3 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(10/08/14 6:08pm)
Dear Middlebury community,
Last spring, a friend encouraged me to download the app Yik Yak. “It’s like an anonymous twitter for Midd people, it’s hilarious,” she said.
I hadn’t spent much time reading it, until one day at lunch when I scrolled through the message board and saw:
“If I could bang a hippo for no finals, I would hunt down Jordan Seman.”
My heart was pounding as I looked around the dining hall. A million things crossed my mind: Is someone watching me? Should I have worn this dress? Did someone see me eat that second cookie? Should I put on my jacket?
In that moment, all of my insecurities flooded me. I felt exposed, betrayed and mostly embarrassed. Without telling my friends, I got up from the table and ran back to my room where I hid out for most of the next two days.
Whoever posted that message couldn’t have known that I have struggled with body image issues for most of my life. He/she probably wasn’t aware that I have gone through therapy to combat those issues. He/she likely didn’t think that clicking “submit” would cause me to restart with overanalyzing every outfit choice and every calorie on my plate. The person couldn’t have known these things because he/she clearly doesn’t know me. I guess you don’t have to know someone to say something hurtful about her.
I’m not one to generally care what others think about me. Since going to therapy I have woken up most mornings feeling confident and unconcerned about my weight. And as someone who loves food and exercise, I don’t really think I should have to be concerned. I am more than my physical body. I am NOT my weight, and I know that.
So why is it that one nasty message sends me spiraling into self-doubt?
Why is it that this person — who, by the way, didn’t even spell my name right — felt it was necessary to publicly criticize me?
Is this what we want our social media use to be capable of?
I write this not to make people pity me. I am not the first or the last girl who will be posted about on Yik Yak or other similar pages. I’m sure that other messages directed at other girls will be no less hurtful. But I am not comfortable with the fact that people on this campus are hiding behind anonymous apps to post character-assassinating messages that serve no useful purpose except to bring people down. Even more than that, I am disappointed that someone in our community would think to post something so distasteful about a fellow student.
To whoever “yakked” about me last spring, if you are reading this, I hope you know that contrary to that childhood rhyme, words CAN hurt me. And yours did. But I hope that coming forward — non-anonymously, for that matter — will inspire other social media users out there to rethink what they post.
Mostly, I hope that we can all reflect on what kind of community we want Middlebury to be.
I know I want to be able to sit down at lunchtime and not worry about what other people are saying — or writing — about me. I want to feel comfortable on our campus, and I don’t think I’m alone.
So, to those of you reading this message, I’m asking you to help me make our school a safe space. I’m asking you to think about your words and how they can sting. I’m asking you to encourage positivity through your actions.
Let’s start now.
Love,
Jordan Seman
Class of 2016
(10/17/13 12:47am)
The College’s focus on local and sustainable food continues this month with “Eating Forward,” a campaign organized by Olivia French ’14 and Jake Nonweiler ’14. The series, which runs through October, features environmentalists in various areas of the American food industry, including farmers, activists, educators, entrepreneurs, and more. On Thursday, Oct. 10, Eating Forward presented a panel discussion about sustainable food in a growing nation entitled “Feeding America.”
The panel featured four environmentalists in different areas of the food industry: local cider entrepreneur David Dolginow, College Food and Farm Educator Sophie Esser-Calvi ’03, grocer Jay Leshinski and chef Woody Danforth. The panelists offered a variety of perspectives about creating a sustainable food future in Vermont and in the U.S., emphasized the need for strong relationships in the industry and advocating for education to encourage the growth of sustainable food.
This series is a continuation of a dialogue that began on campus in January 2012 with student-run organization EatReal, which focuses on conscientious consumption among the student body and promotes cooperation with the administration towards a more sustainable food future.
“Our project is contributing to a conversation that has already been in the works,” French said. “Middlebury students care a lot about this issue; there are a lot of people talking about how to bring more local food to our dining halls.”
Throughout the Feeding American panel discussion, a large emphasis was placed on education and the fostering of relationships in order to encourage innovation and creativity in the food sector. The panelists focused on how to make food sustainability a community-wide engagement, both in Vermont and in the greater U.S.
“The food system in this country is broken; we really need to think about how our future is going to look given how many people we will have to feed in the coming years,” Esser-Calvi said. “In order for us to pursue a sustainable future, we need to educate strong leaders.”
“Sustainability is built on relationships,” Danforth added. “It is the ability to link the farm to the plate, which starts with education and an understanding about how to utilize and manipulate food to get to the end consumer.”
The panelists also specifically emphasized Vermont’s sustainable food future, placing the College in the larger context of the growing movement towards sustainable agriculture in the state. The Farm-to-Plate Initiative, a strategic plan to accelerate the development of Vermont’s Green Economy, has taken off since 2009, promoting access to local food and encouraging economic growth in Vermont’s food and farm sector.
Panelist David Dolginow addressed how a sustainable future in Vermont might look, emphasizing the need for more cooperative growing and marketing and for a diversification of products.
“We need to focus on the concept of a working landscape, and how to diversify products to make the food industry a more interesting area to go into as an entrepreneur,” he said. “The Champlain Valley could become the Napa Valley of hard cider; we have world-class soil and air for growing apples, but only a few regional scale growers as of now.”
Addressing how the College fits into the larger picture of food sustainability, the panelists advocated for larger-scale entrepreneurial farmers within Vermont so that institutional buyers, such as the University of Vermont and the College, will have more of an economic incentive to buy locally.
“As of now, only about 20 percent of our dining hall food is locally grown or processed, and that’s on a good day,” Nonweiler said. “There is a lot of demand being placed on our administration to increase local buying, but a lot of people don’t know what that would really entail. The goal of our series is to show people what ‘sustainable’ and ‘local’ mean for the producer, the seller, and the consumer.”
The Eating Forward series hopes to get the dialogue started by asking questions like “Are we willing to change our meal plan or increase the dining hall budget in order to eat more locally? Is our goal to support local farmers, stimulate the local economy, and protect the environment? Where does our campus fit into the bigger picture of the Farm-to-Table initiative in Vermont?”
(09/26/13 1:11am)
E-books, online textbooks and computer-based note-taking programs are growing in number and popularity, but faculty at the College remain divided over the use of computers in classrooms, opting for course-by-course policies instead of department-wide regulations.
While a lack of cohesion among professors’ attitudes regarding computers makes the development of a department or College-wide rule on computer use unlikely, students and faculty alike have found themselves debating the pros and cons of both banning and allowing computers in class.
A study by Stanford University sociology professor and psychologist Dr. Clifford Nass revealed that not only does digital multi-tasking waste more time, but it also results in a concentration and creativity deficit, regardless of how good one claims to be at multitasking.
Professor of American Studies and English and American Literatures Michael Newbury does not employ a singular laptop policy in his classes, but rather employs “class and context-specific practices designed to maximize constructive engagement with and for students,” considering project-oriented learning with laptops as an example of successful and useful in-class computer use, while remaining wary of laptops in larger lectures and conversations.
“There is an increasing amount of research suggesting that in large classes, students with computers simply cannot stop themselves from dividing their attention,” Newbury wrote in an email. “In addition, the research suggests that laptops in the class distract not just the people using them, but others in the class. It’s a bit like having a TV in a room. People look at it and hear it, whether or not they want to.”
Such distractions led Assistant Professor of Political Science Amy Yuen to ban computers in her lecture classes, especially after receiving feedback from students revealing problematic in-class computer habits.
“I used to allow them in lecture because my thinking was, ‘You’re adults, you can decide whether you’re going to show up to class or whether you’re going to goof off in lecture or not’,” she said. “But it was when I started getting remarks on course evaluations about how distracting computers were to other students that I decided to do something about it.”
Assistant Professor of American Studies Holly Allen has allowed laptops in larger courses so long as students remain undistracted, but is considering discouraging laptop use due to frequent rule violations and increasingly distracted lecture halls.
“I may also ask students who choose to use laptops to sign a contract declaring that they will not engage in non-class computer activity,” Allen wrote in an email. “However, I do not intend to eliminate all student laptop use.”
Students, too, have found themselves conflicted over in-class computer use.
“I cannot keep up with a long lecture if I don’t have my computer in class,” said Julia Rossen ’16. “I understand why some professors would ban computers, but I find that being able to type quickly makes it easier to get the most out of each class. Also, having my computer available gives me quick access to supplementary information if I need it.”
Others, however, prefer to take notes by hand, opting to forgo in-class computer use entirely.
“I feel like writing things down by hand keeps me grounded and attentive to what’s happening in the class,” said Cole Bortz ’17, adding that he retains information more easily when writing by hand.
Most peer institutions allow or restrict laptop use on a course-by-course basis, determined only by the professor. Amherst College, however, used to employ a very strict in-class computer policy, allowing only those with permission from the Director of Student Disability Services to use laptops in class. As computers have become more integral and mainstream teaching tools, the policy has grown more relaxed. Bentley University in Waltham, Mass. installed an on/off switch for Internet connections in classrooms, thereby allowing professors to permit laptop use during classes while limiting distractions.
Both Allen and Newbury stated that any sort of department or campus-wide policy on in-class computer use would be unlikely due to the wide range of views and current policies regarding laptop use.
“There is no uniform answer here,” Newbury wrote. “It will depend on what’s meant to happen in the classroom and the particular needs of individuals. So, the idea that all students would have laptops in all classrooms seems misguided … but the utter elimination of them from every context is probably misguided, too.”