Photo by Duncan Spaulding
On September 9, President Leo Higdon sent a message to Conn students that outlined the college’s goals and objectives for the 2010 – 2011 academic year. He wants the college to remain “one of the pre-eminent private liberal arts colleges in the country.”
In the introductory paragraph of this three page game plan, the document covers its tracks by stating, “There are a number of other important ongoing goals and initiatives not on this list.”
The paper is divided into six main sections, some of which are more vague than others, which include topics like “Educational Programs,” “Diversity in People” and “Environmental Stewardship.” From the headings alone, one can gather that the document is not the most riveting work, but I’ve condensed it into some key points.
The first few goals listed are on educational programs and continuing their “refinement and implementation” on campus.
One proposal is to develop a pilot program such as a “sophomore experience” that would be akin to the Freshman Year Seminar (FYS). This may seem like a good idea in theory, but I don’t think it would be very successful in its execution.
The reason the FYS program works is because freshmen are being thrown into a new environment. Their seminar ensures them at least one class that may be more relaxed and discussion-based than others, so first-year students can get to know their classmates. By sophomore year, most students have already established a group of friends. They don’t need the kind of social support that freshmen seminars provide. In addition, these classes are a way for freshmen to dabble in different fields, as the majority of them are generally undecided about their major.
By the beginning of sophomore year, and certainly by the end, students have usually found the area they want to focus on. This makes the implementation of a “sophomore experience” program difficult; students will either want to pursue their major or continue to fulfill general education requirements, and unless the “sophomore experience” will differ drastically from the FYS, some of these courses won’t even fulfill a requirement. Needless to say, this would not work as a required course for sophomore and I have significant doubts as to how successful this program would be.
On a more positive note, the college seems already to be meeting its goals of educating students about alcohol and general wellness. Organizations like CC Peeps, a group of students who educate their peers on a various wellness related issues, and 1 in 4, an organization that educates men on sexual assault prevention, are visibly active on campus, even so early in the school year.
The mandatory Camel 101 alcohol talk for freshmen had the potential to be yet another lecture that encouraged us to abstain from drinking (or we will surely die), but it turned out to be a rather entertaining event. Instead of staring at a PowerPoint presentation full of statistics about student drinking, each student was given a bottle of water and a Solo cup and was asked to measure out the amount of liquid they thought was equal to one shot. Many people severely miscalculated, some pouring almost three times the amount of an actual shot. This was quite an effective eye opener.
Director of Student Wellness and Alcohol/Drug Education CC Curtiss made trips to individual houses to talk about knowing your limits. She passed out blood alcohol content cards based on gender and weight to make people more aware of how to drink safely. This friendlier approach to alcohol education makes students more receptive to listening and learning, which will hopefully bring down alcohol-related incidents on campus.
The paper also gives substantial attention to diversity on campus, which is an important issue to discuss, as the majority of our students are white and affluent (with about 60% of students paying full tuition). The college is making an effort to increase diversity in the entire population including students, faculty and staff. Currently, on the college’s homepage, a prominent link suggests our “commitment to diversity and equity” including race, ethnicity, class, gender, sexual orientation and religion. Efforts towards this goal were also prominent during freshman orientation, which featured discussions about race and educating people about sexual orientation and LGBTQ events and groups on campus.
Up until this point the goals and objectives are mostly on-par. However, when we encounter the “Environmental Stewardship” section, things begin to unravel. Apparently, the first step to becoming a “greener” campus is the “advance conservation and efficiency through various campus projects and renovations,” which is incredibly vague. The one example of a campus project that Higdon cites is the renovation of the Crozier-Williams entryway.
Don’t even get me started. If there is any entryway on campus that is more dysfunctional then the one at Cro, please tell me.
The outer set of doors is both an exit and entrance, but with the exception of the door on the right, the entire inner set of doors is exit only. So now you’ve found yourself into this little glass cage where you can see the golden light of Oasis and the post office but you have a one-inch plate of glass preventing you from getting there. Fighting off claustrophobia, the only way to actually get inside Cro is to navigate through a flood of people exiting the building and go through the two “entrance” doors on the far right side.
This is apparently some genius way of reducing the heating and cooling cost of Cro. But if that’s the case, then why are the doors always propped open? If this is the college’s idea of environmental stewardship, we’re not off to a good start.
There is always controversy surrounding different renovations on campus and how that money could be better spent. Personally, I would love common room furniture that doesn’t feel like it’s made out of leftover shower curtain material from a hospital, but you can’t always get what you want.
The college also plans to use some of this money to build up its reputation through “media placement,” which would hopefully help to lower the number of times you have to explain, “No, I don’t go to UConn.”
The year’s goals and objectives were rather unremarkable and straightforward. Even after reading them several times I still could not remember anything that was proposed except for my outrage at the reference to the Cro doors. They were unspecific and lacked any unique and creative solutions to making enhancements in the college’s programs and improving the public’s perception of Conn. We are one of the most prestigious liberal arts colleges in the country; I am disappointed we could not come up with anything better.
