ComCil - THE RECORD

ComCil in Crisis

Row Over RAB Leads to Tears and Tyranny

Like an endless Greek tragedy, last week’s Comcil was yet again fueled by the RAB discussion. In an effort to give the paper tiger its claws back, the council for the first time did not talk about REB, but fully focused on the revival and restructuring of the excising advisory board instead.

The meeting began with a quick update by the Subcommittee on Community Learning Structures, which was formed on October 12th in reaction to a memo that President Lawry had presented in Adcil several weeks ago. In the memo he outlined his views on the tasks and position of several community organs, including Comcil and AdCil. The sub-committee has taken on the job to research the history of all organs and find out whether the President’s standpoints reflect the function they were originally endowed with. In its first update, the committee briefly mentioned how it divided its chores and what sources it will consult, including Antiochiana and former presidents of the college.

The subject quickly moved on to the ongoing RAB discussion, in an effort to find workable solutions for some of the problems that were addressed by the initiators of the proposal for an editorial-board. ComCil shot down a revised REB-proposal authored by the Vice president, the Dean of Faculty and the CM two weeks ago. Instead the members voted in favor of a motion to restructure the existing Record Advisory Board.

The revised proposal had failed to win over hearts in ComCil, because the adjustments to the original were too minimal and general questions concerning the accountability of the board prevailed with the members. REB was thus off the table for the first time since the debate about the need for an editorial board started four weeks ago, leaving room to fully concentrated on ideas to bring more representation in to RAB without taking away to much of the power dynamics in the advisory body.

Some members were asking where the Dean of students and the Vice president were in this discussion, as they had been shining with absence since the original REB proposal was tabled 3 weeks ago. In the mean time the proposal had been rejected and a motion had brought about a constructive discourse to enhance the quality of advice presented to the Community’s newspaper. So far, the veto of REB elicited no reaction from the president’s office. Following the “no news is good news�? motto, ComCil stoically continued its move towards reforming RAB, by further elaborating the tabled motion with concrete suggestions to add two extra faculty seats to the existing board and introducing staggered two year appointments for non-student members. Brainstorming and discussion, however, quickly turned into tears and anger after Record co-editor Luke Brennan returned from the President’s office with an unexpected letter from the Dean of Faculty. In the letter, (found on the back of this issue) both Brennan and co-editor Foster Neill are addressed personally, in what Bloch calls “a final admonition that the Antioch Record not be a platform for menacing and threatening speech.” In the letter, Bloch calls into question the extent to which both editors are taking seriously the educational purposes of their co-op experience and their obligations as a paid employee of the College. Brennan, who read the letter to ComCil calmly, took a minute for himself after putting down the paper. Vice-president Jurasek, who had just walked in to the meeting about half way into the letter, took seat in the back to listen. After a ! clear moment of silence, it is CM Levi B. Cowperwhite who first speaks up, addressing Jurasek personally: “I’m pissed! Why wasn’t this taken to RAB? Why is this system so unimportant to you? We fight for what we love, we think it’s important. We talk about it all the time. It means nothing to you. This is what we work so hard for every day. That’s what makes leaders, Rick. What are you teaching us?” He pauses for a second, but doesn’t get the desired answer. “You are skipping every educational moment here. By writing this letter and not bringing this to RAB. What makes you think you’re so damn important? And I mean you Rick! I know this is also you.�? The CM takes moment, before he continues: “We’re trying to make it better, we’re trying to safe this unsavable thing. You don’t care. We’re just a bunch of crazy kids to you. You don’t care that we’re loving and thoughtful kids who care for this. I have no respect for you any more. Respect is something you have to earn. And you did nothing today to earn that. “

For a moment the room went silent, nobody knowing what to say. Many stared down at the table in front of them in silence, glancing up briefly at the person sitting on the opposite side of the table. The chairwoman cried, and she wasn’t the only one. After this unexpected speech concluded a somber silence filled the room. A member of the Alumni Board that attended the meeting as a guest was clearly affected by what she had just seen.

It was Jurasek’s turn to break the silence. “Well, I’m slightly surprised. I thought I was going to come here to reform RAB. I can’t comment on what’s in the letter, since I didn’t write it, but I guess it isn’t necessarily widely unrelated. Does that sound understandable? There are often separate tracks to things. And they sometimes seem to contradict each other, they don’t necessarily. We still have to work on how we manage editorial policy. I want to work to reconfigure RAB, parallel to the letter, that is separate but not widely unrelated.

This eloquence seemed to strain the heads of the burned out ComCil members slightly. It had been an emotional meeting and everybody was eager to leave and get some fresh air. Cigarette consumption was again at its peak after the meeting was adjourned. Several parties at the meeting seemed to be going into a private second round afterwards, as issues were clearly not resolved for all. “ComCil does RAB�? act 6: in a theatre near you, as this paper goes to print.

On a more positive note, the RAB debate has opened up a wider discussion and growing interest for the Advisory Board meetings. In a meeting of the board held in the Record office last Friday, RAB appeared vigorous and eager. Community and ComCil members joined the dialogue with editors, writers and members of RAB about last week’s paper; an encouraging sight after the gloomy ComCil departure the day before. To keep the progress going, all community members are encouraged to join this weeks RAB meeting, Friday at noon in the Antioch Inn.

From The Editors

Dear Community,

Today I’m going to use this forum to reiterate my favorite excerpt from Antioch College’s mission statement for those of you who have yet to receive your student handbook.

“The primary mission of Antioch College is to empower students: the academic curriculum provides students with a broad liberal education that challenges their values and perspectives as well as their knowledge, ability to question, and general intellectual consciousness about the society in which they live; the cooperative education program provides life and work experiences which develop independence, confidence, and selfmotivation; and community structure offers significant responsibility for the social, cultural, financial, and policy issues that govern college life.�?

That last bit is my favorite. All that stuff about significant responsibility within the community seems at odds with the view that AdCil should be solely advisory, and that Community Government should be more educational than functional. What’s a primary mission anyway? We’re in the black, and our administration’s values are financial, not ideological. Still, I think its important that we remember what this place is really about, that we cling to the tradition of libertarianism and open mindedness that created Antioch, and not let some money grubbing suit destroy Horace Mann’s dream.

Love (mostly),

Luke

Dearest Community,

What a long week it’s been. Hope I saw you in AdCil, Community Meeting and ComCil. If not, there’s always next week. Have you submitted to Livermore Street yet? Time is running out! The deadline is the 15th of November, but we are planning a party during which we will raffle off prizes for those who have submitted on the 11th of November, so get that work in!

Perhaps the reason the week has been so long is because it’s eighth week. I, too, though on co-op feel this pressure. Indeed, the demon lives. I would guess that this week were approximately eight inches long, at a speed of .5 snail.

At this point, I’m guessing you’re well aware that once again I saved this letter for last and have nothing to say. If you are, you are right. Nothing. That’s what I have to say. I’m tired, that’s what I have to say. I hope you like the Record. I hope you write us a letter. I hope you write a haiku.

Have you considered working for the Record? There are two co-op positions open for next term, and there should be seven FWSP open for staff. Doesn’t that sound exciting. Maybe that’s just because it’s next term and that means this term would be over. Indeed.

Foster Neill

Layout Editor

Dispatches from Community Meeting

By Kathryn Leahey

This week did not see a run-of-the-mill community meeting. Most noticeably, Levi B. was not joined by his usual cohorts. With one home sick and the other preparing for the Black and Tan bash, Hope and Melody were filled in for by the highly capable Ms. Sarah Buckingham. Beyond the obvious lineup change, more community members, that is, most of them, were conspicuously absent. McGregor 113 held a, sadly, farless- than-capacity audience when Levi called the meeting to order. Nagging Statement Number One: People, for the love of Pete, come to community meeting! By not going, you are only costing yourself some delicious berry-flavored ice cream and the opportunity to argue and make your voice heard. I have heard innumerable people around campus complain about community government being taken less seriously by this administration. If you want shared governance, take a flipping share in it. Do not submit to apathy.

The meeting began as usual with our weekly round of gratitude. Luke Brennan thanked the Record staff and all those community members who have contributed letters to the paper as of late. Levi B. thanked all those who volunteered in the CG office after the desperate plea for help was made on First Class. All those involved with Ann Shine’s piano recital, Community Day activities, the Pennell House art party, and Daniel Farrell’s speech were also thanked. Dennie Eagelson and Janice Kinghorn were thanked for the procurement of the aforementioned delicious raspberry ice cream. Additionally, two student-cum-nurses and an anonymous flower-bearing friend rounded out those on the receiving end of the community’s thankfulness.

As usual, Cil updates were not terribly extensive. As of the time of the meeting, AdCil had yet to meet for the week. However, we did learn the ComCil is continuing their discussion on REB versus RAB and are planning on establishing a RAB restructuring committee to meet the college’s present needs.

Most of the announcements made this week were repeat reminders of things announced at our last meeting. Once again, the Uprising Tour will be taking place on campus soon with a special performance by Drive By Shiavo, a speaker from the ACLU will be coming on the 23rd, and the Alumni Board will be here this weekend. Applications for CM and for Pennell House coordinator, Record editor, and C-Shop manager are still due on the 27th of October and 2nd of November, respectively. In new news, On Saturday at 8 pm, there will be a chem-free harvest-time themed party at the Wellness Center, and the Queer Center is having a meeting on Monday. We also learned as a community that Meghan Pergrem does, in fact, love Erin Winter, as was announced by the former this Tuesday. Then into the blender we went: it was time to Pulse. Our major topic this week was the issue of respect, especially that for CG, its officers, and its things. To begin, CG has office hours for a reason. We are all encouraged to use them. If no one is there during office hours and you need assistance, call the office at PBX 1050. More pressingly, as you may know, the old piano available for use in the Union, which may or may not have been slated to be thrown away, was destroyed at some point late last week. Levi commented that a general sense of entitlement may be cited as the reason why someone would do something like that. Nagging Statement Number Two: I’d like to send a big WTF to anyone involved in this senseless act of vandalism. What’s the point? Why destroy something that belongs to CG and, thus, in a sense, all of us? Step up. Take responsibility. Use this opportunity to change the bratty, privileged attitude that allowed you to do this in the first place.

After learning that a possible Cactus Liberation Front has stolen a giant cactus from Units 1, the conversation on this topic drifted to possible solutions to the problem. Jeanne Kay and Perry have started a fundraising effort to replace the piano. If you’d like to help, talk to one of them. Beyond possibly replacing the instrument, several schools of thought emerged about what ought to happen in regards to the situation. The idea that the pieces of the broken piano be turned into art was presented, although some felt that this should only occur if the piece of work would still be able to produce music. The idea that “people [the vandal(s)] must know they will suffer�? was put forth, but others called for greater positive thought and action. Amanda felt as though the destruction of the piano can be contributed to a phenomenon referred to as the “tragedy of the commons�? and suggested that a sign stating “My name is Betty. I’m a piano. Take care of me!�? posted on the piano may have prevented such an occurrence, an idea that provoked giggles from the crowd but will have Levi looking into the idea of naming other things around campus. Finally, I think most people’s feelings can be summed up by what Nicole stated near the end of our short meeting: “We don’t have nice things. We don’t really have [pause] things…but don’t destroy ‘em, because we sure as hell aren’t going to get new things.�? Until next week, Antiochians, to paraphrase Joe Cali, try not to break anything. And don’t fall down.

Vital Affirmations at a CG meeting

To the Community:

I appreciate Community Government’s strong affirmation of students’ right to freedom of expression. By unanimous vote at last week’s meeting, ComCil rejected a proposal by the Lawry administration to appoint an editorial board to oversee the Record.

In my view, the administration proposed this board to further its plan to censor and control what is printed in the Record — and thus to censor and control the students of Antioch College. As adjunct faculty mentor for the Record staff, and as a longtime friend and admirer of Antioch College, I applaud ComCil’s defeat of the administration’s proposal.

ComCil’s meeting was also an affirmation of the great value of Antioch’s unique system of shared governance, in which students play such a vital role.

This was the first ComCil meeting I’ve attended in several years, and I was deeply impressed — as I have been so many times in my 25-year association with Antioch — with the quality of the work that was done. And the way it was done: a room full of students deeply committed to Antiochian values interacted cohesively, respectfully and responsibly to serve the best interests of the college. Like the Record, shared governance is a both an important service to the Antioch community and a deeply significant educational experience. How can it be that this administration is so bitterly opposed to both?

Sincerely,

Don Wallis

Letter from Callie Cary

“In our society the two institutions commissioned to provide the substance of a democratic public sphere, as a place for critical nquiry, are the news media and academia.�?
This quote comes from a review of David Horowitz’s book “The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America�? by 1979 alumnus Robert McCheseney entitled “David Horowitz and the Attack on Independent Thought,�? “ in which both McCheseney and Antioch alum Gordon Fellman ‘57 are included.

Robert McCheseney is a Research Professor in the Institute of Communications Research and the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign.

Changing campus culture in the name of intellectual freedom is certainly not a new theme in the higher education community. The larger question is how is the term intellectual freedom being defined and by whom? Are the standards universally applied to everyone in the community, and who or what are the arbiters of those standards? And finally, what are the intended educational outcomes of these cultural changes?

It was made clear by President Lawry in his first address at Community Meeting last spring, as well as at subsequent meetings with the Alumni Board and alumni groups around the country, that he seemed to arrive with an agenda, a preconceived opinion about the campus culture and the governance system.

According to the President’s assessment, as stated in “Lawry Challenges Campus Culture; Students Troubled�? (Yellow Springs News, 10/5/06), students are too confrontational, lack mutual respect and social maturity, are self-indulgent, use menacing language, and speak irresponsibly, and all these behaviors lead to an anti-intellectual, closed community that prevents students from being able to “embrace the full spectrum of ideas and opinions, without prejudgment….�? The article goes on to say that Lawry feels that “A less threatening campus…will help the College retain some of the students who tend to leave Antioch because they feel attacked by other students.�?

Where did the President’s perspective come from after such limited exposure to the student body, or anyone else in the community? Is this based on anecdotal information provided by those who oriented him before his arrival? In his presentations, Lawry sites a conversation he had with a student while he was on campus being interviewed for the presidency- a student who had said that he might transfer out of Antioch because he felt uncomfortable with the campus culture. Lawry has also mentioned how a student wearing Nike sneakers got attacked for not being more sensitive to the scourge of sweatshop production. OK, but is there some concrete data to support the theory that the campus culture is the main reason we lose students, or why students don’t come to Antioch? Past data from the exit interviews conducted by the Dean of Students Office over the years has shown that students leave for a variety reasons, including financial, social, academic, developmental, and finding a dream co-op, but very rarely because of campus culture and climate. According to existing data, there has never been one overriding reason for student attrition.

And so, it’s been almost 10 months since this message was first delivered. What steps have been taken to change the campus culture? Apparently, the governance system has been targeted as an axis of confrontation and is described as “out of control�? and combative with the administration.

I am puzzled by this assessment. I served on Community Council (ComCil) in 05/06 and was extremely impressed with the high and civil level of discourse between faculty, staff and students, the student chair’s oversight of the meetings, the humor and creativity of the members, and the overall sense of responsibility members felt for the community. We debated, persuaded, challenged, changed our minds, built consensus and agonized over some difficult and frustrating situations on the campus. We also made every effort to engage with the administration to orient the new President to the Council’s purpose, and to express concern over some of the decisions that were being made without any consultation with Comcil, decisions that had historically been brought to Comcil for deliberation and input.

Although at times a very frustrating experience, for me as an alum, it defined one of Antioch’s core values and part of its mission – to create informed risk takers through participation in a laboratory of democratic decision- making. It would be a mistake to define Antioch’s system of governance as a locus of power for all decision- making, but it would be equally misguided to discredit and ignore the significant educational implications of the decision-making process that happens within this system.

Community governance at Antioch provides one of the most unique educational experiences the College has to offer and, if properly facilitated, allows all community members to feel some ownership and responsibility for the community in which they live and work. For students, these skills are further developed and tested in the various co-op communities they enter around the globe. It is this praxis that, with trial and error, teaches students some sense of humility and cultural mobility. It is the ingredient that helps to turn out so many interesting, entrepreneurial, and, yes, outspoken graduates. Last year Antioch College had three graduating students receive Fulbright awards. That sort of intellectual inquiry doesn’t happen in a vacuum!

I have never understood the concern that oppositional perspectives, be they conservative or radical, are somehow oppressed at Antioch.

Antioch alumni, young and old, have always been represented throughout the political spectrum. I know for a fact that Republicans and radicals (some now democrats) actually sit side-by-side with each other as Trustees and Alumni Board members! The alumni work in both the for-profit and non-profit sectors, many are organizers, artists and educators, but regardless of their path, most feel passionately about their values. The alumni take Antioch’s first President Horace Mann’s dictum “Be ashamed to die until you win some victory for humanity�? very seriously.

There are some very real challenges facing Antioch right now, and while there is nothing inherently wrong with working on creating a campus that promotes open dialog, the administration needs to be sure to walk the talk and to create a forum that builds consensus around what the walk is…and maybe what shoes should be worn. I would also hope that energy is quickly shifted to other institutional priorities with specific steps being outlined on how best to address the recruitment and retention of students and faculty of color, improving the physical plant, supporting faculty moral, professional development and the integrity of tenure, and building a culture of mutual respect and labor incentives for the union workers, exempt staff and middle managers.

Top-down decision-making rarely has any educational value and it generally doesn’t promote a climate of mutual respect or intellectual freedom. If retention, recruitment and fund raising are the priorities right now (as they have been for decades), the entire Antioch community should be embraced as ambassadors, future alumni, future donors, future leaders, and advocates of an extraordinary educational experience that has held a truly unique place in the landscape of higher education.

Callie Cary ‘84
Second-generation alum and former Director of Alumni Relations