809 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(03/19/14 3:40pm)
What does $60,000 mean to you? Perhaps a couple new cars, a good chunk of a house, an annual salary in tech or finance for a recent grad or the rounded comprehensive fee at Middlebury College. In 2009, colleges like Middlebury were cresting the $50,000 mark; now five years later, we are approaching $60,000, a change that has been met largely with silence and indifference.
We look around the world and see riots and protests over tuition increases in places like England, France and Canada where people are still fighting for democratic access to higher education. Take a school like McGill, where in the summer of 2012, thousands of students took to the streets to protest a $1,625 tuition increase—almost exactly the same hike we saw at Middlebury this past year. The difference of course is that tuition at McGill was under $3,000 prior to increase, but at the end of the day, these increases represent the same amount of money out of our pockets, or our future pockets, as the loans pile up. When does the price go from ridiculous to unacceptable?
To the College’s credit, we have mostly stuck to our “CPI plus 1” rule for the past five years, which means that we have limited our tuition increases to inflation plus 1 percent. In addition, awarding financial aid to 42 percent of the student body this past year shows an impressive commitment to college accessibility. These measures have slowed our annual tuition bumps, reduced financial burdens for a number of families, and brought us from being one of the most expensive schools among our competitors to being in the bottom quartile. But is that enough? Should we really be wedded to a model of infinite growth?
Maybe it is unavoidable. Maybe a college of Middlebury’s caliber needs to continue to grow — to build a new school in Korea or offer new programs like MiddCore in the summer. But are we paying for that? Adjusting for inflation is one thing; tacking on the additional 1 percent each year seems to imply growth somewhere in Middlebury’s global offerings.
But what if we as consumers are not satisfied? What if we even ventured to say that we already have too much? Between the Snow Bowl, the Golf Course, 51 Main, the Athletics Department, the Grille, the Museum of Art, or the Commons system, we have places and programs across all walks of life on campus that we sink money into.
The hard question that we as students can and should entertain is, how much of our considerable programming is essential and how much could we do without?
As an editorial board, we have in the past used this space to make concrete policy recommendations. But as we discussed how to cut costs and ultimately make Middlebury more accessible, we found it impossible because we did not have the information. All we have are broad assumptions and educated guesses. That needs to end. We want to know where our tuition goes. It is not good enough to say that it costs $80,000 a year to educate one Middlebury student, and so we should just be happy with what we pay. We want the College to open up its books so that the student body can follow the money and have a say in where that money goes and how it is spent.
As the College looks to choose a successor for President Liebowitz this year, we need a candidate who is committed to cutting costs and making accessibility a bigger part of the College’s mission. As we look at the goals associated with the ongoing branding effort, notably becoming more global and diverse, we cannot continue to ratchet up costs and increasingly cater to families in the top 5 percent of the income bracket in this country who can afford to pay full freight here. Access will be a barrier to becoming a national household name.
John McCardell Jr., one of the College’s most influential presidents, went to work at The University of the South in Sewanee, Tenn., which made national news in 2011 for “bucking the trend” and cutting tuition. This is the kind of leadership we need to see here at Middlebury, but in the foreseeable future, tuition cuts do not seem likely. As long as there are multiple high school applicants glad to shell out $60,000 for every one student that is admitted, what incentive is there to critically evaluate the tuition? Even the Board of Trustees, the people charged with a fiduciary responsibility for the wellbeing of the college, seem content with the annual hike. But there is a breaking point, and it will come.
We should not sit idly by and watch Middlebury’s price tag grow exponentially. It is time for more transparency. While the comprehensive fee has served as an equalizer for incoming students, it is also a veil that obscures the College’s costs and prohibits dialogue.
Here is a place to start. Included in this year’s tuition hike was a 4.5 percent increase to room and board — the first departure from our CPI plus 1 rule in five years — bringing the total up to $13,116. Where is this increase being spent? Are we covering the salary of the new head of dining? Are we upgrading a dorm? Will this help to bring much-sought-after local foods to the dining halls? And where could we tighten the belt to prevent further increases?
These are the kind of questions we want to entertain, and yet we cannot with the current lack of transparency. Vice President for Finance and Treasurer Patrick Norton and President Liebowitz, please break down this amorphous comprehensive fee and give us the facts. We are the ones paying the price for these rises, yet we are left in the dark with no say in where that money goes. As consumers of the Middlebury experience, we are in the best position to see what’s being utilized and what is wasted. While we enjoy and value the services and opportunities that $60,000 allows us, it is time to take control of our wallets and be critical of what we are paying for.
Artwork by NOLAN ELLSWORTH
(03/05/14 11:44pm)
The men’s basketball season ended in disappointment with a 78-75 loss in the NESCAC semifinals against Williams on Saturday, March 1.
Knowing they needed a win to extend their season, the Panthers had arguably their best offensive first half of the season, scoring 50 points against the number-nine Ephs. Middlebury could not keep up its hot shooting from the first half after the break, however, and Williams outscored the Panthers by 14 in the second half to win the game.
This season will be the first since 2006-2007 that Middlebury will not compete in the NCAA tournament. After starting the season 6-5, the Panthers partially righted the ship and finished 17-9. Of those final four losses, three came by a total of eight points, and two of those came at the hands of Williams.
All season long, the Panthers seemed to be plagued by an inability to close out halftime leads, a blemish to which Head Coach Jeff Brown admitted.
“The biggest thing for us was really not having tremendous balance as an offensive team,” Jeff Brown said. “At times, when things cranked up and we got into more of a half court team, we really lacked the close to the basket attack that would get us to the free throw line and get some easy baskets.”
In the Williams game, the two teams battled neck-and-neck for much of the first half. With 6:43 remaining in the game a Hayden Rooke-Ley three-pointer gave Williams a four-point advantage. Rooke-Ley was inactive the last time these two teams met, but the senior guard had a major impact in this contest, scoring 14 points off the bench.
“He’s a very tough competitor,” Jeff Brown said, “He’s able to drive the ball to the basket. More importantly, defensively, he’s really a hard-nosed, competitive player, and I think his presence on the floor certainly made a difference for them over the stretch run.”
Michael Mayer, Williams’ all-conference center, established his dominance early in the contest, sinking three of the Ephs’ first four shots. Mayer finished the night with a game-high 27 points to go along with seven rebounds.
“Williams’ philosophy offensively is to run their offense through their five-man,” Jeff Brown said, “and he’s an ideal player for that style because he can pass…and post-up with an array of offensive moves.”
After the triple from Rooke-Ley, things started to roll for the Panthers, who finished the first half on a 20-5 run, with the only Williams’ points coming from Mayer. Captain Joey Kizel ’14 had an astounding 19 first-half points. Dylan Sinnickson ’15 also had a big first half, scoring nine, while Jake Brown ’17 chipped in seven off the bench.
All told, Middlebury shot 64.5 percent from the floor and 71.4 percent from deep, where Kizel went 5-6, in the first half, far outpacing Williams’ still-impressive 42.4 percent shooting from the floor and 44.4 percent from beyond the arc.
Last time these two teams met, Middlebury held a 16-point lead at halftime, but a significant decline in outside shooting from the Panthers and Williams’ ability to make a lot of free throws down the stretch combined to allow the Ephs to pull away for a three-point win. The story was much the same on Saturday. Middlebury shot just 28.6 percent from the floor and 18.2 percent from deep in the second half, while Williams got to the charity stripe 22 times in the second half and hit 18 free throws.
“They increased their defensive pressure [in the second half] and really kind of controlled us,” Jeff Brown said. “I think the biggest factor was the differential from the free throw line.”
“We didn’t make any defensive adjustments at the half and Williams clearly did because we only scored 25 second half points,” Matt Daley ’16 said. “They didn’t allow us to get open looks from three point land because we hit 10 in the first half.”
Sinnickson made a lay-up to open the second half and extended the Panthers’ lead to 13, but Williams consistently chipped away over the next 13 minutes, finally tying the contest at 64-64 on a pair of Mayer free throws with 7:27 remaining.
Down two with just over a minute remaining, Middlebury ran a poor offensive possession, but James Jensen ’14 kept the Panthers’ hopes alive by knocking down an uncharacteristic jumper, tying the game at 73-73.
A foul on the ensuing possession led to a pair of free throws from Rooke-Ley. Kizel then missed a three-pointer and – after Jensen committed the necessary foul – Williams first-year Duncan Robinson made it a three-point game by hitting 1-2 free throws. On the other end, Kizel forced a foul from Rooke-Ley, who appeared to commit the foul unintentionally, but the move worked out for Williams because it took away the opportunity for Kizel to attempt a game-tying three-pointer.
Kizel hit both of his free throws to draw within one before a pair of free throws extended the Williams lead back to three. On the final possession, Kizel had just six seconds to bring the ball up the floor, and could only muster a deep, contested three-pointer that did not find the net.
“Saturday’s game looked very similar to most of the games we played this year,” Daley said. “Unfortunately that is what happens when you rely almost entirely on the three point shot...This was a trend that will not continue next year.”
Kizel leaves the basketball program with 1493 career points, good for fourth all-time on the Middlebury scoring list, just five behind Kevin Kelleher ’80. Additionally, Kizel exits as the all-time leader in three-point percentage and free throw percentage.
The responsibility of filling the void left by Kizel next year will fall to Jake Brown, who saw extensive minutes as the team’s point guard this season.
“He certainly showed during the stretch run that he’s capable of running the team,” Jeff Brown said, “We’re really high on his potential next year to energize our offense and also to be able to score some points himself.”
As a class, the team’s six seniors – Kizel, Jensen, Jack Roberts ’14, Nate Bulluck ’14, Albert Nascimento ’14 and Luis Alvarez ’14 – finish with a 96-19 record overall, 31-8 in the NESCAC, four NESCAC tournament appearances, three NCAA tournament appearances and one NESCAC championship.
Jeff Brown looked back fondly on what the class of ’14 has accomplished.
“A tremendous amount of effort and unselfishness with the group,” Jeff Brown said, “Jack and James, probably two of our best defensive players on this year’s team, really did a lot of the quiet stuff in the background for the program. They are just a real, real special group.”
(02/26/14 8:52pm)
The Middlebury men’s swimming and diving team placed seventh at NESCAC Championships last weekend, held at Bowdoin’s LeRoy Greason Pool. Williams won the title with 1,849 points, followed by Amherst (1,750) and Connecticut College (1,468). The Panthers finished with 730 points, only 38 behind sixth-place Bates.
It was a slight fall in the standings for the men, who finished in fifth place overall last year.
“Even though we didn’t place as high as a team overall this year,” Ian Mackay ’14 said, “I think that our hard work and training could be seen in the accomplishments of many individual swimmers on the team.”
The meet was extremely challenging for swimmers, who participated in preliminary sessions in the mornings and finals at night over the course of three days. Middlebury finished day one in seventh and held onto that place all the way to the end.
On the first day, the Panthers got off to a fast start with a fourth-place finish in the 200-yard freestyle relay. Mackay led off with a flat-start time of 20.72 seconds, putting the Panthers in the lead. Mackay was followed by Stephan Koenigsberger ’16, Captain Mike Oster ’14 and Bryan Cheuk ’16, finishing with a time of 1:24.53.
Mackay dominated the action on Friday, earning the NESCAC title in two events and breaking a record along the way. During preliminaries he set a NESCAC record in the 50-yard butterfly with a time of 21.89 seconds. That night he finished first in the final with a time of 22.01 seconds. Mackay went on to win the 50-yard freestyle with a time of 20.80 seconds. His prelim time of 20.53 seconds is the 13th-fastest in the nation this year in Division III. He is the also the school and NESCAC record holder in the event, having set the record last year.
Koenigsberger lowered his own Middlebury record with a time of 25.59 seconds in the 50-yard breaststroke preliminaries. He was then disqualified in the final for a false start.
“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times as for some of us the meet started out a little bit rough,” Koenigsberger said.“However we were all able to rally and everyone swam their hearts out which was just epic to be a part of. Going forward we are only going to get faster and closer as a team.”
On Saturday, Mackay earned a second-place finish in the 100-yard butterfly with a time of 29.24 seconds. Two events later Koenigsberger set another school record, placing third in the 100-yard breaststroke with a time of 57.66 seconds.
Koenigsberger continued his hot streak on Sunday, this time finishing fourth in the 200-yard breaststroke. His time of 2:04.97 shattered the Middlebury record of 2:07.02 set back in 2004.
Distance swimmer Michael McGean ’17 excelled in his first collegiate championship meet, finishing seventh in the 1000-yard freestyle (9:37.27) and fourth in the 1650-yard freestyle (16:04.16).
In the one-meter diving event, Dylan Peters ’16 finished sixth with 394.30 points, followed by teammate Skylar Dallmeyer-Drennen ’14 (347.85). They switched spots in the 3-meter event, with Dallmeyer-Drennen placing sixth (389.80) and Peters seventh (337.75).
Those who qualified for the NCAA Division III Championships will have about three weeks to train before the March 19-22 event in Indianapolis, Ind.
(02/26/14 4:39pm)
Middlebury’s only student-run restaurant, Dolci, turns 16 this year. Since its conception in 1998, Dolci has served as an on-campus haven for foodies of all stripes, offering students the unique opportunity to enjoy high-end cuisine or create and serve original menus. Dolci is housed in Atwater dining hall, where 80 students sit down to a free, multi-course meal most Friday evenings of the year. Midd kids doubling as head chefs, cooks and waiters arrange the meal for their peers over the course of the preceding week, working beside — and sometimes with — Atwater dining staff.
Anyone is welcome to cook for Dolci, regardless of background or experience, a detail that encourages students to explore culinary interests at all levels. Ben Bogin ’15, Co-President of Dolci, believes the opportunity to work in an industrial kitchen like Atwater is one of the greatest perks of Dolci.
“I hope that people who have never cooked before can come feel comfortable working in the kitchen, because working in our dining hall kitchen is so amazing,” Bogin said. “It’s a completely different world.”
Bry Kleber ’14, who will be the head chef of the last Dolci dinner of the spring semester, agrees that Dolci is a unique experience for students.
“It’s a really great feeling to be able to cook for somebody,” Kleber said. “There’s something very intimate about that, and you can get that intimacy and that connection with Dolci, which I think is great.”
Attending Dolci as a dinner is just as rich working behind the scenes. Bogin’s sister and Co-President Emily Bogin ’16 explained that Dolci offers a dining experience not usually available to college students.
“I think it’s important to have an opportunity to experience a five course meal if you don’t have the budget for it,” said Emily. “It’s cool to be able to eat in such a formal setting.”
Dolci’s attendance rates have always been high, thanks to its reputation for creative and scrumptious food. Past Dolci dinner themes have ranged from Modernist to Southern Comfort to Art History to Everything Bacon. Anna Flinchbaugh ’14’s Harry Potter Dolci dinner this past fall was so popular that 130 students signed up to fill the usual 80 seats.
Spring promises seven similarly original meals, including a dinner devoted to vegetables of the Allium family like onions, garlic, leeks, and chives; South American surf and turf featuring scallops drizzled in cilantro lime pesto; a dinner inspired by New York restaurants; and an all-chocolate dinner. The endless variety of dinner themes reflects the range of student cooks on campus.
“If you know a person really well and you’re eating their food it’s kind of fun to see what they put together and how their menu might be a reflection of themselves because it ends up being really personal,” said Ben.
Although Kleber has not yet finalized her theme, she and her co-chef Sara Arno ’14.5 have dreamed of leading a Dolci dinner since they were freshmen.
“We have gone to many Dolci’s and I’ve always been super impressed by how the students are able to execute everything,” Kleber said.
The daughter of a chef, Kleber enjoys cooking as a source of calm and connection.
“For me, cooking is something that I do as a way to relax and calm down…I think it’s very therapeutic,” she said. “And the social aspect of food and cooking is great. I find that important, to be able to make connections and friendships.”
Ben and Emily share a similar view of cooking. They grew up making pancake breakfasts together and eventually worked in a restaurants and bakeries in high school.
“Dolci is kind of what brought me to Middlebury,” Ben said. “I heard about it at the information session, and I was sold.”
Indeed, the infrastructure Dolci offers — a clean, professional cooking space and a variety of equipment and ingredients — is very unique to the College and a perfect opportunity for students who want to explore food beyond their limited dorm kitchens.
Dolci continues to expand and evolve thanks to increased funding in recent years. Over their run as co-presidents, Ben and Emily hope to increase the number of dinners offered and perfect the dining experience in Atwater.
“When you’re sitting with seven other people and you only know one of them and it’s family style, you feel kind of awkward. I’d like to see if there’s a way in the future to make the dining experience better,” Emily said.
First and foremost, however, the siblings are committed to promoting community and creativity around food, both on campus and beyond.
To learn more about Dolci or sign up for a spring dinner, check out go/dolci. On most Wednesdays at 9 p.m., you can enter your name into a lottery for a pair of tickets to dinner served on Friday at 6 p.m.
(02/13/14 3:58am)
Coca-Cola announced last Wednesday that it will buy a 10 percent stake in Green Mountain Coffee Roasters (G.M.C.R.), an investment of approximately 1.25 billion dollars. In return, Green Mountain will produce the company’s single serve beverages.
G.M.C.R. stock skyrocketed nearly 25 percent after the announcement, closing at $114.85. The company plans to use the investment for product development and to buy back shares.
Green Mountain Coffee began in 1981 as a little cafe in Waitsfield, Vermont. In 2005, McDonalds began selling the coffee in the Northeast, and in 2006, G.M.C.R. aquired Keurig Incorporated.
The Keurig, a home-brew single serve coffee machine, has staved off competition from myriad imitators, most markedly Starbucks’ model, the Verismo. Green Mountain Coffee plans to release the Keurig Cold in 2015. The machine will utilize Keurig’s pod-based technology to produce carbonated sodas and waters, sports drinks, juices, and even teas.
Since the Keurig system currently accounts for over 90 percent of G.M.C.R.’s revenue, the company plans to change its name to Keurig Green Mountain Incorporated.
Brian Kelly, chief executive of the company, said that Coca-Cola’s global market makes for “the perfect combination” with G.M.C.R.’s technology and household expertise. “The cold beverage business has built brands that are global,” Kelly said, and he believes that it can do so with Keurig.
Coca-Cola hopes to use its new partnership with G.M.C.R. to expand its already significant market share and ensure the continued prevalence of Coca-Cola products in American homes.
Green Mountain Coffee could encounter competition from SodaStream, a company that advertised in Super Bowl XLVIII in a bid to reach a broad North American audience. By early Thursday stock had dropped just 2 percent; experts believe that Pepsi may back the Israeli company in response.
The deal is unwelcome news for David Einhorn, whose hedge fund, Greenlight Capital, has accused G.M.C.R. of misleading shareholders. Einhorn first raised concerns about the company’s accounting practices in 2011, and shares dropped a whopping 80 percent in the months after the accusations.
G.M.C.R.’s deal with Coca-Cola took financial experts by surprise. Coke has traditionally relied on restaurants and bottlers to deliver their product. However, “Coca-Cola sat down at the home beverage table,” said Scott Van Winkle, a Boston analyst with Canaccord Genuity, “and went all in on their first hand.”
(02/12/14 4:42pm)
The philanthropic sector in the U.S. is broken.
According to Jeffery Sach’s estimate in his book, The End of Poverty, just $175 billion dollars annually over the next 20 years, appropriated efficiently, could end global extreme poverty, defined as people living on less than $1.25 a day. The estimate is likely wildly optimistic; nonetheless, it illustrates both the enormous potential of properly applied charitable dollars and the relatively feasible scale of funding needed to fight poverty global poverty.
When Sach’s book was published in 2005, United States philanthropic giving (not including foundations) was a total of $252.2 billion — a figure which has since increased over 25 percent in less than a decade, to over $316 billion (though lower than the pre-bubble high in 2007 of over $344). Despite the availability of significant funding, the philanthropic sector is structurally inefficient at serving the truly neediest. The scope of the misallocation of charitable dollars owes to three main factors.
The first is rooted in human nature; we are largely driven to give by emotional rather than rational reasons. Donors behave like consumers, rather than investors, meaning that how riveting a charity’s “story” or “brand” is often more important than the evidence of their cost-effectiveness (“return on investment”). This characteristic drastically distorts the efficiency of giving.
Great marketing, not empirical evidence, differentiates non-profits like Charity: Water (3.5 million people served) from Evidence Action’s Safe Water Dispenser project (roughly 1 million people served). Despite its smaller reach, which reflects donor behavior, the later’s intervention is based on better empirical evidence, including multiple Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs), oversight of academics at the forefront of their fields, and ongoing evaluation of impact on recipients.
Donor issue selection is also often emotionally driven, as in the case of an individual who gives to Lyme disease foundations because they lost somebody dear to the disease, even though most would agree that preventing malaria has the best impact on human welfare on the margin.
The second factor is the lack of information available to both donors and non-profits themselves. It is extremely challenging — and costly — to measure and compare the real-world impact of charities because of unintended consequences and indirect effects. The effects of deworming efforts on long-term education, for example, could very well be better or worse than widely assumed, despite there being multiple RCTs designed to answer this very question.
Sometimes donors lean on false proxies for cost-effectiveness, like measuring a non-profit’s overhead. Organizations like Charity Navigator are more harmful than helpful in this regard: comparisons of overhead (non-program related operating expenses) distract from the fact that different interventions can be orders of magnitude more impactful than others. In fact, overhead can, depending on context, be the best investment an organization can make, by helping reevaluate programs, and refine best practices in diverse contexts.
The third factor is our misguided charitable tax-deduction policy. Because tax deductions for charitable contributions are tied only to legal classification, rather than impact, tax deductions accrue whether one gives to the Guggenheim or to prevent mother-child transmission of HIV during birth in vulnerable communities. This policy gives legal justification to the ethically flawed rationalization that giving to what we care about matters as much as giving to the neediest. Clearly, the preventing HIV transmission matters more on the margin.
A 2007 study from The Center for Philanthropy at IUPUI found that while households that make less than $100,000 focus around 36 percent of their giving on the needs of the poor, those that make over a million commit less than 22 percent of their giving to such causes, although the wealthiest (top 10 percent) were the most generous to all causes, donating a greater percentage of their income to charity than any other (there were other divergences too, like the top 10 percent prioritizing the Arts and medical research, while giving a smaller percentage of their donations to religious institutions). These figures reflect substantially different giving priorities between classes, but most relevantly about how most Americans prioritize helping the poor.
In total, only 26 percent of charitable contributions go to the domestic poor, while only 4.6 percent of giving goes to help the poor abroad. In 2005, less than one third of giving in the U.S. directly benefitted poor people, with no reason to believe this trend has reversed from contemporary data (for which I did not have the same detailed analysis).
Here’s the kicker: according to a recent CBO report, of the $39 billion dollars the U.S. spends annually on charitable tax deductions, 80 percent goes in tax relief to the donors who give the least, in proportion to total giving, to the poor: the top 20 percent. Such tax deductions represent only 0.1 percent of after-tax income for families in the middle quintile, but a walloping 1.4 percent of after-tax income amongst the richest 1 percent. Tax deductions accrue disproportionately to people who support the needs of the poor the least, when the policy would be far more efficient if it incentivized intelligent, impactful giving by tying deductions to empirical impact as determined by an unbiased, third party.
The principal problem with giving in the U.S. is not the generosity of Americans, but how that money is distributed. Donors are bad at choosing which charities to give to; charities face distorted incentives to market well, rather than be accountable; and charitable tax deductions incentivize counter-productive behavior with regard to the global poor. These factors contribute to the morally catastrophic distribution of U.S. donations, with those most in need of aid shouldering the burden.
(02/12/14 4:34pm)
I recently asked a top administrator what percentage of the faculty read the Campus in some capacity every week.
“What do you think?” She asked me.
“Fifty percent.”
“Try twenty,” was the response.
Twenty percent is unacceptable. Faculty members, you are part of our community. To receive a paycheck from Middlebury College, you should be expected to do more than just teach. What makes our community special is that everyone does more. Custodians do more than just tidy rooms, doling out smiles and advice. Administrators do more than just make big scale decisions, and students are expected to do more than just go to class. Faculty should be held to the same standard. Our community thrives on the fact that nobody lives in a vacuum, and it is not acceptable for faculty members to teach four classes, advise a few students, and go home. This is not just a day job, and the best of our faculty don’t clock out at 5 p.m. You are teaching us more than your field of expertise, you are teaching us life. Faculty, it is time to reinvest in our community.
When you live in a vacuum, you make decisions in a vacuum. That has consequences. When a professor sent out a casting call to nearly a 100 women of color encouraging them to audition for the role a wet nurse role in the play “In the Next Room,” many students responded with anger. If that professor had followed coverage of Chance the Rapper’s concert and the forum which brought to light larger issue of marginalized groups, would the email have been sent? If that professor had understood the complex racial tensions and feelings of isolation that many students had eloquently expressed in the Opinions section of the Campus, would that email have been sent?
Nov. 21 showed both the decaying status quo and glimmers of light in faculty engagement at the College. That Thursday, the Faculty Educational Affairs Committee (EAC) met to discuss the fate of summer internships for credit. The same day, the Campus published an editorial under the headline “Give Credit Where Credit is Due,” recommending specific solutions that integrated student and faculty concerns. When only one of the five EAC members reads a voice of the student body on an important academic issue facing the future of the liberal arts education, we have a problem. Students are ultimately the consumer of the College, and we deserve a faculty that is invested in our community.
But later that day, Amy Wax gave a contentious lecture on diverging family structures and moral deregulation that many of the attendees crammed in Hillcrest found pedantic at best and racist at worst. While Murray Dry’s decision to sponsor Wax was controversial, he showed once again why he is the Gold Standard for community engagement. He consistently weaves Campus articles and editorials into his classes and discussions with students, even sending feedback to individual reporters. Professor Dry, your engagement does not go unnoticed, and I need your help in spreading the word to the 80 percent of your colleagues whose eyes are not on this page.
This is not an attempt to toot our own horn. But when only one in five faculty members reads a newspaper devoted to reporting on our community and tackling issues that affect everyone in our community, that screams apathy. The Campus is one of the only spaces that brings together issues concerning the faculty, staff, students and administrators every single week and allows all parties to throw in their two cents.
It is unfair to characterize a group as diverse as the Middlebury Faculty with a single adjective. I have been taught by professors like Deb Evans, who began class by asking her students about the issues affecting them, and numerous other professors who take a genuine interest in their students’ concerns. But how is a biology professor supposed to find out what issues are affecting students who never set foot in Bicentennial Hall?
This is not an assault on the faculty. It is an invitation. Open the paper, get angry, tell us we are wrong, bring an editorial into a class discussion, write an op-ed, but for the sake of our entire community, it is time to reinvest.
Artwork by NOLAN ELLSWORTH
(01/23/14 5:54am)
The Middlebury ski team finished in third place at the Colby Carnival, one spot ahead of their standing after day one. The Vermont Catamounts topped the charts this weekend with 1,012 points, Dartmouth came in next with 882 points, Middlebury followed by an exact 200 margin with 682 points, and the University of New Hampshire rounded out the standings with 620 points.
The conditions did not play in the skiers favor, as hard snow and ice led to a slick track. Low light also caused difficulty since skiers were unable to commit to the course with the usual level of confidence.
On the first day of competition, a notable run by Yina Moe-Lang ’15 earned her a second straight top 10 finish in the giant slalom, finishing in a time of 2:20.80. In her first race ever as a Panther, Lisa Schroer ’17 came in at 23rd and Katelyn Barclay ’15 ended the race in 26th place.
Kara Shaw ’15 had a standout performance this weekend, finishing in ninth place with a time of 1:40.51, despite having trouble on the first day.
“I skied through the panel of a giant slalom gate and it whipped around and hit my back which knocked the wind out,” Shaw said. “Even though I didn’t finish the GS, I was happy with the way I was skiing and I carried that confidence into the second day and tried not to hold anything back.”
Despite her top ten finish at the slalom carnival this past weekend, Shaw wants to improve upon her results.
“Aside from qualifying for NCAAs, my main goal is to podium in a giant slalom carnival race,” Shaw said. “So far I’ve had disappointing results in the first two giant slalom races, but I’m feeling good with my skiing so I’m looking forward to this weekend to finally put two strong runs together.”
Moe-Lang finished in a time of 1:43.90 earning herself a 21st place finish in the GS. To round out the women’s alpine finishers in the GS was Elle Gilbert ’16 who was less than a second behind fellow teammate Moe-Lang, crossing the line in a time of 1:44.56.
In the giant slalom, the men’s alpine team was led by Christopher McKenna’s ’17 fifth place finish, his second straight top five finish in the giant slalom. Nick Bailey ’14 ended up 13th and Colin Hayes ’17 came in at 29th place.
The men’s alpine team was impressive this weekend as well in the slalom, with two skiers finishing in the top ten. Sixth place finisher Hayes led the Panthers with a time of 1:29.93, while eighth place finisher Liam Mulhern ’14 came in only seventeen-hundredths of a second behind Hayes with a final time of 1:30.08. McKenna’s run in a time of 1:31.22 landed him 16th place.
The women’s nordic team held their own as well in Maine, with three top twenty times in the 10K race. Heather Mooney ’15 led her team with a time of 29:03, giving her a fifth place finish. Fellow classmate Stella Holt ’15 charged her way to 11th place, landing a final time of 29:43. The final scorer for the women’s nordic team was Kaitlin Fink ’16 who came in at 16th in a time of 30:11.
The trio of Mooney, Holt, and Fink also scored the top three finishes for Middlebury in the 10K race. Once again, Mooney led her team in ninth place, Holt had her first top ten finish ending in a remarkable 10th place, and Fink came in at number 24.
Ben Lustgarten ’14 led the men’s nordic team with remarkable results both on day one and day two of the carnival. He earned himself a second place finish in the 10K classic race in a time of 31:34 and a third place finish in the 15K freestyle race in a time of 36:47.
Austin Cobb ‘14 and Jack Steele ‘16 were the other two scorers for the men’s nordic team. Cobb worked his way to a 27th place finish in the 10K and a 15th place result in the 15K event. Steele rounded out the scores with 36th place in the 10K and 33rd place in the 15K.
The ski teams compete at the UNH Carnival this coming weekend, on Jan. 24 and 25.
(01/23/14 1:50am)
The Middlebury College Activities Board (MCAB) has announced that DJ Earworm will be headlining the Winter Carnival Ball on Saturday, Feb. 22. According to MCAB President Elizabeth Fouhey ’14, “Earworm was selected as the DJ for Winter Carnival ball because his mash-ups are always a huge crowd pleaser, he was the right price and he was available. MCAB has already gotten a lot of enthusiastic feedback about the choice, and so we are excited for a great show and Winter Carnival.”
Earworm has performed at the College once before, at Winter Carnival Ball 2010, and the positive feedback resulting from his performance also played a role in inviting him back in 2014, according to Fouhey.
Earworm, whose given name is Jordan Roseman, is a San Francisco-based mashup artist known for his annual “United States of Pop” series, tracks that combine the top 25 pop songs of the year into one song.
The MCAB Traditions Committee has also announced a new event to the Carnival line-up, a yet-to-be-announced musical performance that will replace the traditional Orange Crush dance.
Increasingly low attendance over the past three years among the student body at Orange Crush, an ’80s music event traditionally held on the Friday night of Winter Carnival, has prompted the Traditions Committee to reconsider and ultimately replace the event with an alternative that Fouhey said was inspired by the popularity of the Small Concerts Initiatives.
“This year’s event is supposed to be a fresh take on a great tradition, Orange Crush. To me, this is what the Traditions Committee is really about,” Fouhey said. “Middlebury is constantly updating, and while we need to keep our traditions alive, we do also need to change alongside the student body. In a weekend full of age-old traditions, we are hoping to start a few new ones of our own as well.”
(01/16/14 4:14am)
The men’s basketball team (8-5 overall, 1-1 in NESCAC) went into winter break on a high note with a nail-biting 89-84 victory at Skidmore, but the long layoff did not favor the Panthers, who opened 2014 with three straight losses, including the NESCAC opener on Friday, Jan. 10 against Bates. Middlebury then captured its first NESCAC victory with an impressive defeat of a young and athletic Tufts team 80-66 on Saturday, Jan. 11, and followed-up that performance with a convincing victory over a struggling Lyndon State squad with an 81-69 win on Tuesday, Jan. 14.
Following two sloppy losses against out-of-conference opponents, Middlebury opened NESCAC play at home this past weekend. The Panthers had not lost to Bates since Feb., 2007, but suffered a 64-61 defeat on Friday night. Shots consistently fell for Middlebury in the first half, who took a 36-25 lead at halftime after making six three-pointers and shooting 45 percent from the field.
Prior to the game, Coach Jeff Brown spoke about Dylan Sinnickson ’15, who was poised to return from a personal leave of absence.
“We expect for Dylan to contribute, and in terms of how much, it will really depend on the performance,” Brown said.
Sinnickson rewarded his coach’s decision, exploding off the bench for 17 first-half points on 6-10 shooting, including three of four from beyond the arc.
Despite shooting just 24 percent from the floor in the second half, Middlebury maintained their lead as Bates bailed out the hosts with multiple fouls early in the second half, and 15 personal fouls total after halftime. As a result, the Bobcats (8-4, 1-0) worked tirelessly to cut into the Panthers’ lead. With less than five minutes to play, a missed layup on the Panther end resulted in a dunk for impressive Bates center Malcolm Delpeche to draw the Bobcats within one. On the ensuing Panther possession, another missed layup in traffic gave the ball back to the visitors. The crowd cried for a foul and the volume in Pepin Gymnasium reached a crescendo as the Panthers settled in to protect their one point lead. However, Delpeche made his presence felt again with a follow-up lay-in on the other end to put the Bobcats ahead 54-53.
Trailing by one at the 2:30 mark, captain Joey Kizel ’14 knocked down a free throw to tie the ball game at 56. Kizel, an 82 percent free throw shooter on the season, uncharacteristically missed the second, but the Panthers came out of the crowd underneath the basket with possession and Kizel knocked down a go-ahead three-pointer. On the other end, Adam Philpott retaliated with a three of his own. And then, with 10 seconds remaining, Bates’ leading scorer and co-captain Graham Safford drilled a back-breaking three. The Bates 64-61 victory was sealed when Kizel missed an off-balance three-point attempt of his own as time expired.
Sinnickson finished as the game’s leading scorer with 23 points, and attributed his performance to increased concentration.
“I was very focused heading into this weekend,” he said. “We were struggling prior to Bates and Tufts, but I think we have turned the corner,” Sinnickson said.
Kizel managed 12 of his own, primarily by getting to the line (7-11), and dragged down seven rebounds.
The Panthers played a much more complete game on Sunday against a freshman-laden Tufts (7-6, 0-1) team. With the Jumbos getting two experienced guards back from injury just in time to meet the Panthers, Sunday’s match-up provided a stiffer challenge than Tufts’ record would have suggested. However, Middlebury’s dead-eye shooting throughout made the difference. The Panthers shot at a 51 percent clip from the field, 47 percent from deep and 81 percent from the charity stripe, where Brown’s team has been inconsistent on the year.
The first half featured fast-paced basketball and dominant post-play by Tufts’ first-year big man Hunter Sabety, who was perfect from the field, making all eight of his first-half attempts and adding three boards. Hunter Merryman ’15 led the Panthers in scoring at halftime, knocking down two three-pointers and tallying eight points. As a whole, the Jumbos dominated the first half rebounding battle, played tight perimeter defense and made quick substitutions to keep legs fresh in order to secure a three-point lead going into halftime.
With the game close five minutes into the second half, the physicality picked up when, after the whistle, Sabety slammed the ball through the hoop onto a sprawled Matt Daley ’16. The insult drew a shove from James Jensen ’14, which resulted in a technical for the senior forward and outrage from the Middlebury fans. A minute later, further physical play resulted in a double foul on Jensen and Tufts’ first-year forward Drew Madsen. The rough play meant that both teams were in the double bonus with more than eight minutes remaining, a development that favored Middlebury, as the Jumbos converted only 56 percent of their second half free throws. Both Madsen and Tufts’ junior guard Ben Ferris left the game early due to foul trouble.
The game remained tightly contested until the last two minutes, when a Daley three, followed by an old-fashioned three-point play by Matt St. Amour ’17 pushed the game out of reach as part of a 20-5 Middlebury run over the final 8:54 of the game.
The victory over Tufts halted the team’s first three game losing streak in eight seasons. In Middlebury’s first action of 2014, the Panthers dropped a road game at Salve Regina (9-4) after an eight hour bus ride due to inclement weather and only a 30-minute warm-up. Middlebury followed that by shooting an abysmal 28 percent at home against Plattsburgh St. (8-3) in a 63-47 loss, the team’s lowest scoring performance of the season.
Coach Brown believed that the team’s offense executed well against Plattsburgh, despite displeasing results.
“I think it really just sort of got contagious in that we missed some shots we normally make and we got tighter as the game went on, but in reviewing the game I think our offensive execution was pretty good,” Brown said.
After the two out-of-conference losses, Brown admitted that his team’s resolve had been challenged.
“I think our confidence has been shaken a little bit, not coming out of the gate strong in the second semester,” he said.
On the heels of the conference victory over Tufts, the Panthers traveled to Lyndonville, Vt. to take on in-state opponent Lyndon State.
The Panthers lead throughout, eventually closing out a 81-69 win. Merryman, Sinnickson, St. Amour and Jensen all scored in double digits, while Jack Roberts ‘14 lead the squad with eight rebounds.
Now sitting at 1-1 in conference, the Panthers will resume NESCAC play this coming weekend with road games at Wesleyan and Connecticut College.
(12/05/13 1:51am)
When simple solutions and polished narratives are applied to complex issues, there is often something fishy lurking beneath the surface. Such is the case for Teach for America (TFA), which presents itself as an organization that recruits graduates of elite colleges, like Middlebury, and provides them with two-year teaching positions in “high-need” rural and urban schools.
Several of our friends and peers who we respect and admire and whose intentions we trust have become involved in TFA as corps members, recruiters or in other roles. Our goal is not to demonize them. After all, we personally know many past, current and future TFA members who are committed to teaching and who were even positively impacted by TFA teachers themselves growing up. But, we believe that, as a whole, the TFA organization threatens public education in our country by giving priority to the desires of private interests over the needs of American children whose communities have been impoverished by unjust economic and societal structures.
TFA began 20 years ago, seeking to address teacher shortages by placing inexperienced college grads in schools where their presence would be better than no teachers at all. Since then, the public education landscape has changed drastically: there is now a surplus of qualified, veteran teachers who are getting laid off, often via massive school closings. But instead of adapting to its diminished need, TFA has grown to 32,000 people and boasts assets totaling over $400 million. This huge amount of human and monetary capital is needed, TFA claims, to further its work using “innovative” tactics to address a “crisis” in our public education system caused, they imply, by lazy teachers and corrupted teachers’ unions. This “crisis” has occurred at the same time the Program for International Student Assessment found that, when controlling for poverty, American public school students outperform top scoring nations like Finland and Canada.
Something, indeed, is fishy.
And it is time for us as a campus community — which is one of the top 20 schools TFA recruits from — to closely examine what is going on. Here are some places to start:
First, TFA is “deprofessionalizing” the teaching profession. TFA corps members, often entering classrooms with only a 5-week training course, are rarely equipped to deal with large classes of struggling students. Not only that but 80 percent of them leave the classroom after 4 years. This increase in the teacher turnover rate destabilizes school systems and makes teachers into interchangeable commodities instead of long-term community members and leaders.
And while apparently 60 percent of TFA corps members continue in the education field, that figure represents not only teachers, but also those who enter into school administration, education policy and charter schools, where they often push the same agenda of privatizing public education.
As these TFA corps members flood classrooms, veteran, unionized long-term community teachers in both public and charter schools are being laid off. In Chicago, for example, the city closed 48 schools and laid off 850 teachers and staff while hiring 350 corps members. And those TFA positions are often funded with the heavily lobbied help of federal and state subsidies and grants, in addition to corporations invested in TFA’s privatizing methods such as ExxonMobil Foundation, JPMorgan Chase, Monsanto Fund, and Shell Oil Company who have bolstered TFA’s endowment with six and seven figure donations.
TFA claims that it is challenging the status quo, but we believe that it is part of maintaining an unequal system. Instead of addressing societal and economic structural problems that create poverty and inequality, TFA preaches that the courageous efforts of “leaders” from elite colleges and innovative (read: neoliberal) approaches to education are what is needed to address the “solvable problem” of education inequality.
Catherine Michna counters in Slate that in order for education inequality to have been eliminated at the school where she was a TFA corps member, “We needed smaller class sizes, money for books and materials, money to renovate the crumbling school building. We needed more professional development…Our students’ parents needed jobs that paid a living wage. We needed the police to stop profiling and imprisoning the young men in our community. We needed the War on Drugs to end. We needed all these problems addressed.” Instead, the polished narrative of TFA and the corporate education reform movement conveniently leaves out these issues while calling for an increase in high stakes testing, charter schools, and interchangeable TFA corps members in schools across the country in an effort to privatize them, bust teachers’ unions, “commodify” the teaching profession, and undermine public education.
We challenge Middlebury students to reconsider applying for Teach for America and accepting positions in the program, and instead find other ways to learn about and get involved with education in our country.
Students Resisting Teach for America, including ELMA BURNHAM ’13 (Student Teachers Program) of Fishers Island, NY/Stonington, CT, LUKE GREENWAY ’14.5 of Seattle, WA, HANNA MAHON ’13.5 of Washington DC, ALICE OSHIMA ’15 of Brooklyn, NY, MOLLY ROSE-WILLIAMS ’13.5 of Berkley, CA, LUKE WHELAN ’13.5 of Seattle, WA, ALLY YANSON ’14 of Naples, FL and AFI YELLOW-DUKE ’15 of Brooklyn, NY
(12/04/13 9:00pm)
The Middlebury men’s basketball team hoped to have plenty to be thankful for over the break with two games in the Hoopsville National Invitational Classic on Friday, Nov. 22 and Sunday, Nov. 24. Unfortunately the Panthers fell short in both contests, first by being upset by the host Stevenson Mustangs on Friday, and then by dropping an overtime thriller against 10th-ranked St. Mary’s (Md.). The Stevenson loss was the program’s first pre-New Year’s defeat since 2008.
The Panthers rebounded on Sunday, Dec. 1, with a victory on the road against Rensselaer, 92-79, and added to their win total with a 90-80 defeat of Castleton St. at home on Tuesday, Dec. 3.
Stevenson, who entered the game 1-0, disrupted the Panthers previously fluid offense and won the battle on the boards despite a disadvantage in height — grabbing 47 rebounds to Middlebury’s 42 and pulling down 19 on the offensive end. The Mustangs led 10-5 at the first stoppage in play and never looked back, dropping Middlebury to 2-1 with a 80-69 final score.
Captain Joey Kizel ’14 continued his slow start to the season. On the positive end, Kizel shot well from the line (7-8), a department in which the Panthers as a whole struggled (59.1 percent), and picked the Mustangs for six steals. Yet all that was not enough to make up for his 2-10 shooting from the floor and six turnovers.
The struggles continued for Vermont-native Matt St. Amour ’17 as well. In the starting lineup for the third consecutive game, St. Amour managed just two points on 0-6 shooting from the field.
Jake Brown ’17, in just his second game after missing the season’s first two contests due to injury, played a solid 25 minutes off the bench and handled the ball with poise. The newcomer gathered 14 points on 6-9 shooting to go along with five assists.
“I have a lot of confidence in Jake’s ability to lead our offense,” head coach Jeff Brown said. “[He] has made a quick adjustment to the college game.”
Hunter Merryman ’15 provided the team with an offensive spark. Since coming off the bench in the season opener, Merryman has started every game and has been a consistent scorer. On Friday, Merryman filled it up for 21 points on 8-17 shooting and 5-11 beyond the arc.
The Mustangs outplayed Middlebury physically and attacked the Panthers’ interior, forcing Kizel and others into foul trouble. Kizel fouled out late in the game, while some early whistles relegated Matt Daley ’16 to just 18 minutes in the contest.
Middlebury had a day to recover before squaring off with number 10 St. Mary’s.
Stepping into the starting lineup for St. Amour, Nate Bulluck ’14 had a great start to the game, scoring the Panthers first nine points and giving Middlebury a 9-4 lead. The Panthers led 34-31 at halftime, but with 10 minutes remaining St. Mary’s knotted the score at 52 all.
Kizel found his form in the game’s second half, particularly down the stretch, scoring 20 second half points on 6-10 shooting. With 1:30 left in the second, Kizel completed a three-point play to bring Middlebury within two. A minute later, Kizel went to the line down three and hit both free throws under pressure to make it a one-point game. After the subsequent foul, St. Mary’s hit both of its free throws, leaving the Panthers with 12.9 seconds to make up a three-point deficit. In classic fashion, Kizel knocked down a buzzer beater to send the game into overtime.
Responding well to his change of role, St. Amour played 29 strong minutes, tallying eight points, including a critical three points in overtime to give the Panthers a one point lead, followed on the next possession by two successful free throws.
Merryman played 39 minutes on the night, but did not have his typical solid shooting game. As the clock ticked down in the final second, Merryman got two looks from beyond the arc with a chance to tie the game once again and go to a second overtime period, but failed to tickle the twine, with the buzzer giving Middlebury the 81-78 loss.
For the second game in a row, Jake Nidenberg ’16 contributed significant minutes off the bench, scoring 12 points on 6-7 shooting in 23 minutes. Nidenberg seemed to be taking advantage of the void left by Dylan Sinnickson’s ’15 voluntary leave of absence and the injury of James Jensen ’14, who dressed for the first time on Sunday, but did not play.
“Jake has developed into a strong offensive post player,” the elder Brown said. “His ability to get us high percentage shots inside is his greatest asset.”
From the sideline, Brown looked for more positives despite the disappointing outcomes.
“I don’t view the two losses in Baltimore as a negative,” he said. “We had some bright spots in both games. Playing a strong non-league schedule on the road can be helpful going into the NESCAC schedule in January.”
The Panthers finally got back to their winning ways against the less-heralded RPI Engineers (0-4) on Sunday, Dec. 1, with a 92-79 win — improving to 3-2 on the year.
The Panthers led throughout most of the affair, though the outcome was in doubt until late in the second frame. With 4:28 left in the game, Middlebury led by just six, but their good day from the charity stripe (20-23) allowed them to seal the deal.
Brown, a promising first-year point guard, earned his first start of the season and distributed all game long, attempting just one shot but racking up six assists in 25 minutes. The first-year point guard did not know he would be counted on so heavily early on.
“Honestly, coming in I had no idea what to expect,” he said. “I think I can alleviate some of the pressure [Joey] faces every night. I knew I had an amazing opportunity playing with Joey so every chance I get I try and learn from his play.”
Brown believes he can be successful without scoring, as he was against RPI.
“I see myself as a pass first point guard that can score,” Brown said. “Setting up shots for Joey is a big part of our offense, so any time I can get him the ball I think it makes his job easier.”
Merryman returned to his scoring ways, hitting three shots from deep en route to a 23-point performance. Jensen saw his first action of the year, providing 17 high-energy minutes, 10 points, and three boards while also drawing a charge, earning the praise of coach Brown.
“Jensen adds a lot to our playing group,” coach Brown said. “After Joey he is our most experienced player. He is a tough matchup because of his mid-range game and his ability to drive to the basket.”
Nidenberg, again, shot well (6-12) in 16 minutes off the bench. Kizel, too, put together a strong stat line, with 14 points, nine rebounds, seven assists and three steals.
On Tuesday, Dec. 3 the Panthers defeated in-state opponent Castleton St. (1-3). The Spartans one victory on the season was impressive, coming over WPI who was ranked ninth at the time.
Castleton came into the game shooting 34 percent from behind the arc, but rode strong three-point shooting in this match-up to an early lead, and finished shooting 50 percent from deep.
Castleton St. took a one point lead into halftime, shooting 57.1 percent from the field in the first period and knocking down seven threes, but the Panthers’ significant rebounding advantage (22-12 in the first half) and the performance of Jensen kept it close. Jensen finished the game with a career-best 22 points, shooting 12-15 from the line, and locked down Castleton’s top offensive threat, forward Cornelius Green, who fouled out with zero points.
Jensen's head coach was happy to have Jensen back.
“On offense, he is a tough matchup because of his mid range game and his ability to drive to the basket,” Brown said.
In the game’s final three minutes Castleton could only muster two free throws, allowing Middlebury to pull away with the 90-80 victory.
Kizel had a typical game, scoring 19. Jack Roberts ‘14 tossed away an astonishing nine shots to go with 12 points and seven rebounds.
Despite the team’s losses in Maryland, there is optimism amongst the team and coaching staff.
“For a lot of guys on this year’s team,” Jensen said, “not only were out two weekend tournament games their first big games, but it was also the first time they saw significant minutes. Obviously I wanted to win the Invitational, but I was happy with how some of our younger players stepped up against good competition.”
The Panthers will be 5-2 when they travel to Skidmore on Saturday, Dec. 7 for their final game of 2013.
(11/20/13 10:09pm)
The German newsmagazine Focus has reported that the art collection of Cornelius Gurlitt, an 80-year old German man whose collection of 1406 artworks was seized by German authorities in his Munich apartment in Feb. 2012, was found to include several previously unknown works by famous artists including Henri Matisse, Pablo Picasso, Marc Chagall, Max Liebermann, Edvard Munch, Pierre-Auguste Renoir and Paul Gauguin. The collective value of the discovered works has been estimated to be at least €1 billion.
The story of Cornelius Gurlitt’s hidden collection began in pre-WWII Nazi Germany. Cornelius’ father Hildebrand Gurlitt was an art dealer and museum director on friendly terms with many modern artists of the day. After being fired from a curatorial position in Hamburg in 1933, the elder Gurlitt was one of four men asked by Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels to help sell the thousands of artworks the Nazis had confiscated from museums and labeled “degenerate” to overseas buyers. The Nazis organized the Degenerate Art Exhibition in 1937 to showcase the kind of art they claimed to have corrupting effects on the German people. Among the elder Gurlitt’s trading collection of nearly 1500 works are also believed to be many that the Nazis confiscated from Jewish families in the lead up to and during World War II.
Near the end of World War II, Gurlitt and his family fled to the castle of a friend. As Allied Forces marched across Germany and defeated the Third Reich, they detained and interrogated the elder Gurlitt. He told members of the Monuments, Fine Arts, and Archives unit of the American military that most of his collection had been destroyed in the bombing of Dresden and he did not participate in the confiscation or trading of illegally stolen artworks.
The Allied troops released him, satisfied that Gurlitt’s collection was rightfully owned personal property. The elder Gurlitt died in 1956 from a car crash. Meanwhile, his son, Cornelius, lived quietly in Salzburg, Austria. After the deceased Gurlitt’s wife died in 1967, Cornelius moved into his mother’s apartment in Munich — the same one where the massive collection was uncovered early last year.
What led authorities to the Munich apartment was almost sheer serendipity. Travelling from Germany to Switzerland by train in late 2010, Cornelius Gurlitt was found carrying €9000 in cash, all in crisp new €500 bills. More than a year of investigations later, authorities raided Gurlitt’s Munich apartment and found a massive collection of artworks hidden behind curtains and canned food in the guest room. The authorities carted the works away to a storage facility in the city of Garching where they sought to trace their provenance.
In an interview with the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel, Gurlitt maintained that he had not broken any laws and that the seized works are his rightful personal property. He expressed dismay at the media circus that has intruded his reclusive lifestyle after Focus broke the story back in early November.
“There is nothing more I have loved more in my life than my pictures,” Gurlitt told Der Spiegel, adding that the loss of his collection has been more devastating than the loss of his mother and his sister.
Gurlitt sold some of the works in his collection over the years to help pay for living expenses and medical treatment. In the fall of 2011, he put Max Beckmann’s “Lion Tamer” up for sale at an auction house in Cologne. It sold for €725,000. Gurlitt and the Jewish heirs with claim to the work settled for a 55-45 split on the sale.
(11/14/13 12:20am)
Last week, on Thursday, Nov. 7 the College admissions office began formally reviewing early decision applications, which Dean of Admission Greg Buckles projected would be around 691 applications. This year, however, admissions is hoping to reduce the class size from 600-610 to 575 students for September admits and from 90-100 to 80-90 students for February admits, making an already competitive process even more competitive.
“The goal is to reduce the stress on crowded first-year housing overall,” Buckles said.
Each year, like those 691 applicants, high school seniors all over the country apply to college and admission counselors seek an efficient, fair way to sift through the extremely high number of applications. The College receives around 9,000 applications each year — last year that number peaked at 9,109 — and employs 13 full time readers, four seasonal readers and four operational staff members to review those applications.
Therefore, each admission cycle counselors grapple with making difficult decisions and making those decisions in an efficient, fair manner. Although this challenge is not unique to the College, the system it uses may be unique. Every admission office has a different method of choosing the incoming class and sifting through what will ultimately be acceptances and rejections. This system is a necessary evil, a formula, to make informed choices and predictions on how a student would perform on this campus.
“It’s a sifting a method,” Buckles said. “We are constantly sifting through a pool of applicants so that students begin to rise through the process, so to speak.”
At the College, the first part of this sifting process is the first read. Every application that comes through the office is read twice. The first read is usually completed by the regional representative; each counselor covers a few states or countries based on the location of the applicant’s high school. The second reader is usually chosen at random.
The two readers rank students in four categories: academic strength, extracurricular contribution and personal qualities on a 1-7 point scale. An overall score, the forth category, is then attributed to each applicant, which is not an average of the three categories, but is a recommendation.
“[The overall category] is a recommendation or a general sense of what the reader is recommending for a decision,” Buckles said.
According to the admissions office, the first, most important category is the academic rating of an applicant. This category looks at a student’s transcript, while taking into consideration the high school’s rating system and curriculum. Supporting materials such as the school report, letters of recommendation, testing scores, grades and personal essays are considered within this category as well. All those combined assigns an academic rating.
The rubric for the academic category, which reads, “To what extent does the applicant demonstrate intellectual achievement, engagement, and potential for academic success at Middlebury?” is the overarching question by which each reader attempts to apply a rating.
For this first-year class, the average academic rating, out of 7, for all students who applied was between 5.06 and 5.76 for admitted students. The average academic rating of students who enrolled was 5.45.
The next category, the extracurricular rating, which is also on a 1-7 scale, asks the reader, “What level of contribution will this student make outside the classroom taking into account skill level, initiative, and leadership capabilities?”
A seven in this category would suggest “an unusual and rare ability to contribute here at a national level talent,” while a one rating suggests “no foreseen involvement on campus.” Athletics, art and music would all be considered here.
The personal category which Buckles calls “the most illusive, and the most subjective” seeks to answer the question, “How will the Middlebury community be impacted by this student’s personal qualities?” with a 7 suggesting “exceptional potential to positively impact the lives of others.”
“[The personal category] is one we talk a lot about because it’s a hard one to know,” Associate Dean of Admissions and Head of Diversity Recruitment Manuel Carballo said. “We aren’t interviewing students or having conversations with them. But personal qualities are, to us, is this person going to be a good roommate or a good person to talk to?”
The last category, the overall category, asks, “considering the applicant’s overall contribution to campus including academic talent, extracurricular talent, personal qualities, and special considerations, what recommendation would you give to the committee?”
The overall category is where any special considerations are taken into account, including legacy status, first generation college student status or a set of extenuating circumstances.
Then, based off of the readers’ numerical evaluation of applications in the listed categories, applicants move into committee session where formal decisions are made. On average, only 50 percent of applicants make it to the committee session.
“The first reader may determine that a student is unlikely to be admitted,” Buckles said. “Then a senior, more experienced counselor will go back and verify that [not going to committee] is in fact the right decision and that all things being equal that person will not make it to committee.”
If it has been determined by the first two readers that a student should go to committee, then students are assigned to a committee group. During the regular decision cycle, the office has four different committee groups working at once, comprised of four to five people who get through about 100 decisions a day.
As committees begin reviewing applicants, one of the two readers usually presents the applicant to the committee, and each counselor gets one vote to either admit, deny or waitlist the student.
“I call this precision guesswork. We are trying to apply consistent, fair, ethical, human, educational standards and applications to what is a very subjective, dynamic process. We are trying to make good decisions about 17-year-olds.”
Any decision that cannot be made easily or that the smaller committee is not positive about are passed off to a full committee session which is usually held for a week at the end of the decision process. Both Buckles and Carballo noted that they almost always have to trim the class during this portion, noting how difficult that process can be.
“To me, the hardest part of the process is students come in from such different backgrounds — educational backgrounds, family backgrounds — that there is no way to equate things,” Carballo said. “So how do you compare them? How do you compare students from schools who have a library just like ours to school that don’t have one. It’s not a choice. We have to put them in the same pool and make some decision.”
Read a response by the Alumni Admissions Programs.
(11/13/13 7:09pm)
Last week in Oslo, Marius Holm of the ZERO Foundation presented a report that I co-wrote this summer along with a number of environmental and financial professionals making the case for fossil fuel divestment in Norway’s government pension fund, a portfolio so large that it dwarfs the size of all American university endowments combined. Many of the arguments were specific to Norway, which, as one of the largest producers of oil and gas in the world, is ill-advised to double down on its exposure to shifts within the fossil energy industry. As a fund that already has in place the type of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria for investment missing from Middlebury’s endowment, the debate in Norway is not over whether divestment is an appropriate tool for creating change, but rather how far that tool should be extended. While Middlebury would be well advised to lead the way by creating similar investment screens, even in the absence of concerns about endowment ethics the arguments for divestment in Norway can inform the ongoing debate on this campus.
Over the past six months, many market analysts have revised their predictions for future oil prices from around $110 per barrel to down into the $80 to $90 range. A number of factors are driving this downward trend — increased efficiency of automobiles, uncertainty over future regulations and a Chinese economy far more overleveraged than that of the United States prior to the financial crisis. All of these factors contribute to falling oil demand, which in a world of abundant oil supply means that prices must soon begin to fall.
At lower prices, many of the types of tar sands, ultra-deepwater and shale oil projects currently under development would fail to earn back their investment capital. Any regulatory action that limits carbon dioxide emissions will inevitably require some of these reserves — which have already been factored into the share value of oil companies — to remain in the ground. Expectations about reserves have a significant effect on the share price of fossil fuel companies. When Shell reduced its estimated reserves by 20 percent in January 2004, its share price plunged by 10 percent in a single week. These concerns recently led a large group of investors representing over $100 billion in assets managed by companies that include Boston Common Asset Management and Storebrand Asset Management to issue a call that Norwegian Oil Company Statoil withdraw from tar sands extraction.
World Financial Markets – and, by proxy, the Middlebury College Endowment – are being inflated by a looming Carbon bubble. If you accept that there is a scant one-in-four chance that the world will meet the IEA’s targets to limit global warming to two degrees Celsius, the expected value of the endowment’s position in fossil energy equities is already ten percent inflated. The loss of value if climate change is defeated would be forty percent, which would affect the College’s ability to pay employees, undergo capital projects and award financial aid to deserving students.
The College Administration and Trustees no doubt have faith that, as professional investment managers, Investure will be able to anticipate the shift in fossil energy share prices before they actually arrive. But that poses a significant risk to the endowment – a risk that we would do well to avoid. When financial markets adjust to reflect the changing reality of fossil fuel use, the adjustment will not be smooth or gradual. It will come suddenly and leave those too slow to act with heavy losses. For some of the market, it already has. After an energy speech by President Obama that pledged increased regulation of power plants and an end to international development aid for non-Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) coal plants, the shares of coal companies including Peabody Energy and Walter Energy took dives of 3.4 and 10.4 percent respectively, adding to a year in which Peabody Energy has lost half its value and Walter Energy has lost three quarters. The Stowe Global Coal index, which lists coal-producing companies, fell the same day to its lowest level since the 2009 financial crisis. Utilities across Europe have similarly plunged unexpectedly in response to competition from renewable energy.
To be bullish on the future of the fossil fuel industry is the rough equivalent of a bullish outlook on the nuclear industry sometime after the alarm bells went off at Three Mile Island or after the wave headed for Fukushima. It is comparable to a bet on CFC-producing companies sometime between the discovery of the massive hole in the Ozone layer and the ratification of the Montreal protocol, or a bet on fax machines after the invention of the Internet. Coal and oil powered the 19th and 20th centuries. Their glory days are past. To bet on their future is to bet either against the future of humanity or against the overwhelming judgment of science.
(11/13/13 6:54pm)
“I love Middlebury College because it is in Vermont: everything seems to work here, I feel like I’m far away from those sad things that we see in the news!” That was one of the first things I heard from a Middlebury student, back when I was applying to the College. Indeed, on a campus that abounds with rich food and intense academic opportunities, it is easy to generalize our reality and think our surroundings are the same way.
But I want to tell another story, one that could be compatible with “the sad things we see in the news” the student referred to — except it is happening only a few miles away from our end-of-history campus. This is the story of the Mexican migrant workers in Vermont.
Back in 1994, Mexico, Canada and the U.S. implemented a trade liberalization agreement named the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Mexico approved this treaty under the promises of expanded and globalized trade that would bring more foreign direct investment, and a greater number of high paying jobs, which would increase the standard of living in the country as a whole. After almost 20 years, we see that the reality is the opposite: while the standard of living grew within historical Mexican oligarchies, the country in total suffered from severe levels of unemployment and underemployment while millions of jobs were lost and many farmers went bankrupt as heavily subsidized American products flooded Mexican markets.
A 2008 report by Agence Global stated that every hour Mexico imported $1.5 million worth of food; in that same hour, 30 farmers migrated to the U.S. This phenomenon brought many of those farmers to the United States, some to places like Vermont.
Those who managed to get here, after a risky and dangerous border crossing, integrate into Vermont’s dairy farms’ workforce. Most of these workers are undocumented and typically work 60-80 hours per week enduring extreme isolation in Vermont’s rural areas. This situation leaves the migrant community in a vulnerable position in one of the whitest and most rural states in the U.S. Workers have reported being subject to racial profiling, highly precarious living and labor environments, and are overly dependent on employers to meet their basic needs.
Some of the Migrant Workers also report facing poor living and working conditions. They mention living in improvised, insect-infested shelters that once were barns. Others mention living in trailers overcrowded with other workers. And while most of them have developed solid working relationships with their employers, some workers report having gone months without getting paid for their labor.
Could the farmers not simply give better conditions to the workers? Ironically, some of the nasty effects of globalization have also hit Vermont’s dairy farmers.
“Globalized competition has led to unstable and oddly low prices. We have seen times when the price paid to a farmer for a gallon of the milk produced was $2 lower than the actual price of production,” said Clark Hinsdale III, President of the Vermont Farm Bureau.
Indeed, with fierce, and often times unfair, competition from businesses as far away as New Zealand, many local dairy farmers have been struggling to provide for their own families. Thus, it often becomes complicated to also provide good living conditions for their employees.
And here is where I believe the student with whom I spoke before coming to Middlebury was awfully wrong. In this globalized world, there is no way poverty, poor living conditions and other issues can be limited to the places “we see in the news.” These issues happen here, now, and they deserve our attention.
I believe this issue deserves Middlebury College students’ attention. How many times do we seek places abroad to work on high-impact community projects, while there are big issues just around the corner?
Fortunately, several people in Vermont (including Middlebury students) are starting to take notice of the 1,500 Migrant Farm Workers in the state and are getting involved in their communities. Through grassroots advocacy and the effort of many workers and volunteers, the state government just approved a law that allows the migrant population to get drivers licenses without providing full documentation that could be implemented as soon as next year. This is a big victory — one that may help remedy some of the problems these people face in accessing other regions.
However, there is a lot more that we can do. The Middlebury student-run organization JUNTOS approaches this issue on many different levels: under policy and advocacy, it seeks to influence Vermont policymaking towards harmonizing and stimulating fair relationships between the Migrant Workers community, employers and the state community as a whole.
JUNTOS also has the compañeros program, in which the students reach out to local migrant workers and start friendships with them, learning from them and helping whenever possible. This way the members involved learn how to better help the community. “Who better understands what they need than they themselves?” questions Guadalupe Daniela.
Want to get involved? Get in touch!
email: juntos@middlebury.edu
phone: (832) 889-5798
MARCOS BARROZO FILHO ’17 is from Uberlandia, Brazil
(11/06/13 10:28pm)
McCallum Foote ’14 threw five touchdown passes and just four incompletions in the final home game of his decorated career, leading Middlebury to a 40-13 blowout victory over Hamilton on senior day and improving the Panthers’ record to 6-1 on the season. Tight end Billy Sadik-Kahn ’14 caught three touchdown passes, improving his NESCAC-leading touchdown receptions mark to nine, and emergent running back Ryan Hislop ’15 scored the first two touchdowns of his career.
After stalling on fourth-and-one at the Hamilton 30-yard line on its first drive, the Middlebury offense elevated to previously unreached heights, finding the end zone on each of its next six possessions.
“There are times, particularly with a passing offense when everybody feels in sync and things are a little slower and the windows are a bit bigger and I think that’s the way the offense felt,” said head coach Bob Ritter. “And certainly defensively we played really well and forced some early three-and-outs.”
First-year wide receiver Grant Luna ’17 catalyzed the outburst, hauling in three of his seven catches on the first touchdown drive. On the first play of the drive from the Middlebury 30-yard line, Foote sailed a sideline throw that Luna brought down with a leaping, one-handed catch. Then, two plays later, on third-and-10, Luna made a streaking catch over the middle for 16 yards and a first down. The Panthers slot receiver ran a similar route out of the slot on the next play, this time picking up 18 yards to the Hamilton 21-yard line.
“He has done a tremendous job for us,” Ritter said. “For a first-year, his knowledge off our offense and how to run routes is really impressive. And he runs with a lot of precision, he catches everything and he has no fear. And that has made him one of Mac’s favorite targets.”
A Foote-to-Sadik-Khan connection for 16 yards put the ball at the five-yard line, where, on first-and-goal, Foote hit his running back Hislop in the flat for a pylon-reaching score, the first of Hislop’s career.
“We knew they were going to blitz when we were in the red zone and we called a certain protection where I don’t have any responsibilities to protect the quarterback — I just get out into a route,” Hislop said. “I got out into the right flat as soon as I could and before I knew it Mac threw me the ball and I dove to try to get into the end zone.”
After waiting nearly three seasons for his first career score, Hislop found pay dirt for a second time fewer than 70 seconds later, this time on the ground. The second touchdown was set up by a pair of ball-hawking plays, first by the Middlebury kick-coverage unit, followed by a defensive takeaway. On the kickoff subsequent to Middlebury’s first touchdown, gunner David Elkhatibb ’15 stripped Hamilton return man, Joe Jensen, of the football, which the Continentals recovered at their own one-yard line. Running back James Stanell carried the ball to the four-yard line on first down, but on the next play Continentals’ quarterback Chase Rosenberg, facing pressure from an edge blitz, fluttered a ball over the middle, which first-year linebacker Addison Pierce ’17 intercepted and returned to the one-yard line.
On the sideline, Hislop realized that he might have a chance to score a second touchdown in quick succession.
“The ball was on the half-yard line and I thought, ‘it could be a run play, I have to get dialed in’” Hislop said.
On the first play from scrimmage, Hislop took a handoff from Foote, bounced the ball to the outside away from a penetrating defensive lineman and twisted his way into the end zone.
Hamilton found some continuity on its next drive, injecting heavy doses of the run, to great effect. Stannell and Rosenberg combined to run the ball six times for 29 yards on the drive’s first seven plays. Then, on second-and-seven from the Middlebury 30-yard line, a Rosenberg 11-yard scramble was negated by a holding penalty. On the following play, outside linebacker Jake Clapp ’16 blitzed over the left tackle, sacking Rosenberg and ultimately forcing a Continentals’ punt.
The Middlebury offense drove 80 yards in less than two minutes, as Foote completed five of six passes, including a high-arcing spiral over the top of the Hamilton defense, hitting Brendan Rankowitz ’16 in stride for a 42-yard gain. Three plays later, Foote found Sadik-Khan running a post route for a 13-yard touchdown, giving the Panthers a 20-0 lead less than three minutes into the second quarter.
The defense forced three-and-outs on each of the next two Hamilton possessions, which the offense turned into two more touchdowns and a 34-0 lead. Foote marched the offense 52 yards in 2:06, connecting with Minno for a 29-yard touchdown down the sideline. On the following possession Matt Rea ’14 entered the game, carrying the ball and lowering his shoulder for added emphasis. Again, Foote capped off the drive, making a pair of precision throws over the middle, first threading the needle to a sliding Luna before high-pointing Sadik-Kahn on a seam route for a 25-yard scoring strike.
“Coming into the game I told Billy it should be a pretty good day for him,” Foote said. “Their safeties play pretty deep and pretty wide and I knew we were able to hit a couple of seam balls against them last year with Billy Chapman.”
Trailing 34-0, the Continentals softened the scoreboard with a touchdown drive of their own to end the half. Jensen, somewhat atoning for his earlier fumble, took the kickoff following Foote’s fourth touchdown pass 44 yards up the sideline where he was forced out of bounds by kicker Mike Dola ’15 at the Middlebury 48-yard line. 11 plays later, Rosenberg punctuated the drive with a six-yard quarterback-keeper off right tackle.
The Panthers opened the second half with their sixth and final touchdown drive of the game. Foote and Sadik-Khan continued to exploit Hamilton’s two-high safety scheme, as the senior tight end hauled in three more receptions for 53 yards, including a 22-yard touchdown on the same route concept the pair dialed up on the second touchdown. Alertly, Hamilton’s backside safety read the play and covered enough ground to make a play on the ball, resulting in a simultaneous catch that was awarded to Sadik-Khan for the touchdown.
“That route is an option route, so if the safety is over the top, I’m supposed to cut it off,” Sadik-Khan said. “I saw him in the corner of my eye and I thought we had enough room, but as the ball was in the air, I saw he was gaining ground pretty fast. You’re going to get hit either way so you go up and catch the ball, but he definitely had a good piece of the ball. My hand was over the tip of the ball, but his hands were around the side of it … but I had it.”
Stannell ran for 53 yards on the ensuing Continetals’ drive, culminating in a four-yard score and narrowing the Middlebury lead to 27. With 6:46 remaining in the third quarter, however, Ritter elected to pull Foote, who completed 25 of 29 passes for 33s yards and five touchdowns, followed by most of the first-team offense, shortly thereafter.
Neither team scored from that point, as the Middlebury offense was largely ineffective after Foote and the first-team unit exited the game. Middle linebacker Tim Patricia ’15 registered his second career interception in the fourth quarter, stepping in front of an underneath route over the middle and boxing out the intended receiver.
“I had been caught staring at the quarterback’s eyes earlier in the game; I kind of floated and guys got underneath me a couple of times,” Patricia said. “The difference on that one was that I made sure to take my drop right off the quarterback’s eyes and then focus also on where the receiver was in relation to me. So check the quarterback, check the receiver and I got underneath it and made a play.”
Patricia added 12 tackles to lead the defense, including a sack of Rosenberg. Safety Matt Benedict ’15 added 11 tackles, giving him 30 in the past two games and Jake Clapp sacked Rosenberg to increase his total to 4.5 on the season —good for fourth in the NESCAC.
Middlebury travels to Tufts (0-7) on Saturday for the final game of the season. A Middlebury victory and a Wesleyan loss would guarantee the Panthers a share of the NESCAC title. The Cardinals (7-0) play at Trinity (5-2) where the Bantams have won 50 straight regular season games.
[CORRECTION: The photograph above went uncredited in the print edition of this story; it should be credited to Paul Gerard.]
(10/30/13 10:54pm)
At the age of 20, most people are still thinking about what they want to do when they “grow up.” This is not the case with up-and-coming musician Chancelor Bennett, who is by no definition ‘most people.’ Better known by his stage name Chance the Rapper, the Chicago born hip-hop artist is riding his growing momentum on The Social Experiment Tour, which stops at the College on Nov. 2.
But the concert created as much controversy as excitement, centering around an initial lack of tickets and an ongoing uproar over perceived misogyny and homophobia in his lyrics. In response, the administration asked Chance not to sing the controversial lyric “slap-happy faggot slapper” of "Favorite Song" or use any homophobic terms during his entire performance. According to Dean of the College Shirley Collado, Chance agreed to these terms.
Releasing his first mixtape, 10 Day, after a ten day suspension during his senior year of high school, Chance soon garnered 80,000 downloads and the attention of Forbes magazine, which featured 10 Day in their ‘Cheap Tunes’ column. This growing recognition landed Chance a spot opening for fellow rapper Childish Gambino on tour, and spurred further collaborations with rappers Hoodie Allen and Joey Bada$$. Acid Rap, Chance’s second mixtape released in April of this year, has already achieved 250,000 downloads and catapulted the rapper into wider national recognition. Featuring other artists such as Twista, Vic Mensa and Action Bronson, Acid Rap received critical acclaim and a BET Hip Hop Award nomination for best mixtape, landing him a spot on the famous Lollapalooza festival.
Will Brennan ’16 grew up in Chicago and attended school just a few train stops away from Chance’s school, Jones College Prep, learning of the rapper’s huge ambitions through mutual musical friends.
“He and other rappers on the Save Money label like Vic Mensa were making singles and dropping mixtapes left and right,” Brennan said. “But when I left Chicago I had no idea that Chance would make it as big as he has in recent months.”
The Middlebury College Activities Board, or MCAB, chose the fall concert because of demonstrated student interest in more rap and hip-hop and Chance’s up-and-coming potential, according to MCAB President Elizabeth Fouhey. Chance’s music was relatively well known on campus before his appearance was announced, discovered through the internet or on WRMC. Will Brennan started playing Chance on his own WRMC show because of the home connection, but became a much bigger fan after the release of Acid Rap.
“His jazz harmonies and electronic beats made a really interesting combination that I had never heard before,” Brennan said. “I didn't know what to think of his squawkish noises at first, but I realized it was a part of his playful nature as a musician. I think Chance makes music that is ultimately true to himself and more importantly true to the environment in which he surrounds himself in Chicago.”
Brennan was not the only student impressed by Chance’s distinctive sound. Adam Benay ’13.5 is a huge fan of Chance, listening to Acid Rap every day this past summer.
“I was getting so into him,” Benay said. “I heard a rumor the first or second day of school that he would be coming, and I was thrilled. Kid Cudi came my first semester and this was a nice capstone.”
When MCAB announced Chance the Rapper as the fall concert, needless to say, many people on campus were extremely excited. In an all-student email on Sep. 23, MCAB revealed the Nov. 2 concert date, announcing “Tickets on sale soon,” and directing people to look to Twitter and Facebook for more information. MCAB decided to advertise the event solely through their Facebook page and on the Middlebury Box office website, leaving many students without tickets. Late in the day on Oct. 14, the campus buzzed with news that the tickets to the concert had sold out, leaving many scrambling and willing to pay well above the $12 ticket charge to obtain a highly sought after ticket.
Fouhey explained that the organization decided how to advertise the event at MCAB executive board meetings, brainstorming for electronic advertising alternatives to the all-student email, which has in recent years experienced a push for limited use.
“MCAB made an online status which was shared by dozens of students on MCAB in the hopes that it would reach all corners of campus,” Fouhey said. “We thought that with the excitement on campus and word of mouth, the ticket release information would spread throughout the student body. Our standard procedure is to release the tickets and then do an advertising push once they have been put on sale.”
Benay, who had not ‘liked’ MCAB on Facebook, was one of the students shocked to discover that he had missed his opportunity to purchase a ticket.
“There was a huge portion of people who fell through the cracks,” Benay said. “I found person after person who said ‘What are you talking about? When did the tickets go on sale?’”
Due to uncertainties regarding the Memorial Field House construction, MCAB booked the concert in the McCullough Social Space, which only allowed for 600 tickets to be sold. In addition, the event was limited to students only and each ID holder could only purchase two tickets.
Many students may not be aware of the multi-step process involved in bringing an artist to Middlebury, including the important role of a middle agent to assist in communicating with MCAB which artists fit the desired genre, dates and price range. According to Associate Dean of Students JJ Boggs, bringing a desirable artist to rural Vermont for the right price is no easy task, and the MCAB committee decides which of the suggested acts fits the College.
“[MCAB has] a challenging job, and they have been criticized in the past for hosting unpopular shows,” Boggs said. “They are simultaneously trying to meet student interest, manage their budget responsibly, offer a variety of programming, and at the same time, consider ‘what might the social ramifications be for Middlebury College?’”
The problem with MCAB’s marketing strategy, according to many students, is that not every student is on Facebook, and even those who are may not check their accounts on a regular basis. At the time of the sale, MCAB had a little over 1,100 followers in a student body of 2,500, many of which were alumni. The organization had previously used posters and emails to advertise concerts and many criticized the decision to publicize through social media accounts that students had to join and actively use to be notified.
Fouhey acknowledged that the ticket release issue is a learning experience for MCAB and that the organization never meant to cause the dissatisfaction resulting from the social media marketing idea.
“We understand the frustrations of students about ticket sales,” she said. “It was never our intention to limit or restrict who would know about the ticket release information. We fully acknowledge that we could have done a better job navigating this ticket release. We will certainly learn from this mistake, and in the future we will look to broader methods of communication.”
Boggs reacted to an impassioned letter from Benay, first published on middbeat, and other general student concerns over the way the ticket sales were handled, quickly taking action. On Friday, Oct. 25, Boggs sent out an all-student email announcing that the College was able to secure Nelson Arena, and that more tickets would be made available for purchase soon due to the larger venue. The move to Nelson was motivated by safety concerns, as administrators realized that McCullough did not have the capacity for the crowd or the extensive set and entourage that travels with Chance.
“The real hero of this story is JJ Boggs,” said Benay, pleased with this outcome. “People are reasonable here and it’s very reassuring to know that things can get done.”
Lyric Controversy
In the email, Boggs also referenced student concerns expressed over the perceived misogynistic and homophobic language in Chance the Rapper’s lyrics. But for students like Luke Carroll Brown ’14, Co-Chair of the Community Council, limiting the lyrics and song choice was not enough.
“I think we can all agree that violent homophobia and misogyny are clearly out of bounds and have no place on this campus,” Brown said. “Multiple songs on Acid Rap depict actions that are in clear violation of our community standards, a reality that should prohibit Chance's presence on campus. This performance is especially upsetting in light of the recent hate-letter that managed to combine homophobia with the threat of rape against a student at this college; at a time in which our community should be finding ways of making maligned groups feel safer, we instead chose to hire an unabashedly homophobic singer to perform a concert.”
“The Concert Committee co-chairs and I were completely unaware of the content in question when we booked Chance,” Fouhey said. “The concerns over some of the lyrics were brought to our attention last Monday, Oct. 22. I do sincerely apologize. We never intended to hurt anyone.”
Besides Brown, the controversy has sparked a debate from a variety of other opinions about discussing homophobia on campus and applying community standards to artists visiting the College.
SGA President Rachel Liddell ‘15 said that Chance’s content is disrespectful and offensive to many students on campus, but worries that talk about completely canceling the concert would have crossed a line from concern to censorship.
“I find the content offensive, yet I respect the right of others to tell me things with which I don't agree,” Liddell said. “I don’t want people to be censored. I think that saying ‘bringing Chance to campus condones homophobia’ is an overstatement.”
Liddell further explained that if the concert had been canceled, Middlebury still would have been obligated to pay Chance for a show that never happened. She also believes that the debate resulting from the controversy is a positive outcome, asserting that, “the concert will spark the conversations people wanted to have.”
Boggs added that a complicated conversation took place when considering what to do about the concert.
“Right now we don’t have criteria for evaluating these kinds of decisions. Our struggle was to figure out how to be compassionate and effective allies amid all the complexity in a short period of time. We have a lot to learn from this situation, and we need to figure this out together,” Boggs said.
Collado personally spoke with Chance’s management, requesting that the artist leave homophobic lyrics out of his performance.
“[Chance] is aware of our concerns and our plans for an engaging and honest community forum,” wrote Collado in an email. “[Chance’s manager] said he understood and respected our request and that he was looking forward to being on campus and performing for us.”
Cailey Cron ’14 appreciated the censorship of the lyric, but feels that the controversy should be channeled to discuss a larger campus issue.
“If a lyric is missing, it’s not going to matter unless we seize the opportunity to have a conversation about homophobia on this campus,” Cron said. “Chance will come on Saturday and then on Sunday he will leave. This is not about Chance the Rapper. What we need to fight is blissful ignorance. Chances to address homophobia have come up twice in the past few weeks, and as a campus we need to talk. I’d like to see the administration take a strong, public stand against homophobia. I’m at a loss as to why that’s controversial.”
Benay disagrees with the idea of canceling the concert.
“Of all rappers, Chance’s stuff is way more about drugs and how hopeful he is about his future, and he has lyrics about anti-violence.”
While Benay disagrees with Chance’s use of the word ‘faggot’, he thinks that the compromise between Chance and Collado is reasonable.
“It sort of bums me out that he uses that word, but the idea that he would not come just because of that is sad especially because MCAB hit it out of the park in terms of choosing an act this time.”
To address this issue, Boggs announced that at 7 p.m. on Monday, November 4 in Axinn 229, Student Activities and MCAB will be hosting an open forum to discuss how decisions are made about all kinds of possibly offensive art forms at the College. The forum aims to allow candid conversation about the application of community standards to artistic expression and how they should affect choices about who is invited to campus. MCAB also hopes that this conversation will help to better inform the student group’s decision making in the future.
Forum
Cron does not think that the controversy should revolve around two groups of students pulled to join one extreme opinion or the other. “We’ve created a false choice between having performers violate community standards and censoring all dissenting opinion,” Cron said. “I hope we can use the concept as an entry point to a far more important conversation that has to do with us as a community and the relationship between the student body and administration. It is a hard conversation to approach if the administration hasn’t publicly stated its commitment to protecting and welcoming the queer community and concerns.”
Boggs has high expectations regarding the potential impact of the forum.
“I hope that while we wrestle with these issues, we can commit to listening carefully, act in ways that foster inclusivity, and bridge the divide that’s happening right now,” she said. “Knowing that this is just an initial conversation, I’m hopeful we can both show support for students who feel marginalized and influence MCAB’s work in positive ways.”
[CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article, as well as that in print, stated that "the administration asked Chance not to sing Favorite Song." This was incorrect; they asked Chance not to sing the lyric “slap-happy faggot slapper” or use any homophobic terms during his entire performance. ]
(10/17/13 4:05am)
1. Eating Beef is horrific for the environment.
Eating beef results in an enormous amount of carbon emissions, to the tune of around 2.7 kilograms of carbon dioxide per 100 gram serving (or around 214 calories of 90 percent lean beef). In fact, a drive from Middlebury to New York City actually releases less CO2 than getting a burger along the way.
2. Lamb is actually worse, in-terms of CO2 emissions, than beef.
Producing lamb is estimated to release 34.2 percent more CO2 than beef for the same serving size. One of the main reasons is that the portion of edible flesh on lambs (42 percent by weight) is far lower than in cows (55 percent by weight), although the relative economic value of the meat from a single lamb is higher than beef, meaning there is an incentive for farmers to keep raising lamb. For any amount of protein harvested from lamb, the carbon emissions released will be more than eight times larger than the same amount of chicken would produce.
3. Pork is, relatively, more environmentally friendly than you might think.
In part because so much of each pig is edible (65 percent), CO2 emissions of pork production per weight of meat output are roughly four times less the same amount of beef, and only about two times more than chicken.
4. Locally raised meat, especially beef, does not drastically change environmental impact compared to non-local meat.
According to the Environmental Working Groups, 90 percent of carbon emissions related to beef comefrom the production and disposal — or waste — of beef, which does not include its transportation, storage, or preservation. Locally raised beef may be good for Vermonters, but it is only slightly better for the climate.
5. Cheese is drastically worse for the environment than you thought, but yogurt and milk are fine.
For every kilogram of cheese produced about 9.82 kilograms of CO2 are released, which is only 36 percent less than beef’s emissions by weight. That is more than twice as bad for the environment as bacon (although that is if you are eating 100 grams of cheese, which is unlikely). Yogurt and milk, in contrast, have emissions comparable to broccoli, tomatoes and other crops. The primary reason behind this discrepancy is that it takes 10 pounds of milk to make 1 pound of cheese.
6. Only looking at the weight of wasted food in the dining halls tells us very little.
The difference in the climate implications of an entirely wasted salad is less than the last bite of a hamburger. It is, however, useful to know the total weight if we can estimate the proportion of each type of ingredient that it is made up of (how much of the waste is London broil versus “bean greens”). A better way of doing this is simply measuring how much of what kind of ingredients are used by our dining halls. That said, it is an extremely noble cause: 15 percent of total beef emissions are a result of “avoidable waste”, compared to only around 1 percent for domestic transport and refrigeration.
7. Our binary conception of “vegetarianism” is irrational.
Vegetarianism and Veganism are generally conceived as absolute categories: you are or you are not. This is misguided and not just because vegetarian burritos at Chipotle come with free guacamole. It is very hard to give up meat, but replacing half the meat on your plate with a plant-based protein every day is far more impactful than adopting “meatless Mondays.” If you cannot be a vegetarian because you cannot give up bacon, then just give up everything else. Or just give up beef and lamb and order instead, when possible, vegetarian, chicken or seafood options.
8. There are decreasing returns for replacing proteins.
Although there is about a 20-kilogram difference in CO2 between beef emissions and chicken emissions per kilogram of meat produced, the difference between chicken emissions and tofu (which is similar to other plant based-foods) is only about 4.9 kilograms of CO2 emissions. This means that, although there are strong moral arguments for why eating tofu is preferable to killing chickens, environmentally speaking, you are getting around 80 percent of the benefit by switching from beef to chicken as compared to beef to tofu.
Feel free to reach out with questions regarding methodology, sources, or logic. Almost all of the CO2 emissions estimates for this piece come from the Environmental Working Group’s “Meat Eaters Guide (2011),” which is publicly available for free.
(10/17/13 1:18am)
Patrick McConathy is an entrepreneur of diverse interests and accomplishments. From Colorado, he joined the Middlebury College Board of Trustees in 2005. McConathy brings to the table a Western-U.S. perspective, enthusiasm for the institution, decades of experience and networks in the energy industry and a commitment to sustainability.
“I’m a kind of redneck affirmative action … I love this school … It doesn’t matter whether they’re twenty-five or seventy-five, alumni have done so many things with their lives, with the education they’ve gotten at Middlebury,” McConathy said.
McConathy bridges the distance between Denver and Middlebury and keeps up with developments regarding the College by reading The Middlebury Campus. He takes advantage of board meetings and graduation ceremonies to improve his touch with the Middlebury community.
“I come early to get out and about … and enjoy being around students – all students within reach … The student has to feel comfortable to talk to you around,” McConathy said.
By connecting with students, McConathy has come to believe that social life is their most pressing concern on campus.
“When I was on campus the first thing they bring up is social life. It’s been a significant issue since 2000,” McConathy said.
He recognizes the complexity created by different students’ conflicting views about the prevalence and restriction of alcohol consumption at Middlebury.
“[Some] think [there is] too much drinking,” McConathy said. “Some think there’s not enough access to alcohol … the issues revolve around social seams. I’ve heard so much conversation about it and I don’t have a solution. Ron and his staff has [have] worked a lot [on it but] it’s an issue that won’t go away.
McConathy notes that the greatest problem confronting the College administration is providing quality education at a reasonable cost. He suggests that Middlebury should follow the example of other institutions that make higher education more accessible by making tuition more affordable.
When asked to identify the most exciting strides the College is making into the future, McConathy expresses his hope that the College will increase social and economic diversity on campus.
“The college is doing a good job of that, but we can always do more. Ron’s been very committed to that,” McConathy said.
An environmentalist at heart, however, McConathy singled out Middlebury’s progress toward sustainability.
“I know it’s not as good as others want it to be,” he said, “but we are cutting edge on the front.”
After graduating from Louisiana State University in 1975 with a degree in political science, instead of going to law school, McConathy entered the oil industry through the recommendation of a relative. He explains that he was motivated by an appreciation for the business and the opportunity to make a profit.
“It’s a fascinating business,” McConathy said. “If you guess right about where energy is, you can make some money. But you can also lose. It’s a rollercoaster ride.”
McConathy made both a profit and a reputation for himself in the thirty-one years he worked in oil. He started off drilling wells in Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Wyoming. In 1989, McConathy established Phoenix Oil and Gas and purchased productive oil and gas holdings in these regions. By 2005, the company and its partners had acquired and operated on a significant portion on and offshore properties in California.
In 2006, however, McConathy relinquished his investments in the oil sector and shifted his attention to natural gas, sustainable energy, and environmentally-friendly ranching. Last year, he founded Yarmony Energy, which operates natural gas, alternative energy, and mineral properties in Colorado, Louisiana and Texas. Specific projects he has supported include a year-long solar venture, a wind-powered cattle ranch, and geothermal energy for a big multinational corporation.
“My perspective on the earth has changed since the late 80s,” McConathy said.
The transformation in his entrepreneurial focus embodies personal environmental sympathies that began to develop over two decades ago, when he served on a Louisiana commission that made him aware of the environmental consequences of the energy business in the state.
McConathy cites multiple reasons for his switch to cleaner investments.
“My older son, who came out of Middlebury as a fire-breathing dragon, wanted me to divest, and I wanted to move toward natural gas,” McConathy said. “I had a lot of access to climate research; that had some impact as well. I also thought it was a good thing to do economically. I’d been thinking about it for a while and thought it was the right thing to do.”
According to McConathy, divestment at Middlebury is a far trickier objective that can only be attained over a period of time.
“The human race is destroying the planet,” McConathy said. “It’s not all about money. But it’s very complicated by the fact that the board has a lot of responsibilities in other areas. It won’t take place overnight, but the board is aware of it and it’s a possibility.”
Despite the inertia regarding divestment, McConathy points out we are head and shoulders above other people in the way we address climate change and energy.
“We should be proud of that,” he said.
McConathy has suffered some losses in his new area of investment. He notes that alternative energy will not become viable on a large scale until it produces economic returns higher than conventional sources.
“Alternative energy needs to be able to compete economically for it to get good traction,” McConathy said.
McConathy has not put as much money behind green energy as he did behind oil, but hopes to do so in the future.
“I don’t have the funds I used to five years ago,” he said. “I would if I had the money. I’m no fan of the major oil companies. I can see it happening in the next fifteen years.”
The Yarmony enterprise also includes Yarmony Creek Sport Horses, which runs local cattle ranching, horse breeding, and hay operations in Colorado. McConathy mitigates the environmental impact of his ranches by following the advice of credible ranching consultants and implementing sustainable practices such as cell grazing.
“Every rancher should be an environmentalist,” McConathy said. “It’s in his best interest to take care of the land because that’s all he’s got … it’s in the best interest of livestock, land, and everyone around you.”
McConathy even addressed the human dimensions of environmental problems as the producer of Climate Refugees, which was the only film screened at the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference, and was shown on campus in 2010.
“You can’t see what’s happening to people and not be concerned,” he said.
