Tags » current Issue

 
 
 

Inside Out

Categories: Midd Blogosphere

PrintWhen you approach New York’s Bellevue Hospital on 1st Avenue and 26th Street, its magnificent gated fence looms above. Enclosing the original redbrick structure, it stands tall and spiked, constructed from wrought iron and coated in black. Menacing yet strikingly beautiful, the main gate bears the simple words “Bellevue Hospital” in a font imbued with traces of an asylum. Separating interior from exterior, it speaks of a time long past. The imagination can only run wild with what lies beyond their craggy form.

Bellevue is a buzzword. It denotes “nuthouse,” and “loony bin.” It is referenced in countless films and books as the solution for the mad hatter traipsing through the house uttering nonsense. It is its own punch line.

Unbeknownst to many, however, it is also the oldest public hospital in the country and the training ground for many top American physicians; yet, its infamous moniker often conceals the care and compassion that happen inside.

During the past year, I have worked in Bellevue’s child and adolescent psychiatric inpatient unit, conducting trauma screens, in-take interviews, and assessment scales for various psychiatric disorders. Many of the children I screened were plagued by loneliness. They had slipped through the cracks and seemed lost to the world. They ran the gamut of personas and ranged in age from five to 17.

Some refused to speak; others could not stop talking. Some came from the foster-care system; others from the Upper East Side. Some hugged me; others spit in my face.

Several months ago, I attended the initial assessment of a 10-year-old boy from the Dominican Republic. Having the fewest credentials in the room, I pulled up a chair and sat in the back.

The boy had been adopted and entered the United States at the age of five. Prior to his adoption, he suffered from severe neglect and malnourishment. His mother had admitted him to Bellevue for disorganized thought patterns, increased mood swings, and overt aggression at school. When I entered the room, he sat facing the wall, crouched like a timid animal with eyes tight shut. It was hard to imagine that such a child a few days ago had put his fist through the window.

He was asked questions and answered few. When the boy was asked to recite his birthday, he said he didn’t know. How odd, I thought. With the other patients I had met, even the most damaged, all knew their birthday. Children love to tell you their birthday. They tell you their age down to the very last detail—eight and three-fourths, ten and a half, nine and a quarter. I had never met a child who could not recall his own birthday.

After the assessment, I was invited to meet with the physicians and discuss the diagnosis. I sat in the corner as each resident and medical-school student presented. Their diagnoses were elaborate, layered, and sophisticated beyond the little medical knowledge I had gained. The birthday episode was not mentioned. The attending physician nodded her head and said little. To my surprise, she asked me what I thought.

“I find it very odd that the boy doesn’t know his birthday,” I said.

The attending offered a small, knowing smile.

“Yes,” she replied, “it is quite unsettling.”

It was later discovered that the boy was mentally retarded. In accordance with the group’s original assessment, there were signs of comorbidity with bipolar-1 and generalized anxiety. However, the true culprit was more obvious: the boy didn’t know his birthday because his brain could not comprehend the concept.

I am at the bottom of a long ladder that points toward medicine. Sometimes I’m not even sure if I’ve made it onto the first step. However, I have discovered that my intuition—my ability to sense when something is awry—is perhaps on the right track. Sometimes the solution to the problem is simpler than we perceive. Often, the solution is in our capacity to listen.

Jessica Halper ’11 lives in New York City, where she is finishing her postbaccalaureate for medical school. She currently works as a research assistant on trauma and posttraumatic stress disorder studies at NYU Langone Medical Center.

It All Adds Up

Categories: Midd Blogosphere

Mathematics Professor John Schmitt and student Aden Forrow in Warner HallNearly 60 seconds of silence had elapsed since I mentioned to John Schmitt that he must be inordinately proud of the young man sitting to my left. The awkwardness for me began around the, oh, 20-second mark, so my discomfort surely must have been palpable at this point. Schmitt had seemed ready to answer a few times, but each time he stopped. Finally, he said, “Aden’s intellect isn’t my doing. His work ethic isn’t my doing. His thoughtful approach to problem solving isn’t my doing. I’m delighted that he has these opportunities [after graduation], but pride is not something I can claim. Delighted. That’s what I feel.” I exhaled. My fear that I had misspoken was replaced by the revelation that this mathematician wanted to make sure he was precisely understood.

Let’s back up a moment. I was in Schmitt’s Warner Hall office, chatting with him and the aforementioned Aden, full name being Aden Forrow ’13, an exceedingly quiet, very pleasant young man from the Boston area. In a recent talk, Schmitt had referred to Aden as likely “the most mathematically gifted student I have ever taught.” For the past year or so, the two have been investigating a problem within the area of mathematics known as combinatorics. Schmitt explained that in combinatorics “we are given a finite set of objects and a set of rules placed upon the objects, and our two most basic questions are 1) does there exist an arrangement of the objects that satisfies the rules, and 2) if so, how many?” A Sudoku puzzle is a trivial combinatorial problem, Schmitt said. “But what is more interesting,” he added “is discerning the minimum number of clues that can be given while still providing for a valid puzzle.” The conjecture is 17, and recently an Irish mathematician designed a procedure to prove that no 16-clue puzzle could exist. Tricky thing is, it would take a standard desktop computer 300,000 years to complete the computation.

So Schmitt and Aden are trying to solve the problem using a tool known as the Combinatorial Nullstellensatz . . . and that’s pretty much all I will say about this tool. I asked Schmitt to explain it to me, and another silence arose. Aden quietly chuckled. Then, as polite as he could be, Schmitt attempted to tell me about the Combinatorial Nullstellensatz. Let’s just say that we subsequently both agreed that C. N. is not meant to be understood by a general audience. And, frankly, it’s beside the point.

The point, really, of our discussion was not how Aden and Schmitt were attempting to solve this problem, nor was it about whether they would actually solve it at all. (“One never knows how long it will take to solve a math problem, if you can solve it in the first place,” Schmitt would later say.) No, the reason we were talking that afternoon was because it was so unlikely to be having this discussion in the first place.

Before he met Aden, Schmitt had never found the need to provide a student in an enrolled course with his or her own set of problems, problems that were not a part of the course syllabus. But just one or two days into Aden’s participation in Math 247, Graph Theory, Schmitt knew he had to do something different. “He wasn’t challenged by the class. He picked up on subtleties, special cases that I’ve never seen an undergraduate recognize. There have been times when I’ve noticed disparities between talented students and the whole of a class, but this generally happens in introductory courses. Aden was on an entirely different level.”

So Schmitt decided he would seek out a problem for which he and Aden could apply the Combinatorial Nullstellensatz technique. (Using Sudoku came to him at breakfast one morning while he was having his granola.) “And we have been having an ongoing mathematical conversation that each of us has wanted to have. These conversations have been entirely outside of any syllabus; Aden receives no course credit.”

I asked Aden if this matched his recollection.

He thought for about five seconds and then said, “More or less.”

“Aden is very understated,” Schmitt added.

Aden smiled. “One of the things I like about Middlebury is the amount of attention professors give to their teaching and to their students,” he said. Schmitt mentioned that I could very easily be writing a story about Aden’s collaboration with Noah Graham, in the physics department, “but then you would have missed out on capturing my good looks.”

At this, Aden let out a loud, sustained laugh. It was startling, given how quiet he had been. It was a laugh one shares with a peer.

Aden Forrow ’13 will enroll in the mathematics graduate program at MIT next year. If he has an idea for the Sudoku project, he knows who he will call first.   
    

Things That Happened, Things to Do — Week of April 15

Categories: Midd Blogosphere

dispatch_distressed-300x160

Our regular recap of goings on at the College and a look ahead to events on the horizon. As always, we hope to call your attention to items that captured ours and alert you to events that you won’t want to miss. If you have a news item that you think we’d be interested in, drop us a line at middmag@middlebury.edu.

  • Jay Parini weighed in at CNN.com on whether paper-grading software could replace the human, professorial version. The D.E. Axinn Professor of English and Creative Writing drew on his 40 years of teaching (and paper grading) to limn the difference.
  • With a Supreme Court ruling on affirmative action in the wings, Professor of Political Science Erik Bleich wrote in Atlantic.com that “A collective, nationwide effort by private institutions can transform the debate about affirmative action.”
  • Cold stone seats and leaden skies fit the occasion. On Tuesday, April 16, Middlebury joined 300 venues worldwide marking the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” with public readings.  The lunchtime audience sat in the wind at Gifford Amphitheatre as theatre professor Dana Yeaton first read the letter from the eight white Birmingham ministers who scolded that the freedom march was “unwise and untimely.” A tag team of 26 student and faculty readers then delivered the fruits of King’s mighty pen. Read the letter here.
  • The Spring Student Symposium kicks off Thursday evening with a keynote address by actor and alumna Cassidy Freeman ’05 and performances of all kinds. Friday is filled with visual art and architecture exhibits, oral presentations, and poster sessions. The range and sophistication of student work is mind-blowing. Plus it’s all very fun. The full schedule is here.
  • Boston Globe jazz critic Bob Blumenthal calls him “a jazz treasure.” Now a Middlebury resident, sax and trumpet master Miles Donahue will bring his quintet to the Town Hall Theater Friday evening. Everyone gets a free CD, too.
  • Earth Day is Tuesday, but since many Earthlings gotta work, the Middlebury Natural Foods Co-op will host a party on Saturday from 12-3 pm at the store on Washington Street. Live music, a seed and seedling exchange, stuff for kids. Not to mention our planet’s signature contribution to the Milky Way—food.

Fracking: A Tale of Two Countries

Categories: Midd Blogosphere
Journalist Dimiter Kenarov ’04.5 speaks on shale gas fracking in Poland and Pennsylvania

Journalist Dimiter Kenarov ’03.5 speaks on shale gas fracking in Poland and Pennsylvania.

Journalist Dimiter Kenarov ’03.5 has covered the hunt for a Macedonian serial killer and Baghdad’s Explosive Ordnance Disposal training program (think “Hurt Locker”) but says of his current assignment, “It’s the hardest thing I’ve ever done.” The young Bulgarian writer, now a resident of Istanbul, returned to Middlebury recently to talk about the complexities of “Shale Gas: From Poland to Pennsylvania” at the Franklin Environmental Center at Hillcrest. The widely published Kenarov is partially supported in this project by the Pulitzer Center for Crisis Reporting, a clue to how combative the issue of drilling for this so-called “energy game changer” has become.

The affable Kenarov began, at the audience’s request, with a brief presentation explaining what shale gas is and how drillers recover it from rock through hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking.” Small-scale shale gas drilling has gone on for years, but new horizontal drilling technology puts gas on the leading edge of the “unconventionals,” or fuels (tar sands, ultra deepwater oil, coalbed methane, etc.) being developed now that supplies of the world’s “cheap and easy” fossil fuels are waning. One benefit of shale gas, he noted, is that it’s found worldwide and doesn’t require expensive exploratory drilling.

After Kenarov outlined some of the risks and costs, however, it was hard to understand why Poland was leading the shale gas charge in Europe and how the practice has already achieved such a foothold in the U.S. As Kenarov explained, horizontal fracking wells cover a large surface area. To force and keep open the shale fissures and release the gas within, drillers inject at high pressure from three to seven million gallons of fresh water per well, mixed with sand and toxic chemicals such as benzene and lead. Some of that water is then recovered as “flowback.” “Then what do you do with it?” Kenarov asked. Much of Pennsylvania’s flowback is sent for underground disposal to Ohio. “The water picks up 200 times the salts contained in seawater—in the Marcellus Shale [in the U.S. Northeast] it’s 3,000 times more,” he said. The water also carries as much as 1,000 times the safe drinking levels of radioactivity from its travels through the rock. Chemically tainted water from the wells can seep into underground aquifers; if pumped out and sent to standard water treatment plants, which are not equipped to decontaminate this flowback, the water seeps into rivers, water tables, and food chains.

Then there are the noise and air pollution of huge trucks needed to move water and drilling rigs; the methane released from the wells that cancels out natural gas’s comparatively modest carbon footprint; the quick decline of many of the wells, which prompts more drilling; and the pipelines extending for thousands of miles through previously scenic farmland.

In Poland, one word explains an enthusiasm countered by many other European countries’ fracking moratoriums: Russia. Poland’s longtime nemesis provides two thirds of Poland’s natural gas, and while gas comprises only 13 percent of Poland’s energy mix, many Poles want to make sure it’s “Polish gas.” The writer noted that only eight percent of Europeans overall support shale gas, but any Pole questioning gas development is branded a “national traitor” supporting Russian interests. Despite the U.S. State Department’s technical support for fracking in Poland, and the fact that the state, not farmers, owns subsurface mineral rights, “Poland doesn’t have the infrastructure,” Kenarov said. “The economy of scale doesn’t exist in one small country.” In response, Exxon has withdrawn its interests.

Scale limitation is not the problem in the U.S., where millions of square miles are mapped for fracking and half a million active wells exist. Kenarov described coming into Pennsylvania to report on fracking as “going into a mosh pit at a punk rock concert.” In northern regions of the state that lie over the Marcellus shale gas play, towns are dealing with higher crime rates, accidents caused by huge trucks, and tensions between neighbors on either side of the issue. Struggling dairy farmers who sold their mineral rights for additional income have found their supply chains collapsing as businesses shift to ride the gas wave. Vegetable farmers are either concerned about their water quality or are discovering that their customers, wary of toxicity, are buying elsewhere. (As Kenarov noted, thousands of contamination accidents caused by faulty well casings and other mishaps throughout the U.S. have been registered with the Environmental Protection Agency.)

Still, enough interests are benefiting that the shale gas drive continues (Audience members noted that Vermont is the first and only state so far to ban fracking). Kenarov commented as he showed aerial photos of vast expanses of well clusters that looked more extraterrestrial than Texan, “the scale of development is striking.”

Mo’s Nobel

Categories: Midd Blogosphere

Mo_Yan_WEBThe Nobel Prize in Literature recently awarded to Chinese writer Mo Yan has created such an uproar that the merits of his writing seem to have been lost in the commotion. Taking center stage are cries about the political implications of honoring a member of the Communist Party and questions about the party politics of the writer himself. Then there are the financial questions: How will China best cash in on Mo Yan? The mayor of Mo Yan’s hometown wants to create a “Mo Yan brand,” and there is talk of turning his hometown Gaomi into a theme park.

Seven years ago I interviewed the future Nobel winner, and I have an entirely different take on the current debate. It was September 2005, and I was writing for a magazine based in Hong Kong. Mo Yan’s brilliant epic Big Breasts and Wide Hips had just come out in English; I was certain that he was destined for greatness and must be featured. And while my magazine was more interested in articles on designer-clad, diamond-encrusted socialites than culture, I continued to push for the story, paying for my own flight to Beijing, intent on meeting the author of that wild ride of a novel.

In person, Mo Yan had the well-fed look of someone who has seen too much starvation and famine to diet for fashion. He laughed easily, but his smiles were rare. There were smiles all around, though, on the faces of the staff vying to serve him coffee in the Beijing hotel lobby. Who would have guessed, in a country as vastly populated as China, that an ordinary-looking writer would be as recognizable as a pop star or actor?

Our conversation about his novel turned immediately to politics. It became clear that Mo Yan’s relationship with Communist Party policy is infinitely complex. He said that if he had written the same book 20 years ago he might have been shot, adding that he does not take political sides in his novel, but tries to “treat all as human. I want to show the real China and real life. It seems that [my book] is about a village, but it is actually about China’s history. In this book I want to cover every critical issue of the last century.” Speaking about his future works, his face darkened as he mentioned the unknown consequences he always fears they could provoke. “A writer without controversy is not a good one. A book without controversy is not a good one, either.”

After the interview, I visited a sun-filled Tiananmen Square.  When the changing of the guards began, I was singled out by an official and loudly berated, a club waved in my face. Uncomprehending, I did not move until a girl beside me pushed me down and whispered that he had said I was too tall and blocked the view of people behind me.  Forced to the ground in the shadow of Mao, I started to understand the enormity of the task Mo Yan has set for himself, which in his words is “to cover every critical issue of the last century.”

Now, however, many are denouncing Mo Yan’s win. Dissident writer Yu Jie says it is a victory for the Communist Party, and the American educated artist Ai Weiwei paints Mo Yan to be a sellout.  Even the 2009 Nobel literature laureate Herta Müller calls it a “catastrophe.”

I disagree. To write such compelling fiction featuring current government corruption, inhumane policies, and the country’s bloody history without being jailed, censored, or having to leave his native villagers and country in favor of citizenship abroad, speaks to the deep level of artistry in Mo Yan’s novels and his commitment to his adoring Chinese public. Moreover, the clout of his Nobel now permits him to vocalize opinions that have hitherto only been possible through the veil of his writing. This makes his pen name, translated as “don’t speak,” even more of an irony.

But, be assured that none of this current debate can really be affecting Mo Yan all that much, given his stance that controversy is the mark of good writing. By his own standards, he has proved himself a tour de force. I just worry where he will write his next novel once Gaomi is turned into a theme park.

Anna Schonberg ’95 has a master’s in East Asian studies from Stanford and currently lives in Los Angeles.

Language, In Depth: Why the Nation Needs a Strategic Language Reserve

Categories: Midd Blogosphere

helloglobe_WEBOn November 1, 1941, a little over a month before Pearl Harbor and America’s entry into World War II, the U.S. Army opened a secret facility in an abandoned airplane hangar at San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park. The purpose of this enterprise was to create a cadre of experts who could speak Japanese. After the war, the new language training center, now known as the Defense Language Institute, moved to Minnesota and eventually found a permanent home at the historic Presidio of Monterey.

In times of war, we always seem to remember the need for people to talk to other people in a language they can truly understand—their own. Unfortunately, without the threat of war, Americans—like the former president of Harvard and former secretary of the treasury Larry Summers—seem to believe that foreign languages are a waste of time and resources because the rest of the world, if they want to talk to us, can be expected to do so in English.

Yet even people who realize that the overwhelming majority of the world’s population does not speak English, and that even those who do speak English can often communicate in that language only on a very basic level of proficiency, add to the problem by joining the stampede for what I like to call “the critical language du jour.” The people who jump on these particular bandwagons seem to be unaware of the fact that their behavior is that of lemmings. In the 1960s and 1970s, following the Sputnik crisis of 1957, everybody was supposed to be learning Russian. In the 1990s there was a spike in Japanese (remember Michael Crichton’s Rising Sun and all those courses on Japanese business ethics?) and German (following the fall of the Berlin Wall, when people were afraid of the rise of a “Fourth Reich”!).

While the Arabic School at Middlebury was established in 1982, on a national scale Arabic remained one of the “less commonly taught languages” until 9/11, when it suddenly seemed as if every single college student in America wanted to study Arabic. The same is true of Chinese: Whereas Middlebury established its Chinese summer Language School as early as 1966, the rest of the nation did not catch up until the late 1990s when it suddenly became obvious to everybody else that China was on its way to becoming a global powerhouse.

There is, of course, nothing wrong with people studying Arabic and Chinese. We desperately need proficient speakers in both languages. With less than 20 percent of Americans fluent in a second language (as compared to 50 percent in the European Union) we sorely need foreign language speakers to remain competitive in a global economy, for purposes of national security, and to participate in worldwide conversations about risks like climate change, global health and resources (food, water, energy), or migration.

The problem is that we need experts in all the most important world languages, not just the one or two “critical languages du jour.” Just as we found ourselves catastrophically short of Arabic speakers after 9/11 (and, more importantly before 9/11!), who is to say that, in the wake of a resurgent Russia, we will not someday wish we had had more Russianists?

Currently, many people in the federal government and consequently many administrators of educational institutions seem to think that some of our traditional languages (except for Spanish) no longer matter. This includes French, German, Italian, and Russian. (It also includes Japanese, which, as recently as the 1990s, was very “hot.”) There are about 110 million people in dozens of countries worldwide who speak French as their native language. About 100 million in central Europe speak German. It is also the most widely spoken second language in Europe, after English. Russian is spoken by some 160 million people—and, as The Economist noted some time ago, we are neglecting a country that remains one of the world’s superpowers at our peril. Japanese is spoken by 125 million people; in 2012, Japan, with a GDP of U.S. $6 trillion, was still the world’s third largest economy behind the United States and China, and ahead of Germany. Yet in the headlong race to throw all of our (dwindling) resources at the language spoken by the people we most fear at any given point in time, we are sending a powerful message to students and the public at large that languages matter only if we are at war with the people who speak them.

What we need is a strategic language reserve, a place, or better yet, many places, where the 10 or 20 most important world languages will always be taught, reliably, year after year, with cutting-edge pedagogy and technology in a setting that is immersive, contextualized, interactive, and high octane. There are only three or four places in the nation that do this, and among these, Middlebury has by far the longest tradition of excellence in immersion language education. As Middlebury’s Language Schools approach our centennial in 2015, we should remember that, except for the German School between 1917 (consider the date!) and 1931, Middlebury has never closed a Language School. This means that Middlebury is one place in the nation where, for a hundred years, students have been able to come and study a particular language in one summer, and then return to study some more one or two or many years later. We now teach 10 languages: Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Hebrew, Japanese, Italian, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish. And we expect to teach these languages (and others we hope to add) a decade from now and, barring unforeseen disasters, many years into the future. If this country is to remain competitive, secure, and a leader on issues of global import, it will be critical for us to speak the world’s languages.

Michael Geisler is a professor of German and the vice president of the Language Schools, schools abroad, and graduate programs at Middlebury.

But What About English?

It is estimated that 375 million people around the world speak English as their first language; another 375 million, and possibly more, speak English as a second language. Beyond that, even more people speak English to some level of competence, as many as 25 percent of this planet’s seven billion people.

And the demand for the other three-quarters is increasing. Why? “Because English is the language of business and commerce,” says Renee Jourdenais, the dean of the Graduate School of Translation, Interpretation, and Language Education at the Monterey Institute. “If you are in China, and you want to do business with Russia or Japan or India, you need a common language, and English often serves as that language.”

English is also the official language for maritime and aeronautical communications, for the United Nations, the International Olympic Committee; it is the primary or official language for nearly 100 countries around the globe. For those who can’t speak English, they are at risk of being marginalized, a phenomenon taking place both far and near. Consider: An estimated one in four children in the United States are from immigrant families and live in households where a language other than English is spoken. As a result, in American schools, there is a significant learning gap between English-language learners and native English speakers.

Being able to teach English to nonnative speakers is of critical importance. Under Jourdenais’s purview at MIIS are both the programs in intensive English and teaching English to speakers of other languages. (The former is for international students seeking to learn English; the latter trains people to teach English.) Here are some of Jourdenais’s thoughts on the learning and teaching of English:

On the need for understanding English
There’s the business and commerce equation, as I mentioned. English is increasingly seen as the lingua franca of the world. If you want to participate in the global economy, if you want to be globally literate, knowing how to speak and read English can maximize your possibilities. Likewise, if we look inwardly at our own country, the demographics of the United States are changing. The number of people who speak languages other than English is increasing. And English serves as a common language for U.S. residents as well. As such, there is a critical need in our country and our schools for teachers who can teach English to nonnative speakers—to help close a critical learning gap between those who come to school English-fluent and those who need to develop their English skills along with their academic knowledge.

On the teaching of English to nonnative speakers
Too often, people assume that if you can speak a language, if you are “fluent” in a language, then you can teach it. That’s not entirely true. Those who want to teach English to speakers of other languages need to know why people need the language and how they acquire it. These potential teachers need a sound linguistic foundation—they have to understand linguistic theory, the structures of language, and theories of how languages are learned. And then there is language pedagogy—how best to teach languages and engage students in their learning experience. These teachers also need to be prepared to teach students who come from different backgrounds with different ways of learning. All of this is so important—these teachers are giving their students a voice in the world.

Language, in Depth: Living with Dyslexia

Categories: Midd Blogosphere

bookmaze_WEBThe time that stands out to me, the time when I first realized that I was different, was when I was in the third grade.

At my school, all of the kids in the third grade were asked to read a children’s book to the first graders. This program instilled a very real sense of, I don’t know, superiority, I guess. The age difference between first and third grade isn’t great, but in third grade you can read; it was a differentiator. Reading was imbedded into that sense of identity as a third grader; we were the “big kids,” and we were going to demonstrate it by doing something the first graders couldn’t.

Up until this point, I don’t think I had a full understanding that I couldn’t read like my classmates. I just knew that it was hard, and that was the extent of it. I thought it was like that for everybody. But when it came time for us to choose our books, I remember kids choosing these chapter books, the Magic Tree House series, to show off their reading chops; or maybe they were picking more simple books they had been able to read for a while, books that the first-graders were just learning to read.

So I went that route, picking The Cat in the Hat—except I couldn’t read it. I knew what the story was about because my parents always read to me at bedtime, and I had a pretty good visual memory of the book. I knew how many words there were on a page. The pictures somewhat corresponded with the words, and I could remember the pictures. So up until “reading day” I would have my parents read me that book, and I would try and memorize the story. I would try to remember the words that they were saying.

And then it came time to read the book aloud to the first-graders. And it was right then, when I was sweating, my hands shaking, fumbling for words . . . that’s when I knew. These kids were correcting me. They could read it. And I couldn’t.

That’s when it dawned on me that there was this structure, this hierarchy in the educational world—third-graders should be able to do things that first-graders couldn’t—and I didn’t have a place in it.

I was given the diagnosis in the fourth grade, and it came with such a profound sense of relief. Up until that point, I just felt that I wasn’t smart enough; I couldn’t do what the teachers felt I could do. So getting the diagnosis—that was the ultimate clarification that I was different, but that was good. Suddenly, there was a category that I fit into; I wasn’t alone.

Being diagnosed as dyslexic immediately gave me a sense of what my strengths were and what my weaknesses were. To get these laid out for me was so important because it told me that, OK, there are things I’m going to struggle with, but there are also things that I won’t struggle with. Before, I had no confidence; I just assumed everything would be a struggle.

I was so lucky that my mom was a teacher, because she never had the belief that there were “normal” kids and there were kids who didn’t fit that definition. She sees each kid as an individual learner. The concept that there’s a standard student and there’s a student who needs accommodations is ridiculous because there is no “standard” student. She inherently understood that. Up until my diagnosis, I might have felt alone at school, but never at home.

In high school, I loved studio art, and I think it was expected that because I was dyslexic and because I was good at art, that I’d go to art school. But I saw this as a copout, I saw this as running away from my dyslexia, of conforming to others’ beliefs in what I could or couldn’t do. I had this deep drive to prove to people that I could do academics. I was going to go to a rigorous liberal arts school! And then I was going to be a history major!

When I got here, I felt like Middlebury had taken a risk with me; I was a risky investment. I mean, I knew what I could do, but how could they know for sure? I had bad SAT scores, and I probably spelled some stuff wrong on the application. So I put pressure on myself to prove that kids with learning disabilities, kids who don’t do well on the SATs, can contribute a lot to the community—they can be creators, innovators.

At first I thought that meant excelling in areas I wouldn’t normally excel in and limiting myself to one studio art course a semester—things like that. And I did well. But then I wondered, Why am I not doing what I really want to do? I remember being told that I was going to reach a point in my life when I’d be able to do the things that I wanted to do, that I wouldn’t always have to work so hard to overcome my learning difference.

But there’s no guy standing on the corner saying, “You know that point? It’s happening right now.” You have to come to that realization yourself, and I think this is especially difficult for people with learning differences. When do you shed off that stuff that you have to do?

I think I’ve spent a long time feeling not so great about myself; there are self-esteem issues deeply embedded in working within other people’s expectations. And if you are not doing what you really want to do, not playing to your strengths, then the validation you receive is completely external, and you never feel satisfied.

I’m still working through it. But I’m a studio art major now, though I might minor in history.

Living with dyslexia . . . it’s hard. But from my experience, you have to own it. It’s who I am. It’s always going to be me. Understanding this is essential in order to be happy as a human being.