Shimer Floor Plans?

I'd like to announce the start of the play-with-the-floor-plan-of-the-proposed-space-at-IIT contest! Someone other than me (hopefully) will be administering it! Nominate yourself as administrator and judge! No actual prizes or influence in the eventual floor plans! Just a way to float neat ideas off each other!

At the end of this post, you'll find the current floor plans and my brief sketch of an idea. I made it in Microsoft Paint, included in Windows. Take the floor plan as it is (right click and "save as") and take away walls with the click of a button (painting white over them) and label things with text!

Enter the contest to win glorious prizes! There are no prizes. This is not a contest.

Send your plans to me by email (n.kippleyogman@shimer.edu) or put them in my box in Prairie if you'd rather do it with white-out and pen. I'll post them somewhere when the semester begins. And figure out who may be responsible for figuring out what is eventually done and get all the proposed plans to him or her.

The only guidelines are that you can't knock down the pillars (little squares) and there should be some classrooms and potential office space.

Do it now. Seriously, how can we make this space Shimer?


Current layout

My sketch (one)

My sketch (two)

Outside picture

Best,

Noah

Let Me At 'Em, Sancho

Hope the link above works.

One of the things that hasn't been discussed yet--- what, if any, are the ramifications of the letters Jim passed out at the Assembly? Has anyone been in touch with the alderman who said such lovely things at the Assembly? Do we have copies of these letters? Yes, yes, we all know how I feel about Waukegan--- although some of us care to insult me and the hippy community by implying that I am a hippy, and thus show that they don't know me at all. Name your weapon, sirrah. Let us hope you do not blythely categorize me into something else I am not.

I find myself wishing that I knew if the whole offer is a beginning stance for negotiations or the firm and final offer (the latter, it seems, although I have been wrong before). And then I think--- does this indicate that we are really dealing with Shimerians here? And yes: what about Wednesdays?

I wish I knew what Susanne says about this. What Jack says. Yes, I trust the Buchanans. Yes, I trust Marc. But the more voices, the greater the harmonies, yes?

Happy holidays

Happy Holidays to everyone! Please take care of yourselves and have a happy holiday season!!!!

Calling All Teachers

From David Shiner: Assembly Motions

Here are the motions approved by the Assembly at its December 18 meeting:

1)Resolved, that it is the will of the Assembly of Shimer College that the College proceed with current negotiations with the Illinois Institute of Technology, and that, if and when the Board of Trustees judges that it is in the best interests of the College, Shimer enter into an agreement with IIT to relocate its undergraduate programs to the Chicago South Side campus of IIT and to offer courses there as early as fall 2006. MOTION CARRIES 46-29

2)Resolved, that it is the will of the Assembly that the Board of Trustees pursue offers from the city and community of Waukegan concurrently with the negotiations with IIT. MOTION CARRIES WITH ONE OPPOSED

The remainder of the motions are all recommendations of the Assembly continent upon Shimer's relocation to the IIT campus.

3)Resolved, that Shimer students have access to services that are available to IIT students, including but not limited to: extensive dining option, health services, library, computers, IT, and public transportation passes. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY

4)Resolved, that negotiations to lease space on the IIT campus include the following: (1) a minimum lease period of 15 years; (2) right of first refusal to acquire a self-contained space on the IIT campus should such a space become available and Shimer's finances permit; and (3) the prominent display of "Shimer College" and other welcoming features at and near the entrance to the Shimer space. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY

5)Resolved, that current Shimer students be guaranteed that their net costs for the years 2006-2009 will be no higher than would have been reasonable to expect had Shimer remained in Waukegan, taking financial aid into account. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY

6)Resolved, that Shimer’s academic calendar be adjusted to make cross-registration between Shimer and IIT possible. MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY

7)Resolved, that the Faculty and APC establish appropriate policies for cross-registration between Shimer and both IIT and VanderCook School of Music. MOTION CARRIES WITH TWO OPPOSED

8)Resolved, that Shimer pursue off-campus housing equipped with kitchens for students, as well as contiguous on-campus housing in an IIT dormitory. MOTION CARRIES

Those are all the substantive (as opposed to procedural) motions that were approved. Other motions were either defeated or tabled.

David Shiner

Speaker, Shimer College Assembly

From Yael (moved up from comments)

I wanted to post this as a main header instead of as a comment, but I don't want to wait for a to-join invitation, so here it is. Just pretend this is a new topic entitled "this is what propaganda looks like."

It's so weird getting letters from Shimer. I will admit, however, that I prefer it to getting strange phone calls from sorority-sounding telemarketers who are obviously reading a script off of a page as they ask me to donate money to Shimer and inform me that Shimer does not have the staff to make these phone calls themselves. It's a strange, impersonal approach and one which I don't think many alums would respond to well, me included. I wonder if it has anything to do with the low level donations.

In any case, I was disappointed to receive the "information of interest" letter in the mail because it read like propoganda. I'll be up front about the fact that I never liked Waukegan and took Metra to Chicago every chance I could get during my time at Shimer. However, I never went to the South Side of Chicago for safety reasons. I also know how hard it is to get from one part of Chicago to the next even in the better parts of the city. It's not like it's a hop, skip and a throw from all of the art museum. But I digress. My point is that this letter didn't even cover SAFETY in the "number of objections" list. And I think it's a huge issue. I know that the letter stated that neither the pros nor cons are exhaustive, but I still don't think leaving out this very vital point was just an oversight.

Also, if you look at the wording of the "pros" versus the "cons," it is totally inconsistent. Every word under the list of "various rationales" is not just a verb, but a strong verb that reads like a resume: providing, strengthening, creating, enhancing, giving, promoting, positioning. The language used for the "number of objections" is extremely wishy washy. Like for example, "the loyalty that SOME alums feel to the Waukegan campus" (emphasis mine), the POTENTIAL loss of a distinctive Shimer identity, the lingering unfavorable reputation of the south side of Chicago DESPITE RECENT IMPROVEMENTS." This language makes the objections seem weak. Imagine if the rationales were written in that language. "The possibility that some people think Shimer college might grow that some but not all alum believe would exist" or "overall nervousness about Shimer's fundraising base weakening, despite the possibility that it could strengthen."

Is it just me, or does anybody else feel that a decision has already been made and this letter is just propaganda?

I feel like the most important thing is Shimer's survival, it is more important than this particular decision, finding ways we can all get together to support one another and support the college which has done so much for us. I felt this strange nostalgia I didn't expect just reading this blog and seeing how passionate everyone is, how they've taken the Shimer experience and applied it to different goals... even the way people have reached different conclusions in a way that is so thought-out and balanced and Shimerian. But when I get letters like this, I feel like it totally insults not just my intelligence but that of everyone who's ever stepped into a Shimer classroom and stepped out a different person. Despite what it says, to me it seems obvious that this letter obviously is not intended to provide a balanced perspective and to seek feedback, but to sell an idea. I'm disappointed. When my alma mater claims to send a document to "share an account of the issues at hand" I'd prefer to receive an account that is less one-sided.

Whether or not Shimer moves is obviously not my decision. The fact that my parents would have never let me attend a college on the South Side of Chicago (and that I would be very hesitant to visit for the same reason) probably doesn't matter at this point. I just find it disengenious for this letter to say that moving to that area would "provide an opportunity for Shimer alums to reengage with the college." Just a bit off kilter, don't you think?

I think everyone here has brilliantly hashed the rest of the rationale bullet points quite well, but I just wanted to add something about the whole "providing basic, traditional student services" and "overcoming isolation by giving students contact with greater cultural diversity, larger communities and more academic opportunities" thing. In my three years in Waukegan, I took two yoga classes in Lake Forest, a class at the Carl Jung Center in Evanston, went to the gym in Waukegan regularly, was involved with two pagan groups, was heavily involved with different types of activism in Chicago, and basically had a lot of contact with a large, culturally diverse community. This is a choice. It is possible to live in South Chicago and stay in one's Ivory Tower (and in fact that's probably a choice I would make were I at ITT, under the watchful eye of campus security.) It is possible to take falling-apart dormitory rooms and make them beautiful (as Kathleen demonstrated when she moved into the room I was in...what was it, 18? It took her two days to make it beautiful). It is possible to go to the gym, go to the library, take the train to a bookstore, learn how to cook, hang out in the computer lab, stay engaged with the college, have contact with a culturally diverse community, have access to the cultural assets of Chicago, and all the numerous rationales listed in these bullets in this letter--while still residing in Waukegan. It is much more difficult to maintain a tight-knit community amongst a much bigger one, to experience a city one has to worry about physical safety to get to.

I still have a feeling this decision has already been made, but just wanted to add my voice to the record, to the long list of objections to this move, and the inherent uncertainty of the positive projections listed in favor of this idea.

Yael Grauer, class of '02

Assembly from Afar

For those who are unable to attend the special Assembly tomorrow, Shimer will provide an online reporting system which will allow you to track the progress of various motions and votes.

PLEASE NOTE THAT ONLY THOSE PRESENT AND ELIGIBLE ARE ALLOWED TO VOTE.

Our online system will not allow you to interact in any way with the proceedings short of reading the information as it is posted and/or updated.

The best way to use this tool without overwhelming the servers and/or becoming frustrated would be to let the page load and --occasionally-- refresh your browser or press your F5 key.

For those who might have forgotten the sometimes glacial pace at an assembly of such importance - leaning on your refresh button really won't do much besides swamp the server. Try a refresh cycle of every five or ten minutes.

To take part in viewing the progress of Assembly starting at 4:00PM Central Standard Time on Sunday December 18th, use the following link:

https://portal.shimer.edu/sites/special/default.aspx

USER NAME: shimerguest
PASSWORD: cinderella

(Note that this is a secure page, please copy the link EXACTLY as it appears above)

If you have any questions or experience difficulty, we will have very limited ability to help as our I.T. staff will be taking part in Assembly as community members. You might try to send e-mail to this address: assemblysupport@shimer.edu

As a guest, you will not be able to navigate to other parts of the campus portal, please don't try.

Thank you for your interest in this important event in the history of our College.

Marc Hoffman

SaraDevil's Response to Noah's Survey

I have wanted to answer this and today I finally have time.

What initially brought me to Shimer was the amazing thing that was the Escher campaign. That campaign was brilliant in it’s simplicity and had a profound effect on my decision. I believe that Shimer heard about me, because I certainly had never heard about Shimer, when I ticked boxes on both my ACT and SAT exams for colleges under 900 students. That must be how the found me.

Before Shimer Antioch was my first choice, a great deal of that because of the politics and the community there, followed by a small college in Ohio whose name escapes me, and finally OSU because my father was very, very concerned it be on my list, preferably as a first choice. Then I got a postcard from Shimer. It was simple and to the point. Do you like to read? / Don’t you like to read? Two stickers. Pick one, put it on a side of the postcard, mail the post card in. Well, hell, I was floored. And I liked to read.

So I sent in the postcard and figured I’d see what was what. Didn’t expect much. A few days later a package arrived in the mail. It had a letter. It was written by David Buchanan. It began:

Dear Sara,

This is a form letter. I hate form letters.

I will never forget that opening of that letter that I received, and I’m sure I’m not the only one. I read those words and my brain turned over and Shimer was the place I wanted to be. I was equally enticed by the lack of concern for my ACT and SAT scores, as I felt standardized testing was a load of crap (my ACT’s were good, but my SAT’s weren’t, not helped by the fact that I went to sleep for an hour during the test, and burdened by the sheer fact that I could not afford to take the test again) and that real education had to step outside of programming and onto something more.

I spent four years in High School hating education. I even forced my English teacher to turn my class into an independent study so I could learn something, which she almost held against me later, but I digress. Needless to say, I was not an average student, I was not looking for an average University, and Shimer set itself apart. Because Dave Buchanan hated form letters I loved him. And I decided to go to Shimer.

Everything made Shimer appealing at that point, but mostly that it was an escape. I did not visit the campus before going to Shimer. I signed on the dotted line, signed my future debt free world away, and on a hot day in August packed into a Van for a full day drive to a place I would call home that I had never seen before. I had talked it though. I’d talked to Dave, among others. I talked with Bill Patterson, who I immediately adored. I talked to Psyche on the phone because I liked her name and though, “This is someone I want to know.” I was manic, and a little crazy, and I was going to be taken away to some strange place I had never seen that was more attractive then anything I had known. I knew what to expect, though, from reading about Shimer in the catalog, from talking to Shimer on the phone. I new it was an odd assortment of buildings and eclectic people. Shimer did not disappoint me.

I arrived with stuff in tow, we parked next to 438, and the van officially died. Dave, and several others finally managed to find someone to come out and put a new alternator in the van so it could be moved to the parking lot so my things could be moved to Godot. I would be living in Armstrong, which was not ready. Everyone was very helpful. My mother, in typical fashion, decreed my decision and stated on the spot that I was returning home with her then and there. I did not. Shimer was my home. I cried for a long time my first night at Shimer. I had nothing to eat. I had no money. I had a box of pillows, and some clothes, and a new place to live, and I was freaking out and loosing my mind, and very very afraid, but somehow Shimer would make it all okay.

And it did.

I met Dave and enjoyed his cigarette smoking man pose and the way he dealt with my mother. I was happy and relieved. And everything did get better.

Then when it really began, after running the gauntlet and getting classes and beginning to throw myself into reading, and two day weeks, then it really, really became the place that attracted me. I never understood how people who left after a few weeks did it. Shimer seemed to perfect. Why would you want to leave?

The program was exactly what I wanted. No longer was I being programmed to thinking a preformatted way to perform much like a trained monkey on a test. I was thinking, perhaps for the first time in my life I was really thinking about what I was doing, who I was, and how I learned. Educational methodology will tell you that the kind of learning we do at Shimer is truly valuable for establishing metacognative thought and personal dependency skills. This has remained a valuable tool of Shimer. It helped me survive many things, not the least of those things Shimer. Bill Patterson told me on my third day at Shimer that I would hate it eventually. I told him he was wrong, I could never hate this.

In the middle of my second year though, I began to consider leaving. Leaving for me was not the program, it was the pressure. The pressures were the lack of money. That was it, the number one reason for wanting to leave. I could not afford Shimer. I had been on my own since I’d refused my mother and not gotten back into that van. I paid for the expenses not covered by my loans, small scholarship and grants with my work-study money. I was working 20 hours a week at Shimer the max allowed, while balancing 3 classes. I worked hard, to hard, my CWS ran out, and then I was in big trouble. I had no money, no prospects, no car, and all the other pressures of being on my own. That is what made me want to leave.

Shimer helped that too. There was intervention, and help, and assurance, and I stayed, and it was a good decision. Hard, but good. My best friend in the world moved away, he couldn’t take it anymore. I stayed and was comforted through it by my slowly coming around friend Sam, and by Psyche. Shimer let me stay through the summer’s and I loved that because it meant I did not have to go home. I always loved how quiet Shimer was in the summer time, and how wonderful Waukegan was. It was cheap and easy to live there, and I lived well on less then 70 dollars a month. Life was perfect and grand, and Shimer made it so.

Then I got sick. And Shimer helped me through that. Four days after surgery I started classes on time with everyone else my Junior year. And Shimer took care of me, and looked after me, and helped me get the help I needed. I needed that help, and Shimer, like a warm hand, took me in and kept me safe. Sam brought bread, Psyche laughter, 309 the magical mystical cures they always seemed to have, and Nancy Rose intercepted a phone call from my mother and made sure she could not find me, so that I had time to heal. Shimer was there for me when I needed it most. And I loved it for that.

I went to my classes and I continue to learn to think about thinking and learn about learning and I was very happy. The program was wonderful and I loved it. I loved my classes and the challenges, and the discussion and the writing. For my Hum comp I wrote my final paper as a formal essay by Aristotle critiquing Virgil (assuming Aristotle had lived a little longer). I learned to think outside of boxes, and passed with honors. I learned to live and be free and happy with who I was, with my thoughts and my thinking. Shimer did all that for me.

I didn’t want to leave Shimer when the end finally came, but I could not linger on. Part of that was just who I was, and part of that was knowing that I could not be in classes anymore so I had to go. I needed a little distance and I got that. I got a lot more. But I miss Shimer, and think about it often. I’m surrounded by Shimer everyday in a way, as those people whom I love more then anything, Sam, Sarah, Psyche, Wolf, Bonnie, MikeyW, David S and B, Barb, Eileen, and others and others, are all still there for me.

Last year I decided to partake in some foolishness. I need the help of Shimer which was the only place I knew that existed where I could get shot records. I called up and spoke with a student who put me on the line with Barb Boghart. She sent a fax in just a few hours and even a fed ex with the originals. Could I do that at any other institution?

During the last Winter the laws in Korea changed and Americans working here were suddenly required to present original unopened transcripts from Universities. I called Shimer and Bill Patterson answered the phone. He put me on to Barb Stones phone because Barb B. was out of the office. Barb emailed me right away and I had transcripts in less then a few days. Because Shimer is a place where we take care of each other, no matter how long we have been gone. I love that about Shimer.

I may be removed from the campus life, but I’m not forgotten. Shimer continues to look after me. Daily I return to what I learned at Shimer to read massive amounts of text and glean the important information, to argue and opinion or point and be able to support that with evidence, to help others understand and idea or concept. I learned to do that at Shimer. I refined it as a skill that I can use whenever I need to. I make impossible things happen on a day to day basis. When I have all the pieces of the puzzle I can do amazing things. Shimer showed me how to see those pieces in unusual ways. I’ll always be grateful for that.

Shimer was one of the most difficult things I ever did. I wouldn’t trade it for the world. It is both appealing and unappealing, but underneath it all is the love of learning and the love of the participants that holds it together. That will keep me coming back to it every time.

When people ask me if they should go to Shimer I almost always say no. I’m selfish and I don’t want to share. So I say no and then tell them what Shimer means to me, and very rarely do they listen to that no. More often then not, it makes Shimer that much more interesting and appealing.

Shimer is a wonderful place. We are lucky to have it. If the community can survive the move, then others will find what I found in Shimer, and they will be lucky to do so. I know how lucky I am.

Sincerely,

Sara Davila

Ramblings on all things Moveumental

I haven't had nearly as much time as I would like to post or to at least state my thought about Shimer and Shimer's potential move. Part of that is because I'm in the midst of a personal transition crisis at the moment and adding Shimer's transition crisis to mine just seems like a bad idea. But it is hard not to think about it at the moment, because at the moment I am again without a solid place to call home, and that almost always makes me think of Shimer. Regardless of where I was there, I was always home, even when sleeping in the gym basement because the heat had gone out in the dorm, or because I was visiting the campus and needed a place to crash, I knew I was home.

On the proposed move, I've listened to many of the different arguments made here and have tried to collect in my mind some pros and cons. I'm going to restate what I feel those are here, as a why of trying to organize my own thoughts on this argument.

Pros:

IIT would allow Shimer to offer more to the current attending students.

IIT would reduce maintenance and up-keep expenses of the current campus.

IIT would help to increase enrollment to move Shimer towards a goal of 300 FTE's.

IIT would offer Shimer students amenities not currently had, like an eating program.

IIT would offer Shimer students closer contact to Chicago, a vibrant and beautiful city in it's own right, despite all of its sordid problems.

Cons:

The space at IIT is not nice. It's not very cozy. It's not Prairie House on a cold day, or it's not the only air-conditioned building on campus on an insanely hot summer day, like say Koko house would be.

IIT's no 438 with the octagonal tables, historical flavor, and years of wandering students to add scrawling history to he tiled bathrooms with covered tubs and creatively renovated second floor to allow for offices.

ITT does not guarantee a fix to the enrollment problem.

ITT is not ours. We don't own it. We would be leasing it.

IIT is moving to fast in it's own, understandable way, but sometimes with a dialogical society you need to take things slow.

I think it is easy to see where my heart is based on my cons, however, at the end of the day those are cons.

I've been back and forth over the debate to try to figure out where I stand. When I first heard about this move I was 100% not for it. That was a matter of personal taste, more then anything else. However, I started to think about it. That is an unfortunate thing for me because part of the work that I do is making impossible things happen and work. I'm actually quite good at making the impossible happen. For example I managed to turn a farcical five day English immersion "fun camp" into a legitimate, grounded, methodological institute of learning, that’s still fun. It wasn't easy, but I kept saying it was possible and I was right.

So, when I think about Shimer moving, though my initial reaction was no way no how, I started to think about it like any other problem I deal with on a day to day basis and began to see how to make it possible. Bear with me, I might ramble on for a bit, but I have the time to do so at the moment so I will.

Shimer moving to IIT is certainly possible. The program that Shimer employees is sound enough to be taught anywhere, and is truly grounded enough that any student lucky enough to come into contact with it will grow in leaps and bound by merely experiencing it. It would certainly be a boon to IIT students to be able to enjoy the experience that is Shimer even if they did not immerse themselves in it as Shimer students will.

Considering the dietary habits of the lay Shimerian, having a food program would not be such a horrible thing. In fact, it may be better for all of us in the long run.

Living in Chicago does have advantages, and being a school in Chicago is certainly attractive, may in fact be more attractive to students. And, program or no program, Sheridan Road home or not, without students Shimer will die.

The space, though institutional, can be made cozy, by association, by the love that Shimerians bring to it naturally, by the learning, by the experience. It is possible. Anything is possible.
A move would not be a death blow, but a change, and while change is difficult it is not always bad. Even our dear Socrates if asked might consider the move and think of it. Perhaps he addressed it, I recall:

Then if he [the prisoner] called to mind his fellow prisoners and what passed for wisdom in his former dwelling-place, he would surely think himself happy in the change and be sorry for them. They may have had a practice of honouring and commending one another, with prizes for the man who had the keenest eye for the passing shadows and the best memory for the order in which they followed or accompanied one another, so that he could make a good guess as to which was going to come next. Would our released prisoner be likely to covet those prizes or to envy the men exalted to honour and power in the Cave? Would he not feel like Homer's Achilles, that he would far sooner 'be on earth as a hired servant in the house of a landless man' or endure anything rather than go back to his old beliefs and live in the old way?
(Plato, 1945, p. 230)

As much as I love the Waukegan campus, I am not willing to lock myself in chains and see it as the most perfect, the most beautiful and the most true home of Shimer. If we are going to be truly honest with ourselves then we must be honest about at least considering the move. To take a chance on that change and realize that it might not be so bad. I’m willing to consider chances.

However wonderful all that may be however, I am also practical, as many of us here are, and I like to think of things in practical terms of survival, a life skill which I also learned at Shimer, surviving on nothing but my work study used both to live and to pay for my education at the same time, a trying thing my first year, as I recall.

As a practical person I would rehash many of those arguments made before. However, the greatest one is the speed. Just as our poor prisoner came to finally accept the wisdom, he had the grace and good will of time to do so. He was reluctant when first dragged into the light, and unwilling to accept. So am I. I am reluctant and unwilling to accept such a radical life change for the institution I still think of has home so many years later, without at least some more assurances of how it really would be better.

Show me the students.
Show me the money.
Show me the support.

So far, what we have at best is a potential leasing situation. We have all our varied eggs in one very fragile basket that could be a better reality, or could be much worse. While I think Shimer might survive the move, I’m much more concerned that if it doesn’t survive it, then it won’t survive at all. For those who would look back and say, we did it in the 70’s-80’s, I’d say that at that time there were more alums, and a small core of very dedicated professionals who gave up their lives for an institution that is often ungrateful, unsupportive, and unhelpful. Though they helped bring Shimer back like a phoenix, I’m not sure that same support system is in place to do it a second time. I fear for that possibility.

And that brings me, alas, to the final point. I don’t think the move is in the best interest for Shimer at this time. The small bonuses of the IIT move don’t fix the underlying problems. The underlying problems can certainly be fixed in Waukegan, but when and how? And that leave us, the alumn’s who have been coming here, in a quandary. Because, essentially, it is now up to the 100-150 so who have graduated in the last few years to find a way to make this school work before it doesn’t exist anymore. For that I will continue to do whatever I can. To make the home we currently have the best is my desire. I think home is in Wauekgan. I think the campus can be the place we want it to be with or without IIT, and I’m looking at it with a fresh mind, from knowing that the grass my in fact be greener.


My own transition crisis not withstanding (I made the personal decision that the move for less pay, to a less swanky position was better) I don’t think that a move at this time will be the best for the school. For all those personal and philosophical reasons that have been well outlined I believe that. For all that Shimer is my home, I believe that. For all the lack of time in the world, I’d rather spend the little I have trying to create the utopian educational atmosphere in our Waukegan surroundings, than lose it all for a transition that can offer potential, but not real adequate hope.

As always rambling,

Sara


References
Plato. (1945). The Republic of Plato. London: Oxford University Press.

Dubensky's Postscript

Noah,

I'm not sure if it's too late, and I doubt that my attempt at being funny will be successful, but one approach to a bad argument is to forgive it; another approach is to laugh at it.

I wanted to first say that I agree with your conclusion in a few thoughts "that it would be more difficult to hold on to the College's key mission at IIT." But what did you mean by your November 30 blog posting to Ed: "The fact that the announcement was a bald-faced lie was what made me mad"? I'm still trying to figure out what a bald-faced lie would look like.

Is Barbara your research paper adviser? Could you tell Barbara that Michael has studied the Shimer College Student Catalog very carefully, and he needs to know what page in the Shimer College Student Catalog does it state that the purpose of Shimer College is to "take the mission of the College, education, to new students...to those who are overly confident and need a bit of knocking down." Should the Shimer College Student Catalog be rewritten for the next edition in order to integrate this idea of knocking students down into the mission statement? This is what Barbara must dream about after a night of grading papers, especially after the crap that I used to turn in to her in my first couple of years.

Wouldn't Albert be a good professor to work on a thesis question about what constitutes evidence in literary criticism (unfortunately, a tape recorder, legal documents, and citing professionals seem to be more persuasive as evidence than analyzing the style, attempting to perform a close reading, or interpreting the arguments)? If you do see Albert, could you tell him that I received his second phone call on my voice mail which means I now have evidence of his method and he can call for a phone consultation about how to improve his method at 300$ an hour? But since Albert isn't rich, could you tell Albert calling me up in order to make me doubt my thoughts, my writing, and my mental health is not only a perfect demonstration of the kind of pedagogy that he should try to avoid in the future, but it's also not going to work anymore (bad Albert; bad, bad)?

Could you do me a favor since you are a student member of the board? Could you tell the board at the next board meeting that if they put as much thought into how excellent the faculty were truly-in-practice doing their jobs as they and the faculty did into the rhetoric of these arguments that they would have 300 FTE's (maybe only 200 FTE's because Shimer is still a bit odd) before they even knew it? Could you tell the board that maybe they should buy some new Hondas for the staff if they want to attract and retain more students?

Could you also ask David Shiner if Young Kim's Condition is "If Shimer and IIT can agree on lease terms by January, they will hold the space for us without rent for an additional several months"? This is a strangely-worded statement, which I could benefit from some legal assistance in understanding. Does it mean if Shimer College adheres to the strict time frame and agrees to the terms of a lease [agree on lease terms does not necessarily mean sign the lease] with IIT by January then it will save money on a few month's rent (which is a bit amusing, I have to admit)?

This proposal still feels wrong, and I have read a lot of blog entries, attended multiple presentations, and written too many blogs entries. It seems as if IIT respected getting into a relationship with Shimer College enough to be to open to waiting before getting married to Shimer College; I would, therefore, have preferred if Shimer College launched "A More Beautiful Home for Shimer College (Possibly at IIT) Campaign" and then waited patiently for a better facility to have become available at IIT; even if that's naive, I would have been able to support that campaign. We could then have had a chance to really mull it over, think it through, and talk about it (and talk about it; and talk about it; and talk about it).

This blog has become so quiet that I have a feeling that I may have written the unthinkable truth; in my pursuit of truth and justice, if I have written anything true, please point it out to me so I can edit this blog accordingly, because I have not willfully written anything true in my blog postings. Everything that I have written has been written in a dishonest manner and in bad faith, since I sometimes think that Shimerians may be a bit too over-zealous in their faith for Shimer. We should afterall keep them on their toes, so they don't think they can get away with not doing what we go into debt the big bucks for.

I wish that I could end with a quote by Aristotle, but I have a bad memory and I don't have quotes at the tip of my tongue like some people seem to have a talent for. But didn't Aristotle say something to the effect of excellence being a question of the importance of the motive, the end, and the means; if someone knows which quote I am referring to, maybe you could share it with me. I'll check my edition of Aristotle; I'm almost sure it's in Nichomachean Ethics, which I'm glad because I won't reread Posterior Analytics (although it's a catchy title especially if you are sitting next to a good-looking student) even if it had the answer to all of the problems in the world.

Sam, I think I just took that stress pill (laughter) you recommended; as a massage therapist, you would think I would know how to recognize areas of stress in the body and respond to pain in order help the person achieve homeostasis.

Did you know that massage therapists and literary critics share something in common?

A massage therapist who develops his or her proprioceptors can feel the exact location of a hair that is located in a thick book even if there are hundreds of pages in front of it; a literary critic who is good at his or her craft can recognize the signature of the writer by noticing punctuation marks, specific words, phrases, and sentences.

M.

From David Shiner

Hi All,

David Shiner has dirstributed a packet of information to the community to help make the upcoming decisions. It won't be posted publicly, but David has asked that I make it available to fomer community members. If you send me an email, I'll get you the document. It's twenty three pages of thrilling reading.

My email, once again, is n.kippleyogman@shimer.edu

With Love,

Noah Kippley-Ogman

Alternate proposal link

This didn't come through before. It's what I refer to below as the first link.

Erik

http://www.shimerhenge.com/docs/Alternative%20plan%20proposal_22Nov2005.doc

Alternative Plan Proposal

Shimer folks:

Below please find links to three documents that an alum, Michael Weinman ('98), and I put together in response to the IIT proposal. The first, the "Alternative Plan Proposal," argues for the necessity and feasibility of a pilot project through which to gain more information about partnering and/or moving. The second, "Critiques&Replies," regards the Proposal.

The last is a brief multiple-choice survey seeking to learn more about the significance that Waukegan played for alums in their decision to come/stay/leave Shimer. I encourage you to fill it out and return it to me at erik@shimer.edu. I will work with Noah to make sure this information informs his findings as well.

We hope to make a constructive contribution to this discussion with these documents. If you have any questions or comments, feel free to contact us.

Best,
Erik Badger ('97), erik@shimer.edu
Michael Weinman ('98), Michael Weinman

http://www.shimerhenge.com/docs/Critiques&Replies%20to%20Alternative%20Plan_22Nov2005.doc

http://www.shimerhenge.com/docs/waukegan%20alum%20survey.doc

From Barbara Stone

Hi Everybody,

It’s Barbara Stone, Dean for a time in the early 90s, and Dean now, with a stint in Development in between. I’ve been following the blog for a long time; it’s been good to hear from so many of you again, and to follow the discussion.

Of course I’ve also been trying to pull my thoughts together for a while. This past Sunday I gave an Academic Affairs speech to the Assembly at the College. Most of it treated the long-term academic issues I see facing the College in the years ahead – whether we stay in Waukegan or go to Chicago. I also outline some details related to the possibility of a move to IIT, and report on a faculty discussion of the issue. So, I think this should be of interest to many of you.

Though I understand that the blog is meant to be a personal discussion, for me this speech is very personal, and outlines my own views of how I see things. So, I’ve excerpted the section (yes, it’s long) that treats IIT for all of you to read.

And, to make my life easier (it’s the end of the semester and extremely hectic) I have asked Noah to post it for me since he can do it more quickly than I can. I will of course read responses; and feel welcome to email me at Barbara@shimer.edu too.

From: Academic Affairs Speech
Barbara S. Stone
December 4, 2005

I have excerpted the lengthy section that treats my view of the academic long-term issues that face the College, and how a move to IIT relates to them.

…………
The question I want to address is: How do I see the discussion of the possibility of a move to IIT, and the rethinking of how we do things here, fitting into the mission and the long-term vitality of the College? And, since this is a State of Academic Affairs speech, I will narrow it down even further, and focus on the “academic vitality” part – rather than on the long term financial well-being, though these two things are closely connected.
.
I shall begin by taking stock, and outline where we are, and how we got here. I shall consider a number of issues that impinge on what I consider to be the long-term health and vitality of the College, especially those that impact the future of our academic programs. I will add some basic information which may help to answer a few questions that have come up repeatedly in my conversations with others in the last weeks. My major argument is that, even leaving aside financial difficulties, it is of primary importance that the College’s enrollment grow significantly in the next few years, in order to retain its level of excellence for future generations of students. To my mind, this is one of the basic questions that must be kept foremost in mind as we weigh the option “To Stay or Go.” Some issues I will be addressing will be described slightly differently in a paper which David Shiner is putting together in preparation for the Assembly discussion in two weeks, but hearing them more than once is probably a good thing - at least it’s taken me a while to fully wrap my head around some of these matters.

First, to the current enrollment situation: quickly, somewhat bleakly, and to the point. This year’s entering class was the smallest in a long time, more precisely since 1987. We also have an enormous number of seniors who are expecting to graduate in May. This is the result of a combination of factors, primarily more transfer students and much less attrition. But the number of students who will continue next year, if there were absolutely no attrition – obviously not the case - is that we have 72 remaining students, 21 in the Weekend Program, 51 in the Weekday Program. This doesn’t include readmits, and there are always some, nor does it include new students. Nevertheless, chances are very high, even if Admissions has an extraordinary year, that we will have fewer than 100 FTEs (full-time equivalent students) for the first time in a decade. Though one could argue that money and size, are in fact somewhat peripheral, and that smallness, in and of itself, is a plus, I do not believe this, at least at this scale.

A declining student body has implications for a number of things at the College. I’ll rattle off a few quickly and go into greater depth on some others. Having a critical mass of eligible students to warrant the Shimer-in-Oxford Program is important; lack thereof could place that program in jeopardy. Small enrollment limits the number of elective offerings each semester. And, even though some may love it, it guarantees having the same fellow students in class after class, over and over again. Yes, it can be argued that it forces one to learn to get along better; but it can limit the entry of new ideas and perspectives. In addition, these enrollment figures have major implications for the question of faculty size in the coming years. Today, not counting off- campus faculty members, we have 11 faculty members teaching in the Weekday and Weekend programs. None of these are less than 40 years of age, and the ratio of senior faculty to junior faculty is 9/2. Looking to the future, we are reaching, or have reached the time in which some of our senior members of the faculty may be looking towards retirement. Additionally, other faculty members will be requesting Leaves of Absences as a time for renewal, and to explore other opportunities. Yet, because of static and/or declining enrollments, limitations are now placed on the hiring of new faculty. This is the second year in which we have not brought in new faculty members, nor do I anticipate that this will be possible next year, wherever we are. Though I’m not confident about estimating a “healthy” senior faculty/junior faculty ratio, too many of either is not desirable. Junior faculty prevent a sense of stasis in the senior faculty; they bring in new ideas and vitality, and make us view our procedures from the point of view of a newcomer, which may be difficult but good for all of us. Especially at a time when faculty are looking towards retirement, it is important that new faculty learn from those who are most experienced with our method of teaching and the curriculum. So bringing in new faculty quickly is pivotal to the long term health of the College. At the other end, whenever we have brought in three or more junior faculty in one year, it has been disruptive and has not worked out well. One wants a balance of seasoned teachers and newer members. This can only occur with a sizeable student enrollment which allows for more turnover. For this reason, as I see it, the primary issue before us, on an academic level, is how to grow College enrollment, and how to make the best judgment as to where this can best happen.

With this background, I will clarify a few issues raised by a move of a considerable portion of our operations to IIT. I am of course working on some of these matters right now, but will share my thoughts with you on some of the details. I emphasize that under this proposal Shimer will remain an independent identity and is not becoming part of another college or university.

Academically, wherever we are the College will hold true to its academic mission of original sources in small discussion classes with the Core Curriculum comprising approximately 2/3 of a student’s course registration. Class size and reading lists would not change because we were moving. In fact I would say that most curricular issues and academic requirements at the College are independent of time and place. The Weekend Program, before settling here in Waukegan, took place in different venues, and graduated a terrific group of students, Bill Paterson among them. We would also have our own bookstore and continue to use our won editions of texts.

In terms of cross registrations at IIT, course prerequisites would need to be honored for students registering for courses at IIT or Shimer. For example, Shimer students would need to demonstrate mathematical competency for advanced IIT math courses; IIT students would need to show competencies in 1 & 2 level Shimer courses prior to taking 3-levels. This could be done by placement exams, or, as with Shimer transfer students, we would use the Bachelor of Science model to determine by-pass of core courses. Likewise for elective courses, the same standards would be applied to IIT students as to Shimer students. Shimer students interested in pre-med programs or teaching certification programs in science and math could get a head start on this work prior to graduation. Additionally, VanderCook College of Music is located on the IIT campus; this would give our students the opportunity to take music lessons and courses, which has been a long-term interest of ours, but difficult to accommodate here. So, this represents an argument that being closer to IIT would enhance our course offerings. However, to make cross registrations possible would require changes to our calendar to conform more closely to IIT’s time schedules and calendar.

In addition, we would need to reserve spaces in our classes for Shimer students “over IIT students.” I would expect IIT to likewise give preference to their students. This would require earlier registration and planning for Shimer students, and that, dare I say, may not be such a terrible thing.

What would it feel like to encounter a non-Shimer group of people on a daily basis, and not just when I get on the train and leave Waukegan? In a way it’s been very comfortable here; it’s known and familiar, despite the irritations of being on a campus with deferred maintenance, leaky roofs, scanty resources, and copy machines that are always breaking down. Yeah, on some level it’s pretty comfortable and we all have our habits and know one another’s. I think for many of us there is comfort in small numbers, except for having to respond to the occasional outsider’s question: “What’s wrong with you that you’re so small?” But, as you know by now, I’m not sure this smallness is such a good thing. In fact, I’m pretty sure it isn’t. I say this despite some arguments I have heard in the last weeks, some of the more convincing ones, as to whether there is something about the Shimer curriculum that invites or needs an ascetic way of life.

Nor is such smallness a part of the Shimer mission. As I argued above, the danger is that it can result in personal, if not institutional ossification. At IIT, we would have interactions with many more people, or at least it would be quite difficult not to. This would be a challenge. It is very easy when encountering a new culture to find oneself tending towards the “us” and “them” mentality. Some Shimerians might find meeting new people exhilarating, others might feel: “What do I have in common with all those others who are “techies, nerds, urbanites, … fill in your own words?” and they might dismiss the whole project and leave. When I hear this kind of talk, I find myself thinking – I do have a lot in common with those others– we’re all humans. And “ussing” and “theming”, though well understood to anyone here who has taken Natural Sciences 2 and read Lorenz’ On Aggression, is quite a dangerous thing, especially if one has even a minimum level of commitment to peace and justice. Closer to home, I am reminded of the “disdain” that Weekday students and Weekend students felt towards one another when the Weekend Program first came to Waukegan. Three weeks ago the Weekend students in my Sunday afternoon discussion group begged to be together with the Weekday students if we move since the students from both programs have such great discussions with one another and feel so much that they are part of the same school. I was really touched by this. So, I think this would be a challenge, but might make me - I won’t speak for others - just a bit more open-minded than I tend to be. And to me that’s what education is all about.

It is clear to me that the discussions of the last few weeks have already changed us, and that we can’t go back to the “before-the-IIT-discussion-started-mentality” – in large part because we can’t continue operating in this way in Waukegan – whether the argument is of a financial nature, or an academic one, as I have put forth here. I’d like to read the mission statement of the College, something we rarely pay as much attention to as we should. It has new meaning for me these days.
“The mission of Shimer College is education – education for active citizenship in the world. Education is more than the acquisition of factual knowledge or the mastery of vocational skills. It is the process leading away from passivity, beyond either unquestioning acceptance of authority or its automatic mistrust, and towards informed, responsible action.”

At their worst our discussions of the past weeks have exemplified “unquestioning acceptance of authority” or, at the other end of the spectrum, “its automatic mistrust”. At their best our discussions have exemplified thinking that will lead us “towards informed, responsible action.” Over the next weeks we need to keep these things in mind as we continue to talk with one another. And let us remember, people change and institutions change, and yes, they also stay the same amidst the changes

We are at a fork in the road, we need to figure out what we should do, and how to go about it. Let’s make the changes we need to remain one of the few Great Books colleges in the country that is based on small discussion classes. What is most important to me is to take the mission of the College, education, to new students – to those who are afraid of the world and lack confidence, to those who are overly confident and need a bit of knocking down, to teachers, to home-schoolers, to Early Entrants, high school graduates, to transfer students, to urbanites, to suburbanites, to techies, nerds, luddites, antidiluvians, and so on and so forth.

Finally, I would like to return to the faculty, and their commitment to the College and its continued excellence. .The possibility of moving a significant portion of our operations to IIT raises many questions for all of us in this room – both institutionally and on a personal level. But if we look to those who have been most actively involved with the College, on the day to day, for the greatest number of years, we know it is the faculty who are the longest enduring. And for us, the impact of such a decision is major; and it comes at different times in our lives. For some Waukegan is their home, for others Waukegan is a place you go to because that’s where the College ended up after Mt. Carroll. For some Waukegan is a short and easy commute, for others it’s long and inconvenient. For some the idea of city life is inviting, enticing, energizing, and full of new opportunities. For others, a quiet life along the lake across the Wisconsin border is just the ticket.

The faculty met a couple of weeks ago to discuss the possible move to IIT. This was after our regular monthly Wednesday business meeting. We didn’t have a format for the meeting; we decided to just let things happen. As it turned out, we wanted to hear from one another how we felt about the move, on a personal level. We went around the room and shared with one another our feelings about the potential move. Despite the hardship this may cause for some, and the excitement it offers others, we were all unified in accepting that, if it is best for the College, we will make it happen, and we will be there for you. Thus, I can assure all the students in the room, that the faculty will not abandon the College if it moves. The same number of faculty plan to be with the College for the next years, whether we remain in Waukegan, or move some of our offerings to IIT. Or to quote David Shiner’s words from that meeting, “Wherever Shimer is, I'll be there.”
Thank you for listening.

"IIT invitation is conditional until January."

Yesterday, I decided to call up IIT in order to ask a few questions and find out if IIT has any more beautiful facilities available for Shimer College.

I spoke to a couple of people in the Property Management Office, including a nice woman who handles leases for IIT by the name of Brenda Stewart, who can be reached at (312) 567-3923. She told me that a decision had not been made as of a meeting last week, but that she would speak to John Collins, Vice President for Business and Administration, who is handling this project directly.

I also spoke to Vicki who transferred me to John Collin's office, and I spoke to a nice person on the phone by the name of Meg Mattson, Assistant to the Vice-President, who can be reached for confirmation of any of my statements or her citations at (312) 567-3060.

1. Meg Mattson from IIT told me that a decision has not been made yet to relocate Shimer College. By "decision," I assume she means that the lease has not been signed yet.

2. Meg Mattson from IIT told me that there isn't a deadline, a specific date by which the decision has to be made, but since the facility needs some work, it would be to the best interest of Shimer College to sign the lease as soon as possible in order to prepare the space for the following school year.

If Meg Mattson from IIT told me that there isn't an official deadline, why would Young Kim, Chair of the Shimer Board of Trustees, report in the official Shimer College announcement on November 18 (I think) of the proposal to move to IIT on the Shimer College Web site and published in the Waukegan News-Sun: "The IIT invitation is conditional until January"?

Sarah Kimmel reported in the first blog entry on November 9: "However, the space is currently empty, and they would like to lease it to us, but they have to make a decision to lease it to somebody very soon. So, Shimer has 2 months to decide. If we let this space go, it may be some while before another contiguous space becomes available. Dave [Shiner] says that if this is still a live issue in 2 months, there will be an assembly, probably on December 18th."

In Kim's letter posted to the Future of Shimer College Blog on November 18, Kim wrote: "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 time line for decision-making about a possible move. The time line 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."

Owen Brugh stated in his November 30 blog posting: "We did not pick anything in this situation, not the actual space and not the time frame."

Sara Davila in her December 6 posting wrote: "First, while I do not always believe everything I read in the paper, I feel that the following article is certainly evidence that the move is under consideration and could be taken as evidence that the move is a valid and true fact that is being considered: "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" (Bell, 2005, para. 1). "

David Shiner wrote in Choosing our Future: "In recognition of Shimer's interest, IIT has not actively pursued other potential renters for that space since the departure of Easter Seals in the late summer of 2005. However, they are not willing to continue waiting indefinitely. If Shimer and IIT can agree on lease terms by January, they will hold the space for us without rent for an additional several months. If not, they will seek another renter. If they find one, it might well be a while before another contiguous space becomes available on their campus, and any spaces that do become available might be beyond Shimer's means. " (December 8)

If I accurately understood Meg Mattson from IIT, whom I strongly encourage you to call in order to verify these statements, that there isn't an official deadline for signing the lease agreement, if there even is a lease agreement with agreed upon terms, I can't help thinking that my thesis may be correct, which by the very nature of a thesis statement you have the freedom to disagree with and doubt: Shimer College has most likely planned out this decision a long time ago, but it needs to persuade us to agree with its decision possibly for the sake of donations from alums, even if it does not make the final decision of signing the lease agreement. If you decide to call IIT or Shimer College, challenge David Shiner's recent December 8 claims, his warrants, his conditional statements, his if-then statements: "Is it true if this then that?" "Can you support your written statements with textual support?" "Can Shimer College start a fund-raising campaign to alums and family of students and alums, before the lease has even been signed?"

Even if the motive of making money is tolerable, even if there are multiple benefits in relocating to IIT, even if the facilities were more beautiful than the current campus, even if the majority of the current students and alums were to agree with the decision to move Shimer College to IIT, even if there weren't a huge risk to the quality of the dynamics of the pursuit of an excellent great books discussion group--the method, the argumentation, the dynamics, and the process of this argument in favor of moving to IIT lack virtue.

Should I have had to ask Kim, 'what is the condition of your statement that the IIT invitation is conditional until January'? Should I have had to ask Kim, 'what are the underlying if-then statements [see Shiner's excerpt above] that your statement is built off of'? Is this some kind of rigged game in which I will lose the game if I make a false assumption? In my opinion, this is still yet another example of a bad argument that you can get away with, but an argument non-the-less that lacks virtue if you are conducting yourself in good faith.

3. I then asked Meg Mattson from IIT if there are any more beautiful buildings for Shimer College to rent. She told me that besides the cost of a more attractive facility, "there is nothing else available for next year."

Meg Mattson from IIT asked if I had ever seen the inside of the facility, implying that the inside of the place is in terrible condition; but I have only seen the outside of that ugly building, a building so ugly that even Owen Brugh admitted at the end of his November 30 blog posting that it is one of the ugliest buildings on the campus: "although I think you're right that the building they are offering might be the ugliest there." If the facilities at IIT are not even in good condition, how are they a solution to the current physical plant? Why don't you use the money that would be used to move, redesign, and remodel the IIT facility and invest it into the current Shimer College facility, especially since everyone is claiming that there is no guarantee of increasing enrollment by moving to IIT?

The current condition of the proposed facility and the absence of any other facilities for next year would suggest that the "possiblity of a low-cost pilot program at IIT" that David Shiner mentioned in his November 27 blog entry and Noah Kippley-Ogman's recent December 4 posting about "talk of doing a pilot program first" could not make sense if you consider the time and cost of moving and remodeling. This alternative plan proposal, especially if it requires inevitable financial investment of a facility in terrible condition, may be used to transition Shimer College from Waukegan to Chicago.

By making these phone calls, I have shattered two of my major hopes: 1) Waukegan will save Shimer College; 2) IIT will offer Shimer College a more beautiful home.

I guess your final decision comes down to the cozy or the ugly. And the process of making this decision and the execution of this argument will be less than beautiful. It's reality, which may be one of the ugliest hoaxes of all.

Michael Dubensky

Shimer Survey

The letter below is from Noah Kippley-Ogman, a current junior at Shimer and a weekday student board representative. I encourage you to reply to him.

Apologies for the short notice. Best,
Erik Badger ('97)


Dear fellow Shimerians,

In the process of deciding whether a move (or expansion) at the IITcampus on the South Side would be a good idea for the College, it isimportant to consider the effect it would have on recruitment andretention of students. I have seen little serious discussion of thisnature and much unfounded conjecture. In order to replace thisgroundless 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 or faculty of thepresent or past:

- What brought you to Shimer initially? What aspects of Shimer madethe College appealing, and what aspects made is unappealing?
- What keeps you at Shimer (or made you leave)? What aspects of Shimerare those that draw you in as you live the Shimer life, and whataspects make you want to leave?

Please consider as many aspects of the college as you can, includingbut not limited to the community, the academics (both the curriculumand the format), the schedule, the location, the amenities and thephysical plant.If you'd forward this to people who you think should be included inthis informal study, I'd appreciate it greatly.Please return your responses with or without your name, but preferablyincluding whether you're a staff member, faculty member, weekday orweekend 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 6th of December. I'll have some sort of report and summary tothe whole community when I can, hopefully with the informationprovided by David Shiner and the Self-Study group.Please respond either by email (n.kippleyogman@shimer.edu) or in mybox in Prairie.

Thank you very much,
Noah

"The mayor is looking into possibilities..."

I spoke to the Mayor of the City of Waukegan, Richard Hyde, in order to find out if the City of Waukegan could do something for Shimer College in Waukegen.

It made me sad that the City of Waukegan can't financially support Shimer College with public money. Because Shimer College is a private institution, "the city can't do anything for them."

One of his responses clarified a question that I asked in a previous blog entry, what is the meaning of "This alderman wants them to stay in Waukegan"? (Chicago Tribune, November 23) The mayor stated that "We would like Shimer College to stay, but this is a decision that they would have to make."

The City of Waukegan was my biggest hope for Shimer College in Waukegan.

Did the mayor's attitude change after David Shiner reported on November 30 that President Bill Rice's meeting with the mayor went quite well and President Bill Rice is happy about how the meeting went: "The mayor is looking into possibilities that would help make it easier for Shimer to stay in Waukegan"?

But the mayor didn't make any comment in our conversation that would suggest that the mayor has any intention of doing anything for Shimer College.

Michael Dubensky

Request for Focus

I don't want to offend anyone but this is a blog whose purpose is listed in the Title banner. It really is not meant for you to post general Shimer information. This blog is about the move specifically.

Also, sarcasm does not carry well in this context.

Basically, this is the kind of thing that weighs dialogue down. It really does not help the dialogue to be interupted by people saying hello or unclear posts about "Hoaxes".

Can we please attempt to focus on the discussion for those of us who do not have time to drive up to Waukegan and visit the campus on a regular basis.

This is important to me. I am divorced, I have two children, 3 Jobs and two bands that I am hustling to combine into a healthy paycheck. My time is important to me.

I really and truly care if this is a scam to get Shimers Property in Waukegan or to shut down the school by trying to make it live up to standards that it cannnot-- namely high enrollment requirements and leasing costs at IIT. These are problems we do not currently have.

Consider this: This is not a dialogue where we consider various solutions for the problem of low enrollment because the move is on the table and a decision must be made soon. Therefore what is on the table are all arguments supporting assigning faculty to that campus, the signing of a contract with IIT, and the selling of property. The backdrop of course is the question of the boards willingnes to use the power it obviously has in spite of oposition to a decision that some board members do not remember hearing about much less voting on.

I am troubled by the rhetoric from all those who think that the students, faculty and alum do not deserve an explanation as to why Bill Rice did not present this in a more formal fashion. Did he in fact post on here as someone else to test our integrity?? What would have been the point of that?

The facts are that the political climate today is full of merger and take overs. This is so prevelant in our society that it is seen by many as a secure business move. Cheat your employees and dumb down the working class so that you can pay them less. The connection to Shimer is that we have leaders acting and it is not clear that it is the best interest of the school.

This is what is known as a social fact. Just read your newspapers or talk to someone who has been layed off like me. The lies people are told across corporations is so similar that management sounds like a bunch of parrots. And believe me -- the voice of reason is always there. It keeps saying trust your betters and it criticizes anyone who asks a question.

Don't bother knocking my post. Just produce some real statistics. Don't worry about what anyone thinks just give us your argument for the move and defend your stance. I don't care what others think I will make my own decision based on the facts.

Right now all I see is a smokescreen of whining and supposition. Pretty shameful for Shimerians.

And before you write it down. I am not accusing or insiting anything. I am asking that we focus on answering the questions honestly with verifiable data.

P.S. Mr. Dubinsky please consider a call for a clear and concise explanation of your post.

1.) Are you saying that Bill Rice misrepresented himself on this blog and if so, given the fact that this sort of thing is common place on the internet, what of it? Make your point, please.

Hoax Clarification

Clarify-- this is a hoax? As in there is no move....

from Steven 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.

"Mine certainly was."

Dear Shimer College,

In argumentation, you can not trust the claims (a claim cannot by its very nature be trusted) of the makers of the argument. In argumentation, there are two fundamental tasks: 1) You take a position on an issue and defend it; 2) you doubt the main claim, which in this case is "There is an opportunity to relocate to IIT."

When I asked Owen Brugh the question on December 02, "Owen and Noah, Have your two rhetorically-sophisticated, well-written, strong arguments been written by Bill Rice?," didn't Noah Kippley-Ogman clearly state that same day: "Mine certainly was"?

Since President Bill Rice has "admitted" to being "Noah" and "Owen", isn't it reasonable to ask if there has ever been an opportunity to move to IIT?

If there is an opportunity to move to IIT, why would the "Noah" of "a few thoughts" and the "Owen" of "Vision" perform in the last few weeks an elaborate hoax at the expense of our community's emotions?

I think the time has come for what one of the bloggers has been asking for all week: full informed transparency; in other words, has the decision already been made to relocate to IIT? And as the faculty used to write in the margins of my arguments: "Support your claims with evidence."


With Genuine and Sincere Respect for the Makers of the Shimer College Hoax,

Michael Dubensky

P.S. Albert, I forgive you for calling me up and telling me that you spoke to "Owen" and that you told "Owen" that the Michael that you know would not have written the original letter to Bill Rice. That was an excellent hoax.

A few thoughts

When I first sat down to write this a couple of weeks ago, I started with an apology. I did that elsewhere, so I’ll just recap. I have made poor judgments in handling myself in conversations both digital and analog about the proposed move. I worked to stifle dialogue in direct and indirect ways, and for that I’m very sorry. To be very clear, I am currently undecided about the proposal and certainly would appreciate any thoughts that could help me make a decision as to how I should cast my vote in the assembly, and while I’d also appreciate any thoughts that could help me make a decision as to how I should cast my vote at the board meeting, the assembly’s advice will be doing most of the helping to which I’m interested in listening. And I assume that other members of the assembly and board feel similarly, making it not just a favor to me to express opinions and thoughts but an obligation to both the assembly and the board.

I think the rubric by which we must judge the proposal in whatever form it is at a given time is by asking the following question:

“Is Shimer in Waukegan or Shimer at IIT more conducive to maintaining the college’s essence while increasing enrollment?”

Because that’s what needs to happen. If Shimer moves or doesn’t move, enrollment needs to increase while maintaining the college’s essence.

So the easy part is figuring out what the college’s essence is and how it is affected by Waukegan and how it would be affected by IIT. And then figuring out how enrollment is affected by Waukegan and how it would be affected by IIT. I think these are the questions that I’m hoping to shed some light on with the survey I’m conducting.

But I’ve got my own tentative answers.

I think that Shimer’s essence is simple and straightforward. I think Shimer is about dialogue. The courses are structured as dialogue with students and faculty and the ages. The governance is structured as dialogical. Hell, buildings and grounds are run pretty dialogically, as is housing and admissions and FWS stuff. If there’s a problem with anything, the answer lies not in appealing to rules and regulations but in coming together to work something out using past experience as codified by rules and regulations as a text.

I can see a Shimer at IIT maintaining dialogue in the classroom with faculty, students and the ages. I can see Shimer at IIT maintaining a dialogical Assembly that elects dialogically run committees that govern the college, the way it is now. I have more trouble seeing a dialogical element in the outside-of-daytime life of weekday students of Shimer at IIT. I have trouble imagining a proposal to, say, build a fire-pit being taken seriously and being explored through dialogue.

But I’ve been told by Jim Donovan, the current Dean of Students, who has talked extensively with the parallel staff at IIT, that there is a great deal of it. In a (not so well attended) meeting on Wednesday, Jim expressed his belief that a truly dialogical atmosphere was the way the housing is run. And that a fire-pit was being talked about.

But the dialogue of Shimer isn’t just the formal dialogue of classrooms and governance, it’s also the meeting faculty and staff and students and alumni in the quad randomly and talking. All the time. And in a place where the dorm may be far from the Shimer “campus”, that would happen less, maybe. And if we’re not all eating lunch together, I’m not sure what would happen.

I think that the Waukegan campus has been conducive to dialogue because of its together-ness and the eating together and the housing across the quad from classes. And Harold or Steven living above the bookstore. And because it’s difficult to leave to someplace interesting (no offence, anyone – I hate both Chicago and Waukegan with all my soul and prefer the nice, clean town of Evanston where everyone’s a yuppie and wealthy except for the people who have service jobs and no one cares about anyone else. Sorry Evanston aficionados).

And recruitment and retention? I probably wouldn’t have attended a Shimer at IIT, but my mother wouldn’t have been in tears leaving me to the filthy Godot my first semester. And I’d probably have been a lot less hesitant about staying. So, as I’ve said before (not here, I guess), the best solution for me would have been to spend the first semester or two in Waukegan and then have the college move to IIT’s campus.

But more seriously, in Waukegan, a prospective Shimer student has to really want to attend, whereas I can see less passionately Shimerian students being attracted to Shimer-at-IIT. But a parent’s decision to let her/his child attend or to pay for it could be made a lot easier by a move to IIT’s campus. So, I’m pretty sure that my view of recruitment sees it as a wash between Waukegan and IIT-town (but a move would probably be awful short-term). I’m hoping to have a clearer picture based more on many peoples’ impressions than on my feelings after compiling things sent me by the survey, and will make results public as soon as I have them.

So, in conclusion, I think that a Shimer at IIT would not change enrollment dramatically (until I’m convinced otherwise) in either direction, and that it would be more difficult to hold on to the college’s key mission at IIT.

So the question comes down to, how much of a problem is the physical plant? Is it enough of a problem to maybe make the college’s essence more difficult to do to dramatically fix it?

Answers, please.

And I’d like to see the conversation that Michael (I think) tried to start a while ago about what Shimer is happen.

Yours,

Noah

Practice Critical Thinking

Question: What is the fundamental problem that this move potentially solves?

Answer: How can we attract and retain more students?

Answer: How we we recruit more students?

Answer: How can we market the college to Chicago consumers?

Answer: How can we make more money?

Warrant: Is it true that if Shimer College relocates to IIT that it will attract and retain more students?

Rebuttal: What are some reasons why relocating to IIT could result in losing students and not attracting students?

Rebuttal: Why might students be attracted to or comfortable with studying at the Shimer College campus?

Rebuttal: Why might someone seeking a liberal arts experience choose to not go for a liberal arts education at a technical university and choose to go to a more traditional liberal arts college or university?

Rebuttal: Why would someone seeking a hard-core great books liberal arts education choose Shimer College at IIT versus St Johns College, which I would highly recommend as the best alternative to Shimer College, if Shimer College moves to IIT?

Save Shimer College in Waukegan: An Argument Against the Shenanigans of the Final Hoax

Position Statement: Shimer College can be Shimer College somewhere else, but Shimer College can't be Shimer College at IIT.

1. Take a position on whether you are for or against relocating to IIT. This is the fundamental task in argumentation, and this is an argument, not a discussion.
2. You have to be prepared to doubt the claims of even people that you are fond of or used to respecting.
3. If this is an argument, the decision to relocate has already been made; the board may, on the other hand, change its mind, if it is persuaded that the risk in relocating is too great or that there are greater benefits in staying. You may choose to disagree with its always already existing decision; you may choose to not buy into the relocation.
4. This isn't a proposal. A proposal is defined in the dictionary as "an act of putting forward or stating something for consideration." This move has already been considered for many months before anouncing the decision. There are two ways of treating a proposal. 1) You propose something which will be decided by shared consensus; 2) you decide whether you accept the already existing proposal. In this case, if this is a proposal, which I don't think that it is, we are dealing with a proposal in the latter meaning of the term.
5. If the board and the administration are not prepared to honor the decision of the assembly, the assembly is a hoax. This does not mean that it won't occur or that it may not matter. That all depends on the motives of the board and information that we are not fully aware of. But if the board and administration are not prepared to honor the decision of the assembly, then the assembly is being used as the means of creating the illusion of Democracy and Dialogue (which used to be the Core Values of Shimer College) and the appearance that the Final Decision has not already been made. This would explain why there was such strong resistance to even having an assembly meet upon this issue.
6. Resist the insidious problematization of the Beauty of Shimer College (for example, the production of the perception of an ugly campus through the rhetoric of the "Beautify Shimer" campaign) that we all fell in love with for its Simple and Honest Virtues and with what will most likely be very strong argumentation and rhetoric to sell you on moving to IIT and staying with the "remains" of the Shimer College that we once loved.
7. It is not un-Shimerian to disagree with the move to IIT. It may be more Shimerian to decide to remain in Waukegan, if you believe in the fragile beauty (like the glass unicorn in Eileen's theatrical production of The Glass Menagerie) of the cozy campus, if you believe in an authentic "good-faith" assembly and proposal, if you believe in dialogue as the means of conducting the business of the College, if you believe that Shimer College deserves a more beautiful home than the lease at IIT, if you believe that Shimer College is selling out its Ethos and Values in these shenanigans, if you believe that the dynamics of the discussion groups that we work so hard to cultivate will be compromised by students from IIT who are not fully invested into the purpose of achieving an excellent great books discussion group.
8. A decision is defined in the dictionary as "a determination arrived at after consideration." In a discussion, a decison about a proposal is arrived at by shared consensus. In an argument, you begin the proposal with a decision. The proposal to move to IIT is technically a decision to do something that was not brought to the attention of the students before determination of the proposal had been made. But, in order to qualify my argumentation, this does not mean that the board may not still make a decision to withdraw its initial decision or arrive at a different decision. On the other hand, the decision to persuade students to accept the proposal means that the board and administration are still arguing for a specific decision, the determination by the board and administration, and not necessarily the students and alums, that relocating the current students to IIT is the Final Solution to the Final Problem (why is it the only "real" problem?) of moving Shimer College to IIT.
9. If you know for a fact, deep in your bones, in the full truth of your being, that you will not relocate to Shimer College if it moves to IIT, gather signatures and present it to the assembly or the board for their re-consideration of a possibly fatal blow to the Real Shimer College (which is the Platonic Form that is our community's vision of Shimer College) with the True Shimerians (not the students who will most likely be paying for great books classes in order to merely fulfill their liberal arts requirements).
10. Will the board honor the decision of the assembly not to relocate to IIT, if the board and administration do not successfully persuade the assembly of its position?



Michael Dubensky

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?

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