In a year marked by political rigidity, global violence and immense grief, it is hard for Middlebury students not to feel the weight of all the issues that surround us. While some students navigate a shrinking job market, others wonder when is the next time they can return home. With so many shifts in both personal lives and larger-scale affairs, it seems that only one word can fully encapsulate what we are feeling: unstable.
In its eighth year, Zeitgeist seeks to understand how this instability shapes our views of ourselves, others, and the world around us. This year, Zeitgeist 8.0 questions acknowledge that things are constantly fluctuating. To figure out how we move forward, we must first understand the conditions, both within our campus, with its unique perspectives, and outside it.
Many may remember this year through the college’s changing landscape. With the inauguration of our 18th President of Middlebury, Ian Baucom; the college being named in the elite colleges lawsuit; vacancies in the English Department; the rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in academia; and severe understaffing, it is hard to know whether we are moving forward or backwards.
This is also a year marked by extreme tragedy. The loss of another student has left a huge hole in our community. The Trump administration’s visa restrictions are continuing to create severe concerns for international students, budget cuts are causing uncertain futures and U.S. intervention in Iran is relocating some students who are abroad.
Yet, surrounded by turmoil, the Middlebury community continues to lean on one another, finding outlets that express the fear and doubt of our current moment. Whether that’s through cultural celebrations, increasing access to the arts or creating opportunities to connect with others, it is clear that Middlebury is at its best when it strives for empathy.
Last year’s theme, (un)certainty, explored how we reconcile with being on the cusp of a transitional period. A year later, we are well underway and hope that this year’s Zeitgeist will delve into what happens when the changes have been put into place. For the first time ever, we asked: “Do you have faith in the future of Middlebury?” Faithful or faithless, let’s see what it means to be a Middlebury student amidst so much instability.
Editor’s note: The print version of the Zeitgeist features fewer graphics due to space constraints. The online version features all graphics.
Zeitgeist 8.0 received 791 responses this year, representing a 30% response rate among the current full-time degree-seeking student population of 2,618. This marks a 10% decrease in the Zeitgeist response rate as compared to our 2025 survey. The response rate for Zeitgeist 8.0 marks a five-year low in The Campus’ annual student survey. Respondents answered 60 questions across eight different sections, ranging from demographic information to Social Life and Sex & Wellness. All respondents were required to answer 15 demographic questions at the start of the survey, with the option to decline to disclose information.
Our questions allow for multiple answers to be selected, often leading to responses which do not align with the college’s reported demographic information. As with any Zeitgeist issue, there is over- and underrepresentation of certain groups. Zeitgeist data is anonymous and cannot be shared in any capacity.
The largest class year in Zeitgeist 8.0 was the class of 2026, which represented 23% of responses. The class of 2029 came in second, representing 22% of respondents. The number of first-year respondents was notably high, despite the low overall response rate, likely due to the planned increase in the size of the new class, as the college hopes to generate revenue to close its chronic deficit.
When asked about their race and ethnicity, 644 people identified as white, accounting for 84% of respondents. 16% identified as Asian; nine percent as Hispanic or Latino; three percent as Black or African American; and two percent as Middle Eastern or North African. One respondent identified as Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander.
According to Middlebury’s Common Data Set, 56.1% of matriculated students selected to be reported as white, with 30.7% identifying as part of an underrepresented minority, a five-year low. The remaining 13.2% of students are grouped as international. For Zeitgeist 8.0, survey results mirror the worsening diversity of Middlebury’s student body, with a five-year low in Black or African American respondents.
The survey asked respondents if they identify as a student of color to create a standard comparison metric for the survey. Under one-quarter of respondents identified as a student of color, in line with previous surveys.
32% of respondents who identified as a person of color said they received financial aid, 14 percentage points higher than for students who identified as not a person of color. Significantly fewer respondents in both categories received financial aid than in previous surveys, despite the reported increases in tuition.
57% of respondents do not receive any financial aid in order to attend Middlebury. 328 respondents, or 41%, do receive financial aid. This marks a 6% decline from the previous survey. Middlebury College reports that 45% of the class of 2029 receives financial aid.
Cisgender females comprised 55% of all respondents, followed by 303 cisgender men — comprising 38% — of respondents. 4% of respondents identified as non-binary, and less than two percent as a transgender male. Another 2 percent of respondents selected “these options don’t define me.”
Respondents also had the opportunity to select if they identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning (LGBTQ+), with 35% of students identifying as so. This is similar in proportion to the last three student surveys.
18% of respondents reported identifying as a student with a disability while at Middlebury, a 2-percentage-point increase from Zeitgeist 7.0.
Notably, students who identify as LGBTQ+ were more likely to also identify as a student with a disability, making up 23% of students who have had a disability at Middlebury. However, this was a notable decrease from last year’s survey, where 57% of students with a disability identified as LGBTQ+. Of the students who did not identify as having a disability, 90% were not LGBTQ+.
This year’s Zeitgeist continued last year’s introduction of a religious identity question. 54% of respondents did not identify as religious, with 31% as agnostic, and 23% as atheist. Both the atheist and agnostic categories saw an increase compared to last year. 7% of respondents selected the “spiritual” option. Among the named religions, 12% identified as Roman Catholic, 8% as Jewish, 6% as Protestant, 2% as Muslim and 1% as Buddhist.
For the second year in a row, The Campus mistakenly omitted the “Hindu” category from the list of religious identities. A large proportion of the 37 “other” respondents would have likely selected that category.
New England was again the best-represented region among U.S. respondents, with 27% from the region. 14% of respondents were from the far west, 8% from the southeast, 5% from the Great Lakes, and 3.6% each from the Rocky Mountain, Plains, and Southwest regions.
Among respondents not based in the U.S., 6% said they were international students, down from last year’s 11%. China was again the most represented, with 18 students. 30 other countries were represented, each containing between 1 and 5 respondents.
Just under half of respondents went to a public high school, while 34% attended a private day school. 11% attended boarding schools, and under 5% attended charter or magnet schools.
Roughly equal proportions of respondents who identified as a person of color or not went to public schools. 37% of respondents who do not identify as a person of color went to private schools, compared to 27% for those who identified as a person of color.
12% of respondents, 97 people, identified as a first-generation college student — neither parent had previously studied at a college — a decrease from last year’s 15%, but two percent higher than a 10% low in 2022.
31% of respondents who identify as a person of color are first-generation college students, compared to 7% of students who do not identify as a person of color. 96% of first-generation students received financial aid, compared with 34% of non-first-generation respondents. 28 respondents had both parents attend Middlebury, and 57 had one parent attend. 89% of respondents did not identify as a legacy student.
14% of respondents marked that they participate in a varsity sport, identical to the proportion of varsity athletes in last year’s survey. It is likely that athletes are underrepresented in this survey as over a quarter of the student body participates in a varsity sport.
24% of varsity athletes reported receiving financial aid, compared to 44% of non-athlete respondents.
Middlebury students’ relationship with academics has largely remained consistent with last year, with a diverse array of majors and high academic fulfillment. Yet A.I. use and Honor Code violations have seen a massive spike over the past three years, and a major split in student opinion on A.I.'s usefulness and Middlebury’s policies surrounding it has developed.
The largest portion of Zeitgeist respondents identified as undeclared. Economics and Environmental Studies remain the most popular majors among Middlebury students, which helps explain the Economics Department’s recent struggles with rising class sizes and grade inflation.
The number of double majors has continued to increase, jumping from last year’s 32.6% to 37.9%. The increase could be attributed to the lower number of Zeitgeist respondents this year, but it marks a shift towards interdisciplinary study among Middlebury students.
Although reported Honor Code violations decreased by 4% this year, the majority of respondents admitted to having broken the Honor Code, most of them citing unauthorized use of A.I. as at least one of the ways they had broken it. Calls for revisions to the Honor Code, given the rising A.I. use, have broken out, and A.I. policies tend to vary widely from department to department and professor to professor.
Unauthorized A.I. use has spiked over the past year, climbing from 46% to 74%; this number has steadily increased since the Zeitgeist first asked about it in 2023, but this year presents the most extreme jump yet, reflecting the increased presence of A.I. use by Middlebury students. Reports of the use of unauthorized aid and cheating have also increased from last year, by 16% and 10%, respectively.
The sudden increase in Honor Code violations signals a rising disregard for the Honor Code as it stands. A third of respondents did not report feeling guilty about breaking the Honor Code, while the largest portion of respondents reported feeling guilt, an almost identical distribution to last year’s Zeitgeist.
Close to a third of students use A.I. for their classes either very often or frequently, unauthorized or not. Given the ever-increasing number of A.I. models, A.I. use has become much more accessible over the past three years. This year’s Clifford Symposium was dedicated to discussing A.I.’s rising prevalence in the classroom and beyond, and both faculty and experts put forth a wide range of opinions on its future at Middlebury. A concrete, detailed A.I. policy beyond what is currently written in the Honor Code and on Middlebury’s website has yet to be introduced.
The student body is split on Middlebury’s approach to A.I., with 31% of respondents at least somewhat satisfied with the college’s policies and 33% at least somewhat dissatisfied. The largest portion of respondents reported neutral feelings towards Middlebury’s A.I. approach. Students who reported breaking the Honor Code due to unauthorized use of A.I. were no more likely to find an issue with Middlebury’s A.I. approach than those who did not report unauthorized use of A.I.
The debate over whether A.I. impedes learning has surged with A.I. use. Unsurprisingly, the vast majority of students who reported using A.I. rarely, very rarely, or not at all said that A.I. does not help with their liberal arts learning, while close to half of students who report using A.I. frequently, very often or occasionally said that it did. Schoolwide, the student body is split, with 43% of respondents saying that A.I. harms their liberal arts learning.
When sorted by major, Economics majors were the most likely to think that A.I. helps with their liberal arts learning, while Environmental Studies majors were the least likely to believe that it helped. Among undeclared students, there is a more even split: 44 respondents believe A.I. helps their learning, 43 say it doesn’t and 24 say it “maybe helps” their learning.
Despite the recent increases in reported Honor Code violations, the majority of students feel academically fulfilled at Middlebury. Reported A.I. use did not substantially impact respondents’ feelings of academic fulfillment, although first-generation students were 10% less likely to feel academically fulfilled.
Middlebury students are typically well-rounded beyond academics; they are artists, outdoor people and early-career professionals. But we often overlook our social well-being in pursuit of being accomplished students. This year, we asked students to reflect on different aspects of their social life at Middlebury. Composed of first-generation students, varsity athletes and international students, the Middlebury community does not socialize in the same way.
For Middlebury students, finding time to spend with friends can be a challenge. When asked what impeded them from spending time with friends, respondents, sorted by 91% of first-generation and 94% non-first-generation students, answered that the major impediment was academic work. A close second for first-generation respondents was the financial cost of outings, at 53%, compared to 17% of respondents who do not identify as first-generation students. 53% of non-first-generation students said extracurricular commitments were the second-largest barrier to spending time with friends. 36% of first-generation students cited the lack of a car on campus as a barrier to spending time with friends, compared to 20% of non-first-generation respondents.
A majority of respondents said they felt fulfilled by their friendships at Middlebury, with 611 responses saying yes. Unsurprisingly, when broken down by grade, the class of 2029.5 showed the highest level of uncertainty about their friendships, as they have had the least time to form those bonds yet.
When asked if they felt isolated at Middlebury, 86% of students identifying as a person of color responded yes. For respondents who do not identify as a person of color, 74% said no. The drastic difference between levels of isolation and identification points to Middlebury's geographical location and to the experience of living in a majority-white area. Secondly, the Trump administration’s crackdown on the language of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) led to a restructuring in the Middlebury Office of DEI.
The party scene at Middlebury remains consistently oriented towards alcohol, with 705 respondents having consumed alcohol. For the class of 2026, 80% of respondents have used marijuana, and 17% have tried psychedelics. For the class of 2029, 54% report using marijuana, and only 7% report using psychedelics. The average use of marijuana and psychedelics is higher for Feb graduates, which remains consistent with last year’s results.
This year, respondents noted that dining halls and dorms were the most important parts of their social life at Middlebury, a result consistent with last year’s findings. Club sports and varsity sports ranked the lowest, with 14% of respondents finding varsity sports important to their social life. This is likely due to the historic low response rate among varsity athletes in the Zeitgeist.
A majority of those who responded that they were less “proud to be a panther” were not varsity athletes. However, Middlebury students generally seem to fall into the category of prideful, with 179 respondents rating themselves 8 out of 10 on a scale from “not proud” to “proud”.
Of respondents receiving need-based financial aid, 77% reported working a paid job. Of those not receiving need-based financial aid, 56% reported working a paid job. The 21% gap between students who receive financial aid reflects the financial disparities present at Middlebury, which often require students to fill the gaps with paid jobs.
Overall, students’ satisfaction with their social lives seems consistent with the amount of time they have spent in our community developing friendships and relationships over the years. However, respondents also showed that social life at Middlebury can be costly, and that academic work and the cost of outings –– which often require time and money that could otherwise be spent working –– place a burden on students who must balance their needs with their desire for social activities.
When thinking about instability, love may be one of the first things that comes to mind for Middlebury students. While many would ideally have a committed romantic relationship, the reality often looks different, with shifting and sometimes confusing relationships.
For the second year, we asked if students were in a romantic or sexual relationship to better unpack what this romantic instability may look like.
44% of all 791 respondents said that they are currently in a romantic or sexual relationship, while 56% said they are not.
Senior Febs (class of 2026.5) appear to be the most romantic, followed by graduating seniors at 60% and 54%, respectively. The class of 2026 had a lower rate of romantic and sexual relationships than last year’s seniors, with a 5-percentage-point drop. However, the rate of romantic relationships in the class of 2026 increased by two percentage points from last year.
Baby Febs (class of 2029.5) had the lowest rate of romantic or sexual relationships at 28%, consistent with last year’s results.
Middlebury students are nearly just as satisfied with the college’s romantic scene as they were last year. This year, 10% of students reported being extremely satisfied. 20% were somewhat satisfied, and 32% said they were neither satisfied nor dissatisfied, the same percentages as last year. 28% of students reported feeling somewhat dissatisfied, and 10% reported being extremely dissatisfied, consistent with last year’s 28% and 10%, respectively.
Among respondents who identify as LGBTQ+, the percentages remained nearly the same across all categories, fluctuating by only one or two percentage points.
The gap between past romantic experiences and ideal relationships endures this year. 77% of respondents reported that they would ideally have a committed, monogamous relationship, a 2-percentage-point decrease from last year. However, only 52% of students reported having had a committed relationship, similarly to last year’s 53%. In addition, 44% of students are currently in a committed relationship.
Just over half (51%) have reported having a situationship, yet only 15% indicated they would ideally have one. In a similar fashion, a mere 9% reported ideally having a long-distance relationship, while 35% indicated that they have been in one.
Mutual friends remain the place where students most commonly find romantic or sexual partners (47%), followed by parties and gatherings (44%). Nearly a quarter of students (24%) continue to find partners through their classes. Other responses included Middlebury Language Schools and dorms.
74% of respondents reported having at least one romantic or sexual partner in the past year, a slight decrease from last year’s 77%. Consistent with past years, one partner accounted for the highest percentage of responses, at 41%.
14% of respondents said they would describe their sexuality differently than how they did when they arrived at Middlebury, a four percentage point drop from last year, and a drop of over 10 percentage points since 2022, when 26% of respondents said they would describe their sexuality differently.
Each year, the percentage of LGBTQ+ students who describe their sexuality differently has also dropped steadily. This year, 25% of respondents responded “yes,” a significant decrease from last year’s 34%. However, 14% of respondents identifying as not LGBTQ+ said they would describe their sexuality differently, a five-percentage-point increase from last year.
This past academic year, the Middlebury community has grappled with a shifting landscape, navigating global and political crises, campus discourse, and mental health concerns. Both national events and everyday experiences affect the student body and the community's well-being. Understanding how students think about safety and wellness on campus remains not only relevant but necessary.
This year, 83% of respondents reported feeling happy, compared with 87% the previous year.
Cisgender females reported the highest levels of happiness, with 88% of respondents answering yes, whereas transgender males reported the lowest, with 67% answering yes. To preserve respondents' anonymity, the identity “Transgender female” was excluded because it represented fewer than 5 respondents. This is consistent with Campus editorial policy.
While 64% of respondents reported that they have struggled in their relationship with food or exercise, the category varies dramatically when broken down by gender identity. 77% of cisgender female students answered yes, compared to 45% of cisgender male students. Nonbinary students reported the highest percentage, with 84% of students answering yes.
57% of students reported feeling comfortable using the athletic center facilities, with 34% answering “in some places or at some times,” and 9% answering no. These numbers mirror last year's almost exactly.
Almost half of respondents (47%) reported that they never find themselves using alcohol or drugs to cope with stress, with 28% answering “rarely,” 20% answering “occasionally,” and only 4.6% respondents answering “frequently.” The first-year Febs (2029.5) reported the lowest numbers, with 69% answering “never” and 0% answering “frequently.”
An overwhelming number of participants (90%) reported feeling safe walking around campus, with 9% reporting “in some places or at some times” and only 0.4% (three respondents) answering “no.”
73% of respondents reported that they have never experienced self-harm or suicidal ideation while at Middlebury. The numbers have remained consistent since the question was first asked in Zeitgeist 6.0.
15% of respondents reported that they have experienced sexual assault, although only 44% of the incidents happened on Middlebury’s campus or on a Middlebury program. On campus, 23% of respondents report having a sexual experience that made them uncomfortable, which is down 8% from last year.
8% of cisgender males report that they have experienced sexual assault, compared with 21% of cisgender females. 20% of respondents who identify as transgender male or non-binary students reported that they have experienced sexual assault. When examining sexual orientation, 22% of LGBTQ students report that they have experienced sexual assault, compared to 12% of non-LGBTQ students.
Notably, only 15% of those who have experienced sexual assault reported the incident to Middlebury, and only 25% of students were satisfied with the way the school addressed their complaints (although this number comes from a much smaller sample size than the rest of the Zeitgeist).
42% of respondents reported avoiding people on campus due to their own sexual experiences or experiences of their friends.
This year, we asked students about their awareness and satisfaction with resources on campus, including the Student Activities Office (SAO), Center for Careers and Internships (CCI) and Student Government Association (SGA). We also inquired about students’ satisfaction with their financial aid packages.
The resources that received the highest ratings of student approval were the Disability Resource Center (DRC) and the Parton Center for Health and Wellness, with 30% of respondents very satisfied with both. The Scott Center for Spiritual and Religious Life was next, with 29% of respondents very satisfied. Although the DRC received one of the highest overall ratings, it declined by 13 percentage points this year. The Civil Rights and Title IX Office and the SGA received the lowest approval rate, with only 7% of respondents very satisfied.
The resource with the highest dissatisfaction rate is the SAO, with 23% of respondents very dissatisfied. The SGA had the second-highest dissatisfaction rate, with 12% of respondents very dissatisfied. The CCI, Counseling Services and the Middlebury College Activities Board (MCAB) are all tied for third, with 10% of respondents feeling very dissatisfied. MCAB had a one-per-cent increase in those who responded “very-satisfied,” consistent with its low overall rating since the reported purchase of Aritzia superpuff jackets in 2024. The SGA disapproval rating increased by six percentage points, but otherwise the results are consistent with last year’s data.
Students’ familiarity with resources remained consistent with the past two years. Aside from Residential Life, MCAB and the CCI were the most widely known resources, with 86% and 83% of students indicating some level of satisfaction, respectively. In line with historical trends, these resources received worse approval ratings. Only 9% were very satisfied with MCAB, and just 12% with the CCI.
Resources used by the fewest students included the International Student and Scholar Services (ISSS) — 70% respondents reported not having used it — and Peer Educators for Affirming Relationships (PEAR).
Ten percent of respondents reported not knowing what the Anderson Freeman Resource Center (AFC), Center for Student Success and PEAR are. Middlebury only launched the Center for Student Success this February, a hub designed to streamline access to student resources and support. This consolidated the Class Deans, CARE management and Equity Services into a single team. This is also the first academic year with PEAR, which combined the resources of the now-closed MiddSafe and the Mental Health Peer Educators. This new system is one possible explanation for the decreased visibility of these resources.
Overall, the percentage of students very satisfied with the CCI dropped by three percentage points from the previous year. Students in the class of 2026 were more disappointed with the CCI than their 2029 counterparts, reflecting a general decrease in satisfaction over the years. Only 34% of respondents in the class of 2026 reported some level of satisfaction with the CCI, compared with 53% in the class of 2029.
Although this could be attributed to a general increase in exposure to the CCI over four years, it could also reflect the effects of a tight job market and competitive job search.
Among international students who took the survey, 76% said they were very or somewhat satisfied with the ISSS, up five percentage points from last year. The efficacy and accessibility of the ISSS are especially important as international students are constantly maneuvering uncertainty and strife with new immigration policies under the current Trump administration.
Student satisfaction with their financial aid packages increased by two percentage points from last year, with 27% of respondents reporting high satisfaction. The 2025 Zeitgeist also noted a two percentage point increase from the 2024 Zeitgeist, indicating a constant increase over the past two years.
Only 25% of students familiar with Student Financial Services reported being very satisfied with their financial aid packages; however, this is a slightly more positive rating than the 22% reported last year.
Only 3.1% of first-generation students said they did not receive financial aid packages, compared with 54% of non-first-generation students. However, first-generation students report much higher satisfaction, with 78% feeling very or somewhat satisfied, compared with 25% of non-first-generation students. This is consistent with last year’s data.
Buddhist and Jewish students indicated that they were most likely to use the Scott Center for Spiritual and Religious Life, with 67% of respondents indicating their level of satisfaction. Only 50% of Buddhist respondents reported being very or somewhat satisfied with the resource. It is important to note that this could be impacted by a limited sample size, with only 12 students identifying as Buddhist in the survey. 78% of Jewish students felt very or somewhat satisfied with the Scott Center. Similar to last year, 71% of agnostic and 73% of atheist respondents said they had not used the Scott Center.
Political engagement among Middlebury students remains high, with 85% of respondents selecting that they “care a lot about a wide range of issues” or “care a lot about a few specific issues.” 12% reported that they “care a little bit,” while one percent selected “I don’t care at all.” Only two percent reported that they “actively avoid thinking/talking about politics.”
Marginalized students generally reported higher levels of political engagement. Respondents who identified as people of color were six percentage points more likely to report that they “care a lot about a wide range of issues” than respondents who did not. The largest gap was between LGBTQ and non-LGBTQ individuals: 65% of LGBTQ respondents reported the highest level of political engagement, while 49% of non-LGBTQ respondents did the same.
In accordance with past Zeitgeists, Middlebury’s students largely self-identified as liberal. On a scale of zero to 10, with 10 being the most conservative, students most commonly placed themselves at a two. Over 82% of respondents placed themselves at a three or below, while around 10% self-described as conservative (five to 10).
More than half of respondents (62%) described Middlebury’s political climate as “somewhat open, but certain opinions dominate,” while 26% described it as “somewhat restricted, but different opinions exist.” 5% said that the political climate was “very restricted, with few different opinions,” and 3% said that it was “very open, with many different opinions.”
Separating responses by political ideology reveals that 66% of self-described liberals described the political climate as “somewhat open,” while 33% of respondents who identified as conservative did so as well. Conservatives were 12 percentage points more likely to describe Middlebury’s political climate as “very restricted” than liberals, and no conservatives described it as “very open,” while 3% of liberals did so.
For the second year, we asked if the current Trump administration had significantly impacted students’ lives. 75% of respondents agreed with this statement, including 28% who strongly agreed and 47% who somewhat agreed.
International students were more than twice as likely as domestic students to strongly agree that the current Trump administration significantly impacted their lives. This reflects the current administration’s emphasis on anti-immigration policies, which have made it more difficult for international students to study in the U.S.
Students from marginalized groups were more likely to agree that the Trump administration significantly impacted their lives. 100% of transgender male respondents, 84% of nonbinary respondents, and 81% of cisgender female respondents either strongly agreed or somewhat agreed with this statement. 62% of cisgender male respondents also expressed agreement. Since less than 5 respondents identified as transgender female, they were not included to preserve respondent anonymity, as per Campus editorial policy. In accordance with last year’s responses to this question, LGBTQ+ individuals and people of color were more likely than their non-LGBTQ+ and non-POC counterparts to agree that the Trump administration has significantly impacted them.
While political concerns were prevalent, climate change was identified by respondents as the most pressing issue of our time for the seventh consecutive year. Almost 80% of climate-related responses cited climate change alone, while the remainder cited it alongside other issues, such as human rights and AI governance. “Democracy,” “democratic erosion,” and “democratic backsliding” were mentioned over 30 times, and “fascism” was cited over 20 times. Respondents also expressed concerns about authoritarianism, consolidation of power and checks and balances.
Political polarization was a pressing issue, with some linking it to social media and others to a lack of civil discourse. Closely following were economic issues, including income inequality and affordability. Students expressed anxieties about their economic futures, highlighting the “inability to live comfortably as Americans on a modest salary” and “labor market difficulties.” Critiques of capitalism and imperialism also appeared about twenty times. Several respondents connected these critiques to American foreign policy and interventionism.
War was cited over forty times, with some responses explicitly naming Iran. Thirty-five responses explicitly named Trump or the “current administration,” while over forty identified immigration and/or ICE as the most pressing issues. Palestine, Gaza, and Israel were much less frequently mentioned than in past years, with fewer than 15 responses. Respondents also named human rights, corruption and apathy as key issues.
As in past years, some students focused on personal issues, such as academic work and interpersonal relationships. Overall, the survey responses highlighted students’ political engagement and showed how national and international events impact students’ daily lives at Middlebury.
Middlebury has long positioned itself as a liberal arts institution defined by change, but this past academic year marked a particularly consequential period of transition. The college welcomed new leadership, as Ian Baucom assumed the presidency in July 2025 and was formally inaugurated in Nov. 2025.
Early in the fall semester, Baucom announced a strategic planning initiative to clarify the college’s mission, sharpen its priorities and define clear goals for the decade ahead. The plan was led by a 13-person steering committee, co-chaired by Professor of Global Health Jessica Holmes and Associate Professor of Chemistry AJ Vasiliou and included many faculty, staff, student, trustee and alumni perspectives.
With all of the talk about change on the campus, there also have been many changes happening outside of the college. Many students and faculty discuss the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) both in classrooms and in the workforce. For many seniors in particular, these questions feel more immediate, amid rising concerns about the job market and whether their degrees will retain their value in an increasingly uncertain landscape. This year, we also reported on the growing precarity international students face under recent federal immigration policies, adding another layer of unpredictability to many students' college experience.
Amidst the backdrop of instability, both in the liberal arts and beyond, this year’s Zeitgeist posed a rather vague final question: Do you have faith in the future of Middlebury? The answers, spanning hundreds of responses, reveal a student body that is largely hopeful — but far from being uncritical.
There was a clear majority of students who answered with a straightforward yes, often with a little bit of hesitation. Some others were more confident answering with “Absolutely!” “Of course” “Without question” which reflects overall optimism in the college. Other students framed their optimism more thoughtfully, pointing a finger to the people who make up the college.
“I have faith that people will keep working to make it better,” one student wrote.
“I have faith in students and eager leaders who will drive positive change.”
For many, that optimism is directly tied to the new college leadership. Baucom was mentioned a substantial amount of times in the responses, often cited as a renewed source of confidence.
“He is very engaged with the student body,” a student wrote.
“He is sane and logical and smart.”
“I think the college is headed in the right direction under him.”
At the same time, the optimism in Baucom was not absolute. In a moment marked by many uncertainties, students said that leadership alone cannot resolve many of the deeper structural challenges facing the college.
Many students noted concerns about affordability and the changing landscape of higher education in the United States. Rising tuition and limitations in financial aid surfaced quite frequently.
One student wrote: “The cost of attendance risks making Middlebury more full of wealthy elites.”
Others pointed out staffing shortages and the treatment of staff on campus.
“I'm disappointed in how the administration has treated staff as a whole, and I think this could have severe ramifications. I think students and faculty are committed to being part of the community, but staff are stretched too thin.”
“I have concerns about what might be cut in the pursuit of the college increasing its income (lower wages and less benefits for faculty and staff, tuition hikes, the College deciding to restrict/diminish/underfund or completely shut down programs).”
Academic concerns were prominent as well, with some students questioning whether the college is keeping up with shifts in education across the country, particularly the rise of AI.
“I think there needs to be significant reform of honor code and AI policy to encourage learning rather than GPA focused work,” one student wrote.
“I believe that white collar jobs will be mostly consumed by AI. Middlebury either needs to incorporate AI in a massive way or teach more practical, blue collar skills.”
“I think that developing a uniform approach to AI (at least within departments) will be important for this future. I don’t think it matters if we choose to embrace or reject AI.”
“Ban AI!!”
Among all of the more critical responses, there often was a sense of investment in the college. Students who wrote about the doubt in the college paired it with a desire for reform such as better support systems, stronger community and overall more transparency from Old Chapel.
If Zeitgeist is meant to capture the spirit of the student body, this year’s responses point to a campus defined less by certainty than by instability: a constant push and pull between optimism and concern, tradition and change. To many students, the future of the college is constantly in flux.
Zeitgeist came out today on April 30, however this has been a nine week endeavor which started on March 1.
The Zeitgeist team consists of a group of Campus editors across different sections. We met in early March to review questions from past Zeitgeist additions, particularly Zeitgeist 7.0, and evaluated whether or not it would be relevant for this year. We also got feedback from a form posted on our Instagram page, and the finalized survey comprised 60 questions in total.
The team also brainstormed some new questions to add to this year’s edition. Some notable ones include: Do you think A.I. helps with your liberal arts learning? Do you feel academically fulfilled at Middlebury? Do you feel fulfilled by the friendships you’ve made at Middlebury? We also added the open ended question: Do you have faith in the future of Middlebury?
We launched the survey on the morning of Monday, March 30, and ran it for two weeks through Monday, April 13 at midnight. We advertised Zeitgeist 8.0 through three emails to the entire student body, several Instagram posts and stories, and by tabling four times outside the Proctor and Ross dining halls. In the end, we received 790 responses by the time we closed the survey on Qualtrics.
Each of our writers for Zeitgeist then used the anonymous Zeitgeist responses and created data visualizations through Data Wrapper, a platform that is used extensively in data journalism. We then published the results in print and online on Thursday, April 30, 2026.
The theme we chose for this year’s Zeitgeist is “Unstable”. This can be interpreted in many different ways — academically, socially, politically — but what it ultimately reflects is a moment of transition. Based on many of the responses to our wrap-up question, “Do you have faith in the future of Middlebury?”, this is a campus that is thinking in real time, grappling with what it means to move forward in this moment. Zeitgeist is not meant to offer the ultimate answer to all of this, but rather capture a snapshot of the complexity of the Middlebury experience in 2026.
If anything, this can remind us that instability is not only something to fear, but something that can provoke reflection, conversation and change.
The Campus has spent the past nine weeks producing Zeitgeist, with a dedicated team of editors contributing over one hundred hours of writing, editing and visualization to bring today’s final product to life. Without all of these efforts, none of this would have been made possible.
Thank you to the Zeitgeist team, who helped brainstorm new questions, write sections, create incredible visuals and tabled for this years’ edition. This team (in no particular order) includes: Yuvraj Shah ’26, Curran Amster ’26, Maya Alexander ’26, Gabi Gerig ’27, Violet Wexler ’28, AJ Slocum ’26.5, Kai Arrowood ’29 and myself. However, this team would not have been made possible without the amazing Ellie Trinkle ’26, whose leadership kept all of us on track for this year's Zeitgeist. Ellie created the entire Zeitgeist master plan, ensuring we stayed on track each week and took notes for all the Zeitgeist meetings we held. Ellie also trained the Zeitgeist team on Qualtrics and Datawrapper to create all the visuals, which she has extensive experience with from years past. Thank you, Ellie!
A special shoutout as well to the incredibly talented layout team, led by Joanne Zhang ’29. Somehow, they managed to fit both our regular stories and Zeitgeist into just 12 pages.
Thank you also to the fantastic online team, led by Kayleigh Christley ’28, whose work made this project accessible to a much wider audience.
An overall huge thank you to the entire Campus staff for spreading the word to students and for editing each week. I do not think our editors are thanked enough for their work, so kudos to all of them!
And finally, thank you to all of the students who participated in this year's Zeitgeist. Whether you’ve filled it out every year or encountered it for the first time, your responses are what make this project possible. By sharing your experiences, you’ve helped create a snapshot of life at Middlebury in this particular moment.
I hope the questions we posed — and the answers you offered — spark reflection on your time at Middlebury, inspire conversations with friends and classmates, and maybe even challenge your understanding of this college. However you may have approached it, your contribution is now part of Middlebury’s story.
Thank you for trusting the Campus with this work each spring. I hope you’ll continue to share your voices with us at Zeitgeist 9.0 next year. It’s been especially meaningful to watch this project evolve since I first took it as a freshman during Zeitgeist 5.0 and even more so now to help shape what it has become.
