuttlebus.html). IIT also has a security force and "panic button" boxes on the campus. Returning from a recent visit to IIT, Shimer staff have taken the EL without incident.
Albert Fernandez (Shimer faculty)
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
On Marketing and Such
Here's my thinking so far about the move.
If alums have any interest in working over seas, some countries (now including Korea) require sealed official transcripts mailed by the college in order to grant a foreign worker a visa to work in the country. Not sure how many other countries require this but Korea is not alone. But any job or school requiring this (sealed and mailed by the college) would in the future be off limits to Shimer alum. For this issue, the survival of the school is essential.
The date. I understand that the school must decide within 1 month whether or not to move. This gives me the impression that ITT wants rent not partners. Why such short notice and such a quick deadline. That by itself would make me work against the move.
The Shimer as we know it. Shimer is for the Waukegan alum an isolated distopia of mental rigors and emotional catharsis which seems hard to preserve in the midst of another larger and not particularly separate university. Simply having the proximity of such a large number of "others" would completely destroy the sense of isolated safety in which many Shimer students thrived for 4,5,8 years.
My guess is that the real problem with numbers is the isolation within Waukegan. And Marketing/recruiting practices. Shimer as a school has or had little interaction with Waukeganites or Chicagoans (little local recruitment, community interaction, community programs etc). A lot of people are only vaguely aware that it is there.
Marketing is expensive, but it seems that Shimer has no real marketing scheme or identity aside from hit or miss instances. And no market research. How do they find anybody? It seems to me random. What is the school’s target audience and do they make any effort to find them? How hard could it be to find 40 people? Fine, it's a strange thing to sell but whom are they selling to?
If the problem really is numbers, are there enough dedicated alums who could figure out a market or marketing for the school? It seems that the alumni may be the best people to explain and "sell" the school to others. We seem as a whole to have been "converted" to the school and most of us probably evangelize the methods, etc., given the chance.
Christopher McGlynn
If alums have any interest in working over seas, some countries (now including Korea) require sealed official transcripts mailed by the college in order to grant a foreign worker a visa to work in the country. Not sure how many other countries require this but Korea is not alone. But any job or school requiring this (sealed and mailed by the college) would in the future be off limits to Shimer alum. For this issue, the survival of the school is essential.
The date. I understand that the school must decide within 1 month whether or not to move. This gives me the impression that ITT wants rent not partners. Why such short notice and such a quick deadline. That by itself would make me work against the move.
The Shimer as we know it. Shimer is for the Waukegan alum an isolated distopia of mental rigors and emotional catharsis which seems hard to preserve in the midst of another larger and not particularly separate university. Simply having the proximity of such a large number of "others" would completely destroy the sense of isolated safety in which many Shimer students thrived for 4,5,8 years.
My guess is that the real problem with numbers is the isolation within Waukegan. And Marketing/recruiting practices. Shimer as a school has or had little interaction with Waukeganites or Chicagoans (little local recruitment, community interaction, community programs etc). A lot of people are only vaguely aware that it is there.
Marketing is expensive, but it seems that Shimer has no real marketing scheme or identity aside from hit or miss instances. And no market research. How do they find anybody? It seems to me random. What is the school’s target audience and do they make any effort to find them? How hard could it be to find 40 people? Fine, it's a strange thing to sell but whom are they selling to?
If the problem really is numbers, are there enough dedicated alums who could figure out a market or marketing for the school? It seems that the alumni may be the best people to explain and "sell" the school to others. We seem as a whole to have been "converted" to the school and most of us probably evangelize the methods, etc., given the chance.
Christopher McGlynn
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Argumentation versus Discussion, or the Essay versus Shared Inquiry
I have been trying to figure out the problem of how the board and the administration are handling this proposal to move to IIT. While there are many problems, including the issue of transparency, which one of the Shimer College bloggers pointed out, one way to interpret the problem of this proposal to move to IIT is that we are looking for a discussion, and the administration is treating this as an argument. In an argument, you essentially assume the position, and then you persuade the reader to agree with your position, anticipating and responding to your reader's doubts mainly in order to further your argument. This is essentially what Shimer College was trying to teach us to do in our papers from semester one to the final semester. But it seems as if what we are looking for is a discussion, a process of shared inquiry into the issue and problems, in order to arrive at a shared consensus. This is what we were doing in the classroom, and this is why, I would assume, most people came to Shimer College and stayed at Shimer College, including myself, and that is what will most likely remain true about Shimer College, since it's Shimer College's unique selling point, if it moves to IIT. The problem, then, for most students and alums, is that this proposal isn't a discussion. This proposal is an argument.
The question then, if my reading is correct, is should the administration change its approach from argumentation to shared inquiry? Should the administration have started with a discussion approach instead of an argument? Since it's too late for the administration to change how it began, which was how we were expected to begin an essay at Shimer College, with a position, should the administration shift from the essay to the discussion group, by joining this discussion for example? If you follow the metaphor of the essay to its logical conclusion, then can't we treat everything that led up to announcing the proposal to move to IIT as rough drafts, prep work, and research that you would not turn in to the professor for a grade or submit to the academic community for consideration of being published? If the administration sustains its approach of arguing its main point of moving to IIT being the best solution to the Problem of Shimer College, if Shimer College is indeed an emergency, should we assume the role of the skeptical, reasonable educated citizen who is poking holes in the argument in order to make certain this argument is indeed good for the college and the students? If we are to treat this as an argument for moving to IIT by the board and the administration, should we prepare an "un-official" list of counter-arguments against moving to IIT and a list of arguments for staying in Waukegan, since there is no evidence that we have to accept that staying in Waukegan isn't an option, in addition to bombarding the administration with questions and doubts, which is absolutely appropriate if this is in fact an argument? Why is this argument so strangely problematic, puzzling, and irritating?
Since I sincerely believe that you have a highly developed aesthetic sensibility, which is demonstrated in your diction and in your lecture on Oscar Wilde, and since we are now being sold what I believe to be a very ugly building on the unattractive IIT campus, I can't help thinking that this proposal must be a hoax.
What does it mean that "[Waukegan] wants Shimer College to stay"?
1) Will the upcoming discussion with the mayor of Waukegan be a serious attempt to discuss with the City of Waukegan the possibility of how the City of Waukegan can potentially financially support the college--if the board and administration have already decided that the move to IIT is the best solution to the problem of increasing its revenue? (In a discussion, you arrive at a decision at the end of the discussion by shared consensus; in an argument, you begin with a decision.)
2) How can we find out what the City of Waukegan is willing to offer to Shimer College, if there is no informed transparency by the board and administration?
3) When is the President of Shimer College meeting with the City of Waukegan?
4) Will Shimer College and the City of Waukegan benefit from (and laugh at) the hoax?
Michael Dubensky '03
The question then, if my reading is correct, is should the administration change its approach from argumentation to shared inquiry? Should the administration have started with a discussion approach instead of an argument? Since it's too late for the administration to change how it began, which was how we were expected to begin an essay at Shimer College, with a position, should the administration shift from the essay to the discussion group, by joining this discussion for example? If you follow the metaphor of the essay to its logical conclusion, then can't we treat everything that led up to announcing the proposal to move to IIT as rough drafts, prep work, and research that you would not turn in to the professor for a grade or submit to the academic community for consideration of being published? If the administration sustains its approach of arguing its main point of moving to IIT being the best solution to the Problem of Shimer College, if Shimer College is indeed an emergency, should we assume the role of the skeptical, reasonable educated citizen who is poking holes in the argument in order to make certain this argument is indeed good for the college and the students? If we are to treat this as an argument for moving to IIT by the board and the administration, should we prepare an "un-official" list of counter-arguments against moving to IIT and a list of arguments for staying in Waukegan, since there is no evidence that we have to accept that staying in Waukegan isn't an option, in addition to bombarding the administration with questions and doubts, which is absolutely appropriate if this is in fact an argument? Why is this argument so strangely problematic, puzzling, and irritating?
Letter to President Bill Rice:
A Critique of the Move to IIT on Aesthetic Grounds
I am having trouble reconciling the campaign to "Beautify Shimer" with the facilities that IIT has offered to Shimer College and that were presented to us at the recent alum meeting. I strongly believe that the cozy aesthetics of the Shimer College campus in Waukegan are a far more beautiful learning environment than the ugly factory, warehouse, institutional, corporate setting and space that we are being offered to lease for the next 30 years.
Since I sincerely believe that you have a highly developed aesthetic sensibility, which is demonstrated in your diction and in your lecture on Oscar Wilde, and since we are now being sold what I believe to be a very ugly building on the unattractive IIT campus, I can't help thinking that this proposal must be a hoax.
Although some people may believe that the poetics of place and aesthetic values are superficial compared to the more serious considerations regarding this move, I have to personally oppose this move to IIT on aesthetic grounds. The poetics of space and the beauty of the place are fundamental values in a liberal arts experience. I can't tolerate considering this proposed facility as a future home for Shimer College. This proposal insults the sense of aesthetics that I developed at Shimer College through study and appreciation of beautiful works of arts and the great books. Schiller and Kant, I suspect, would agree with my position.
In the name of Oscar Wilde, consider looking for a more aesthetically pleasing space for Shimer College. If a school of adult education, such as The Feltre School, can create such a beautiful home for itself, even though it is mainly selling grammar courses, I don't understand why Shimer College should relocate to a space that one can't simply say that it is a beautiful place to read and discuss the great books.
Tell IIT that we refuse this lease because Shimer College deserves a beautiful home.
What does it mean that "[Waukegan] wants Shimer College to stay"?
1) Will the upcoming discussion with the mayor of Waukegan be a serious attempt to discuss with the City of Waukegan the possibility of how the City of Waukegan can potentially financially support the college--if the board and administration have already decided that the move to IIT is the best solution to the problem of increasing its revenue? (In a discussion, you arrive at a decision at the end of the discussion by shared consensus; in an argument, you begin with a decision.)
2) How can we find out what the City of Waukegan is willing to offer to Shimer College, if there is no informed transparency by the board and administration?
3) When is the President of Shimer College meeting with the City of Waukegan?
4) Will Shimer College and the City of Waukegan benefit from (and laugh at) the hoax?
Michael Dubensky '03
Response to Noah's Survey
After posting and deleting this several times. I believe now I have it posted on the first page. I felt the need to be a star and be at the top of the page. It is amazing that I actually looked at the posting instructions to finally get it right. Noah, use this how you will, I just wanted everyone to see it. Your survey helped greatly to formulate an opinion.
I believe discussion classes and self-directed learning where my main reasons for attending Shimer. I’ll have to admit the location was rather unappealing as well as living space and lack of amenities. Lack of an arts program was also a pretty big issue.
I initially left Shimer to explore the world a bit more. I also realized that I no longer needed Shimer. I realized that I could learn on my own, which is part of what Shimer is teaching. I returned to Shimer after traveling and moving around a bit in order to finish my degree. I felt that I needed a degree and Shimer was one of the few places I could stomach getting one. During my final year or so I moved to Evanston and commuted. I also spent a semester at Weekend College. Living away from Shimer helped a lot. I found myself able to participate in Chicago’s artistic community and lead a life not so steeped in the small community. I could come back to it refreshed and ready to listen.
It looks like from the above statement I’d be for the move, but I don’t believe I am for it. I am definitely for some physical improvements of the existing college. I think if the College were to go to Chicago I’d rather see it not affiliated with another College. If it had to affiliate with another college to survive I’d like it to be an institution with similar values. I’d like to see Shimer in Chicago or Waukegan with a broadened curriculum, taking other approaches to education that fall in line with dialogue classes and self-directed learning techniques. I’d like to see music, art, performance art, gender studies, global studies, technology and classes concerning political activism added. I believe this would attract more students of differing backgrounds and abilities. Speaking as a bit of an anti-intellectual, I’d like to see less intellectual types attend Shimer. I’d like Shimer to broaden its scope a little whilst maintaining the great books core curriculum.
I see some talk on this blog of Shimer students being a certain ‘type’. And, that somehow ‘other’ types might ruin the experience. I’m more of a mind to share the love. To seek people out who may not be the exact ‘type’ and bring them in to see what they are able to do. I certainly didn’t feel like the typical Shimer student when I attended. I often felt frustrated with the attitudes and intellectual dogma of a great deal of the student body. However, I felt I contributed a lot by being different. Diversity is a beautiful thing.
- Chris Heinisch
I believe discussion classes and self-directed learning where my main reasons for attending Shimer. I’ll have to admit the location was rather unappealing as well as living space and lack of amenities. Lack of an arts program was also a pretty big issue.
I initially left Shimer to explore the world a bit more. I also realized that I no longer needed Shimer. I realized that I could learn on my own, which is part of what Shimer is teaching. I returned to Shimer after traveling and moving around a bit in order to finish my degree. I felt that I needed a degree and Shimer was one of the few places I could stomach getting one. During my final year or so I moved to Evanston and commuted. I also spent a semester at Weekend College. Living away from Shimer helped a lot. I found myself able to participate in Chicago’s artistic community and lead a life not so steeped in the small community. I could come back to it refreshed and ready to listen.
It looks like from the above statement I’d be for the move, but I don’t believe I am for it. I am definitely for some physical improvements of the existing college. I think if the College were to go to Chicago I’d rather see it not affiliated with another College. If it had to affiliate with another college to survive I’d like it to be an institution with similar values. I’d like to see Shimer in Chicago or Waukegan with a broadened curriculum, taking other approaches to education that fall in line with dialogue classes and self-directed learning techniques. I’d like to see music, art, performance art, gender studies, global studies, technology and classes concerning political activism added. I believe this would attract more students of differing backgrounds and abilities. Speaking as a bit of an anti-intellectual, I’d like to see less intellectual types attend Shimer. I’d like Shimer to broaden its scope a little whilst maintaining the great books core curriculum.
I see some talk on this blog of Shimer students being a certain ‘type’. And, that somehow ‘other’ types might ruin the experience. I’m more of a mind to share the love. To seek people out who may not be the exact ‘type’ and bring them in to see what they are able to do. I certainly didn’t feel like the typical Shimer student when I attended. I often felt frustrated with the attitudes and intellectual dogma of a great deal of the student body. However, I felt I contributed a lot by being different. Diversity is a beautiful thing.
- Chris Heinisch
Institutional Memory and Urban Liberal Arts
Geez I wish we had had the collective brainstorm of sharing the materials from the "epic Roosevelt Assembly Meeting" sooner! (And thanks so much to Noah for posting them!!) It is amazing how much of that conversation we are rehearsing right now; which might seem alarming to some (in a "history repeats itself," "do they never learn anything" way), but which makes me very proud, in that it shows that there is genuine continuity in the Shimer experience (at least over the span of a generation and four "student life-cycles."
But what really struck me was David's proposal to become a College of Roosevelt University, but remain in Waukegan. In part because this is--to the extent that I understand it--what I would have probably supported at that time (had I not been 14 years old), but I think more because it presented exactly that balance that many of us have been trying to think through: how can we address the significant challenges (though, clearly the challenges then were far greater than the challenges today) the College faces--especially unimpressive recruitment--without undermining the unique (and I say unique, and not distinctive, in that I believe Shimer is not merely remarkable or "different" [a number of places are that], but genuinely unlike anything else, and hence "unique") character of the College.
In this light, I want to share David's conclusion in his motivating memo for his proposal, and ask us (and him specifically, if he wishes to take up this friendly address) what the meaning of this is for us today. He wrote: "The Shimer community has survived, and in many ways thrived, for nearly a century and a half as a geographically independent entity. While it is certainly possible that a move of the main campus to Chicago would enhance the program in certain ways, it would also risk the somehow intangible benefits of this geographical distance. The proposal I have set forth here seems to me to involve the least risk to our community as it currently stands" (roosevelt.pdf, p. 13). This entirely captures the nature of my concern today, and the motivation behind the alternative proposal Erik and I developed: might there be a way for us to see (at least "experimentally") if "we" really feel like "us" somewhere else, before moving the whole Shimer enterprise into the "brave new world" of the Southwest Loop (or elsewhere)?
And one final thing, while I am here. I taught for two years at a "liberal arts college in an urban context" (Eugene Lang College); which is growing propitiously (I mean like 30% a year), and succeeding by any measure. I am grateful for that experience, and especially to my students there. There were engaged, bright, fun, and eager. They were also largely attracted to being in NYC, and not necessarily to what was distinctive (and not unique) about Lang's curriculum or pedagogy; indeed many of them did not even know about the curriculum in much detail (with its seminar classes (capped at 15 when I started teaching there and 18 a year later, but 11 when I considered it as a potential undergrad back in 1993-4), 5 concentrations, rather than majors, and its focus on interdisciplinarity and so on). It seems to me entirely possible, in light of David's 1990 concerns, that Shimer would move to the Loop, increase recruitment significantly, and feel tremendous pressure to serve students wanted more to be in a "liberal arts college" (loosely understood) in Chicago than to be at the unique Shimer college in Waukegan (or wherever). Put another way: be careful what you wish for. Lang wanted like anything to grow. Now it has--it will reach 1000 students soon if it hasn't already, after having been at around 150 when the Assembly made its Roosevelt decision--and it will very soon cease to be truly distinctive (let alone unique), as it keeps raising the class size (now to 20, and soon beyond) and loses the "seminar" brand from its advertising materials and self-understanding. I am not saying this will happen to Shimer should it move, but it seems to me a very realistic possibility.
But what really struck me was David's proposal to become a College of Roosevelt University, but remain in Waukegan. In part because this is--to the extent that I understand it--what I would have probably supported at that time (had I not been 14 years old), but I think more because it presented exactly that balance that many of us have been trying to think through: how can we address the significant challenges (though, clearly the challenges then were far greater than the challenges today) the College faces--especially unimpressive recruitment--without undermining the unique (and I say unique, and not distinctive, in that I believe Shimer is not merely remarkable or "different" [a number of places are that], but genuinely unlike anything else, and hence "unique") character of the College.
In this light, I want to share David's conclusion in his motivating memo for his proposal, and ask us (and him specifically, if he wishes to take up this friendly address) what the meaning of this is for us today. He wrote: "The Shimer community has survived, and in many ways thrived, for nearly a century and a half as a geographically independent entity. While it is certainly possible that a move of the main campus to Chicago would enhance the program in certain ways, it would also risk the somehow intangible benefits of this geographical distance. The proposal I have set forth here seems to me to involve the least risk to our community as it currently stands" (roosevelt.pdf, p. 13). This entirely captures the nature of my concern today, and the motivation behind the alternative proposal Erik and I developed: might there be a way for us to see (at least "experimentally") if "we" really feel like "us" somewhere else, before moving the whole Shimer enterprise into the "brave new world" of the Southwest Loop (or elsewhere)?
And one final thing, while I am here. I taught for two years at a "liberal arts college in an urban context" (Eugene Lang College); which is growing propitiously (I mean like 30% a year), and succeeding by any measure. I am grateful for that experience, and especially to my students there. There were engaged, bright, fun, and eager. They were also largely attracted to being in NYC, and not necessarily to what was distinctive (and not unique) about Lang's curriculum or pedagogy; indeed many of them did not even know about the curriculum in much detail (with its seminar classes (capped at 15 when I started teaching there and 18 a year later, but 11 when I considered it as a potential undergrad back in 1993-4), 5 concentrations, rather than majors, and its focus on interdisciplinarity and so on). It seems to me entirely possible, in light of David's 1990 concerns, that Shimer would move to the Loop, increase recruitment significantly, and feel tremendous pressure to serve students wanted more to be in a "liberal arts college" (loosely understood) in Chicago than to be at the unique Shimer college in Waukegan (or wherever). Put another way: be careful what you wish for. Lang wanted like anything to grow. Now it has--it will reach 1000 students soon if it hasn't already, after having been at around 150 when the Assembly made its Roosevelt decision--and it will very soon cease to be truly distinctive (let alone unique), as it keeps raising the class size (now to 20, and soon beyond) and loses the "seminar" brand from its advertising materials and self-understanding. I am not saying this will happen to Shimer should it move, but it seems to me a very realistic possibility.
Monday, November 28, 2005
Notes from the Alum Meeting
Since Mike and others have requested a write up of what was discussed at Sunday’s alum meeting, I will do my best to oblige. To be honest, we were all over the place, and no one issue got discussed in any great depth. Far more questions were posed than were answered and we seemed to bounce back and forth between things. It was difficult to keep up while I was taking notes, and even more difficult to make sense out of it once I got home. This will not have the larger narrative that my other summation did. Here are some of the informational points that came out of the meeting, in no particular order.
- No Shimer Trustees will sit on the Board of IIT. No IIT Trustees will sit on the Board of Shimer.
- It appears to be primarily Mount Carroll Alums who are in favor, and Waukegan Alums who are opposed to the move (not that there aren’t exceptions).
- In 1989-90, Shimer started exploring joining, merging, etc with other colleges. We had a 14-hour assembly, with more than 70 points on which there was discussion and a forced yes/no vote. At the end of fourteen hours, the assembly had agreed to merge with Roosevelt University. However, Roosevelt hadn’t consulted their own faculty, who objected to Shimer professors receiving tenure. So, the merger never happened. Who has this document with the 70+ points on which the assembly voted? Dave Shiner? This could be an invaluable document for considering the issues at stake here. If Shimer has already been through this process successfully once before…
- Our staff salaries are 60% of what they would be at comparable institutions.
- The North Central Commission was about receiving financial accreditation. It was pointed out that we had academic accreditation the entire time.
- Weekend enrollment has been decreasing. Weekday enrollment has been low for the past two years, after having 2 boom years. This means that we are about to graduate 2 unusually large classes. Unless there is some kind of recruitment miracle, our enrollment will be well below 100 next year, and possibly below 80 the year after that.
- Weekend college will also be moving to the IIT campus, should the move be approved.
- A particular point of discussion was Glorious isolation and peace and quiet vs. integration into the world. Mount Carroll campus was very isolated. Waukegan, while located in a city, has some of the same qualities of quiet isolation. Some pointed out that while the IIT campus is really in the middle of things, the campus is not without some green space, but that it is a very manicured kind of green space.
- Security concerns. The “L” stop on the IIT campus has the highest crime rate in the entire area (mostly students getting mugged for their laptops). Albert Fernandez looked into the overall crime rates between University of Chicago, IIT and Shimer. All of them share the characteristic of being islands of relative calm, with below average crime rates, while the space around them has above average crime rates. His analysis was posted on the Shimer intranet, which unfortunately is not available to alums. Albert, would you post your information here?
- Which scenario is more likely to ensure the survival of the college? Some thought there was more life and culture in Chicago. Is there a greater opportunity to market in an urban area?
- Many of the Mount Carroll alums have been unwilling to re-engage with the college. These are the people who are excited by the prospect of the move to IIT.
- There would be a kind of Institutional Relations Committee created to discuss any issues that arise between Shimer and IIT, such as student discipline, etc.
- Our Bond would be paid off by the sale of the Waukegan campus.
It would take 2 ½ million dollars to bring the Waukegan campus up to spec. - The Alum Donor base is going to shrink in future, if only because the number of alums graduated from the college in the past 27 years has radically decreased. Right now, the last round of Mount Carroll alums are at the height of their giving power.
- It will cost approx 60 thousand dollars to move the college.
- Shimer’s library would be integrated into IIT’s.
- Bill Rice will be meeting with officials from the city of Waukegan. They do not want Shimer to move out of Waukegan.
- Notable quotes: There is no harsher landlord than poverty. Albert Fernandez
We’re betting the school. Barry Carroll On this issue, many people were struck by the risk we would be taking in moving the school. - Albert reports that after a recent faculty meeting, most of the faculty are provisionally in favor of the move.
- In our financial projections for the move, we’re only betting that 6 IIT students will be taking Shimer classes.
- A Provisional Satellite arrangement? Bill Rice says it’s unfeasible. However, Albert, Mike Weinman and Erik Badger are putting together a proposal for a provisional arrangement, lasting perhaps 5 years.
- The Assembly will be on December 18th, at 4pm.
- Why is enrollment declining? According to the school’s present research:
Complete lack of visibility
Lack of Scholarship money
Facilities
I hope this was helpful.
Sarah Kimmel
Class of ‘96
The First One to Lose His Temper...
Mr. Dubensky... I applaud your championing the President and the Chairman. I wish I could explain the rest of the lesson to you but I can't. You have to see it happen a few times before you realize we are emotional and intellectual beings. Temper your emotion, yes; lay it aside never. It paints our great chapels and drags us out of concentration camps
So can we get a few people to acknowledge Sara Kimmel, the alumn and the students she spoke to?
Without all of these emotional, over-reactive students and alumn this calm orderly, well mannered dialouge would never have taken place.
As long as people are patting themselves on the back for maintaining their composure and eloquence....
It's about the Ying and the Yang, Ya Know?
Now where were we? Oh yeah, some students asked some questions...
So can we get a few people to acknowledge Sara Kimmel, the alumn and the students she spoke to?
Without all of these emotional, over-reactive students and alumn this calm orderly, well mannered dialouge would never have taken place.
As long as people are patting themselves on the back for maintaining their composure and eloquence....
It's about the Ying and the Yang, Ya Know?
Now where were we? Oh yeah, some students asked some questions...
dual diagnosis
I'm one of those rare birds with Mt. Carroll-Waukegan Shimer experience. I will never forget moving the library. It snowed -- a lot that year. (I graduated 1975, taught 1978-80). I also attended an informational meeting at the college 11/27. I am disposed toward the move to Chicago as a means to keep this 152-year-old institution alive because:
-- enrollment has flattened at 110 students. (Don Moon cited this figure at meeting). That's really not a whole lot of people with which to have a college experience nor is it a good way to increase visibility or a base of alumni financial support.
-- the future is not good for liberal arts colleges in general unless they are distinctive, a word Bill Rice used that made sense. Shimer's Great Books curriculum & discussion method is distinctive but it doesn't mean anything if no one knows about it. The pairing of liberal Shimer & techno IIT is unorthodox, which certainly boosts the distinctive factor.
-- most idealistically, Shimer shaped my life forever. I met at Shimer five of my closest friends, whom I have known for more than 30 years. I would like other people to have this unique developmental opportunity, particularly because our country and world need people who know how to think, see interrelationships and analyze. Plus everybody needs loyal friends.
Count me in.
-- enrollment has flattened at 110 students. (Don Moon cited this figure at meeting). That's really not a whole lot of people with which to have a college experience nor is it a good way to increase visibility or a base of alumni financial support.
-- the future is not good for liberal arts colleges in general unless they are distinctive, a word Bill Rice used that made sense. Shimer's Great Books curriculum & discussion method is distinctive but it doesn't mean anything if no one knows about it. The pairing of liberal Shimer & techno IIT is unorthodox, which certainly boosts the distinctive factor.
-- most idealistically, Shimer shaped my life forever. I met at Shimer five of my closest friends, whom I have known for more than 30 years. I would like other people to have this unique developmental opportunity, particularly because our country and world need people who know how to think, see interrelationships and analyze. Plus everybody needs loyal friends.
Count me in.
Request Re: Alum Meeting
For those of us who could not be there yesterday, I was wondering if some intrepid soul might be able to "sum up" (provisionally at least?) the general sense of the discussion?
Thanks,
Michael
(weinman ['98])
Thanks,
Michael
(weinman ['98])
Thank You for Creating a Dialogue
I want to thank President Bill Rice for holding the alum meeting last night and the previous meeting in Evanston. We are a critical and cynical group of students and alums. We are passionate about our education and we have been trained to question and disagree. Unfortunately, one of the negative effects of being taught how to argue is that we develop the tendency to label and treat real people as problems--and even enemies--that a skeptical reader doubts--and even hates. But it's not the person that should be doubted, although the person may appear to be the cause of the problem, but the proposal (which is essentially an argument), the reasons for the proposal, the reasons against the proposal, and the evidence or lack-there-of for the proposal. I know that's a heavy claim, with debatable philosophical and legal implications, which some people will not accept or tolerate, but so be it. This is not at all meant to discourage rigorous debate and discussion, which I strongly promote and believe is necessary for a healthy, strong democracy. I am also very aware that there is a lot at stake with this proposal; the very survival and identity (some people would even go so far as to say "soul") of Shimer College are being gambled with. But I feel that we need to have some respect for the decision-makers and the decision-making process regarding something so huge and complex. Even if you feel that one of the core values of Shimer has been violated, the value of dialogue, which is one of the main selling points of the college, we need to recognize the efforts of the administration to remedy its errors, which I suspect in this case is because we have been offered a deal in the last minute with short notice to act upon it, and include us in the dialogue, even as they work their way through complex territory and issues. Frankly, the whole situation is less than beautiful, and even IIT's approach to Shimer College does not appear to be as generous as I would like it to have been; but Shimer College is a poor liberal arts college, and it simply can't afford to buy a Lexus, when it can barely afford a Honda.
I want to firmly state, even if I lose what few friends I have at Shimer, which is not too many at this point, that I sincerely believe (at least I don't have any reason or evidence to believe otherwise) that the president is doing his job, doing what he is being paid the big bucks for. He has analyzed a complex problem, explored various options, discussed the problem deeply with many smart people, and emerged with a solution. He and the board are now selling us on this proposal; they are trying to persuade us of the benefits of this move. Since there are some genuine benefits, which depends on the individual, such as the location in Chicago, access to pre-med and technology courses, and a stream-lined and simplified operation in which the professors can focus on what they are being paid the-not-so-big bucks to do, I would like to strongly encourage the Shimer community to respect the leadership of Shimer College, who must have put a lot of thought into this proposal. At the end of the day, whether or not the board honors the assembly, and whether or not the board decides to move to Chicago, it is the students who will decide whether they agree with the decison of the board with their purchasing power.
Think about the cost and benefits of the proposal, the pros and cons, the risks and advantages. Think about how you can benefit from this move, whether it is a good feel or fit for you, whether it will meet your needs, whether you can still deeply engage in the great books discussion groups at IIT. And then only you have the final power, the final authority, the final decision of whether you agree or not.
Michael Dubensky '03
If I am being naive about what is going on, and if someone wants to inform me about anything that could change the trust that I have that our leaders are acting in good faith and that their heart is in the right place (i. e., the quality of the education and experience for the students), I can be reached at (312) 217-4503 or mdubensky@earthlink.net.
I want to firmly state, even if I lose what few friends I have at Shimer, which is not too many at this point, that I sincerely believe (at least I don't have any reason or evidence to believe otherwise) that the president is doing his job, doing what he is being paid the big bucks for. He has analyzed a complex problem, explored various options, discussed the problem deeply with many smart people, and emerged with a solution. He and the board are now selling us on this proposal; they are trying to persuade us of the benefits of this move. Since there are some genuine benefits, which depends on the individual, such as the location in Chicago, access to pre-med and technology courses, and a stream-lined and simplified operation in which the professors can focus on what they are being paid the-not-so-big bucks to do, I would like to strongly encourage the Shimer community to respect the leadership of Shimer College, who must have put a lot of thought into this proposal. At the end of the day, whether or not the board honors the assembly, and whether or not the board decides to move to Chicago, it is the students who will decide whether they agree with the decison of the board with their purchasing power.
Think about the cost and benefits of the proposal, the pros and cons, the risks and advantages. Think about how you can benefit from this move, whether it is a good feel or fit for you, whether it will meet your needs, whether you can still deeply engage in the great books discussion groups at IIT. And then only you have the final power, the final authority, the final decision of whether you agree or not.
Michael Dubensky '03
If I am being naive about what is going on, and if someone wants to inform me about anything that could change the trust that I have that our leaders are acting in good faith and that their heart is in the right place (i. e., the quality of the education and experience for the students), I can be reached at (312) 217-4503 or mdubensky@earthlink.net.
From Noah: Shimer Survey
Dear fellow Shimerians,
In the process of deciding whether a move (or expansion) at the IIT campus on the South Side would be a good idea for the College, it is important to consider the effect it would have on recruitment and retention of students. I have seen little serious discussion of this nature and much unfounded conjecture. In order to replace this groundless guesswork with guesswork based on some little substance, I’d like to hear from as many current students, former students, graduates and students who left the answers to two sets of questions, and certainly wouldn’t mind hearing from staff, faculty of the present or past:
- What brought you to Shimer initially? What aspects of Shimer made the College appealing, and what aspects made is unappealing?
- What keeps you at Shimer (or made you leave)? What aspects of Shimer are those that draw you in as you live the Shimer life, and what aspects make you want to leave?
Please consider as many aspects of the college as you can, including but not limited to the community, the academics (both the curriculum and the format), the schedule, the location, the amenities and the physical plant.
If you’d forward this to people who you think should be included in this informal study, I’d appreciate it greatly.
Please return your responses with or without your name, but preferably including whether you’re a staff member, faculty member, weekday or weekend student and whether you’re still here or left by graduation, retirement or by your own volition.
If I could get these back in a week or two, that would be awesome. Let’s say the 4th of December, which is a Sunday of weekend college (and Assembly meeting!). I’ll have some sort of report and summary to the whole community when I can, hopefully with the information provided by David Shiner and the Self-Study group.
Please respond either by email (n.kippleyogman@shimer.edu) or in my box in Prairie.
Thank you very much,
Noah
----
Noah Kippley-Ogman
n.kippleyogman@shimer.edu
651.269.7336
Sunday, November 27, 2005
From David Shiner: Helping Hands
Helping Hands
Hi, it's David Shiner again. I've got a favor to ask of everyone who has posted on this blog. I sent a letter to all current members fo the internal Shimer community earlier this week. That letter stated in part:
"A number of staff members are in the process of preparing reports on the IIT issue that will be collated during the week after Thanksgiving. The product of those reports will inform the next phase of discussions with IIT, resulting in a document concerning a possible lease agreement. This should be completed and ready for general distribution sometime the following week.
"In the meantime, I will be preparing a document representing the collective wisdom of the Shimer community. What are the major issues at stake, perceived and real? What will be resolved prior to December 18, and what will wait until afterward? How are things likely to play out if we remain in Waukegan versus if we move most of our operations to IIT? And so on.
"In order to do the best job on this I can, I ask that everyone in the Shimer community bombard me with whatever facts, opinions, or questions you have concerning any aspect of this....I’ll also use the notes from every meeting I’ve attended, from web blogs, from passersby, from everywhere. The Accreditation Self-Study group will help me prepare a document for
distribution to the entire Shimer community."
For these purposes, I'd like your permission to print excerpts from what various people have written on ths blog, along with your name, in the document I'm preparing. Of course I won't reprint everything, but I would like to have the option to include various statements and questions that seem particularly important to various aspects of our considerations.
"In the meantime, I will be preparing a document representing the collective wisdom of the Shimer community. What are the major issues at stake, perceived and real? What will be resolved prior to December 18, and what will wait until afterward? How are things likely to play out if we remain in Waukegan versus if we move most of our operations to IIT? And so on.
"In order to do the best job on this I can, I ask that everyone in the Shimer community bombard me with whatever facts, opinions, or questions you have concerning any aspect of this....I’ll also use the notes from every meeting I’ve attended, from web blogs, from passersby, from everywhere. The Accreditation Self-Study group will help me prepare a document for
distribution to the entire Shimer community."
For these purposes, I'd like your permission to print excerpts from what various people have written on ths blog, along with your name, in the document I'm preparing. Of course I won't reprint everything, but I would like to have the option to include various statements and questions that seem particularly important to various aspects of our considerations.
If you are willing to permit me to do this, simply email me at david@shimer.edu and write "Yes" or something simple like that. If you're willing to have me quote you on some things but not others, let me know that too. If I don't hear from you at all I might use your words, but I won't attribute them to you by name.
Whatever you decide concerning this, please let me know as soon as possible, as I only have two weeks to complete the document. Thanks to all.
David
From Steve Werlin
I’ve been trying to figure out where to place myself in this discussion. Officially, I’m a member of the internal community, a member of the faculty. I work for the College full-time. At the same time, the particular assignment that the College has allowed me to create for myself means that I’m not in Waukegan more than a few days each year. Almost any member of the internal community has better information than I have and has had opportunities to think more deeply and in more subtle ways than I’ve been able to do.
A lot that’s valuable seem to me to be emerging from what I’ve been able to follow of these discussions. Two separate issues seem on the table, and they both are worth getting into, though for very different reasons. One is the College’s governance structure, what we want it to be and what it turns out to be in practice. The other is the possible move itself.
The first is made especially important because it seems to be the source of a lot of pain right now, with accusations and defensive responses as regular parts of the dialogue. Two points seem easy to make. The first is that the Board has final authority at the College. As Don once explained things to me, even such authority as we are accustomed to leaving in the hands of the Assembly is only delegated to the Assembly by the President of the College, whose authority comes from the Board.
The second is that the Assembly ought to have a powerful voice in the Board’s deliberations on so important a question as whether the College moves. Since I joined Shimer, the Board has consistently shown that it respects the Assembly’s role in College decision making. This is to say that the fact that the Board has the final voice – and I have more to say about this below – does not have to mean that the Assembly has no voice at all.
This is true even if the Board and its representatives are unwilling to guarantee that its decision will follow the Assembly’s will. I myself think it would be improper for the Board to guarantee, in advance, that the Assembly will get its way. Only current Board members can know how important the Assembly’s view is to them, and I doubt even they can be sure right now how they will react when and if they are asked to take a vote.
A third point clouds things, but it does so beautifully. If one wants to see the limits of a board’s final authority over a college, one need look no farther that to our own history. It was, after all, Shimer’s board that decided to close the College. (Was it twice?) And yet here we are. Though I don’t want to suggest that we members of the internal community prepare ourselves to ignore the Board and carry on if their decision is not what we want it to be, I do think that the College’s history can remind us all what internal community members have done over the years to earn the voice that they’ve traditionally had at Shimer – if, that is, a reminder is necessary.
As far as the move itself goes, I am at a loss. I’ve grown fond of the College’s home in Waukegan and of Waukegan itself, but am excited by the prospect of a campus in Chicago. There’s a lot about the space we’re in right now that suits us, but the most important academic aspects of our lives together do not, it seems to me, depend very much on the coziness of a particular space. I would be happy to be able to offer students and staff more in the way of services, but worry that a traditional College cafeteria would wreak havoc on the lunch program that has come to offer so much to our communal life. I wonder whether we can survive a move, with all the short-term difficulties that it may entail in lost staff and other problems, but have to admit that I’m part of the group that has failed to figure out how to make the College grow where it is.
One note: I am a little confused about exactly what kind of decision the Assembly will be asked to make, but that may just be because I’m so far away. If the Assembly is supposed to say whether it prefers Waukegan or the South Side, then it needs little more information than detailed descriptions of the facility we are considering. If, however, the Assembly is being asked whether it thinks moving is a good idea, then it needs much more. It needs summaries of the schools current financial position. It needs to know why someone might take the view that the school needs to do something dramatic. It needs a lot of information about the proposed deal itself.
It is the second question, the one as to whether making a move is the right thing for the College, that I would prefer to see the Assembly face. It’s a much harder question, of course, but I see no reason to protect the Assembly from hard questions. Though the Board has final responsibility for the College’s finances, that doesn’t mean that the Assembly should keep from considering such matters. David Shiner’s recent offer of information from various administrators seems very positive to me.
What comforts me as I watch the discussions from a distance is my conviction that those who in the midst of the discussions care deeply about the College. This is true of those of you who are speaking gently. It’s also true, I think, of those who are not. At first I was a little taken back by the testiness I see in some of this discussion, but I’ve come to think that it’s just a reflection of how much we all do care. I’d like to believe – and, in fact, I do believe – that at least in terms of our intentions in these discussions, we are all on the same page.
Friday, November 25, 2005
The question of response-ability
When I was at Shimer College, I was one of the weaker students. I was constantly struggling academically in the same way that Shimer College was struggling financially. But whenever I listened to the rhetoric of Shimer College, I was told that I am responsible for my own education, that I should be self-reliant, that if I continue reading carefully and participating actively then my writing will improve, that if I am not successful it must be because I am lazy, because I am "intellectually inferior" (a sophisticated way of saying "stupid"), because I don't have the talent, because I am not very good, because I am not trying hard enough. But I know that I tried very hard, because I was intellectually exhausted ("devastated" would be a better word for it) by my experience at Shimer College, a tiredness that I suspect many members of the Shimer faculty and administration are feeling because of the relentless financial issues and problems. In all four years, from IS2 in my first semester to Nat Sci 4 in my last semester, I could not intellectually handle the curriculum, although I always enjoyed with a genuine enthusiasm the great books discussion groups. At some point, I began to try different strategies, not unlike how Shimer College tries to solve its financial problems, but I still feel like I failed to be successful with my education. Shimer College was really, fucking hard academically--and it must be fucking hard to financially sustain as well.
Now, I am in a situation in which I can sense the financial crisis of Shimer College deeply, and I am not sure how to respond. I am responsible for at least three full-time students at Shimer College, including one member of the current board and one current student, because of my referals, which may be worth over 200,000$ to the college. I have also made significant official donations of half-page advertisements, even before I graduated, in an Education Guide of a Chicago newspaper to the college, in order to address the problem of how to increase enrollment at Shimer College. This year, my donation was more directly concerned with the problem of the current job market for liberal arts graduates. I, therefore, subscribed to a national current jobs in the liberal arts bulletin that could hopefully inspire students to start considering how they are going to transition from Shimer College, a problem that I have temporarily solved like many, many other liberal arts graduates by enrolling in graduate school, although like Shimer College, I run a small mom and pop stand of a massage therapy company, which barely pays our bills each month. But how can I help the college financially, and, more philosophically, should I help the college? Is it my responsibility to help the college? What is our response-ability as alums to generate money for the college?
My initial follow-up questions are controversial, but they directly address this question of responsibility.
If a Shimer College student is drowning or at risk of drowning, should the Shimer College professor a) prevent the student from drowning by offering the student private swimming lessons in addition to fulfilling the obligation to show up for class and grade the paper; b) get his or her clothes wet by leaping in to save the student; c) hold up a sign that states "swim"?
If Shimer College is drowning or at risk of drowning, should the Shimer College alum a) prevent the college from drowning by offering the college financial assistance in addition to paying for the high cost of a liberal arts education; b) sacrifice his or her personal desires and needs in order to save the college; c) hold up a sign that states "swim"?
The problem then is a question of mutual responsibility. I could say, well, since Shimer College's academic philosophy is to tell the student to swim when he or she is in trouble, then I should, as an alum, tell Shimer College to swim in its predicament. This sounds harsh, but I am sure that there is more than one alum who is thinking the same thing, especially as they struggle to pay their student loans or work a less-than-ideal job, especially as they struggled to transition from Shimer College to the real world without support from the college or a network of alums, especially as they struggled academically while at Shimer College. On the other hand, this could be a reminder to the faculty that we are in this together, and that in time of academic need, the doctrine of placing the entire burden of academic responsibility on the student is easy on the professor, but harsh on the student (the question of whether it is for the student's own good is also metaphorically strained when compared with a real financial crisis). Forgive me for investigating an issue that deeply concerns me--the quality of education at Shimer College--at a time of crisis for the college, but I do have an appropriate point and message.
I have been asking for a long time for Shimer College to adopt various academic proposals in order to improve the quality of education at Shimer College--and consequently attract and retain more students. Now, I am going to suggest that perhaps it's our responsibility as alums to reach into our pockets and donate substantial money to the college, even if the college decides to stay in Waukegan, if nothing else as to set an example that we can recognize when there is a need and begin to consider an appropriate response to that need. But this is easier for me to say than do, since I am living on student loans and occassional massages. Regardless, the tough question for us--I would like to propose--is not necessarily whether or not Shimer College should stay in Waukegan, because the board and the administration are most likely going to make that tough decision, a decision that I would not want to make after considering the pros and cons of both options; the tough responsibility that the alum Young Kim seems to have taken on. The tough question for us is how do we go about creating a fund-raising campaign, regardless of whether we stay in Waukegan or move to Chicago. Although very few people want to admit their weaknesses, such as my chronic academic failures to understand one of the great books, the underlying issue in this case is, I would venture to guess, lack of money, the long-term effects of lack of money on the quality of education, and the problem of whether the college can make more money by relocating to IIT--and thereby improve the quality of the education. If more money will improve the quality of the education and renew the spirit of the faculty at Shimer College, and if moving to IIT will solve that problem, I am in favor of the move to IIT.
If my thinking is problematic, don't hesitate to point it out to me, and I will edit this message accordingly.
Michael Dubensky '03
Now, I am in a situation in which I can sense the financial crisis of Shimer College deeply, and I am not sure how to respond. I am responsible for at least three full-time students at Shimer College, including one member of the current board and one current student, because of my referals, which may be worth over 200,000$ to the college. I have also made significant official donations of half-page advertisements, even before I graduated, in an Education Guide of a Chicago newspaper to the college, in order to address the problem of how to increase enrollment at Shimer College. This year, my donation was more directly concerned with the problem of the current job market for liberal arts graduates. I, therefore, subscribed to a national current jobs in the liberal arts bulletin that could hopefully inspire students to start considering how they are going to transition from Shimer College, a problem that I have temporarily solved like many, many other liberal arts graduates by enrolling in graduate school, although like Shimer College, I run a small mom and pop stand of a massage therapy company, which barely pays our bills each month. But how can I help the college financially, and, more philosophically, should I help the college? Is it my responsibility to help the college? What is our response-ability as alums to generate money for the college?
My initial follow-up questions are controversial, but they directly address this question of responsibility.
If a Shimer College student is drowning or at risk of drowning, should the Shimer College professor a) prevent the student from drowning by offering the student private swimming lessons in addition to fulfilling the obligation to show up for class and grade the paper; b) get his or her clothes wet by leaping in to save the student; c) hold up a sign that states "swim"?
If Shimer College is drowning or at risk of drowning, should the Shimer College alum a) prevent the college from drowning by offering the college financial assistance in addition to paying for the high cost of a liberal arts education; b) sacrifice his or her personal desires and needs in order to save the college; c) hold up a sign that states "swim"?
The problem then is a question of mutual responsibility. I could say, well, since Shimer College's academic philosophy is to tell the student to swim when he or she is in trouble, then I should, as an alum, tell Shimer College to swim in its predicament. This sounds harsh, but I am sure that there is more than one alum who is thinking the same thing, especially as they struggle to pay their student loans or work a less-than-ideal job, especially as they struggled to transition from Shimer College to the real world without support from the college or a network of alums, especially as they struggled academically while at Shimer College. On the other hand, this could be a reminder to the faculty that we are in this together, and that in time of academic need, the doctrine of placing the entire burden of academic responsibility on the student is easy on the professor, but harsh on the student (the question of whether it is for the student's own good is also metaphorically strained when compared with a real financial crisis). Forgive me for investigating an issue that deeply concerns me--the quality of education at Shimer College--at a time of crisis for the college, but I do have an appropriate point and message.
I have been asking for a long time for Shimer College to adopt various academic proposals in order to improve the quality of education at Shimer College--and consequently attract and retain more students. Now, I am going to suggest that perhaps it's our responsibility as alums to reach into our pockets and donate substantial money to the college, even if the college decides to stay in Waukegan, if nothing else as to set an example that we can recognize when there is a need and begin to consider an appropriate response to that need. But this is easier for me to say than do, since I am living on student loans and occassional massages. Regardless, the tough question for us--I would like to propose--is not necessarily whether or not Shimer College should stay in Waukegan, because the board and the administration are most likely going to make that tough decision, a decision that I would not want to make after considering the pros and cons of both options; the tough responsibility that the alum Young Kim seems to have taken on. The tough question for us is how do we go about creating a fund-raising campaign, regardless of whether we stay in Waukegan or move to Chicago. Although very few people want to admit their weaknesses, such as my chronic academic failures to understand one of the great books, the underlying issue in this case is, I would venture to guess, lack of money, the long-term effects of lack of money on the quality of education, and the problem of whether the college can make more money by relocating to IIT--and thereby improve the quality of the education. If more money will improve the quality of the education and renew the spirit of the faculty at Shimer College, and if moving to IIT will solve that problem, I am in favor of the move to IIT.
If my thinking is problematic, don't hesitate to point it out to me, and I will edit this message accordingly.
Michael Dubensky '03
Decision Making and Consensus Building
We are struggling to make a decision. What has been put forward, as reasons for and against the move, has been speculative. We seem to be thinking that more information will lead us to a better decision, and I would be the last person to dispute the relative truth in that idea. But there’s more to change than just making a decision. I started to think that if we examined some of the actual processes involved in decision-making and implementation, we might find some useful insights. The following three points are paraphrases from Jeffery Pffeffer’s book, Managing with Power. Pfeffer teaches organizational behavior at Stanford, and Shimer grads will find his insights extraordinarily useful for figuring out what to DO with what Shimer has given us, and even better, how to go about doing it.
1. A decision by itself changes nothing. A decision will not put itself into effect. How would this decision to move be implemented? Who would be required to do what? Who’s anticipating the risks and managing the consequences? An organization like Shimer survives, not by mere acquiescence to decisions, but by active, willing, even joyous participation. It won’t be enough for students and alumni to “let it happen.” Most new students come to Shimer through word of mouth, from alumni and current students. What motivates our passion for our alma mater? Although I recognize that we have differing motivations, I would submit that it is our strong attachment to the identity of the college that sustains our passion for it. Ah, but which identity? Shimer has so many. Here are just a few:
a. The place where anyone is welcome, no matter what their academic background. The place where anyone can have a second chance, based solely on their own commitment to doing the work and participating in the discourse.
b. One of the last bastions of radical political empowerment. Not so much for leaning radically to the left or right, as for it’s anti-leaning orientation altogether. After graduating from Shimer, one of the things that cannot be taken from you is your knowledge that you are not powerless. Those who attempt to manipulate you do so at their own risk. You have absorbed the lineage of every argument that might be thrown at you, and waded through the muck of their strengths and weaknesses. You have been through the Boot Camp of bullshit and collaboration.
c. The “Great Books College of the Midwest.” Ah, the noble academic pedigree. The venerable Hutchins, the shared inquiry, the dialogical methodology, ‘the great conversation’, the purely astonishing percentage of our alumnus who go on to receive graduate degrees (despite the fact that many of them would never have been described as ‘academic’ types before arriving at Shimer).
d. The Community. The sense of belonging, of being in a wholly safe space that allows you to condense so purely into the essence of what you are. And who can say of what this community is constructed? The shared experience, inquiry and curriculum; the aforementioned political empowerment, and the conviction that we are all getting ‘free’ together; the shared consumption of coffee at 3am; the enormous amount of work and effort and dedication that we invest in the institution and in each other; our charming, (or as some would have it, dilapidated) campus in one of the strangest outposts on the frontier of Chicagoland; the tight-knit (some would say incestuous) social environment where we live virtually without secrets for four intense years of our life.
What makes Shimer? The curriculum? The environment? The size? The collaborative process? Maybe all of it together. Maybe just our will to believe in it. Perhaps where we disagree is not so much a point of particular facts in a rational configuration, but in what we identify with in our Shimer experience. It cannot have escaped anyone’s notice that it is primarily those who identify with the community and the political empowerment aspects of Shimer who are the most concerned about the move. This makes a great deal of sense when you reflect that these are the aspects of Shimer’s identity that are most at risk in the move. How much could we lose and still be Shimer? If we were reduced to only “The Great Books College of the Midwest” would it be enough? Would it be enough to command the loyalty and passion of the alumnus? Enough to attract new students? Enough to create those purely Shimer types of people who are so distinctive that we can almost recognize each other on sight? I hope so, but I’m not sure. For me, I can imagine a worse case scenario than Shimer ceasing to exist. My true nightmare is that Shimer becomes just an ok place to read Aristotle. Let’s be honest, there are nicer places to read Aristotle.
2. At the moment a decision is made, we cannot possibly know whether it is good or bad. Decision quality, when measured by results, can only be known as the consequences of the decision become known. From Daniel Shiner’s post on this blog:
a. Move to IIT: Best case: Shimer maintains identity, draws significant numbers of new students, becomes everything it aspires to be in 5-10 years. Worst case: Shimer loses current students, loses identity, attracts few new students, and disappears.
b. Stay in Waukegan: Best case: Shimer maintains identity, somehow figures out how to attract more new students, becomes everything it aspires to be in 5-10 years. Worst case: Shimer student body steadily declines, buildings deteriorate from lack of money to fix & repair, and Shimer disappears.
c. As Daniel points out, this doesn’t really help much. We don’t know. Logically, we can’t know.
3. We almost invariably spend more time living with the consequences of our decisions than we do in making them. Rather than spending inordinate amounts of time and effort in the decision-making process, it would seem at least as useful to spend time implementing decisions and dealing with their ramifications. This is a leadership issue. Good leaders are skilled in managing the consequences of their decisions. Perhaps the leadership of Shimer College will be skilled in managing the consequences of this move. Perhaps they will not. Do we know? No. We choose to believe in their skill, or we choose not to. But Shimer is different from most other institutions. It is different in a variety of ways, but the one which is applicable in this instance is that students and alumni are far more crucial to the survival of the institution than they might be at a more regular company or college. The decision to move cannot be implemented successfully without a significant number of people getting on board and committing to it. Good leadership, in this case, is consensus building. Having the power to make the decision is irrelevant (tragically irrelevant, given what the price of failure would be). Having the skill and the credibility and the passion to get everyone focused on a common cause is the whole game.
Do we have enough consensus to implement this move? Can we build it? These are questions we have a good chance of answering. If the answer is no…
Would it be naïve to believe that those who have always supported the institution, in money and time and prospective students, will go on supporting the college wherever it is located? Maybe. Maybe not. I am not in favor of the move (like you didn’t notice). But I am sympathetic to those who want the advantages that the move might bring. However, I see no reason that consensus could not be created toward gaining those advantages in Waukegan, rather than through becoming a tenant of IIT.
I agree with danbooks comment below that we should cease speaking of this as if the college were facing imminent death. I don’t believe it either. I will not believe it.
Sarah Kimmel
Class of '96
1. A decision by itself changes nothing. A decision will not put itself into effect. How would this decision to move be implemented? Who would be required to do what? Who’s anticipating the risks and managing the consequences? An organization like Shimer survives, not by mere acquiescence to decisions, but by active, willing, even joyous participation. It won’t be enough for students and alumni to “let it happen.” Most new students come to Shimer through word of mouth, from alumni and current students. What motivates our passion for our alma mater? Although I recognize that we have differing motivations, I would submit that it is our strong attachment to the identity of the college that sustains our passion for it. Ah, but which identity? Shimer has so many. Here are just a few:
a. The place where anyone is welcome, no matter what their academic background. The place where anyone can have a second chance, based solely on their own commitment to doing the work and participating in the discourse.
b. One of the last bastions of radical political empowerment. Not so much for leaning radically to the left or right, as for it’s anti-leaning orientation altogether. After graduating from Shimer, one of the things that cannot be taken from you is your knowledge that you are not powerless. Those who attempt to manipulate you do so at their own risk. You have absorbed the lineage of every argument that might be thrown at you, and waded through the muck of their strengths and weaknesses. You have been through the Boot Camp of bullshit and collaboration.
c. The “Great Books College of the Midwest.” Ah, the noble academic pedigree. The venerable Hutchins, the shared inquiry, the dialogical methodology, ‘the great conversation’, the purely astonishing percentage of our alumnus who go on to receive graduate degrees (despite the fact that many of them would never have been described as ‘academic’ types before arriving at Shimer).
d. The Community. The sense of belonging, of being in a wholly safe space that allows you to condense so purely into the essence of what you are. And who can say of what this community is constructed? The shared experience, inquiry and curriculum; the aforementioned political empowerment, and the conviction that we are all getting ‘free’ together; the shared consumption of coffee at 3am; the enormous amount of work and effort and dedication that we invest in the institution and in each other; our charming, (or as some would have it, dilapidated) campus in one of the strangest outposts on the frontier of Chicagoland; the tight-knit (some would say incestuous) social environment where we live virtually without secrets for four intense years of our life.
What makes Shimer? The curriculum? The environment? The size? The collaborative process? Maybe all of it together. Maybe just our will to believe in it. Perhaps where we disagree is not so much a point of particular facts in a rational configuration, but in what we identify with in our Shimer experience. It cannot have escaped anyone’s notice that it is primarily those who identify with the community and the political empowerment aspects of Shimer who are the most concerned about the move. This makes a great deal of sense when you reflect that these are the aspects of Shimer’s identity that are most at risk in the move. How much could we lose and still be Shimer? If we were reduced to only “The Great Books College of the Midwest” would it be enough? Would it be enough to command the loyalty and passion of the alumnus? Enough to attract new students? Enough to create those purely Shimer types of people who are so distinctive that we can almost recognize each other on sight? I hope so, but I’m not sure. For me, I can imagine a worse case scenario than Shimer ceasing to exist. My true nightmare is that Shimer becomes just an ok place to read Aristotle. Let’s be honest, there are nicer places to read Aristotle.
2. At the moment a decision is made, we cannot possibly know whether it is good or bad. Decision quality, when measured by results, can only be known as the consequences of the decision become known. From Daniel Shiner’s post on this blog:
a. Move to IIT: Best case: Shimer maintains identity, draws significant numbers of new students, becomes everything it aspires to be in 5-10 years. Worst case: Shimer loses current students, loses identity, attracts few new students, and disappears.
b. Stay in Waukegan: Best case: Shimer maintains identity, somehow figures out how to attract more new students, becomes everything it aspires to be in 5-10 years. Worst case: Shimer student body steadily declines, buildings deteriorate from lack of money to fix & repair, and Shimer disappears.
c. As Daniel points out, this doesn’t really help much. We don’t know. Logically, we can’t know.
3. We almost invariably spend more time living with the consequences of our decisions than we do in making them. Rather than spending inordinate amounts of time and effort in the decision-making process, it would seem at least as useful to spend time implementing decisions and dealing with their ramifications. This is a leadership issue. Good leaders are skilled in managing the consequences of their decisions. Perhaps the leadership of Shimer College will be skilled in managing the consequences of this move. Perhaps they will not. Do we know? No. We choose to believe in their skill, or we choose not to. But Shimer is different from most other institutions. It is different in a variety of ways, but the one which is applicable in this instance is that students and alumni are far more crucial to the survival of the institution than they might be at a more regular company or college. The decision to move cannot be implemented successfully without a significant number of people getting on board and committing to it. Good leadership, in this case, is consensus building. Having the power to make the decision is irrelevant (tragically irrelevant, given what the price of failure would be). Having the skill and the credibility and the passion to get everyone focused on a common cause is the whole game.
Do we have enough consensus to implement this move? Can we build it? These are questions we have a good chance of answering. If the answer is no…
Would it be naïve to believe that those who have always supported the institution, in money and time and prospective students, will go on supporting the college wherever it is located? Maybe. Maybe not. I am not in favor of the move (like you didn’t notice). But I am sympathetic to those who want the advantages that the move might bring. However, I see no reason that consensus could not be created toward gaining those advantages in Waukegan, rather than through becoming a tenant of IIT.
I agree with danbooks comment below that we should cease speaking of this as if the college were facing imminent death. I don’t believe it either. I will not believe it.
Sarah Kimmel
Class of '96
Wednesday, November 23, 2005
Trust, Leadership and Community
I thought the decision was still up in the air? I really want feed back on this. Is there anyone else who thinks an interview should not have been given?
I am afraid to ask, but can the Board sign a lease without the assembly?
I see nothing trustworthy or Shimerian in the spirit in which this is being done. This article looks like a way of speeding up the process and burying the hopeful. I do not like the way that the Board Chairperson and the College President are handling this. That comment is not deragatory, it is clear.
It is hard to read the words of so many people dancing around that issue while the fate of Shimer is decided.
I will add this to the words of Daniel Shiner. If you understand nothing else, understand this:
If we stay in Waukegan we sink or swim on our own. At IIT someone else will be helping us determine the fate of Shimer. Not the Great Books education alone but the spirit of Shimer College that gives an academic home to those who are not so lofty... Shimer did change when it left Mount Caroll, it became more than it was.
When I got to Shimer, I had never read Plato or Aristotle. I always held them in such reverence that I felt I wasn't smart enough to read them. I left it to my betters to determine for me the value of the great works. I learned to read and understand the "big words" and "big thoughts". Don't get me wrong I was far from a stellar student. But I understand this:
Shimer is there for people who can't go to just any college. It needs to be exactly what it is. That is Shimers niche. It is called A-l-t-e-r-n-a-t-v-e education.
Let me tell you about the place I work, the Old Town School of Folk music. It is an institution for learning music in the aural tradition that went from 1500 students per week to 6000 in two years. The first thing that happened was that the price of childrens classes skyrocketed. Then private lessons were only provided in blocks of 8. Making the cost of getting private lessons quite an obstacle if you can't afford to buy 8 at once. Programming was changed to implement measurable standards for fundraising purposes. They began to do demographic studies.
In truth, none of these things is "bad" but the Old Town School is slowing becoming like every other institution that provides supplemental arts education. This little independant hippy organization that gave a home to the person and the songs of Big Bill Broonzy and Pete Seger now does business with Clear Channel. It just seems to be one compromise away from the next compromise at all times.
Maybe, it's Shimers fate to die in Waukegan. That seems to be the undertow of all the good thoughts behind moving to IIT. Let's move because we fear the death of the institution?
Think about what Jimmy Cliff said: " I'd rather be a free man in my grave than living as a puppet or a slave."
Shimer might die in Waukegan but when it does it will still be Shimer, not some annex of IIT.
If Shimer needs to move and have a lease then let's have a lease on our own. Novel thought eh?
Happy Thanksgiving!
I am afraid to ask, but can the Board sign a lease without the assembly?
I see nothing trustworthy or Shimerian in the spirit in which this is being done. This article looks like a way of speeding up the process and burying the hopeful. I do not like the way that the Board Chairperson and the College President are handling this. That comment is not deragatory, it is clear.
It is hard to read the words of so many people dancing around that issue while the fate of Shimer is decided.
I will add this to the words of Daniel Shiner. If you understand nothing else, understand this:
If we stay in Waukegan we sink or swim on our own. At IIT someone else will be helping us determine the fate of Shimer. Not the Great Books education alone but the spirit of Shimer College that gives an academic home to those who are not so lofty... Shimer did change when it left Mount Caroll, it became more than it was.
When I got to Shimer, I had never read Plato or Aristotle. I always held them in such reverence that I felt I wasn't smart enough to read them. I left it to my betters to determine for me the value of the great works. I learned to read and understand the "big words" and "big thoughts". Don't get me wrong I was far from a stellar student. But I understand this:
Shimer is there for people who can't go to just any college. It needs to be exactly what it is. That is Shimers niche. It is called A-l-t-e-r-n-a-t-v-e education.
Let me tell you about the place I work, the Old Town School of Folk music. It is an institution for learning music in the aural tradition that went from 1500 students per week to 6000 in two years. The first thing that happened was that the price of childrens classes skyrocketed. Then private lessons were only provided in blocks of 8. Making the cost of getting private lessons quite an obstacle if you can't afford to buy 8 at once. Programming was changed to implement measurable standards for fundraising purposes. They began to do demographic studies.
In truth, none of these things is "bad" but the Old Town School is slowing becoming like every other institution that provides supplemental arts education. This little independant hippy organization that gave a home to the person and the songs of Big Bill Broonzy and Pete Seger now does business with Clear Channel. It just seems to be one compromise away from the next compromise at all times.
Maybe, it's Shimers fate to die in Waukegan. That seems to be the undertow of all the good thoughts behind moving to IIT. Let's move because we fear the death of the institution?
Think about what Jimmy Cliff said: " I'd rather be a free man in my grave than living as a puppet or a slave."
Shimer might die in Waukegan but when it does it will still be Shimer, not some annex of IIT.
If Shimer needs to move and have a lease then let's have a lease on our own. Novel thought eh?
Happy Thanksgiving!
Struggling college may move: Shimer Considers Relocating to IIT
Barbara Bell
Special to the Tribune
Published November 23, 2005
Shimer College may repeat a history lesson learned more than 25 years
ago when self-preservation forced the school to move from western
Illinois to Waukegan.
The small liberal arts college on the north side of the city may
relocate next summer to the Illinois Institute of Technology on the
South Side of Chicago. The relocation is a survival move because
Shimer's enrollment has been stagnant for 15 years, said Young Kim,
chairman of the college's board of trustees.
IIT invited Shimer to its campus at 3300 S. Federal St., and college
officials say they will decide by January whether to accept the offer.
"I think we are obliged to move in order to survive," Kim said. "[But]
there's no imminent crisis forcing us to move."
The college would probably have to shut down eventually if it stays in
Waukegan because it has been unable to get its enrollment above 110
students and it needs a minimum of 200. "It's just not sustainable,"
Kim said.
"We do see growth as essential to the college," said President William
Craig Rice.
Thom Karnik, director of communications and marketing at IIT, confirmed
that the colleges are negotiating a lease.
Shimer, which opened in the 1850s in Mt. Carroll, would maintain its
independence at IIT and enter into a long-term agreement for a building
on the campus.
Most of Shimer's Waukegan facilities would be liquidated, Kim said. The
science classes for home-schooled students would remain in Waukegan for
the time being, according to a news release. The college has a weekend
program for adults that would be moved to IIT, although school
officials said courses would be held in Waukegan if there is a demand.
At IIT, Shimer students would have access to more amenities, including
a fitness center, and the opportunity to take advantage of some IIT
academic offerings, such as a pre-med program.
"We would be able to offer our students more," Kim said.
Shimer students attend classes primarily in houses converted to
classrooms on Genesee Street. The school moved to Waukegan in 1979. The
college is best known for its curriculum based on the Great Books and
Western intellectualism in which students participate in discussions
with the faculty rather than listen to lectures.
Shimer has an intimate atmosphere and almost none of the frills found
at larger colleges. For example, the college doesn't have food service
or a gym. But students say that's what makes Shimer unique, and some
would prefer to stay in Waukegan.
"It would be much more difficult to keep our community," said Kyra
Keuben, 21, of Wheaton as she and other students spent time last week
in Shimer's bookstore, which is in the living room of a converted
house.
"I think the students here don't care as much about those things," said
Sarah Green, 25, of Pittsburgh.
Some Shimer students said they worry that the wooden tables used during
class discussions literally won't fit in the building where Shimer
would be housed at IIT. In addition, they said they would miss the
baked goods that students make every Friday to share.
But Colby Somerville, 21, of Florida said the small student body can
make life frustrating at times. "We're kind of lacking in diversity
that way," he said.
Shimer officials have been trying for years to create a campus in
Waukegan out of its 14 buildings, but it's too costly to build a
campus, Kim said. In addition, Shimer has been unable to run a capital
campaign to raise money, but Kim said that would probably change if the
school moved to IIT because the alumni are in favor of the relocation.
If Shimer moves south, students would be able to live in a dedicated
wing of an IIT dorm or off campus, and students at both colleges would
be able to attend classes at either school, officials said.
Kim, who graduated from Shimer in 1973, said he doubts the school will
be swallowed up by IIT.
"We have such a strong identity," he said.
Waukegan Mayor Richard Hyde said he plans to meet soon with Rice. And
Ald. Rick Larsen said Shimer has been an asset to Waukegan, citing
certificate programs that the school offers for teachers.
"This alderman wants them to stay in Waukegan," he said.
Special to the Tribune
Published November 23, 2005
Shimer College may repeat a history lesson learned more than 25 years
ago when self-preservation forced the school to move from western
Illinois to Waukegan.
The small liberal arts college on the north side of the city may
relocate next summer to the Illinois Institute of Technology on the
South Side of Chicago. The relocation is a survival move because
Shimer's enrollment has been stagnant for 15 years, said Young Kim,
chairman of the college's board of trustees.
IIT invited Shimer to its campus at 3300 S. Federal St., and college
officials say they will decide by January whether to accept the offer.
"I think we are obliged to move in order to survive," Kim said. "[But]
there's no imminent crisis forcing us to move."
The college would probably have to shut down eventually if it stays in
Waukegan because it has been unable to get its enrollment above 110
students and it needs a minimum of 200. "It's just not sustainable,"
Kim said.
"We do see growth as essential to the college," said President William
Craig Rice.
Thom Karnik, director of communications and marketing at IIT, confirmed
that the colleges are negotiating a lease.
Shimer, which opened in the 1850s in Mt. Carroll, would maintain its
independence at IIT and enter into a long-term agreement for a building
on the campus.
Most of Shimer's Waukegan facilities would be liquidated, Kim said. The
science classes for home-schooled students would remain in Waukegan for
the time being, according to a news release. The college has a weekend
program for adults that would be moved to IIT, although school
officials said courses would be held in Waukegan if there is a demand.
At IIT, Shimer students would have access to more amenities, including
a fitness center, and the opportunity to take advantage of some IIT
academic offerings, such as a pre-med program.
"We would be able to offer our students more," Kim said.
Shimer students attend classes primarily in houses converted to
classrooms on Genesee Street. The school moved to Waukegan in 1979. The
college is best known for its curriculum based on the Great Books and
Western intellectualism in which students participate in discussions
with the faculty rather than listen to lectures.
Shimer has an intimate atmosphere and almost none of the frills found
at larger colleges. For example, the college doesn't have food service
or a gym. But students say that's what makes Shimer unique, and some
would prefer to stay in Waukegan.
"It would be much more difficult to keep our community," said Kyra
Keuben, 21, of Wheaton as she and other students spent time last week
in Shimer's bookstore, which is in the living room of a converted
house.
"I think the students here don't care as much about those things," said
Sarah Green, 25, of Pittsburgh.
Some Shimer students said they worry that the wooden tables used during
class discussions literally won't fit in the building where Shimer
would be housed at IIT. In addition, they said they would miss the
baked goods that students make every Friday to share.
But Colby Somerville, 21, of Florida said the small student body can
make life frustrating at times. "We're kind of lacking in diversity
that way," he said.
Shimer officials have been trying for years to create a campus in
Waukegan out of its 14 buildings, but it's too costly to build a
campus, Kim said. In addition, Shimer has been unable to run a capital
campaign to raise money, but Kim said that would probably change if the
school moved to IIT because the alumni are in favor of the relocation.
If Shimer moves south, students would be able to live in a dedicated
wing of an IIT dorm or off campus, and students at both colleges would
be able to attend classes at either school, officials said.
Kim, who graduated from Shimer in 1973, said he doubts the school will
be swallowed up by IIT.
"We have such a strong identity," he said.
Waukegan Mayor Richard Hyde said he plans to meet soon with Rice. And
Ald. Rick Larsen said Shimer has been an asset to Waukegan, citing
certificate programs that the school offers for teachers.
"This alderman wants them to stay in Waukegan," he said.
From Daniel Shiner
Dear extended Shimer community,
I’m Daniel Shiner, a Shimer student from 1971-1977, and an on and off board member (from 1987 to 1997 and again starting this Fall). I’m thinking about the proposed move, and a couple of thoughts are brewing.
Of course, the essence is that there are not only the obvious questions (the logistics of a possible move) but also a myriad of other questions that result from consideration of the first question--all the intangibles-- i.e., we can put together tangible information--costs of meal plans, space in buildings, etc; make our best guesses as to the effect on admissions, fundraising, profile, etc.; but we haven't a clue how this will/might affect what you (and most of us) consider the essence of Shimer--the dialogical community, within and without the classroom. I'm struggling with that one. From my frame of reference, when we moved to Waukegan, perhaps half the students declined to move, based on the same assumption--that in Waukegan, it would be impossible for Shimer to maintain its community; that the essence of the College could not survive anywhere except in an isolated, removed-from-the-real-world setting. I think time has proved them wrong. That same question recurs now. And like then, no one knows the answer. Those of us who chose to move back in 1979 believed (or convinced ourselves) that Shimer could exist anywhere; that the ideals were so strong, physical location could not destroy them, and if it did, perhaps the College did not deserve to exist. Of course, the logical extension of this (or absurd extension) is that Shimer could exist in any environment--prison, Antarctica, Baghdad. There are clearly some limits, not the least of which is attracting new students, which seems to me to be a major impetus for the move. And here we get to what Rumsfeld (I think) so (in)eloquently talked about--the known knows, the known unknowns, the unknown unknowns, etc. Whatever he said, it sounded bizarre but actually made sense in some situations, including the one Shimer finds itself in. And there is the realization that doing nothing, or slowing down the process, is making a decision, a decision for the status quo--which may not be a bad thing.
Usually, I look at best and worst case scenarios to help guide me in major decisions. Here, that looks something like this:
Move to IIT: Best case: Shimer maintains identity, draws significant numbers of new students, becomes everything it aspires to be in 5-10 years. Worst case: Shimer loses current students, loses identity, attracts few new students, and disappears.
Stay in Waukegan: Best case: Shimer maintains identity, somehow figures out how to attract more new students, becomes everything it aspires to be in 5-10 years. Worst case: Shimer student body steadily declines, buildings deteriorate from lack of money to fix & repair, and Shimer disappears.
This doesn't help me much.
What bemuses (and amuses) me most about this, I think, is that for many years I thought being on the Board meant that I would be among the first to know about important issues, that I would have access to far more information than if I were not on the Board, would be kept informed on all aspects of important decisions, etc. In essence, I thought being on the Board would be like gaining admission to some secret society--that the Illuminati, Freemasons, and Knights Templar would recognize me as one of their own and initiate me into the secrets of the universe. What I find, instead, is that I don't know, or learn, a damn thing more than when my involvement with Shimer was limited to sending a check each year. Until Young started talking at the October Board meeting, I barely knew IIT existed and certainly knew nothing about any proposed move. Now I find myself getting current information from reading blogs. I'm amazed at how little being on the Board means in terms of information.
If any students are interested in emailing me with their thought/ideas/insane ramblings, I'd be very interested; I don't know how one goes about disseminating a request like this to the community; I can't even figure out how to post to some of the blogs, except as replies. My email is dansbooks@excite.com. I’d welcome anyone’s input. Thanks for being Shimer.
I’m Daniel Shiner, a Shimer student from 1971-1977, and an on and off board member (from 1987 to 1997 and again starting this Fall). I’m thinking about the proposed move, and a couple of thoughts are brewing.
Of course, the essence is that there are not only the obvious questions (the logistics of a possible move) but also a myriad of other questions that result from consideration of the first question--all the intangibles-- i.e., we can put together tangible information--costs of meal plans, space in buildings, etc; make our best guesses as to the effect on admissions, fundraising, profile, etc.; but we haven't a clue how this will/might affect what you (and most of us) consider the essence of Shimer--the dialogical community, within and without the classroom. I'm struggling with that one. From my frame of reference, when we moved to Waukegan, perhaps half the students declined to move, based on the same assumption--that in Waukegan, it would be impossible for Shimer to maintain its community; that the essence of the College could not survive anywhere except in an isolated, removed-from-the-real-world setting. I think time has proved them wrong. That same question recurs now. And like then, no one knows the answer. Those of us who chose to move back in 1979 believed (or convinced ourselves) that Shimer could exist anywhere; that the ideals were so strong, physical location could not destroy them, and if it did, perhaps the College did not deserve to exist. Of course, the logical extension of this (or absurd extension) is that Shimer could exist in any environment--prison, Antarctica, Baghdad. There are clearly some limits, not the least of which is attracting new students, which seems to me to be a major impetus for the move. And here we get to what Rumsfeld (I think) so (in)eloquently talked about--the known knows, the known unknowns, the unknown unknowns, etc. Whatever he said, it sounded bizarre but actually made sense in some situations, including the one Shimer finds itself in. And there is the realization that doing nothing, or slowing down the process, is making a decision, a decision for the status quo--which may not be a bad thing.
Usually, I look at best and worst case scenarios to help guide me in major decisions. Here, that looks something like this:
Move to IIT: Best case: Shimer maintains identity, draws significant numbers of new students, becomes everything it aspires to be in 5-10 years. Worst case: Shimer loses current students, loses identity, attracts few new students, and disappears.
Stay in Waukegan: Best case: Shimer maintains identity, somehow figures out how to attract more new students, becomes everything it aspires to be in 5-10 years. Worst case: Shimer student body steadily declines, buildings deteriorate from lack of money to fix & repair, and Shimer disappears.
This doesn't help me much.
What bemuses (and amuses) me most about this, I think, is that for many years I thought being on the Board meant that I would be among the first to know about important issues, that I would have access to far more information than if I were not on the Board, would be kept informed on all aspects of important decisions, etc. In essence, I thought being on the Board would be like gaining admission to some secret society--that the Illuminati, Freemasons, and Knights Templar would recognize me as one of their own and initiate me into the secrets of the universe. What I find, instead, is that I don't know, or learn, a damn thing more than when my involvement with Shimer was limited to sending a check each year. Until Young started talking at the October Board meeting, I barely knew IIT existed and certainly knew nothing about any proposed move. Now I find myself getting current information from reading blogs. I'm amazed at how little being on the Board means in terms of information.
If any students are interested in emailing me with their thought/ideas/insane ramblings, I'd be very interested; I don't know how one goes about disseminating a request like this to the community; I can't even figure out how to post to some of the blogs, except as replies. My email is dansbooks@excite.com. I’d welcome anyone’s input. Thanks for being Shimer.
Tuesday, November 22, 2005
Tentative Thoughts
Fellow Shimerians,
After reflecting some on the proposed move, here are some tentative thoughts.
On its face, the most obvious advantage of the proposed move would be to allow Shimer students access to more typical college amenities like more diverse dining options, a modern gymnasium, a better-maintained dormitory, a library, etc. All of this is desirable, as is an independent administrative and governance structure, and better, more modern facilities in general.
However, the other advantages claimed for the proposal are dubious at best, in the absence of further supporting evidence.
For example, that the College should move closer to its traditional source of students might seem an obvious strategy to change the school's fortunes. However, in recalling the location of IIT's campus, I don't see how relocating from Waukegan to a remote, semi-distressed neighborhood on the south side of Chicago would make students feel that much less isolated. (If we were thinking of moving to Lincoln Park, that would be one thing, but . . .) A move to the south side would also likely adversely affect the College's recent successes in recruiting students from outside the Midwest--if not the Chicago suburbs.
Without a large and targeted capital campaign, it's true that the long-term deficiencies in Shimer's Waukegan facilities will be impossible to overcome (though it's undeniable that they've manifestly improved in recent years). However, will the trade off in maintenance cost for long-term leases be worth it for the College? What savings will be realized by the College? What are the financial details here?
The intimation that Shimer's course offerings need to be made more "robust" through the option of taking IIT courses strikes my ears as (a) a lack of faith in the Core, (b) a degraded understanding of Shimer's educational mission, and (c) an affront to those of us who found Shimer's curriculum very robust indeed. Better they had just said that this would make it easier to "market" the school. But in pandering to a market, let's make sure it's the right one--and not one that would distort if not destroy the historical identity of the College.
More ephemeral are considerations of the poetics of place, but they should be considered at some level. For example, I'm not that wild about Shimer having a "storefront" entryway. Will IIT be the "anchor store" of our educational "strip mall"?
Finally, it is not at all clear to me that this move will automatically generate the other benefits claimed for it: increased enrollments, a stronger fundraising and donor base, the opportunity for the College to play a national role in Great Books education, greater recognition for the Hutchins Institute, etc. It does not follow, without further evidence, that this move will generate these improvements.
Simply put, if this proposed move is not part of a strategic, long-term plan, my confidence in the proposal would be greatly diminished to almost nil.
A start would be some baseline data. Have studies been commissioned that show that Waukegan is the reason Shimer's growth has been stagnant? Conversely, is there quantifiable evidence that the proposed move would have a reasonably good chance of reversing the College's fortunes? Or is this just a desperate hope?
I would hope that these questions are considered carefully before the Board makes any commitment to this move. Though I know the College is not nearly as healthy as we'd all like it to be at this point in its history, we are also not in Mount Carroll in 1977, when the only option was to move. A move now, even one that has been more fully justified, would undoubtedly cost us some students, and further splinter the loyalties of our alumni base into Carrolians, Waukeganites, and Chicagoans (and this after having some success with bringing many Carrolians back into the fold).
Finally, and in closing, I would ask whether or not the College may be writing off the potential of Waukegan's future too soon. The city is situated on a lakefront with much potential. The last time I visited, I noticed that many homeowners in the area surrounding the College had undertaken substantial renovations of their properties. This residential area is very complimentary to the College's mission. The Genesee Theater has been fully renovated. The Public Library is of remarkably high quality for a city the size of Waukegan. And Waukegan has finally come to fully embrace the College, after years of open hostility.
Yours in common dialogue,
David Koukal (Shimer, 1990)
After reflecting some on the proposed move, here are some tentative thoughts.
On its face, the most obvious advantage of the proposed move would be to allow Shimer students access to more typical college amenities like more diverse dining options, a modern gymnasium, a better-maintained dormitory, a library, etc. All of this is desirable, as is an independent administrative and governance structure, and better, more modern facilities in general.
However, the other advantages claimed for the proposal are dubious at best, in the absence of further supporting evidence.
For example, that the College should move closer to its traditional source of students might seem an obvious strategy to change the school's fortunes. However, in recalling the location of IIT's campus, I don't see how relocating from Waukegan to a remote, semi-distressed neighborhood on the south side of Chicago would make students feel that much less isolated. (If we were thinking of moving to Lincoln Park, that would be one thing, but . . .) A move to the south side would also likely adversely affect the College's recent successes in recruiting students from outside the Midwest--if not the Chicago suburbs.
Without a large and targeted capital campaign, it's true that the long-term deficiencies in Shimer's Waukegan facilities will be impossible to overcome (though it's undeniable that they've manifestly improved in recent years). However, will the trade off in maintenance cost for long-term leases be worth it for the College? What savings will be realized by the College? What are the financial details here?
The intimation that Shimer's course offerings need to be made more "robust" through the option of taking IIT courses strikes my ears as (a) a lack of faith in the Core, (b) a degraded understanding of Shimer's educational mission, and (c) an affront to those of us who found Shimer's curriculum very robust indeed. Better they had just said that this would make it easier to "market" the school. But in pandering to a market, let's make sure it's the right one--and not one that would distort if not destroy the historical identity of the College.
More ephemeral are considerations of the poetics of place, but they should be considered at some level. For example, I'm not that wild about Shimer having a "storefront" entryway. Will IIT be the "anchor store" of our educational "strip mall"?
Finally, it is not at all clear to me that this move will automatically generate the other benefits claimed for it: increased enrollments, a stronger fundraising and donor base, the opportunity for the College to play a national role in Great Books education, greater recognition for the Hutchins Institute, etc. It does not follow, without further evidence, that this move will generate these improvements.
Simply put, if this proposed move is not part of a strategic, long-term plan, my confidence in the proposal would be greatly diminished to almost nil.
A start would be some baseline data. Have studies been commissioned that show that Waukegan is the reason Shimer's growth has been stagnant? Conversely, is there quantifiable evidence that the proposed move would have a reasonably good chance of reversing the College's fortunes? Or is this just a desperate hope?
I would hope that these questions are considered carefully before the Board makes any commitment to this move. Though I know the College is not nearly as healthy as we'd all like it to be at this point in its history, we are also not in Mount Carroll in 1977, when the only option was to move. A move now, even one that has been more fully justified, would undoubtedly cost us some students, and further splinter the loyalties of our alumni base into Carrolians, Waukeganites, and Chicagoans (and this after having some success with bringing many Carrolians back into the fold).
Finally, and in closing, I would ask whether or not the College may be writing off the potential of Waukegan's future too soon. The city is situated on a lakefront with much potential. The last time I visited, I noticed that many homeowners in the area surrounding the College had undertaken substantial renovations of their properties. This residential area is very complimentary to the College's mission. The Genesee Theater has been fully renovated. The Public Library is of remarkably high quality for a city the size of Waukegan. And Waukegan has finally come to fully embrace the College, after years of open hostility.
Yours in common dialogue,
David Koukal (Shimer, 1990)
In the name of honest dialouge and all that is holy...
I have made adjustments, much to blogger’s chagrin, so that all the comments will now appear upon the top level, rather then in a secondary page. While blogger may feel it is improper to post comments on the header page, as we all know, almost every comment is just as important as the statement that started it, so down with blogger’s unnecessary totalitarianism, and up with free posting for all, members or no.
Cheers,
Saradevil
From Alan Perry
Sorry to repeat a comment up here but I'm just figuring out how to post on the top page like so many others. I wanted a current "Official" position and I liked the method used by John and Vicky so that I don't get Lost in the blogosphere. I think Shimer would have a lot to contribute to the near South side of Chicago and that Chicago would have a lot to offer Shimer. Shimer students would have greater access to museums, and theaters and all of the amenities of a powerful city/state. These tech students would have to take our classes in order based on prereqs. They would likely take maybe 4 or 5 of our core classes tops along with their specialized classes. Perhaps an architect could run through the Soc curriculum and gain a better understanding of how their designs impact the community and environment. An Engineer who took our Nat Sci courses would certainly be shaped in his thinking. We do have something to give in Chicago.
Shimer can be a hard pill to swallow whole. I'm glad I did. And we all know the benefits of a Shimer Education. I see the Shimer "Voice" as the echoes of plato's academy drifting through time. I think it would add to our voice if we are able to give part of our knowledge to the young industrialists. In fact, influencing the minds of engineers and architects etc. Brings our ideas and wisdom into the 21st century which is still largely undefined.
Partial tuition coming from these students fulfilling either their minimalist core requirements or even as electives would be added income. Plus their unique perspectives would add things to our dialogue that may otherwise go unnoticed by those of us full time Shimerians with our heads in the clouds. The campus appears pretty safe to me. It is well lit. The security is like a small police force. They have several cars and bicycle patrols along with radio contact to the Chicago Police department. There are Emergency call boxes on campus. They will even escort students after dark to several campus locations, housing, el station, etc.
I think there may be the potential to recruit part time faculty from the area as well. Perhaps UofC professors or graduates who feel like teaching a core class to a bunch of misfits. More part time professors and fewer full time professors might be a way to lower costs. It would be nice if the forced marriage between administration and faculty could be severed. Perhaps the old timers could semi retire to administration duties and teach at their leisure and rely more on part time faculty.
As far as the assembly is concerned, is it necessary? What is sacred and nearly untouchable to me is the Core Curriculum and the dialogical method. There is a possibility that the function of the assembly has run it's course and it is time for it to dissipate into the final stage of student communism. Perhaps the future of Shimer could be a place where administrators administrate, teachers teach, and students study. I'm still frightened by the idea of this move. But I do have faith in Shimer. I have faith in our method and our place in the modern world. If Shimer does relocate I hope they do it with optimism and hope.
Alan Perry
Monday, November 21, 2005
From the student and faculty members of the board
The Shimer community is faced with one of the most important choices to come before the College in a generation. Tensions are bound to run high. Still, this moment must serve as a testament to our dedication to the ideals of Shimer. This decision-making process is just as much a part of the dialogical learning experience as anything that happens around the octagon.
And around the octagon, we do not tolerate personal attacks that distract us from the task at hand, even if some of those attacks may be warranted. Our tradition of dialogue demands that we take people at face value while critically examining their ideas and conclusions.
Not everyone involved in this discussion is good at expressing their views clearly. It is our responsibility to help them clarify their views with questions, comments, suggestions and critiques. This is at the heart of what it means to be a Shimerian.
We all have differing and evolving opinions about this choice. Those of us who have signed this letter are no different. But those of us who have signed this letter – the student and faculty members of the Board of Trustees – are unanimous in our belief that all who are contributing to the dialog, including those with whose opinions we may strongly disagree, are acting in good faith, however much their visions for Shimer may differ.
Although we may not notice them much, everyone on the Board of Trustees volunteers because they believe in Shimer and what it stands for. The vast majority are alumni. They have given vast amounts of time and money to the preservation and improvement of this College. Everyone in the Shimer community, including board members, is trying to determine what is in the best interests of the College.
Shimer College is best served by deliberations that address the merits of the proposal, not the motives, character or conduct of other community members. Let us together act in this way to ensure that we engage in true dialog and reach the best decision for Shimer's future.
Shimer College and its traditions of educational dialog deserve nothing less.
Feel free to contact any of us with questions, comments or concerns.
Owen Brugh
Weekend Student Trustee
o.brugh@shimer.edu
Albert B. Fernandez
Faculty Trustee
a.fernandez@shimer.edu
Matilda Kriemelmeyer
Weekday Student Trustee
m.kriemelmeyer@shimer.edu
Jim Donovan
Faculty Trustee
j.donovan@shimer.edu
Noah Kippley-Ogman
Weekday Student Trustee
n.kippleyogman@shimer.edu
And around the octagon, we do not tolerate personal attacks that distract us from the task at hand, even if some of those attacks may be warranted. Our tradition of dialogue demands that we take people at face value while critically examining their ideas and conclusions.
Not everyone involved in this discussion is good at expressing their views clearly. It is our responsibility to help them clarify their views with questions, comments, suggestions and critiques. This is at the heart of what it means to be a Shimerian.
We all have differing and evolving opinions about this choice. Those of us who have signed this letter are no different. But those of us who have signed this letter – the student and faculty members of the Board of Trustees – are unanimous in our belief that all who are contributing to the dialog, including those with whose opinions we may strongly disagree, are acting in good faith, however much their visions for Shimer may differ.
Although we may not notice them much, everyone on the Board of Trustees volunteers because they believe in Shimer and what it stands for. The vast majority are alumni. They have given vast amounts of time and money to the preservation and improvement of this College. Everyone in the Shimer community, including board members, is trying to determine what is in the best interests of the College.
Shimer College is best served by deliberations that address the merits of the proposal, not the motives, character or conduct of other community members. Let us together act in this way to ensure that we engage in true dialog and reach the best decision for Shimer's future.
Shimer College and its traditions of educational dialog deserve nothing less.
Feel free to contact any of us with questions, comments or concerns.
Owen Brugh
Weekend Student Trustee
o.brugh@shimer.edu
Albert B. Fernandez
Faculty Trustee
a.fernandez@shimer.edu
Matilda Kriemelmeyer
Weekday Student Trustee
m.kriemelmeyer@shimer.edu
Jim Donovan
Faculty Trustee
j.donovan@shimer.edu
Noah Kippley-Ogman
Weekday Student Trustee
n.kippleyogman@shimer.edu
More from David Shiner
I guess David Shiner is the only one who speaks the language of the people:
Thanks again, Michael. I hope this isn't only a private conversation in a public venue, like two sportscasters who address wach other on the air, but rather that others feel free to chime in.Your main point concerns the ability of the Assembly to make an informed and relevant decision on IIT by the time the bell rings. I don't know whether that will happen, but as I mentioned in an earlier post, I'm trying hard to help see that it does.On your other points: I didn't intend to give the impression that I see recent Assembly meetings as "irrelevant." I think they fulfill a somewhat different function than in the 80s and 90s - not all that different, but somewhat so. In thinking this over, it occurs to me that the rise in Weekend student attendance and the decline in decisions on substantive issues might be related to each other. The Weekend students, on the whole, seem to appreciate hearing committee reports and the like more than Weekday students and staff; it helps them feel more informed about what's going on at Shimer. They don't seem at all frustrated by the lack of substantive items, although they do speak up when we have discussions. I'll think more about it, but in any case I surely wouldn't characterize the Assembly as "irrelevant." I would say that Shimer is somewhat less democratic than it was a decade ago, and much less so than 25-30 years ago. I don't think that's a bad thing, but I do think it could become a bad thing if it goes much further. Since I'm obviously committed to the Assembly, I'll continue to try to figure out how to make it as functional and relevant as possible.As far as the statement that "even non-serious discussions about something like moving the College" would have been communicated widely in the past, I simply don't agree. Examples to the contrary abound. Back in 2002 Don was approached by a proprietary school that was interested in affiliating with Shimer. He told me about it some time after his initial conversations, and eventually he told the rest of the faculty. The talks disintegrated before the students and administrative staff (not to mention alumni) were brought in. Those dicussions never got to the point that the IIT proposal has, but they were certainly at least somewhat serious. If they had gone further, I assume the Assembly would have been brought in, although months after the initial contact. We'll never know. What I do know is that Bill, like Don, regularly gets calls about this sort of thing, which could loosely be termed "non-serious discussions to move the college" or to subtantially affect the college in other ways. I don't think it makes sense to have them all disseminated widely, or in most cases at all. What I think is probably in this case is not that issue, but the rather clunky way this particular situation has been handled. I hope that everyone involved, myself included, will learn to handle such matters better in the future.
Thanks again, Michael. I hope this isn't only a private conversation in a public venue, like two sportscasters who address wach other on the air, but rather that others feel free to chime in.Your main point concerns the ability of the Assembly to make an informed and relevant decision on IIT by the time the bell rings. I don't know whether that will happen, but as I mentioned in an earlier post, I'm trying hard to help see that it does.On your other points: I didn't intend to give the impression that I see recent Assembly meetings as "irrelevant." I think they fulfill a somewhat different function than in the 80s and 90s - not all that different, but somewhat so. In thinking this over, it occurs to me that the rise in Weekend student attendance and the decline in decisions on substantive issues might be related to each other. The Weekend students, on the whole, seem to appreciate hearing committee reports and the like more than Weekday students and staff; it helps them feel more informed about what's going on at Shimer. They don't seem at all frustrated by the lack of substantive items, although they do speak up when we have discussions. I'll think more about it, but in any case I surely wouldn't characterize the Assembly as "irrelevant." I would say that Shimer is somewhat less democratic than it was a decade ago, and much less so than 25-30 years ago. I don't think that's a bad thing, but I do think it could become a bad thing if it goes much further. Since I'm obviously committed to the Assembly, I'll continue to try to figure out how to make it as functional and relevant as possible.As far as the statement that "even non-serious discussions about something like moving the College" would have been communicated widely in the past, I simply don't agree. Examples to the contrary abound. Back in 2002 Don was approached by a proprietary school that was interested in affiliating with Shimer. He told me about it some time after his initial conversations, and eventually he told the rest of the faculty. The talks disintegrated before the students and administrative staff (not to mention alumni) were brought in. Those dicussions never got to the point that the IIT proposal has, but they were certainly at least somewhat serious. If they had gone further, I assume the Assembly would have been brought in, although months after the initial contact. We'll never know. What I do know is that Bill, like Don, regularly gets calls about this sort of thing, which could loosely be termed "non-serious discussions to move the college" or to subtantially affect the college in other ways. I don't think it makes sense to have them all disseminated widely, or in most cases at all. What I think is probably in this case is not that issue, but the rather clunky way this particular situation has been handled. I hope that everyone involved, myself included, will learn to handle such matters better in the future.
Sunday, November 20, 2005
On the Powers & Nature of the Assembly
The following was posted in the comments section by David Shiner in response to Mickey D. It seemed something that everyone would like to read.
Thanks, Michael. I didn't talk about process much in my post yesterday, so maybe it would be good to do more of that here.The role of the Assembly at Shimer has been changing incrimentally for several years now. I've had to do a lot of thinking about that, because I'm chairing a group of staff members who are responsible for the next accreditation self-study report. One portion of a paragraph in the working draft of our self-study (which won't be completed for another couple of months) is as follows: "The Assembly’s present business is primarily threefold: the election of members to Assembly committees that are responsible for work such as academic planning, administrative review, and budget recommendations; the hearing of annual or semiannual reports by administrators, especially the President and the Dean; and the discussion of the future of the Assembly, including proposed amendments to the Constitution. While these functions are important, they do not suggest a body with significant decision-making authority, or one that needs to meet all that regularly." One can be happy, sad, or indifferent to this trend, but for whatever it's worth, it seems to those of us on the committee that it's been going in this direction for several years now. Last year I served as Speaker of the Assembly (as I do again this year), and on several occasions I had to introduce (that is, invent) motions and discussion items just so we'd have a legitimate reason for the thrice-semesterly meetings that were called for in the Assembly Constitution. I tried to get Assembly members to introduce items thenmselves, but with little success.That's not to say that the Assembly is dying. For our first meeting in September there were something like 75 attendees, which was pretty incredible, possibly a record. All Assembly committees were filled without anyone's leg having to be twisted, which to my memory hadn't happened for a long time. The next meeting was also well attended. Weekend students, who hadn't been all that visible in Assembly for many years (if ever), have been turning out in impressive numbers for the past year or so. It's true, I think, that orientation toward the Assembly doesn't come naturally to Young or Bill. I don't think that's too surprising, since Bill comes from very different academic environments (which, of course, is almost all of them) and there was no Assembly when Young was a Shimer student. It's a learning process for them, and also for those of us who are more used to Shimer's current brand of self-governance. When I'm around either of them and the issue of the Assembly comes up, they treat it with respect. It's an evolving process. I don't know how it will play out concerning the IIT situation. I doubt that the Assembly will be treated as "a mere plebescite," and I'm trying to do what I can to help, but I wouldn't want to make any predictions at this point. As you mentioned in an earlier post, the strengthening of the Board that appears to be happening these days is probably a good thing, but it might affect the Assembly in ways that are hard to foresee.As far as the issue of when conversations with IIT began, your concerns have also been expressed by folks around here at times. From my perspective the issue isn't innacuracy, but a difference in what is being talked about. From what I understand, Bill and Young had very casual conversations with folks at IIT back in the spring. Those conversations were at first infrequent, but became more frequent and interesting as the summer wore on. By the time I was brought into the picture about 10 weeks ago, it looked like there might be reason for serious interest on both sides. So in one sense the conversations began in the spring, in another around September or even later. It depends on what level of seriousness you're talking about. College presidents frequently say things to each other like, "Maybe we should work together on X." It's part of the terrain. The Higher Learning Commission (our accrediting agency) encourages it, as to some extent does the Illinois State Board of Higher Education. Up to a certain point such conversations are too casual to take very seriously, let alone enlist others in (sorry about ending that sentence with a preposition).Look, here's an analogy. Nancy and I met in the summer of 1988, when she started working at Shimer. We were married in the summer of '93. We definitely were not an item for the first couple of years; we weren't dating in any romantic sense. Sometimes we went out together casually (I remember in particular a ballgame in Kenosha in the summer of '89), but lots of Shimer faculty members do that sort of thing. As time went on we saw each other more often, because we enjoyed each other's company. By January of 1993 we were engaged. Somewhere before that, obvously, we were getting serious, but I'm not exactly sure where the tipping point was. If you were to ask either of us, we might well give different answers. Each of us might even give different answers from ourselves at different times. It's not a matter of duplicity, just what we consider important or decisive.That analogy might seem silly, but I hope it brings out at least one aspect of present-day Shimer situation that could as easily be looked upon as benign as otherwise. We don't have any spinmeisters here; we don't have people trying to control who tells what to whom. People do write press releases, and some voices are necessarily more "official" than others, but no one is duty-bound to toe any sort of party line. No one tells me whether to post on a blog such as this, and I don't ask. So sometimes a "story" won't look particularly "straight." You can see that as deceptive or even duplicitous; I see it as one of the defects of our virtues, the virtue in this case being that Shimer people, even so-called "high-ranking administrators," say what they want without a party line, prior coaching, or fear of negative repercussions. That's pretty rare in higher education or, for that matter, anywhere else. But it has been, and continues to be, one of the great things about Shimer.Keep the comments coming. I'll check in daily, or at least as often as I can. Take care.
Original Post: Sun Nov 20, 09:12:27 AM CST
Thanks, Michael. I didn't talk about process much in my post yesterday, so maybe it would be good to do more of that here.The role of the Assembly at Shimer has been changing incrimentally for several years now. I've had to do a lot of thinking about that, because I'm chairing a group of staff members who are responsible for the next accreditation self-study report. One portion of a paragraph in the working draft of our self-study (which won't be completed for another couple of months) is as follows: "The Assembly’s present business is primarily threefold: the election of members to Assembly committees that are responsible for work such as academic planning, administrative review, and budget recommendations; the hearing of annual or semiannual reports by administrators, especially the President and the Dean; and the discussion of the future of the Assembly, including proposed amendments to the Constitution. While these functions are important, they do not suggest a body with significant decision-making authority, or one that needs to meet all that regularly." One can be happy, sad, or indifferent to this trend, but for whatever it's worth, it seems to those of us on the committee that it's been going in this direction for several years now. Last year I served as Speaker of the Assembly (as I do again this year), and on several occasions I had to introduce (that is, invent) motions and discussion items just so we'd have a legitimate reason for the thrice-semesterly meetings that were called for in the Assembly Constitution. I tried to get Assembly members to introduce items thenmselves, but with little success.That's not to say that the Assembly is dying. For our first meeting in September there were something like 75 attendees, which was pretty incredible, possibly a record. All Assembly committees were filled without anyone's leg having to be twisted, which to my memory hadn't happened for a long time. The next meeting was also well attended. Weekend students, who hadn't been all that visible in Assembly for many years (if ever), have been turning out in impressive numbers for the past year or so. It's true, I think, that orientation toward the Assembly doesn't come naturally to Young or Bill. I don't think that's too surprising, since Bill comes from very different academic environments (which, of course, is almost all of them) and there was no Assembly when Young was a Shimer student. It's a learning process for them, and also for those of us who are more used to Shimer's current brand of self-governance. When I'm around either of them and the issue of the Assembly comes up, they treat it with respect. It's an evolving process. I don't know how it will play out concerning the IIT situation. I doubt that the Assembly will be treated as "a mere plebescite," and I'm trying to do what I can to help, but I wouldn't want to make any predictions at this point. As you mentioned in an earlier post, the strengthening of the Board that appears to be happening these days is probably a good thing, but it might affect the Assembly in ways that are hard to foresee.As far as the issue of when conversations with IIT began, your concerns have also been expressed by folks around here at times. From my perspective the issue isn't innacuracy, but a difference in what is being talked about. From what I understand, Bill and Young had very casual conversations with folks at IIT back in the spring. Those conversations were at first infrequent, but became more frequent and interesting as the summer wore on. By the time I was brought into the picture about 10 weeks ago, it looked like there might be reason for serious interest on both sides. So in one sense the conversations began in the spring, in another around September or even later. It depends on what level of seriousness you're talking about. College presidents frequently say things to each other like, "Maybe we should work together on X." It's part of the terrain. The Higher Learning Commission (our accrediting agency) encourages it, as to some extent does the Illinois State Board of Higher Education. Up to a certain point such conversations are too casual to take very seriously, let alone enlist others in (sorry about ending that sentence with a preposition).Look, here's an analogy. Nancy and I met in the summer of 1988, when she started working at Shimer. We were married in the summer of '93. We definitely were not an item for the first couple of years; we weren't dating in any romantic sense. Sometimes we went out together casually (I remember in particular a ballgame in Kenosha in the summer of '89), but lots of Shimer faculty members do that sort of thing. As time went on we saw each other more often, because we enjoyed each other's company. By January of 1993 we were engaged. Somewhere before that, obvously, we were getting serious, but I'm not exactly sure where the tipping point was. If you were to ask either of us, we might well give different answers. Each of us might even give different answers from ourselves at different times. It's not a matter of duplicity, just what we consider important or decisive.That analogy might seem silly, but I hope it brings out at least one aspect of present-day Shimer situation that could as easily be looked upon as benign as otherwise. We don't have any spinmeisters here; we don't have people trying to control who tells what to whom. People do write press releases, and some voices are necessarily more "official" than others, but no one is duty-bound to toe any sort of party line. No one tells me whether to post on a blog such as this, and I don't ask. So sometimes a "story" won't look particularly "straight." You can see that as deceptive or even duplicitous; I see it as one of the defects of our virtues, the virtue in this case being that Shimer people, even so-called "high-ranking administrators," say what they want without a party line, prior coaching, or fear of negative repercussions. That's pretty rare in higher education or, for that matter, anywhere else. But it has been, and continues to be, one of the great things about Shimer.Keep the comments coming. I'll check in daily, or at least as often as I can. Take care.
Original Post: Sun Nov 20, 09:12:27 AM CST
Saturday, November 19, 2005
Curve Balls
What will the estimated market value of the land/property that the college owns be in 5 years from now at the current rate of growth?
If we factor in current real-estate trends and Lake County regentrification efforts what are the options?
What is the probable return on that land if developed and used to give Waukeganites a Community Center devoted to personal academic growth and supplemental tutoring program for college bound teens some of whom could be routed to Shimer?
What if we taught Shimer students to teach workshops on co-inquiry learning, study habits and research skills and gave them credit for student teaching?
What about a rental property for wayfaring intellectuals, entertainers and speakers visiting the Chicago Area or a hospice for developing artists?
What about reaching in instead of out?
I understand that Sarah Kimmel is part of a group that handles problems very similar to Shimer’s for groups very much like Shimer.
By the way, I did notice that Young Kim did not give the specifics of the proposed contract with IIT or explain its stealthy presentation and that he looked at the Assembly as an advisory committee.
Perhaps it was not the way he intended it but it did read as though he was belittling concerns and vilifying people who asked pointed questions.
I have had quite enough of people dismissing legitimate inquiries and facts provided that do not support the move as the bantering of nay sayers and the whining of laypeople. Also, attempts to calm the people who are concerned by assuring them that nothing is wrong, especially in this political climate, are probably ill pursued. Let's talk about the problems and how to solve them without putting all of the schools eggs in a basket and crawling to IIT. Right now Shimer is in control of its own fate. If you have been alive long enough you know that that counts for more than you think it does.
If we factor in current real-estate trends and Lake County regentrification efforts what are the options?
What is the probable return on that land if developed and used to give Waukeganites a Community Center devoted to personal academic growth and supplemental tutoring program for college bound teens some of whom could be routed to Shimer?
What if we taught Shimer students to teach workshops on co-inquiry learning, study habits and research skills and gave them credit for student teaching?
What about a rental property for wayfaring intellectuals, entertainers and speakers visiting the Chicago Area or a hospice for developing artists?
What about reaching in instead of out?
I understand that Sarah Kimmel is part of a group that handles problems very similar to Shimer’s for groups very much like Shimer.
By the way, I did notice that Young Kim did not give the specifics of the proposed contract with IIT or explain its stealthy presentation and that he looked at the Assembly as an advisory committee.
Perhaps it was not the way he intended it but it did read as though he was belittling concerns and vilifying people who asked pointed questions.
I have had quite enough of people dismissing legitimate inquiries and facts provided that do not support the move as the bantering of nay sayers and the whining of laypeople. Also, attempts to calm the people who are concerned by assuring them that nothing is wrong, especially in this political climate, are probably ill pursued. Let's talk about the problems and how to solve them without putting all of the schools eggs in a basket and crawling to IIT. Right now Shimer is in control of its own fate. If you have been alive long enough you know that that counts for more than you think it does.
On Chicago vs. Waukegan - or how not to discuss the move
Waukegan is a strange place (any disagreements here?).
However, the notion being tossed around that moving the College into downtown Chicago - and making it a small appendage of a professional school - may improve enrollment isn't based on much.
Waukegan and the College are within an affordable hour's ride of Chicago. Many liberal arts colleges are even further away from metropolitan fun than that. The Waukegan campus is - in my opinion - pretty nice (landscaping, historic buildings, etc.) and has improved through the hard labor of many over the years. My big complaint was that we didn't have enough books and our library was locked away in the basement of Waukegan Public (which has since changed, no?)
Waukegan itself is even nice. The lake, old houses on Sheridan, parks and whatnot, the diners. I was a bit nervous about being there my first year. But I also appreciated its remove, for the most part, and appreciated the opportunity to learn about Waukegan and find my niches there. (too bad Irene's is gone.)
My class schedule (at times including a 4-day weekend) allowed me to spend every other weekend in Chicago with friends and do all the exploring and getting-away I needed. A few days of city bustling then prepared me well to look forward to returning to the relatively more quiet - even quaint - surrounds of Waukegan and the campus.
From what I've heard, the IIT neighborhood is no great shakes either. Given this, and the benefits of the Waukegan campus noted above, exactly what are people thinking when they talk about students wanting to be there rather than Waukegan? How do you 'market' an industrial looking campus in a much more urbanized area, where - from what I've heard - students are instructed to not even leave the boundaries of the campus? How can this be better than Bob+Ann's and Prairie House?
Yours at the barricades,
John McGough
Class of '98
However, the notion being tossed around that moving the College into downtown Chicago - and making it a small appendage of a professional school - may improve enrollment isn't based on much.
Waukegan and the College are within an affordable hour's ride of Chicago. Many liberal arts colleges are even further away from metropolitan fun than that. The Waukegan campus is - in my opinion - pretty nice (landscaping, historic buildings, etc.) and has improved through the hard labor of many over the years. My big complaint was that we didn't have enough books and our library was locked away in the basement of Waukegan Public (which has since changed, no?)
Waukegan itself is even nice. The lake, old houses on Sheridan, parks and whatnot, the diners. I was a bit nervous about being there my first year. But I also appreciated its remove, for the most part, and appreciated the opportunity to learn about Waukegan and find my niches there. (too bad Irene's is gone.)
My class schedule (at times including a 4-day weekend) allowed me to spend every other weekend in Chicago with friends and do all the exploring and getting-away I needed. A few days of city bustling then prepared me well to look forward to returning to the relatively more quiet - even quaint - surrounds of Waukegan and the campus.
From what I've heard, the IIT neighborhood is no great shakes either. Given this, and the benefits of the Waukegan campus noted above, exactly what are people thinking when they talk about students wanting to be there rather than Waukegan? How do you 'market' an industrial looking campus in a much more urbanized area, where - from what I've heard - students are instructed to not even leave the boundaries of the campus? How can this be better than Bob+Ann's and Prairie House?
Yours at the barricades,
John McGough
Class of '98
View from the Front
Hi everybody, it's David Shiner (or Dave if you prefer; I've never been bothered one way or the other). Thanks to Sara for kindly helping me figure out how to post here.
I hope to use this space to try to clarify what's going on with the Shimer-IIT situation, in my view, and particuarly what the large-scale issues are. As I see it, there are three major issues, not all of which I'll have the time to address today:
1) Why is Shimer contemplating major action?
2) Given that Shimer has good reason for contemplating major action (and I think it does, as I'll explain below), why does this include the possibility of leaving (or at least mostly leaving) Waukegan?
3) Given that Shimer has good reason to contemplate leaving Waukegan, why this particular proposal?
I addressed #1 in my conversation with Katie and Sandy last week, and with others since. To recap and add to that, Shimer is in a tough spot. Although retention is up, enrollment is down. The enrollment of new students has declined for three straight years despite the fact that modest resources have been added to the Admissions office and budget during that time. We enrolled 19 new students this fall, the lowest number in something like 20 years. Donations are also down over the past few years. These trends are worrisome in and of themselves, because we've tried a lot of different appproaches without much success. If we had more money we could try more things, but we don't, and I frankly don't know how we're going to get it. As things stand, the Budget Commitee regularly projects more income from donations than we recieve, our best efforts to the contrary. That puts a strain on all of us.
Some people have proposed that sustainability rather than growth should be Shimer's goal. I'm sympathetic with that argument and in fact used to believe it myself, but now I can see that it won't work in the long run. We have regularly been told by our accrediting agency that we can't continue to operate with our current numbers of students. Our response has been that we'll try to increase our student body. We've tried for years, and we haven't been able to do that. Similarly, we've been awarded a number of grants in recent years. This has really helped financially, compensating for some of the things we haven't been able to accomplish (more students, donations, etc). However, granting agencies want to see quantifiable returns, such as more students, as the result of their "investments." We've promised those increases, and we haven't delivered. All this makes it less likely that we'll be awared future grants, which reduces another group of funding sources. Our accreditation is also a concern, for similar reasons - not this year or next year, but in the long run and perhaps sooner than that.
By the way, the downturns have almost nothing to do with the "new administration" that I can see. All of those declines were well under way before we hired professional administrators except for the Chief Financial Officer, who has nothing to do with any of them. The plans for growth were written into the 2001 accreditation self-study, chaired by Barbara Stone; the biggest grant we have received, Title III (U.S. government), was written by Don Moon and approved by the government agency more than two years ago. Board membership was almost entirely different 3-5 years ago than it is now, with only three or four holdovers.
This year 38 out of our 103 (fulltime equivalent) students will graduate. There will also be some attrition, as there always is. Unless an enrollment feat not seen since the 1970's occurs, enrollment next year (perhaps next semester) will be under 100 for first time since the early 1990's. So the situation is worrisome, and no one knows if and when it will improve.
There's no reason to be alarmist about any of this. Shimer has had its ups and downs over the past 150+ years. The recent trends might be a blip on the screen, or they might not. If they are, great. If not, we need to be prepared, and it's better to be prepared when you have a choice, as I believe we do now, than to wait too long and have no choice. I witnessed the latter when we left Mount Carroll 27 years ago, and it wasn't pretty.
To move on to the second point: When I first heard that Young Kim and Bill Rice were talking with IIT about moving most of Shimer to the IIT campus, I really disliked idea. As time has gone by, I've come to take a different attitude. It's not that I favor the move; I don't. I also don't oppose it. It's a tough decision. I haven't made up my mind yet, and I won't until more facts (or at least projections) are available.
But my current attitude has nothing to do with my personal views on whether the move is a good one. Simply put, as I now see it, before this idea came up Shimerians were thinking in a manner that was too restricted. We tried various things in Admissions and Development. When they didn't work, we tried something else. At worst, we got the Director out of the office and brought in someone else. Amateurs, professionals, this approach, that approach - we tried a lot of things. Not everything, obviously - we don't have the resources or expertise for that - but a lot of things.
What we never did, or did all too rarely, is take a step back and ask whether the problem wasn't bigger than we were conceiving of it. One effect of the IIT discussions, however they play out, is that we're doing that now. Maybe our campus is a major part of our problem, and maybe it isn't. We haven't decided that issue, and we probably never will, but at least we're thinking about it. Maybe Waukegan is part of the problem, or maybe not - same deal.
I say all this for a couple of reasons. First, it's true. Second, I know that some current students and recent alumni feel like we're being forced into a move by the Board, or Bill Rice, or the administration, or somebody. I can understand that; frankly, the dissemination of information around this whole matter has been, to put it delicately, less than ideal. But that's separate from the issue of whether this or any other move would be a good one for Shimer. As I say, I don't know the answer, but I'm glad we're finally asking the question.
It might be replied that we have asked this question before, in the Roosevelt negotiations 15 years ago. But that situation was a lot different. At that time we had been unaccredited for 10 years, and Don believed that only a merger (not a lease agreement) could save Shimer, because we had no realistic chance of getting accredited. Not getting accredited would mean no federal financial aid for students, which would obviously mean the end of Shimer. So we voted to become a college of Roosevelt, believing there was no other alternative but closing the school - in other words, basically the same deal as when we moved from Mount Carroll. It didn't work out, but we somewhat miraculously received a major grant, and the rest is history. My point here, though, is that we want to ask the big questions when we don't feel the situation is hopeless, when the possibility of choice still exists.
I've got to run, so that's it for now. I'll reply to any responses to this post, which I know is seriously incomplete, when I can make time for it. I'll also keep reading with interest, and I hope many alumni can make it to the meeting with Don Moon and Bill Rice in Prairie Lounge next Sunday (4 PM, if you hadn't heard).
I'll close with this thought. A few folks who don't like the possibility of the IIT move have told me, "This really sucks." What really sucks, in my view, is that Shimer still finds itself in this position: that we're always having to scramble for our very existence, that things never seem to get better, at least not for very long. I know that all the postings on this and other sites, different though they might be, come from a common perspective, which is that those writing them care enough about Shimer to weigh in on this, express concern, and see how other Shimerians are thinking and feeling. That's great, and I take heart from it. I just wish we could figure out how to translate all that energy into a more viable future for Shimer.
Thanks for listening, and caring.
David
I hope to use this space to try to clarify what's going on with the Shimer-IIT situation, in my view, and particuarly what the large-scale issues are. As I see it, there are three major issues, not all of which I'll have the time to address today:
1) Why is Shimer contemplating major action?
2) Given that Shimer has good reason for contemplating major action (and I think it does, as I'll explain below), why does this include the possibility of leaving (or at least mostly leaving) Waukegan?
3) Given that Shimer has good reason to contemplate leaving Waukegan, why this particular proposal?
I addressed #1 in my conversation with Katie and Sandy last week, and with others since. To recap and add to that, Shimer is in a tough spot. Although retention is up, enrollment is down. The enrollment of new students has declined for three straight years despite the fact that modest resources have been added to the Admissions office and budget during that time. We enrolled 19 new students this fall, the lowest number in something like 20 years. Donations are also down over the past few years. These trends are worrisome in and of themselves, because we've tried a lot of different appproaches without much success. If we had more money we could try more things, but we don't, and I frankly don't know how we're going to get it. As things stand, the Budget Commitee regularly projects more income from donations than we recieve, our best efforts to the contrary. That puts a strain on all of us.
Some people have proposed that sustainability rather than growth should be Shimer's goal. I'm sympathetic with that argument and in fact used to believe it myself, but now I can see that it won't work in the long run. We have regularly been told by our accrediting agency that we can't continue to operate with our current numbers of students. Our response has been that we'll try to increase our student body. We've tried for years, and we haven't been able to do that. Similarly, we've been awarded a number of grants in recent years. This has really helped financially, compensating for some of the things we haven't been able to accomplish (more students, donations, etc). However, granting agencies want to see quantifiable returns, such as more students, as the result of their "investments." We've promised those increases, and we haven't delivered. All this makes it less likely that we'll be awared future grants, which reduces another group of funding sources. Our accreditation is also a concern, for similar reasons - not this year or next year, but in the long run and perhaps sooner than that.
By the way, the downturns have almost nothing to do with the "new administration" that I can see. All of those declines were well under way before we hired professional administrators except for the Chief Financial Officer, who has nothing to do with any of them. The plans for growth were written into the 2001 accreditation self-study, chaired by Barbara Stone; the biggest grant we have received, Title III (U.S. government), was written by Don Moon and approved by the government agency more than two years ago. Board membership was almost entirely different 3-5 years ago than it is now, with only three or four holdovers.
This year 38 out of our 103 (fulltime equivalent) students will graduate. There will also be some attrition, as there always is. Unless an enrollment feat not seen since the 1970's occurs, enrollment next year (perhaps next semester) will be under 100 for first time since the early 1990's. So the situation is worrisome, and no one knows if and when it will improve.
There's no reason to be alarmist about any of this. Shimer has had its ups and downs over the past 150+ years. The recent trends might be a blip on the screen, or they might not. If they are, great. If not, we need to be prepared, and it's better to be prepared when you have a choice, as I believe we do now, than to wait too long and have no choice. I witnessed the latter when we left Mount Carroll 27 years ago, and it wasn't pretty.
To move on to the second point: When I first heard that Young Kim and Bill Rice were talking with IIT about moving most of Shimer to the IIT campus, I really disliked idea. As time has gone by, I've come to take a different attitude. It's not that I favor the move; I don't. I also don't oppose it. It's a tough decision. I haven't made up my mind yet, and I won't until more facts (or at least projections) are available.
But my current attitude has nothing to do with my personal views on whether the move is a good one. Simply put, as I now see it, before this idea came up Shimerians were thinking in a manner that was too restricted. We tried various things in Admissions and Development. When they didn't work, we tried something else. At worst, we got the Director out of the office and brought in someone else. Amateurs, professionals, this approach, that approach - we tried a lot of things. Not everything, obviously - we don't have the resources or expertise for that - but a lot of things.
What we never did, or did all too rarely, is take a step back and ask whether the problem wasn't bigger than we were conceiving of it. One effect of the IIT discussions, however they play out, is that we're doing that now. Maybe our campus is a major part of our problem, and maybe it isn't. We haven't decided that issue, and we probably never will, but at least we're thinking about it. Maybe Waukegan is part of the problem, or maybe not - same deal.
I say all this for a couple of reasons. First, it's true. Second, I know that some current students and recent alumni feel like we're being forced into a move by the Board, or Bill Rice, or the administration, or somebody. I can understand that; frankly, the dissemination of information around this whole matter has been, to put it delicately, less than ideal. But that's separate from the issue of whether this or any other move would be a good one for Shimer. As I say, I don't know the answer, but I'm glad we're finally asking the question.
It might be replied that we have asked this question before, in the Roosevelt negotiations 15 years ago. But that situation was a lot different. At that time we had been unaccredited for 10 years, and Don believed that only a merger (not a lease agreement) could save Shimer, because we had no realistic chance of getting accredited. Not getting accredited would mean no federal financial aid for students, which would obviously mean the end of Shimer. So we voted to become a college of Roosevelt, believing there was no other alternative but closing the school - in other words, basically the same deal as when we moved from Mount Carroll. It didn't work out, but we somewhat miraculously received a major grant, and the rest is history. My point here, though, is that we want to ask the big questions when we don't feel the situation is hopeless, when the possibility of choice still exists.
I've got to run, so that's it for now. I'll reply to any responses to this post, which I know is seriously incomplete, when I can make time for it. I'll also keep reading with interest, and I hope many alumni can make it to the meeting with Don Moon and Bill Rice in Prairie Lounge next Sunday (4 PM, if you hadn't heard).
I'll close with this thought. A few folks who don't like the possibility of the IIT move have told me, "This really sucks." What really sucks, in my view, is that Shimer still finds itself in this position: that we're always having to scramble for our very existence, that things never seem to get better, at least not for very long. I know that all the postings on this and other sites, different though they might be, come from a common perspective, which is that those writing them care enough about Shimer to weigh in on this, express concern, and see how other Shimerians are thinking and feeling. That's great, and I take heart from it. I just wish we could figure out how to translate all that energy into a more viable future for Shimer.
Thanks for listening, and caring.
David
Friday, November 18, 2005
Posting on the Top Level of the Blog Rather then Comments
Hello All,
Here are some slightly more explicit directions for how to post on the top end of the blog.
First you need a blogger account. These are free, you can sign up for one by going to http://www.blogger.com and clicking the links for signing up. After you sign up you want to join the http://www.shimercollege.blogspot.com blog. To do this send an email to me saradevil@gmail.com or bill bill@billbrickey.com and we will send you a membership invitation. Numerous invites were sent out, but they may have gotten lost or ended up in bulk mail folders. If you did not get an invitation and want one let one or the other know.
Follow the directions in your invitation to join the blog. Once you have joined you can login again at blogger.com to be taken to the blogger dashboard. From the dashboard click the link that says Future of Shimer College where you will see the title in the upper left corner, and directly beneath a tab that says POST. Click on this tab and you should see a large open text field where you can past text (usually better to write in a word processor first) under the title field. This looks like a screen you might see when composing an email. Add a subject, paste your text and you are ready to publish.
Click the giant orange button under the text field that says Publish Post and you should be ready to go.
If you have any further problems please feel free to contact Bill or myself and we will do our best to help you through it.
Cheers,
Saradevil
Here are some slightly more explicit directions for how to post on the top end of the blog.
First you need a blogger account. These are free, you can sign up for one by going to http://www.blogger.com and clicking the links for signing up. After you sign up you want to join the http://www.shimercollege.blogspot.com blog. To do this send an email to me saradevil@gmail.com or bill bill@billbrickey.com and we will send you a membership invitation. Numerous invites were sent out, but they may have gotten lost or ended up in bulk mail folders. If you did not get an invitation and want one let one or the other know.
Follow the directions in your invitation to join the blog. Once you have joined you can login again at blogger.com to be taken to the blogger dashboard. From the dashboard click the link that says Future of Shimer College where you will see the title in the upper left corner, and directly beneath a tab that says POST. Click on this tab and you should see a large open text field where you can past text (usually better to write in a word processor first) under the title field. This looks like a screen you might see when composing an email. Add a subject, paste your text and you are ready to publish.
Click the giant orange button under the text field that says Publish Post and you should be ready to go.
If you have any further problems please feel free to contact Bill or myself and we will do our best to help you through it.
Cheers,
Saradevil
Regarding The Marketing of Shimer
I spoke to my father, who is a 30+ year veteran of the advertising industry, about marketing Shimer and about the IIT move. He does not specialize in advertising campaigns for colleges, but he did do a campaign for Creighton University, which is a very different place than Shimer (what isn't?) but shares some of the same strengths and drawbacks -- good academics, little reputation in the general population, arguably dreary location. When he had finished working with them, their enrollment jumped way up.
Some highlights:
* His initial reaction to a possible IIT move: "Has a lot of potential. If the numbers work out, a location in Chicago could be a huge plus for attracting students. Very few people know where Waukegan is, and those who do usually don't want to move there."
* The Creighton campaign ended up costing them around $20,000. He reckons that a similar expenditure could yield dramatically improved enrollment results for Shimer.
* The biggest problem with advertising Shimer is that Shimer students are very self-selecting and hard to pigenhole. There's no one magazine, TV show, etc., that you can buy advertising on and reach a large number of potential Shimer students.
* Selling the school is not a lost cause. Chicago has some virtues as a location that Waukegan does not, but there's always room to improve the website, collateral materials, etc., regardless of where the school ends up.
Some highlights:
* His initial reaction to a possible IIT move: "Has a lot of potential. If the numbers work out, a location in Chicago could be a huge plus for attracting students. Very few people know where Waukegan is, and those who do usually don't want to move there."
* The Creighton campaign ended up costing them around $20,000. He reckons that a similar expenditure could yield dramatically improved enrollment results for Shimer.
* The biggest problem with advertising Shimer is that Shimer students are very self-selecting and hard to pigenhole. There's no one magazine, TV show, etc., that you can buy advertising on and reach a large number of potential Shimer students.
* Selling the school is not a lost cause. Chicago has some virtues as a location that Waukegan does not, but there's always room to improve the website, collateral materials, etc., regardless of where the school ends up.
email from young kim via janice scarbalis
Ladies and gentlemen,
I am addressing this message to the Shimer community, generally, in an
attempt to clear up some misconceptions that have developed with regard to
the current discussions about a possible move of some of the College’s
operations to IIT’s main campus in Chicago, to report to you on the status
of the discussions between the two institutions and to outline the process
by which members of our Shimer community will be able to consider and be
heard on the possible move and its various aspects.
First, I should mention that I am writing you, instead of having anyone else
involved in the IIT discussions write you, because I understand that I am
becoming or have become, the target of some disgruntlement about the
possible move, including comments challenging the efficacy of such a move,
as well as comments having to do with enfranchisement issues, and the power
of the Board of Trustees vis-Ã -vis that of the Assembly. I believe in a
direct approach to many matters in life, so I thought it best that I, as
supposedly a main culprit in this drama, address you directly.
For me personally, I have not come to any conclusions about the efficacy of
a possible move to IIT. I do not yet have enough information to do so. I can
tell you, however, as one working in the trenches on this matter, that so
far, the discussions with IIT have been promising and worthy of our
consideration. I understand the unfortunate tendency of some people to
personalize issues, and to vilify those who disagree with them or who they
perceive as doing them a wrong. I can only hope that we are better than
that, as we discuss these serious and dramatic issues. We, who have been
trained in a discussion methodology and in working with others to analyze,
consider and resolve issues, should treat each other with respect in those
discussions, understanding that our discussions about this matter are guided
by what each of us thinks is in the best interests of the College.
Additionally, I must report to you that some comments I have heard about the
possible move contain such crafted distortions and inaccuracies, that I am
obliged to believe that they are purposeful misstatements, made in order to
make a case. This is also unworthy of us.
Let me turn to the matter of “the best interests of the College”, and who
should decide what they are, at least in this context. The short answer is
that we, the whole Shimer community, should be involved in the decision
about a possible move to IIT. I say this not only because I believe that
this is the right thing to do, but also, in recognition of the democratic
and participatory culture of the College, not only in its Waukegan years,
but also to an extent in its Mt. Carroll years. The long answer is more
Shakespearean, in the sense that in life, we all have various roles that we
play, given the circumstances. In the matter of the deciding upon what is in
the best interests of the College, at least with regard to major decisions,
long range strategic matters and issues affecting the mission of the
College, that is particularly the Board of Trustees’ charge and
responsibility, their fiduciary responsibility.
That is not to say that the Board should not actively solicit and listen to
input from various segments of the Shimer community, including staff
(faculty and administration), students, alum and friends of the College.
And, that is what the Board has been trying to do this past month. We have
apprised the various segments of the Shimer community about the discussions
with IIT about a possible move, that a mix of Board members and staff are
working with colleagues at IIT to shape what the meaning and effect of such
a move would be in various areas (facilities, academic affairs, library, IT,
student life, admissions, development and financial), and once the effects
on those various areas are further analyzed, developed and synthesized into
a proposal, that proposal, as well as the underlying assumptions for the
proposal, will be further discussed within the Shimer community. To date,
many of you have contributed by raising questions and concerns, and for this
we are thankful. The Board’s desire in this process is not only to be sure
that we have covered all the bases, but also, to be inclusive as to how we
come to decisions about the matter. The Assembly’s role in this process, is
to consider the possible move and develop recommendations to the Board.
Now, with regard to the discussions between Shimer and IIT, as I mentioned,
a mix of Shimer Board members and staff are engaged in discussions with
their respective counterparts at IIT, with a view to developing the meaning
and effect of a possible move on their respective areas by the end of this
month. We should also receive by the end of this month, what IIT has termed
an economic/services proposal regarding the possible move. These materials
will be sent to the executive committee of the Board of Trustees, together
with our internal analysis, financial projections and modeling. The
executive committee will have comments, questions and instructions. Taking
those various comments in hand, we will also bring the proposal back to the
various segments of the Shimer community, for their further consideration
and views. I anticipate that as a result of these further internal
discussions including those at the Assembly, we will engage in further
refinement (negotiations) with IIT with regard to the proposal, culminating
in a consideration and decision by the full Board with regard to the final
proposal in mid-January.
There has been some pique expressed over the seeming abruptness in which the
IIT discussions have been brought to the attention of the Shimer community,
as well as the relatively short timeline for decision-making about a
possible move. The timeline is what it is, and not completely within our
control. To the extent that we decide not to make a decision within the time
frame, and we may do so if we choose, that may very well serve as a
decision. As to when this matter has been brought to the attention of
different segments of the Shimer community, let me say that the initial
inquiry from IIT arose last spring, and more people became involved as the
discussions gathered form and seriousness. The judgment call of when this
matter had matured sufficiently to be brought to the attention of different
people and segments of the Shimer community for their consideration, with
its inherently powerful disruptive effects, has largely been mine. Thank you
again, for the thoughtful questions and concerns that many of you have
raised, and I look forward to our further discussions about this matter.
Young Kim
Chair, Board of Trustees
Shimer College
I am addressing this message to the Shimer community, generally, in an
attempt to clear up some misconceptions that have developed with regard to
the current discussions about a possible move of some of the College’s
operations to IIT’s main campus in Chicago, to report to you on the status
of the discussions between the two institutions and to outline the process
by which members of our Shimer community will be able to consider and be
heard on the possible move and its various aspects.
First, I should mention that I am writing you, instead of having anyone else
involved in the IIT discussions write you, because I understand that I am
becoming or have become, the target of some disgruntlement about the
possible move, including comments challenging the efficacy of such a move,
as well as comments having to do with enfranchisement issues, and the power
of the Board of Trustees vis-Ã -vis that of the Assembly. I believe in a
direct approach to many matters in life, so I thought it best that I, as
supposedly a main culprit in this drama, address you directly.
For me personally, I have not come to any conclusions about the efficacy of
a possible move to IIT. I do not yet have enough information to do so. I can
tell you, however, as one working in the trenches on this matter, that so
far, the discussions with IIT have been promising and worthy of our
consideration. I understand the unfortunate tendency of some people to
personalize issues, and to vilify those who disagree with them or who they
perceive as doing them a wrong. I can only hope that we are better than
that, as we discuss these serious and dramatic issues. We, who have been
trained in a discussion methodology and in working with others to analyze,
consider and resolve issues, should treat each other with respect in those
discussions, understanding that our discussions about this matter are guided
by what each of us thinks is in the best interests of the College.
Additionally, I must report to you that some comments I have heard about the
possible move contain such crafted distortions and inaccuracies, that I am
obliged to believe that they are purposeful misstatements, made in order to
make a case. This is also unworthy of us.
Let me turn to the matter of “the best interests of the College”, and who
should decide what they are, at least in this context. The short answer is
that we, the whole Shimer community, should be involved in the decision
about a possible move to IIT. I say this not only because I believe that
this is the right thing to do, but also, in recognition of the democratic
and participatory culture of the College, not only in its Waukegan years,
but also to an extent in its Mt. Carroll years. The long answer is more
Shakespearean, in the sense that in life, we all have various roles that we
play, given the circumstances. In the matter of the deciding upon what is in
the best interests of the College, at least with regard to major decisions,
long range strategic matters and issues affecting the mission of the
College, that is particularly the Board of Trustees’ charge and
responsibility, their fiduciary responsibility.
That is not to say that the Board should not actively solicit and listen to
input from various segments of the Shimer community, including staff
(faculty and administration), students, alum and friends of the College.
And, that is what the Board has been trying to do this past month. We have
apprised the various segments of the Shimer community about the discussions
with IIT about a possible move, that a mix of Board members and staff are
working with colleagues at IIT to shape what the meaning and effect of such
a move would be in various areas (facilities, academic affairs, library, IT,
student life, admissions, development and financial), and once the effects
on those various areas are further analyzed, developed and synthesized into
a proposal, that proposal, as well as the underlying assumptions for the
proposal, will be further discussed within the Shimer community. To date,
many of you have contributed by raising questions and concerns, and for this
we are thankful. The Board’s desire in this process is not only to be sure
that we have covered all the bases, but also, to be inclusive as to how we
come to decisions about the matter. The Assembly’s role in this process, is
to consider the possible move and develop recommendations to the Board.
Now, with regard to the discussions between Shimer and IIT, as I mentioned,
a mix of Shimer Board members and staff are engaged in discussions with
their respective counterparts at IIT, with a view to developing the meaning
and effect of a possible move on their respective areas by the end of this
month. We should also receive by the end of this month, what IIT has termed
an economic/services proposal regarding the possible move. These materials
will be sent to the executive committee of the Board of Trustees, together
with our internal analysis, financial projections and modeling. The
executive committee will have comments, questions and instructions. Taking
those various comments in hand, we will also bring the proposal back to the
various segments of the Shimer community, for their further consideration
and views. I anticipate that as a result of these further internal
discussions including those at the Assembly, we will engage in further
refinement (negotiations) with IIT with regard to the proposal, culminating
in a consideration and decision by the full Board with regard to the final
proposal in mid-January.
There has been some pique expressed over the seeming abruptness in which the
IIT discussions have been brought to the attention of the Shimer community,
as well as the relatively short timeline for decision-making about a
possible move. The timeline is what it is, and not completely within our
control. To the extent that we decide not to make a decision within the time
frame, and we may do so if we choose, that may very well serve as a
decision. As to when this matter has been brought to the attention of
different segments of the Shimer community, let me say that the initial
inquiry from IIT arose last spring, and more people became involved as the
discussions gathered form and seriousness. The judgment call of when this
matter had matured sufficiently to be brought to the attention of different
people and segments of the Shimer community for their consideration, with
its inherently powerful disruptive effects, has largely been mine. Thank you
again, for the thoughtful questions and concerns that many of you have
raised, and I look forward to our further discussions about this matter.
Young Kim
Chair, Board of Trustees
Shimer College
Wednesday, November 16, 2005
An Email that was sent to Shimer Cosmos
Dear Community,Here are a few resources for discussion regarding the potential move to IIT aswell as other Shimer related topics. These are open discussion boards and blogsavailable to all who are interested.
Shimer livejournal:http://www.livejournal.com/community/shimer_college_/- This is a message board run by current students. You do not have to be amember of the site to post.
The Future of Shimer College:http://shimercollege.blogspot.com/- Run by alums, and predominately aimed at informing alums and giving them aplace to voice concerns. Students and other Shimerians welcome. I do not thinkyou have to register with the site to contribute.
ShimerHengehttp://shimerhenge.com/shimer/viewforum.php?f=1- Have not participated in this site, and do not know who is running it. Thesite does not have a particular focus on Shimer's current issues, but couldprove helpful nonetheless.
Hope that these prove useful,Alayna
Shimer livejournal:http://www.livejournal.com/community/shimer_college_/- This is a message board run by current students. You do not have to be amember of the site to post.
The Future of Shimer College:http://shimercollege.blogspot.com/- Run by alums, and predominately aimed at informing alums and giving them aplace to voice concerns. Students and other Shimerians welcome. I do not thinkyou have to register with the site to contribute.
ShimerHengehttp://shimerhenge.com/shimer/viewforum.php?f=1- Have not participated in this site, and do not know who is running it. Thesite does not have a particular focus on Shimer's current issues, but couldprove helpful nonetheless.
Hope that these prove useful,Alayna
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
Response to Bill
My name is Sandy Kaczocha, class of 2000. I like the rehab style opening, helps me understanding who's involved in the discourse.
I want to respond to a few of the points in both Bill and PJ's postings. The first thing I'd like to address is the real side of Waukegan. Bill wants us to ensure that we don't overlook the darker side of neighborhoods that are in the midst of regentrification. I'd like us to make sure that we don't also overlook the reality of Waukegan. My family relocated to Waukegan in 1979 when Shimer moved. I grew up in the Waukegan schools. I know many many students who were lost to stray bullets or the jail system. I was an early entrant not only because I was seeking to get away from the things we all thought lacking in High School. I was an early entrant because I no longer wanted to watch my fellow students get thrown out of third story windows or knifed in the counselor's office.
The real story is that Shimer is in one of the better parts of Waukegan and is very much encapsulated. The fact that people with an income and higher education are moving into the neighborhoods surrounding IIT is indeed a good sign. People investing their time and money into neighborhoods almost inevitably means a reduction in crime. Look at the crime stats for the area around Cabrini Green. I see no such growth happening in Waukegan. I know the city has plans, but the start of Waukegan's plan requires those same steps taken years ago to begin the regentrification in Pilsen, Bronzeville and Bridgeport.
I'd also like to make a point about Corporate America. I work for a credit card company, surely the epitome of Corporate America. What I've found is an increasing hunger for critical thinking abilities. I've read numerous articles in various magazines about the corporate world's increased recruitement and hiring of liberal arts majors. In fact, my mother finally finished her degree at Shimer last year. She did her thesis on the value of a liberal arts education in Corporate America. I helped her complete her research and there was plenty of evidence showing that the types of skills Shimer helps us develop and hone are the same types of skills that Corporate America wants in employees. All the theses are on the school's website, so check it out if you'd like more concete detail.
I don't believe that schools like IIT are actively seeking to crank out androids who can only do what they are told. All institutions want employees who can analyze a situation, dialogue with coworkers and create a sense of cohesion among disparate entities. This isn't something unique to liberal or non-corporate professions.
I'm currently attending graudate school online working towards my Masters in Computer Information Sciences. I'm attending a school that is very much all about the profit, but much of my experience has been very similar to my experience at Shimer. My classes are discussion based. I do have to read from text books, but the experience of taking the text and moving down a path of understanding through dialogue is virtually identical to what we all had when we were sitting around the octagonal tables.
I have been encouraged by my graduate studies. I've realized that the Shimer model is not only valuable in my eyes, but is something that other institutions both corporate and educational are seeking to emulate at least in part. I have been so encouraged that I was thinking that Shimer could potentially benefit by creating a program, maybe along the lines of Integrated Studies 1 or 2 geared towards professionals. I can't tell you how many courses and seminars are being offered around the world aimed at enhancing the critical thinking, speaking and writing skills of professionals. There are even more courses out there on how to facilitate and participate in discussions or how to work to create project group cohesion.
These are absolutely the kind of skills that institutions like IIT are looking to instill in their students. These are absolutely skills that the coporate world is hoping have already been instilled in employees. I don't think that places like IIT and Shimer are diametrically opposed.
One last point, I live in the northern burbs. The DePaul/Barat deal was most definitely talked about as a merger or acquisition. Everyone knew that Barat had reached a critical situation and was incapable of keeping their doors open by themselves. Depaul acquired Barat with dreams of financial benefit. The rapidity with which the decision about the move to IIT has to be made denotes to me that the agreement is indeed a financial one for IIT. Meaning, they have space to rent and want to get it rented. Surely everyone with eyes knows that there is no other financial benefit to partnering with Shimer right now.
I want to respond to a few of the points in both Bill and PJ's postings. The first thing I'd like to address is the real side of Waukegan. Bill wants us to ensure that we don't overlook the darker side of neighborhoods that are in the midst of regentrification. I'd like us to make sure that we don't also overlook the reality of Waukegan. My family relocated to Waukegan in 1979 when Shimer moved. I grew up in the Waukegan schools. I know many many students who were lost to stray bullets or the jail system. I was an early entrant not only because I was seeking to get away from the things we all thought lacking in High School. I was an early entrant because I no longer wanted to watch my fellow students get thrown out of third story windows or knifed in the counselor's office.
The real story is that Shimer is in one of the better parts of Waukegan and is very much encapsulated. The fact that people with an income and higher education are moving into the neighborhoods surrounding IIT is indeed a good sign. People investing their time and money into neighborhoods almost inevitably means a reduction in crime. Look at the crime stats for the area around Cabrini Green. I see no such growth happening in Waukegan. I know the city has plans, but the start of Waukegan's plan requires those same steps taken years ago to begin the regentrification in Pilsen, Bronzeville and Bridgeport.
I'd also like to make a point about Corporate America. I work for a credit card company, surely the epitome of Corporate America. What I've found is an increasing hunger for critical thinking abilities. I've read numerous articles in various magazines about the corporate world's increased recruitement and hiring of liberal arts majors. In fact, my mother finally finished her degree at Shimer last year. She did her thesis on the value of a liberal arts education in Corporate America. I helped her complete her research and there was plenty of evidence showing that the types of skills Shimer helps us develop and hone are the same types of skills that Corporate America wants in employees. All the theses are on the school's website, so check it out if you'd like more concete detail.
I don't believe that schools like IIT are actively seeking to crank out androids who can only do what they are told. All institutions want employees who can analyze a situation, dialogue with coworkers and create a sense of cohesion among disparate entities. This isn't something unique to liberal or non-corporate professions.
I'm currently attending graudate school online working towards my Masters in Computer Information Sciences. I'm attending a school that is very much all about the profit, but much of my experience has been very similar to my experience at Shimer. My classes are discussion based. I do have to read from text books, but the experience of taking the text and moving down a path of understanding through dialogue is virtually identical to what we all had when we were sitting around the octagonal tables.
I have been encouraged by my graduate studies. I've realized that the Shimer model is not only valuable in my eyes, but is something that other institutions both corporate and educational are seeking to emulate at least in part. I have been so encouraged that I was thinking that Shimer could potentially benefit by creating a program, maybe along the lines of Integrated Studies 1 or 2 geared towards professionals. I can't tell you how many courses and seminars are being offered around the world aimed at enhancing the critical thinking, speaking and writing skills of professionals. There are even more courses out there on how to facilitate and participate in discussions or how to work to create project group cohesion.
These are absolutely the kind of skills that institutions like IIT are looking to instill in their students. These are absolutely skills that the coporate world is hoping have already been instilled in employees. I don't think that places like IIT and Shimer are diametrically opposed.
One last point, I live in the northern burbs. The DePaul/Barat deal was most definitely talked about as a merger or acquisition. Everyone knew that Barat had reached a critical situation and was incapable of keeping their doors open by themselves. Depaul acquired Barat with dreams of financial benefit. The rapidity with which the decision about the move to IIT has to be made denotes to me that the agreement is indeed a financial one for IIT. Meaning, they have space to rent and want to get it rented. Surely everyone with eyes knows that there is no other financial benefit to partnering with Shimer right now.
Double Edged Razor
My name is Bill Brickey. I graduated from Shimer College in 1989.
Occam's Razor
"Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate" or "plurality should not be posited without necessity." ( click on the words above to read about the Razor for yourself )
PJ, I think you have things the wrong way around.
Also, spelled Okham’s Razor; it is a Medieval Theory. Without going too far into mentioning how this type of “old saw” is twisted by people like George Bush to whip people into mindlessness let me just point out that this little rule of logic is prepositioned by the words “without necessity”. This dialogue is necessary because the move does not seem to be necessary.
Perhaps some of you have missed the NCLB years of public schooling in Chicago. I have not. I am teaching in the public schools near the beautiful Pilsen area. I know multiple students who have lost loved ones to stray and intended bullets in the soon to be regentrified area. No freshmen year Shimer type college student needs to be walking around Pilsen, Bridgeport or any other part of southwest Chicago casually at night. That is a reality. It is a simple truth. Don’t try to complicate it with rhetoric about regentrification and art hippies moving into the neighborhood. The art hippies are moving into condominiums or homes with security doors, locks and/or guards or better yet they know the hood. They are protecting themselves against the displaced, the unhappy and the uneducated. Gated neighborhoods are not uncommon.
There is a concerted effort in this country to “dumb down” education for the common folk in order to create a more affordable working class. If you are a degreed Shimerian working in corporate America you see it everyday. The story of America’s success is the story of cheap labor. This is the impetus behind schools like IIT. They want to produce workers. People who stand up for their rights in the work place slow down the wheels of production. This is why I don’t think we should be associated with IIT.
IIT is what it is and it serves a purpose. Shimer serves a purpose as well. They are fewer and fewer schools that do what Shimer does. The educational paradigm is shifting for the worst. Each day it moves closer and closer to the Western World Business Management Paradigm. The paradigm is a pyramid. The leader sits at the top and the orders are passed down hill. It is the way that businesses are run and it is the way that sports teams are lead. For my feminist friends this is also known as the male power archetype. This is in sharp contrast to Shimer’s power archetype which is more feminist or flat decisions and activities are taken on together.
The way this decision is being made is more in the spirit of a school like IIT. We Shimerians are actively involved in our communities. Anyone who expected to move the school by walking into a room and saying, “This is what we are going to do, now do it.”, is, kindly put, sadly mistaken. I did not vote for George Bush and I am not part of his America any more than I have to be. I am going to ask the hard questions and I am going to expect cogent answers. If I do not receive intelligent responses I will be suspicious. This, I would think is to be expected of all Shimerians. We ask questions, we ask a lot of questions and we expect answers.
I ask the questions about Shimer because I am weird. I am not perfect. I don’t fit easily into the top down management structure. If it were not for Shimer, I would not know the difference between being lazy and having a learning disability. Shimer fits a niche. Pursuing a relationship to have a financial profile like all the other big institutions takes us out of that niche. That’s right I said us. Despite the love hate thing I know who I am, and I am a Shimerian. When something happens in that community that calls me I will respond. I am worried about all the other “unique” people that will come after me. Where will they go if the only thing that is left is IIT and DePaul University?
In response to some recent posts: Many of the arguments in favor of the move have three major components in common:
1.) The arguments acknowledge a lack of data to support the argument in favor of the move.
2.) The arguments dismiss the lack of data or logic as part of the complexity of business; beyond the understanding of laypeople.
3.) The arguments suggest that in spite of these curiosities and concerns the move is a good thing because it will bring Shimer in line with other colleges and universities.
In the “..Thoughts from left field...” post he says: “Unless you're willing to ascribe extreme bad faith to the Shimer administration when they say that Shimer will remain financially and administratively independent…” seems to imply that arguments against moving are arguments against the administrative bodies at Shimer College. This is a brilliant way to quash intelligent dialogue.
Please do not insult the integrity of this blog and its patrons by trying to create friction that does not exist anymore than it always has. Asking questions about things that will impact you or something you care about greatly is not a sign of animosity or bad faith. It is healthy adult behavior and good citizenship. The comments posted here contain legitimate questions. These are the legitimate arguments and thoughts of concerned alumni and students (and now teachers and board members). I guard carefully against disparaging comments and demonizing.
Furthermore:
(1) The articles posted here, in regard to Barat College, were from legitimate sources located on the internet in the public domain. They were not solicited. Barat was required or expected to produce 800 enrollments per year and failed. That factoid came from the office DePaul has set up to field questions about the Barat closure. As a result they were closed down after 4-5 years. It would be good to know ahead of time if there is such a stipulation in the contract with IIT. In which case the move would definitely not be a good move; unless, one feels, that by moving to the IIT campus, Shimer College will increase its enrollment goal over 800% within 5 years of its move. The point of posting the article was not to demonize the move but to give a framework to understand the possibilities and parameters of moving a College or University for those of us not currently moving Colleges or Universities. Unless someone is willing to post the details that show that this is not an issue, it is not a cogent argument to suggest that examining the similarities is equal to bad faith in the administration. There are those of us who believe that our education at Shimer taught us to ask questions and not to trust blindly. Following this charter should not put us in opposition to any part of the Shimer College Family. It should make them proud of us. We want to know what is going on.
Occam's Razor
"Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate" or "plurality should not be posited without necessity." ( click on the words above to read about the Razor for yourself )
PJ, I think you have things the wrong way around.
Also, spelled Okham’s Razor; it is a Medieval Theory. Without going too far into mentioning how this type of “old saw” is twisted by people like George Bush to whip people into mindlessness let me just point out that this little rule of logic is prepositioned by the words “without necessity”. This dialogue is necessary because the move does not seem to be necessary.
Perhaps some of you have missed the NCLB years of public schooling in Chicago. I have not. I am teaching in the public schools near the beautiful Pilsen area. I know multiple students who have lost loved ones to stray and intended bullets in the soon to be regentrified area. No freshmen year Shimer type college student needs to be walking around Pilsen, Bridgeport or any other part of southwest Chicago casually at night. That is a reality. It is a simple truth. Don’t try to complicate it with rhetoric about regentrification and art hippies moving into the neighborhood. The art hippies are moving into condominiums or homes with security doors, locks and/or guards or better yet they know the hood. They are protecting themselves against the displaced, the unhappy and the uneducated. Gated neighborhoods are not uncommon.
There is a concerted effort in this country to “dumb down” education for the common folk in order to create a more affordable working class. If you are a degreed Shimerian working in corporate America you see it everyday. The story of America’s success is the story of cheap labor. This is the impetus behind schools like IIT. They want to produce workers. People who stand up for their rights in the work place slow down the wheels of production. This is why I don’t think we should be associated with IIT.
IIT is what it is and it serves a purpose. Shimer serves a purpose as well. They are fewer and fewer schools that do what Shimer does. The educational paradigm is shifting for the worst. Each day it moves closer and closer to the Western World Business Management Paradigm. The paradigm is a pyramid. The leader sits at the top and the orders are passed down hill. It is the way that businesses are run and it is the way that sports teams are lead. For my feminist friends this is also known as the male power archetype. This is in sharp contrast to Shimer’s power archetype which is more feminist or flat decisions and activities are taken on together.
The way this decision is being made is more in the spirit of a school like IIT. We Shimerians are actively involved in our communities. Anyone who expected to move the school by walking into a room and saying, “This is what we are going to do, now do it.”, is, kindly put, sadly mistaken. I did not vote for George Bush and I am not part of his America any more than I have to be. I am going to ask the hard questions and I am going to expect cogent answers. If I do not receive intelligent responses I will be suspicious. This, I would think is to be expected of all Shimerians. We ask questions, we ask a lot of questions and we expect answers.
I ask the questions about Shimer because I am weird. I am not perfect. I don’t fit easily into the top down management structure. If it were not for Shimer, I would not know the difference between being lazy and having a learning disability. Shimer fits a niche. Pursuing a relationship to have a financial profile like all the other big institutions takes us out of that niche. That’s right I said us. Despite the love hate thing I know who I am, and I am a Shimerian. When something happens in that community that calls me I will respond. I am worried about all the other “unique” people that will come after me. Where will they go if the only thing that is left is IIT and DePaul University?
In response to some recent posts: Many of the arguments in favor of the move have three major components in common:
1.) The arguments acknowledge a lack of data to support the argument in favor of the move.
2.) The arguments dismiss the lack of data or logic as part of the complexity of business; beyond the understanding of laypeople.
3.) The arguments suggest that in spite of these curiosities and concerns the move is a good thing because it will bring Shimer in line with other colleges and universities.
In the “..Thoughts from left field...” post he says: “Unless you're willing to ascribe extreme bad faith to the Shimer administration when they say that Shimer will remain financially and administratively independent…” seems to imply that arguments against moving are arguments against the administrative bodies at Shimer College. This is a brilliant way to quash intelligent dialogue.
Please do not insult the integrity of this blog and its patrons by trying to create friction that does not exist anymore than it always has. Asking questions about things that will impact you or something you care about greatly is not a sign of animosity or bad faith. It is healthy adult behavior and good citizenship. The comments posted here contain legitimate questions. These are the legitimate arguments and thoughts of concerned alumni and students (and now teachers and board members). I guard carefully against disparaging comments and demonizing.
Furthermore:
(1) The articles posted here, in regard to Barat College, were from legitimate sources located on the internet in the public domain. They were not solicited. Barat was required or expected to produce 800 enrollments per year and failed. That factoid came from the office DePaul has set up to field questions about the Barat closure. As a result they were closed down after 4-5 years. It would be good to know ahead of time if there is such a stipulation in the contract with IIT. In which case the move would definitely not be a good move; unless, one feels, that by moving to the IIT campus, Shimer College will increase its enrollment goal over 800% within 5 years of its move. The point of posting the article was not to demonize the move but to give a framework to understand the possibilities and parameters of moving a College or University for those of us not currently moving Colleges or Universities. Unless someone is willing to post the details that show that this is not an issue, it is not a cogent argument to suggest that examining the similarities is equal to bad faith in the administration. There are those of us who believe that our education at Shimer taught us to ask questions and not to trust blindly. Following this charter should not put us in opposition to any part of the Shimer College Family. It should make them proud of us. We want to know what is going on.
(2) I am a Chicagoan and yes Chicago is being regentrified at the expense of the poor. Why would anyone brag about or espouse the process of regentrification as something good? It is a way to legally move poor people out and affluent people in. But if regentrification and growing intellectual population are your argument, so be it. Crime is generally higher in Chicago than in Waukegan but no matter how one paints it, as neighborhoods in Chicago go, Pilsen and Bridgeport are still some of the riskiest if your skin is the wrong color or you look like an easy target. I work in and around them and I don’t have a problem, so I don’t want to paint it like Viet Nam or Iraq. But please don’t tell people that they can hang out in Pilsen or Bridgeport at night the way the do in Waukegan. Safety is an issue in that part of Chicago still.
(3) Waukegan has produced poets, comedians and authors. While it is not an intellectual Mecca let us not forget that there are some extremely intelligent and innovative people born and raised in Waukegan. It can still be a good home for Shimer. Let us not forget that Notre Dame is in Indiana, of all places. The commentary on Waukegan’s intellectual capacity makes us look bad. There is nothing that we know that is so special that we should feel that we are better than those who do not know it or do not espouse a particular idea or possess a special degree. It is not that I feel I am above any intellectual snobbery but I really fight against in myself. I think I learned that at Shimer.
(4) Left of Field also said...“…but nobody's going to compose pastoral poetry about downtown Waukegan, either.” This statement may be the reason that Shimer flounders in Waukegan. How many poets, artists and comedians does Waukegan have to produce to get a break from the intellectual elite?? Can we get over ourselves?? Shimer needs a small community to thrive and Waukegan needs a unique educational experience to promote the hell out of. Maybe they want to help grow a college. Has anyone asked them?
(5) Next IIT’s pedigree was never in question. The meat of the argument against them for me is that IIT is part of a new class of colleges designed to serve the needs of Corporate America. They intentionally forgo intellectual pursuits in favor of getting people ready for the work force. They are designed to do two things prepare you for Wal-Mart or Wall Street. If this is not the case I have not seen anything that suggests the contrary. I for one am really genuinely concerned about the education being watered down in favor of catering to the goals of a financially driven agenda. Also, I have a hard time buying the, “Good Samaritan” picture we are painting of IIT. IIT is a business and I don’t see that they need anything but Shimer’s name and property.
About the potential benefits mentioned in the last post:
1.) Poor Location – This point is very subjective and assumes that all avenues for growth in Waukegan have been explored. No factual data was supplied to support it. Also, I just learned that there is a new marketing plan for the Waukegan area this makes the most sense to me.
2.) Crumbling Physical Plant – That is not a reason to move it is a reason to research avenues to pursue funding for renovation. This is a point that might be presented to the city of Waukegan. Shimer is one of the things that keep Waukegan ahead in the race for growing municipality. Besides, IIT is ugly. This is a cogent point because it speaks to the learning environment.
3.) Lack of Extra Curricular Activities – If you really want a football team and sports bars with naked chicks of the girls gone wild variety you can go to a different school. There is St. Johns if you want something more upbeat with that respectable intellectual tinge. The train ride to Chicago is 45 min. and what about Ravinia or the Botanical gardens. I know they are not easy to get to but they are there within reach. They can ride bikes and get some exercise.
4.) Small Incestuous Social Scene – This is the nature of institutions. I would bet I could get 9 out of 10 college students to show me the click they hate and tell me evil stories about the townies. But this is a valid point. You can change clicks more easily at a larger and better placed university. In small communities everyone knows each others business. If you don’t like this aspect of small colleges you can go to a larger one.
5.) Lack of Diversity In Electives – This is about money and impetus. It will be the same no matter where Shimer is. If they want traditional or additional programming they will have to pay people to work as professors and provide them with infrastructure. IIT could definitely help with this but I feel the price may be to high and the rewards to few.
And one more thing about Occam’s Razor.
In today’s political and economic climate the simpler truth would be the unpleasant one. Owning and selling real-estate is the fastest way to make money. Mergers and Acquisitions are the new business model. The simpler idea is that someone is making money and that that is the motivator. The more complex thought is that there are secrets that we should not know for our own good and the good of Shimer’s future.
Finally, to be clear, this blog was meant to gather facts to facilitate discussion. I have no data that suggests that anyone is doing anything untoward. I know that there are board members who want to move Shimer College to Chicago. I know that there are students, alumni and faculty who believe this is a good idea. I know that there are others who disagree. I believe this is a bad idea based on my own insights and research. I do not however, “know” that this is a bad idea. The facts presented thus far suggest that it is not wise.
I am waiting for facts to the contrary. If the move is good for Shimer and this is the simpler of the two theories on how to save Shimer, why can’t we simply know the facts?
My Sincere and Heartfelt Apologies
Please be aware that in my years at Shimer Teachers, Faculty, Students and Board Members all attended classes sooner or later. This made everyone a student. Therefore in my eyes all Shimerians can post on this blog.
This is the spirit of dialogue. It is one of the things that gives me pause regarding the secrecy around the decision to move. In my experience it is not Shimerian to exclude withour clear cause and justification.
( For those of you that are laughing at that last sentence --- so am I! )
Please feel free to post here if you are a member of the Shimer Community.
This is the spirit of dialogue. It is one of the things that gives me pause regarding the secrecy around the decision to move. In my experience it is not Shimerian to exclude withour clear cause and justification.
( For those of you that are laughing at that last sentence --- so am I! )
Please feel free to post here if you are a member of the Shimer Community.
Monday, November 14, 2005
Between Yes and No
Thanks PJ and John, friends both (at least in some deep potential way, if not in current actuality [so to speak]) for frank assessments that have merit that leads us to alternative conclusions about the move. I want to briefly state the case--as I do in a piece I just sent at Erik's (Badger, Class of 1997) suggestion to Promulgates--that what is needed is not so much to line up as for or against as to think of a third way. My proposed third way is to design a "test pilot" program (say 12 students [taking 3 or 4 classes each] and 2 faculty members [teaching 3 classes (two cores, one elective) each] on the campus of a prospective partner institution for one semester, sharing classes with some [maybe 15-20] students from the host insitution [taking one class each]) which could then be pitched to--and carried out at--perhaps 3 area institutions seen as suitable potential partners over 2006-2007. A way of figuring out and comparing the relative quality of the interaction at each institution would be discussed and voted on in advance, and then, at the conclusion of the pilots, a vote would be taken to (a) rank the potential partners, and then (b) pursue a detailed partnership offer with them, if desired. This partnership would then begin in 2008-2009--not so very long from now really, and surely soon enough to fix whatever could be fixed by moving in 2006-2007.
If you are interested in this, please email me at mdweinman@gmail.com, and I can send the draft to you (if you like). (You can also email me to say that it sounds like a worthless idea, but please don't as my fragile ego will be crushed. Instead, please say that it doesn't make much sense. That seems gentler.)
Love and best wishes to all,
(and under-slept and over-worked) Michael
If you are interested in this, please email me at mdweinman@gmail.com, and I can send the draft to you (if you like). (You can also email me to say that it sounds like a worthless idea, but please don't as my fragile ego will be crushed. Instead, please say that it doesn't make much sense. That seems gentler.)
Love and best wishes to all,
(and under-slept and over-worked) Michael
Some thoughts from left field.
By way of introduction: My name is PJ Killian, and I attended Shimer from '95-'97 and then again from '01-'03. I posted Sarah's initial letter to the LiveJournal Shimer College community. I can be reached at pj.killian@gmail.com if anyone would like to talk privately.
When I initially heard about the proposed move to IIT, my initial reaction was "hey, that sounds like a neat idea."
I have since read many of the arguments against the move, and while some of them are both cogent and wise, I still can't shake the notion that it's still a pretty good idea.
There are also, however, some arguments that seem to me to be on shakier ground, and I think we can't properly make informed judgements on the move without shedding additional light on these topics:
(1) The analogy to Barat does not seem to be apposite. Barat may have spun their acquisition by DePaul as an "alliance" or a "merger," but the truth is that they were acquired. DePaul was responsible for paying their bills, the bills got too high, and DePaul shut down the operation. Unless you're willing to ascribe extreme bad faith to the Shimer administration when they say that Shimer will remain financially and administratively independent, our situation is fundamentally different. IIT will be landlords, and their ability to interfere with our internal operations will be bounded by the four corners of the lease. If they kick us out, we move somewhere else.
(2) There is a notion that IIT is located in some sort of urban deathground, which is not the case. Bronzeville has received a ton of city, state, and federal funds for reconstruction, and it's a far safer and more pleasant neighborhood than it was 10-20 years ago. Bridgeport is in the first stages of an invasion by artists and hipsters who have been priced out of Wicker Park, and the middle/upper-middle class areas of the South Loop keep pushing southward; there are luxury condos and townhouses a mere 10 blocks north of IIT's campus -- in an area that used to be housing projects. From an overall quality-of-life standpoint, Bridgeport, Pilsen, Ukranian Village, and other affordable areas within a 15 minute bus/El ride of IIT are so far ahead of Waukegan it's not even a contest. (Think: museums, concert venues, restaurants, bars, etc.) Granted, I am a city person and a Chicagoan, so I'm biased in favor of an urban environment, but nobody's going to compose pastoral poetry about downtown Waukegan, either.
(3) There has been some talk that IIT is essentially an overgrown "trade school" and, more generally, that they don't share our values. Setting aside for the sake of argument the fact that we will (barring, again, extreme bad faith on the administration's part) be operationally independent of IIT and thus not required to have our classes conform to their values, this idea is still absurd. Flawed as they are, the US News & World Report rankings give an insight into the reputation that colleges have in the eyes of the education community, and IIT ranks #97 among universities nationwide. That Shimer has a different approach to education, an approach that works for us, does not mean that the Shimer way is the only worthwhile way to run a college. What's more, there is ample evidence to indicate that IIT values a diversity of approaches in education even within its own structure. While they are an engineering/science school first and foremost, they are also the parent institution of the Chicago-Kent School of Law, and law schools (especially in classes beyond the first year) are hell of a lot more like Shimer than engineering school.
To me, the potential benefits of the move are legion. In my experience, the things that are driving the attrition rate at Shimer are, above all:
* poor location
* crumbling physical plant
* a lack of extracurricular or off-campus activities
* a small and incestuous social scene
* a lack of diversity in electives
(I would assume that the aspects of Shimer that cause people to not enroll in the first place are similar.) A move to IIT addresses all of these concerns. The location of the IIT is not ideal, and certainly not to everyone's taste, but Waukegan had big-city problems without big-city amenities. A move, by contrast, would put Shimer almost dead-center in one of the world's most fun, interesting and diverse cities. Moving the campus would take the burden of maintaining most of the Waukegan buildings off the shoulders of the administration. I understand the leeriness at the prospect of selling off (some of) the campus buildings, but if you can't afford to build equity or even properly maintain real estate, it becomes a liability rather than an asset. IIT obviously has a range of people with a diverse enough set of interests that there will be far more extracurriculars, and if Shimer can piggyback on IIT's membership in the CTA U-Pass program, the entire city is easily accessible at little to no cost. Being a small school in the context of a larger institution obviously opens up more opportunities to make friends with non-Shimer folks, as does being in the middle of a large city. Having IIT electives out there really broadens the range of classes available to Shimer folks, and are a particular boon to people who want to go to grad school in the hard sciences, or to med school, or to become a math/science teacher.
While I share the general concern about the relatively secretive approach to this move on the administration's part, I have yet to be convinced that the cons outweigh the pros. Just using Ockham's Razor, which is more likely: that IIT has a predatory interest in wiping Shimer off the face of the earth, and the administration and board are going along with it, or that IIT sees Shimer as an opportunity to fill up some otherwise unnocupied space on their campus, and maybe help humanize their student body a bit?
When I initially heard about the proposed move to IIT, my initial reaction was "hey, that sounds like a neat idea."
I have since read many of the arguments against the move, and while some of them are both cogent and wise, I still can't shake the notion that it's still a pretty good idea.
There are also, however, some arguments that seem to me to be on shakier ground, and I think we can't properly make informed judgements on the move without shedding additional light on these topics:
(1) The analogy to Barat does not seem to be apposite. Barat may have spun their acquisition by DePaul as an "alliance" or a "merger," but the truth is that they were acquired. DePaul was responsible for paying their bills, the bills got too high, and DePaul shut down the operation. Unless you're willing to ascribe extreme bad faith to the Shimer administration when they say that Shimer will remain financially and administratively independent, our situation is fundamentally different. IIT will be landlords, and their ability to interfere with our internal operations will be bounded by the four corners of the lease. If they kick us out, we move somewhere else.
(2) There is a notion that IIT is located in some sort of urban deathground, which is not the case. Bronzeville has received a ton of city, state, and federal funds for reconstruction, and it's a far safer and more pleasant neighborhood than it was 10-20 years ago. Bridgeport is in the first stages of an invasion by artists and hipsters who have been priced out of Wicker Park, and the middle/upper-middle class areas of the South Loop keep pushing southward; there are luxury condos and townhouses a mere 10 blocks north of IIT's campus -- in an area that used to be housing projects. From an overall quality-of-life standpoint, Bridgeport, Pilsen, Ukranian Village, and other affordable areas within a 15 minute bus/El ride of IIT are so far ahead of Waukegan it's not even a contest. (Think: museums, concert venues, restaurants, bars, etc.) Granted, I am a city person and a Chicagoan, so I'm biased in favor of an urban environment, but nobody's going to compose pastoral poetry about downtown Waukegan, either.
(3) There has been some talk that IIT is essentially an overgrown "trade school" and, more generally, that they don't share our values. Setting aside for the sake of argument the fact that we will (barring, again, extreme bad faith on the administration's part) be operationally independent of IIT and thus not required to have our classes conform to their values, this idea is still absurd. Flawed as they are, the US News & World Report rankings give an insight into the reputation that colleges have in the eyes of the education community, and IIT ranks #97 among universities nationwide. That Shimer has a different approach to education, an approach that works for us, does not mean that the Shimer way is the only worthwhile way to run a college. What's more, there is ample evidence to indicate that IIT values a diversity of approaches in education even within its own structure. While they are an engineering/science school first and foremost, they are also the parent institution of the Chicago-Kent School of Law, and law schools (especially in classes beyond the first year) are hell of a lot more like Shimer than engineering school.
To me, the potential benefits of the move are legion. In my experience, the things that are driving the attrition rate at Shimer are, above all:
* poor location
* crumbling physical plant
* a lack of extracurricular or off-campus activities
* a small and incestuous social scene
* a lack of diversity in electives
(I would assume that the aspects of Shimer that cause people to not enroll in the first place are similar.) A move to IIT addresses all of these concerns. The location of the IIT is not ideal, and certainly not to everyone's taste, but Waukegan had big-city problems without big-city amenities. A move, by contrast, would put Shimer almost dead-center in one of the world's most fun, interesting and diverse cities. Moving the campus would take the burden of maintaining most of the Waukegan buildings off the shoulders of the administration. I understand the leeriness at the prospect of selling off (some of) the campus buildings, but if you can't afford to build equity or even properly maintain real estate, it becomes a liability rather than an asset. IIT obviously has a range of people with a diverse enough set of interests that there will be far more extracurriculars, and if Shimer can piggyback on IIT's membership in the CTA U-Pass program, the entire city is easily accessible at little to no cost. Being a small school in the context of a larger institution obviously opens up more opportunities to make friends with non-Shimer folks, as does being in the middle of a large city. Having IIT electives out there really broadens the range of classes available to Shimer folks, and are a particular boon to people who want to go to grad school in the hard sciences, or to med school, or to become a math/science teacher.
While I share the general concern about the relatively secretive approach to this move on the administration's part, I have yet to be convinced that the cons outweigh the pros. Just using Ockham's Razor, which is more likely: that IIT has a predatory interest in wiping Shimer off the face of the earth, and the administration and board are going along with it, or that IIT sees Shimer as an opportunity to fill up some otherwise unnocupied space on their campus, and maybe help humanize their student body a bit?
Sunday, November 13, 2005
From John McGough
First, thanks to Sarah for acting on this helping us get together.
I'm not sure if we should be making the argument that Shimer has 'a marketing problem'. Enrollment and attendance at Shimer has been and is consistently low.
It seems to me that this is largely a result of the nature and position of the College, as it is, in
today's academic world, and not largely not the result of mistakes or errors by individuals. Numerous strategies have been employed to tackle this throughout the years, with varied and modest-to-no effect.
However, this year's graduating class is projected to be something like 30 students, the highest in recent memory and perhaps since the move to Waukegan. What went well here? Something was different this year, and this deserves serious attention.
It also seems obvious to me that the solutions - bureacratic at their core, suspicious on every side - discussed by the current President and his cohorts amongst the faculty and Board, would not simply move the College, but effectively end it as the institution - faults included, and these are many - that it currenty is. Plus, there is NO way imaginable that a move to IIT in and of itself would 'improve marketing' or enhance enrollment.
The President and upper-level administration salaries (no longer on level with the rest of College employees) have added an extra $250,000 to the current budget. And despite this, still no effecive strategy or action in the way of building the College. I suggest we make the argument that any and all discussion of the College's future (always largely grounded in its finances, no?) has to start here, along with a serious look at the rest of the budget.
There are definite material interests, in my opinion, for the proposed move. In the last few years, Shimer has hired 'outsiders' and broken with its egalitarian pay structure to benefit from the supposed expertise. The old guard is getting older, and over 20 years in Waukegan have probably stretched their ideological and material committment to the struggling College and its
mission to the breaking point. They want to retire, ideally with a secure-enough pension. IIT, a corporatized and thus 'legitimate' university, is seen as securing this.
I would also not be surprised to discover other more nefarious connections between those plotting the move and those who stand to benefit on the Board or IIT. The bureaucratic nature of the 'discussions' on it to date, and the carefulness of the arranged, exclusivist meetings, certainly raise suspicions.
Anyhow, just trying to point out that the solutions offered refer only in the most fantastic and idealist manner to the identified problems facing the College. We - the opposition - should draw up our own balance sheet to oppose this, including a comprehensive evaluation of finances, and the Colleges tradition and the accumulated intellectual and manual labor that has gone into building the Waukegan institution and which now stands to be stupidly and quietly 'sold'.
In militant opposition to bureaucracy everywhere and the Proposed Move to IIT,
John McGough
Class of '98
I'm not sure if we should be making the argument that Shimer has 'a marketing problem'. Enrollment and attendance at Shimer has been and is consistently low.
It seems to me that this is largely a result of the nature and position of the College, as it is, in
today's academic world, and not largely not the result of mistakes or errors by individuals. Numerous strategies have been employed to tackle this throughout the years, with varied and modest-to-no effect.
However, this year's graduating class is projected to be something like 30 students, the highest in recent memory and perhaps since the move to Waukegan. What went well here? Something was different this year, and this deserves serious attention.
It also seems obvious to me that the solutions - bureacratic at their core, suspicious on every side - discussed by the current President and his cohorts amongst the faculty and Board, would not simply move the College, but effectively end it as the institution - faults included, and these are many - that it currenty is. Plus, there is NO way imaginable that a move to IIT in and of itself would 'improve marketing' or enhance enrollment.
The President and upper-level administration salaries (no longer on level with the rest of College employees) have added an extra $250,000 to the current budget. And despite this, still no effecive strategy or action in the way of building the College. I suggest we make the argument that any and all discussion of the College's future (always largely grounded in its finances, no?) has to start here, along with a serious look at the rest of the budget.
There are definite material interests, in my opinion, for the proposed move. In the last few years, Shimer has hired 'outsiders' and broken with its egalitarian pay structure to benefit from the supposed expertise. The old guard is getting older, and over 20 years in Waukegan have probably stretched their ideological and material committment to the struggling College and its
mission to the breaking point. They want to retire, ideally with a secure-enough pension. IIT, a corporatized and thus 'legitimate' university, is seen as securing this.
I would also not be surprised to discover other more nefarious connections between those plotting the move and those who stand to benefit on the Board or IIT. The bureaucratic nature of the 'discussions' on it to date, and the carefulness of the arranged, exclusivist meetings, certainly raise suspicions.
Anyhow, just trying to point out that the solutions offered refer only in the most fantastic and idealist manner to the identified problems facing the College. We - the opposition - should draw up our own balance sheet to oppose this, including a comprehensive evaluation of finances, and the Colleges tradition and the accumulated intellectual and manual labor that has gone into building the Waukegan institution and which now stands to be stupidly and quietly 'sold'.
In militant opposition to bureaucracy everywhere and the Proposed Move to IIT,
John McGough
Class of '98
From Vicky Muehlesen
heard about this blog in a message from Sara. I don't know any of you guys, but I am a Shimer graduate, and I do have something to say (rather a lot…)
Since most of you already seem to be set against the proposal to move, this long message probably won't persuade you otherwise, but I'll post it anyway. Feel free to e-mail me if you want any more details about anything.
First, to introduce myself, I'm Vicky Muehleisen, and I attended Shimer from 1982-1986, which were probably some of the darkest years for Shimer. (There were about 20 people in my entering class, and I think only about 6 who graduated). I went on to graduate school (MA in linguistics from Temple, PhD from in linguistics from Northwestern), and now I teach at a big university in Tokyo. I've been in Japan for 11 years, and I plan to stay here, but I still have ties to the Chicago area. In fact, my brother teaches at IIT (at the College of Engineering, and I've visited the campus a few times. For a long time after graduating, I didn't go back to Shimer (the usual love-hate thing that many Shimer graduates have, I think), but I've gone back to visit a few times in the past few years, I read the newsletters and check out the web page from time to time. From my perspective, I think the proposal to move to the IIT campus is a good one.
The biggest reason is that it would give so many advantages to Shimerians in terms of curriculum. I absolutely loved the Shimer curriculum--I took as many credits as possible each semester, doing all the classes in Soc Sci and Nat Sci, and doing a lot of independent studies in sociology, philosophy, and botany. But although I really wanted to do more science, there was just no chance to do it at Shimer. These days, there must be many Shimerians who are interested in environmental issues, and IIT has interdisciplinary course on the environment. It's true, as someone said, that IIT is a tech school, but technology can be useful. Aren't there Shimerians who'd like to be able to take classes in computer programming, web page design, etc. as a way of expressing themselves? My brother also pointed out to me the Center for Ethics in the Professions and the Math and Science Education Program, both of which are nationally known and which could be of interest to Shimerians.
Another reason in favor of the move is that the general facilities would be so much better. It wasn't until graduate school that I realized how great it could be to have access to a real library, not just a collection of books stored in the basement of the Waukegan public library. And the dormitory! I know people have a lot of attachment to that run-down building, but it was already dangerous when I lived there. From what I saw the last time I was there, in the summer of 2004, there have been some cosmetic improvements (the scary basement is not so scary anymore), but basically, it still seems to be falling apart. It's true that the Shimer dorm rooms have kitchens, but since they have the same stoves that were already no working right 20 years ago, I'm not sure how useful they really are.
What are the specific arrangements for the dorms at IIT? Will the Shimerians be living together in the same dorm? Are there some communal kitchens available? If so, then people can cook and eat together sometimes, as one way of creating a sense of community. (That's what the Chinese students in Tokyo seem to do, in whatever dorm they are living in, and it works for them. And don't they still have community lunches and potluck dinners at Shimer, even though the dorm has kitchens?)
The Chicago location would be great! IIT is much closer to the Art Institute, the Field Museum, the Chicago Symphony, all those used bookstores, not to mention the restaurants and the Chicago Blues Festival. Back in my Shimer days, I was lucky to get down to Chicago once or twice a semester. It would be so cool for Shimerians to be just a short El ride from the Art Institute. Maybe the neighborhood surrounding IIT is dangerous, but I don't think it's nowhere near as dangerous as that of Temple University, and students seemed to adjust to that environment pretty quickly. And what does "dangerous" really mean? When I was going to Northwestern, I lived in Edgewater, another "dangerous" neighborhood in Chicago, and it was really not as bad as the reputation would lead you to believe. My brother hasn't had any problems commuting to and from IIT, even when using public transportation in the evening. What does Waukegan have to offer? As far as I can see, Waukegan has never been especially welcoming to Shimer, and it certainly isn't very attractive to potential students. I went to Shimer in spite of the fact that it was in Waukegan, not because of it.
I can understand the worries about Shimer losing its identity, but I don't think it will really be a problem. Right now, I am at a big university (50,000 students), divided into many schools; I'm currently teaching at two undergraduate schools, the School of Law, and the new School of International Liberal Studies which just opened in 2004. Even at such a big place, the students quickly feel an identity with their school because of the shared curriculum. Even at our new school, which doesn't even have it's own "space" within the university yet, (we're just using empty rooms at various locations aroundthe campus), students feel a strong identity just because they are studying something that the others aren't. As long as Shimer sticks with its core curriculum, people will feel that they are Shimerians, and if they "Shimerize" the space as they intend to, it will be even better. My brother also thinks there would be no problem with Shimer keeping its own identity. He says most of the techie-type students don't especially identify with IIT, and the ones who do want to be part of a group join one of the student organizations. From the point of view of the average IIT student, then, Shimerians would easily be able to keep their distinct identity. He also says that Vandercook feels like a clearly separate entity, but that regular IIT students really enjoy being able to take music classes there.
About the only thing that I don't like about the proposal is that IIT doesn't seem to offer many (or maybe any) classes in foreign languages, something which is sorely lacking in Shimer's curriculum. But at least there are plenty of international students on the IIT campus.
Shimer has been in Waukegan for more than 20 years, and it just is not thriving. I think it's time to try something new.
Since most of you already seem to be set against the proposal to move, this long message probably won't persuade you otherwise, but I'll post it anyway. Feel free to e-mail me if you want any more details about anything.
First, to introduce myself, I'm Vicky Muehleisen, and I attended Shimer from 1982-1986, which were probably some of the darkest years for Shimer. (There were about 20 people in my entering class, and I think only about 6 who graduated). I went on to graduate school (MA in linguistics from Temple, PhD from in linguistics from Northwestern), and now I teach at a big university in Tokyo. I've been in Japan for 11 years, and I plan to stay here, but I still have ties to the Chicago area. In fact, my brother teaches at IIT (at the College of Engineering, and I've visited the campus a few times. For a long time after graduating, I didn't go back to Shimer (the usual love-hate thing that many Shimer graduates have, I think), but I've gone back to visit a few times in the past few years, I read the newsletters and check out the web page from time to time. From my perspective, I think the proposal to move to the IIT campus is a good one.
The biggest reason is that it would give so many advantages to Shimerians in terms of curriculum. I absolutely loved the Shimer curriculum--I took as many credits as possible each semester, doing all the classes in Soc Sci and Nat Sci, and doing a lot of independent studies in sociology, philosophy, and botany. But although I really wanted to do more science, there was just no chance to do it at Shimer. These days, there must be many Shimerians who are interested in environmental issues, and IIT has interdisciplinary course on the environment. It's true, as someone said, that IIT is a tech school, but technology can be useful. Aren't there Shimerians who'd like to be able to take classes in computer programming, web page design, etc. as a way of expressing themselves? My brother also pointed out to me the Center for Ethics in the Professions and the Math and Science Education Program, both of which are nationally known and which could be of interest to Shimerians.
Another reason in favor of the move is that the general facilities would be so much better. It wasn't until graduate school that I realized how great it could be to have access to a real library, not just a collection of books stored in the basement of the Waukegan public library. And the dormitory! I know people have a lot of attachment to that run-down building, but it was already dangerous when I lived there. From what I saw the last time I was there, in the summer of 2004, there have been some cosmetic improvements (the scary basement is not so scary anymore), but basically, it still seems to be falling apart. It's true that the Shimer dorm rooms have kitchens, but since they have the same stoves that were already no working right 20 years ago, I'm not sure how useful they really are.
What are the specific arrangements for the dorms at IIT? Will the Shimerians be living together in the same dorm? Are there some communal kitchens available? If so, then people can cook and eat together sometimes, as one way of creating a sense of community. (That's what the Chinese students in Tokyo seem to do, in whatever dorm they are living in, and it works for them. And don't they still have community lunches and potluck dinners at Shimer, even though the dorm has kitchens?)
The Chicago location would be great! IIT is much closer to the Art Institute, the Field Museum, the Chicago Symphony, all those used bookstores, not to mention the restaurants and the Chicago Blues Festival. Back in my Shimer days, I was lucky to get down to Chicago once or twice a semester. It would be so cool for Shimerians to be just a short El ride from the Art Institute. Maybe the neighborhood surrounding IIT is dangerous, but I don't think it's nowhere near as dangerous as that of Temple University, and students seemed to adjust to that environment pretty quickly. And what does "dangerous" really mean? When I was going to Northwestern, I lived in Edgewater, another "dangerous" neighborhood in Chicago, and it was really not as bad as the reputation would lead you to believe. My brother hasn't had any problems commuting to and from IIT, even when using public transportation in the evening. What does Waukegan have to offer? As far as I can see, Waukegan has never been especially welcoming to Shimer, and it certainly isn't very attractive to potential students. I went to Shimer in spite of the fact that it was in Waukegan, not because of it.
I can understand the worries about Shimer losing its identity, but I don't think it will really be a problem. Right now, I am at a big university (50,000 students), divided into many schools; I'm currently teaching at two undergraduate schools, the School of Law, and the new School of International Liberal Studies which just opened in 2004. Even at such a big place, the students quickly feel an identity with their school because of the shared curriculum. Even at our new school, which doesn't even have it's own "space" within the university yet, (we're just using empty rooms at various locations aroundthe campus), students feel a strong identity just because they are studying something that the others aren't. As long as Shimer sticks with its core curriculum, people will feel that they are Shimerians, and if they "Shimerize" the space as they intend to, it will be even better. My brother also thinks there would be no problem with Shimer keeping its own identity. He says most of the techie-type students don't especially identify with IIT, and the ones who do want to be part of a group join one of the student organizations. From the point of view of the average IIT student, then, Shimerians would easily be able to keep their distinct identity. He also says that Vandercook feels like a clearly separate entity, but that regular IIT students really enjoy being able to take music classes there.
About the only thing that I don't like about the proposal is that IIT doesn't seem to offer many (or maybe any) classes in foreign languages, something which is sorely lacking in Shimer's curriculum. But at least there are plenty of international students on the IIT campus.
Shimer has been in Waukegan for more than 20 years, and it just is not thriving. I think it's time to try something new.
Saturday, November 12, 2005
What to do?
There seems to be a great deal of consensus that the move is problematic. Mike makes the excellent observation that if IIT really cared about Shimer, the offer wouldn't be: "we have space to rent, take it in a couple months or forget about it."
So what do we do? It looks like there is very little time to stop this train and that the only way to do it is to present the board with an alternative plan to raise money and enrollment. Simply pleading that the Shimer Way is at risk probably won't turn things around - if it could, there wouldn't have been such secrecy behind the plan (clearly there's a lot of pressure/desire to end the just-barely-scraping-by experience).
I suggested some group of alumni propose new programs that would be natural outgrowths of the existing curriculum and for which there might be some funding out there (that group of alumni might also have access to some of these potential donors).
Are there other ideas? Ways to move forward on this idea? I'm happy to write something up for the group if there's interest - maybe a conference call before I start drafting?
So what do we do? It looks like there is very little time to stop this train and that the only way to do it is to present the board with an alternative plan to raise money and enrollment. Simply pleading that the Shimer Way is at risk probably won't turn things around - if it could, there wouldn't have been such secrecy behind the plan (clearly there's a lot of pressure/desire to end the just-barely-scraping-by experience).
I suggested some group of alumni propose new programs that would be natural outgrowths of the existing curriculum and for which there might be some funding out there (that group of alumni might also have access to some of these potential donors).
Are there other ideas? Ways to move forward on this idea? I'm happy to write something up for the group if there's interest - maybe a conference call before I start drafting?
Hello,
(I think this is factual information, sort of. If not, feel free to delete and/or disparage it.)
I find that blogs are not a very satisfactory way of discussing anything, and I have therefore created a little forum at http://shimerhenge.com. It's no RabbitCarrot, but it's something.
I hope to do some more long-term and wide-ranging things with shimerhenge.com, but if it can provide a more satisfactory place for discussing the issues of these unhappy days ... well, then, that won't be so bad.
Many thanks to Sarah, Mike, et al., for their extensive and thoughtful contributions here.
All the best,
Snorey J. Henderson
(I think this is factual information, sort of. If not, feel free to delete and/or disparage it.)
I find that blogs are not a very satisfactory way of discussing anything, and I have therefore created a little forum at http://shimerhenge.com. It's no RabbitCarrot, but it's something.
I hope to do some more long-term and wide-ranging things with shimerhenge.com, but if it can provide a more satisfactory place for discussing the issues of these unhappy days ... well, then, that won't be so bad.
Many thanks to Sarah, Mike, et al., for their extensive and thoughtful contributions here.
All the best,
Snorey J. Henderson
Friday, November 11, 2005
From Michael Weinman
Dear Sarah,
Michael Weinman here. Good to hear from you! How the heck are you, anyway? I just graduated with the ol' PhD and am teaching in northern NJ and living in Brooklyn, NY. Can't complain on the whole.
Anyway, I am writing to say thanks so much for your effort in crashing the meeting, taking such copious notes, and sending them out to "huddled masses" dispersed throughout the lower 48 and beyond. And to let you know a few thoughts which you might be so kind as to subsume with the others and pass along. I have 4 points here: (1) Governance; (2) Timing; (3) Integrity; (4) Motivation.
(1) Governance: What troubles me, and I think most "concerned alums" about the whole move--beyond a fear/feeling/certainty that this will be the final death of Shimer--is that it is happening in a way almost antithetical to the way the "Roosevelt crisis" went down. At least in the versions I have heard about that earlier time, everything about it was out in the open--maybe to a fault. And then, of course, it came down to that fateful 10-hour (or was it 10-day) Assembly meeting. Everything about the way that this is happening seems diametrically opposed: backroom, last-minute, mad-rushed nonsense. This is definitely the sense from a distance, but I do not think it is way off. Now, maybe the point is just that I was at Shimer for the end of the self-governance era (I have heard told that Assembly attendance has been on an unrelentingly downward trend for 5 years, and there has been more and more Board involvement--which is a good thing, from my perspective), but if so then THAT at least ought to be openly acknoweledged, if nothing else is.
(2) Timing: This whole "we need to lease the space" argument seems to be a total red herring. In all my (not so great, but no so limited) experience, I have never heard of a decision on the scale of whether to form an alliance between two academic institutions being hinged upon a leasing situation. This just can't be right. If it is important enough to IIT to find a partner, and if they are seriously interested in Shimer, then it should be fully possible to reflect over this for the course of a year or so, and make an **INFORMED** decision in the Fall 06 or Winter 07, to commit for 07-08 or 08-09. In the meantime, there could be some pilot program(s) run over the 06-07 year to see how Shimer-style education and Shimer students and faculty might be able (or unable) to integrate with the academic community at IIT. Being forced--or forcing ourselves--into a decision to move to/partner with IIT because of a lease deadline is like deciding to buy **THIS PARTICULAR HOUSE** because of a mortgage offer expiring soon **WHEN YOU NEVER DECIDED WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANTED TO BUY A HOUSE IN THE FIRST PLACE.** In short, it is "putting the cart before the horse," or as my Mom would simply say "ass-backwards."
(3) Integrity of the Shimer classroom experience: IIT obviously cares about class size. Under faculty resources, they proudly report: "(1) 13:1 student/faculty ratio; (2) 22% of classes have fewer than 10 students, 90% have fewer than 40."
(http://www.iit.edu/admission/undergrad/Fast_Facts/index.html). This is definitely remarkable, **BUT** two point are worthy of mention. (i) the full class-size picture is not so rosy from a Shimerian perspective, for while it is true that 84/415 class had 9 or fewer students, and 203/415 (or almost 50%) had 19 or fewer students, it is also true that 210/415 (or over 50%) had 20-49 students, and that the number of classes with 30-49 students was roughly (see Table 1) Point being, IIT might be remarkable in its commitment to the class size, but that does not mean that students attending IIT have either the expectations or the desires that are really necessary to make a Shimer seminar work. So, if and when they came to elective offerings, or to Hum 3, it would be an awful lot to expect from them the kind of work and love a Shimer class requires if they are expecting to "fulfill a liberal arts requirement." (And here I know of what I speak, having taught 5 years of student in 4 institutions, almost all of whom were seeking just that, even in classrooms that happening to have 20 students or fewer.)
Table 1: Class Size (source: oii.iit.edu/oii/facts/cds03-04/2003-04_cdsI.pdf)
2-9 84
10-19 119
20-29 108
30-39 57
40-49 21
50-99 24
100+ 2
Total 415
The second point under (3) "integrity": (ii) As we know well, it is not the size (of the class) that matters, but rather "what you do with it." That is, you have 19 folks in room, or even just 10 or even 8, and still have a stitled discursive space which is no genuinely a place of co-inquiry. I have no idea if there is co-inquiry at IIT or not, or if IIT students are interested in it, but I **DO KNOW** that what makes Shimer Shimer is co-inquiry. If in melding course offerings with IIT--which is clearly the only condition under which this makes sense--means that co-inquiry is lost, or even just compromised, then this move will have eviscerated Shimer once for all. And that is the nightmare scenario.
(4) Motivation (or the "all or nothing" character of this proposal): Finally, and perhaps least instructively, I do want to throw my voice behind those who say that a move like this seems like something that you because you MUST, not because you WANT TO. (Contra David Shiner's point about the move consideration at the meeting, as you reported to us, Sarah.) What I mean is that, this whole idea of allying/merging/partnering with an insitution so different from Shimer, and pulling up thw weekday program outright from Waukegan, and losing a campus for a wing of building, and moving to a place where the college would have no ownership. All this seems to me something you do if you are out of options. Isn't there a comproomise here? Can't Shimer pursue some sort of pilot with IIT, while keeping its identity in Waukegan? At a minimum, wouldn't it make sense to do something on a provisional basis (like 2 years) and see if it is working before uprooting the Weekday program altogetehr. I hear the concern about parallel costs and cutting "administrative fat," but I can't see how Shimer exists in 15 or 30 years as having an identity **WITHIN** IIT. How would that work? "The small liberal arts college of the Midwest--a subsidiary (or equal, but subsumed partner) of IIT"? It just doesn't seem logical.
Above all, what I see points 1, 2, and 4 pointing for is the desperate need for further deliberation here. (Point 3 just points to perils of pursuing any "alliance" ever.) I am open, for my part, and for whatever (little I imagine) it is worth, to the idea of such an alliance. But the all-or-nothing, now-or-never character of this seems illusory and harmful to me. Frankly, it feels akin to a gun at the head of Shimer's academic community and self-governing character. If the Board was coming to us saying "look, it is do this, or face a vote to close the college," then my answer (at least) would be "do this." But under a scenario where the College has continung, chronic, but no-worse-now-than-before problems, this is too much too fast. And frankly, I am surprised that anyone DOESN'T feel that way. (But then again, maybe I don't understand what kind of a "gun" IIT is holding at Bill Rice's head and the Board's head.)
Alright, that is all from me. I thank you, Sarah, for listening to this, and I hope you can find some usefulness in it for sharing with others in the proper venue. I look forward to further "reports from the front," from yourself, or from whoever has the time and opportunity.
Sincerely,
Michael Weinman, '98
Michael Weinman here. Good to hear from you! How the heck are you, anyway? I just graduated with the ol' PhD and am teaching in northern NJ and living in Brooklyn, NY. Can't complain on the whole.
Anyway, I am writing to say thanks so much for your effort in crashing the meeting, taking such copious notes, and sending them out to "huddled masses" dispersed throughout the lower 48 and beyond. And to let you know a few thoughts which you might be so kind as to subsume with the others and pass along. I have 4 points here: (1) Governance; (2) Timing; (3) Integrity; (4) Motivation.
(1) Governance: What troubles me, and I think most "concerned alums" about the whole move--beyond a fear/feeling/certainty that this will be the final death of Shimer--is that it is happening in a way almost antithetical to the way the "Roosevelt crisis" went down. At least in the versions I have heard about that earlier time, everything about it was out in the open--maybe to a fault. And then, of course, it came down to that fateful 10-hour (or was it 10-day) Assembly meeting. Everything about the way that this is happening seems diametrically opposed: backroom, last-minute, mad-rushed nonsense. This is definitely the sense from a distance, but I do not think it is way off. Now, maybe the point is just that I was at Shimer for the end of the self-governance era (I have heard told that Assembly attendance has been on an unrelentingly downward trend for 5 years, and there has been more and more Board involvement--which is a good thing, from my perspective), but if so then THAT at least ought to be openly acknoweledged, if nothing else is.
(2) Timing: This whole "we need to lease the space" argument seems to be a total red herring. In all my (not so great, but no so limited) experience, I have never heard of a decision on the scale of whether to form an alliance between two academic institutions being hinged upon a leasing situation. This just can't be right. If it is important enough to IIT to find a partner, and if they are seriously interested in Shimer, then it should be fully possible to reflect over this for the course of a year or so, and make an **INFORMED** decision in the Fall 06 or Winter 07, to commit for 07-08 or 08-09. In the meantime, there could be some pilot program(s) run over the 06-07 year to see how Shimer-style education and Shimer students and faculty might be able (or unable) to integrate with the academic community at IIT. Being forced--or forcing ourselves--into a decision to move to/partner with IIT because of a lease deadline is like deciding to buy **THIS PARTICULAR HOUSE** because of a mortgage offer expiring soon **WHEN YOU NEVER DECIDED WHETHER OR NOT YOU WANTED TO BUY A HOUSE IN THE FIRST PLACE.** In short, it is "putting the cart before the horse," or as my Mom would simply say "ass-backwards."
(3) Integrity of the Shimer classroom experience: IIT obviously cares about class size. Under faculty resources, they proudly report: "(1) 13:1 student/faculty ratio; (2) 22% of classes have fewer than 10 students, 90% have fewer than 40."
(http://www.iit.edu/admission/undergrad/Fast_Facts/index.html). This is definitely remarkable, **BUT** two point are worthy of mention. (i) the full class-size picture is not so rosy from a Shimerian perspective, for while it is true that 84/415 class had 9 or fewer students, and 203/415 (or almost 50%) had 19 or fewer students, it is also true that 210/415 (or over 50%) had 20-49 students, and that the number of classes with 30-49 students was roughly (see Table 1) Point being, IIT might be remarkable in its commitment to the class size, but that does not mean that students attending IIT have either the expectations or the desires that are really necessary to make a Shimer seminar work. So, if and when they came to elective offerings, or to Hum 3, it would be an awful lot to expect from them the kind of work and love a Shimer class requires if they are expecting to "fulfill a liberal arts requirement." (And here I know of what I speak, having taught 5 years of student in 4 institutions, almost all of whom were seeking just that, even in classrooms that happening to have 20 students or fewer.)
Table 1: Class Size (source: oii.iit.edu/oii/facts/cds03-04/2003-04_cdsI.pdf)
2-9 84
10-19 119
20-29 108
30-39 57
40-49 21
50-99 24
100+ 2
Total 415
The second point under (3) "integrity": (ii) As we know well, it is not the size (of the class) that matters, but rather "what you do with it." That is, you have 19 folks in room, or even just 10 or even 8, and still have a stitled discursive space which is no genuinely a place of co-inquiry. I have no idea if there is co-inquiry at IIT or not, or if IIT students are interested in it, but I **DO KNOW** that what makes Shimer Shimer is co-inquiry. If in melding course offerings with IIT--which is clearly the only condition under which this makes sense--means that co-inquiry is lost, or even just compromised, then this move will have eviscerated Shimer once for all. And that is the nightmare scenario.
(4) Motivation (or the "all or nothing" character of this proposal): Finally, and perhaps least instructively, I do want to throw my voice behind those who say that a move like this seems like something that you because you MUST, not because you WANT TO. (Contra David Shiner's point about the move consideration at the meeting, as you reported to us, Sarah.) What I mean is that, this whole idea of allying/merging/partnering with an insitution so different from Shimer, and pulling up thw weekday program outright from Waukegan, and losing a campus for a wing of building, and moving to a place where the college would have no ownership. All this seems to me something you do if you are out of options. Isn't there a comproomise here? Can't Shimer pursue some sort of pilot with IIT, while keeping its identity in Waukegan? At a minimum, wouldn't it make sense to do something on a provisional basis (like 2 years) and see if it is working before uprooting the Weekday program altogetehr. I hear the concern about parallel costs and cutting "administrative fat," but I can't see how Shimer exists in 15 or 30 years as having an identity **WITHIN** IIT. How would that work? "The small liberal arts college of the Midwest--a subsidiary (or equal, but subsumed partner) of IIT"? It just doesn't seem logical.
Above all, what I see points 1, 2, and 4 pointing for is the desperate need for further deliberation here. (Point 3 just points to perils of pursuing any "alliance" ever.) I am open, for my part, and for whatever (little I imagine) it is worth, to the idea of such an alliance. But the all-or-nothing, now-or-never character of this seems illusory and harmful to me. Frankly, it feels akin to a gun at the head of Shimer's academic community and self-governing character. If the Board was coming to us saying "look, it is do this, or face a vote to close the college," then my answer (at least) would be "do this." But under a scenario where the College has continung, chronic, but no-worse-now-than-before problems, this is too much too fast. And frankly, I am surprised that anyone DOESN'T feel that way. (But then again, maybe I don't understand what kind of a "gun" IIT is holding at Bill Rice's head and the Board's head.)
Alright, that is all from me. I thank you, Sarah, for listening to this, and I hope you can find some usefulness in it for sharing with others in the proper venue. I look forward to further "reports from the front," from yourself, or from whoever has the time and opportunity.
Sincerely,
Michael Weinman, '98
Conversation With David Shiner
From: Live Journal Blog
by anonymous
My first reaction to all of this was 'I have to dialogue about this'. So I called my friend Katie and we talked. In testimony to our Shimer education, the two of us felt lost dialoguing without a source text. Our response was to call Dave Shiner and ask numerous questions. Here's what we jotted down from our conversation:
1. Although retention is up, enrollment is down, donations are way down in the last 5 or so years. This doesn't mean the end of Shimer tomorrow, but it does mean that growth isn't happening. No growth means no grants. Shimer is trying to consider options while they are still in a position to bargain rather than in a position where they have to take whatever they can get.
2. This year 38 out of 103 FTE will graduate (this doesn't account for natural attrition). Unless an enrollment feat not seen since the 1970's occurs, enrollment will be under 100 for first time in 15 years.
3. The big picture being considered with all of this is the long-term sustainability of the college.
4. Per capita crime statistics for the geographic area surrounding IIT do show that the area is more dangerous than Waukegan. IIT has campus security and a seemly safe on campus record.
5. The campus is lacking in green space and the area surrounding the campus is what we in Chicago tenderly term 'up and coming'. This means it is not as bad as it was 20 years ago, but still not too good.
6. The date of December 18 is the day the school plans on hosting the last assembly meeting of the term at which the potential move will be discussed. This date was chosen with the hopes that more details of the potential move could be ironed out by then and many students will still be on campus.
7. The final decision will be strictly left to the board of directors. This will probably happen in January. The board's vote will take into consideration the discussion from the Dec. 18 assembly.
8. The agreement with IIT is being discussed as a lease agreement allowing limited cross registration but without sacrificing class size or Shimer purpose.
9. The thought behind the move is that Chicago appeals to more students, parents, and funders. There are increased funding opportunities for schools in Chicago (this is one point of definitive fact, however location obviously does not guarantee funding).
10. Vandercook (the music school) has operated independently at IIT for 10 years and they have good things to say about the affiliation.
11. The extended Shimer community was not brought into discussions sooner partialy because it was believed discussion would be creating more problems than solutions when there were no answer and the possibility was still tenuous. Until two weeks ago Shimer didn't know how much IIT planned on charging for the space, or if the number would be something the school could even afford. There was also fear that talk of a potential move would send an "f-you" to Waukegan. Finally, Shimer is still Shimer and there were numerous discussions about getting a communication out there but no decisions or action.
12. The lawyers who will be working on the contract are Shimer graduates.
13. IIT has been very willing to take time out to give tours and speak w/Shimerians when they visited. Even when visits were unscheduled and lengthy.
14. IIT definitely regards Shimer highly and respects the education model.
15. The Humanities program at IIT is pretty weak in comparison to Shimer's. (Dave thinks that we could easily pollute them rather than vice versa. This last part may not be a salient point, but the idea of polluting made me smile)
16. An e-mail from Bill including specifics about the deal will be going out in the next few days or so.
17. You are encouraged to ask questions if you have them. Most of the faculty and staff members are not actively involved in the inner workings of the talks with IIT, but they are open to getting you the information you seek.
18. Dave believes that most of the faculty are retaining judgement until they have more details. At the very least, he is.
by anonymous
My first reaction to all of this was 'I have to dialogue about this'. So I called my friend Katie and we talked. In testimony to our Shimer education, the two of us felt lost dialoguing without a source text. Our response was to call Dave Shiner and ask numerous questions. Here's what we jotted down from our conversation:
1. Although retention is up, enrollment is down, donations are way down in the last 5 or so years. This doesn't mean the end of Shimer tomorrow, but it does mean that growth isn't happening. No growth means no grants. Shimer is trying to consider options while they are still in a position to bargain rather than in a position where they have to take whatever they can get.
2. This year 38 out of 103 FTE will graduate (this doesn't account for natural attrition). Unless an enrollment feat not seen since the 1970's occurs, enrollment will be under 100 for first time in 15 years.
3. The big picture being considered with all of this is the long-term sustainability of the college.
4. Per capita crime statistics for the geographic area surrounding IIT do show that the area is more dangerous than Waukegan. IIT has campus security and a seemly safe on campus record.
5. The campus is lacking in green space and the area surrounding the campus is what we in Chicago tenderly term 'up and coming'. This means it is not as bad as it was 20 years ago, but still not too good.
6. The date of December 18 is the day the school plans on hosting the last assembly meeting of the term at which the potential move will be discussed. This date was chosen with the hopes that more details of the potential move could be ironed out by then and many students will still be on campus.
7. The final decision will be strictly left to the board of directors. This will probably happen in January. The board's vote will take into consideration the discussion from the Dec. 18 assembly.
8. The agreement with IIT is being discussed as a lease agreement allowing limited cross registration but without sacrificing class size or Shimer purpose.
9. The thought behind the move is that Chicago appeals to more students, parents, and funders. There are increased funding opportunities for schools in Chicago (this is one point of definitive fact, however location obviously does not guarantee funding).
10. Vandercook (the music school) has operated independently at IIT for 10 years and they have good things to say about the affiliation.
11. The extended Shimer community was not brought into discussions sooner partialy because it was believed discussion would be creating more problems than solutions when there were no answer and the possibility was still tenuous. Until two weeks ago Shimer didn't know how much IIT planned on charging for the space, or if the number would be something the school could even afford. There was also fear that talk of a potential move would send an "f-you" to Waukegan. Finally, Shimer is still Shimer and there were numerous discussions about getting a communication out there but no decisions or action.
12. The lawyers who will be working on the contract are Shimer graduates.
13. IIT has been very willing to take time out to give tours and speak w/Shimerians when they visited. Even when visits were unscheduled and lengthy.
14. IIT definitely regards Shimer highly and respects the education model.
15. The Humanities program at IIT is pretty weak in comparison to Shimer's. (Dave thinks that we could easily pollute them rather than vice versa. This last part may not be a salient point, but the idea of polluting made me smile)
16. An e-mail from Bill including specifics about the deal will be going out in the next few days or so.
17. You are encouraged to ask questions if you have them. Most of the faculty and staff members are not actively involved in the inner workings of the talks with IIT, but they are open to getting you the information you seek.
18. Dave believes that most of the faculty are retaining judgement until they have more details. At the very least, he is.
Barat College’s “Strategic Alliance”
( This article was written prior to the alliance between DePaul and Barat. The outlook is very positive and the arguments are very good in favour of the move.
The articles that were posted prior to this one talk about the demise of Barat College. )
Financially troubled small school merges with DePaul University
by Kathy Witkowsky, Lake Forest, Illinois
When Erica Van Schaik returned to Barat College after Christmas break, she discovered some unexpected changes. Gone were the seven-foot-high wooden lockers and floor-to-ceiling paneling that had lined many hallways of Old Main, the 1904 red-brick Georgian Revival centerpiece of the school's wooded campus in the north Chicago suburb of Lake Forest. Hall doorways actually had doors, fire doors, no less, and workmen were busy installing sprinkler systems. Van Schaik realized that the changes were necessary safety improvements, but still, they temporarily upset her and many of her classmates.
"I came back and it was like, 'What school is this?'" said Van Schaik, 22, a junior from Wauconda, Illinois.
Van Schaik's reaction may seem extreme, but these days, her question is a fair one. She transferred from a community college to Barat (pronounced "berra," as in Yogi Berra) a tiny Catholic liberal arts school with an enrollment of 800, because she liked its small classes and personalized attention. She didn't mind that the physical facilities had suffered from neglect; in fact, she sort of liked it.
"Look at this place, there's wobbly windows, the floors creak, the desks are from, like, the 1930s," said Van Schaik, as she gestured happily around one of the worn classrooms. "That was part of the reason I came here, because the school has this unique look." Like many of her classmates and professors, she was taken aback when Barat announced last December that it planned to become part of DePaul University, the nation's largest Catholic university, based in nearby Chicago.
Van Schaik and her classmates still can graduate from Barat College. So can students entering this fall, who may choose whether to enroll in Barat College or the newly created Barat College of DePaul University. But by fall 2002, all new students must enroll in Barat of DePaul. The two schools will co-exist until 2005, when Barat College graduates its last class.
The Barat-DePaul arrangement is one of the latest of several mergers and closures that have struck financially troubled schools across the nation. But officials from both Barat College and DePaul University say that they are determined not to allow Barat to be subsumed by DePaul the way other small schools have been swallowed up through educational mergers in the past. "We didn't want a Mundelein," said Sheila Smith, former board chair of the Barat Board of Trustees, in a reference to the way Mundelein College, another small Catholic women's college, was absorbed into Chicago's Loyola University in 1991.
Instead, administrators hope to create a new model. By retaining all 33 of Barat's tenured and tenure-track faculty, and developing new interdisciplinary programs exclusive to the Barat campus, they say the school can maintain a separate identity while still benefiting from DePaul's brand name and resources, including an endowment worth about $180 million.
"I'm very optimistic," said Smith, a Barat alumna who spearheaded the merger, or "strategic alliance," as she prefers to call it. "We're hoping to create a unique college here, and that college will be part of DePaul. That's very different from being merged out of existence," said Smith, who now chairs the newly formed Barat Education Foundation. The foundation will oversee the school's remaining endowment, alumni affairs and fundraising for the Barat campus. A new and temporary Barat College board, comprised of eight members named by the Barat Education Foundation and nine named by DePaul's board, will oversee the school as it phases out over the next four years, while DePaul's board will take over the running of the school in its new incarnation.
"Higher education is changing in this country, and either you adapt or you become a victim of it," added Smith. "And Barat is certainly not going to be a victim of it."
"We're seeing an era where small colleges really are struggling," said Tom Emmet, president of Higher Education Executive Associates, a consulting firm that encouraged Barat to look for partners. "Any school that has less than $10 or $15 million in endowment is in a gray area," said Emmet, who estimates that about 50 schools have endowments of less than $8 or $9 million, which puts them in "very dangerous water." Barat's endowment was under $2 million when it decided to join up with DePaul.
"I think the financial circumstances for many small colleges have gotten more severe in recent years," said Richard Ekman, president of the Council of Independent Colleges. Private schools are facing higher operating costs at a time when they're offering increasingly greater tuition discount rates. Still, despite a handful of recent well-publicized mergers and closures, Ekman said, "It's not right to think that small colleges are all going to be subsumed into larger entities. I think that many, indeed most, small colleges are likely to find ways to not only survive but thrive." He estimated that only about a dozen schools are "on the edge."
Barat College graduates enjoy the college’s last ceremony as an independent institution before Barat merges with larger, wealthier DePaul University.
In general, the nation's 1,600 independent colleges and universities are healthy, said David Warren, president of the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities. Each year, about five institutions close, he said, but at the same time, three new ones open. Relatively speaking, that's not a big change, according to Warren. "I don't think we have a trend here of either closings or any kind of dramatic increase in mergers," he said, and added that the issue is not even on the list of his members' concerns.
But, he conceded, "If you are a school with a small endowment, $10 million or less, and a small enrollment of a thousand or less, you're going to have to be incredibly ingenious and innovative and flexible in order to keep ahead of the curve." It is becoming increasingly common for schools, even public institutions, to share faculty and academic programs, or pool their resources to jointly purchase expensive laboratory, computing equipment, and even electricity and health care, Warren said. Some are consolidating "back of the office" positions such as registrars, bursars and business officers. "The sky is not falling," said Warren. "The sky has different colorations to it."
But the sky was falling at Barat. The school couldn't attract enough students, it needed between 1,000 and 1,200 to be viable, and was dipping into its endowment to pay its bills, according to Smith. And that endowment was too small to last long. An all-women's college until 1982, Barat has suffered from a lack of large donors, since alumnae either didn't have the financial resources to give generously or concentrated on their husband's alma maters.
"I was surprised to find out how vulnerable the college was," said Smith, who joined the Barat College board in 1995 and became its chair two years later. She quickly came to the conclusion that if Barat was to remain open, it needed a partner with greater financial resources. "I knew we had to have an alliance that would allow us to compete in a very technical world," she said.
Barat and DePaul are a natural fit, said Smith. Both are long-standing Roman Catholic institutions that emphasize public service. Barat was founded as a women's academy in 1858 by the Religious of the Sacred Heart, a French order of nuns; DePaul was founded as a men's college in 1898 by Vincentian Fathers. Both now serve a co-educational student body with about 30 percent minority populations. About 40 percent of undergraduate students at both schools are first-generation college students.
"What we found was that there was a convergence of missions," said Richard Meister, DePaul's executive vice president for academic affairs. Meister recognized that Barat offered more than a 30-acre campus in the wealthy suburb of Lake Forest. It offered an established presence and a loyal faculty, student body and alumni base on which to build.
That is one of the reasons Meister insisted on retaining the tenured Barat faculty, even though the DePaul faculty would have preferred to have had a voice in the matter. "If we were going to be successful up there we had to build off the faculty," Meister said. "Otherwise we'd still be fighting. They'd be in court. We may never have signed."
But the task of blending without merging is tricky at best. The upgrades to Old Main were simply the first of the changes yet to come as Barat College transforms into Barat College of DePaul University over the next four years. Officials from DePaul wouldn't even finalize the agreement until they had begun to sink what will amount to $1 million in safety features and maintenance into the school.
DePaul expects to spend another $4 million upgrading the physical facilities, improving dorms, purchasing furniture, remodeling faculty offices and installing new technology, over the next year and a half. That's more than double the size of Barat's entire endowment.
Improvements to the physical plant are expensive, but they're far less complex than managing enrollment and course logistics. Barat will keep six standard majors and some of its unique programs, such as community service, arts therapy and its Learning Opportunities Program for students who have learning disabilities.
Barat College student government president Silas Betten has some doubts about the Barat-DePaul University merger.But Barat's beloved dance conservatory is being phased out due to its high costs. Administrators said that decision was made before the alliance with DePaul, and that the DePaul administration had nothing to do with it. Nonetheless, the decision, which was announced not long after the alliance was made public, has upset many Barat students and faculty members, even those unaffiliated with the dance department.
"It's going to make a big difference in the atmosphere of the place," said professor of English Amy Kessel. She'll miss hearing the music and watching the dancers stretching in the halls, she said, as well as the discipline and rigor they bring to class, where they often serve as role models for less mature students.
Most of Barat's academic programs will be incorporated into existing programs run by DePaul, though many of those classes still will be available on the Barat campus. Meanwhile, Barat of DePaul will launch four new interdisciplinary programs to distinguish itself from DePaul's other colleges.
"You can be anything except what you are now," DePaul's Assistant Vice President of Academic Affairs Laura Hartman told the Barat College faculty this spring. "You can be anything except a traditional liberal arts college."
That's a tall order, but also an exciting opportunity, said Gene Beiriger, a Barat associate dean, who is in charge of developing an interdisciplinary curriculum in the humanities, social science, interdisciplinary science and leadership. Tentative new programs include environmental science, peace and social justice, global studies, ethics and human values, and non-profit leadership. "If we are going to be distinct within this greater university, it falls to us to do that. If we fail, it won't be because of a lack of opportunity," said Beiriger, who hopes to have the new interdisciplinary programs in place by 2002.
Faculty are relieved that the school has a future, and that they have jobs. "I'm very happy that Barat College will continue to exist," said Lesley Kordecki, chair of Barat's English department. At the same time, she said, "I'm worried about the changes. We are told that we are continuing, but of course with a whole other set of rules. It makes a difference in terms of people's careers."
Kordecki also is concerned about class sizes, which are expected to increase from the current average of 13 students to an average of 20. Administration officials downplay the increase, but "that's a huge difference," Kordecki said.
And then there are the transitional difficulties. The agreement went through 19 drafts, mostly due to nitpicking by attorneys, before the alliance was finalized and signed on February 1, 2001. Even so, there were a number of issues no one thought much about.
Throughout the 2001-'02 school year, Barat College courses will remain on the semester system, but at the same time, professors also will have to teach Barat of DePaul courses on the quarter system. Other logistical hassles include transferring federal aid from Barat to DePaul and bringing Barat's tuition in line with DePaul's. Students will be charged on a two-tiered system: Current Barat College students will continue to pay tuition tied to Barat's current tuition, which in the 2000-'01 academic year was just under $14,000; students enrolling in the fall will pay DePaul's new-student tuition of $16,500. DePaul also needs approval from the Illinois Board of Higher Education before it can begin offering degrees in Lake County.
DePaul University official Richard Meister presents a diploma at the last Barat College graduation. The college becomes part of DePaul in the next academic year.
"It is more difficult than I thought," acknowledged DePaul's Meister. But the long-term gain is worth the effort, he said. "We can't even foresee the possible benefits of this decision ten or 20 years down the road."
The immediate benefits, though, are obvious. DePaul already has two Chicago locations, the original campus in tony Lincoln Park and one downtown, as well as five suburban campuses, including a small one near Barat (Its classes will move to the Barat campus within the next two years). With the acquisition of the Barat campus, DePaul gains an established presence and a residential campus in the underserved educational market of Lake County.
That fits with DePaul's expansionist mission, which is to make education available to the masses in order to promote a better society. "We are committed to making education accessible to the many who are qualified, rather than the few who are elite," explained Meister. If the alliance with Barat works out as hoped, Meister said he could imagine entering into similar agreements with other area colleges.
Once known as "the little school under the el," a reference to its Lincoln Park location near Chicago's elevated train, DePaul has bounced back from the early 1980s, when it suffered from declining enrollment. With the help of an ambitious ten-year strategic plan the school adopted in 1988, enrollment has increased from about 12,300 in 1984 to 20,500 today; at the same time, the school's endowment skyrocketed from under $15 million to $180 million. Its current strategic plan calls for enrollment to reach 24,000 by 2006.
The acquisition of the Barat campus should help significantly: Within the next three years, DePaul hopes to have a thousand full-time students taking courses on the Barat campus, including freshmen it couldn't accommodate at its Lincoln Park campus. In addition, DePaul wants 1,500 adult, part-time students there.
But the Barat campus is more than just a land acquisition. It gives DePaul an opportunity to attract a different kind of student, someone looking for an isolated, residential campus and small classes. "We could add 2,000 students in the Loop (downtown) or Lincoln Park, that's what we do," said Meister. "But to add 2,000 students up there is really going to change the nature of DePaul. It's going to change our future."
But not as much as it will change the future of Barat College. Students say that after an initial period of anxiety, they are looking forward to the infusion of capital and other opportunities that the alliance represents. "I think at first there were a lot of harsh feelings, but I think it's eased up a lot," said Samantha Schrunk, 21, a junior from Dubuque, Iowa. "I've always trusted the administration," she said. "I don't think they're going to allow DePaul to swallow us." In fact, Schrunk said, "I think DePaul is really going to help us out."
Still, some students remain concerned that increased enrollment will cause Barat to lose some of its small-school feel. "I have pretty much mixed feelings about it," said Silas Betten, president of Barat's student government. He credits Barat with showing him the value of an education after he flunked out of Merrimack College in Massachusetts, which he was attending on a basketball scholarship.
A lone student in the library during Barat College’s last days as an independent campus. After acquiring Barat, DePaul University plans to spend several million dollars on upgrading its physical facilities."You can't hide here. That's the good thing about Barat," said Betten, a 25-year-old senior who said he never expected to get involved with anything other than basketball. These days, he often lunches with his professors, an opportunity he hopes won't be lost as enrollment increases.
Another potential danger of a merger is the possibility of losing alumni support. But Barat alumni are overwhelmingly in favor of the Barat-DePaul deal, said Catherine Miserendino, director of alumni relations. "They realize that the DePaul administration is very sensitive to our identity and the Sacred Heart mission and core values," she said. "I see my job being only enhanced." Through the Barat Education Foundation, alumni still will be able to support the Barat campus and programs.
"We want the feeling and spirit of Barat to continue," said Rosalind Hodgkins, who was one of Barat's numerous non-traditional students when she returned to school as an adult and graduated in 1983. "I don't want this to become just a country campus satellite of DePaul," said Hodgkins, who is often back on campus because her alumni book group meets regularly at the school.
There is no question that the alliance is a huge turning point for the school. But Paul Hettich, a professor of psychology who has taught at Barat since 1970, is quick to point out that it's not the first time the school has adapted to changes in the educational marketplace. Prior to 1970, Barat had a "convent-school image," and its students were generally white, wealthy girls aged 18 to 21, said Hettich. But in 1969, the operations were turned over to a lay board, and by the mid-70s, Barat had begun to reach out to non-traditional, and non-white, students: often married or divorced women with children who came for Barat's new nursing and education programs.
In 1982, in need of money, Barat went through another radical change when it began accepting male students.
"That was really a shock," said Hettich. "I can still remember how unhappy many of our alums were. Some of our students thought that was the end of their education."
It wasn't, and the alliance with DePaul won't be, either, Hettich said. "We are not dead. We have changed radically again to survive and offer our students education."
And that's exactly the point, said Sheila Smith, the former Barat College board chair. "If 'It's the students, stupid!'" said Smith, playing off a well-known Clinton-era campaign slogan, "then I'm convinced we did the right thing."
But in the end, Smith said only time will tell. "I will be thrilled if four years from now you are interviewing me and saying, 'You were right.'"
The articles that were posted prior to this one talk about the demise of Barat College. )
Financially troubled small school merges with DePaul University
by Kathy Witkowsky, Lake Forest, Illinois
When Erica Van Schaik returned to Barat College after Christmas break, she discovered some unexpected changes. Gone were the seven-foot-high wooden lockers and floor-to-ceiling paneling that had lined many hallways of Old Main, the 1904 red-brick Georgian Revival centerpiece of the school's wooded campus in the north Chicago suburb of Lake Forest. Hall doorways actually had doors, fire doors, no less, and workmen were busy installing sprinkler systems. Van Schaik realized that the changes were necessary safety improvements, but still, they temporarily upset her and many of her classmates.
"I came back and it was like, 'What school is this?'" said Van Schaik, 22, a junior from Wauconda, Illinois.
Van Schaik's reaction may seem extreme, but these days, her question is a fair one. She transferred from a community college to Barat (pronounced "berra," as in Yogi Berra) a tiny Catholic liberal arts school with an enrollment of 800, because she liked its small classes and personalized attention. She didn't mind that the physical facilities had suffered from neglect; in fact, she sort of liked it.
"Look at this place, there's wobbly windows, the floors creak, the desks are from, like, the 1930s," said Van Schaik, as she gestured happily around one of the worn classrooms. "That was part of the reason I came here, because the school has this unique look." Like many of her classmates and professors, she was taken aback when Barat announced last December that it planned to become part of DePaul University, the nation's largest Catholic university, based in nearby Chicago.
Van Schaik and her classmates still can graduate from Barat College. So can students entering this fall, who may choose whether to enroll in Barat College or the newly created Barat College of DePaul University. But by fall 2002, all new students must enroll in Barat of DePaul. The two schools will co-exist until 2005, when Barat College graduates its last class.
The Barat-DePaul arrangement is one of the latest of several mergers and closures that have struck financially troubled schools across the nation. But officials from both Barat College and DePaul University say that they are determined not to allow Barat to be subsumed by DePaul the way other small schools have been swallowed up through educational mergers in the past. "We didn't want a Mundelein," said Sheila Smith, former board chair of the Barat Board of Trustees, in a reference to the way Mundelein College, another small Catholic women's college, was absorbed into Chicago's Loyola University in 1991.
Instead, administrators hope to create a new model. By retaining all 33 of Barat's tenured and tenure-track faculty, and developing new interdisciplinary programs exclusive to the Barat campus, they say the school can maintain a separate identity while still benefiting from DePaul's brand name and resources, including an endowment worth about $180 million.
"I'm very optimistic," said Smith, a Barat alumna who spearheaded the merger, or "strategic alliance," as she prefers to call it. "We're hoping to create a unique college here, and that college will be part of DePaul. That's very different from being merged out of existence," said Smith, who now chairs the newly formed Barat Education Foundation. The foundation will oversee the school's remaining endowment, alumni affairs and fundraising for the Barat campus. A new and temporary Barat College board, comprised of eight members named by the Barat Education Foundation and nine named by DePaul's board, will oversee the school as it phases out over the next four years, while DePaul's board will take over the running of the school in its new incarnation.
"Higher education is changing in this country, and either you adapt or you become a victim of it," added Smith. "And Barat is certainly not going to be a victim of it."
"We're seeing an era where small colleges really are struggling," said Tom Emmet, president of Higher Education Executive Associates, a consulting firm that encouraged Barat to look for partners. "Any school that has less than $10 or $15 million in endowment is in a gray area," said Emmet, who estimates that about 50 schools have endowments of less than $8 or $9 million, which puts them in "very dangerous water." Barat's endowment was under $2 million when it decided to join up with DePaul.
"I think the financial circumstances for many small colleges have gotten more severe in recent years," said Richard Ekman, president of the Council of Independent Colleges. Private schools are facing higher operating costs at a time when they're offering increasingly greater tuition discount rates. Still, despite a handful of recent well-publicized mergers and closures, Ekman said, "It's not right to think that small colleges are all going to be subsumed into larger entities. I think that many, indeed most, small colleges are likely to find ways to not only survive but thrive." He estimated that only about a dozen schools are "on the edge."
Barat College graduates enjoy the college’s last ceremony as an independent institution before Barat merges with larger, wealthier DePaul University.
In general, the nation's 1,600 independent colleges and universities are healthy, said David Warren, president of the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities. Each year, about five institutions close, he said, but at the same time, three new ones open. Relatively speaking, that's not a big change, according to Warren. "I don't think we have a trend here of either closings or any kind of dramatic increase in mergers," he said, and added that the issue is not even on the list of his members' concerns.
But, he conceded, "If you are a school with a small endowment, $10 million or less, and a small enrollment of a thousand or less, you're going to have to be incredibly ingenious and innovative and flexible in order to keep ahead of the curve." It is becoming increasingly common for schools, even public institutions, to share faculty and academic programs, or pool their resources to jointly purchase expensive laboratory, computing equipment, and even electricity and health care, Warren said. Some are consolidating "back of the office" positions such as registrars, bursars and business officers. "The sky is not falling," said Warren. "The sky has different colorations to it."
But the sky was falling at Barat. The school couldn't attract enough students, it needed between 1,000 and 1,200 to be viable, and was dipping into its endowment to pay its bills, according to Smith. And that endowment was too small to last long. An all-women's college until 1982, Barat has suffered from a lack of large donors, since alumnae either didn't have the financial resources to give generously or concentrated on their husband's alma maters.
"I was surprised to find out how vulnerable the college was," said Smith, who joined the Barat College board in 1995 and became its chair two years later. She quickly came to the conclusion that if Barat was to remain open, it needed a partner with greater financial resources. "I knew we had to have an alliance that would allow us to compete in a very technical world," she said.
Barat and DePaul are a natural fit, said Smith. Both are long-standing Roman Catholic institutions that emphasize public service. Barat was founded as a women's academy in 1858 by the Religious of the Sacred Heart, a French order of nuns; DePaul was founded as a men's college in 1898 by Vincentian Fathers. Both now serve a co-educational student body with about 30 percent minority populations. About 40 percent of undergraduate students at both schools are first-generation college students.
"What we found was that there was a convergence of missions," said Richard Meister, DePaul's executive vice president for academic affairs. Meister recognized that Barat offered more than a 30-acre campus in the wealthy suburb of Lake Forest. It offered an established presence and a loyal faculty, student body and alumni base on which to build.
That is one of the reasons Meister insisted on retaining the tenured Barat faculty, even though the DePaul faculty would have preferred to have had a voice in the matter. "If we were going to be successful up there we had to build off the faculty," Meister said. "Otherwise we'd still be fighting. They'd be in court. We may never have signed."
But the task of blending without merging is tricky at best. The upgrades to Old Main were simply the first of the changes yet to come as Barat College transforms into Barat College of DePaul University over the next four years. Officials from DePaul wouldn't even finalize the agreement until they had begun to sink what will amount to $1 million in safety features and maintenance into the school.
DePaul expects to spend another $4 million upgrading the physical facilities, improving dorms, purchasing furniture, remodeling faculty offices and installing new technology, over the next year and a half. That's more than double the size of Barat's entire endowment.
Improvements to the physical plant are expensive, but they're far less complex than managing enrollment and course logistics. Barat will keep six standard majors and some of its unique programs, such as community service, arts therapy and its Learning Opportunities Program for students who have learning disabilities.
Barat College student government president Silas Betten has some doubts about the Barat-DePaul University merger.But Barat's beloved dance conservatory is being phased out due to its high costs. Administrators said that decision was made before the alliance with DePaul, and that the DePaul administration had nothing to do with it. Nonetheless, the decision, which was announced not long after the alliance was made public, has upset many Barat students and faculty members, even those unaffiliated with the dance department.
"It's going to make a big difference in the atmosphere of the place," said professor of English Amy Kessel. She'll miss hearing the music and watching the dancers stretching in the halls, she said, as well as the discipline and rigor they bring to class, where they often serve as role models for less mature students.
Most of Barat's academic programs will be incorporated into existing programs run by DePaul, though many of those classes still will be available on the Barat campus. Meanwhile, Barat of DePaul will launch four new interdisciplinary programs to distinguish itself from DePaul's other colleges.
"You can be anything except what you are now," DePaul's Assistant Vice President of Academic Affairs Laura Hartman told the Barat College faculty this spring. "You can be anything except a traditional liberal arts college."
That's a tall order, but also an exciting opportunity, said Gene Beiriger, a Barat associate dean, who is in charge of developing an interdisciplinary curriculum in the humanities, social science, interdisciplinary science and leadership. Tentative new programs include environmental science, peace and social justice, global studies, ethics and human values, and non-profit leadership. "If we are going to be distinct within this greater university, it falls to us to do that. If we fail, it won't be because of a lack of opportunity," said Beiriger, who hopes to have the new interdisciplinary programs in place by 2002.
Faculty are relieved that the school has a future, and that they have jobs. "I'm very happy that Barat College will continue to exist," said Lesley Kordecki, chair of Barat's English department. At the same time, she said, "I'm worried about the changes. We are told that we are continuing, but of course with a whole other set of rules. It makes a difference in terms of people's careers."
Kordecki also is concerned about class sizes, which are expected to increase from the current average of 13 students to an average of 20. Administration officials downplay the increase, but "that's a huge difference," Kordecki said.
And then there are the transitional difficulties. The agreement went through 19 drafts, mostly due to nitpicking by attorneys, before the alliance was finalized and signed on February 1, 2001. Even so, there were a number of issues no one thought much about.
Throughout the 2001-'02 school year, Barat College courses will remain on the semester system, but at the same time, professors also will have to teach Barat of DePaul courses on the quarter system. Other logistical hassles include transferring federal aid from Barat to DePaul and bringing Barat's tuition in line with DePaul's. Students will be charged on a two-tiered system: Current Barat College students will continue to pay tuition tied to Barat's current tuition, which in the 2000-'01 academic year was just under $14,000; students enrolling in the fall will pay DePaul's new-student tuition of $16,500. DePaul also needs approval from the Illinois Board of Higher Education before it can begin offering degrees in Lake County.
DePaul University official Richard Meister presents a diploma at the last Barat College graduation. The college becomes part of DePaul in the next academic year.
"It is more difficult than I thought," acknowledged DePaul's Meister. But the long-term gain is worth the effort, he said. "We can't even foresee the possible benefits of this decision ten or 20 years down the road."
The immediate benefits, though, are obvious. DePaul already has two Chicago locations, the original campus in tony Lincoln Park and one downtown, as well as five suburban campuses, including a small one near Barat (Its classes will move to the Barat campus within the next two years). With the acquisition of the Barat campus, DePaul gains an established presence and a residential campus in the underserved educational market of Lake County.
That fits with DePaul's expansionist mission, which is to make education available to the masses in order to promote a better society. "We are committed to making education accessible to the many who are qualified, rather than the few who are elite," explained Meister. If the alliance with Barat works out as hoped, Meister said he could imagine entering into similar agreements with other area colleges.
Once known as "the little school under the el," a reference to its Lincoln Park location near Chicago's elevated train, DePaul has bounced back from the early 1980s, when it suffered from declining enrollment. With the help of an ambitious ten-year strategic plan the school adopted in 1988, enrollment has increased from about 12,300 in 1984 to 20,500 today; at the same time, the school's endowment skyrocketed from under $15 million to $180 million. Its current strategic plan calls for enrollment to reach 24,000 by 2006.
The acquisition of the Barat campus should help significantly: Within the next three years, DePaul hopes to have a thousand full-time students taking courses on the Barat campus, including freshmen it couldn't accommodate at its Lincoln Park campus. In addition, DePaul wants 1,500 adult, part-time students there.
But the Barat campus is more than just a land acquisition. It gives DePaul an opportunity to attract a different kind of student, someone looking for an isolated, residential campus and small classes. "We could add 2,000 students in the Loop (downtown) or Lincoln Park, that's what we do," said Meister. "But to add 2,000 students up there is really going to change the nature of DePaul. It's going to change our future."
But not as much as it will change the future of Barat College. Students say that after an initial period of anxiety, they are looking forward to the infusion of capital and other opportunities that the alliance represents. "I think at first there were a lot of harsh feelings, but I think it's eased up a lot," said Samantha Schrunk, 21, a junior from Dubuque, Iowa. "I've always trusted the administration," she said. "I don't think they're going to allow DePaul to swallow us." In fact, Schrunk said, "I think DePaul is really going to help us out."
Still, some students remain concerned that increased enrollment will cause Barat to lose some of its small-school feel. "I have pretty much mixed feelings about it," said Silas Betten, president of Barat's student government. He credits Barat with showing him the value of an education after he flunked out of Merrimack College in Massachusetts, which he was attending on a basketball scholarship.
A lone student in the library during Barat College’s last days as an independent campus. After acquiring Barat, DePaul University plans to spend several million dollars on upgrading its physical facilities."You can't hide here. That's the good thing about Barat," said Betten, a 25-year-old senior who said he never expected to get involved with anything other than basketball. These days, he often lunches with his professors, an opportunity he hopes won't be lost as enrollment increases.
Another potential danger of a merger is the possibility of losing alumni support. But Barat alumni are overwhelmingly in favor of the Barat-DePaul deal, said Catherine Miserendino, director of alumni relations. "They realize that the DePaul administration is very sensitive to our identity and the Sacred Heart mission and core values," she said. "I see my job being only enhanced." Through the Barat Education Foundation, alumni still will be able to support the Barat campus and programs.
"We want the feeling and spirit of Barat to continue," said Rosalind Hodgkins, who was one of Barat's numerous non-traditional students when she returned to school as an adult and graduated in 1983. "I don't want this to become just a country campus satellite of DePaul," said Hodgkins, who is often back on campus because her alumni book group meets regularly at the school.
There is no question that the alliance is a huge turning point for the school. But Paul Hettich, a professor of psychology who has taught at Barat since 1970, is quick to point out that it's not the first time the school has adapted to changes in the educational marketplace. Prior to 1970, Barat had a "convent-school image," and its students were generally white, wealthy girls aged 18 to 21, said Hettich. But in 1969, the operations were turned over to a lay board, and by the mid-70s, Barat had begun to reach out to non-traditional, and non-white, students: often married or divorced women with children who came for Barat's new nursing and education programs.
In 1982, in need of money, Barat went through another radical change when it began accepting male students.
"That was really a shock," said Hettich. "I can still remember how unhappy many of our alums were. Some of our students thought that was the end of their education."
It wasn't, and the alliance with DePaul won't be, either, Hettich said. "We are not dead. We have changed radically again to survive and offer our students education."
And that's exactly the point, said Sheila Smith, the former Barat College board chair. "If 'It's the students, stupid!'" said Smith, playing off a well-known Clinton-era campaign slogan, "then I'm convinced we did the right thing."
But in the end, Smith said only time will tell. "I will be thrilled if four years from now you are interviewing me and saying, 'You were right.'"
Tiny Barat College closing after a century
June 11, 2005
by Nicole Ziegler Dizon
The final days of Barat College were spent much like those at any other school wrapping up for the summer: final exams, late-night study sessions, a boat cruise for graduating seniors.
But the mood was more somber and the tears flowed more freely among students realizing they weren't just saying goodbye for now, but forever. Barat will close its doors at the end of this month, a year after celebrating its 100th anniversary in Chicago's north suburbs.
''It was kind of the happiest and saddest time of my life because it was the best environment I've ever been in,'' said sophomore Morgan Lemmer, eyes welling up as she took a break from setting up chairs for the school's final graduation.
Faced with dwindling enrollment, tens of millions of dollars in needed repairs and a small endowment, the tiny liberal arts school -- which was taken over by DePaul University in 2001 -- is shutting down. About 150 students will make up the last graduating class at today's commencement.
Survival spurred merger
Barat's closure leaves six colleges of the 10 founded by the Society of the Sacred Heart, a Catholic order begun in France in 1800 by the college's namesake, St. Madeleine Sophie Barat. Originally an academy for young girls, it became a college around the turn of the century and thrived during a boom in Catholic women's schools in the 1950s. But enrollment lagged as women moved away from single-sex colleges in the 1960s and 1970s. The society got out of the business of running colleges in 1971, and those that remained struggled to stay afloat by going coed -- as Barat did in 1982 -- or by merging with bigger schools.
Survival was behind Barat's decision to merge with DePaul, the country's largest Catholic university, in 2001. But after spending $6 million to buy Barat and another $16 million on upgrades, DePaul trustees voted last year to shut down Barat, saying an enrollment hovering around 800 didn't bring in enough to break even.
''It was a long and disappointing decision process,'' said DePaul spokeswoman Denise Mattson.
Enrollment dropped to about 350 students this quarter. Lemmer was one of only a few dozen students in dorms that once held more than 300. Like many other underclassmen, she will transfer to one of DePaul's Chicago campuses.
Even with few students left, the school has worked hard to make its final year a celebration rather than a funeral, said acting Dean Gene Beiriger, a 20-year Barat veteran. Faculty made sure each gathering was not billed as ''the last,'' preferring barbecues and bands to teary-eyed speeches.
Students and alumni say it will be hard to replicate the family experience in a place where everyone knows everyone else.
''I'm going to miss this school. I would never have made it at a big school,'' said Lauren Harvey, a graduating senior who dug through school archives to put together a photo display of Barat's history that now lines the walls of the main building's basement.
It is unclear what will happen to the campus and its buildings.
AP
by Nicole Ziegler Dizon
The final days of Barat College were spent much like those at any other school wrapping up for the summer: final exams, late-night study sessions, a boat cruise for graduating seniors.
But the mood was more somber and the tears flowed more freely among students realizing they weren't just saying goodbye for now, but forever. Barat will close its doors at the end of this month, a year after celebrating its 100th anniversary in Chicago's north suburbs.
''It was kind of the happiest and saddest time of my life because it was the best environment I've ever been in,'' said sophomore Morgan Lemmer, eyes welling up as she took a break from setting up chairs for the school's final graduation.
Faced with dwindling enrollment, tens of millions of dollars in needed repairs and a small endowment, the tiny liberal arts school -- which was taken over by DePaul University in 2001 -- is shutting down. About 150 students will make up the last graduating class at today's commencement.
Survival spurred merger
Barat's closure leaves six colleges of the 10 founded by the Society of the Sacred Heart, a Catholic order begun in France in 1800 by the college's namesake, St. Madeleine Sophie Barat. Originally an academy for young girls, it became a college around the turn of the century and thrived during a boom in Catholic women's schools in the 1950s. But enrollment lagged as women moved away from single-sex colleges in the 1960s and 1970s. The society got out of the business of running colleges in 1971, and those that remained struggled to stay afloat by going coed -- as Barat did in 1982 -- or by merging with bigger schools.
Survival was behind Barat's decision to merge with DePaul, the country's largest Catholic university, in 2001. But after spending $6 million to buy Barat and another $16 million on upgrades, DePaul trustees voted last year to shut down Barat, saying an enrollment hovering around 800 didn't bring in enough to break even.
''It was a long and disappointing decision process,'' said DePaul spokeswoman Denise Mattson.
Enrollment dropped to about 350 students this quarter. Lemmer was one of only a few dozen students in dorms that once held more than 300. Like many other underclassmen, she will transfer to one of DePaul's Chicago campuses.
Even with few students left, the school has worked hard to make its final year a celebration rather than a funeral, said acting Dean Gene Beiriger, a 20-year Barat veteran. Faculty made sure each gathering was not billed as ''the last,'' preferring barbecues and bands to teary-eyed speeches.
Students and alumni say it will be hard to replicate the family experience in a place where everyone knows everyone else.
''I'm going to miss this school. I would never have made it at a big school,'' said Lauren Harvey, a graduating senior who dug through school archives to put together a photo display of Barat's history that now lines the walls of the main building's basement.
It is unclear what will happen to the campus and its buildings.
AP
Barat College Faces Final Month
by Lindsay Beller
Staff Writer, Lake Forester
In a recent dream, Leslie Bertholdt stood in her yard watching the stars when an airplane flying overhead exploded and destroyed her neighborhood.Bertholdt, director of the college office at Barat College of DePaul University, believed the dream represented her anxiety over the school's imminent closure and her feelings that her community will soon be destroyed."That's the emotional level," said Bertholdt, a Lake Bluff resident and 11-year employee who is looking for a new job.
"There's a lot of anxiety."With less than a month left until the doors close for good on June 30, Barat College faculty, staff and students are preparing to say their final good-byes to the 101-year-old institution.The school will hold a centennial celebration on Saturday for students, faculty, staff and alumni where 1,000 copies of a Barat oral history will be distributed on DVD. Commencement is scheduled for June 11, where approximately 150 students will receive their degrees and Silvia Nasar, former Newsweek reporter and author of "A Beautiful Mind," will serve as the keynote speaker.
The emotions leading up to these events are "a mixed bag," said Jessica Horowitz, assistant dean of academic affairs."There is a deep sadness and some melancholy and some pretty low energy," she said. "I think people are trying to get up for the events, but it's difficult."Associate Dean Eugene Beiriger said the upcoming commencement will be "bittersweet.""On one hand, there is a clear understanding of what commencement means," he said. "On the other hand, there is a sense of accomplishment on the year."He credited staff and students with how they handled themselves during the transition."There is a sense of remarkable resilience," Beiriger said. "There's a strength that comes from having gone through this year. Everyone who dedicated themselves to getting the job done and the job done well deserves a lot of praise.
"DePaul University announced plans to close the school in February 2004, three years after the two schools merged, because of low enrollment and high costs associated with upgrading the facilities."We've been living with the closure for over a year," Horowitz said. "It's almost more painful to have so much time. Once April hit, the finality is really looming, and it's been really difficult for the people involved."A majority of faculty will continue to work at another DePaul campus, while about 20 staff members will receive severance packages, said Denise Mattson, a DePaul spokeswoman.
In March DePaul announced an agreement with the Dallas-based American College of Education to buy the assets of Barat College, but the 23-acre property remains for sale. The school will stay closed until a buyer is identified."It will be vacant and have security but no academic activity or other activities as we continue to consider potential offers," Mattson said.Pat Melchi, a graduating senior and Waukegan resident, is sad to see the school close without knowing what the next generation of life will be in the historic buildings on campus.
"It's the end of an era," she said.
Staff Writer, Lake Forester
In a recent dream, Leslie Bertholdt stood in her yard watching the stars when an airplane flying overhead exploded and destroyed her neighborhood.Bertholdt, director of the college office at Barat College of DePaul University, believed the dream represented her anxiety over the school's imminent closure and her feelings that her community will soon be destroyed."That's the emotional level," said Bertholdt, a Lake Bluff resident and 11-year employee who is looking for a new job.
"There's a lot of anxiety."With less than a month left until the doors close for good on June 30, Barat College faculty, staff and students are preparing to say their final good-byes to the 101-year-old institution.The school will hold a centennial celebration on Saturday for students, faculty, staff and alumni where 1,000 copies of a Barat oral history will be distributed on DVD. Commencement is scheduled for June 11, where approximately 150 students will receive their degrees and Silvia Nasar, former Newsweek reporter and author of "A Beautiful Mind," will serve as the keynote speaker.
The emotions leading up to these events are "a mixed bag," said Jessica Horowitz, assistant dean of academic affairs."There is a deep sadness and some melancholy and some pretty low energy," she said. "I think people are trying to get up for the events, but it's difficult."Associate Dean Eugene Beiriger said the upcoming commencement will be "bittersweet.""On one hand, there is a clear understanding of what commencement means," he said. "On the other hand, there is a sense of accomplishment on the year."He credited staff and students with how they handled themselves during the transition."There is a sense of remarkable resilience," Beiriger said. "There's a strength that comes from having gone through this year. Everyone who dedicated themselves to getting the job done and the job done well deserves a lot of praise.
"DePaul University announced plans to close the school in February 2004, three years after the two schools merged, because of low enrollment and high costs associated with upgrading the facilities."We've been living with the closure for over a year," Horowitz said. "It's almost more painful to have so much time. Once April hit, the finality is really looming, and it's been really difficult for the people involved."A majority of faculty will continue to work at another DePaul campus, while about 20 staff members will receive severance packages, said Denise Mattson, a DePaul spokeswoman.
In March DePaul announced an agreement with the Dallas-based American College of Education to buy the assets of Barat College, but the 23-acre property remains for sale. The school will stay closed until a buyer is identified."It will be vacant and have security but no academic activity or other activities as we continue to consider potential offers," Mattson said.Pat Melchi, a graduating senior and Waukegan resident, is sad to see the school close without knowing what the next generation of life will be in the historic buildings on campus.
"It's the end of an era," she said.
Barat College & DePaul
Barat College of Lake Forest had a similar agreement with DePaul. Barat Is now Closed! I found a couple of Articles for reading.
I will Post....
I will Post....
Update
I have come across some data that may be pertinant to the move. I will post this afternoon if I can pull it together....
the meeting is apparently planned for the 27th of this month...
the meeting is apparently planned for the 27th of this month...
Thursday, November 10, 2005
Blog Mechanics & Support
Hi All,
Welcome to the dialogue. Here are some blog basics.
1.) A Blog is basically an online journal. It is highly effective as a tool for allowing multiple people in different locations to share information and discourse.
2.) Anyone can respond to the posts on this blog if they know where the site is.
3.) Only members can initiate posts and membership is free.
4.) There are 3 blog administrators. Saradevil and Bill and Shimerbard31
Shimerbard31 -- shouldn't be bothered too much because she is hustling data.
Saradevil - Knows many of you and is very familiar with the way the blogs work.
Bill - Knows some of you and is very familiar with the way blogs work.
5.) In order to view comments to any post go to the original post and click on the word "comments" at the end of the entry.
6.) Tell as many alumn as you can about the blog.
Welcome to the dialogue. Here are some blog basics.
1.) A Blog is basically an online journal. It is highly effective as a tool for allowing multiple people in different locations to share information and discourse.
2.) Anyone can respond to the posts on this blog if they know where the site is.
3.) Only members can initiate posts and membership is free.
4.) There are 3 blog administrators. Saradevil and Bill and Shimerbard31
Shimerbard31 -- shouldn't be bothered too much because she is hustling data.
Saradevil - Knows many of you and is very familiar with the way the blogs work.
Bill - Knows some of you and is very familiar with the way blogs work.
5.) In order to view comments to any post go to the original post and click on the word "comments" at the end of the entry.
6.) Tell as many alumn as you can about the blog.
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
From Josh Hilgart
Sarah,
Thank you so much for this incredibly thoughtful collection of information and observations; you really delivered a wonderfully vivid and thorough service.
All,
Hello to everybody I know - for those who don't I finished with Sarah in Oxford (and started a year earlier). Too bad we come together on such somber news, whatever the wisdom of the move.
I will forward on this report to a few people I'm still in touch with and also want to thank Sarah for offering to voice the concerns of the absent. My initial reaction is that the move is a bad idea. In fact, I think it could seal Shimer's fate as an attractive appendage to a mundane experience instead of catapulting the college into national prominence, which I believe is possible with more money and good marketing.
On finding independent solutions and a good marketing angle, I'm stumped too. But I'm thinking that it's worth exploring what big money is out there that has a Shimer-sized hole it wants to fill. More explicitly, are there uncorrupted sources of funding that are looking to create a discourse that Shimer is primed to facilitate?
Because I work in lefty politics, I can think of liberal funders who are sick of both parties and would love to grow a political curriculum markedly different from the status quo (which these days consists of learning how to write sound-bytes that won’t be taken out of context and that red is a bad color for a yard sign). Shimer is the perfect ground to plant a new school of government that assumes rational discourse to be a priority instead of whatever monster now dictates policy-making dynamics. The ends are the means in democracy, right?
But there are other models too - music, community engagement, theater, applied public science, and, of course, pedagogy/education. There are probably a number of financial interests who want to foster programs that: 1) currently have no dialectical program of merit; 2) would require an existing home base like Shimer in order to foster the goals of the donors; 3) could flourish without altering Shimer's mission one iota.
In politics I can think of a number of funders who together could invest the tiny amount of money needed to guarantee Shimer can soldier on at least comfortably. Once you expand into other areas, the number of potential donors jumps.
Does this sound rational to folks? I think Shimer could become the # 1 school for clever high school students who know they want to work on community building, or getting rid of card-board cutouts in government, or encouraging critical thinking in public education, or approaching music as a cultural and scientific artifact as much as an artistic one.
Of course, students wouldn’t have to enroll in such a school in order to attend Shimer. And while I realize there are good programs budding out there already, none would be quite the same as the Shimer version.
- Josh Hilgart
Thank you so much for this incredibly thoughtful collection of information and observations; you really delivered a wonderfully vivid and thorough service.
All,
Hello to everybody I know - for those who don't I finished with Sarah in Oxford (and started a year earlier). Too bad we come together on such somber news, whatever the wisdom of the move.
I will forward on this report to a few people I'm still in touch with and also want to thank Sarah for offering to voice the concerns of the absent. My initial reaction is that the move is a bad idea. In fact, I think it could seal Shimer's fate as an attractive appendage to a mundane experience instead of catapulting the college into national prominence, which I believe is possible with more money and good marketing.
On finding independent solutions and a good marketing angle, I'm stumped too. But I'm thinking that it's worth exploring what big money is out there that has a Shimer-sized hole it wants to fill. More explicitly, are there uncorrupted sources of funding that are looking to create a discourse that Shimer is primed to facilitate?
Because I work in lefty politics, I can think of liberal funders who are sick of both parties and would love to grow a political curriculum markedly different from the status quo (which these days consists of learning how to write sound-bytes that won’t be taken out of context and that red is a bad color for a yard sign). Shimer is the perfect ground to plant a new school of government that assumes rational discourse to be a priority instead of whatever monster now dictates policy-making dynamics. The ends are the means in democracy, right?
But there are other models too - music, community engagement, theater, applied public science, and, of course, pedagogy/education. There are probably a number of financial interests who want to foster programs that: 1) currently have no dialectical program of merit; 2) would require an existing home base like Shimer in order to foster the goals of the donors; 3) could flourish without altering Shimer's mission one iota.
In politics I can think of a number of funders who together could invest the tiny amount of money needed to guarantee Shimer can soldier on at least comfortably. Once you expand into other areas, the number of potential donors jumps.
Does this sound rational to folks? I think Shimer could become the # 1 school for clever high school students who know they want to work on community building, or getting rid of card-board cutouts in government, or encouraging critical thinking in public education, or approaching music as a cultural and scientific artifact as much as an artistic one.
Of course, students wouldn’t have to enroll in such a school in order to attend Shimer. And while I realize there are good programs budding out there already, none would be quite the same as the Shimer version.
- Josh Hilgart
Cohesion
While trying desperately to maintain my focus on work today, I’m finding it rather difficult when I think of the situation Shimer is currently in. When Sarah first told me of it my initial reaction was that it simply could not be happening, but with the recent confirmation, I’m very concerned.
I’ve been worried about Shimer for some time. While I understand the schools admissions crisis and finical difficulty first hand, I can only imagine that part of this stems form a disconnect between those trusted with recruiting for Shimer, and the real Shimer student.
I’ve look at the pros and cons of this particular mess and all I can think is that it’s not worth it. Part of what makes Shimer so special is the cohesiveness of the school. While moving to this new campus may certainly allow for numerous opportunities, what will happen to that beautiful and fragile collective mentality? Only someone who doesn’t understand that collective need of the Shimer community would see this move as a good idea.
What makes Shimer and the program so unique and individual is not the program. If it were the program alone, many of would have been happier and perhaps healthier at another school. No, the program aside, it was the people that made Shimer special. The unique ability to share feelings, to develop personal philosophies and create new understanding that made the experience so valuable. I don’t think that would be sustained in this projected new environment in which students would be engulfed by this larger faceless entity that is ITT. Whatever can be done to prevent this from happening needs to be done quickly. I hope we can, all of us, scattered as we have become, find a way to join together to help save the spirit of Shimer before it is coldly destroyed.
I’ve been worried about Shimer for some time. While I understand the schools admissions crisis and finical difficulty first hand, I can only imagine that part of this stems form a disconnect between those trusted with recruiting for Shimer, and the real Shimer student.
I’ve look at the pros and cons of this particular mess and all I can think is that it’s not worth it. Part of what makes Shimer so special is the cohesiveness of the school. While moving to this new campus may certainly allow for numerous opportunities, what will happen to that beautiful and fragile collective mentality? Only someone who doesn’t understand that collective need of the Shimer community would see this move as a good idea.
What makes Shimer and the program so unique and individual is not the program. If it were the program alone, many of would have been happier and perhaps healthier at another school. No, the program aside, it was the people that made Shimer special. The unique ability to share feelings, to develop personal philosophies and create new understanding that made the experience so valuable. I don’t think that would be sustained in this projected new environment in which students would be engulfed by this larger faceless entity that is ITT. Whatever can be done to prevent this from happening needs to be done quickly. I hope we can, all of us, scattered as we have become, find a way to join together to help save the spirit of Shimer before it is coldly destroyed.
Discussion Guide Lines
For now anyone can comment on this blog. It helps if you identify yourself. If the site becomes a warehouse for rude comments or disparraging remarks I will simply delete the blog. So here are the rules.
1.) Feel Free to post as you please.
2.) Refrain from all disparraging remarks about individuals.
3.) All facutal data is welcome as long as it is factual, quantifiable data.
4.) All posts will be moderated and are subject to deletion at the discretion of the host.
5.) Try at all times to focus on the topic of Shimers move to the South Side of Chicago. How does your comment feed this discussion?
6.) If you feel like you don't have a big enough voice email me and I will talk to you about becoming a "team member" for the blog.
1.) Feel Free to post as you please.
2.) Refrain from all disparraging remarks about individuals.
3.) All facutal data is welcome as long as it is factual, quantifiable data.
4.) All posts will be moderated and are subject to deletion at the discretion of the host.
5.) Try at all times to focus on the topic of Shimers move to the South Side of Chicago. How does your comment feed this discussion?
6.) If you feel like you don't have a big enough voice email me and I will talk to you about becoming a "team member" for the blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)