Issues raised by planning are not entirely new

In a presentation to the General Faculty, President Nancy Dye outlined a number of issues related to long-range planning that particularly interested her. Dye said she hoped to explore the relationship between the Conservatory and the College, address how and why a residential community is set up, and discuss the lack of common spaces at Oberlin.

Dye made her presentation on May 21, months before the long-range planning process began.

http://review.oberlin.edu/11.22.96/news/report.htmlDye again appeared before the General Faculty on Nov. 19 to report on issues that had emerged from focus groups held in conjunction with the long-range planning process. According to Dye, the most significant issues related to the need for common spaces and the reasons underlying the residential nature of Oberlin.

Although Dye's presentations were separated by dozens of focus groups that were attended by over 440 members of the Oberlin community, the content of the two presentations was startlingly similar.

The long-range planning process was first proposed by Dye last spring. Dye was careful to distinguish the process from the last comprehensive planning program that swept Oberlin.

In 1993, President S. Frederick Starr launched the a Strategic Issues Steering Committee (SISC) that was widely denounced by students and faculty as exclusive and directionless, among other complaints. The process culminated in a compilation of more than 100 recommendations. In her first semester as president, Dye attempted to finish what Starr had started by shortening the list of goals to a more manageable number. The process, dubbed SISC-Lite, was never completed.

Dye officially opened the long-range planning process in September. "We hope to gain a far better understanding of ourselves and the future," Dye said in September. Dye constantly emphasized in the early meetings regarding planning that the goal of the process was to develop coherent guidelines to steer college policy rather than specific strategies for the future. Unlike SISC, Dye's process included a concerted effort to gather input from every segment of the college community.

Focus groups, facilitated by Elaine Kuttner of Ampersand Associates, were held in October and November. Groups of students, staff and faculty members met in groups to consider five broad questions addressing Oberlin's core values and goals for the future. A paucity of student participants led to a final thrust of focus groups held in co-ops and dorms.

The results of the small group discussions were compiled in a document that was released in late November.

A meeting was organized last Saturday to solicit student reactions to the report. Only six students attended the session, some of whom were wary about the planning process. "I wonder if certain fundamental things are really going to change," said a college senior.

At last week's college faculty meeting, Dye said in the context of presenting the report on focus groups, "It is no great secret that I have a desire to build a student union." Dye has never kept it a secret. Since last year, Dye has been discussing what she perceives as Oberlin's dire need for common space. Cole has also expressed an interest in creating a news student center.

Some faculty members at the meeting worried about the cost of such a project despite Dye's insistence on thinking at a more conceptual level.

Dye has repeatedly spoken of a new student union as a place where students and faculty could meet. In response to suggestions to physically bring together the Oberlin community, Professor of Politics Marc Blecher said, "I think the biggest barrier to all this is the amount of work we all do."

Other members of the faculty seemed jaded by previous planning processes. "We keep doing things that sound good that certainly are expensive, that give us a warm glow," said one faculty member at November's General Faculty meeting. "What will keep us from going through another cycle?"

Despite concerns voiced by members of the faculty, the planning report seemed to echo Dye's sentiments, "One critical area pointed out by participants was the fact that Oberlin lacks a central gathering place. It does not have a campus center or student union that is designed to create and support a sense of community ... It is hoped that the future brings a more substantive solution to the issue."

"We need to move soon to making strategic decisions," said Professor of English Robert Longsworth, a member of the planning advisory committee.

The building of a student union, which would be financed by an enormous capital campaign, has developed a facade of popular support by cloaking the issue in long-range planning. Although many faculty members have privately expressed concerns with the planning process, the procedure has thus far been applauded by the Board of Trustees.

"This procedure has been has been getting all of that input from students, faculty, staff," said Chairman of the Board Bill Perlick. Perlick has been pleased with the `true consensus' that has been built by process participants.