Defining Grinnell
Strategic planning committee hopes to find the college’s identity, then achieve it
by Erin Petty
Features Editor
The popular “Where the hell is Grinnell?” T-shirts may soon become obsolete if the newly-established strategic planning steering committee realizes its goals.
Increased name recognition is among the aims of the strategic planning process, which was prompted by the college’s new mission statement. The steering committee, composed of trustees, faculty and staff, and one student met for the first of four meetings last weekend. Committee members embarked on two main tasks Saturday: determining the identity of the college as laid out by its mission statement, and articulating goals necessary to achieve this identity.
One difficult task the committee faces is achieving consistency between the present-day college and the implicitly improved college of the mission statement.
“Are we comfortable in our own skin? Do we want to become just like every other school, and in the process kill Grinnell?” asked Gabe Rosenberg ’03, the committee’s student representative.
Committee members engaged in extensive dialogue regarding growing importance of the college’s commitments to such causes as social justice and diversity, both concerns at the core of many Grinnellians’ ideals. Other aims of the committee may make fewer peoples’ priority lists.
“I am alone when I say I want to rise in the U.S. News and World Report college rankings,” acknowledged Professor Mark Montgomery, the steering committee’s chairperson. “That’s one of my key goals. This is absolutely not representative of the faculty.”
Montgomery refuses to make a push to rise in the rankings at the expense of Grinnell’s individuality, however. “If we have to turn into one of the East Coast liberal arts colleges to [rise in the rankings], forget it,” he said. “I don’t want to sell our soul.”
Rather, Montgomery values the rankings as a marketing tool for the college. “I have no opposition to rising in the rankings,” he said, “because then we will get on the radar screens of the students who ought to be thinking of coming to Grinnell.”
Currently, Grinnell attracts fewer students than most of its official peer institutions. Grinnell received fewer completed applications than any of its peer colleges, and nine of these 11 colleges are more selective than Grinnell.
Some trustees believe Grinnell not only lacks in terms of quantity of applicants, but even possibly in terms of some qualities as well. Citing freshman surveys from 1999 to 2001 that indicated Grinnell students have the lowest self-rated drive to achieve and are the least likely to desire community leadership among students at peer institutions, trustee Patricia Finkelman ’80 asked the committee, “Why aren’t we producing leaders—or students who think of themselves as leaders?”
Acknowledging that the surveys also found Grinnell students to be the most politically liberal of all the students at peer institutions, Finkelman did not view Grinnell students as completely apathetic. “Grinnell students want to change the world, but don’t want to be the ones to do it,” she said.
In addition to the applicant pool, other aspects of the college that committee members defined as priorities in the planning process include curriculum, quality of student and faculty life, and community relations. In a discussion format called the dialogue planning process, these and other concerns were documented on computer and will be subject to brainstorming in later meetings.
The dialogue planning process, also called the bracket approach, was the idea of trustee Clint Korver ’89, a member of the planning (separate from steering) committee. “There’s two reasons to do the bracket approach,” he explained to the steering committee. “One reason is the creativity. The other is [that] we commit to less.”
The bracket approach is meant to encourage steering committee members to engage in uncensored dialogue that produces innovative solutions to the committee’s concerns. For example, under the concern “Financial Prudence,” Professor Mark Schneider, the science division’s representative to the committee, suggested that one possible, though by his own admission somewhat “far out” course of action is to put the college’s endowment toward tuition, thus making Grinnell tuition-free.
By achieving the mission statement through the goals they set, the members of the steering committee hope to attain—or maintain—the college’s greatness. Though each member has his or her own thoughts regarding Grinnell’s claim to greatness, Montgomery, for one, hopes the college never becomes too concerned with the concept.
“I’m sure this is a very bad thing to say, but this college manages to be great without having its head up it rear-end,” he said. “We have really good students, we provide a really good education, we’re one of the top schools. But we don’t focus on how great we are.”
Local group considers movie theater expansion
Investors to assess market’s potential; decision by Dec. 1
by David Archer
Staff Writer
A group of Grinnell-based investors has recently bought an option to purchase the city’s lone first-run movie theater, and the adjoining property to the south, turning the theater into a rare business on the cusp of expansion. Before the option expires on Dec. 1 the group plans to explore the feasibility of opening a new three- or four-screen complex.
The Grinnell-based businesspeople formed the investment group, Grinnell Private Investment Corporation (GPIC), earlier this year when they learned that the owners of the one-screen movie house, Fidley Theater Corporation, planned to close the business because of sagging profits.
The GPIC has not decided to buy the property yet, so the project’s details are sketchy at best. Before the Dec. 1 expiration date they need to compile and analyze market data about the long-term feasibility of a multi-screen theater in downtown Grinnell.
In an effort to flesh out their plans they have hired a Des Moines based architect, who specializes in movie theaters, to give them ideas about what the expansion might look like.
Because they have not even purchased the property yet, much less begun construction, they are uncertain when the renovated thater might open. The project’s success depends on the ability of the investment group to raise enough money early in the project and avoid going into debt, said Jim Ramsey, a GPIC manager.
The Fidley Theater Corporation is a Des Moines-based company that owns and operates theaters throughout the region. At one point they also considered expanding the Grinnell theater, but decided that it would not fit with their stringent profit requirements: generally, they open multi-screen theaters in suburban areas that can provide a quick return on investment. The GPIC, on the other hand, has longer-term profit schedule, and they also aim for the theater to be a catalyst for all downtown commerce.
It might also give Grinnell students and local teenagers something to do when they’re bored. According to a recent Des Moines Register article about Grinnell, a survey of Grinnell residents revealed a desire for more activities for young people.
“From a community standpoint, we’re excited about the option,” said Ramsey. “The theater will help get Grinnell students involved in downtown Grinnell, and it will attract people from the outlying areas of Grinnell.”
Trustees respond to student criticism
Discussion at last Friday’s open forum with fourteen members of the Board of Trustees ranged from campus construction to how best to maintain contact with board members
by Brian Clites
Staff Writer
Dining Hall Closures
“I’m concerned with a different kind of sustainability,” said John Abramowitz ’05. “We’re building all of these new buildings, and that’s great—there’s certainly merit to a lot of them—but I’m concerned about some of the things that may be closed down or changed in the process,” he added.
Abramowitz said that Quad dining hall was one of the most attractive parts of campus to him when he visited. He also cited that studying in the Forum grill was a tradition for many students. Abramowitz said, “I would like to implore you, and to plead with you to keep these places open, because while I can certainly understand the rush for newer and bigger things, there is something to be said for what we’ve grown up with.”
Trustee Todd Linden promptly interjected, asking, “What year are you?” Abramowitz stated that he was a second year student. “Then you have no problem, you’ll be fine,” he said, laughing.
Taking the matter more seriously, trustee Bob Barr added, “Before you get too excited about that, I think you need to look at the plans for the new campus center … before you get too upset about losing something, make sure you understand what you’re going to gain.”
Henderson gave a more personal response, saying, “I feel the same way you do about Main. The absence of something is very painful, until you see the whole thing … the feelings you’re having now are no different from the feelings we’re having—we have the same attachments,” he said.
Spence and Henderson reminded the audience of their fondness of “the Barracks”—as they used to call the building that formerly stood where the Forum is now. As a student, Spence said she hated the Forum because it replaced the building her class was so fond of. She pointed out that it is a matter of reference, and that students have loved the Forum ever since a few years after her class graduated.
Sustainable Design
Eli Zigas ’06 opened the session by expressing his concern for more environmentally conscious buildings.
Trustee David White ’90 said, “For the record, there are a number of trustees concerned with that same issue.”
Trustee Russ Allen nearly ended the question by nicely suggesting that that Zigas’ concern would be best handled by other people. He said, “I believe that the architects are coming back to campus soon, and the best idea [for you] is to talk with them. You could also talk to [FM Director] Mark Godar.”
Zigas, however, continued the dialogue by putting his question in a clearer context, saying that there is a clause about sustainable building in the Master Plan. He continued by suggesting the Leadership for Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) criteria. “Lots of other colleges around the country are designing buildings based on [the LEED] system of points certification,” he said.
Trustee chair Caroline Little joined the discussion to clarify the role of the trustees. “I think it’s very important to understand the role of the trustees on campus,” she said. “We are very interested in what goes on on campus, but we’re not responsible for the operation of the campus, nor do we get involved in a lot of details about a particular building.”
Zigas responded by declaring that his concern was for more than just one building. “What I propose is that all new buildings will be up to a certain level of certification of certain standards … otherwise this college will not pursue, to the extent necessary, a sustainable design,” he said. “What we’re asking for is some form of commitment that new buildings will be held to this level.”
Little responded receptively to the idea. She said, “I think that is a reasonable request.” She added that the students also need to consider all of the implications of their proposals, including costs, and accentuated, “I think that you need to be very concrete [in your request] and make a proposal.”
Without much hesitation, Zigas did just that. He said, “My proposal is that…the Board of Trustees assert that every new building built on this campus will be held to bronze level or above LEED certification.”
The board said that it could not make any commitment without knowing exactly what, for instance, bronze level LEED certification was. Little said, “I’d like to know more about it, what it involves … and frankly that’s the role of the administration, and if it becomes a larger issue where there is real concern about it, I suppose we, the board, would be willing to consider it. But first it needs to go to the administration.”
Later in the open forum, Henderson returned to Zigas’ concerns, saying, “I guarantee you that there won’t be any further discussions in which your comments aren’t going to be considered by this board … what you said today will be in the minds of the members of this board a year, two years, and three years from now. You have communicated, and so you shouldn’t think that you haven’t. You have taught us something new, and it will stay.”
Sweatshop code of conduct
Linda Johnson ’05 voiced great concern over the changes President Osgood made to the code of conduct drafted by Students Against Sweatshops last year in close conjunction with the president and the Board of Trustees.
On the verge of tears at times, Johnson was emotional while expressing her dissatisfaction in the result of the code that she and so many others had worked passionately on, including members of the Board.
Immediately, Little responded with a clear and assertive tone, “I can assure you that you were not being ignored. Remember, you guys wanted a code—we are discussing a code. We all put an effort into this because we know that this is very important to you [students].”
Trustee Steve Holtz added, “The process isn’t over, so hang in there.”
Campus Center
One student raised concerns over the size of the campus center. “One of my concerns is whether the campus center is going to be this huge shopping mall atmosphere, and I think that you have the responsibility as you are looking at these plans to realize what our particular concerns are,” she said. “We don’t want Darby to go, we don’t want the Forum to go,” she added.
Little responded that when the board switched from the original to the current architects working on the campus center, it was exactly for that reason—the fear that it would be too massive under the original architect’s designs. She said, “It’s something that we care about very deeply too. We’re not going to be here in 50 years, but we want to make sure [it is] in harmony with the rest of campus.”
Trustee Anne Spencer said that she was also very concerned about the appearance and size of the campus center. However, her opinion had just changed earlier Friday, when the architects presented the latest design plans to the board in the morning. She said, “Shopping mall? —There’s no way. I just loved it.”
She added, “This is [part of the] ongoing process of the evolution of Grinnell College … like all other evolutionary processes, it will sometimes be good, it will sometimes be not as good as we want, and it will sometimes hurt.”
Darby
Heather Robb ’03, a volleyball player, expressed concern about where the volleyball team, basketball teams, and other athletic groups that use Darby will play after the gym is demolished, which is scheduled to happen years before any new athletic facilities are built. “When you decide what buildings get built and demolished,” she asked, “do you realize there’s no place for the volleyball team to play?”
Several members of the board said that that very issue is a chief concern for the board. “Darby is going to have to make way for a fabulous campus center,” said trustee Bob Musser, “but when [that] happens we intend to have fabulous athletic facilities available to the students—maybe not right away, there may be a transition problem—but eventually we will.”
Robb responded that she wasn’t concerned whether or not the new facility will be great, but whether or not the teams will have somewhere good to play before that new facility is built. Henderson assured Robb, saying, “We’re not going to trade off the experiences of current students for someone who comes in ten years from now.”
Several other trustees spoke, agreeing on the importance of the issue and their hopes for a possible future athletic complex. They were as yet undecided on a solution to the problem, but suggested the possibility of building temporary facilities until a new complex is built.
How to contact the trustees
Many of the students at the open forum seemed confused or frustrated about the best way to get their issues heard by the trustees. In the first question of the forum, Eli Zigas ‘06 asked, “From your prospective, what is the most effective way [to contact the Trustees]?”
White responded that there are several ways to get ideas to the trustees. “One way is a forum like this, which we try to hold as often as possible,” he said. “You have your representation on SGA, and … there’s also the Student Affairs Committee.”
“We are very interested in what goes on on campus, but we are not responsible for the [daily] operation of the campus,” said Little.
SGA Vice President Devin McGranahan ’04 added that students should attempt to frame their communication with specific proposals. “It is important that you do your work … it demonstrates that you actually care, and it also makes sure that what is done is up to your standards,” he said. “Then you have a hard copy, a document that you can expound on.”
Further into the session, students expressed confusion over the role of the trustees as well.
Several issues over which the trustees have no control were brought up in the meeting, such as the allocation of student activity funding and input on which academic programs are offered.
Trustees seemed very receptive to communication with students, including e-mail and mail, but said that most issues should be taken to SGA or to the administration first, who can then approach the trustees if necessary.
“We are here when we come as a group … to make the decisions this board needs to make,” Spence said. “We can’t run this school on a daily basis; that is for the administration.”
Shorthand
Campus news
The GRINNELL MAGAZINE, the college’s quarterly publication for past and present Grinnellians, will try to cultivate a new “clean, simple look” in its next issue. Describing related changes, the Office of Communication and Events, which puts out the magazine, reported that “staff wanted to tighten and strengthen the copy, include more student and alumni voices, and make the campus news section more accessible, more vibrant, and simply irresistible to the reader.” The office also hoped that an increased emphasis on photography will “dramatically improve” the magazine . . . Facilities Management director Mark Godar reported that workers are RUSHING TO FINISH CONSTRUCTION on central campus and outside the Bucksbaum Center before the soil freezes in late October. Pending agreement from involved labor unions, workers will be asked to fill Saturday shifts in order to finish everything by fall break. Godar said that construction was essentially on schedule, and that some peripheral tasks had even been added to the project . . . Grinnell dropped one slot in U.S. News and World Report’s ANNUAL COLLEGE RANKINGS last month, from a tie for the country’s eleventh-ranked liberal arts college into twelfth place. Grinnell rose sharply in the rankings over the last twenty years but has never broken the top ten. It also remained on the magazine’s “best value” list, at number 5, and narrowly beat Harvard and Swarthmore for 10th place in a new category: schools providing excellent opportunities for undergraduate research. As usual, several elite schools, such as Reed College and St. John’s College, received deceptively low rankings after refusing to fill out U.S. News surveys . . . Grinnell’s police department will beginto more strictly enfoce 24-HOUR LIMITS TO PARKING on streets in the campus area, reported Parking Committee representative Phil Morse-Fortier ‘05 . . . College administrators are also seeking solutions for the SCARCITY OF ON-CAMPUS PARKING, Morse-Fortier said. At the moment, he said, about 1800 registered vehicles share only 750 parking spaces, 250 of which are reserved for students. Among other suggestions, the committee discussed a possible increase in parking permit fees, in an effort to deter students from needlessly bringing vehicles to campus . . . At its meeting last weekend, the trustees’ Development Committee decided on an official name for the JOSEPH ROSENFIELD CAMPUS CENTER, after the late Joe Rosenfield ‘25, a longtime Grinnell trustee, reputed financial wizard, and sometime roommate of Welcome Center namesake John Chrystal . . . Eli Zigas ‘06 has obtained space for a “TRADE BOARD” IN THE POST OFFICE, on which students will be able to post descriptions of unwanted items. . . Longtime Grinnell theatre professor SANDY MOFFETT will take his campaign for a seat on the county’s Board of Supervisors to this weekend’s homecoming parade, accompanying his performance in the Too Many Strings Band with posters announcing his candidacy . . . Several Residence Life Coordinators will organize a night of ALCOHOL-FREE BINGO in the South Lounge this Saturday from 10 p.m. to 1 a.m. RLC Don Weston said it would provide an alternative to the weekend’s several beer-greased activities.
Student government
John Bacino ’05 was elected to serve as CLEVELAND HALL’S SENATOR in a runoff last Friday. He replaced Matt Blake ’04, who was voted into the office against his will at the beginning of the year. After his election, Blake had attempted to organize a system of rotating representation, whereby a number of Cleveland students could share Joint Board duties and committee assignments, but SGA Administrative Coordinator Liz Allan ’04 rejected the plan. Over objection from Gabe Rosenberg ’03 (Haines), Allan removed Blake from office under a seldom-used clause of SGA’s constitution, which requires the removal of senators who miss more than two JB meetings, and called a by-election on Wednesday, Oct. 2. There, Bacino, who had served in Blake’s place for several weeks, tied with Blake, forcing Friday night’s runoff and leading to Bacino’s eventual victory. Blake reported that he voted for Bacino on both Wednesday and Friday, but that friends of his had voted for him to protest SGA’s dismissal of what they saw as a more democratic system of representation . . . Vice President Devan McGranahan ’04 announced the formation of an AD-HOC COMMITTEE ON SELF-GOVERNANCE to discuss what he sees as the sorry state of the policy at Grinnell. Among his ideas: a return to the pre-1970 practice of letting SGA issue penalties to students who violate campus policies. Students, said McGranahan, must take action to reduce the incidence of problems such as alcohol abuse, lest self-governance end completely. The new committee will meet at 1 p.m. Sunday in the Forum Coffeehouse, and an open forum will follow Tuesday at 8 in the South Lounge . . . Monday’s Joint Board approved funding for an Environmental Action Group project to construct NOTEBOOKS FROM RECYCLED PAPER scavenged from bins around campus. Though several senators worried that the booklets might contain paper that students wouldn’t want circulated around campus, EAG representatives said that they wouldn’t use any paper that contains anyone’s name. The group said that further notebooks would be made of paper from special “reuse” bins they hope to place around campus . . . Student representatives on the trustees’ Commitee on Student Affairs presented the committee last weekend with SGA’s TUITION FREEZE PROPOSAL, which would limit tuition increases for returning students to a maximum percentage change per academic year. Representative Patrick Midtlyng ‘03 said committee members seemed receptive, but mentioned possible complications with the transition to such a policy. The group will continue to explore the issue in the months to come.
-Michael Andersen
News | Arts | Features | Opinion | Sports | Staff | Archives | Email the Editor | Email the Webmaster