Come to the Reunion! Everyone
Come to the Reunion! Everyone from Jody Abzug
to Carter Zinn
will be there.
Don’t miss out on a good time.
We are working on adding
We are working on adding a link on the main button to the right that would provide an updated list of reunion attendees. Thanks in advance for your patience as we muddle through the technical difficulties. In the meantime, I am pleased to announce (via Nicole Melcher) that Ken Alleyne, Erin Block Braden and Carter Zinn will be coming.
Also, our apologies for any delays or problems with the blog. Our provider (Blogger) has been giving us trouble recently.
Here is the latest list
Here is the latest list of confirmed attendees (as of 5/28, I believe) from Ben Miller. If any of your friends have not yet registered, please encourage them to do so right away! Remember that you can register online at http://www.williams.edu/alumni/events/reunion_weekend.php. Also, see the entry below this one for options if you do not plan to spend the entire weekend at the reunion.
Abzug, Jody Lynn
Andersen, Joyce N.
Berman, Scott L.
Bjornlund, Britta Suzanne
Bock, Timothy D.
Boyd III, William M.
Brydges, William C.
Burnett, Mara E.
Buxbaum, Deborah Lisa
Chatas , Catherine Kessler
Christoffersen, Nils D.
Churchill Jr., Frederic E.
Collins, Carolyn Benedict
Collins, Claude Lewis
Cook Haymov M.D., Heather
DeMarco, Marianne I.
DePippo M.D., Theresa Cavaliere
Elliott, James K.
English, Peter H.
Fiocco, Nancy T.
Foehl, Alison Denne
Foehl, Brooks L.
Friend, Pierson
Garfield, Scott B.
George III, Raymond E.
Glendon, David C.
Goldstein M.D., Michael Harry
Groh, Stephen Vincent
Grose, Peter Kingman
Harrington, Michael R.
Hartnett IV, James J.
Hartnett, Anne M.
Heilman, Tracy J.
Higgins II M.D., Thomas F.
Hollenberg, Jonathan S.
Hooks, Jean T.F.
Huffman, Mark Gordon
Hurwitz, Laura
Johnson, Cynthia Craig
Jones, Christopher H.
Kane, David D.
Kazak, Kerri A.
Kelleher, Maureen G.
Kelley, Gregg M.
Kessler, Lillian R.
Kirschner, Gerald Scott
Lapointe, Matthew J.
Leitz, Christopher D.
Lennon, Chauncy H.
Lisker, Donna E.
Logan, Sean M.
Malm, Cecilia J.
Mandl M.D., Lisa A.
Marcus, Kenneth L.
McGuire, Julie A.
McIver, Keith W.
McIver, Kenneth W.
Melcher, Nicole
Miller, Benjamin J.
Newhall, Thomas Blackwell
Newman, Robert D.
O’Connell, Ellen A.
Oldham, Christopher H.
O’Malley, Anne Elizabeth
Papasodoro, Michael W.
Phillips Jr., John D.
Phillips, Douglas S.
Pike, William A.
Rahill, John G.
Raisbeck, Mark E.
Rakonitz, David
Richardson, Catherine Woods
Roegge, Bradford John
Ryan, William A.
Schlosser, Benjamin A.
Smith, Thomas Everett
St. Antoine, Sara L.
Staley, Stuart Waugh
Swan III, Wilbur M.
Swindell , Christopher Andrew
Taub, Sarah Florence
Tenerowicz, Lisa A.
Thomas, Susan A.
Thorndike III, Joseph J.
Tierney, Geraldine L.
Treworgy, David E.
Troob, Douglas M.
Ulmer M.D., Mary E.
Werkman, Sarah Loebs
Wolsk, Daniel O.
Yarter, Timothy J.
Ellen O’Connell provided the following
Ellen O’Connell provided the following update on reunion options:
While it is great if people can come for the whole weekend, we understand that maybe only one day is available. To that end, we have a slightly different pricing structure. In advance thanks for your assistance. There are two ‘partial weekend’ options that reduce costs somewhat.
Option 1: Will be there 1 evening (either arriving Friday, leaving Sat.during the day or arriving Sat. and leaving Sun. during the day): Cost: $120 alum, $100 adult guest, $35 kids
Option 2: Saturday day only (Sat. day events and meals, all logo items Doesn’t include any alcohol or any evening meals.Cost: $80 alum, $60 adult guest, $20 kids
To do that registering you need to register on paper and confirm with Ben Miller or me Ellen O’Connell (I have a copy of the paper form) if you want to do one of the partial weekend options so we can alert the folksin the alumni office to expect a partial payment.
The on-line payment system can’t handle anything but the standard, full-weekend costs.
I should also note that your friendly neighbood bloggers (Tracy, Kim and me) stand ready to post any information like this, as well as Eph Blurbs. Unfortunately, we are not technically sophisticated enough to make it simple for our loyal readers to post things, but, if you e-mail any of us, we will post.
Just a reminder that you
Just a reminder that you can sign up for the reunion online: http://www.williams.edu/alumni/events/reunion_weekend.php. It doesn’t get much easier than that!
Here is an update from
Here is an update from Ben Miller:
We’re entering the home-stretch for the reunion, barely over 2 weeks away !
We have over 250 folks registed so far, including classmates, friends and family, all planning on descending on the Purple Valley for the weekend of June 13th-15th.
Register today (especially in the interest of making sure we tell our caterers and drink providers (ie the Spirit Shop) how much we need more than 2 days before the reunion !)
As of 5/28/03, firm attendees are 91 alums, 148 adults total, 98 kids, 8 babysitters. There are about another 50 alums who’ve said they’re ‘thinking’ of attending — time to sign up !
Athletics
I am busy searching for more information on athletics at Williams. As always, pointers are appreciated. Anyone more interested in seeing information about our class and reunion activities should send in an Eph Blurb. We publish everything we get.
In any event, there was a Williams Record editorial on athletics last year. The editorial notes that:
The Ad Hoc Faculty Committee on Athletics has just released a detailed, thoughtfully considered analysis of the status of athletics at the College. Although it is open to interpretation, it appears that the report finds, in general, that there is not a major problem with the athletic program at Williams, but rather with a small number of athletic teams.
I would love to find a copy of that report, but no success so far. The most disturbing paragraph in the editorial was:
The report finds, in general, that female athletes on campus do not suffer from these tendencies. However, particularly in two men’s teams whose members predominantly (78 percent) major in Division II subjects, this is not the case. The greatest concern of faculty in the two departments within division two “is evidence of anti-intellectualism, of clear disengagement and even outright disdain, on the part of varsity athletes…in particular sports,” the report states, referring to two specific men’s teams. Division II faculty feel that often they have athletes who only want the bare minimum grade, which forces them to “dumb down” courses or structure courses around menial assignments that check whether or not students are doing their work.
Two men’s teams? Let me guess: squash and skiing? The Record provides an overview article about the report here. The discussion of “tips” is interesting.
This year, Williams has cut down the number of athletic “tips” it gives from 72 to 66. The term “tip,” according to the report, is misleading. Rather than tipping the scale for an athlete when all else is equal, the report says that tips “more accurately should be seen as ‘coaches’ preferences.’ Coaches are allocated a certain number of choices per year, depending on the sport,” which must be ratified by the admissions department. The athletics department, according to Sheehy, is getting close to the point where it cannot remain competitive given the few slots it is allowed.
“We have really come to the point where our coaches can’t make any mistakes,” Sheehy said. “The school has to decide how competitive it wants to be.”
Perhaps the Record has mischaracterized Coach Sheehy’s position here. Over the last decade, Williams has had far and away the most successful Division III athletic program in the country. What would happen if the college cut the number of tips in half, to around 30? I am certainly ready to believe that this would prevent us from winning the Sears Cup. But it is hard to believe that we wouldn’t still be “competitive”. Surely most of our teams would still be win 1/2 their games. Surely some of our teams would be Little Three champions. How horrible a world would that be?
The Record also had an article this past fall that described the inception of a new standing committee on athletics. Nothing in it is that interesting, but the following quote is priceless.
Though the members of last year’s ad hoc Faculty Committee on Athletics frequently said they were appointed because of their publicly neutral opinions towards athletics, several members of the new committee have been outspoken about their views.
Sheehy has been a vocal supporter of athletics at faculty meetings and in other public forums, while Shanks has represented the opposite end of the spectrum. In 2001, she told the Record “of course, this isn’t a college. It’s a Nike Camp with enrichment classes” (”Some faculty voice concerns about athletics,” March 13, 2001).
If only this blog could come up with lines like that . . .
I’m a little reluctant to
I’m a little reluctant to post my Eph blurb after the suggestion that the blog has a tendency toward self-absorption, but I promised David I’d do this about a week ago and I don’t want to renege! :)
Tracy Heilman’s Eph Blurb:
I moved to Chicago right after graduation and started working at the Sachs Group, a startup health care information company. I had found the opportunity through a somewhat chance encounter with a Williams alum. I had no intention of getting into the health care information field, but the opportunity to work at a small, startup company getting exposure to a variety of jobs was appealing. It turned out to be a pivotal choice. I stayed there for 5 years, during which the company grew from 15 to 75 people, and I had just about every job under the sun except hardcore tech stuff and sales. I finally left to go to b-school at Kellogg.
After about a year of living in Chicago, I met my future husband, Ray. (I can actually trace our meeting back to Andy Garrow…long story!) We ended up getting married about 5 or 6 years later, after I finished grad school. We pretty much did everything backwards – bought a building together, got a dog, and then got married.
After Kellogg, I went to Deloitte Consulting’s health care practice in Chicago. I loved the work, but the lifestyle stunk (too much time on out of town projects in less than glamorous venues!). I left after almost 2 years…to go back to the Sachs Group. I returned at a great time, as the company was trying to figure out new ways of delivering their information, and the Internet was where they turned. I ended up immersing myself in Internet product development and loving it. After a few years of designing products, going through a merger, and seeing the company change pretty substantially, I decided to leave (again!).
Despite being an incredibly risk-averse person, I joined 3 of my former Sachs colleagues to start my current company, Subimo. While we don’t have the best timing (we started up right as the dot com bubble burst!), we really do have a “dream team” that has vision and gets things done. We provide information that helps consumers make better health care decisions, and it’s been fun to be at the forefront of an emerging trend. I am lucky to be able to work from home – usually in my PJ’s or running clothes, with my dogs (Codi and Boston, both Black Labs) at my feet…kind of makes up for the low “salary” afforded a startup partner (not exactly sure Ray would agree, but…!)
A few years ago, Ray and I were really fortunate to purchase some property in Maine that had belonged to my great uncle. It is on a lake in a rural part of Maine, and we love the contrast between it and the city…I really can have the best of both worlds, especially since I’m able to work out there and spend more time there than I otherwise could.
That’s my last 15 years in a nutshell. Looking forward to hearing more from the rest of you!
Scott Berman sent in these
Scott Berman sent in these thoughts on tips. My comments are interspersed.
Please take no personal offense, but you are a bit late to this debate.
No offense taken. This is not the first time that I have come late to the party.
It has been raging at Williams for some time now, and President Shapiro (along with numerous others) has publicly weighed in already. I don’t think it is worth rehashing the issues here, as they have been comprehensively covered elsewhere and I doubt that I can do either side justice.
If anyone (Scott or others) know of good on-line discussions of the issue, I would love to post the links. I saw an article on related topics in the Alumni Review a while back, but it is not on-line.
But in case the term is not self-explanatory to some, I believe that “tips” refer to the fact that some students are given “preference” by the admissions committee based on recommendations by the athletic coaches. I believe that some of these “tips” are arguably just as qualified as any other admitted student (i.e., they may have been accepted anyway). Others may be slightly below the “average,” but I think that the admissions committee argues (justifiably in my opinion) that they are treated similarly to other applicants whose grades or SATs may be “below average” but who can bring a unique talent that boosts the overall quality of the Williams Community (i.e., no different than an accomplished musician or artist). I think that as I have heard it described, coaches do not even bother trying to get tips for applicants who are clearly below Williams standards.
Hmmm. Of course, as always, the devil is in the details. To the extent that the average SAT scores and high school grades for the tips are “similar” to those of the non-tips, I see no problems. In fact, I can’t imagine that anyone would have a problem. But, I suspect, that the reason for tips in the first place is that these are students that don’t quite measure up, as a group, to their non-tip peers. The key unknown (to me) is the extent of the disparity.
Whether one agrees or disagrees with this policy probably depends upon the relative importance one places on sports, and personal beliefs about the role athletics plays in shaping the overall college experience. Interestingly, Harry Sheehy (the current Athletic Director and former basketball coach) gave an outstanding talk on this and related topics at the Boston Alumni Association’s annual meeting just a couple of weeks ago. It’s a shame that only a few of our local classmates could be there because not only was he very entertaining, but also I thought he made some excellent arguments that I had not considered previously – for both sides of the debate. Admittedly I went into the meeting with a slight bias in favor of a continued emphasis on athletics, but I left with an even deeper understanding of the role athletics can play at the college, as well as a greater appreciation for some of the pitfalls that must be carefully avoided.
I like to think that it is possible to believe both a) athletics are important to Williams and should be treated as so and b) very little if any benefit in the admissions process should be given to tips. After all, if there were no tips, Williams would still field athletic teams. Someone would still play varsity soccer. Those teams would not be as successful, but since when is something like winning the Sears Cup important. The key issue is that, in a world without tips, some Williams students who currently do not make the team (or who make the team but ride the bench) would make the team. There are only 12 spots on the varsity basketball team. For every tip who takes a spot, a non-tip student must give up a spot. Places in the starting lineup are limitted. Those who say that tips are a good thing because it is more fun to play on a winning team than a losing team miss the (obvious) point that this is only true if one gets to play on both teams. I would assume that the vast majority of Williams students would rather play on a team that was 10-10 than watch that same team win the national championship.
Anyway, I’d better leave it at that for now, lest I be sucked into what I know is a very polarizing debate.
By the way, does this get me off the hook for submitting an Eph Blurb?
Yes! You, unlike some memebers of the reunion committee who shall remain unnamed, get full Eph Blurb credit.
Ellen O’Connell sent in this
Ellen O’Connell sent in this info:
In response to someone’s inquiry into the exact meaning of gala for Saturday night. Thsounds a whole lot fancier than what is intended for the Saturday dinner. Remember for 4 years we walked around sweats — often with Williams emblazoned on it as if we were to be lost someone would know where to return us. Everyone should be shod, but beyond that blue blazer/cocktail dress or the 2003 version of that.
Here’s the point – Come to reunion to relax, reminisce, pick up where you left off, & enjoy the company of your classmates and their families.
This blog seems to encourage a bit of self-absorption so in offering my congratulations to Suz Mc., I’ll note that Jonathan shares my birthday and just beats my birth weight. The one time I topped the charts (well and in that “easy” Jake House picture).
Comments:
1) This wasn’t quite a Eph Blurb, but it was still way better than the (missing) material that we have received from most members of the reunion committee.
2) “Self-absorbtion?” Who can Ellen be talking about? ;-)
3) “Blue blazer?” I can’t speak for others, but I will be in shorts at the gala, unless either a) the Massachusetss weather continues its current pattern (47 degrees and raining) or b) my wife makes other plans.
4) Speaking of Suz MacCormac and self-absorbtion, Suz’s birthday was 2 days ago. If you happen to be out in San Francisco, you should get her an Oreo Frappe with chocolate syrup. They’re her favorite.
Sad to see that Renzie
Sad to see that Renzie Lamb, ex-Marine and long-time lacrosse coach, has retired. Best part of the record article is:
Lamb, too, remembers that banquet fondly, but his fondest memories are of his times teaching at Williams. “The most memorable moment when I was here was in my Phys. Ed. classes,” Lamb said. “The person who, at the end of six weeks, comes up to me and says, ‘Thanks coach, I love squash,’ that’s special. A captured soul, required to be there, giving me attendance, and I’m able to get them to see something new, that’s memorable. That will be what I miss the most.
“I’d like to think that Mark Hopkins, when he was done sitting on that log, that the student walked away thinking, ‘I loved that time.’ If they said that to Mark Hopkins, and said that to me now, then it’s been a good life,” Lamb said.
Of course, I also enjoyed:
A former Marine, Lamb brought the lessons he learned there with him to campus. It was about a sense of camaraderie, but also about taking responsibility. And Lamb was the first to show that responsibility. “I’ve bailed kids out of jail,” the coach said. “It used to be, whenever a kid got in trouble for doing donuts on Cole Field, they’d think, who can we call? Call Coach Lamb.”
If I can’t get the college to hire me as a token right-wing professor, perhaps the ex-Marine-who-bails-kids-out-of-jail spot is now open.
;-)
Close readers of this Sunday’s
Close readers of this Sunday’s New York Times will have been drawn to the front page article, “Play to Win, or Just to Play? N.C.A.A.’s Lowest Rung Split”.
Basic storyline is that there is some tension within Division III about how serious the athletes (and the athletic programs) should be. One example mentioned was the maximum of 5 weeks of spring footbal practice that is allowed. (Anyone know if Williams has a spring football practice?) Some of the conferences within Divisions III, including NESCAC, within which Williams plays, are considering forming their own division with stricter guidelines. The only paragraph that mentioned Williams directly was:
Some institutions, though small, are nonetheless Division III athletic giants in many sports, none more notable than Williams College in Massachusetts. For the last four years, Williams, with about 2,000 students, has won the Directors’ Cup, presented annually to the Division III institution gauged to have the best overall athletic program.
Nothing wrong with that. Faithful observers of the Williams scene, however, could not but be struct by this observation:
Bigger Division III institutions tend to have more money for better athletic facilities and they draw their athletes from a larger pool of applicants, both geographically and academically. “If a school of 10,000 students lets in 75 more athletes for its teams, it’s not going to raise any eyebrows,” said Steve Allrich, the Centennial Conference’s top administrator. “That’s 3 percent of the freshman class. If a school of 2,000 does the same thing, it’s a big issue because that’s 15 percent of the freshman class.”
Hmmm. Does anyone know of a Division III school with 2000 students that lets in “75 more athletes?” I don’t think Mr. Allrich was referring to Williams, but consider this recent article from the Record.
Athletic tips comprised 68 of the admitted student group; though the College generally accepts 66 tips, they accepted 68 this year because only 64 tips attended last year. An additional 177 have been identified by coaches as capable of competing at the varsity level, but were not formally recruited.
I am still trying to determine exactly what a “tip” is. I don’t remember the term from our time at Williams. Anyone with good information should please enlighten the rest of us. In the meantime, the most plausible reading of this paragraph (to me) is that the college has a quota (of size 66) of applicants who it will let in because of their atheletic talent but who they would not let in if they were not so athletic.
Is anyone besides me bothered by this?
This sure looks like our
This sure looks like our Keith McIver to me! Keith is manager of the Community Development Corporations program initiative at the South Carolina Department of Commerce.
It is so nice when there are pictures to help confirm – but how come everyone looks soooo young still?! I am feeling very old after last week’s birthday!
Here is a bio on
Here is a bio on one of our reunion attendees – Mike Goldstein, who is at the New England Eye Center. There is even a picture of Mike at work.
It is sometimes hard to
It is sometimes hard to explain to people why the education that a student gets at Williams is, for almost everyone, much better than the education that that same student would have gotten at Harvard, Yale or (insert your favorite reearch university). Other times, a simple anecdote tells the whole tale. Harvard awards a prize for excellence in teaching to one senior professor, one junior professor and one teaching fellow each year in May. This year, the winning senior professor was Benjamin Friedman, a professor of economics. Professor Friedman is a perfectly nice guy (I knew him a little) who genuinely cares about undergraduate education. But the article notes that:
Students who nominated Friedman, many of them in his Economics 1480: “Moral Consequences of Economics” course, cited his teaching and his personal attention as distinct and outstanding. He reads all the papers himself and writes pages of responses, one student wrote.
“Reads all the papers himself?” To any Williams student, this must seem a strange compliment. After all, if Professor Friedman doesn’t read the papers, who would? Aren’t having one’s papers read by a professor and having the professor write comments part of the whole process at Harvard? Isn’t undergraduate education at Harvard more or less like undergraduate education at Williams
The sad truth is that it is not. One reason that his students think so highly of Professor Friedman is that their experience with him is very different from their experiences with other professors. Most Harvard classes are lectures. Almost all papers are graded by teaching fellows, poorly paid graduate students (I was one) who are under a lot of pressure to spend time on their research rather than on their teaching. Most Harvard students, especially those in big departments, graduate without ever having more than one or two tenured professors look at all seriously at their written work. Many graduate without a single professor knowing their names.
Whenever I think about the disparity between Williams and Harvard, I always go back to the end of graduation, to that final walk through the clapping faculty members. Shaking hands with the professors (like Alan White and Mike McPherson) who had meant so much to my education is a moment that will never leave me.
At Harvard, the vast majority of professors don’t even attend graduation.
I firmly believe that if more high school seniors had an accurate picture of the real differences between Williams and its larger competitors, more would choose to become Ephs.
But that is enough of a rant for today.
It seems that the College
It seems that the College does a good job of thanking those who work hard at making it so special.
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass., May 19, 2003 — Williams College honored its employees at its annual appreciation day on Tuesday, May 6. The celebration included a commemorative luncheon at the Williams Inn for employees completing their 5th, 10th, 15th, or 20th year of service. In the evening, employees celebrating their 25th year of service and those retiring from the college were honored with dinner at the Mill on the Floss.
The Kane family owes special thanks to Mary Winston (retiring from OCC) and Fatma Kassamali (celebrating 25 years at OCC). I would wager that:
1) It has been a challenging couple of years at OCC.
2) “Fatma Kassamali” is the coolest name in all of Williamstown. Not that “Mary Winston” isn’t a perfectly nice name too . . .
It is also worth noting that there are no faculty in this celebration. That is, the college is only celebrating non-faculty “employees” here. I have mixed feeings about that. On the one hand, faculty are “employees”, just as their W-2’s confirm. Why wouldn’t a faculty member who has been there for 10 years deserve an invitation to the luncheon? On the other hand, faculty are special in their role at the college, so perhaps it is fit and proper that there be some other celebration just for them.
Alas, our own Brooks Foehl is not listed among the honorees.
Eph NPR
Alas, no Eph Blurbs came in today, so we will just have to make due with media comments.
Morty Schapiro had a couple of comments of NPR’s Marketplace show this evening. Alas, I can’t find the actual comments anywhere, but this site provides an overview on the series: “The Ivory Tower in the Real World.” Morty’s comments were perfectly reasonable, but quite short. Perhaps he’ll be on in future installments of the series. I think that this might be an audio of the story, but I am not smart enough to do audio.
The real shocker of an item about Williams from the program was that the college has an endowment of $1.1 billion — I don’t remember it being that big — which is down from $1.5 billion a year ago. I tried my best to find information on the endowment at the college website, but all I could find was this quite-out-of-date Q & A. Here is my favorite section:
What is the performance of the investments of the endowment?
The chart below indicates the performance of the Williams endowment in recent years.
‘88 ‘89 ‘90 ‘91 ‘92 ‘93 ‘94 ‘95 ‘96 ‘97 ‘98 ‘99 ‘01
Return 2.6 14.5 11.0 6.8 13.9 14.3 4.5 14.9 18.0 22.3 18.3 28.9 51.2
The web page also includes S&P and bond returns for these years, but I had trouble copying it over. Looking at this, the obvious comments are:
1) The College sure did benefit from the bull market of the 1990’s.
2) The chart on the web page is missing ‘00. I suspect that the last figure is for ‘00 and is just mislabeled. There is almost no way that the college made 50% (!) in 2001.
3) Back of the envelope, it is not clear to me that the college’s active investment strategy has served it that well. I wonder what returns would have been if the college had just indexed (in any reasonable mix of bonds and equities) over the last 15 years. I’ll try to find a more thorough report.
4) I remember that, during the bubble years, the college seemed quite pleased with a variety of venture capital investments that it had made. There was an article (in the Review?) about how the college had cleaned up in Amazon. (Actually, it wasn’t clear how much money (total dollars) the college made in Amazon and the like. Instead, it was obvious that, in perecentage terms, the college (like every other high tech venture capitalist of that era) did well on the investments.
5) Depending on how much money the college put into venture capital (on on the quality of those VC folks), the college could be looking at more trouble over the next year or two. A lot of those investments have probably not been marked down as far as they should have been.
Congratulations Kim! You guys look
Congratulations Kim! You guys look mahvelous!
A little over a
A little over a week ago, I married Cyrus Daboo. We have a few photos taken by friends to keep us amused while we await the professional shots. Alas, none with the dogs yet so this will have to do. Kate Macko, Lee Steinberg, Kerstin Skoogfors Porter (all ‘88), and F.R. Dengel (’87) were in attendance so a traditional Williams photo, complete with class of 88 banner, will also appear eventually.
Not sure we’re going to make the reunion yet, but we are trying.
Suz MacCormac’s Eph Blurb Suz
Suz MacCormac’s Eph Blurb
Suz and Andy are delighted to announce the arrival of Jonathan Edward Taylor on Saturday May 17th at 4:27pm. Little Ed weighed in at 8lbs, 14oz and 21.5″; mother and child are doing well.
Comments:
1) Friends of Suz will recall that she had picked out the name Jonathan during our time at Williams. She is fortunate to have a husband as obliging as Andy.
2) 8 pounds, 14 ounces is a big baby. Can anyone in our class top that? SIngle births only, please. ;-)
3) When last we saw Suz, she had claimed that the new baby would prevent her attending reunion. Hah, I say! She has a month to recover. Wonder what the record is for youngest child brought to reunion . . .
4) Are those silk pajamas? My wife was not outfitted so nicely for her post-birth photos . . .
Subscribe to EphBlog
College News- Center for Development Economics Brings Rich Diversity to Williamstown
- Williams Graduate Program in the History of Art, Class of 2009 (Corrected 6/25/09)
- J.R.R. Tolkien & C.S. Lewis Illustrator's Work Comes to Williams College Library
- 63 Williams College Seniors Inducted into Sigma Xi Scientific Research Society
- Astronomer Jay Pasachoff Sheds Light on Earth-Based Solar Eclipse Research in June 11 Issue of ...
- Athletics
- Anne O'Leary named NGCA All-American Scholar for 3rd straight year
- Ephs lead NESCAC with 10 team titles in 2008-09 and in overall team titles
- Ephs top Little Three competition for 24th straight year
- Ephs come from behind to win 11th consecutive Directors' Cup
- Dan Greenberg '08 named head coach of men's tennis
- CRCA names Justin Moore National Coach of the Year
Get email updates
Follow us on Twitter