After announcing the third round of budget cuts a few weeks ago, I received more than 50 e-mails protesting my decision to accept the Budget Oversight Committee’s (BOC) recommendation, slightly amended, that the College reduce support for The New England Review.  Although the BOC proposed that the College cease all financial support of The Review, I elected to give The Review until December 31, 2011 to eliminate its deficit.
I am writing this post to acknowledge the many people who have written to me, and to respond to the concerns they raised in their individual letters.

The message common to virtually every e-mail is not surprising: all who have written point to the great value of The New England Review; the loss of intellectual life that would be felt by its going away; the frailty of literary magazines in general and how none can exist without external support; and how places like Middlebury have some kind of obligation, moral and otherwise, to continue their support of such publications in the name of supporting the arts and intellectual discourse.
I agree fully with the first three items above, but not necessarily the last.  That is why I decided to give The Review an additional two-plus years to consider how it might garner greater financial support beyond the subsidy it now receives from Middlebury College.  Given current financial circumstances, which none of the e-mailers seemed willing to confront, I find asking families who are paying $50,000/year in comprehensive fees to, in effect, subsidize a literary magazine that serves a very small slice of the general population and is known only to a handful of Middlebury students, a very hard sell.  That some e-mails mention how several universities, with far deeper pockets than Middlebury, have closed down literary magazines in better economic times should mean something to those who insist that Middlebury continue to subsidize The New England Review.

I am a fan of The Review, and have been for many years.  But as president of this liberal arts college, I also have a responsibility to the students, faculty, staff, and the generous supporters of the College.  In contrast to the small number of people who have published in the NER or read it regularly, I must consider how our institution will weather the current financial challenges and, first and foremost, preserve what is most central to our students’ education.  Perhaps it is normal to pronounce that “no literary magazine breaks even; all require subsidies,” as many e-mailers claimed.  However, it seems unreasonable, indeed illogical, to expect an undergraduate liberal arts college to provide those subsidies when there is little direct benefit to the students who are covering the costs of operation.  This is not to say The Review is not excellent, valuable, or worth preserving.  It surely is.  It simply cannot continue operating as it has, and my hope is that by increasing subscriptions and sponsorships (gifts), plus exploring whether there are alternatives to the current (and expensive) method of production, it will be able to operate without such a significant subsidy.  I should add that, to my knowledge, not a single individual who has written in protest of the College’s decision has contributed financially to help subsidize The Review.
We are committed to assisting editor and colleague Stephen Donadio find ways to increase revenues and reduce costs so The Review can continue to publish the high quality writing it has for the past thirty years.  And, of course, I am interested in any suggestions you may have for bolstering The Review’s revenues or reducing its operating costs.

I close by providing a link to an article that appeared in The Chronicle of Higher Education, just as I was completing this post.  An interesting read, and certainly germane to the issue we are facing with The Review.

UPDATE: I have received e-mails letting me know that at least two individuals have made contributions on behalf of the NER since information about the financial situation became public.  We thank those who have made contributions and hope others will do the same and also become subscribers to the magazine.

I have a guest post on MiddBlog, asking students if we should change the College’s planned breakfast venues next year so that Atwater Dining could offer a continental breakfast.

Students: if you are interested in weighing in, please go to Middblog.


I have yet to attend a Liebowitz Day. Was never invited. The closest I came to either attending or being invited was last year, when, by coincidence, my wife and I were hosting a lunch for first-year Febs at 3 South Street, and two guests at the lunch were wearing red “Che” (Liebowitz) tee-shirts. Almost wished I had one.  One of the students innocently asked me, “Are you coming to the concert tonight?” “What concert?” I asked.  “You know, the Liebowitz Day concert.”

I embarrassingly told the student that I hadn’t been invited to the concert or, for that matter, to any Liebowitz Day events. Ever. All those Feb first-years, who had been on campus for only a month or so, didn’t quite know how to react. “Well, just come,” one said slowly after a few awkward moments.  Unfortunately, doing things spontaneously is not that easy with three small children at home (finding babysitting on short notice is near impossible, especially on weekends), so we couldn’t attend. Besides, I was not invited!

This year, once again, I have not received an invitation to Liebowitz Day. Not one. But even if I had, or had been planning to make a surprise appearance, I would not be able to do so. Sadly, I will be out of town at a memorial service for an extraordinary friend of the College who passed away far too early in life.

But there is next year, perhaps, for both receiving an invitation and attending an event.

I will not try to capture what Saturday night’s NCAA D-III game at Pepin between the Panthers and Bridgewater was like other than to say that it might have been one of the single greatest (yet excruciatingly painful) games I have witnessed, in any sport. This coming from a lifelong sports fan.

The outcome, a last-second (literally) 78-76 loss by Middlebury, was a disappointment in that the Panthers will not continue their season. But the game, and indeed the entire season, was quite remarkable, and one could not help but feel great pride in watching the Middlebury team play with great intensity and sportsmanship.

The comments at the end of the heartbreaking loss by team captain Ben Rudin, who had an outstanding game, season, and career, reflected an unusual maturity for a 22-year-old whose storied season had just ended, and ended in such dramatic fashion. Coach Jeff Brown’s comments reflected the kind of class that has become the standard for Middlebury coaches and the ideals and quality of our athletics program led by athletic director Erin Quinn—something we should never take for granted.

On behalf of so many, I want to thank Jeff and the Panther basketball team for the best season in the program’s history and, even more, for showing such class in both victory and defeat.

This past Saturday may have been slightly unusual for our college, but what went on is an astounding example of the richness of this liberal arts college and what it offers our students. These are some of the things I witnessed as I went about my day, moving from 3 South Street to the library to the Grille (to get some coffee) to the Peterson Athletics Complex and back home. Consider this a sampling:

  • Wilson Café in the library was packed, not only with students, but also faculty and staff as I walked by to return some borrowed videos. The library itself was packed with students working solo and in groups, tackling everything from reading assignments to multimedia projects in the library’s numerous smart classrooms and labs.
  • Dr. Paul Farmer, the remarkable medical anthropologist/physician, who co-founded Partners in Health, spoke at 3 p.m. to an overflow crowd … or rather crowds (more than 400 were in McCullough social space and another 300 were in venues that had live video feeds.
  • The annual Posse retreat, which brings together more than 100 students, faculty, and staff who support the mission of the 40-plus Posse scholars enrolled at the College from New York City, was taking place at Lake Fairlee, Vermont. I was unable to attend the retreat, but received an e-mail reporting that the retreat was extremely spirited and engaging.
  • The practice rooms in the Mahaney Center for the Arts were filled with students playing a range of instruments.
  • The men’s and women’s hockey teams hosted home games in their respective NESCAC conference tournaments. (Both won). As usual, the stands were filled with not only students, but staff, faculty, and townspeople, who convert Kenyon Arena into a “town hall” of sorts, where the greater Middlebury community comes together most easily and frequently between our annual town meetings.
  • The ski team was competing at the Eastern Intercollegiate Ski Championships at Sugar Loaf in Maine (and placed third behind Dartmouth and UVM).
  • And 1,250 fans (a full house) were on hand in Pepin Gymnasium to watch the Panthers defeat Bowdoin to make it to the NESCAC tournament finals against Amherst (which Middlebury won the next day).

Much more was happening on campus, of course, and these snippets represent just a slice of life at Middlebury on a Saturday afternoon in late February.

Like most presidents of colleges and universities, I have been trying to keep a wide range of constituents apprised of how the steep decline in the American economy is affecting the College. This has been a collective effort, as my administration and the Trustees share my desire to be fully open about the current state of College finances. We have circulated memos, held open meetings, and posted as much information as we can on the College Web site describing our economic status. And we began the process of budget-cutting early in this academic year. This has proven to be a good decision since-as I continuously remind people-we do not know whether we have hit the bottom of this global recession.

I will not repeat here much of what I have been saying for the past six months, but I do want to highlight some of the challenges we have encountered in trying to overcome the $20 million deficit we would experience if we didn’t make major cuts now. Our Budget Oversight Committee (BOC), which is comprised of two faculty, two staff, two students, and three administrators, has worked hard to review many suggestions that have come from the College community at large, from members of the president’s staff, and from within the committeee’s ranks. It has done remarkable work in what is an unprecedented economic environment, and it has had to work relatively quickly (for an academic institution) because the sooner we negate a budget gap, the less of an accumulating deficit we will face and need to address two, three, and four years out. Thus, while many would like a slower and more deliberate process than the one in place, doing so would require more drastic cuts in future years.

The big issue for all of us is how to engage and involve students more effectively in the choices before the BOC. I recognize that having two student representatives on BOC does not meet many students’ desire to voice their opinions on options before the committee as it makes its recommendations to me. Acting Provost Tim Spears and I will be meeting with the Student Government Association (SGA) this coming week to see if it can form its own budget oversight committee to recommend cuts in the budget. We will also see whether SGA can develop a process that will get from students a collective sense of what are the most important things to preserve so the BOC and I are better informed about student opinion regarding specific programs and services on campus.

To date there has been less visible student interest in the budget situation than I would have thought. The two open meetings for staff that our chief financial officer Patrick Norton, Tim Spears, and I hosted earlier this month (February 5-6) attracted nearly 500 staff members. Each meeting lasted two hours and included many, many good questions from the floor. The February faculty meeting (February 16), with finances on the agenda, was very well attended, and included, again, good questions and discussion from a wide range of colleagues. The open meeting for students, on the other hand, held at 7:30 p.m. on a Monday evening (February 10), drew fewer than 40 students. The discussion was very good, and there were more good questions, but the turnout was a disappointment. 

I will be holding more open meetings for students this semester-the next will be Thursday, March 5, at noon in McCullough Social Space-and I hope students will attend and participate. In the meantime, I would love to hear any ideas on how to bring students up to speed on the nature and magnitude of the financial challenges before us, as well as finding ways to hear what is most important to them. For starters, they should consult the Web site listed above and try to attend the open meetings in the coming months so their concerns and suggestions will be better informed and placed in a context that reflects these severe economic circumstances.

« Older entries § Newer entries »

Sites DOT Middlebury: the Middlebury site network.