Loving Middlebury, Quirks And All

Author: Michael Stahler

Junior Year Abroad. It is an opportunity for Middlebury students to get away from the College and all its quirks, including some interesting late night McCullough dances, and venture out into the larger world for a peek. As I looked into the opportunity, I did not fully understand at the time that I was not just traveling to another country, but would also be studying in another atmosphere besides Middlebury College. So why is this Opinions piece, originating 3,000 miles from campus, relevant? In light of the recent increase in tuition, as well as the flood of prospective students that will be barraging the campus in a few weeks, I felt that this was a good opportunity to reflect on the one thing that distinguishes a 'good' school from a 'great' one. Is it location? Is it reputation? Is it something else?

I currently am in the second semester of my year abroad at Scotland's University of St. Andrews. I can recall looking at the colorful promotional material and trying to imagine the University — much to my dismay, I let my 'Middlebury vision' paint a portrait of a school on the North Sea with many of the same amentities that our school has to offer. When thinking of the small things, such as the residence halls and the food, I could not help but envision the interiors of New Dorms and the culinary delights of Proctor or at the very least Hamlin. My friends who had been to St. Andrews told me that the food was bad and the 'such and such a hall is nice,' but nothing prepared me for what I was faced with. Please note that this is not an article bashing St. Andrews — those considering coming here should indeed come.

St. Andrews has a lot of benefits that Midd does not. It is located a mere 55 miles from Edinburgh and about 70 miles from Glasgow. Both cities have populations of over 500,000 people, making them great places for museums, night clubs,and — as long as my credit card is not involved — shopping. St. Andrews is also nicely integrated into an easy-to-use public transport system consisting of trains and buses. Of course several of the University's buildings are within sight of the famous Old Course for those interested in a game of golf or just snagging the flag from the 18th hole after a night of partying.

Middlebury's location, on the contrary, is rather isolated. Those without cars can tend to feel a bit stuck at times due to the lack of public transportation. However, much like St. Andrew's golfing reputation, Middlebury is very close to some of the finest skiing and riding in New England. These same mountains offer great hiking as well.

It is important to note such differences, but these are things that the institutions have little or no control over. The real distinction that I have seen lies in the schools themselves.

The organization of the two schools is extremely different. St. Andrews, with a student body of approximately 6,000 students, is very decentralized administratively. Such decentralization makes things extremely difficult for students to navigate. On my first day here I visited three different offices before finally getting the information that I needed. Some junior semester abroad students were even bounced between four offices before getting the information that they needed. Although many students think that Middlebury is too small, it seems as if our size certainly benefits the organization of the school and ultimately the students. Why? Communication. We all have an idea of what is going on in Old Chapel and officials there have a good idea of what is going on around campus. Although it may seem easy to criticize the administration, and many students do so, I feel that Middlebury's administration deserves credit for their visibility at events such as the hockey games, concerts and other functions. I have seen Principal Lang, the head of St. Andrew's, twice this entire year — once at Chapel and once on a visit to our hall. I cannot think of a Middlebury hockey game where I did not see at least one College administrator in the crowd.

This idea of the administration being in touch with the students that they work for also leads into my next and the single most important distinction that I have noticed. St. Andrews was founded in 1411 and has remained a reputable institution ever since. Middlebury, founded in 1800, has also worked hard to build a reputation as solid as the marble in Mead Chapel, but it is still working hard to preserve that image and to improve on it and the quality that lies underneath such a reputation. When meeting with Lang I mentioned the minor shortcomings — including the communications issue between departments as well as the quality of food and housing. His response was in fact a question: Why did you come here? After a few seconds, the word "reputation" emerged from my mouth. Later that night, I thought about the discussion and Lang's response to my constructive criticism. I couldn't help but feel as if Lang had not registered what I had said and maintained that the University's reputation alone would compensate for the shortcomings. I agree that the reputation of the University is key, but people must be careful not to rest on their laurels. Indeed, I could see how the University may have been taking this approach in recent years, reflected by the fact that such shortcomings I have mentioned have not been rectified for whatever reason (most likely due to the lack of funding, since St. Andrews is a public school). However, a look at the old buildings and other pieces of the University's past revealed the grandeur to which Lang referred — a grandeur that seemed now to be fading with cuts in courses offered and inadequate computing facilities. This idea of a great image of the past alone though does not help the school. Where is the inspiration for scholars to investigate? How will the University compete with other schools that are working hard to expand not just their infrastructure, but also their resources for students?

Applying Darwinism, simply relying on the past will not help to improve the University and may serve to weaken it.

Even though I hear some students state that Middlebury is not in the most exciting place in the world, it seems as if that the location is irrelevant when considering the effort the trustees, alumni and the administration have put into continuously improving Middlebury with not just new buildings, such as Bicentennial Hall, but also new programs such as the new Portuguese language school.

Innovation drives a lot of things in the world: New computers are always being developed, researchers are working hard to discover cures for diseases. If the institutions that create such innovators are not themselves trying to constantly improve, then isn't something wrong?