54 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(04/14/16 2:54pm)
On Tuesday, March 22, Community Council began its meeting with a presentation by Tim Spears, vice president for academic development and professor of American studies. Spears came to propose a potential pilot project to revise the College’spet policy, specifically in regard to dogs.
Under the College’s current bylaws,faculty and staff are not allowed to keepdogs on campus. However, responding to community input, the administration has recently discussed allowing faculty andstaff to bring their dogs to campus duringbusiness hours, provided that they register the dogs and receive permission from their supervisors.
“There are any number of positive reasons to be around dogs,” Spears said. “In bringing a dog to campus, we, in a funny way, humanize people ... If I bring my dog to campus, and you see me with my dog, you come to understand me as a facultymember or administrator in a different sortof way.”
Several council members expressedconcern that College custodial staff wouldbe left with increased cleanup duties. Spears acknowledged the legitimacy of these concerns, but cited similar programs at institutions such as Amherst College, where faculty members are required to be completely responsible for their own pets.
The Council did not take a vote, as the intent behind Spears’s visit was simply to gauge the Council’s feelings on the matter.
Later in the meeting, the Council completed its discussion from the previous week on its list of possible solutions to student stress. The document was compiled by Emma Bliska ’18, and would be sent by the Council to the working group on stress established by President of the College Laurie L. Patton. After several amendments, including changing the proposal from an “endorsement” to a “formal recommendation,” the Council voted unanimously to approve the document.
During the next meeting on Tuesday, April 5, the Council welcomed Roberto Lint-Sagarena, associate professor of American studies and director of the Anderson Freeman Resource Center, who gave an update on the work of the Alliance for an Inclusive Middlebury.
Lint-Sagarena primarily discussed the Alliance’s upcoming website, which will include “a picture of who’s at Middlebury and how long they’re at Middlebury.” This information, Lint-Sagarena shared, is “themost difficult” aspect of the website.
Lint-Sagarena presented data to the Council showing the College’s retention rates for black students, overall students of color and all students. According to the data, six-year graduation rates for black students have generally increased over the past several years, rising from 69 percent during the 2005 cohort to 100 percent in 2009.
Other students of color maintained a relatively steady six-year graduation rate,finishing most recently at 94 percent.The rate for all students, meanwhile, was generally slightly higher, although the2009 figure of 94 percent was identical tothat of students of color.
“This data has been mysterious for a very long time,” said Lint-Sagarena. “Sowe’re hoping to have this be the first step intransparency, so we can see where we are, where we’ve been, where we might be going and address any issues that might have negative consequences.”
Afterwards, Associate Dean of Students for Residential and Student Life Doug Adams gave a presentation on the biennial review of academic and special interest houses conducted by Residential Life.
According to Adams, the committeeapproved 14 of the 17 houses this year withno stipulations. The remaining houses were given various stipulations regardinginsufficient membership or possiblechanges to the house mission.
(03/16/16 8:39pm)
Community Council met on Tuesday, March 8, and began with a brief presentation by Associate Dean for Judicial Affairs and Student Life Karen Guttentag, and Associate Dean for Judicial Affairs and Student Life AJ Place. Each year, as mandated by the College Handbook, two Community Council members serve on the committee to select the student members of the next year’s Judicial Boards.
“It’s a really interesting way to get a perspective on the community and what people’s concerns are,” Guttentag said. “Participating in this is a really exciting and enlightening lens into how the community is working and into how different members of the community experience it.”
Next, the Council welcomed Alden Cowap ’17 and Matt Witkin ’16.5, who serve as President and Vice President of the Chromatic social house. Cowap and Witkin visited the Council to propose an amendment to the Social House Fall Term Housing Policy Regulations.
The current regulations allow no more than two sophomores to live in Tavern or Chromatic houses, and no more than one sophomore to live in the Mill or Xenia; Cowap and Witkin proposed increasing these maximums to six and two, respectively.
“Social houses provide a very deliberate and diverse community experience,” Cowap said. Cowap also cited the ability of social houses to facilitate campus leadership. “By allowing sophomores to live in the house, it makes them more engaged and active members, which will lead to better leadership, and to them wanting to take on leadership positions at a younger age so we don’t just have juniors and seniors.”
In the end, the Council was convinced, and voted to approve Cowap and Witkin’s recommendation by a vote of 13 to 1, with 2 abstaining.
On Tuesday, March 15, Council members spent most of the meeting brainstorming potential projects to focus on for the remainder of the semester. Among numerous other ideas, Emma Bliska ’18 suggested instituting “protected breaks,” meaning that assignments could not be due immediately after a school vacation.
Ilana Gratch ’16 proposed allowing faculty and staff to eat at dining halls at all times. (Currently, faculty are only allowed to eat once per week with a student, and no such program exists for staff).
Vignesh Ramachandran ’18 suggested a reform of the counseling services at Parton Health Center; specifically, Ramachandran cited numerous students of color who feel that they have received inadequate counseling by the mostly-white staff. “A lot of my friends who can afford it go to counselors in town, who they rate better,” he added.
Finally, the Council reviewed a list compiled by Bliska detailing possible solutions to student stress; a continuation of the Council’s concentration on the subject during the Fall semester. The list had been compiled from suggestions made by various Council members, though each idea had not necessarily been voted on individually by the entire Council. If approved, this list would have been sent directly to the working group on stress established by President of the College Laurie L. Patton.
In the end, however, Council members expressed reservations over endorsing a document whose recommendations had never been approved individually, and elected to postpone further action until next week’s meeting.
(03/09/16 4:15pm)
Middlebury Posse scholars attended the PossePlus Retreat this past weekend, March 4-6, in Silver Bay, New York. Held every year, the retreat aims to address national and on-campus issues often involving race, class, gender and power. The events are attended not only by Posse scholars, but also by College faculty, staff and fellow students invited by the Posse scholars.
The Posse Foundation is a nonprofit organization that identifies and recruits students with leadership and academic potential from public high schools in urban areas, forming these students into 10-12 person “posses” which then attend a given college or university as a group. Posse scholars are awarded four-year, full-tuition scholarships from the foundation’s partner institutions of higher education. Middlebury has been one of the foundation’s partner schools since 1998, and today works with Posse students from New York, Chicago and Los Angeles.
The theme for this year’s retreat was “Sticks + Stones: Language and Speech in a Diverse Society.” Attendees discussed the contention between the right to free speech and the right to limit offensive language, a dispute which has sprung up on campuses nationwide. Activities over the weekend ranged from larger group discussions to smaller circles about the power of language and what speech should be considered acceptable in online forums, apps like Yik Yak, social media sites and college newspapers. Students discussed the problematic use of certain types of speech on college campuses and possible solutions that ranged from trigger warnings to Administrative responses.
Posse Scholar Daniel Amar Pena ’16 said this year’s event, the third he has attended, was a successful if imperfect experience.
“This was my third retreat and personally I have seen improvements compared to the first retreat I attended,” he said. “While the topic this year was very broad and not enough energy was focused on the issues occurring at Middlebury, the retreat was an overall success.”
“The retreat provided a space for each scholar, their Plus Ones and faculty/staff to engage in conversations both on the macro and micro levels...I am hopeful that going forward, the Posse Foundation and Middlebury will be able to bring the conversations that happen on these retreats back to campus and the administration,” he added.
Michael Garel-Martorana ’16 attended the event as a guest, and feels strongly about Posse’s role on campus.
“Posse plays an important role in these discussions because Posse Scholars are not afraid to speak their mind, to put things into action,” he said. “They are strong, resilient individuals. The retreats put on by the foundation tackle topics that people need to engage with and learn about.”
Pena felt that this year’s focus on speech was especially timely. “Personally, I feel that this issue is becoming relevant to every campus across the nation and conversations such as the ones facilitated by the Posse Foundation are necessary,” he said. “Both academic and personal instances of freedom of speech on campuses have garnered much attention by media outlets, campus administrators and the student body. While the standards for freedom of speech do vary between public and private institutions, I believe that freedom of speech, in certain contexts, can be damaging both emotionally and psychologically to a campus community and the victims of hate speech. I am a strong believer that the retreat was only the beginning of larger group discussions regarding this topic that need to occur on campus.”
Garel-Martorana noted that the retreat serves as a powerful educational tool. “No one can hear the stories, see the powerful support system that marginalized students provide for each other, and engage in the discussions at PPR, without recognizing that there are problems all too real for so many of us on campus, and that change is not up for debate.”
(03/03/16 4:26am)
On Thursday, Feb. 26, the Vermont Senate voted 17-12 to approve a bill legal- izing the recreational use of marijuana in Vermont. The bill, S.241, brings Vermont one step closer to be coming the fifth U.S. state to legalize marijuana. It will now proceed to the State House of Representatives, where the Judiciary Committee will begin to iron out details in the next several
weeks.
According to the bill, lawmakers “...recognize legitimate federal concerns about cannabis reform,” and seek to pass legislation establishing a pathway to legal access to cannabis in Vermont.
The bill lists numerous problems related to prohibition, including “distribution of cannabis to persons under 21 years of age,” revenue of sales going to “criminal enterprises” that are associated with increased lawlessness and violence, “drugged driving and the exacerbation of any other adverse public health consequences” and the possession or cultivation of cannabis on public or federal property.
If approved in its current form, S.241 would create a system for marijuana taxation and regulation, allowing Vermonters who are 21 and older to possess up to an ounce at a time. The bill would take effect beginning on Jan. 2, 2018.
Tax revenue would help fund law-enforcement and drug treatment programs, and permits would be issued for up to thirty marijuana stores throughout the state. Additionally, an amendment passed on Thursday, Feb. 25 allows for the expansion of cultivator licenses, which will enable more individual citizens to grow their own marijuana.
In the past several years, marijuana legalization has emerged as a key issue in state politics. In his final State of the State address in January, Governor Peter Shumlin called for legalization, and has endorsed the current legislation.
“The War on Drugs has failed when it comes to marijuana prohibition,” Shumlin said in the speech. “Under the status quo, marijuana use is widespread, Vermonters have little difficulty procuring it for personal use, and the shadows of prohibition make it nearly impossible to address key issues like prevention, keeping marijuana out of the hands of minors and dealing with those driving under the influence who are already on Vermont’s roads.”
“With over 80,000 Vermonters admitting to using marijuana on a monthly basis, it could not be more clear that the current system is broken,” Shumlin continued. “I am proud that the Senate took [the] lessons learned from states that have gone be- fore us, asked the right questions, and passed an incredibly thoughtful, common-sense plan that will bring out of the shadows an activity that one in seven Vermonters engage in on a regular basis.”
If the bill were eventually passed, Vermont would become the first state to legalize marijuana through legislative action. The previous four states – Alaska, Colorado, Oregon and Washington – have done so via ballot initiative.
Mark Williams, a Professor of Political Science at the college currently teaching ‘The political economy of drug trafficking’ Political Science course, expressed that the bill would not solve all of Vermont’s problems.
“Legalizing marijuana won’t solve the broader problems of drug abuse or addiction,” Williams wrote in an email, “and it’s unlikely to decrease the number of Vermonters who use this particular drug. However, it would address some negative externalities our current drug policies generate: overcrowded jails/prisons; a rap sheet and jail time for nonviolent marijuana offenders; a thriving black market...”
Unlike some of the previously listed states, Vermont is unique in the level of popular support for marijuana legalization. The Vermont electorate overwhelmingly supports legalization of marijuana; a recent poll from Vermont Public Radio (VPR) showed 55 percent supported legalization, versus only 32 percent opposed. 13 percent of those polled said they were unsure.
Of course, support for legalization amongst government officials is far from universal. Lieutenant Governor Phil Scott, a Republican frontrunner for Governor in the coming election, says the bill raises too many unanswered questions.
“In my opinion, this bill is as much about the money as it is about ending a failed prohibition, and this major policy shift should not be about money and commercialization,” he said in a statement.
Citing unresolved issues such as highway safety and the potential need for “multimillion dollar expansions of our current smoking cessation programs,” Scott advised that Vermont wait a few years to “review the positive and negative effects” of legalization in states that have already completed the process.
Skeptics of the bill have also cited federal law, arguing that because marijuana remains a schedule I substance on the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, legalization at the state level nullifies federal law.
When asked about whether a Republican president might reverse the decision, State Senator John Rogers (D) seemed unperturbed. He cited the Cole memo, a letter written by former Attorney General James Cole, which assures that federal agents will not conduct raids in states that allow “...possession of small amounts of marijuana and provide for the regulation of marijuana production, processing, and sale.”
“I think there’s always concern, but clearly what they have been doing for the last 40 years hasn’t worked,” Rodgers said
in an interview. “I think it’s time for the states to take the lead because the federal government isn’t going to act.”
Others have expressed doubts that the bill will be able to pass the House of Representatives, where support is tepid despite a strong Democratic majority. House Speaker Shap Smith (D) said the bill will need to move through several committees, and that pushing it through the House “will take work.”
“The bill has not come over with a ton of momentum,” Smith said, referring to the Senate’s relatively narrow vote margin. “I think that if you had seen a bill that came over with 20 votes or more, that would have been a different signal.”
Smith has remained pragmatic about legalization, and insisted that if there is not adequate support for the bill, he would not be opposed to delaying marijuana legalization.
If it is clear that we don’t have the support and we can’t get it right this year,” Smith said, “then we’re not going to push something forward that’s not ready for prime time."
Governor Shumlin, however, insisted that there is no good reason for further delaying the legalization process.
“My prediction is, what happened in the Senate may well happen in the House: logic, good information will encourage House members to do what they were elected to do, which is to make their best judgments to protect the safety, health and welfare of the people who elected them."
The bill has also caught the attention of legislators and law-enforcement officials outside Vermont. One such voice was Police Chief George Bell of Cambridge, New York. In an interview with WRGB News, he explained that he would continue to treat
the possession of marijuana as a criminal offense, unless it was prescribed in New York.
In fact, both Massachusetts and Maine will likely conduct a ballot on recreational marijuana legalization this November as well.
“I don’t think anybody in law enforcement at this point knows how they are going to deal with it if it does go in Vermont
like this,” Bell explained in the interview. Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey (D) also opposes recreational marijuana. After the legalization of marijuana in Colorado, Healey artued that an increased rate of auto accidents and fatalities is sufficient evidence to not legalize the drug. “What’s most profound to me is what this means for young people,” Healey told the South Shore paper. She went on to reference the propensity for younger users to abuse the drug in unsafe environments.
Similar legalization efforts have occurred in Rhode Island, Connecticut and New Hampshire.
In the Granite state, one bill is pending before a committee of the New Hampshire House. However, similar bills have been killed by the New Hampshire Senate.
(03/02/16 4:33pm)
On Tuesday, Feb. 16, Community Council welcomed Cheryl Mullins, Acting Associate Vice President for Human Resources. As the Council prepares in the coming weeks to tackle the issue of staff wages, Mullins gave a presentation explaining the College’s pay scale and why the College believes it pays a living wage to all of its employees.
The College’s current compensation system, Mullins explained, dates back to 2005, and was the product of an extensive process that featured input from an international consulting company, community surveys and focus groups.
“The main objectives of our system were to come up with a program that would be really nimble,” she said. “Middlebury changes a lot, jobs are combined together, new things are added on and we need to be able to react really quickly.”
Additionally, the system needed to support employees’ abilities to advance within their field, and offer competitive market salaries to attract new hires while also rewarding good performance for individuals who were already employed at Middlebury. Finally, Mullins said, “We wanted something that was clear and understandable; we didn’t want employees to feel that compensation decisions were made in a black box.”
The final product was a system that divides College staff into four bands by their level of responsibility: Administrator, Manager, Specialist or Operations. Each band then contains several levels, with the lowest of all being level one of Operations.
The “worst-case scenario” in terms of compensation, Mullins said, is a group of nine Operations employees who make less than 9 dollars an hour. However, she emphasized that the group was “for the most part, very young” and had “little previous work experience.” Therefore, she said, such employees would likely be expected to move into a higher-paying job in the near future.
Dan Adamek ’18, expressed some uneasiness with Mullins’ rationale. “Just because someone doesn’t have experience, or just because they’re out of high school, does that mean they’re not entitled to a wage that adequately compensates them and allows them to live in a way that they’re not struggling day-to-day?” he asked.
Mullins responded that according to the College’s calculations, “We feel very confident that we are providing a living wage to our employees.” Furthermore, she explained, the College provides a generous benefits package that greatly increases the true value of employee compensation.
On Tuesday, Feb. 23, the Council began by voting to indefinitely table a motion calling for President of the College Laurie L. Patton to send a campus-wide email addressing the controversial MLK Today event and comments made by former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Given Patton’s recent article in The Campus which mentioned both topics, this motion would have been largely symbolic, but by a vote of eight to six, the Council voted to end discussion and move to a new subject.
Next, the Council discussed the proposal brought forward by Michael Geisler, VP for Risk and Compliance, to install security cameras at the entrances of dorms and/or in the entrance areas of dining halls. Geisler argued that the dorm cameras would help guard against unwanted visitors, while the dining hall cameras would help reduce thefts.
Before the Council voted on the proposals, Student Co-Chair Tiff Chang ’17.5 read statements from three student organizations who oppose the installation of cameras: Queers and Allies, Women of Color and Distinguished Men of Color. Citing the risk of disproportionate targeting of minorities, all three groups stated that they feared the installation of cameras would damage Middlebury’s inclusivity efforts.
Ultimately, the Council voted against installing dorm cameras by a vote of four to seven with three abstentions, and against dining hall cameras by a vote of four to nine, with one abstention.
(02/25/16 3:15am)
Despite Senator Bernie Sanders’ 20-point margin of victory in Vermont’s neighboring state of New Hampshire, Senator Patrick Leahy reiterated last week that he will continue to support Clinton’s candidacy, and plans to cast his superdelegate vote in her favor.
Leahy and Sanders have served alongside each other in the Senate for almost a decade. Combined, the two men have over fifty years of experience in Washington.
Leahy has represented Vermont in the Senate since 1975, while Sanders was first elected to the House of Representatives in 1991, where he remained until his 2006 ascendance to the Senate. Both progressives, Sanders and Leahy have no drastic ideological disagreements. Nevertheless, Leahy represents the Democratic Party establishment in a way that Sanders, who only recently registered as a Democrat after decades as an Independent, does not. Leahy is a member of the Clinton campaign’s “Vermont Leadership Council,” a 25-person committee that includes state elites such as former Governor Howard Dean and incumbent Governor Peter Shumlin.
As a sitting Democratic Member of Congress, Leahy is automatically conferred the title of superdelegate – a delegate to the Democratic National Convention who is free to support any candidate for the party’s nomination, unlike a typical delegate who is bound by the primary results of his or her home state. And while Sanders is widely expected to win easily in Vermont’s March 1 primary election, Leahy says that he cannot go back on his pledge to support Clinton.
“One of the touchstones of our family – I learned it from my grandparents, I learned it from my parents and I’ve tried to teach my children – is you keep your word,” he said. “Long before Senator Sanders ever said he was going to run, I urged then-Secretary Clinton to run and told her I’d support her. I think anybody who knows me, anybody who knows my years as state’s attorney or my years in the Senate, knows that I’d never break my word. And certainly Senator Sanders would never ask me to break my word, nor has he.”
Middlebury College Professor of Political Science Bert Johnson says that Leahy’s consistency hardly comes as a surprise.
“It’s not all that unusual for a superdelegate to support someone other than the most popular candidate in the state,” Johnson said in an interview.
Indeed, as a forty-year incumbent who remains popular in his home state, Leahy recently scored a 71 percent approval rating among his constituents. Sanders is first among all Senators with 83 percent support.
Leahy has little to lose even by endorsing the eventual loser of his state’s primary. Clinton remains the Democratic front-runner by virtually any metric, and while Sanders’ resilience has proved surprising, he remains the undeniable underdog as Super
Tuesday looms on March 1. In other words, aside from his self-professed determination to keep his word, it also makes political sense for Leahy to align with the candidate who remains most likely to capture the nomination by August.
Yet if Clinton does come out on top, Johnson says that superdelegate votes like Leahy’s will probably not be the deciding factor after all.
“I would be very surprised if the superdelegates were decisive in this election,” Johnson said. “In 2008, when they had the potential to be decisive, they fell in line with the leader among elected delegates, Barack Obama, even after Hillary Clinton had a substantial lead in superdelegate endorsements early in the campaign.”
Indeed, however things shake out, Leahy made one thing clear: he is a Democrat above anything else.
“If Senator Sanders is the nominee, I’ll happily campaign all over the country for him,” said Leahy. “We’ve worked together, he’s a good friend of mine, our wives are friends and I’m proud of a lot of the issues he’s raised.”
(02/17/16 4:31pm)
On Tuesday, Jan. 26, members of the newly-formed Bias Response Team visited Community Council to present their group’s mission and invite feedback.
“The three core pieces of what we are thinking as we move forward are prevention, education and response,” said AJ Place, associate dean for judicial affairs and student life and member of the Bias Response Team.
The purpose of the team, members explained, was to address incidents of bias that may not have been addressed in the past, due to problems with categorization.
“One of the tricky points for us was figuring out where bias begins and ends versus discrimination and harassment,” explained Miguel Fernandez, professor of Spanish and interim chief diversity officer.
They offered the example of unintentionally offensive humor, which may not be considered harassment or discrimination, but which is capable of harming students’ well-being. The team does not have disciplinary authority, but members emphasized that the College would be able to discipline individuals while the Bias Response Team continues to act on a case.
In terms of education, the team shared that they plan to publicly summarize recent cases, potentially through a column in the Campus. Fernandez said that one of the team’s immediate goals was simply to promote awareness of the existence of the Bias Response Team, while Place hoped that over time, the team could play a role in a larger cultural shift on campus.
Next, the Council witnessed a proposal from Charles Rainey ’19 and Student Co-Chair Tiff Chang ’17.5 primarily regarding the “MLK Today” event held at Mead Chapel on Jan. 18. According to Rainey and Chang, the event featured “numerous highly offensive and post-racial actions” including “a mainly-white chorus repeating direct quotes from Dr. King” and “white students delivering quotes that police people of colors’ reactions to racism.”
In addition, they cited controversial comments made by Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia in December’s Fisher v. University of Texas case, in which he implied that black students may suffer academically at elite institutions. Rainey and Chang proposed that President of the College Laurie L. Patton send a campus-wide email within three days addressing the two incidents.
Fernandez shared a response from Patton in which she discussed the College’s progress on the thirteen action points presented at the Town Hall Meeting in December and shared her plans to write extensively on the Fisher case, but cautioned that she cannot comment publicly on every issue she deeply disagrees with, especially before discussions between the offended parties have taken place.
On Tuesday, Feb. 2, Community Council voted on a recommendation from Dining Software Intern Myles Kamisher-Koch to cease the sale of energy drinks at on-campus retail food locations. The Council debated the recommendation, and while some expressed concern over a potential intrusion into students’ freedom of choice, the majority of members strongly supported the measure.
“It wouldn’t ban their use,” explained Fiona Mohamed ’18 — instead, it is only their sale on campus that would be restricted.
The Council eventually approved the recommendation by a vote of 11 to 1. The recommendation will now go to Patton.
Afterwards, the Council intended to vote on Rainey and Chang’s recommendation from the prior week. While many on the Council voiced their support for the larger effort to affirm that students of color belong on campus, several suggested that they were uncomfortable with the recommendation’s language, which appeared to directly link the “MLK Today” event with the comments made by Justice Scalia.
Ultimately, while five members voted to proceed with a formal vote on the recommendation, six voted to table it until the Council’s next meeting in the Spring semester.
(01/27/16 5:06pm)
The College announced on Jan. 14 that Colleen Fitzpatrick, a current administrator at Duke University, will succeed Jim Keyes as Middlebury’s next Vice President for Advancement. Fitzpatrick currently serves as an Assistant Vice President for Trinity College and the Graduate School and also previously served as Assistant Dean for Arts & Sciences Development at the University of Virginia.
As Vice President for Advancement, Fitzpatrick will be responsible for fundraising and alumni relations for the College and its affiliated institutions such as the Bread Loaf School of English and the Institute of International Studies at Monterey.
In an official announcement, President of the College Laurie L. Patton said that she was excited for her former colleague’s arrival.
“I’m delighted that Colleen will join the senior administration at Middlebury,” Patton said. “Having worked closely with Colleen at Duke University, I know first-hand what a positive impact she makes and the value she places on an institution’s mission —particularly in institutions that have liberal arts at the center of their common life. As Middlebury has grown in size and complexity, and expanded the reach of our programs, the need to think globally and strategically about our relationships with alumni and friends has never been greater. I am confident that Colleen will build on the success our alumni relations and advancement teams have enjoyed in recent years.”
Fitzpatrick, too, shared her excitement.
“The opportunity to work with President Patton and the senior leadership team at Middlebury was irresistible,” she said. “Middlebury College alumni are among the most engaged and supportive in the country, as is evident from their extraordinarily high giving rates year after year. That is a legacy I will be proud to help build upon.”
At Duke, Fitzpatrick helped raise $418 million from 1996 to 2003, and an additional $425.5 million in an ongoing campaign. Her office also raised over $200 million in need-based scholarships and graduate fellowships during Duke’s 2005-2008 Financial Aid Initiative.
“Laurie Patton is fortunate to team up with Colleen again to further Middlebury’s historic accomplishments in development and alumni affairs,” said Stephen Bayer, Duke’s Associate Vice President for University Development.
Keyes announced his retirement in Sept. after five years in the position. During his time, Keyes helped spearhead the Middlebury Initiative, a seven-year fundraising campaign whose goal of $500 million was ultimately exceeded by $30 million.
In an email to advancement staff on the day of the announcement, Keyes concurred with Patton.
“I’ve spent time with Colleen and I’ve been extremely impressed with her development and alumni-relations expertise and her insights and perspective on higher education,” he said. “I look forward to working with Colleen during a transition period and I know you’ll join me in welcoming her to Middlebury and to our office.”
(01/21/16 4:29am)
On Monday, Jan. 12, Community Council held its first meeting of the 2016 Winter Term.
The Council welcomed Maddie Orcutt ’16, who discussed The Ribbon Project, an upcoming project centered around the prevention of sexual and relationship violence at the College. Orcutt told the Council that the project grew out of a grant provided to the College several years ago by the Department of Justice, which was intended to enable the College to better address issues of sexual violence.
The Ribbon Project, Orcutt said, is unlike other programs in that it hopes to tailor specific solutions to different groups on campus. “I think it works really well with things like Green Dot and other programming,” Orcutt said, “but what we’re going to try a little bit differently is to say ... how are you as a body uniquely situated to address the issues of sexual and relationship violence?”
Orcutt elaborated that over the next several weeks, The Ribbon Project will begin discussions with various campus groups, focusing on the perceived causes of sexual violence and how those groups are equipped to address it.
After considering Community Council’s potential contributions to The Ribbon Project, the Council discussed potential topics for the remainder of the academic year. In particular, the subject of living wages will be discussed more heavily in the coming weeks, as Council members agreed it was a crucial issue, but one that lacks any simple solution.
At the Council’s next meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 19, Dining Software Intern Myles Kamisher-Koch ’15 initiated a discussion on the sale of energy drinks on campus. According to Kamisher-Koch, many in Dining Services have warmed to the idea of ceasing to sell energy drinks at retail food locations such as Wilson Café, The Grille and Midd Express.
Kamisher-Koch cited “well-publicized scientific literature” documenting the harmful health effects of energy drinks such as Red Bull and 5 Hour Energy. In addition to fostering unhealthy study habits and perpetuating a campus “culture of stress,” he said, one study found that “up to 25 percent of current drinkers combine alcoholic beverages with energy drinks” – a combination known to cause severe health problems. Referencing Middlebury Dining Services’ pledge to sustain “mind, body and earth,” Kamisher-Koch argued that the sale of these products contradicts Dining’s overall mission.
Charles Rainey ’19 stated that he was wary of Dining Services “controlling what people consume,” and asserted that many, such as himself, consume energy drinks “in a way that is responsible.” Several others, however, emphasized that energy drinks would continue to be sold as nearby as Sama’s Café, and that many fail to realize the negative impact of the products.
The Council then welcomed Michael Geisler, Vice President for Risk and Compliance, who argued for the installation of security cameras in various public spaces around campus. While the Council had discussed the issue during the 2014-15 academic year and ultimately decided against the installation of cameras, Geisler argued that they have the potential to greatly reduce property theft and potentially reduce the risk of assault. Some on the Council were receptive, but others cautioned against the risks of racial profiling and privacy intrusion.
(12/09/15 3:39pm)
On Monday, Dec. 7, Community Council held its final meeting of the fall semester.
Student Co-Chair Tiff Chang ’17.5 began by noting that the Student Government Association recently passed two recommendations – an extension of the add/drop deadline and an extension of the Pass/D/Fail option – which both grew out of discussions originally held in Community Council about academic stress.
The council then considered the recent campus-wide discussions on cultural appropriation and inclusivity. Several members shared that they were supportive of the most recent Town Hall meeting, but wished that it could have been held in a larger venue and at a more convenient time of day, since many potential dissenting voices seemed absent from the discussion.
Public Safety Telecom Manager and Tech Support Specialist Solon Coburn noted, however, that the problem of an insufficiently large venue was “a good problem to have.”
Some faculty members on the Council shared their disappointment that students seemed hesitant to turn to professors to discuss issues of race and class, particularly professors who study those very topics.
Additionally, the question was raised of whether Community Council should begin to tackle those issues, especially in light of student protests at Yale University and the University of Missouri. Members generally agreed that such subjects would probably be best addressed within larger topics that the Council plans to review later in the academic year.
The Council had planned to end Monday’s meeting – the culmination of a semester-long focus on stress – by formulating an official recommendation to President of the College Laurie L. Patton. However, several staff members stated that they felt uncomfortable forming a recommendation primarily on academic stress – a subject about which they have little knowledge. Furthermore, some members pointed out that the Community Council’s charter specifies that it must address only non-academic issues.
“I’m wondering if there needs to be a conversation about what we’re allowed to do and whether that needs to change, in the wording of the way we were chartered as a body,” Ethan Brady ’18 said.
In the end, the Council agreed that the best option would likely be the creation of a smaller task force focusing specifically on stress. This task force would be given a list of specific issue areas generated by Community Council, each of which would be categorized as either a short-term, mid-term or long-term goal.
(12/02/15 9:18pm)
On Nov. 9, Community Council reviewed its large list of potential solutions to student stress, discussing whether additional topics should be added.
Several students agreed that the advising system could be significantly improved. An opportunity to engage with their advisors on subjects that are not purely academic, they said, would be highly valued.
In addition, Public Safety Telecom Manager and Tech Support Specialist Solon Coburn, citing a recent New York Times article, mentioned the possibility of framing stress not simply as a negative emotion, but as a tool which can be utilized to one’s advantage.
On Nov. 16, the Council dedicated its meeting to the subject of faculty stress, with several professors sharing their thoughts on the issue.
Dean of the College Katy Smith Abbott (who has taught in the Department of the History of Art and Architecture) concurred with another professor that certain measures to combat student stress may only increase the stress felt by faculty. Self-scheduled exams, she said, were one example.
“There is a very high percentage of cheating that goes on with self-scheduled exams,” she said. “So if you’re managing the anxiety about whether your students are going to be dishonest in taking it, or you’re spending the time following up on a dishonesty case, that’s a lot of time and an immense amount of stress for a faculty member.”
Associate Professor of Political Science Bert Johnson felt similarly. “When I first got here, I did a lot of self-scheduled exams, because I thought it was easier for students,” he said. “But after several cycles of honor code review committee reports, I could not in good conscience continue because of the incidence of cheating.”
“From a faculty perspective, when you encounter an instance of cheating or plagiarism… there’s nothing in my teaching career that has made me feel worse than that,” Johnson said.
Faculty also cited students’ frequent desire to see course syllabi during the summer before registration takes place. “Very often, a faculty member is planning on using the summer or late summer weeks to pull [a syllabus] together,” said Smith Abbott.
Sarah Laursen, Assistant Professor of History of Art and Architecture, agreed on several points, adding that “it’s more difficult for new faculty to pull together that syllabus. It takes time to gauge what level the students are at, and you need a little flexibility in your syllabus if you end up changing some things.”
Laursen listed several additional sources of stress for many faculty, including advising, developing and preparing new courses, and maintaining a “rigorous schedule” of publication.
Johnson noted that the issue of publication was a common one, particularly when balanced with a professor’s responsibility to teach. “It used to be that when you were at a liberal arts college like this, it was all about teaching. Increasingly, at liberal arts colleges, you are expected to have a big record of publications, in addition to being the best possible teacher and being engaged in the community.”
This accumulation of “stuff,” Johnson felt, is what prevents the College community from “interacting with one another in low-stakes, casual ways.”
Several students shared that this high level of faculty stress often deters them from “bothering” professors who they feel might be busy – a revelation which struck faculty as particularly disappointing.
“It breaks my heart when students say, ‘I know how busy you are!’” Smith Abbott said.
“The best part of my day is going into the classroom,” agreed Johnson. “If students are worried about approaching faculty because they’re worried about adding stress load to the faculty, that’s a real problem.”
(11/13/15 4:21am)
On Oct. 26, Community Council welcomed Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty Andi Lloyd and Chief Diversity Officer Miguel Fernández, who, along with Dean of the College Katy Smith Abbott, presented a wide-ranging plan for improving the quality of life of students.
Originally tasked by the College’s Board of Overseers with addressing issues of diversity and inclusivity as well as campus-wide stress, Lloyd and Smith Abbott soon determined that these subjects should be dealt with holistically by merging those separate issues.
Over the past summer, the group generated a long list of difficulties frequently cited by the student body; among those problems were the fear of missing out, time management, microagressions, sexual violence, suicidal ideation, financial hardships and job market fears. These issues were then grouped into three main categories: promoting mind-body well-being, increasing diversity and fostering inclusivity and building community and resilience.
These three categories, said Lloyd, Fernández and Smith Abbott, will guide the implementation of numerous programs over the next few years intended to combat those difficulties. For diversity and inclusivity, the group mentioned the usage of transgender-friendly language in admissions materials and the potential modification of the Cultures and Civilizations requirement.
For mind-body wellness, potential measures discussed included creating a counseling fellow program to expand the number of counselors on campus, drop- in group exercises on mindfulness, and expanding Question Persuade Refer (QPR) training, which is designed to prevent suicides.
Finally, for building community and resilience, the group cited an upcoming storytelling program centered on discussions of failure and resilience and a strengthening of the faculty advising system.
Some initiatives, such as expanded counseling and QPR training, are already being implemented. Lloyd, Smith Abbott and Fernández also emphasized that the project is ongoing and intended to be open to contributions from all members of the community.
On Nov. 2, the Council continued its wide-ranging discussion on stress, focusing this week on the disproportionate levels of stress faced by students of color. The Council welcomed Charles Rainey ’19, who shared that during his short time at Middlebury, he has already experienced multiple instances of racial prejudice.
In one case, while struggling to complete a difficult calculus problem, a classmate asked Rainey if he had attended a primarily black high school. In another instance, during a particularly heated political debate, an acquaintance of Rainey’s used a racial slur.
The most troubling aspect of these incidents, according to Rainey, was not simply the fact that they occurred; rather, it was the lackluster response to the incidents by both fellow students and Residential Life staff. After the first incident, Rainey spoke to his First Year Counselors, who he said told him that “these things happen” and that he had no choice but to “hold [his] head up and keep going.”
After the second incident, Rainey said there was a distinct lack of remorse on the part of the other student. “There was no apology,” Rainey said. “It was almost as if he felt entitled to use that word.”
Several on the Council emphasized that these experiences were common among students of color at Middlebury, and that the College must take a stronger stance against hurtful speech. “This is not just ignorance,” said Metadel Lee ’18.5, “it is willful disregard for our humanity, and I no longer accept it.”
Finally, the Council welcomed Gus Jordan, Executive Director of Health and Counseling Services, who, among several issues, discussed the possibility of closing the Parton Center during low-traffic hours, and increasing student knowledge of counseling services.
(10/21/15 8:13pm)
On Oct. 12, Community Council began to brainstorm specific issues to address during the academic year. When all was said and done, the Council generated 51 different topics which its members hoped to cover to some degree.
Issues raised by College staff included increased awareness of the dangers of drinking and driving, a possible discontinuation of Winter Carnival and increasing campus accessibility for disabled persons.
Faculty mentioned a clarification on spousal hiring policies, a more comprehensive plan for faculty housing and shortening the add/drop period, which can be disruptive in a 12-week semester.
Students raised a number of issues, as well. Enabling faculty and staff to eat at dining halls for free was met with much enthusiasm, as did the institution of a living wage for all staff workers. Others pointed to the necessity for more gender-neutral bathrooms, the renovation of older campus buildings to improve their energy efficiency and establishing a space on campus for student organizations.
Issues of race and class were frequently mentioned; some pointed to the pronounced lack of diversity in the Feb class, while others discussed the College’s role as a gentrifier in the town of Middlebury, and whether such a problem could be mitigated.
The most popular topic, however, was stress. Though the topic was raised by students, faculty and staff emphasized its prevalence throughout the College community. While various events – such as a temporary campus petting zoo – were suggested as potential “de-stressers,” the Council agreed that a larger discussion was needed.
The Council’s next meeting on Oct. 19 was dedicated entirely to the topic of stress. Brainerd Commons Dean Natasha Chang, SGA Representative Emma Erwin, Dean of Curriculum Suzanne Gurland, Associate Director of the Center for Careers and Internships Tracy Himmel Isham and Parton Counseling Director Ximena Mejia attended as guests to weigh in on the issue.
“[Stress] is a multifaceted issue,” said Clair Beltran ’16. “When it’s brought up in conversation it’s meant academically, but it also ends up affecting you personally, emotionally and in other aspects.”
“There’s this culture of exceptionalism that exists on campus,” said Emma Bliska ’18, “and from a student perspective, it becomes difficult to handle all of these different pressures.”
Campus Horticulturalist Tim Parsons pointed to Middlebury’s relatively short semesters as a cause of student stress, saying that they result in faculty being forced to “cram more coursework into less time.”
The Council’s guests discussed how their respective organizations addressed the issue of stress. Mejia discussed the belief that with the right attitude, stress can be “your friend and ally.” Making meaning of our stressful experiences, she said, is oftentimes more important than the simple levels of stress which we face.
Chang brought up the way stress is deeply embedded in campus life. “Students will report to me that they have a feeling of competition around who’s most stressed,” she said. Productive conversations about stress can be impossible, she noted, when stress is prioritized over personal health and wellness.
Gurland suggested that combatting day-to-day stress may be a matter of choosing our battles wisely. “Figuring out the things that are important to us, and embracing the reality that we cannot do everything, are necessary tasks,” she said. “You may need to pick one class that you’re simply not going to give 100 percent to.”
(10/08/15 1:33am)
Community Council held its first meeting of the academic year on Monday, Oct. 5, in McCullough’s Crest Room.
The council’s responsibilities include oversight of residential issues, making appointments to several judicial and academic boards and reviewing social and academic interest houses. In addition, the Council has the ability to make recommendations directly to the President and the administration.
In Monday’s meeting, Council members were asked to outline their goals for the upcoming year. Several students specified that they hoped the council would provide a voice to marginalized groups on campus.
“I’ve known what it might feel like to be in a minority group,” said Chang, “and I feel that there’s a bridge to be made between minority groups that I’m a part of, and some of the privileges that I have from coming to this school.”
Others in attendance echoed her sentiment.
“The voices heard on campus are of a very specific population of Middlebury,” said Fiona Mohamed ’18, “and I’d like to distribute that voice across campus, to the more marginalized areas.”
Metadel Lee ’18.5 agreed, while stressing the need for “some sort of mediation between marginalized and non-marginalized groups, because it seems that both sides feel marginalized in some way or another.”
Several staff echoed the students’ discontent with Middlebury’s prevailing social structures.
“The fractured nature of Middlebury’s student community is something that I’ve seen grow in the last 15 years...there’s less and less cross-communication, and it would be nice to see us address that,” said Doug Adams, Associate Dean of Students for Residential and Student Life.
The “stress culture” on campus was another topic of discussion. While initially raised by students, Adams and Public Safety Telecom Manager and Tech Support Specialist Solon Coburn noted that stress was also widespread among faculty and staff, respectively. Still, some Council members cautioned that an over- emphasis on eliminating stress entirely could leave students unprepared for the pressures of the world outside of the College.
The Council also discussed the mandatory courses on drugs, alcohol and sexual violence, which are criticized by some for being easy to skip through without much thought. Sarah Laursen, Assistant Professor of Art and Architecture and Curator of Asian Art, mentioned that other community members should be made aware of these issues, noting that the culture has likely changed since faculty and staff attended college.
Council members went on to discuss other potential projects for the upcoming year. Coburn discussed the possibility of implementing new card access around campus, which would be a major step forward but “a ton of work.” Others brought up improvements to faculty housing, and an increased focus on mental health.
The most frequently mentioned subject was new President Laurie L. Patton, and the high hopes held by many for her tenure.
Brandon Baird, Assistant Professor of Spanish and Linguistics, is among those who eagerly anticipate Patton’s work.
“I’ve seen her a couple of times and whenever she’s introduced, she’s introduced to thunderous applause. So I’m excited to see what she does, and if they’ll repeat the thunderous applause for years to come,” he said.