from Steven Werlin

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

"Mine certainly was."

Dear Shimer College,

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

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

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

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

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


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

Michael Dubensky

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

A few thoughts

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

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

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

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

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

But I’ve got my own tentative answers.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Answers, please.

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

Yours,

Noah

Practice Critical Thinking

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

Answer: How can we attract and retain more students?

Answer: How we we recruit more students?

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

Answer: How can we make more money?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



Michael Dubensky