And yes, the fact that many languages are not included in the new Exploring Diversity requirement is absurd.

That said, I do wish I spoke a language better. I’m not sure that college would have been the place to learn. I’m all for increasing the emphasis on languages in primary grades (we should all be learning Spanish/French at the very least in elementary or middle school), but I don’t think that language requirements in College really are the sort of “fix” eph seems to be looking for.

It is critical, as you say, that all Williams programs, off-campus and on, be academically rigorous before they are anything else.

If it were indeed true that students were sloughing off coursework in favor of internships (and gaining, as you fear, far too much credit for them in the process), I would share your worry.

But I’d urge you to think about the program not as a series of internships, but as an opportunity for students to pursue fieldwork. This may sound like a rhetorical distinction, but hear me out:

For older students in particular, one of the more valuable components of a Williams education in particular is the opportunity to pursue a longer-term project (research in the field followed by an extensive period of writing and revision under the supervision of a faculty mentor, for instance, or a chance to translate abstract theoretical tools into lived experience).

Williams-in-New York is the only program at Williams open to all* that offers students an opportunity to do this kind of work as part of a structured program. (Fieldwork, when it happens at all, is typically relegated to the summer.) Given that, and given that academic governors at Williams have been appropriately satisfied as to the rigor inherent in such fieldwork, I find the credit structure appropriate.

*The summer Mellon Fellows program may offer some minority students a mentored research opportunity.

2) Whatever way you define basic proficiency, almost all the rich kids who get into Williams will already be exempt. Rich kids go to excellent schools, either public or private. The vast majority of them will have had 4 years of a foreign language in high school. Many will take an AP or achievement test as well. Almost all would be able to pass out of any test that could be passed by someone who had, from scratch, taken two years at Williams.

3) So, any requirement will mostly impact non-rich kids. Sucks to be them! In fact, I think that the majority (75%? 90%?) would be able to pass out of any requirement from the start. How many of your friends would actually be required to do anything?

4) And what’s the point? Some kids love languages and want to learn them. Good for them. And Williams should do everything it can to support those students. For example, I am glad to see that Williams now offers Arabic to those students who *want* to take it. But you are proposing forcing students who do not want to take a language and who, for whatever reason, did not take a language in high school to take a year (or two? or three?) of a language. How well do you think that is going to work out? Do you think that they will enjoy themselves? That they will get something out of it? That they will thank you for it later?

I’ll take the other side of those bets.

Lots of students appear to be “lov[ing] a fun-filled vacation” in Williamstown. If you’re going to get real about academic seriousness, you’ve got to get real in Williamstown, too.

You must not be serious. I’m certainly not for making Williams four years of mandatory checking-of-boxes, but in an era such as this, not to require at least basic proficiency in one other language– the most painless way of ensuring that students think about the outside world, and certainly far more painless than requiring ungodly numbers of nebulously-defined ‘peoples and cultures’ courses** — is bordering on irresponsible.
**Languages don’t count here, by the way, speaking of perverse incentives.

“Visit a major museum.”
“Attend…a music performance”
“Attend a Broadway show”

Then again, it is Williams.

So what am I missing right now?

I’d be interested in knowing more about the relationship with NYU and how that will fit into future versions of the program. I saw it mentioned on the WNY website, but didn’t see it in the materials Prof. Jackall provided here.

In looking at the materials, I was excited about how alumni and alumnae participate and open their professional lives and perspectives to current students. To me, the courses looked as though they would expose students to (and in some cases train them in) varied ways of looking at things and also make them more comfortable/familiar with exploring the unknown and unfamiliar. Whatever path one planned to take professionally, I would think those experiences could be quite useful.

In response to David’s point about increasing the WNY enrollment…shouldn’t Williams be focusing on more highly desired programs first? My understanding of application to the Oxford Programme is that in both absolute numbers and percentages, there are more people who want to participate who are not given the chance (I’ve heard that roughly 2-3 as many people apply as there are spaces, which means that 25+ Ephs aren’t getting the chance to go to Oxford every year, which is a pretty significant number).