With a vote approaching on whether or not to keep the Russian Department, faculty and students are struggling to make decisions and to voice their opinions.

The Educational Policy and Governance Committee (EPAG) has said that it will bring a motion to eliminate Russian at the December faculty meeting.

According to Religious Studies professor and EPAG member Jim Laine, the committee has made clear that its position is to discontinue the Russian major. He said that the fact that the department is currently in transition incited the discussion.

Currently, Russian has three full time faculty (FTE), two of whom are tenured. Russian Professor Jim von Geldern, one of the tenured faculty, is currently attending law school and said that he will use this additional degree to return to Macalester in a different academic capacity, possibly teaching in the Legal or International Studies departments.

The faculty began debating the issue immediately following their October meeting, at which EPAG and the Russian department presented their respective arguments. Faculty continued that debate at this month’s meeting on Wednesday.

EPAG’s argument, according to EPAG Chair and Economics Professor Gary Krueger, is predicated primarily on low enrollment statistics. Due to conflict of interest, Krueger has recently attempted to distance himself from his position as chair of the Russian, Central and Eastern European Studies department.

According to Provost Dan Hornbach, the elimination of Russian would ultimately free up three FTE that could alleviate the burden in larger departments that are currently understaffed. There is also some discussion about creating new programs, including Middle Eastern Studies, Arabic and Chinese language.

Members of the Russian departmentargue that their numbers reflect national trends which are generally responsive to geopolitical climates, and that there are indications of increasing popularity for Russian.

“We fare no worse than our comparison schools,” Russian Department Chair Gitta Hammarberg said.
 

Uncertainty and concern among faculty

Pointing out the involvement of real individuals and careers, many faculty were hesitant to disclose their opinions candidly on the issue. Nearly all, however, indicated that they continue to grapple with what will be a very difficult decision as they confront a financial situation that prevents change without sacrifice.

As President Rosenberg pointed out in his comments to the faculty, the school must act as though we are “dealing with a pie that will not be growing. We cannot do everything,” he said.

Rosenberg would not state his specific opinion, but said, “I would encourage you not to shy away from change simply because it is change.”

Faculty in the humanities showed particular concern that the elimination of Russian signifies a larger threat to language programs at Macalester, despite assurances from EPAG that the issue is not one of languages, but rather is specific to Russian.

While EPAG claims that statistics are the thrust of its argument, Hornbach has stated that the issue also regards Russian’s centrality to a liberal arts education—a contention that many faculty take issue with.

“I can’t buy that argument,” Laine said. “It’s arguable that the greatest works of literature in the 20th century are Russian.”

German Professor Kiarina Kordela stressed the political importance of studying Russia. “The brain wash of the cold war still determines American identities, even of people at the age of our students,” she said.

Several faculty said that they sympathize with both sides of the issue: recognizing the value of Russian while also appreciating the school’s need for additional resources.

“It’s inefficient for a college to devote substantial resources where nobody is taking classes,” International Studies Professor David Chioni Moore said. “And the people who pay the price are larger, overburdened departments.” Moore added that he had been unable to come to a decision on the issue as of yet.

Numerous faculty questioned the way that the elimination of Russian figures into Macalester’s mission statement and commitment to internationalism.

“We claim that internationalism is central to our mission, but we’re very schizophrenic about what that means,” Political Science Professor Frank Adler said. “Something bothers me when we’re only counting beans and not talking about our identity, which is internationalism.”

“As a scholar of International Studies this conversation pains me a little bit,” said Dean of International Studies and Programming Ahmed Samatar.

Those faculty that stayed for the Russian discussion, at both this and last month’s meetings, were primarily humanities and language people—who some faculty say are disproportionately supportive of Russian.

The only faculty member to vocally support EPAG was Computer Science professor Michael Schneider. “For the past ten years, we’ve been lucky enough to be able to change with growth. Those days are over,” he said. “Change now must come with reallocations. Russian is the poster child for change.”
 

Unclear alternatives

There is a general sense among faculty that the decision is more difficult because of uncertainty regarding outcomes. A vote to eliminate the major would leave two options: one, to discontinue the department entirely, or two, to merge the Russian and area studies department into an interdisciplinary department utilizing tenured faculty already on campus.

According to Hammarberg, the latter alternative would eliminate language faculty and therefore would not allow students to develop proficiency in Russian, which, she pointed out takes much longer to achieve than more commonly taught languages.

If the faculty eliminate Russian, EPAG has said that a number of options will be discussed in terms of where lost positions will be allocated, including existing departments as well as committing to the development of new ones.

Several faculty said that they were uncomfortable with voting to get rid of Russian without an understanding of what the consequence will be.

“Nobody is talking carefully about what it is we could do,” German Professor David Martyn said.

“You’re asking us to vote without an alternative,” History Professor Peter Weisensel said. “It’s as though we’re voting the faculty into a black hole.”

EPAG maintains that a discussion of future programs cannot begin without the knowledge that means are available. “We’re at the very beginning stages of that conversation,” Hornbach said. “We can’t talk about it without knowing that we have the resources.”

Faculty expressed concern that programs in Arabic and Chinese language would be equally, if not more difficult both to build and to teach. There is also evident skepticism among faculty of what some view as a response to “trendiness.”

“This sounds to me like rushing after what is in vogue,” Kordela said.

“If we just teach those languages that are popular by student demand, is that the kind of place we want to be?” Japanese Program Director Satoko Suzuki asked the faculty. “I don’t think so.”
 

Student Concern

Since the faculty began discussing the future of Russian, past and current students of the department have rallied to the cause of maintaining it.

Numerous alumni have sent letters to the Provost, President and EPAG describing their appreciation for the department and the ways in which it has shaped their lives and careers.

Senior Russian majors Krista Goff, Susannah Johnson and Emily Baran garnered signatures from 87 students that have taken at least one class in the Russian department to attach to their petitionary letter. The list includes students at other ACTC schools, a graduate, and students from nearly each department on campus.

“A college cannot be committed to internationalism without offering languages that allow students to function in the international community,” Johnson said. “By eliminating Russian, we would close off a vast portion of the world to students at Macalester and deny them the opportunity to gain proficiency in a language crucial to the international community.”

Emily Baran ’04 transferred to Macalester after Cornell University cut their Russian Studies program, and is enthusiastic about the work done here. “Macalester’s program right now is small enough that you get to really know the faculty and have many opportunities to work closely with them, but large enough that you get a broad and solid education,” she said.

Numerous students who are not Russian majors but have been involved with the department are also passionate about supporting it. “As a Humanities and Cultural Studies major, it was in the Russian and German departments that I have encountered the most intellectually enriching classes at Macalester,” Tanya Espinoza ’04 said.

Several students and faculty pointed out that despite the end of the Cold War, Russian maintains its relevance and has perhaps even increased in practicality. “It is now, when Russian businesses have become established and are looking to enter the global market on a larger scale, that the need for Russian-speaking Americans becomes essential,” Russian major Cassandra Hartblay ’06 said.

Kordela echoed this argument. “Now in the US there are more jobs requiring knowledge of Russian than many other languages,” she said.