Williams-Specific Application Essays
Morty discussed the issue of how Williams can/should ensure that the students we accept want to come and will be happy here. We have a big advantage in that lots of people seek the number one liberal arts college, especially from abroad. But does someone from Shanghai really know what they are getting into? Do they understand what it means to spend 4 years in rural New England? Morty noted that the Common Application makes it easy for someone who is already applying to Harvard and Swarthmore to just add Williams to their application list. Why not? [It is free for someone who checks the financial waiver box and, since elite colleges want more poor kids, why not check it?] Morty noted that we want to somehow tell which applicants really understand Williams and want to come here for the right reasons.
A committee of trustees (led by Bob Scott ‘68?) is actually looking at this issue and actively considering having Williams add a special essay section. Morty used the example [Not sure if this was actively under consideration?] of pointing out the course catalog and asking students to pick a few classes that they really wanted to take and to explain why. The expectation would be that students who really want to come to Williams would take the time to write these essays, would have the energy to look up the CVs of the professors and tell a compelling story. Even if this causes several thousand applicants not to apply [which seems plausible], Morty argued that this would be a feature rather than a bug. Why bother with students who aren’t that interested in Williams? They are unlikely to come even if we accept them. [And don't forget adverse selection since the ones that would come from this category are the ones that couldn't get in to any place better.] And even those that do come are less likely to be happy, contributing members of the community.
[I think that this is a great idea. In general, there are two models of Williams admissions. First is the contest. Once you set the rules (grades count for this much, SAT scores for this, X number of slots for athletes and URMs), you select the best candidates, regardless as to whether you think that they will come or be happy at Williams. You let them decide since they "won" the contest. The second model for Williams admissions is the dinner party. (Perhaps I need a better analogy? Suggestions welcome!) Although there are standards for who you most want at your party, you are especially interested in inviting people who will come and have a good time. Miserable guests make other people miserable as well. At the very best parties, all the attendees will be excited to be there.
In order to have a sense of whether this is a good idea, you would want to measure the happiness and contribution to campus life of different sorts of students, especially those who you think would have gone to the trouble of filling out an extra essay and those who wouldn't have. One (imperfect) way of getting to that would be to compare early decision Ephs (both those accepted early and those admitted regular) with other Ephs. One assumes that the ED Ephs are more likely to understand what Williams is all about and be making an informed choice. If such students are much happier and more involved in the community than a matched sample of non-ED students, then requiring an Williams-specific essay makes some sense.]
If Morty and/or the Trustees go very far down this path, it promises to be the biggest change in undergraduate admissions in a decade. Comments anyone?
Confucians for Obama
Professor Sam Crane explains:
Some attention is being drawn to John McCain’s first marriage and the apparently shabby manner in which he ended it. Andrew Sullivan blogs on it and makes the point that in a liberal society, one that draws a distinction between personal and public life, this should not matter:
This is what liberalism allows for: it can simply say that an immoral private life may be a negative, but it is not to be conflated with much more salient matters of public import. With political liberalism, you can have your moral cake and your politics too.
Sullivan is engaged in a debate with American conservatives, especially religious conservatives, for whom personal moral failings should matter in presidential elections. I would simply want to add that Confucians would agree here with conservatives: how we lead our personal lives is an expression of our daily moral commitments. If we cannot live up to our familial duties, then we are not worthy to assume positions of political leadership.
Indeed. Read the whole thing.
Magic Castle
Update on author Andy Straka ‘80. (Previous Straka coverage here.)
To 8-year-old Andy Straka, the Sherburne Public Library loomed like an enchanted palace over East State Street.
“Looking back, I realize it WAS a magic castle or some sort of magic portal for me, in that it transported me into a world of reading and imagination I had scarcely known existed,” says Andy, now 49 and living in Virginia. From that time on, he dreamed of being a writer.
Now, with shining book reviews extolling his name in Publishers Weekly and other major publications, he’s living his dream.
Read the whole thing. Many Ephs feel the same about the local public library from their youth. Straka is married to Dr. Bonnie (Foster) Straka ‘80, a dermatologist. There are few wiser paths in life than marrying an Eph dermatologist . . .
Question
Someone asked me whether, when a Williams faculty member who holds a named professorship takes emeritus status, another faculty member is then designated as holding the named professorship. I haven’t been paying attention, and I have no idea. I remember seeing professors referred to as, say “AB, ZY-XW Professor of Subject, Emeritus” (or “Emerita”) but it never occurred to me to look to see whether someone else was soon thereafter appointed “CD, ZY-XW Professor of Subject” while the former incumbent continued to hold the designation but on emeritus status.
I assume that some monetary grant goes with most named professorships. How does that work when the holder takes emeritus status?
Williams has been profoundly fortunate in the various ways so many of its emerati professors have continued to teach, research, head special committees, and otherwise give to and promote the interests of the College. I think of Hodge Markgraf ‘52 (the Ebenezer Fitch Professor of Chemistry, Emeritus), as the epitome of that.
Eph Teaching Diary: Life in a Low-Income District
Because Williams does not have an Education major, a graduating Eph who wishes to teach has three main options.
1) Enroll in a graduate school of Education
2) Teach at a private or parochial school (they are not required to hire licensed teachers)
3) Enroll in an alternative-route certification program, such as Teach for America, Mississippi Teacher Corps, New York City Teaching Fellows, Chicago Teaching Fellows, and many, many others.
I am not exactly sure of the typical breakdown between these three options for Williams grads who go in to teaching. My (very rough) guess is that around 10 members of the class of ‘07 ended up in #2, and another 10-20 in #3. I only know of a few people who were considering #1. (Note: Plenty of students also go abroad to teach - the phantom 4th option on my list). Perhaps someone more familiar with these numbers (the OCC must know!) could chime in and correct me…
I hope to get few writers from each of these categories, but I’m starting these entries with participants from alternative-route (meaning: not through traditional graduate school) programs. Obviously, as a current member of one these programs, its the viewpoint most familiar to me. But I am also starting here because it is the category that has been receiving the most attention recently - news articles, columns, books, and lots of good buzz about how a big chunk of our generation has chosen to devote two years of our lives to improving our nation’s educational system.
Most aspiring teachers who choose that third category will find themselves in low-income school districts that have a high rate of teacher turnover — and a whole slew of problems that contribute to it.
More below the jump…
Best President
I attended two events with Morty on last Friday at reunion: the Ephraim Williams Society breakfast (Williams wants to be in your will) and the general Q&A from 4:00 to 5:00. Morty was in amazing form at both events: hilariously funny, (almost) completely honest and (close to) exactly correct about the best policies for Williams. If Morty continues for another decade or so to serve as well as he has for the last 8 years, he will deserve to be named, along with Jack Sawyer ‘39, as the best Williams president since Mark Hopkins. Each day next week, I will provide my summary, from memory, of the most important points, along with my comments [in brackets] and links to previous discussions. I encourage other readers who were there to chime in as well.
Choosing Princeton
The competition for the very best students is global.
From prestigious Princeton to MIT, city boy Rik Sengupta can pick and choose where he wants to study — for free. The South Pointer has bagged full scholarship seats at seven top universities in the US.
Princeton, the top ranking university in the US, has offered him a scholarship of $52,990 a year. His other scholarships have even more jaw-dropping amounts: Yale $53,764, Caltech $48,490, MIT $51,540, Williams College (1st among undergraduate liberal arts colleges) $50,390 and Amherst College $51,832.
Sengupta chose Princeton. Thanks to EphBlog’s favorite Lord Jeff, Modale Hall, for the pointer. Hall also asks, “Is this a sign of increased financial aid for international students, or are there full scholarships available for whiz kids? Or is it a little of both?” I assume that this was all need-based and that Sengupta’s family is poor. How Williams (or any other school) can actually measure the income/wealth of applicants from around the world is unclear (to me).
Congratulations!
Williams has won the Directors Cup (pdf). Look at how strong the NESCAC conference was this year (out of almost 300 listed D3 schools):
1) Williams 1120.5
2) Wash U. 899
3) New Jersey 825.25
4) Amherst 815
5) Middlebury 813.50
Our women’s tennis and rowing teams were national champions this spring - but I’ll leave the details for someone else as I’m rushing to get this posted and get to a meeting.
Go Ephs!
UPDATE (DK): I put the pdf link in-line above. Still no official announcement from the College. Dick Quin is, presumably, writing something now. Could one of our sports experts provide some more commentary on where these points come from? For example, I see that we earned 53 points in mens lacrosse. First, how was it determined that we we’re the 9th best team in DIV III? Second, what is the breakdown in points by finish? I had thought that the drop-off from 1st to 9th was much steeper. Also, how do the points breakdown between mens and womens teams? It almost seems like Williams women, alone, could have won the cup.
Surely there is a member of the EphBlog community who is, or would be willing to become, an expert on the Directors’ Cup. Start here.
Try Outs for Graduation Speakers?
Zachary Thomas ‘08, Valedictorian, “The Liberal Arts After Williams”
But, throughout the whole process, Williams’ defining characteristic was the perhaps mysterious appellation of “Liberal Arts College,” with its separate ranking in the U.S. News & World Report. The label of “liberal arts” includes a deep commitment to educating its students across many different fields of study, one that I found quite appealing — and one that is by no means necessarily present at other colleges. During my search, I knew I was quite interested in science and math, and I looked at several top engineering schools during my tours — but I felt out of place there. I wanted to attend a college where I could study both physics and history — a school with more than one lone English major on campus — and Williams more than fit the description.
Your thought process for choosing Williams (unless it is very funny and/or self-deprecating) will not make for the best material in a graduation speech.
One of the few things that Harvard does better than Williams is to require try-outs from the students who want to talk at graduation and then choose the best ones. Being valedictorian does not (and should not) guarantee you a spot on the podium. Williams should do the same.
Eph Diaries: The Eph Teachers
This is the first post in a summer-long series of “Eph Diaries” about the experiences of recent Williams grads who have chosen to pursue teaching after graduation. As an ‘07 graduate, I just completed my first year in the Mississippi Teacher Corps, a two-year, alternative-route program (similar to Teach for America), which trains and places recent graduates in the critical-needs school districts of Mississippi. I’ll be cross-posting some of my own blog entries from this year, as well as thoughts from other young Ephs in the classrooms. Hopefully our stories, observations, and ideas will provide inspiration for other Williams students who are contemplating a career in education.
Perhaps it seems odd that these entries appear over the summer — school is out, we are not necessarily teaching, and our blog entries will often be outdated. I think, in fact, it is the perfect time for these entries - a time in which students and teachers alike can reflect on the year, on what has (or has not) been accomplished, and on what might be achieved when September rolls around again. To those undergraduates adrift in a sea of career opportunities, summer is the perfect time to begin thinking about the future -and hopefully you might gain some insight from those of us newly “on the job”.
So, without further ado, I will give you an entry of mine, recently written, which was required by my program: a reflection of my first year of teaching. This year, I taught Junior and Senior English at a large high school in the Mississippi Delta, one of the poorest (if not the poorest) regions in the country. My attempt to reflect on the year is as follows:
Keeping It Real
Richard Serra, Commencement Address, “If Not Now, When?” See our previous discussion of Serra’s speech. I am surprised that no one noticed the obvious: His speech was a parody.
The constant need for referents prevents direct experience. Experience does not always need to be compared and related. The habit of recalling stored imagery subverts both what’s present and what’s being re-called. Analogies and metaphors fail to impress a solid image on us. I have no problem with the virtual reality on your screens as long as you are aware that it is virtual. My concern is that experience by proxy is a poor substitute for the reality of the interactive space we inhabit. As a sculptor I believe that perception structures thought and that to see is to think and conversely to think is to see. The virtual reality of the media, be it television or internet, limits our perception in that it affects our sense of space. It immobilizes our ability to apprehend actual physical space. Don’t let the rhetoric of simulation steal away the immediacy of your experience. Keep it real, keep it in the moment.
Ha! Don’t you get it? Serra spent the first part of the speech telling the graduates to give “little heed to those who will attempt to quell your aspiration” to “challenge others” to not “suffer fools gladly” and to “invent your own tools.” The signature line of the speech is “If it’s not broken, break it.”
All good stuff. But then he acts, at the end, as if the only way to do art (or live life) is in the here and now, that we must abandon the virtual, that only “actual physical space” matters. This is, obviously, in direct contradiction of what he has said before. He says, at the end, that we must follow his, and his generation’s rules and use their tools. No virtual worlds for you!
Either Serra is a very smart guy and purposely constructed his speech in this way, hoping that a few listeners would notice and would understand the real message: The future of art is virtual! Don’t follow me and work in steel. Work in a medium that no one has worked in before. Or Serra is not a smart guy and is to shallow the see the contradiction. Here’s hoping for the former!
Jaffer on McCain
Jameel Jaffer ‘94, Director of the A.C.L.U.’s National Security Project, responds forcefully to John McCain’s support for the Bush wiretaps in today’s New York Times.
Those Who Serve
EphBlog readers represent a variety of views about the current U.S. military engagements. They are in broad agreement, however, that we need to provide support to our troops, both while they serve and when they return.
We can start with Ephs who are in the military. Could someone please supply the names and contact information for the Ephs who are serving in the current conflicts? Feel free to include individuals, who, although they are not Ephs themselves, have close Williams ties, such as 1st Lt. Nate Krisoff’s (’03) father and brother and Jonathan’s brother (please be sure to explain the Williams connection).
Once we have the list, we can write to them. We can send packages. Current students can mobilize support campaigns on campus in the fall.
Somewhere in the archives is a list of suggested items to send to deployed Ephs and their colleagues. I haven’t been able to find it. Could someone provide a link?
I would like to reach out not only to those who are in combat areas, but also to those who are in training and to all Ephs in uniform, whether stateside or overseas. Please provide their names and a way to contact them, if you have that information.
Others serve, as well, although not in uniform. I would like to have a separate list, with contact information, for Ephs who are in the Peace Corps, Teach for America or other service programs. They, too, deserve our thanks, support and interest in their service. (By the way, the College recently published an article on Williams and the Peace Corps: http://www.williams.edu/home/focus/peace_corps.)
Let’s see if we can get this project organized in plenty of time to prepare letters, emails and packages for the Fourth of July. Thank you in advance for helping me with this.
Will Slack ‘11 Rings the Bells
EphBlogger Will Slack is featured playing the Thompson Chapel bells in a new Williams podcast.
http://drm.williams.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/ephcast&CISOPTR=19&CISOBOX=1&REC=1
Good stuff.
And a good time was had by all
I’ve never posted before on Ephblog, and I wasn’t planning to begin now. However, the combination of missing our scheduled meeting Saturday morning (Paula Moore Tabor ‘76 grabbed me and shepherded me, lovingly, to the 2003 section when I was walking towards the balcony) and seeing as my return to ephblog from the ephoric (yes, I know, terrible pun) heights of reunions a couple of posts about the Iraq War and questioning each others patriotism (that’s what we do at ephblog now? really?) either directly or in vague insinuations, I decided it was my duty to try to change the tenor of the conversation.
First, it was HOT this weekend all over the East Coast, and Williamstown was no exception. That meant little to the fun of reunions, except, perhaps for explaining the absurd number of alumni and children swarming the free gelato stand whenever it was open. Swarming, truly, is the only adequate term for it.
Seeing campus again was a wonderful treat and I’m still somewhat overwhelmed by the mixed feelings I had–the joy of seeing so many great friends again and how most of us seem to have found a good path only 5 years out of college was coupled with the return of some of those pathetic freshman insecurities I had thought I had fully outgrown (will I be cool enough? Who will remember me?). It was, however, overall a truly wonderful weekend.
A couple stories to get it started may help. In the small world category, one of my hallmates freshman year is now teaching in public school outside of NYC and mentioned the reunion to one of his fellow teachers, who happens to have been my high school mentor way back when he taught in Princeton before moving. So, if they happen to find ephblog, Austin and Mr. Heyman, hi!
In the “Morty’s not just our President, he’s a bad-ass” category, Morty promised me we’d share a beer the Saturday night with the massive open bar. Unfortunately, the fifth year reunion was somewhat…impatient…with our consumption and by the time Morty made it over to our reunion (around 10 pm), we were out of beer. Fortunately, someone found him an unopened (but warm) can of PBR. So picture Morty with a rotating group of 5 or 6 26-27 year olds all of us just off of a three hour open bar and him politely and kindly holding a warm can of PBR. In thirty minutes of talking, I didnt see him sip from it once, but I still give him credit for it.
Finally, in the “why do I get myself into these things”, while David might not have met me, he probably got a good look at me at the alumni meeting. When the class of 2003 (03! 03! 03!) won the attendance award (I know, not surprising at all), no class officer was in attendance at the meeting (d’oh). So while every alumni waited patiently for someone–ANYONE–to step up and accept the award so we could move on to more interesting stuff, no one in our class knew what to do. Enter my stupid/brave/slighty hungover self. Jumping over classmates, I raced to the stage, got the cup and then thought “wait, what do I do now?” Kindly, our Alumni President in one of his last acts of his presidency was polite enough to whisper to me “now bring it back”. Unfortunately, with my coffee still struggling to kick in, I didn’t realize where “back” was. Thinking that it meant back to where the cup had been (on the far side of the stage) before I saved my class the embarrassment of not picking up its one and only award (curse you 2004 for your high giving rates!), I took a couple hesitant steps towards the other side of the stage before being (again, very politely) told “no, back to your class”. Now somewhat red with embarrassment, I turned, faced the crowd and raised the cup before retreating back to our section with the biggest darn bowl I’d ever seen.
So David, and anyone else who was at reunions, that confused guy from the class of 2003 in the brown shirt? That’s me!
Why We Don’t Serve
There is a line I hear from anti-war people who believe they can neatly separate their condemnation of the war from criticism of the volunteers in our army: “I support the troops; I don’t support the war.” Hearing this said has always bothered me deeply because the dual sentiment seems truly impossible to have unless one believes that either 1) The soldiers fighting today are somehow compelled or otherwise there against their better judgment, or 2) The soldiers fighting today fight willingly and chose to willingly, but only because they were somehow “duped” by their superiors.
One cannot believe that members of our armed forces fight in part because they were compelled or tricked, without taking something away from their choice to serve.
More to the point that is crucial for us to wrestle with now, before the troops come home: if either of the above is a belief about reasons for serving and those who serve that lurks quietly in your heart, I beg that you confront it before the end of this war. Was it Jeff that mentioned the term cognitive dissonance? Can anyone imagine the cognitive dissonance that will occur if 130,000+ soldiers return home to a population that offers, “Thank you for your service. Personally, though, I wish no one had had to do what you did, and I believe you and others like you were the victims of trickery”? I am glad that Americans at large recognize the need to not repeat the end of Vietnam, but in my mind we are a lot closer to that danger than we realize when we “support” the troops but have as much understanding for the decision to serve as is given in
If you want your kids to do good NOW, have them join the Peace Corp or something. I don’t understand why any rational parent with kids who have great alternative options (as almost any Williams grad does) would encourage their kid to join the military so long as this administration is in place. Hence, unsurprising that hardly anyone does.
Jeff’s language above is likely careless, in that it states “I don’t understand . . . hence, unsurprising that hardly anyone does.” I don’t think he meant to say that, but it is a slip that is telling about the “me, therefore everyone” way we all think, a way that will be dangerous to our society in the very near future. We think that, because you and I see nothing to die for in a given context, no other rational being possibly could.
If you, for some reason, have an interest in how I think, read below the break. It is extremely long.
Read more
Art, Politics, and Ali
This post is coming to you at the suggestion of our esteemed commenter FM.
There is a cover story in the June/July issue of the magazine Art in America called “Talking Politics 2008″ by Eleanor Hartley. She features “six artists whose work courts controversy” including Williams Professor Laylah Ali. The artists “exchange ideas about the common ground between politics and art,” a very timely topic given the recent bit of Yale art drama (discussed on EB here and here, and nicely commented upon by our own Prof. Lewis in the WSJ).
Unfortunately the Art in America article is not available online, although FM has a request in and/or might end up scanning it. We’ll see what happens. Regardless, Prof. Ali is a talented artist and notable figure in the arts. This link is from a PBS feature about artists in the 21st century called Art:21. There are some great shots of the art-in-the-making, as well as slideshows of some of her work, interviews, and other video. What a great program! This link is from another exhibition of showing examples of Professor Ali’s work.
The theme of the article seems all the more timely given the controversy surrounding the installation of “The Assassination of Hillary Clinton/The Assassination of Barack Obama” exhibition in New York City that was quickly shut down by the Secret Service. Granted, some see its attempted creation as more a bit of performance art than an actual attempt to create an exhibition “about character assassination — about how Obama and Hillary have been portrayed by the media,” but it does point again to the intersection of art and politics. The New York Times also did a feature piece in April about how the campaigns generally, and Barack Obama particularly, have inspired quite a bit of political art.
Obviously this is not a new phenomenon. Art is political, politicians and campaigns (and kings and queens and patrons) make use of and support art to fit their various purposes and ideals. Political issues likewise provide an inspiration, frame, and focus for art throughout the ages. Art is revolutionary form of speech, a unique way for artists to express their response to the world. I suppose given the Williams infiltration of the greater art community…wait, that sounds sinister. Saturation perhaps (?) of the arts community it makes sense that one of our professors was featured on this topic. So pick up a copy of the magazine if you see it someplace, or at the very least check out the link to the PBS feature of Laylah Ali above and get a taste of the work and creative process of this talented artist and asset to our faculty.
Do any of our commenters have particularly political pieces of art (visual, musical, etc.) that are your favorites or are particularly notable? Personally, I have always been truly moved and inspired by Picasso’s Guernica. I have seen the tapestry reproduction of the work that is at the United Nations building in New York, and it always evokes a raw sadness and anger in me. Thoughts from others?
Machete
Erika Williams ‘08, Phi Beta Kappa Speaker, “Get a Machete.”
This is hard. But let me just tell you about a statement that was really reassuring to me. It’s buried in pages and pages of contract, regulation and equipment specifications for the position I’m taking next year. I am going to study capuchin monkeys in dense forest in Costa Rica. The sentences read as follows: “The project also has machetes to give out. These you keep over the year as well.” Lets just pause and think about what this really means. To me, it meant this: If you want to clear your own path, you can find people who will, quite literally, give you a large jungle knife to do so. It suggests we can have confidence that others will be supportive of our wandering in to new territory. Supportive and excited enough to help equip us to go. That’s what a machete is: this proof of support, this sharing of excitement.
This seems like the most clever and interesting speech of the week-end, at least on paper. Or perhaps I am just an Buckaroo Banzai fan boy.
Daily Sacrifice
Gordon Phillips ‘08, Class Speaker, “Good Morning.”
Before we get too far into the day, I just wanted to take a minute to recognize those serving in our armed forces. No matter your views on why and how our country has done what it has, men and women exactly our age are fighting half a world away to keep us safe and secure and their daily sacrifice should be appreciated.
A nice start, spoken to 500 of our best and brightest. How many are heading off from Williams to serve in the military? Zero, as far as I know. Corrections welcome!
Williamstown Construction Update
Lots of cool construction updates from on campus and beyond:
First, check out these new drawings of the renovated Stetson, which looks absolutely bad-ass.
Second, the North and South Academic buildings are nearing completion. While it is difficult to judge without seeing them in person, based on these photos I’d group them with the new Science center and Tunnel City building in the inarguable success category on the scale of recent campus construction (as opposed to the open-to-debate [mainly due to context, not the buildings themselves] new theater and Paresky center, or the what-were-they-thinking studio art building.
Third, the new Stone Hill Center is about to open at the Clark. I would love to see more photos, but the few I have seen look great.
Fourth, the Cable Mills project on Water Street is back on track. Turning this vacant building into that much housing should really revitalize and energize Water Street, and help turn it into a second destination street to complement Spring Street.
Meg Lowman ‘76 Still Climbs Trees
KERA’s (Dallas) Krys Boyd recently interviewed tropical field biologist Meg Lowman ’76 on Boyd’s always fascinating “Think” program.
http://podcastdownload.npr.org/anon.npr-podcasts/podcast/77/510036/91173599/KERA_91173599.mp3
The interview ranges over a variety of topics, from Lowman’s creation of the first tree canopy walks (she was the force behind the one in Hopkins Memorial Forest), being an international field biologist, teaching (she is a professor at New College of Florida, where she teaches undergraduates), life as the single mother of two boys while working in the field, and women in science. More than anything, I was struck by how much her identity as a parent shapes her worldview and values. She and her sons (who are now in their early twenties, and destined for scientific careers of their own) have collaborated in writing about life growing up in a field scientist’s family.
Those of you who are at Williams for reunions can try out a canopy walk for yourselves tomorrow (assuming the rain stops):
Sat., 1:30 - 5 p.m. Hopkins Forest: Visit the Treetops on the Canopy Walkway
The walkway is a pair of tree platforms set 70 ft. above the ground and originally used for research. Platforms are linked by a cable bridge and accessed via a wooden ladder. Participants are harnessed to safety cables, and aided by guides. Space limited; long waits possible; first come, first served; no children under 12.
(It’s safe, but a challenge if you have height anxieties. Even if you don’t ascend, it’s worth walking over to HMF just to look at the structure. There will be an open house in the forest at the same time, so you could stop in at HMF headquarters and see the museum of farm implements, buy some homemade maple syrup, and view some of the other exhibits. And if you are outdoorsy, don’t miss the bird walk and the hike, both of which are also on the main reunion schedule.)
Listening to the interview or seeing the canopy walk might interest you in reading Meg’s books for the layperson:
Life in the Treetops: Adventures of a Woman in Field Biology by Margaret D. Lowman (2000)
and
It’s a Jungle Up There: More Tales from the Treetops by Margaret D. Lowman, James Burgess, Edward Burgess, and Ghillean T. Prance (2006) (written with her sons)
Lowman has a website, canopymeg.com. Officialy, her title is Margaret D. Lowman, Ph.D., Professor of Biology and Environmental Studies and Director of Environmental Initiatives, New College of Florida, but, if one just adds “Mom,” the subtitle of her website encapsulates it rather nicely: “Author, Adventurer, Tropical Rain Forest Canopy Biologist.” She is very much a proud product of the Williams Center for Environmental Studies, and the College has celebrated her accomplishments by honoring her with a Bicentennial Medal.
Baccalaureate Address
Robert Lipp’s ‘60 speech “Don’t Make a Living, Make a Life!”
OK, let’s start with what differences I see between your class and my class of 50 years ago —
* You are all very special — you’re smarter, more mature, and have had a much more diverse and enriching experience at Williams than we did.
Talk about sucking up to your audience . . .
One in a Million Eph
Check out this great article on future Eph Amanda Reid ‘12. The highlights:
FALA director Kirk Quitter describes Reid as “one in a million.” “Her future is going to be whatever she wants it to be. She’s an outstanding artist, an outstanding scholar, and she’s going to change the world,” Quitter said.
Reid, who will graduate Friday, was recently selected as a Ron Brown scholar — one of the most prestigious awards presented to African American youth in the country. She will receive $10,000 a year for four years at Williams College in Williamstown, Mass.
At Williams, Reid plans to delve into a combination of studio art, African American studies and history.
David Kane will be pleased to note that she turned down Yale (and, more importantly, Amherst):
Reid was also accepted to Yale University, Cal Poly Pomona, Amherst College, Swarthmore College, the University of Delaware, Carleton College and the University of Arizona.
During her high school years she was part of the swim and track teams, National Honor Society, Art Honor Society, French Honor Society, Black History Month assembly committee and student council. She organized FALA’s Amnesty International club.
“Amanda is so ahead of her years. Everything Amanda does is meaningful. She brought a sense of action and activism to our school,” FALA art educator Janeece Henes said. “She changes how you think and how you perceive.”
Alumni fundraising of yore
Even as far back as 1913, Williams was doing its best to establish a nest egg for the future. An article in the wonderful New York Times archives describes then-President Garfield’s announcement of a $2 million endowment effort. True to form, he already had about 25% lined up and more pledged to match. This effort was announced at the “alumni luncheon” following commencement. I wonder if Morty will have any exciting announcements this weekend during reunions?
I continue to enjoy the fact that Williams College news made it to the New York Times with great regularity back in the day. Including such exciting events as the alumni beating the varsity basketball team in a game. Yes, really. I can’t find the link again at the moment, but it was great. In the 1920s, someone wrote in with that bit of news - including the roster and some form of a box score from the game - and it was published in the Times.
You can see the article in its original form (scanned a little crookedly, but readable) here.
WILLIAMS SEEKS $2,000,000.
President Garfield at Commencement Tells Endowment Plans.WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass., June 25 — At the alumni luncheon following the commencement exercises at Williams College to-day, President Harry A. Garfield announced that the college would attempt to obtain an endowment fund of $2,000,000. Half of the first million appeared to be in sight, he said. The General Education Board of New York, Rockefeller Foundation, had offered $100,000 when the college should raise $500,000. Mrs. Russell Sage had contributed $50,000, and $200,000 more had been promised conditionally. To this, President Garfield said, $150,000 might be added from an estate over which litigation recently ended.
The need for $1,000,000, Dr. Garfield said, was immediate, as that sum would hardly do more than make up the annual deficit, and a second million must be had to do justice by the teaching force and the future. The college, he pointed out, had prospered by buildings presented, but giving for endowment had not been popular and the faculty as a result had been kept on low pay.
President Garfield said that while the salaries of the teachers at Williams had increased more than $50,000 in the last twelve years, the maximum paid to any professor was only $500 in excess of the amount paid in 1900, and the largest amount now received by any professor was $3,200. The President believed desirable to raise the maximum at once to $4,000, with corresponding increases to all professors and assistant professors.
Williams graduated 115 young men with the degree of bachelor of arts. Among the honorary degrees conferred were these: Doctor of Laws, Charles B. Wheeler, ‘73, of Buffalo, a Justice of the New York Supreme Court; Master of Arts, Albert Rathbone, ‘88, lawyer of New York.
Copyright (c) The New York Times, originally published June 26, 1913
Thoughts on professor salaries as an effective fundraising ploy? Did everyone notice the names of those donors? I would love to know whose estate was being challenged - possibly over the gift to Williams? Any Williams history buffs know what famous alum or former prof died sometime around 1913?
I’d also like to say that this shows some shrewd planning by somebody. Capitalizing on the strength of our alumni to start building those funds way back when undoubtedly built a foundation for the massive pile of cash we’re sitting on today. Granted, Williams graduated a lot of young men from old money families, so this kind of strategy was likely old hat to them although it seems practically clairvoyant to those of us brought up without trust funds, family homes, and other such personal “endowments.”
EphBlog Meet Up Confirmed
Our two EphBlog meet ups are confirmed. For those in town early, we will meet on Friday morning at 11:00 in the snack bar. For those arriving late, we will congregate on the back balcony in the gym (facing the main stage) during the Society of Alumni meeting after the parade. Look forward to meeting you all!
Speech Comments?
Got more comments on the graduation speeches? Good! I will be posting links to each of the five individual speeches over the next five days. Read them then and tell us what you think.
Parents as Graduates
Wick Sloane ‘76 on community college graduations.
What’s lost in the noise around community college graduation rates is community college graduations. My first community college graduation was in 2002, at Windward Community College in Hawaii.
That evening at Windward, the graduates came up the stairs on the right side of the stage, received their degrees, walked across the stage and down the stairs on the left. At the bottom of those stairs, a little girl, eight or nine years old, was waiting. She was holding a lei. When her father came down the stairs with his diploma, he bent over to let her put the lei around his neck. He picked her up and, diploma in one hand, daughter in the other, ran to his wife who was waiting to hug them both. These upside-down scenes at community colleges, with parents as the graduates, are my favorites.
Read the rest for some nice stories.
“Vibrant” Downtown Experience …
on Spring Street, coming soon, according to local real estate mogul Mark Paresky (whose name should sound familiar). The good news:
He said he sees his plans as only one part of a Spring Street “resurgence,” evidenced so far by the thoroughfare’s expanded parking lot and the proposed rebuilding of the Images Cinema storefront entrance.
The latest planned improvement to Spring Street would move Zanna’s, a high-end locally owned women’s clothing store, from its current spot at 41 Spring St. to a renovated retail space in the former George Hopkins building at 61 Spring St.
As for the half-retail, half-residential structure Zanna’s occupies currently, Paresky said, “We plan to plan to replace those buildings with new commercial and residential buildings that reflect the character and tradition of Spring street while looking to the future.”
He is also still in the contemplation phase, he said, about
what to do with the property he owns between Zanna’s and the Hopkins building, which housed three restaurants before its interior burned in a fire in March 2007. Paresky said he plans to demolish that building, but it will remain as is until at least the autumn.
Eventually, however, Paresky said, “We’ll make Spring Street a destination for anyone visiting the Berkshires, Southern Vermont and neighboring New York.”Engineers from Guntlow and Associates submitted plans last week at Town Hall that propose a renovation and expansion of the Hopkins building.
In addition to Zanna’s, the re-vamped structure would likely house a Subway franchise and the Purple Pub, which had occupied part of the building that burned last year. Professional offices would continue to occupy the building’s second floor.
The bad news (at least in the short run, in the long run, sounds like a HUGE improvement):
Some residents had hoped the Purple Pub might open by summer’s end, but the popular bar and restaurant will likely not re-open in its new location for many more months. Plans show that engineers will need to secure five special permits and two variances and one waiver from the Zoning Board of Appeals, along with seven other various town permits before proceeding.
The special permits would allow contractors to expand certain parts of the building and the parking lot. According to the plans, the first-floor pub would have 76 seats at 19 tables and 12 seats along a bar. The fast-food restaurant would seat 32 customers at eight tables. Paresky said the building should contain changing rooms and showers for those interested in bicycling to work, and may feature other attributes designed to promote concern for a healthy environment.
EphBlog Meeting?
Surely we have some authors and readers who are going to be in Williamstown this week-end for reunion. I will be there and am eager to buy lunch for any and all. It would certainly be fun to meet such EphBlog luminaries as Derek Catsam ‘93 and Ken Thomas ‘93 in person. What about 11:00 AM in the new snackbar in Paresky on Friday morning? (I want to attend the alumni lecture from 9:00 to 10:30 on “Perspectives from the Ground and Air in Iraq.”) If not Friday, perhaps we can arrange a meet-up during the Alumni Meeting itself in Chandler Gym on Saturday morning, perhaps on the balcony above the bleachers and opposite the main stage?
Or will I be the only EphBlog reader in town?
Campus Readers
In previous discussions of EphBlog’s readership, I have estimated that about 1/3 is on campus (students, faculty and staff), 1/3 off campus (alumni, parents and local residents) and 1/3 random Web surfers (people looking for information about Williams issues like legacy admissions or about famous Ephs like Erin Burnett ‘98, Chase Coleman ‘93, Bethany McLean ‘92 and others). We make all this data public using the links to the lower left of the side bar. In the past, readership from the williams.edu domain has averaged between 20%-25% on a typical weekday. Today (and early this week), it is close to 10%. My interpretation is that about 1/2 of our campus readers are students, most of whom are now either not reading EphBlog or are reading it from elsewhere for the summer. The remainder are faculty and staff.
All are welcome.
