Dartmouth's education department and Jimmy Hoffa have more in common than you might think. Both were up against a powerful and secretive group that wanted them eliminated. And if the Social Sciences Council wants the department eliminated, it is a done deal. Dartmouth's education department and its teacher certification program will disappear. Quietly. Like Hoffa did. If the Social Sciences Council could bury the education department under the end zone of Giant's Stadium, they would.
I say this after attending last Thursday night's hour and a half meeting where Assoicate Dean of Social Sciences George Wolford made a weak attempt to defend himself from a standing-room only crowd of 300-plus education department supporters.
At that meeting, people offered very compelling arguments in support of the department. They might as well have saved their breath. The Council is not listening. How do I know? They still have not come up with any answers to the basic question: What is so wrong with the department that it needs to be eliminated?
Wolford says it is not the classes. Another Council member says there is "concern over the quality of the program." Which is it? Wolford says it is not the professors, they are all "doing a good job." Yet most of them are going to be let go. Which is it? Wolford told the crowd at the meeting that it is not about resources. However, another member of the Council has mentioned dividing the education department's resources among "better programs." Which is it?
The answers that have been publicly revealed are an impressive array of bombastic drivel: structural problems, personnel problems, it is just not working, administratively troubled, complex, not appropriate for public discussion, incongruous with the College's purpose. Teachers should get a masters degree in teaching, anyway. Not at liberty to expand. Not functioning properly. Trouble attracting scholars. Difficult atmosphere. The department is not cohesive. Producing too little scholarly work. Money can be used better elsewhere.
Only one word comes to my mind when I think about the plight of the education department and how it has been handled: dirty. The Social Sciences Council has made it obvious that this is about ugly politics.
Did they ask students about the quality of the department's classes? No. Did they ask alumni? No. Did they ask the faculty of the education department? No. Did Council members attend classes themselves? No.
How can they be "concerned over the quality of the program" when they have never checked out the program? How can they know that resources can be better used elsewhere when they have never seen how they are used now? Obviously, this is not about the quality of the program or resources or scholarly work or anything else that the council has claimed publicly.
I hope those on the Social Sciences Council do not think Dartmouth students are this naive. Every student in the room could see right through Wolford's vagaries. I felt like a child whose parents try to talk behind his back by spelling words instead of saying them.
It is dangerous when administrators forget that their purpose is to serve student interest. I acknowledge that tough decisions have to be made sometimes. However, the question must be asked: does the elimination of the education department serve students' interests or the Council's?
This is not just about the education department. There is a larger issue here: the way this decision is being handled. I am referring to the complete lack of student and alumni input. Should I bother filling out the survey at the end of my education class this term? Does Dartmouth listen to its students or is that just lip service?
A wide variety of input and output is necessary for a decision as important as the elimination of a department. After all, based on the published criteria for this decision, who knows which department will be buried next. Maybe the engineering department is too vocational.
Almost all the pieces are in place for an informed discussion leading to a win for everybody. Students, alumni, and the education department have all shown their willingness to say what they want and why. Unfortunately, the Social Sciences Council is not willing to operate in such good faith.
Wolford says that no decision has been made. I do not buy it. All I can see is how underhanded this situation is. I will not be surprised if the tattered remains of the education department end up buried in the concrete foundation of Berry Library, while no students are looking.
