Student Involvement in Faculty Hiring

To the Editor:

In the article “Rosenberg Forms Search Committee for New Provost” (October 22), writer Peter Gartrell asserts “There are no students on the search committee because the position is tenure track, and students are generally not involved with tenure-track hiring decisions.”

Well, this is just wrong. Every tenure-track hiring committee is required (by the Provost’s office) to include two students. Generally, students are very involved with tenure-track decisions. Groups of students are convened to meet all candidates privately (without current faculty members present), and all candidates give lectures that students attend. In addition, students may be included at meals and other social events with the candidates. Candidates often teach actual classes while here, thereby meeting lots of students. Search committees collect feedback from students about all candidates brought to campus for interviews.

I have served on several search committees, in many departments, and am now chairing one search committee. It is my experience that student input is heavily weighed when choosing whom to offer the job to! How potential faculty members interact with our students is of major concern to us. And, to be fair, Peter’s article does say, a few lines later: “However, Rosenberg and Wright said the committee values student input, and they plan to have finalists meet with a group of five or six students when they visit campus in the spring.”

In writing this, my point is certainly not to admonish Peter Gartrell. Instead, let this letter serve as a timely reminder that we (the faculty) want you (the students) to be involved with hiring of new faculty members. If you go to the Provost’s webpage, you can see the list of departments that are searching for new faculty members. Over the next few weeks and months, candidates will be brought to campus for interviews. Go see their talks, go to the specially arranged meetings with students, and talk with the student representatives on the search committee.! Please, get involved.

Karen Saxe

Professor of Mathematics and Computer Science
 

Civic Participation Beyond the Election

To the Editor:

As much as it gave me the warmest fuzzies to see so many people proudly sporting those red stickers on Tuesday, I gotta wonder—where were y’all last year? I was doing get out the vote for Rich Broderick, running with the Greens for school board. I seem to recall standing out in front of the Campus Center, asking people to stroll down the block and do that voting thing. Well, you know how it goes, stuff going on, busy student lives, yada yada—needless to say, hardly anyone gave a damn.

Make no mistake; I’m not starry-eyed enough to think that we live in a democracy or that the electoral arena is Theater A (B or C…) for social change. And in this two-party regime, I don’t delude myself into thinking that my vote matters to anyone other than myself and maybe the election judges who get a kick out of seeing earnest young folks turn up. However, I am enough of a sucker to believe that local politics and even elections are important and potentially vibrant spaces, spaces to build towards the anarchies or small-scale decentralized democracies that many of us are working for. That’s why I helped out on Tom Taylor’s kick-ass House campaign in northeast Minneapolis this year and Elizabeth Dickenson’s campaign for city council last year.

My red sticker felt a little lonely that fall day last year. It would like some company next time there’s no fancy-pants gubernatorial or national race to get everyone all worked up. Be accountable to the place you are living in and the local resources you are using, while you’re here, eh? (Nothing against those who vote absentee in their home states.) For example, on Saturday, (that’s right, tomorrow!) there is a public meeting about a grassroots effort to ban chain stores on Grand. Doesn’t get much closer to home than that. 9:30 a.m. Linwood Rec Center gym @ 860 St. Clair. See you there.

Renee Lepreau ’06
 

Ending Divisiveness in Need-Blind Debate

To the Editor:

As Luce GuillÈn-Givins wrote last week, “It is not divisive to point out that some people are rich and some people are not.” However, ridiculing those who, through no fault of their own, come from families with more money than others certainly is divisive. I understand how much it sucks to see students’ parents buy them new cars and pay the insurance for them when you can’t afford to fix your bike and you don’t know how you are going to pay rent through the summer, much less buy food. I understand complaining about rich people because I have done it plenty of times, even though I know it’s not fair. But talking about something with friends and writing a letter about it in The Mac Weekly are two very different things.

Like Luce, I believe I can “legitimately claim” to be poor, although I do not consider myself a need-blind admission because I think I would have gotten in (to Macalester at least) anyway. I grew up worrying about not having enough to eat even though we went to the food shelf once a month, and watching my mom go deeper and deeper into debt to support three kids (she never paid the energy bill on time in the winter because it is illegal in Minnesota to turn off someone’s heat). I’m not trying to brag about whatever class people think I’m in—I’m not particularly proud of it—I just want to be able to argue a few points with some credibility.

Like Luce, I have friends that I consider rich, although I wonder what kind of friend she thinks she is being by insulting them as a group. These friends of mine don’t get significant financial aid because their parents are “rollin’ in the dough.” However, just because parents can afford to pay doesn’t mean they do. I know several people who are forced to take out large, interest-accruing loans to get through their college years because their parents don’t pay whatever amount Macalester decides they can afford. Meanwhile, I am doing better financially than I ever have before, because my financial aid pays all my living expenses, including food, rent, even alcohol, and after graduate school I will have a very good chance of making more money than my mom does. Of course I will be in debt from my federal loans, but this debt is nowhere near the amount my “rich” friends will find themselves in. So, unlike Luce, I don’t consider myself more “fucked” to be at Macalester than they are. In fact, coming to Macalester is the first time I have considered my economic situation (i.e., complete inability to pay for anything) an advantage.

Furthermore, it is not, as Luce believes, an issue of class, it is an issue of economic status. No one at Macalester, no matter how poor, can claim to be of the lowest classes, because we are all getting a very good liberal arts education. Class is not just about how much money a person has; one of the most important factors in America is education. My mother makes significantly less money per year as an adjunct professor at the U of M than a full-time dishwasher, yet no one would consider her “working-class.” We are all fortunate (or “privileged”, if you prefer) to have the opportunity to study here, which many lower working-class people do not. Regardless of how much we might want to flaunt our supposed lower-class status, none of us is justified in doing so. The truth is, most people at Macalester can’t tell who is poor and who is not, beyond whether or not they own a Coach purse.

Finally, I would like to echo others in emphasizing that Macalester is sadly behind other MIAC schools in the quality of our athletic facilities, which makes a significant difference in our ability to compete in some sports. Long and triple jumpers cannot even practice their events during the indoor track season because we have no indoor facility aside from a track suitable for walking and jogging and a hole in the floor where the pole vault pit can be set up. A liberal arts college is not just about academics; it is about extra-curricular activities as well, and whether you like it or not, athletics is one of those activities, one which attracts significant numbers of students who happen to attain higher GPAs on average than non-athletes. Besides, alumni donations earmarked for athletic or other facilities cannot be used for financial aid.

Need-blind admissions is an important ethical commitment that should be maintained if at all possible. It should not, however, be used as a forum to complain about rich people or promote reverse-hierarchies in which people from less well-off families are viewed as more prestigious than those from wealthier families.

Johanna Shreve ’05
 

Our Ethical Obligation and Need-Blind

To the Editor:

President Rosenberg in his pellucidly written and cogently argued letter on “quality and access” observed that the question raised by our need-blind admissions policy is both an “ethical and a practical one.” Many others have referred to it as a moral issue and a matter of social justice. I would like to suggest that the ethical principle that applies in this case is what philosophers refer to as “ought implies can.” While interpreted differently, as one would expect, this principle is generally taken to mean “ought morally implies can.” I would put it this way: no agent (individual or institutional) is ever morally obliged to do what is impossible. For Macalester, continuing the present need-blind policy has become impossible. Ergo, Macalester has no moral obligation to continue it. For me the truth of this premise has been satisfactorily proven by the President’s letter and by Jim Stewart’s letter to the editor of The Mac Weekly (10/8/04) both of which provide a long list of necessities that require some income from the endowment. A corollary of the above principle could be stated thus: “When an institution cannot do something, this inability is an excuse for not doing it, and we do not consider it blameworthy for not doing it.” If there is anything the Macalester community has agreed upon during the past three decades, it is that one of the most important goals of liberal arts education is critical thinking. Here is an opportunity to prescind from emotion and think critically about a very important subject.

Jeremiah Reedy

Professor Emeritus, Classics
 

Macalester Students Feign Tolerance

To the Editor:

Okay, fellow Mac students, here’s a question for you: how tolerant are you? I know, I know, most of you will consider this question preposterous, and perhaps even insulting that I would dare insinuate that the student body is anything but tolerant. However, to my disappointment, I’ve come to the conclusion recently that in many ways, when it comes to this issue, the student body is one laden with hypocrisy.

But most people will say “Wait a minute. I’m cool with blacks, Hispanics, anarchists, gays, transvestites, Mormons, etc., etc.” And that’s great. I applaud that, I really do. The problem is, this benevolence is not extended to those in the mainstream. People of different political opinions (conservatives, Republicans, maybe even moderates) and those who have benefited from a capitalist system (the so-called rich), are not only not tolerated, but treated abysmally here at Mac.

You want proof? How about the fact that at the International Roundtable our own Professor Mark Davis was booed? Correct me if I’m wrong, but I thought this was an intellectual discussion, designed to get us thinking, not a football game. The point of the roundtable, as far as I understood it, was to promote thoughtful discourse, which is only furthered by a variety of viewpoints. Also, why come to an academic institution like Mac just to shoot down, without any consideration whatsoever, another perspective? Isn’t it possible you might actually learn something from that viewpoint, and even strengthen your own? The guys who booed Professor Davis were not only rude (which is bad enough in itself), but really, intolerant. To my shock, the shows of intolerance were just beginning at the Roundtable. I don’t think I can emphasize how utterly disgusted I am at the treatment of Michael Ledeen. It is quite one thing to disagree; it is another to be contemptuous and disrespectful to the point of, yes, intolerance. I may not agree with him, but I at least recognize that there was no excuse for the laughter, the interruptions, or the overall rudeness shown to him. Disagreement, no matter what the situation, is not a free pass to be obnoxious, which is exactly what many Mac students were. News flash, kids: acting like that only undermines all of the values you claim to hold and represent, and also reflects extremely poorly on our school. The goal of Macalester is not tolerance or acceptance to a point; it is tolerance, period. In my mind, this should encompass those with different political or social views, not just those of different races, sexualities, or religions.

Another issue which should be addressed is the issue of class around here. I am a student who does not receive financial aid, and probably would be inaccurately dubbed as rich. I belong to a middle class (perhaps upper middle class) family in which both of my parents have worked extremely hard. That being said,on numerous occasions people have tried to make me feel guilty because of my situation. Yes, there are financial separations, but to imply that it is my fault (or my family’s) is unfair and prejudiced. Luce Guillen-Givens wrote in her letter to the editor that “…it sucks to be around a bunch of rich people when you’re not.” Probably true. What is equally true, and not at all recognized, is that it sucks to be a so-called rich person (whether you are or not isn’t relevant) and blamed for that. I’m sure some people reading this are thinking that I’m just a spoiled little rich Jewish girl, complaining without any real reason. But you know what, I don’t enjoy the fact that my simple lattÈ drinking, North Face wearing existence and presence at Mac is a reason for the class divide. Don’t tell me that this atmosphere of blaming the “rich” does not exist, because I know that it does. It’s just not acknowledged, except through stereotypes, such as the aforementioned lattÈ/North Face characterization, another reference to Luce’s letter. I know I’m lucky; nobody here has to tell me that, thanks. But that’s not a valid reason to blame me, or to perpetuate the class divides, at least not in my mind. Yes, financially, I am “different,” if you will, from many here, but that does not, or should not, make it acceptable to treat me differently.

Mac has the potential to be a truly excellent school, in almost every way. But the only way we can do that is to recognize the problems and try to fix them. I believe that there are these prejudices inherent in the student body, and I also believe they need to be changed if we are to live up to our potential as students and people. Obviously, this is not a simple or easy thing to do. All I’m asking though, is for you to take some time out and think, and listen. Listen to those with whom you disagree. Consider, and I mean really consider people, who they are, and where they come from. If we all do this, then Mac, and the world around us will be better. And really, isn’t that what we all want in the end?

Claire Flaxman ’06