When describing Dartmouth to an outsider, the first descriptor that comes to mind is often: "Small, but not too small."
Perhaps it's silly to hedge my summary of Dartmouth, but most of our descriptions are actually equivocations. Dartmouth is a liberal arts college among Ivy League universities. Our setting is rustic and natural, but also technologically advanced and the nucleus of groundbreaking academic research. Our professors undertake complex research while focusing on undergraduate teaching. Students work hard, students party hard. The list goes on.
These days, defining a university among other institutions of higher learning in the United States entails identifying a niche. Dartmouth will never be tiny Williams College, nor a research behemoth like Harvard. "Small, but not too small."
In the aggregate, when students and faculty check off the features they want in a college, this works well. Do you like small class sizes, a big library and beautiful surroundings? How about Division I athletics, a college-town feel, with research opportunities? Or distinguished faculty, frequent skiing and active Greek life? Dartmouth fits.
The trouble with simply filling an educational niche, however, is that it becomes difficult to identify what Dartmouth does best. In what areas are we exclusively, exceptionally and unequivocally the best? We might have the right ingredients, but are any of them special? We don't have the smallest class sizes, or the biggest library or the most beautiful location.
I'm not advocating for a one-track institution. As I wrote in my last column ("Webster's Words," March 30), flexibility is vitally important for the future of the College. But so is innovation.
Innovative is one word that I've sadly never used to define Dartmouth. Unfortunately, there isn't much that stands out about the College. We're just another institution of higher learning a really fantastic one, but without any defining characteristic that separates us from the pack.
Sure, innovation is just a buzzword. Implementing it is the difficult part but I'm not sure anyone's really trying. We have ample resources paired with smart students, faculty and administrators. And yet there's a fundamental lethargy and contentment in being at the top of the higher education heap.
There's just not enough creativity on this campus. Even the calls for change entail little more than returning to previous patterns or adopting features present at other schools: a "Great Issues" course, expanded humanities curriculum, residential colleges or rejuvenated athletics program.
Instead of joining the current, I wish we'd fight it a little bit test other ways of running a College in the 21st Century. Maybe there should be more intricate high-level courses before we add introductory material. Perhaps residential dorms should be scrapped for more apartment-style living accommodations. How useful are sports teams anyway?
It's not that any of these proposals are better than their counterparts. Dartmouth's current ethos just stifles originality and innovation. We never have these status quo-challenging conversations at all. We never pilot new student life programs or new methods of teaching. We don't tinker with traditional success. We never outright fail, but we don't improve our spot in the top-15 ranking by U.S. News and World Report.
But if we never fail, it's only because we aren't trying to be the best. We just continue to define ourselves by the small niche we've carved out, rather than the potential we have to achieve beyond the usual. By embracing failure as just another component of innovation, Dartmouth can actually stand out as an institution that isn't afraid to lean boldly over the cutting edge of educational progress.
For me, anyway, that sounds a lot more exciting than "Small, but not too small."
