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

Response to Noah's Survey

After posting and deleting this several times. I believe now I have it posted on the first page. I felt the need to be a star and be at the top of the page. It is amazing that I actually looked at the posting instructions to finally get it right. Noah, use this how you will, I just wanted everyone to see it. Your survey helped greatly to formulate an opinion.

I believe discussion classes and self-directed learning where my main reasons for attending Shimer. I’ll have to admit the location was rather unappealing as well as living space and lack of amenities. Lack of an arts program was also a pretty big issue.

I initially left Shimer to explore the world a bit more. I also realized that I no longer needed Shimer. I realized that I could learn on my own, which is part of what Shimer is teaching. I returned to Shimer after traveling and moving around a bit in order to finish my degree. I felt that I needed a degree and Shimer was one of the few places I could stomach getting one. During my final year or so I moved to Evanston and commuted. I also spent a semester at Weekend College. Living away from Shimer helped a lot. I found myself able to participate in Chicago’s artistic community and lead a life not so steeped in the small community. I could come back to it refreshed and ready to listen.

It looks like from the above statement I’d be for the move, but I don’t believe I am for it. I am definitely for some physical improvements of the existing college. I think if the College were to go to Chicago I’d rather see it not affiliated with another College. If it had to affiliate with another college to survive I’d like it to be an institution with similar values. I’d like to see Shimer in Chicago or Waukegan with a broadened curriculum, taking other approaches to education that fall in line with dialogue classes and self-directed learning techniques. I’d like to see music, art, performance art, gender studies, global studies, technology and classes concerning political activism added. I believe this would attract more students of differing backgrounds and abilities. Speaking as a bit of an anti-intellectual, I’d like to see less intellectual types attend Shimer. I’d like Shimer to broaden its scope a little whilst maintaining the great books core curriculum.

I see some talk on this blog of Shimer students being a certain ‘type’. And, that somehow ‘other’ types might ruin the experience. I’m more of a mind to share the love. To seek people out who may not be the exact ‘type’ and bring them in to see what they are able to do. I certainly didn’t feel like the typical Shimer student when I attended. I often felt frustrated with the attitudes and intellectual dogma of a great deal of the student body. However, I felt I contributed a lot by being different. Diversity is a beautiful thing.

- Chris Heinisch

The First One to Lose His Temper...

Mr. Dubensky... I applaud your championing the President and the Chairman. I wish I could explain the rest of the lesson to you but I can't. You have to see it happen a few times before you realize we are emotional and intellectual beings. Temper your emotion, yes; lay it aside never. It paints our great chapels and drags us out of concentration camps

So can we get a few people to acknowledge Sara Kimmel, the alumn and the students she spoke to?

Without all of these emotional, over-reactive students and alumn this calm orderly, well mannered dialouge would never have taken place.

As long as people are patting themselves on the back for maintaining their composure and eloquence....

It's about the Ying and the Yang, Ya Know?

Now where were we? Oh yeah, some students asked some questions...

dual diagnosis

I'm one of those rare birds with Mt. Carroll-Waukegan Shimer experience. I will never forget moving the library. It snowed -- a lot that year. (I graduated 1975, taught 1978-80). I also attended an informational meeting at the college 11/27. I am disposed toward the move to Chicago as a means to keep this 152-year-old institution alive because:

-- enrollment has flattened at 110 students. (Don Moon cited this figure at meeting). That's really not a whole lot of people with which to have a college experience nor is it a good way to increase visibility or a base of alumni financial support.

-- the future is not good for liberal arts colleges in general unless they are distinctive, a word Bill Rice used that made sense. Shimer's Great Books curriculum & discussion method is distinctive but it doesn't mean anything if no one knows about it. The pairing of liberal Shimer & techno IIT is unorthodox, which certainly boosts the distinctive factor.

-- most idealistically, Shimer shaped my life forever. I met at Shimer five of my closest friends, whom I have known for more than 30 years. I would like other people to have this unique developmental opportunity, particularly because our country and world need people who know how to think, see interrelationships and analyze. Plus everybody needs loyal friends.

Count me in.

Thank You for Creating a Dialogue

I want to thank President Bill Rice for holding the alum meeting last night and the previous meeting in Evanston. We are a critical and cynical group of students and alums. We are passionate about our education and we have been trained to question and disagree. Unfortunately, one of the negative effects of being taught how to argue is that we develop the tendency to label and treat real people as problems--and even enemies--that a skeptical reader doubts--and even hates. But it's not the person that should be doubted, although the person may appear to be the cause of the problem, but the proposal (which is essentially an argument), the reasons for the proposal, the reasons against the proposal, and the evidence or lack-there-of for the proposal. I know that's a heavy claim, with debatable philosophical and legal implications, which some people will not accept or tolerate, but so be it. This is not at all meant to discourage rigorous debate and discussion, which I strongly promote and believe is necessary for a healthy, strong democracy. I am also very aware that there is a lot at stake with this proposal; the very survival and identity (some people would even go so far as to say "soul") of Shimer College are being gambled with. But I feel that we need to have some respect for the decision-makers and the decision-making process regarding something so huge and complex. Even if you feel that one of the core values of Shimer has been violated, the value of dialogue, which is one of the main selling points of the college, we need to recognize the efforts of the administration to remedy its errors, which I suspect in this case is because we have been offered a deal in the last minute with short notice to act upon it, and include us in the dialogue, even as they work their way through complex territory and issues. Frankly, the whole situation is less than beautiful, and even IIT's approach to Shimer College does not appear to be as generous as I would like it to have been; but Shimer College is a poor liberal arts college, and it simply can't afford to buy a Lexus, when it can barely afford a Honda.

I want to firmly state, even if I lose what few friends I have at Shimer, which is not too many at this point, that I sincerely believe (at least I don't have any reason or evidence to believe otherwise) that the president is doing his job, doing what he is being paid the big bucks for. He has analyzed a complex problem, explored various options, discussed the problem deeply with many smart people, and emerged with a solution. He and the board are now selling us on this proposal; they are trying to persuade us of the benefits of this move. Since there are some genuine benefits, which depends on the individual, such as the location in Chicago, access to pre-med and technology courses, and a stream-lined and simplified operation in which the professors can focus on what they are being paid the-not-so-big bucks to do, I would like to strongly encourage the Shimer community to respect the leadership of Shimer College, who must have put a lot of thought into this proposal. At the end of the day, whether or not the board honors the assembly, and whether or not the board decides to move to Chicago, it is the students who will decide whether they agree with the decison of the board with their purchasing power.

Think about the cost and benefits of the proposal, the pros and cons, the risks and advantages. Think about how you can benefit from this move, whether it is a good feel or fit for you, whether it will meet your needs, whether you can still deeply engage in the great books discussion groups at IIT. And then only you have the final power, the final authority, the final decision of whether you agree or not.


Michael Dubensky '03

If I am being naive about what is going on, and if someone wants to inform me about anything that could change the trust that I have that our leaders are acting in good faith and that their heart is in the right place (i. e., the quality of the education and experience for the students), I can be reached at (312) 217-4503 or mdubensky@earthlink.net.

From Noah: Shimer Survey

Dear fellow Shimerians,

In the process of deciding whether a move (or expansion) at the IIT campus on the South Side would be a good idea for the College, it is important to consider the effect it would have on recruitment and retention of students. I have seen little serious discussion of this nature and much unfounded conjecture. In order to replace this groundless guesswork with guesswork based on some little substance, I’d like to hear from as many current students, former students, graduates and students who left the answers to two sets of questions, and certainly wouldn’t mind hearing from staff, faculty of the present or past:

- What brought you to Shimer initially? What aspects of Shimer made the College appealing, and what aspects made is unappealing?

- What keeps you at Shimer (or made you leave)? What aspects of Shimer are those that draw you in as you live the Shimer life, and what aspects make you want to leave?

Please consider as many aspects of the college as you can, including but not limited to the community, the academics (both the curriculum and the format), the schedule, the location, the amenities and the physical plant.

If you’d forward this to people who you think should be included in this informal study, I’d appreciate it greatly.

Please return your responses with or without your name, but preferably including whether you’re a staff member, faculty member, weekday or weekend student and whether you’re still here or left by graduation, retirement or by your own volition.

If I could get these back in a week or two, that would be awesome. Let’s say the 4^th of December, which is a Sunday of weekend college (and Assembly meeting!). I’ll have some sort of report and summary to the whole community when I can, hopefully with the information provided by David Shiner and the Self-Study group.

Please respond either by email (n.kippleyogman@shimer.edu) or in my box in Prairie.

Thank you very much,

Noah

----

Noah Kippley-Ogman

PO Box 500

Waukegan IL 60079

n.kippleyogman@shimer.edu

651.269.7336

From David Shiner: Helping Hands

Helping Hands

Hi, it's David Shiner again. I've got a favor to ask of everyone who has posted on this blog. I sent a letter to all current members fo the internal Shimer community earlier this week. That letter stated in part:

"A number of staff members are in the process of preparing reports on the IIT issue that will be collated during the week after Thanksgiving. The product of those reports will inform the next phase of discussions with IIT, resulting in a document concerning a possible lease agreement. This should be completed and ready for general distribution sometime the following week.

"In the meantime, I will be preparing a document representing the collective wisdom of the Shimer community. What are the major issues at stake, perceived and real? What will be resolved prior to December 18, and what will wait until afterward? How are things likely to play out if we remain in Waukegan versus if we move most of our operations to IIT? And so on.

"In order to do the best job on this I can, I ask that everyone in the Shimer community bombard me with whatever facts, opinions, or questions you have concerning any aspect of this....I’ll also use the notes from every meeting I’ve attended, from web blogs, from passersby, from everywhere. The Accreditation Self-Study group will help me prepare a document for
distribution to the entire Shimer community."

For these purposes, I'd like your permission to print excerpts from what various people have written on ths blog, along with your name, in the document I'm preparing. Of course I won't reprint everything, but I would like to have the option to include various statements and questions that seem particularly important to various aspects of our considerations.

If you are willing to permit me to do this, simply email me at david@shimer.edu and write "Yes" or something simple like that. If you're willing to have me quote you on some things but not others, let me know that too. If I don't hear from you at all I might use your words, but I won't attribute them to you by name.

Whatever you decide concerning this, please let me know as soon as possible, as I only have two weeks to complete the document. Thanks to all.

David

From Steve Werlin

I’ve been trying to figure out where to place myself in this discussion. Officially, I’m a member of the internal community, a member of the faculty. I work for the College full-time. At the same time, the particular assignment that the College has allowed me to create for myself means that I’m not in Waukegan more than a few days each year. Almost any member of the internal community has better information than I have and has had opportunities to think more deeply and in more subtle ways than I’ve been able to do.

A lot that’s valuable seem to me to be emerging from what I’ve been able to follow of these discussions. Two separate issues seem on the table, and they both are worth getting into, though for very different reasons. One is the College’s governance structure, what we want it to be and what it turns out to be in practice. The other is the possible move itself.

The first is made especially important because it seems to be the source of a lot of pain right now, with accusations and defensive responses as regular parts of the dialogue. Two points seem easy to make. The first is that the Board has final authority at the College. As Don once explained things to me, even such authority as we are accustomed to leaving in the hands of the Assembly is only delegated to the Assembly by the President of the College, whose authority comes from the Board.

The second is that the Assembly ought to have a powerful voice in the Board’s deliberations on so important a question as whether the College moves. Since I joined Shimer, the Board has consistently shown that it respects the Assembly’s role in College decision making. This is to say that the fact that the Board has the final voice – and I have more to say about this below – does not have to mean that the Assembly has no voice at all.

This is true even if the Board and its representatives are unwilling to guarantee that its decision will follow the Assembly’s will. I myself think it would be improper for the Board to guarantee, in advance, that the Assembly will get its way. Only current Board members can know how important the Assembly’s view is to them, and I doubt even they can be sure right now how they will react when and if they are asked to take a vote.

A third point clouds things, but it does so beautifully. If one wants to see the limits of a board’s final authority over a college, one need look no farther that to our own history. It was, after all, Shimer’s board that decided to close the College. (Was it twice?) And yet here we are. Though I don’t want to suggest that we members of the internal community prepare ourselves to ignore the Board and carry on if their decision is not what we want it to be, I do think that the College’s history can remind us all what internal community members have done over the years to earn the voice that they’ve traditionally had at Shimer – if, that is, a reminder is necessary.

As far as the move itself goes, I am at a loss. I’ve grown fond of the College’s home in Waukegan and of Waukegan itself, but am excited by the prospect of a campus in Chicago. There’s a lot about the space we’re in right now that suits us, but the most important academic aspects of our lives together do not, it seems to me, depend very much on the coziness of a particular space. I would be happy to be able to offer students and staff more in the way of services, but worry that a traditional College cafeteria would wreak havoc on the lunch program that has come to offer so much to our communal life. I wonder whether we can survive a move, with all the short-term difficulties that it may entail in lost staff and other problems, but have to admit that I’m part of the group that has failed to figure out how to make the College grow where it is.

One note: I am a little confused about exactly what kind of decision the Assembly will be asked to make, but that may just be because I’m so far away. If the Assembly is supposed to say whether it prefers Waukegan or the South Side, then it needs little more information than detailed descriptions of the facility we are considering. If, however, the Assembly is being asked whether it thinks moving is a good idea, then it needs much more. It needs summaries of the schools current financial position. It needs to know why someone might take the view that the school needs to do something dramatic. It needs a lot of information about the proposed deal itself.

It is the second question, the one as to whether making a move is the right thing for the College, that I would prefer to see the Assembly face. It’s a much harder question, of course, but I see no reason to protect the Assembly from hard questions. Though the Board has final responsibility for the College’s finances, that doesn’t mean that the Assembly should keep from considering such matters. David Shiner’s recent offer of information from various administrators seems very positive to me.

What comforts me as I watch the discussions from a distance is my conviction that those who in the midst of the discussions care deeply about the College. This is true of those of you who are speaking gently. It’s also true, I think, of those who are not. At first I was a little taken back by the testiness I see in some of this discussion, but I’ve come to think that it’s just a reflection of how much we all do care. I’d like to believe – and, in fact, I do believe – that at least in terms of our intentions in these discussions, we are all on the same page.

The question of response-ability

When I was at Shimer College, I was one of the weaker students. I was constantly struggling academically in the same way that Shimer College was struggling financially. But whenever I listened to the rhetoric of Shimer College, I was told that I am responsible for my own education, that I should be self-reliant, that if I continue reading carefully and participating actively then my writing will improve, that if I am not successful it must be because I am lazy, because I am "intellectually inferior" (a sophisticated way of saying "stupid"), because I don't have the talent, because I am not very good, because I am not trying hard enough. But I know that I tried very hard, because I was intellectually exhausted ("devastated" would be a better word for it) by my experience at Shimer College, a tiredness that I suspect many members of the Shimer faculty and administration are feeling because of the relentless financial issues and problems. In all four years, from IS2 in my first semester to Nat Sci 4 in my last semester, I could not intellectually handle the curriculum, although I always enjoyed with a genuine enthusiasm the great books discussion groups. At some point, I began to try different strategies, not unlike how Shimer College tries to solve its financial problems, but I still feel like I failed to be successful with my education. Shimer College was really, fucking hard academically--and it must be fucking hard to financially sustain as well.

Now, I am in a situation in which I can sense the financial crisis of Shimer College deeply, and I am not sure how to respond. I am responsible for at least three full-time students at Shimer College, including one member of the current board and one current student, because of my referals, which may be worth over 200,000$ to the college. I have also made significant official donations of half-page advertisements, even before I graduated, in an Education Guide of a Chicago newspaper to the college, in order to address the problem of how to increase enrollment at Shimer College. This year, my donation was more directly concerned with the problem of the current job market for liberal arts graduates. I, therefore, subscribed to a national current jobs in the liberal arts bulletin that could hopefully inspire students to start considering how they are going to transition from Shimer College, a problem that I have temporarily solved like many, many other liberal arts graduates by enrolling in graduate school, although like Shimer College, I run a small mom and pop stand of a massage therapy company, which barely pays our bills each month. But how can I help the college financially, and, more philosophically, should I help the college? Is it my responsibility to help the college? What is our response-ability as alums to generate money for the college?

My initial follow-up questions are controversial, but they directly address this question of responsibility.

If a Shimer College student is drowning or at risk of drowning, should the Shimer College professor a) prevent the student from drowning by offering the student private swimming lessons in addition to fulfilling the obligation to show up for class and grade the paper; b) get his or her clothes wet by leaping in to save the student; c) hold up a sign that states "swim"?

If Shimer College is drowning or at risk of drowning, should the Shimer College alum a) prevent the college from drowning by offering the college financial assistance in addition to paying for the high cost of a liberal arts education; b) sacrifice his or her personal desires and needs in order to save the college; c) hold up a sign that states "swim"?

The problem then is a question of mutual responsibility. I could say, well, since Shimer College's academic philosophy is to tell the student to swim when he or she is in trouble, then I should, as an alum, tell Shimer College to swim in its predicament. This sounds harsh, but I am sure that there is more than one alum who is thinking the same thing, especially as they struggle to pay their student loans or work a less-than-ideal job, especially as they struggled to transition from Shimer College to the real world without support from the college or a network of alums, especially as they struggled academically while at Shimer College. On the other hand, this could be a reminder to the faculty that we are in this together, and that in time of academic need, the doctrine of placing the entire burden of academic responsibility on the student is easy on the professor, but harsh on the student (the question of whether it is for the student's own good is also metaphorically strained when compared with a real financial crisis). Forgive me for investigating an issue that deeply concerns me--the quality of education at Shimer College--at a time of crisis for the college, but I do have an appropriate point and message.

I have been asking for a long time for Shimer College to adopt various academic proposals in order to improve the quality of education at Shimer College--and consequently attract and retain more students. Now, I am going to suggest that perhaps it's our responsibility as alums to reach into our pockets and donate substantial money to the college, even if the college decides to stay in Waukegan, if nothing else as to set an example that we can recognize when there is a need and begin to consider an appropriate response to that need. But this is easier for me to say than do, since I am living on student loans and occassional massages. Regardless, the tough question for us--I would like to propose--is not necessarily whether or not Shimer College should stay in Waukegan, because the board and the administration are most likely going to make that tough decision, a decision that I would not want to make after considering the pros and cons of both options; the tough responsibility that the alum Young Kim seems to have taken on. The tough question for us is how do we go about creating a fund-raising campaign, regardless of whether we stay in Waukegan or move to Chicago. Although very few people want to admit their weaknesses, such as my chronic academic failures to understand one of the great books, the underlying issue in this case is, I would venture to guess, lack of money, the long-term effects of lack of money on the quality of education, and the problem of whether the college can make more money by relocating to IIT--and thereby improve the quality of the education. If more money will improve the quality of the education and renew the spirit of the faculty at Shimer College, and if moving to IIT will solve that problem, I am in favor of the move to IIT.

If my thinking is problematic, don't hesitate to point it out to me, and I will edit this message accordingly.

Michael Dubensky '03

Trust, Leadership and Community

I thought the decision was still up in the air? I really want feed back on this. Is there anyone else who thinks an interview should not have been given?

I am afraid to ask, but can the Board sign a lease without the assembly?

I see nothing trustworthy or Shimerian in the spirit in which this is being done. This article looks like a way of speeding up the process and burying the hopeful. I do not like the way that the Board Chairperson and the College President are handling this. That comment is not deragatory, it is clear.

It is hard to read the words of so many people dancing around that issue while the fate of Shimer is decided.

I will add this to the words of Daniel Shiner. If you understand nothing else, understand this:
If we stay in Waukegan we sink or swim on our own. At IIT someone else will be helping us determine the fate of Shimer. Not the Great Books education alone but the spirit of Shimer College that gives an academic home to those who are not so lofty... Shimer did change when it left Mount Caroll, it became more than it was.

When I got to Shimer, I had never read Plato or Aristotle. I always held them in such reverence that I felt I wasn't smart enough to read them. I left it to my betters to determine for me the value of the great works. I learned to read and understand the "big words" and "big thoughts". Don't get me wrong I was far from a stellar student. But I understand this:

Shimer is there for people who can't go to just any college. It needs to be exactly what it is. That is Shimers niche. It is called A-l-t-e-r-n-a-t-v-e education.

Let me tell you about the place I work, the Old Town School of Folk music. It is an institution for learning music in the aural tradition that went from 1500 students per week to 6000 in two years. The first thing that happened was that the price of childrens classes skyrocketed. Then private lessons were only provided in blocks of 8. Making the cost of getting private lessons quite an obstacle if you can't afford to buy 8 at once. Programming was changed to implement measurable standards for fundraising purposes. They began to do demographic studies.

In truth, none of these things is "bad" but the Old Town School is slowing becoming like every other institution that provides supplemental arts education. This little independant hippy organization that gave a home to the person and the songs of Big Bill Broonzy and Pete Seger now does business with Clear Channel. It just seems to be one compromise away from the next compromise at all times.

Maybe, it's Shimers fate to die in Waukegan. That seems to be the undertow of all the good thoughts behind moving to IIT. Let's move because we fear the death of the institution?

Think about what Jimmy Cliff said: " I'd rather be a free man in my grave than living as a puppet or a slave."

Shimer might die in Waukegan but when it does it will still be Shimer, not some annex of IIT.

If Shimer needs to move and have a lease then let's have a lease on our own. Novel thought eh?

Happy Thanksgiving!

Struggling college may move: Shimer Considers Relocating to IIT

Barbara Bell
Special to the Tribune
Published November 23, 2005

Shimer College may repeat a history lesson learned more than 25 years
ago when self-preservation forced the school to move from western
Illinois to Waukegan.
The small liberal arts college on the north side of the city may
relocate next summer to the Illinois Institute of Technology on the
South Side of Chicago. The relocation is a survival move because
Shimer's enrollment has been stagnant for 15 years, said Young Kim,
chairman of the college's board of trustees.
IIT invited Shimer to its campus at 3300 S. Federal St., and college
officials say they will decide by January whether to accept the offer.
"I think we are obliged to move in order to survive," Kim said. "[But]
there's no imminent crisis forcing us to move."
The college would probably have to shut down eventually if it stays in
Waukegan because it has been unable to get its enrollment above 110
students and it needs a minimum of 200. "It's just not sustainable,"
Kim said.
"We do see growth as essential to the college," said President William
Craig Rice.
Thom Karnik, director of communications and marketing at IIT, confirmed
that the colleges are negotiating a lease.
Shimer, which opened in the 1850s in Mt. Carroll, would maintain its
independence at IIT and enter into a long-term agreement for a building
on the campus.
Most of Shimer's Waukegan facilities would be liquidated, Kim said. The
science classes for home-schooled students would remain in Waukegan for
the time being, according to a news release. The college has a weekend
program for adults that would be moved to IIT, although school
officials said courses would be held in Waukegan if there is a demand.
At IIT, Shimer students would have access to more amenities, including
a fitness center, and the opportunity to take advantage of some IIT
academic offerings, such as a pre-med program.
"We would be able to offer our students more," Kim said.
Shimer students attend classes primarily in houses converted to
classrooms on Genesee Street. The school moved to Waukegan in 1979. The
college is best known for its curriculum based on the Great Books and
Western intellectualism in which students participate in discussions
with the faculty rather than listen to lectures.
Shimer has an intimate atmosphere and almost none of the frills found
at larger colleges. For example, the college doesn't have food service
or a gym. But students say that's what makes Shimer unique, and some
would prefer to stay in Waukegan.
"It would be much more difficult to keep our community," said Kyra
Keuben, 21, of Wheaton as she and other students spent time last week
in Shimer's bookstore, which is in the living room of a converted
house.
"I think the students here don't care as much about those things," said
Sarah Green, 25, of Pittsburgh.
Some Shimer students said they worry that the wooden tables used during
class discussions literally won't fit in the building where Shimer
would be housed at IIT. In addition, they said they would miss the
baked goods that students make every Friday to share.
But Colby Somerville, 21, of Florida said the small student body can
make life frustrating at times. "We're kind of lacking in diversity
that way," he said.
Shimer officials have been trying for years to create a campus in
Waukegan out of its 14 buildings, but it's too costly to build a
campus, Kim said. In addition, Shimer has been unable to run a capital
campaign to raise money, but Kim said that would probably change if the
school moved to IIT because the alumni are in favor of the relocation.
If Shimer moves south, students would be able to live in a dedicated
wing of an IIT dorm or off campus, and students at both colleges would
be able to attend classes at either school, officials said.
Kim, who graduated from Shimer in 1973, said he doubts the school will
be swallowed up by IIT.
"We have such a strong identity," he said.
Waukegan Mayor Richard Hyde said he plans to meet soon with Rice. And
Ald. Rick Larsen said Shimer has been an asset to Waukegan, citing
certificate programs that the school offers for teachers.
"This alderman wants them to stay in Waukegan," he said.

In the name of honest dialouge and all that is holy...

I have made adjustments, much to blogger’s chagrin, so that all the comments will now appear upon the top level, rather then in a secondary page. While blogger may feel it is improper to post comments on the header page, as we all know, almost every comment is just as important as the statement that started it, so down with blogger’s unnecessary totalitarianism, and up with free posting for all, members or no.

Cheers,

Saradevil

p.s. There are a few repeats now in here, however it really is better I think

More from David Shiner

I guess David Shiner is the only one who speaks the language of the people:

Thanks again, Michael. I hope this isn't only a private conversation in a public venue, like two sportscasters who address wach other on the air, but rather that others feel free to chime in.Your main point concerns the ability of the Assembly to make an informed and relevant decision on IIT by the time the bell rings. I don't know whether that will happen, but as I mentioned in an earlier post, I'm trying hard to help see that it does.On your other points: I didn't intend to give the impression that I see recent Assembly meetings as "irrelevant." I think they fulfill a somewhat different function than in the 80s and 90s - not all that different, but somewhat so. In thinking this over, it occurs to me that the rise in Weekend student attendance and the decline in decisions on substantive issues might be related to each other. The Weekend students, on the whole, seem to appreciate hearing committee reports and the like more than Weekday students and staff; it helps them feel more informed about what's going on at Shimer. They don't seem at all frustrated by the lack of substantive items, although they do speak up when we have discussions. I'll think more about it, but in any case I surely wouldn't characterize the Assembly as "irrelevant." I would say that Shimer is somewhat less democratic than it was a decade ago, and much less so than 25-30 years ago. I don't think that's a bad thing, but I do think it could become a bad thing if it goes much further. Since I'm obviously committed to the Assembly, I'll continue to try to figure out how to make it as functional and relevant as possible.As far as the statement that "even non-serious discussions about something like moving the College" would have been communicated widely in the past, I simply don't agree. Examples to the contrary abound. Back in 2002 Don was approached by a proprietary school that was interested in affiliating with Shimer. He told me about it some time after his initial conversations, and eventually he told the rest of the faculty. The talks disintegrated before the students and administrative staff (not to mention alumni) were brought in. Those dicussions never got to the point that the IIT proposal has, but they were certainly at least somewhat serious. If they had gone further, I assume the Assembly would have been brought in, although months after the initial contact. We'll never know. What I do know is that Bill, like Don, regularly gets calls about this sort of thing, which could loosely be termed "non-serious discussions to move the college" or to subtantially affect the college in other ways. I don't think it makes sense to have them all disseminated widely, or in most cases at all. What I think is probably in this case is not that issue, but the rather clunky way this particular situation has been handled. I hope that everyone involved, myself included, will learn to handle such matters better in the future.

On the Powers & Nature of the Assembly

The following was posted in the comments section by David Shiner in response to Mickey D. It seemed something that everyone would like to read.

Thanks, Michael. I didn't talk about process much in my post yesterday, so maybe it would be good to do more of that here.The role of the Assembly at Shimer has been changing incrimentally for several years now. I've had to do a lot of thinking about that, because I'm chairing a group of staff members who are responsible for the next accreditation self-study report. One portion of a paragraph in the working draft of our self-study (which won't be completed for another couple of months) is as follows: "The Assembly’s present business is primarily threefold: the election of members to Assembly committees that are responsible for work such as academic planning, administrative review, and budget recommendations; the hearing of annual or semiannual reports by administrators, especially the President and the Dean; and the discussion of the future of the Assembly, including proposed amendments to the Constitution. While these functions are important, they do not suggest a body with significant decision-making authority, or one that needs to meet all that regularly." One can be happy, sad, or indifferent to this trend, but for whatever it's worth, it seems to those of us on the committee that it's been going in this direction for several years now. Last year I served as Speaker of the Assembly (as I do again this year), and on several occasions I had to introduce (that is, invent) motions and discussion items just so we'd have a legitimate reason for the thrice-semesterly meetings that were called for in the Assembly Constitution. I tried to get Assembly members to introduce items thenmselves, but with little success.That's not to say that the Assembly is dying. For our first meeting in September there were something like 75 attendees, which was pretty incredible, possibly a record. All Assembly committees were filled without anyone's leg having to be twisted, which to my memory hadn't happened for a long time. The next meeting was also well attended. Weekend students, who hadn't been all that visible in Assembly for many years (if ever), have been turning out in impressive numbers for the past year or so. It's true, I think, that orientation toward the Assembly doesn't come naturally to Young or Bill. I don't think that's too surprising, since Bill comes from very different academic environments (which, of course, is almost all of them) and there was no Assembly when Young was a Shimer student. It's a learning process for them, and also for those of us who are more used to Shimer's current brand of self-governance. When I'm around either of them and the issue of the Assembly comes up, they treat it with respect. It's an evolving process. I don't know how it will play out concerning the IIT situation. I doubt that the Assembly will be treated as "a mere plebescite," and I'm trying to do what I can to help, but I wouldn't want to make any predictions at this point. As you mentioned in an earlier post, the strengthening of the Board that appears to be happening these days is probably a good thing, but it might affect the Assembly in ways that are hard to foresee.As far as the issue of when conversations with IIT began, your concerns have also been expressed by folks around here at times. From my perspective the issue isn't innacuracy, but a difference in what is being talked about. From what I understand, Bill and Young had very casual conversations with folks at IIT back in the spring. Those conversations were at first infrequent, but became more frequent and interesting as the summer wore on. By the time I was brought into the picture about 10 weeks ago, it looked like there might be reason for serious interest on both sides. So in one sense the conversations began in the spring, in another around September or even later. It depends on what level of seriousness you're talking about. College presidents frequently say things to each other like, "Maybe we should work together on X." It's part of the terrain. The Higher Learning Commission (our accrediting agency) encourages it, as to some extent does the Illinois State Board of Higher Education. Up to a certain point such conversations are too casual to take very seriously, let alone enlist others in (sorry about ending that sentence with a preposition).Look, here's an analogy. Nancy and I met in the summer of 1988, when she started working at Shimer. We were married in the summer of '93. We definitely were not an item for the first couple of years; we weren't dating in any romantic sense. Sometimes we went out together casually (I remember in particular a ballgame in Kenosha in the summer of '89), but lots of Shimer faculty members do that sort of thing. As time went on we saw each other more often, because we enjoyed each other's company. By January of 1993 we were engaged. Somewhere before that, obvously, we were getting serious, but I'm not exactly sure where the tipping point was. If you were to ask either of us, we might well give different answers. Each of us might even give different answers from ourselves at different times. It's not a matter of duplicity, just what we consider important or decisive.That analogy might seem silly, but I hope it brings out at least one aspect of present-day Shimer situation that could as easily be looked upon as benign as otherwise. We don't have any spinmeisters here; we don't have people trying to control who tells what to whom. People do write press releases, and some voices are necessarily more "official" than others, but no one is duty-bound to toe any sort of party line. No one tells me whether to post on a blog such as this, and I don't ask. So sometimes a "story" won't look particularly "straight." You can see that as deceptive or even duplicitous; I see it as one of the defects of our virtues, the virtue in this case being that Shimer people, even so-called "high-ranking administrators," say what they want without a party line, prior coaching, or fear of negative repercussions. That's pretty rare in higher education or, for that matter, anywhere else. But it has been, and continues to be, one of the great things about Shimer.Keep the comments coming. I'll check in daily, or at least as often as I can. Take care.
Original Post: Sun Nov 20, 09:12:27 AM CST

Curve Balls

What will the estimated market value of the land/property that the college owns be in 5 years from now at the current rate of growth?

If we factor in current real-estate trends and Lake County regentrification efforts what are the options?

What is the probable return on that land if developed and used to give Waukeganites a Community Center devoted to personal academic growth and supplemental tutoring program for college bound teens some of whom could be routed to Shimer?

What if we taught Shimer students to teach workshops on co-inquiry learning, study habits and research skills and gave them credit for student teaching?

What about a rental property for wayfaring intellectuals, entertainers and speakers visiting the Chicago Area or a hospice for developing artists?

What about reaching in instead of out?

I understand that Sarah Kimmel is part of a group that handles problems very similar to Shimer’s for groups very much like Shimer.

By the way, I did notice that Young Kim did not give the specifics of the proposed contract with IIT or explain its stealthy presentation and that he looked at the Assembly as an advisory committee.

Perhaps it was not the way he intended it but it did read as though he was belittling concerns and vilifying people who asked pointed questions.

I have had quite enough of people dismissing legitimate inquiries and facts provided that do not support the move as the bantering of nay sayers and the whining of laypeople. Also, attempts to calm the people who are concerned by assuring them that nothing is wrong, especially in this political climate, are probably ill pursued. Let's talk about the problems and how to solve them without putting all of the schools eggs in a basket and crawling to IIT. Right now Shimer is in control of its own fate. If you have been alive long enough you know that that counts for more than you think it does.

View from the Front

Hi everybody, it's David Shiner (or Dave if you prefer; I've never been bothered one way or the other). Thanks to Sara for kindly helping me figure out how to post here.

I hope to use this space to try to clarify what's going on with the Shimer-IIT situation, in my view, and particuarly what the large-scale issues are. As I see it, there are three major issues, not all of which I'll have the time to address today:

1) Why is Shimer contemplating major action?
2) Given that Shimer has good reason for contemplating major action (and I think it does, as I'll explain below), why does this include the possibility of leaving (or at least mostly leaving) Waukegan?
3) Given that Shimer has good reason to contemplate leaving Waukegan, why this particular proposal?

I addressed #1 in my conversation with Katie and Sandy last week, and with others since. To recap and add to that, Shimer is in a tough spot. Although retention is up, enrollment is down. The enrollment of new students has declined for three straight years despite the fact that modest resources have been added to the Admissions office and budget during that time. We enrolled 19 new students this fall, the lowest number in something like 20 years. Donations are also down over the past few years. These trends are worrisome in and of themselves, because we've tried a lot of different appproaches without much success. If we had more money we could try more things, but we don't, and I frankly don't know how we're going to get it. As things stand, the Budget Commitee regularly projects more income from donations than we recieve, our best efforts to the contrary. That puts a strain on all of us.

Some people have proposed that sustainability rather than growth should be Shimer's goal. I'm sympathetic with that argument and in fact used to believe it myself, but now I can see that it won't work in the long run. We have regularly been told by our accrediting agency that we can't continue to operate with our current numbers of students. Our response has been that we'll try to increase our student body. We've tried for years, and we haven't been able to do that. Similarly, we've been awarded a number of grants in recent years. This has really helped financially, compensating for some of the things we haven't been able to accomplish (more students, donations, etc). However, granting agencies want to see quantifiable returns, such as more students, as the result of their "investments." We've promised those increases, and we haven't delivered. All this makes it less likely that we'll be awared future grants, which reduces another group of funding sources. Our accreditation is also a concern, for similar reasons - not this year or next year, but in the long run and perhaps sooner than that.

By the way, the downturns have almost nothing to do with the "new administration" that I can see. All of those declines were well under way before we hired professional administrators except for the Chief Financial Officer, who has nothing to do with any of them. The plans for growth were written into the 2001 accreditation self-study, chaired by Barbara Stone; the biggest grant we have received, Title III (U.S. government), was written by Don Moon and approved by the government agency more than two years ago. Board membership was almost entirely different 3-5 years ago than it is now, with only three or four holdovers.

This year 38 out of our 103 (fulltime equivalent) students will graduate. There will also be some attrition, as there always is. Unless an enrollment feat not seen since the 1970's occurs, enrollment next year (perhaps next semester) will be under 100 for first time since the early 1990's. So the situation is worrisome, and no one knows if and when it will improve.

There's no reason to be alarmist about any of this. Shimer has had its ups and downs over the past 150+ years. The recent trends might be a blip on the screen, or they might not. If they are, great. If not, we need to be prepared, and it's better to be prepared when you have a choice, as I believe we do now, than to wait too long and have no choice. I witnessed the latter when we left Mount Carroll 27 years ago, and it wasn't pretty.

To move on to the second point: When I first heard that Young Kim and Bill Rice were talking with IIT about moving most of Shimer to the IIT campus, I really disliked idea. As time has gone by, I've come to take a different attitude. It's not that I favor the move; I don't. I also don't oppose it. It's a tough decision. I haven't made up my mind yet, and I won't until more facts (or at least projections) are available.

But my current attitude has nothing to do with my personal views on whether the move is a good one. Simply put, as I now see it, before this idea came up Shimerians were thinking in a manner that was too restricted. We tried various things in Admissions and Development. When they didn't work, we tried something else. At worst, we got the Director out of the office and brought in someone else. Amateurs, professionals, this approach, that approach - we tried a lot of things. Not everything, obviously - we don't have the resources or expertise for that - but a lot of things.

What we never did, or did all too rarely, is take a step back and ask whether the problem wasn't bigger than we were conceiving of it. One effect of the IIT discussions, however they play out, is that we're doing that now. Maybe our campus is a major part of our problem, and maybe it isn't. We haven't decided that issue, and we probably never will, but at least we're thinking about it. Maybe Waukegan is part of the problem, or maybe not - same deal.

I say all this for a couple of reasons. First, it's true. Second, I know that some current students and recent alumni feel like we're being forced into a move by the Board, or Bill Rice, or the administration, or somebody. I can understand that; frankly, the dissemination of information around this whole matter has been, to put it delicately, less than ideal. But that's separate from the issue of whether this or any other move would be a good one for Shimer. As I say, I don't know the answer, but I'm glad we're finally asking the question.

It might be replied that we have asked this question before, in the Roosevelt negotiations 15 years ago. But that situation was a lot different. At that time we had been unaccredited for 10 years, and Don believed that only a merger (not a lease agreement) could save Shimer, because we had no realistic chance of getting accredited. Not getting accredited would mean no federal financial aid for students, which would obviously mean the end of Shimer. So we voted to become a college of Roosevelt, believing there was no other alternative but closing the school - in other words, basically the same deal as when we moved from Mount Carroll. It didn't work out, but we somewhat miraculously received a major grant, and the rest is history. My point here, though, is that we want to ask the big questions when we don't feel the situation is hopeless, when the possibility of choice still exists.

I've got to run, so that's it for now. I'll reply to any responses to this post, which I know is seriously incomplete, when I can make time for it. I'll also keep reading with interest, and I hope many alumni can make it to the meeting with Don Moon and Bill Rice in Prairie Lounge next Sunday (4 PM, if you hadn't heard).

I'll close with this thought. A few folks who don't like the possibility of the IIT move have told me, "This really sucks." What really sucks, in my view, is that Shimer still finds itself in this position: that we're always having to scramble for our very existence, that things never seem to get better, at least not for very long. I know that all the postings on this and other sites, different though they might be, come from a common perspective, which is that those writing them care enough about Shimer to weigh in on this, express concern, and see how other Shimerians are thinking and feeling. That's great, and I take heart from it. I just wish we could figure out how to translate all that energy into a more viable future for Shimer.

Thanks for listening, and caring.

David

Posting on the Top Level of the Blog Rather then Comments

Hello All,

Here are some slightly more explicit directions for how to post on the top end of the blog.

First you need a blogger account. These are free, you can sign up for one by going to http://www.blogger.com and clicking the links for signing up. After you sign up you want to join the http://www.shimercollege.blogspot.com blog. To do this send an email to me saradevil@gmail.com or bill bill@billbrickey.com and we will send you a membership invitation. Numerous invites were sent out, but they may have gotten lost or ended up in bulk mail folders. If you did not get an invitation and want one let one or the other know.

Follow the directions in your invitation to join the blog. Once you have joined you can login again at blogger.com to be taken to the blogger dashboard. From the dashboard click the link that says Future of Shimer College where you will see the title in the upper left corner, and directly beneath a tab that says POST. Click on this tab and you should see a large open text field where you can past text (usually better to write in a word processor first) under the title field. This looks like a screen you might see when composing an email. Add a subject, paste your text and you are ready to publish.

Click the giant orange button under the text field that says Publish Post and you should be ready to go.

If you have any further problems please feel free to contact Bill or myself and we will do our best to help you through it.

Cheers,
Saradevil

email from young kim via janice scarbalis

Ladies and gentlemen,

I am addressing this message to the Shimer community, generally, in an
attempt to clear up some misconceptions that have developed with regard to
the current discussions about a possible move of some of the College’s
operations to IIT’s main campus in Chicago, to report to you on the status
of the discussions between the two institutions and to outline the process
by which members of our Shimer community will be able to consider and be
heard on the possible move and its various aspects.

First, I should mention that I am writing you, instead of having anyone else
involved in the IIT discussions write you, because I understand that I am
becoming or have become, the target of some disgruntlement about the
possible move, including comments challenging the efficacy of such a move,
as well as comments having to do with enfranchisement issues, and the power
of the Board of Trustees vis-à-vis that of the Assembly. I believe in a
direct approach to many matters in life, so I thought it best that I, as
supposedly a main culprit in this drama, address you directly.

For me personally, I have not come to any conclusions about the efficacy of
a possible move to IIT. I do not yet have enough information to do so. I can
tell you, however, as one working in the trenches on this matter, that so
far, the discussions with IIT have been promising and worthy of our
consideration. I understand the unfortunate tendency of some people to
personalize issues, and to vilify those who disagree with them or who they
perceive as doing them a wrong. I can only hope that we are better than
that, as we discuss these serious and dramatic issues. We, who have been
trained in a discussion methodology and in working with others to analyze,
consider and resolve issues, should treat each other with respect in those
discussions, understanding that our discussions about this matter are guided
by what each of us thinks is in the best interests of the College.
Additionally, I must report to you that some comments I have heard about the
possible move contain such crafted distortions and inaccuracies, that I am
obliged to believe that they are purposeful misstatements, made in order to
make a case. This is also unworthy of us.

Let me turn to the matter of “the best interests of the College”, and who
should decide what they are, at least in this context. The short answer is
that we, the whole Shimer community, should be involved in the decision
about a possible move to IIT. I say this not only because I believe that
this is the right thing to do, but also, in recognition of the democratic
and participatory culture of the College, not only in its Waukegan years,
but also to an extent in its Mt. Carroll years. The long answer is more
Shakespearean, in the sense that in life, we all have various roles that we
play, given the circumstances. In the matter of the deciding upon what is in
the best interests of the College, at least with regard to major decisions,
long range strategic matters and issues affecting the mission of the
College, that is particularly the Board of Trustees’ charge and
responsibility, their fiduciary responsibility.

That is not to say that the Board should not actively solicit and listen to
input from various segments of the Shimer community, including staff
(faculty and administration), students, alum and friends of the College.
And, that is what the Board has been trying to do this past month. We have
apprised the various segments of the Shimer community about the discussions
with IIT about a possible move, that a mix of Board members and staff are
working with colleagues at IIT to shape what the meaning and effect of such
a move would be in various areas (facilities, academic affairs, library, IT,
student life, admissions, development and financial), and once the effects
on those various areas are further analyzed, developed and synthesized into
a proposal, that proposal, as well as the underlying assumptions for the
proposal, will be further discussed within the Shimer community. To date,
many of you have contributed by raising questions and concerns, and for this
we are thankful. The Board’s desire in this process is not only to be sure
that we have covered all the bases, but also, to be inclusive as to how we
come to decisions about the matter. The Assembly’s role in this process, is
to consider the possible move and develop recommendations to the Board.

Now, with regard to the discussions between Shimer and IIT, as I mentioned,
a mix of Shimer Board members and staff are engaged in discussions with
their respective counterparts at IIT, with a view to developing the meaning
and effect of a possible move on their respective areas by the end of this
month. We should also receive by the end of this month, what IIT has termed
an economic/services proposal regarding the possible move. These materials
will be sent to the executive committee of the Board of Trustees, together
with our internal analysis, financial projections and modeling. The
executive committee will have comments, questions and instructions. Taking
those various comments in hand, we will also bring the proposal back to the
various segments of the Shimer community, for their further consideration
and views. I anticipate that as a result of these further internal
discussions including those at the Assembly, we will engage in further
refinement (negotiations) with IIT with regard to the proposal, culminating
in a consideration and decision by the full Board with regard to the final
proposal in mid-January.

There has been some pique expressed over the seeming abruptness in which the
IIT discussions have been brought to the attention of the Shimer community,
as well as the relatively short timeline for decision-making about a
possible move. The timeline is what it is, and not completely within our
control. To the extent that we decide not to make a decision within the time
frame, and we may do so if we choose, that may very well serve as a
decision. As to when this matter has been brought to the attention of
different segments of the Shimer community, let me say that the initial
inquiry from IIT arose last spring, and more people became involved as the
discussions gathered form and seriousness. The judgment call of when this
matter had matured sufficiently to be brought to the attention of different
people and segments of the Shimer community for their consideration, with
its inherently powerful disruptive effects, has largely been mine. Thank you
again, for the thoughtful questions and concerns that many of you have
raised, and I look forward to our further discussions about this matter.

Young Kim
Chair, Board of Trustees
Shimer College

Response to Bill

My name is Sandy Kaczocha, class of 2000. I like the rehab style opening, helps me understanding who's involved in the discourse.

I want to respond to a few of the points in both Bill and PJ's postings. The first thing I'd like to address is the real side of Waukegan. Bill wants us to ensure that we don't overlook the darker side of neighborhoods that are in the midst of regentrification. I'd like us to make sure that we don't also overlook the reality of Waukegan. My family relocated to Waukegan in 1979 when Shimer moved. I grew up in the Waukegan schools. I know many many students who were lost to stray bullets or the jail system. I was an early entrant not only because I was seeking to get away from the things we all thought lacking in High School. I was an early entrant because I no longer wanted to watch my fellow students get thrown out of third story windows or knifed in the counselor's office.

The real story is that Shimer is in one of the better parts of Waukegan and is very much encapsulated. The fact that people with an income and higher education are moving into the neighborhoods surrounding IIT is indeed a good sign. People investing their time and money into neighborhoods almost inevitably means a reduction in crime. Look at the crime stats for the area around Cabrini Green. I see no such growth happening in Waukegan. I know the city has plans, but the start of Waukegan's plan requires those same steps taken years ago to begin the regentrification in Pilsen, Bronzeville and Bridgeport.

I'd also like to make a point about Corporate America. I work for a credit card company, surely the epitome of Corporate America. What I've found is an increasing hunger for critical thinking abilities. I've read numerous articles in various magazines about the corporate world's increased recruitement and hiring of liberal arts majors. In fact, my mother finally finished her degree at Shimer last year. She did her thesis on the value of a liberal arts education in Corporate America. I helped her complete her research and there was plenty of evidence showing that the types of skills Shimer helps us develop and hone are the same types of skills that Corporate America wants in employees. All the theses are on the school's website, so check it out if you'd like more concete detail.

I don't believe that schools like IIT are actively seeking to crank out androids who can only do what they are told. All institutions want employees who can analyze a situation, dialogue with coworkers and create a sense of cohesion among disparate entities. This isn't something unique to liberal or non-corporate professions.

I'm currently attending graudate school online working towards my Masters in Computer Information Sciences. I'm attending a school that is very much all about the profit, but much of my experience has been very similar to my experience at Shimer. My classes are discussion based. I do have to read from text books, but the experience of taking the text and moving down a path of understanding through dialogue is virtually identical to what we all had when we were sitting around the octagonal tables.

I have been encouraged by my graduate studies. I've realized that the Shimer model is not only valuable in my eyes, but is something that other institutions both corporate and educational are seeking to emulate at least in part. I have been so encouraged that I was thinking that Shimer could potentially benefit by creating a program, maybe along the lines of Integrated Studies 1 or 2 geared towards professionals. I can't tell you how many courses and seminars are being offered around the world aimed at enhancing the critical thinking, speaking and writing skills of professionals. There are even more courses out there on how to facilitate and participate in discussions or how to work to create project group cohesion.

These are absolutely the kind of skills that institutions like IIT are looking to instill in their students. These are absolutely skills that the coporate world is hoping have already been instilled in employees. I don't think that places like IIT and Shimer are diametrically opposed.

One last point, I live in the northern burbs. The DePaul/Barat deal was most definitely talked about as a merger or acquisition. Everyone knew that Barat had reached a critical situation and was incapable of keeping their doors open by themselves. Depaul acquired Barat with dreams of financial benefit. The rapidity with which the decision about the move to IIT has to be made denotes to me that the agreement is indeed a financial one for IIT. Meaning, they have space to rent and want to get it rented. Surely everyone with eyes knows that there is no other financial benefit to partnering with Shimer right now.

Double Edged Razor

My name is Bill Brickey. I graduated from Shimer College in 1989.

Occam's Razor
"Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate" or "plurality should not be posited without necessity." ( click on the words above to read about the Razor for yourself )

PJ, I think you have things the wrong way around.

Also, spelled Okham’s Razor; it is a Medieval Theory. Without going too far into mentioning how this type of “old saw” is twisted by people like George Bush to whip people into mindlessness let me just point out that this little rule of logic is prepositioned by the words “without necessity”. This dialogue is necessary because the move does not seem to be necessary.

Perhaps some of you have missed the NCLB years of public schooling in Chicago. I have not. I am teaching in the public schools near the beautiful Pilsen area. I know multiple students who have lost loved ones to stray and intended bullets in the soon to be regentrified area. No freshmen year Shimer type college student needs to be walking around Pilsen, Bridgeport or any other part of southwest Chicago casually at night. That is a reality. It is a simple truth. Don’t try to complicate it with rhetoric about regentrification and art hippies moving into the neighborhood. The art hippies are moving into condominiums or homes with security doors, locks and/or guards or better yet they know the hood. They are protecting themselves against the displaced, the unhappy and the uneducated. Gated neighborhoods are not uncommon.

There is a concerted effort in this country to “dumb down” education for the common folk in order to create a more affordable working class. If you are a degreed Shimerian working in corporate America you see it everyday. The story of America’s success is the story of cheap labor. This is the impetus behind schools like IIT. They want to produce workers. People who stand up for their rights in the work place slow down the wheels of production. This is why I don’t think we should be associated with IIT.

IIT is what it is and it serves a purpose. Shimer serves a purpose as well. They are fewer and fewer schools that do what Shimer does. The educational paradigm is shifting for the worst. Each day it moves closer and closer to the Western World Business Management Paradigm. The paradigm is a pyramid. The leader sits at the top and the orders are passed down hill. It is the way that businesses are run and it is the way that sports teams are lead. For my feminist friends this is also known as the male power archetype. This is in sharp contrast to Shimer’s power archetype which is more feminist or flat decisions and activities are taken on together.

The way this decision is being made is more in the spirit of a school like IIT. We Shimerians are actively involved in our communities. Anyone who expected to move the school by walking into a room and saying, “This is what we are going to do, now do it.”, is, kindly put, sadly mistaken. I did not vote for George Bush and I am not part of his America any more than I have to be. I am going to ask the hard questions and I am going to expect cogent answers. If I do not receive intelligent responses I will be suspicious. This, I would think is to be expected of all Shimerians. We ask questions, we ask a lot of questions and we expect answers.

I ask the questions about Shimer because I am weird. I am not perfect. I don’t fit easily into the top down management structure. If it were not for Shimer, I would not know the difference between being lazy and having a learning disability. Shimer fits a niche. Pursuing a relationship to have a financial profile like all the other big institutions takes us out of that niche. That’s right I said us. Despite the love hate thing I know who I am, and I am a Shimerian. When something happens in that community that calls me I will respond. I am worried about all the other “unique” people that will come after me. Where will they go if the only thing that is left is IIT and DePaul University?

In response to some recent posts: Many of the arguments in favor of the move have three major components in common:

1.) The arguments acknowledge a lack of data to support the argument in favor of the move.
2.) The arguments dismiss the lack of data or logic as part of the complexity of business; beyond the understanding of laypeople.
3.) The arguments suggest that in spite of these curiosities and concerns the move is a good thing because it will bring Shimer in line with other colleges and universities.

In the “..Thoughts from left field...” post he says: “Unless you're willing to ascribe extreme bad faith to the Shimer administration when they say that Shimer will remain financially and administratively independent…” seems to imply that arguments against moving are arguments against the administrative bodies at Shimer College. This is a brilliant way to quash intelligent dialogue.

Please do not insult the integrity of this blog and its patrons by trying to create friction that does not exist anymore than it always has. Asking questions about things that will impact you or something you care about greatly is not a sign of animosity or bad faith. It is healthy adult behavior and good citizenship. The comments posted here contain legitimate questions. These are the legitimate arguments and thoughts of concerned alumni and students (and now teachers and board members). I guard carefully against disparaging comments and demonizing.

Furthermore:

(1) The articles posted here, in regard to Barat College, were from legitimate sources located on the internet in the public domain. They were not solicited. Barat was required or expected to produce 800 enrollments per year and failed. That factoid came from the office DePaul has set up to field questions about the Barat closure. As a result they were closed down after 4-5 years. It would be good to know ahead of time if there is such a stipulation in the contract with IIT. In which case the move would definitely not be a good move; unless, one feels, that by moving to the IIT campus, Shimer College will increase its enrollment goal over 800% within 5 years of its move. The point of posting the article was not to demonize the move but to give a framework to understand the possibilities and parameters of moving a College or University for those of us not currently moving Colleges or Universities. Unless someone is willing to post the details that show that this is not an issue, it is not a cogent argument to suggest that examining the similarities is equal to bad faith in the administration. There are those of us who believe that our education at Shimer taught us to ask questions and not to trust blindly. Following this charter should not put us in opposition to any part of the Shimer College Family. It should make them proud of us. We want to know what is going on.

(2) I am a Chicagoan and yes Chicago is being regentrified at the expense of the poor. Why would anyone brag about or espouse the process of regentrification as something good? It is a way to legally move poor people out and affluent people in. But if regentrification and growing intellectual population are your argument, so be it. Crime is generally higher in Chicago than in Waukegan but no matter how one paints it, as neighborhoods in Chicago go, Pilsen and Bridgeport are still some of the riskiest if your skin is the wrong color or you look like an easy target. I work in and around them and I don’t have a problem, so I don’t want to paint it like Viet Nam or Iraq. But please don’t tell people that they can hang out in Pilsen or Bridgeport at night the way the do in Waukegan. Safety is an issue in that part of Chicago still.

(3) Waukegan has produced poets, comedians and authors. While it is not an intellectual Mecca let us not forget that there are some extremely intelligent and innovative people born and raised in Waukegan. It can still be a good home for Shimer. Let us not forget that Notre Dame is in Indiana, of all places. The commentary on Waukegan’s intellectual capacity makes us look bad. There is nothing that we know that is so special that we should feel that we are better than those who do not know it or do not espouse a particular idea or possess a special degree. It is not that I feel I am above any intellectual snobbery but I really fight against in myself. I think I learned that at Shimer.

(4) Left of Field also said...“…but nobody's going to compose pastoral poetry about downtown Waukegan, either.” This statement may be the reason that Shimer flounders in Waukegan. How many poets, artists and comedians does Waukegan have to produce to get a break from the intellectual elite?? Can we get over ourselves?? Shimer needs a small community to thrive and Waukegan needs a unique educational experience to promote the hell out of. Maybe they want to help grow a college. Has anyone asked them?

(5) Next IIT’s pedigree was never in question. The meat of the argument against them for me is that IIT is part of a new class of colleges designed to serve the needs of Corporate America. They intentionally forgo intellectual pursuits in favor of getting people ready for the work force. They are designed to do two things prepare you for Wal-Mart or Wall Street. If this is not the case I have not seen anything that suggests the contrary. I for one am really genuinely concerned about the education being watered down in favor of catering to the goals of a financially driven agenda. Also, I have a hard time buying the, “Good Samaritan” picture we are painting of IIT. IIT is a business and I don’t see that they need anything but Shimer’s name and property.

About the potential benefits mentioned in the last post:

1.) Poor Location – This point is very subjective and assumes that all avenues for growth in Waukegan have been explored. No factual data was supplied to support it. Also, I just learned that there is a new marketing plan for the Waukegan area this makes the most sense to me.

2.) Crumbling Physical Plant – That is not a reason to move it is a reason to research avenues to pursue funding for renovation. This is a point that might be presented to the city of Waukegan. Shimer is one of the things that keep Waukegan ahead in the race for growing municipality. Besides, IIT is ugly. This is a cogent point because it speaks to the learning environment.

3.) Lack of Extra Curricular Activities – If you really want a football team and sports bars with naked chicks of the girls gone wild variety you can go to a different school. There is St. Johns if you want something more upbeat with that respectable intellectual tinge. The train ride to Chicago is 45 min. and what about Ravinia or the Botanical gardens. I know they are not easy to get to but they are there within reach. They can ride bikes and get some exercise.

4.) Small Incestuous Social Scene – This is the nature of institutions. I would bet I could get 9 out of 10 college students to show me the click they hate and tell me evil stories about the townies. But this is a valid point. You can change clicks more easily at a larger and better placed university. In small communities everyone knows each others business. If you don’t like this aspect of small colleges you can go to a larger one.

5.) Lack of Diversity In Electives – This is about money and impetus. It will be the same no matter where Shimer is. If they want traditional or additional programming they will have to pay people to work as professors and provide them with infrastructure. IIT could definitely help with this but I feel the price may be to high and the rewards to few.

And one more thing about Occam’s Razor.

In today’s political and economic climate the simpler truth would be the unpleasant one. Owning and selling real-estate is the fastest way to make money. Mergers and Acquisitions are the new business model. The simpler idea is that someone is making money and that that is the motivator. The more complex thought is that there are secrets that we should not know for our own good and the good of Shimer’s future.

Finally, to be clear, this blog was meant to gather facts to facilitate discussion. I have no data that suggests that anyone is doing anything untoward. I know that there are board members who want to move Shimer College to Chicago. I know that there are students, alumni and faculty who believe this is a good idea. I know that there are others who disagree. I believe this is a bad idea based on my own insights and research. I do not however, “know” that this is a bad idea. The facts presented thus far suggest that it is not wise.

I am waiting for facts to the contrary. If the move is good for Shimer and this is the simpler of the two theories on how to save Shimer, why can’t we simply know the facts?

My Sincere and Heartfelt Apologies

Please be aware that in my years at Shimer Teachers, Faculty, Students and Board Members all attended classes sooner or later. This made everyone a student. Therefore in my eyes all Shimerians can post on this blog.

This is the spirit of dialogue. It is one of the things that gives me pause regarding the secrecy around the decision to move. In my experience it is not Shimerian to exclude withour clear cause and justification.

( For those of you that are laughing at that last sentence --- so am I! )

Please feel free to post here if you are a member of the Shimer Community.

From John McGough

First, thanks to Sarah for acting on this helping us get together.

I'm not sure if we should be making the argument that Shimer has 'a marketing problem'. Enrollment and attendance at Shimer has been and is consistently low.
It seems to me that this is largely a result of the nature and position of the College, as it is, in
today's academic world, and not largely not the result of mistakes or errors by individuals. Numerous strategies have been employed to tackle this throughout the years, with varied and modest-to-no effect.

However, this year's graduating class is projected to be something like 30 students, the highest in recent memory and perhaps since the move to Waukegan. What went well here? Something was different this year, and this deserves serious attention.

It also seems obvious to me that the solutions - bureacratic at their core, suspicious on every side - discussed by the current President and his cohorts amongst the faculty and Board, would not simply move the College, but effectively end it as the institution - faults included, and these are many - that it currenty is. Plus, there is NO way imaginable that a move to IIT in and of itself would 'improve marketing' or enhance enrollment.

The President and upper-level administration salaries (no longer on level with the rest of College employees) have added an extra $250,000 to the current budget. And despite this, still no effecive strategy or action in the way of building the College. I suggest we make the argument that any and all discussion of the College's future (always largely grounded in its finances, no?) has to start here, along with a serious look at the rest of the budget.

There are definite material interests, in my opinion, for the proposed move. In the last few years, Shimer has hired 'outsiders' and broken with its egalitarian pay structure to benefit from the supposed expertise. The old guard is getting older, and over 20 years in Waukegan have probably stretched their ideological and material committment to the struggling College and its
mission to the breaking point. They want to retire, ideally with a secure-enough pension. IIT, a corporatized and thus 'legitimate' university, is seen as securing this.

I would also not be surprised to discover other more nefarious connections between those plotting the move and those who stand to benefit on the Board or IIT. The bureaucratic nature of the 'discussions' on it to date, and the carefulness of the arranged, exclusivist meetings, certainly raise suspicions.

Anyhow, just trying to point out that the solutions offered refer only in the most fantastic and idealist manner to the identified problems facing the College. We - the opposition - should draw up our own balance sheet to oppose this, including a comprehensive evaluation of finances, and the Colleges tradition and the accumulated intellectual and manual labor that has gone into building the Waukegan institution and which now stands to be stupidly and quietly 'sold'.

In militant opposition to bureaucracy everywhere and the Proposed Move to IIT,

John McGough
Class of '98

From Vicky Muehlesen

heard about this blog in a message from Sara. I don't know any of you guys, but I am a Shimer graduate, and I do have something to say (rather a lot…)
Since most of you already seem to be set against the proposal to move, this long message probably won't persuade you otherwise, but I'll post it anyway. Feel free to e-mail me if you want any more details about anything.

First, to introduce myself, I'm Vicky Muehleisen, and I attended Shimer from 1982-1986, which were probably some of the darkest years for Shimer. (There were about 20 people in my entering class, and I think only about 6 who graduated). I went on to graduate school (MA in linguistics from Temple, PhD from in linguistics from Northwestern), and now I teach at a big university in Tokyo. I've been in Japan for 11 years, and I plan to stay here, but I still have ties to the Chicago area. In fact, my brother teaches at IIT (at the College of Engineering, and I've visited the campus a few times. For a long time after graduating, I didn't go back to Shimer (the usual love-hate thing that many Shimer graduates have, I think), but I've gone back to visit a few times in the past few years, I read the newsletters and check out the web page from time to time. From my perspective, I think the proposal to move to the IIT campus is a good one.

The biggest reason is that it would give so many advantages to Shimerians in terms of curriculum. I absolutely loved the Shimer curriculum--I took as many credits as possible each semester, doing all the classes in Soc Sci and Nat Sci, and doing a lot of independent studies in sociology, philosophy, and botany. But although I really wanted to do more science, there was just no chance to do it at Shimer. These days, there must be many Shimerians who are interested in environmental issues, and IIT has interdisciplinary course on the environment. It's true, as someone said, that IIT is a tech school, but technology can be useful. Aren't there Shimerians who'd like to be able to take classes in computer programming, web page design, etc. as a way of expressing themselves? My brother also pointed out to me the Center for Ethics in the Professions and the Math and Science Education Program, both of which are nationally known and which could be of interest to Shimerians.

Another reason in favor of the move is that the general facilities would be so much better. It wasn't until graduate school that I realized how great it could be to have access to a real library, not just a collection of books stored in the basement of the Waukegan public library. And the dormitory! I know people have a lot of attachment to that run-down building, but it was already dangerous when I lived there. From what I saw the last time I was there, in the summer of 2004, there have been some cosmetic improvements (the scary basement is not so scary anymore), but basically, it still seems to be falling apart. It's true that the Shimer dorm rooms have kitchens, but since they have the same stoves that were already no working right 20 years ago, I'm not sure how useful they really are.

What are the specific arrangements for the dorms at IIT? Will the Shimerians be living together in the same dorm? Are there some communal kitchens available? If so, then people can cook and eat together sometimes, as one way of creating a sense of community. (That's what the Chinese students in Tokyo seem to do, in whatever dorm they are living in, and it works for them. And don't they still have community lunches and potluck dinners at Shimer, even though the dorm has kitchens?)

The Chicago location would be great! IIT is much closer to the Art Institute, the Field Museum, the Chicago Symphony, all those used bookstores, not to mention the restaurants and the Chicago Blues Festival. Back in my Shimer days, I was lucky to get down to Chicago once or twice a semester. It would be so cool for Shimerians to be just a short El ride from the Art Institute. Maybe the neighborhood surrounding IIT is dangerous, but I don't think it's nowhere near as dangerous as that of Temple University, and students seemed to adjust to that environment pretty quickly. And what does "dangerous" really mean? When I was going to Northwestern, I lived in Edgewater, another "dangerous" neighborhood in Chicago, and it was really not as bad as the reputation would lead you to believe. My brother hasn't had any problems commuting to and from IIT, even when using public transportation in the evening. What does Waukegan have to offer? As far as I can see, Waukegan has never been especially welcoming to Shimer, and it certainly isn't very attractive to potential students. I went to Shimer in spite of the fact that it was in Waukegan, not because of it.

I can understand the worries about Shimer losing its identity, but I don't think it will really be a problem. Right now, I am at a big university (50,000 students), divided into many schools; I'm currently teaching at two undergraduate schools, the School of Law, and the new School of International Liberal Studies which just opened in 2004. Even at such a big place, the students quickly feel an identity with their school because of the shared curriculum. Even at our new school, which doesn't even have it's own "space" within the university yet, (we're just using empty rooms at various locations aroundthe campus), students feel a strong identity just because they are studying something that the others aren't. As long as Shimer sticks with its core curriculum, people will feel that they are Shimerians, and if they "Shimerize" the space as they intend to, it will be even better. My brother also thinks there would be no problem with Shimer keeping its own identity. He says most of the techie-type students don't especially identify with IIT, and the ones who do want to be part of a group join one of the student organizations. From the point of view of the average IIT student, then, Shimerians would easily be able to keep their distinct identity. He also says that Vandercook feels like a clearly separate entity, but that regular IIT students really enjoy being able to take music classes there.

About the only thing that I don't like about the proposal is that IIT doesn't seem to offer many (or maybe any) classes in foreign languages, something which is sorely lacking in Shimer's curriculum. But at least there are plenty of international students on the IIT campus.

Shimer has been in Waukegan for more than 20 years, and it just is not thriving. I think it's time to try something new.