Faculty discusses Inventing America

by Benjamin Waterhouse

On Wednesday, Nov. 5, the faculty of Lewis & Clark College did not vote on a proposition by the Inventing America Task Force to replace the controversial core course with “a set of broadly conceived, co-taught, interdisciplinary first-year courses that will introduce students to the humanities and social sciences, leaving open the possibility of courses that will include the sciences as well.”

Wednesday’s well-attended faculty meeting lasted a little over two hours, in which time the issue at hand—the Task Force’s proposal—was hardly discussed. In its stead, a number of unfriendly amendments were extensively debated, leading to much frustration all around.

The Inventing America Task Force’s proposal would set guidelines for the creation of multiple “cluster classes” taught jointly by three or more faculty members, who would work cooperatively to build curricula for their individual sections. “Eventually,” the proposal reads, “the goal is to establish a diverse set of courses of enduring value that can be staffed not only by the faculty who create the classes, but by others who will learn from them. The courses will reflect a commitment to undergraduate teaching at an introductory level, will offer students a variety of options from which to choose, and will recognize and accommodate the diverse interests, training, and traditions of the faculty.” All courses would share common foci: namely, critical thinking skills, analytical reading skills, extensive expository writing, essay examinations, public speaking, and library and information technology. The individual sections of any given course would meet at the same time and would share at least fifty percent of the readings in common. A permanent sub-committee of the Curriculum Committee would be established to oversee the core courses.

Interim President Bragdon expressed his high hopes for the meeting: “It’s great that [the professors] are so enthusiastic over the core course,” he said. “No president is going to be forcing the issue, no dean is going to be forcing the issue. The responsibility [for replacing inventing America] falls on your shoulders.” The creation of a new core class for first-year students is, he said, his primary goal for his year of presidency: “I have failed if [the faculty] cannot come up with a new program.”

Ben Westervelt, the head of the Inventing America Task Force, presented the proposal for the new core course. He looked haggard, saying he had spent much of the week wading through Inventing America-related correspondence, not all of it friendly: “We’ve been accused with a lot of things, and our work has been described with all sorts of colorful language,” he said. He expressed hope, however, that the resolution—the product of a year’s work by the Task Force—would finally be voted upon. “We’re going to get this donkey to the market and we’re going to sell it or we’re not going to sell it.”

Westervelt, on the behalf of the Task Force, proposed to make an exemption to the general rules of procedure to require that the proposal receive a two-thirds majority vote to pass, as opposed to the usual simple majority. The increased majority requirement would ensure that the proposal, should it pass, have enthusiastic backing from much of the faculty, unlike its predecessor. “Inventing America was passed by a very small majority, just barely more than fifty percent. That is why it has been so weak; there was not enough faculty support,” said Juan Carlos Toledano.

Westervelt’s proposal was greeted with mixed reactions. Many faculty members were hesitant to change the usual way of doing things. The debate went back and forth for almost an hour, prompting John Callahan to observe, “This is starting to sound like the Florida recount.” Stepan Simek finally forced a vote, and the request for a two-thirds majority was denied by a margin of two votes, with 42 in favor and 22 opposed.

The proposal was further delayed by an unfriendly amendment to, should the Task Force’s proposal be defeated, default to a two-semester, writing-intensive seminar course for first-year students. The proposed amendment was greeted with widespread hostility: “We were charged with creating a replacement for Inventing America, not with creating a replacement for Inventing America and then creating a replacement for the replacement” said one member of the Task Force.

The meeting continued to suffer from what Callahan termed “too much democracy.” Dean of the College Curtis Johnson finally declared the meeting adjourned at 5:20pm, after a third of the faculty had already left. The issue will, barring further delays, be decided at the meeting next week.

Coming Out Week followed by mixed reactions

by Anne Winchell

Coming Out Week, organized by United Sexualities, began Sunday, October 26, and ended Saturday, November 1. The event featured different activities every night, and promoted awareness of all sexual orientations. Though successful, Coming Out Week left many students feeling alienated due to the aggressive promotion.

Laura Wright hosted the Queerluck on Sunday in the Trail Room, beginning the events. “We ended up with more food than people,” said Kestryl Lowry (’07), Events Coordinator for United Sexualities. “We started giving it away to everyone passing by.”

On Monday, Queer 101 was held in Stamm. The round table discussion had a panel of 5 students and Andrew Bernstein, Assistant Professor of History. Many students felt that the event was an excellent chance to find out about the differences and similarities of gay and straight lifestyles.

Tuesday featured an all day dragathon, where students challenged gender roles in their clothing during the day. One of the students to dress up, Jonas Roy (’06), said, “I used the dragathon as an excuse to wear a skirt.” Lowry was pleased at the number of people who did dress up, saying, “I saw a lot of students dressed up who I didn’t expect.”

On Wednesday at United Sexualities’ usual meeting time, they held a social, discussing the club and letting people know about their goals for the upcoming weeks and months.

When asked which event was her favorite, Lowry laughed. “Well, I’m a little biased,” she said, explaining that she organized the game show, Guess the Het, on Thursday evening in Smith Hall. The game consisted of a panel of off-campus students, one of whom was heterosexual. The audience could ask any questions except direct questions relating to sexual orientation. “It breaks down a lot of stereotypes,” Lowrey said. “Only 5 of around 35 people guessed right.”

Friday and Saturday’s events were off-campus adventures. On Friday, the group traveled downtown to Portland State University’s Boo Ball, an event put on by their gay-straight alliance group. “On Saturday,” said Lowry, “We went to a womyn-owned and operated erotic boutique.” The store, It’s My Pleasure, was also a part of the Rubberwear Party in Forest earlier this year.

Lowry estimated that between 20-30 people participated in each evening’s event, and said that this was about on par with other campus events. “It’s not just a queer thing,” said Lowry. “It’s the idea of examining yourself and coming out as queer, or as a queer ally.” United Sexualities worked hard to make Coming Out Week a memorable event, and succeeded in raising awareness of the group, even if many students were offended by the promotion.

United Sexualities put up many posters and tabled outside of the Bon at lunch and dinner, Monday through Friday. “They were harassing me,” said Terry Stratton (’06). “I asked them if they could be a little quieter and they said no, the only way people will listen is if we’re loud and annoying.” One bisexual student remarked that she wanted to go back in the closet after seeing UniSex.

Matt Price (’06) summed up the feelings of many when he said, “It wasn’t that they made me uncomfortable. But the method of presentation set me against whatever they wanted even before I knew what it was. If that was an honest representation of UniSex, it was a total turn off.” He described their presentation as having an “annoying telemarketer calling you at dinner and won’t hang up attitude”.

“I feel like UniSex is trying to make homosexuality the first thing about a person,” said Marianne Weidel (’06). “It is part of who they are, but not the first thing.” She supports gay rights, but feels that United Sexualities discriminates among other members of the gay community, making the less flamboyant members feel uncomfortable.

In defense of UniSex, Roy explained, “Some people were offended. The posters were aggressive, but it didn’t bother me.” Kristen Godwin (’07) said that United Sexualities was “pretty good about getting across the point”, and complimented them on their enthusiasm. “I think it’s cool that they were there,” she said.

United Sexualities has meetings every Wednesday at 7pm in Thayer, and welcomes everyone to join in. Lowry, summing up UniSex’s activity, said, “We’re an active club, we have fun and we want to include everyone.”

Bold is my suggestion for the pull out thing… J

If you want a shorter version, here is my shortened version of the above:

Coming Out Week, organized by United Sexualities, began Sunday, October 26th, and ended Saturday, November 1st. The event featured different activities every night, and promoted awareness of all sexual orientations. Though successful, Coming Out Week left many students feeling alienated due to the aggressive promotion.

Some of the highlights of the events included an all day dragathon on Tuesday, where students challenged gender roles in their clothing during the day. “I used the dragathon as an excuse to wear a skirt,” said Jonas Roy (’06). Lowry was pleased at the number of people who did dress up, explaining, “I saw a lot of students dressed up who I didn’t expect.”

When asked which event was her favorite, Lowry laughed. “Well, I’m a little biased,” she said, explaining that she organized the game show, Guess the Het, on Thursday evening in Smith Hall. The game consisted of a panel of off-campus students, one of whom was heterosexual. The audience could ask any questions except direct questions relating to sexual orientation. “It breaks down a lot of stereotypes,” Lowrey said. “Only 5 of around 35 people guessed right.”

Lowry estimated that between 20-30 people participated in each evening’s event, and said that this was about on par with other campus events. “It’s not just a queer thing,” said Lowry. “It’s the idea of examining yourself and coming out as queer, or as a queer allie.” United Sexualities worked hard to make Coming Out Week a memorable event, and succeeded in raising awareness of the group, even if many students were offended by the promotion.

United Sexualities put up many posters and tabled outside of the Bon at lunch and dinner, Monday through Friday. Matt Price (’06) said, “The method of presentation set me against whatever they wanted even before I knew what it was. If that was an honest representation of UniSex, it was a total turn off.” One bisexual student remarked that she wanted to go back in the closet after seeing UniSex.

“I feel like UniSex is trying to make homosexuality the first thing about a person,” said Marianne Weidel (’06). “It is part of who they are, but not the first thing.” She supports gay rights, but feels that United Sexualities discriminates among other members of the gay community, making the less flamboyant members feel uncomfortable.

Kristen Godwin (’07), however, said that United Sexualities was “pretty good about getting across the point”, and complimented them on their enthusiasm. “I think it’s cool that they were there,” she said.

United Sexualities meets every Wednesday at 7pm in Thayer. Lowry, summing up UniSex’s activity, said, “We’re an active club, we have fun and we want to include everyone.”