“There are no solutions, only trade-offs.” The immortal words of economist Thomas Sowell apply as much to college administration as they do to public policymaking. When it comes to academics, I believe it is high time that Middlebury confronts this reality.
From my very first semester, I noticed a contradiction between the college’s mission statement and the academic culture that it promotes. How is it that students are prepared to “lead engaged, consequential, and creative lives” when most of their time is spent trying to complete a virtually endless array of assignments and readings? Does living a life of consequence go hand in hand with academic rigor? In the latter’s current form, I think not.
Of course, there is a case to be made for rigor: It forces us to challenge ourselves in ways we might not otherwise elect to and pushes the boundaries of our intellectual limits. However, the pursuit of rigor for the sake of rigor, which I believe is what the academic culture at Middlebury has devolved to, merely breeds burnout and misery.
Further, the contradictions do not end with the mission statement. They appear to be omnipresent. For instance, as a member of the College’s Community Council during the 2023–2024 academic year, I was privy to frequent conversations on how student well-being could be improved. We always seemed to invariably circle back to the idea that we needed more: more clubs, more events and more outreach.
However, there was little recognition of the fact that what would really improve students’ well-being is giving them more control of their time, which would follow from having fewer academic obligations — a solution that is antithetical to Middlebury’s present brand of academic rigor. Let us be clear: Any conversation on student well-being cannot be meaningful if it eschews the question of their academic workload.
The college’s academic policies also make for proverbial headscratchers. Take, for example, the prohibition against invoking Credit/No-Credit (CR/NCR) for academic distribution requirements. If the purpose of having these requirements is to “encourage breadth of learning in our liberal arts curriculum,” why stop students from using a grading method that would support them in taking larger steps outside of their academic comfort zones? Is the goal academic exploration or academic perfection? Is the latter even attainable? Clarity and realism are urgently needed.
Another case-in-point example is the fact that when a student decides to retake a class that they previously did not perform well in, the new grade they receive will appear on their transcript along with the older one, but not be used for GPA calculations. In other words, your GPA is a function of how well you perform on the first go. Whatever happened to fostering a growth mindset and rewarding effort? Are these no longer worthy endeavors?
As a counterargument, I can imagine the questions I have raised in this article being met with the following response: “While Middlebury College’s academic culture exhibits certain features which one may be inclined to deplore, we must, I think, agree that a certain curtailment of the right to work-life balance is unavoidable, and that the rigors which Middlebury students are being subject to have been vindicated in the sphere of academic achievement.” I am taking some creative liberties here, but such a response is not completely removed from reality either. There are many people who would consider the status-quo perfectly justifiable; I would implore them to ask themselves to what end.
To be sure, the issues that I have raised in this op-ed constitute merely one facet of a much more complex endeavor, which is clearly defining our institutional identity. There is a need to go back to the fundamentals and ask ourselves what our values are, what we really care about and how we can bring both of these things to the fore beyond just the academic sphere. Students, too, need to take personal responsibility for this.
That being said, with academics constituting the dominant part of our college experience, it only makes sense to iron out the inconsistencies here first. The reduction in the graduation credit requirements from 36 to 34, which faculty ratified last semester, is a welcome move to the extent that it gives students more flexibility and creates a more level playing-field. We should capitalize on the momentum generated to implement further changes to make the academic experience at Middlebury engaging, fulfilling and fit for purpose. With a new president due to take over soon, the time is ripe for an academic reckoning. I hope the moment does not escape us.
