The following are descriptions of some of the discussion at selected planning team meetings. The meetings were held in Peters Hall Sunday to facilitate feedback for the teams during their planning process. The descriptions are examples of the type of discussion and may not cover every issue that was brought up.
The discussion in the Educational Policies and the Curriculum group touched on several issues including diversity, student-centered teaching, interdisciplinary teaching and advising.
The committee members welcomed feedback about diversity in the curriculum because they had not yet discussed the issue. "All of us are a little bit fuzzy I think on how to address the issue," Steve Wojtal, professor of Geology and member of the team, said.
Micheal Fisher said he thinks diversity is a double concept: diversity of students and diversity of curriculum. He also said he sees value in a curriculum that both reflects the diversity in the community and looks at cultures that are not represented in the community.
Julianne Donnally, a senior attending the meeting, brought up the issue of interdisciplinary student-centered teaching. She said work that helps students integrate what they learn in different disciplines is lacking at Oberlin.
Donnally also said she thinks more actual skills should be taught at Oberlin. She suggested an expansion of the Expository Writing Program for this.
Other members of the group agreed that Oberlin should teach more interdisciplinary courses and programs, but they also recognized the difficulties in that. They discussed how much disciplines could theoretically be integrated given the intrinsic differences between them.
Student independence and initiative in their academic program was also discussed by the group. Members raised questions about where the line between structure and freedom should be, and how course requirements and the advisor structure affects student freedom.
"How do we guide people to the place they want to go early?" Wojtal said.
The group agreed that students need concrete guidance at the beginning of their career.
The diversity planning group was sparsely attended; only a handful of students and faculty not already on the team were at the meeting.
The group discussed the need to improve communication in the Oberlin community about diversity issues.
The team set out questions to guide the discussion that asked how diversity will change in the next 20 years, why the community needs diversity and how to have a civilized discussion about diversity.
Naomi Buck, college junior, and Hillary Greer, communtiy service coordinator, talked to the committee about the expectations about diversity when they came to Oberlin and how they have felt disappointed.
"I was very disappointed when I got here and saw a pretty much segregated campus," Buck said.
Greer also said spaces like Third World Co-op are important in building diversity and community. "Third World is one thing that is being done right," she said.
Paval DeJesus, college senior, said the idea of diversity and what it means needs to be discussed. "I don't think the faculty have the foggiest idea of what diversity is," he said.
The group also discussed the need for greater financial aid if Oberlin is to become a diverse campus. Greer talked about the assumptions of class background that students have.
"You can have a diverse ethnic and racial background, but I feel like if you want to be at a College that is representative and drawing from what the world is like, I don't think we should have such a high percentage of rich students here basically," Buck said.
Members of the group said Oberlin has a diversity that is claimed but not true because of a class homogeneity.
The Sports planning team meeting was crowded with varsity and intramural athletes raising concerns about the equity of athletics at Oberlin and the attention and respect given to sports among administrators, professors and the community.
Discussion centered on the difficulties athletes have in being both athletes and students, the miscommunication between the athletic community and the whole student body as well as the failure of the athletics department to involve the general student body in its activities.
Nearly 20 members of the Ultimate Frisbee team, in addition to other athletes, crowded the room to voice their concerns and make sure the planning team incorporated club and intramural sports into their discussion.
Several varsity athletes discussed the disrespect they feel from some professors and students. Chris Lavin, a college junior, said, "I've been in classrooms when the professor has blatantly insulted the sport I play."
Another student said the disrespect is even greater in the Conservatory, where classes and studios are scheduled during practice. "The Con definitely looks down on sports," she said.
Athletes in both the college and the Conservatory said time conflicts are a problem. Several cited examples of classes which were scheduled during their mandatory practices.
Students at the meeting said they think many students don't find athletics accessible. Several suggested more extensive reserve teams to allow more students on teams, as well as give varsity athletics more depth.
One student said, "I think programs that don't welcome energy are hurt."
Members of the Ultimate Frisbee team described their recruiting techniques. "Ultimate does recruit on campus. I don't see that for varsities," one student said.
Erica Zaklin, a college sophomore, said recruitment helps both the team and the players. She said new players come to practice and learn they can do something they never thought they could.
The athletes also discussed the difficulties they have in eating a nutritious diet at Campus Dining Service.
The Student Initiatives planning team was attended by about 7 non-panel members.
Paticipants began by discussing ways in which a supportive environment can be achieved and fostered in terms of student associations. The panel reviewed its previous discussion about student and faculty governance, funding, and also non-financial ways of supporting student-led organizations, such as faculty advising.
One panel member stated that "by the end of this process we want to be able to say `Oberlin has this kind of relationship with students.'"
A participant gave the Aikido Club, Oberlin Gilbert and Sullivan Players (OGASP), and Ultimate Frisbee were given as examples of popular and efficient student-run organizations.
The group discussed the possibility of giving students more institutional or academic credit for being involved in student-run organizations. One participant questioned if the popularity of an extracurricular activity that is related to curricular activities signals a lack in curricular offerings. For example, if OGASP is popular with students, how might it be supported by the musical theater program?
Ellen Sayles, a member of the planning team, responded that the team had addressed the issue, and that it might put undue pressure on students if everything were academic.
The lack of space for student-led activities was brought up as an issue to be remedied. Participants identified the lack of space for non-Conservatory students to rehearse, and non-varsity atheletes to conduct team practices as problems in addition to who pays for equipment that is commonly used.
One participant said that cross-campus communication about student-led activities could be better. He said that the more people know about what's going on in their community the more they will feel a part of it.
"You develop community spirit by knowing, not necessarily doing," the participant said.
The group discussed faculty evaluations, faculty load, retention of women on the faculty, community space, desired general characteristics of a future Oberlin faculty member and curriculum, among other things.
A student in the group said the last day of class might not be the best time to give evaluations. This eliminates the possibility of hearing from students who have dropped the class, and it also does not allow for the synthesis of knowledge that is only gained by synthesis later on in the college career.
One faculty member mentioned the pressure many faculty members feel working within a "reward system" that values research but a college mission that values teaching and interaction with students.
A participant, who was also on the Campus Space planning team, discussed the small amount of space on campus for faculty to congregate. This contributes to what many see as the compartmentalization and isolation among the faculty.
The retention of female faculty members, especially women of color, was identified as an issue intertwined with the diversity of the campus in general. One panel member said that the College will only be able to attract and retain women if the campus is truly diverse, and mentoring might be a way to achieve that.
One participant identified a willingness to implement different strategies in teaching as an essental characteristic for a future faculty member.
"I hope we have people who are willing to explore," she said.
The team discussed the following questions:
*For what kinds of students will we want to provide educational access?Hannah Richman (`95), Class Trustee, mentioned peer tutoring as a potential way to increase retention without increasing financial burdens for the college.
*What should be the fuction of finacial aid in the future?
*What non-financial aspects will affect access and retention?
The possible need for a re-orientation each year to campus services was also discussed, as was the need for diversity in the faculty.
Related Story:
