The Soul of Dartmouth: The Academic Direction of Dartmouth College

Student Assembly Presidential Report

The Soul of Dartmouth:
The Academic Direction of Dartmouth College

Jorge Miranda `01
Student Assembly President `00-`01

Michael Perry `03
Vice President of Academic Affairs `00-`01

Special Thanks to:
Jeff Beardsley `04, Stephanie Bonan `03, Reid Coggins `04, Andy Edwards `04, Tara Maller `03, Joshua Marcuse `04, Greta Milligan `04, Katie Stewart `01, Lindsey Wolf `03

Introduction

"There is a battle going on for the soul of Dartmouth." The soul of Dartmouth, as this anonymous professor spoke of it, is the academic direction of the college. Very often, this battle is discussed in terms of "teaching vs. research." Others argue that such a dichotomy is too simplistic and argue that teaching and research go hand in hand and should not be pitted against one another. Both descriptions, as well as what this institution values academically, deserve further exploration.

Incoming students and faculty members are told that Dartmouth is the perfect balance between a research university and a small liberal arts college. It is this precious balance that is often used to distinguish Dartmouth from other institutions. Today, however, Dartmouth stands at a crossroads. It is currently trying to retain its past reputation and commitment to quality teaching, while also enhancing its research capabilities in order to gain preeminence. Could the balance that so many value be disrupted?

As President Wright said in his now famous words, "Dartmouth is a research university in all but name." The fact that this simple statement drew so much attention is evidence of the tension that exists between research and teaching. In the past few years, both students and faculty have expressed frustration over the academic direction of the college. Concern has been aired regarding the role of research, the importance of teaching, the student/faculty interaction outside of the classroom, the values of the tenure process, the role of students in academic decision making, and the basic academic values of the institution.

With these issues in mind, the Academic Affairs Committee of the Student Assembly began considering the academic direction of the college at the beginning of the year. In order to get a better handle on student opinion we surveyed a random sample of 800 students, 200 from each class. We asked questions varying from what importance they thought the college attached to teaching, to what the academic direction of the college should be. This was the starting point.

We also met with approximately thirty members of the faculty to discuss what direction the college is going in and what was good and bad about that direction. Faculty were selected based on the diversity of the views they represented, as well as their positions at the college: tenured faculty, junior faculty, adjunct, and visiting. From these interviews we gained a great deal of insight into the values that the college claims to uphold, and the values it lives out in its day to day workings. We also learned a great deal about where Dartmouth is coming from, and the questions and challenges posed by its present academic direction. We also left with many ideas regarding how to academically strengthen Dartmouth. All of these interviews and quotations from there are confidential.

The result of those surveys, interviews, and a great deal of discussion on our part is the report that follows. In it we go through the various themes that we found and recommendations that we have come up with. It is our hope that this report may be used as a springboard to facilitate further campus discussion and awareness of the academic direction that Dartmouth takes in the coming years.

Themes

Seeking a Balance in Transition

Teaching and Research are not by definition mutually exclusive. To see these two processes as inherently antagonistic is problematic and reveals a narrow-minded point of view. As several professors pointed out, the best teachers and the most engaging professors are very often the best scholars and the individuals at the top of their field.
One professor referred to the research/teaching relationship as "cross fertilization," where in order to be a good teacher, you need to be just as good a scholar. Within the sciences the relationship between teaching and research goes without saying. One professor commented: "I reject emphatically that there's any sort of conflict between teaching and research - they are totally complimentary." However, the notion of teaching and research working in harmony is also too simplistic and needs to be examined. Although theoretically the two do go hand in hand, there are situations where this balance can be altered.

For instance, one factor that professors again and again talked about is time. No matter how well an institution balances teaching and research, professors are still working with a limited amount of time. One professor writes, "Intellectually, Wright is correct. Research and teaching do go hand in hand. Professors, in some fields, do need to be on top of their research. But there are also only 24 hours in a day. At other schools a common phrase is 'everyday in the classroom is a day away from your career.'" Although Dartmouth certainly doesn't prescribe to this notion, its faculty members are still affected by the same time constraints. If other institutions call for a greater focus on research and less on teaching and Dartmouth is demanding both, a piece of the bigger picture is missing. Unless Dartmouth has a supply of super-professors who can more effectively use their time, one needs to ask what is being lost in the equation.

One of the underlying themes throughout this report and obviously one the inspirations for it was this notion of Dartmouth changing, Dartmouth evolving, and in the opinion of some, Dartmouth misguided. As one professor commented, "The college is in a phase of transition - liberal arts college to something else and it doesn't even know where its going or if it'll know when it gets there." Dartmouth without a doubt is changing, and that can be good, yet too much change too quickly could be dangerous for the delicate balance that Dartmouth seeks.

Over the years, standards at Dartmouth have changed. For instance, in the early nineties, the faculty had to teach five courses a year. This number was reduced to four and increasingly, research has become more and more of a priority and focus. One professor worried, "We're headed towards a greater emphasis on scholarly activities and that has happened for the past 5 to 10 years. And that worries me. I think we've gone too far.” It’s important to note that the emphasis should be on going “too far,” not just the act of creating higher standards. Dartmouth cannot charge into the transition blindly. Instead, it must proceed cautiously ensuring that while the beneficial changes are made and more research opportunities are added, that the balance is kept. As one professor lamented, "[Dartmouth is] positioning itself away from Williams and Amherst, dropping the college from Dartmouth College." If this becomes true, Dartmouth will lose its sense of balance in its attempt to gain preeminence.

This report begins and ends on the idea that both teaching and research are essential to Dartmouth. One does not take precedence over the other. Additionally, research itself, when made available to undergraduates is a form of teaching and often times the best way for students to learn. For most students and most professors, Dartmouth's commitment to both teaching and research were reasons for choosing Dartmouth. However, there are conditions in which this balance can be damaged. Although teaching and research are not inherently mutually exclusive, they can become so given the right circumstances. And at Dartmouth, a number of these circumstances do exist and will probably increase over the years. In all, student and faculty insight tell us that there is a reason to be concerned about the academic direction of the college.

The Road to Preeminence

Like many aspects of the academic direction of the college, there is nothing wrong on the surface with Dartmouth trying to become preeminent. Who would argue with the goal of making Dartmouth more nationally known and more respected in various fields? Who would argue with bringing scholars who are at the top of their field to Dartmouth? However, conversations with professors reveal several problems that create barriers along Dartmouth's road to preeminence and justifiably cause many to have concerns.

First, there is the increasing role of money. One professor commented: "What increasingly matters (in sciences) is how much money someone can bring in. If you're in a field where grant money is available, you better have a piece of it...Occasionally, that perverts what people do. People take on problems that are fundable and not intellectually interesting. The desire to get funding because what is most important." This should concern everyone at Dartmouth; the amount of money a professor is able to acquire in grants, which Dartmouth claims a percentage of, is used to review professors and evaluate their ability as scholars. Therefore, when the college talks about increasing research and improving the status of Dartmouth, this can be partially interpreted attempting to bring in more money. More research does not necessarily mean professors and undergraduates are working side by side. More research at another level means more money and a larger endowment for Dartmouth.

The process of securing grants requires a great deal of time, including the application process as well as dedication to one’s project after receiving the grant. To an extent, this makes sense: if an institution is giving you a large amount of money to tackle a question of problem, then you're expected to devote significant time to the project’s completion. As a result, professors can "buy themselves out." This basically means that professors can teach less than the four courses a year if they bring in a large sum of money to the college. Over the last few years it is something that has been happening more often; further, this is referred to as a prestigious distinction. Among some faculty and administrators, removal of oneself from the classroom is highly regarded. However, this brings potential problems, as explained by one professor:

The role of money has changed at Dartmouth over the last 20 years. The whole idea of buying your time out has emerged recently. 'Career Development Awards' are from the federal government and they buy you out of teaching, out of classroom. This says something about the outside of world. Something that develops your career is not about teaching. In the past, buying yourself out of your courses would have hurt your chances of getting tenure [at Dartmouth]. Now, it helps. Over 20 years, it has changed.

If Dartmouth increasingly tries to compete with other institutions, it plays more and more by the rules of bigger institutions. The reason why so many people have a gut reaction to comments such as "Dartmouth is a research university in all but name," is because many of the qualities of other institutions are antithetical to Dartmouth. Simply by tapping into resources that bigger research universities tend to use, there is a danger of losing sight of what makes Dartmouth so wonderful too so many people. By choosing to compete, Dartmouth is jeopardizing more than it cares to admit.

Another phenomenon repeatedly mentioned is the policy of hiring scholars from outside of Dartmouth who are at the top of their field. At first glance, this practice of hiring “stars” from other universities sounds fine. After all, Dartmouth should want to have top scholars and world renowned professors. Unfortunately, it is also true that most big names have not gotten their reputation for their teaching ability. One professor, who approved of Dartmouth hiring top scholars, admitted that at other universities, “the people who are successful in research, generally do not teach.” It would be inappropriate and misguided to assume that professors from other universities cannot be great teachers. Still, “stars” from other schools, given the amount of grant money they bring to Dartmouth, are likely to “buy” themselves out of class time. If Dartmouth had a huge faculty like other universities, this might not be a problem. But because Dartmouth is smaller, each faculty position is a limited resource. Having professors who primarily just research, regardless of the name recognition they bring to Dartmouth, leads to other potential problems.

Preeminence at Dartmouth has also come to mean specialization, which for a liberal arts college, should be of great concern. A psychology professor commented:

Dartmouth wants to be on the map. Teaching does not put you on the map. To do that, we need to specialize. Pick an area and develop a national reputation. But getting a reputation for a special kind of cognitive neuroscience has nothing to do with undergraduates...There are whole areas of psychology that we don't teach. We can't teach everything so we end up specializing. We have to pick and choose. So we use visitors where we can. In order to build up, you can't spread out as well.

This professor reveals significant concerns that require careful consideration. First, it relates a real loss for Dartmouth. In order to gain preeminence, the institution seems willing to not develop all departments equally and to instead try and place resources where we can be competitive. This forces certain departments to conserve resources and not teach large areas within a given discipline. Furthermore, in the case of the department of psychological and brain sciences, the college is earning a national reputation for an area of study that has little to do with undergraduates. Once again, a greater emphasis on research does not really positively affect undergraduate students, it affects graduates students and it affects the college as a whole.

Another recurring concern is the role of graduate students. In fact, the entire debate about research and teaching often comes down to undergraduate students saying that they don't want to be taught by graduate students, they want to have the one on one interaction with professors. The role that graduate students play cannot be ignored or overlooked. The universities Dartmouth seeks to compete with have large graduate student bodies that allow professors more time to do research by teaching and filling in for office hours. Although the college has stated that it does not want to enlarge the graduate student population, there does seem to be a contradiction. In order to do the amount of work that larger universities do, more graduates are needed. Even those professors who were most sympathetic to teaching and wanted to work with undergraduates admitted that, considering the amount of scholarly work expected of junior faculty, more graduate students are needed. One professor commented: "Dartmouth wants to become more like places where meeting with undergraduates does not matter....Depending on your department, research cannot be done by undergraduates." Given the constraints of the D-Plan and the high level of some research, involving undergraduates is not always feasible. Even those professors in full agreement with the notion that teaching and research go hand in hand argued that Dartmouth should consider enrolling more graduate students in the future. If Dartmouth wishes to, as one professor said, "compete with the big boys," eventually increasing the number of graduate students will become an issue whether the current administration admits it or not.

One final concern was the stark difference between disciplines regarding research. One humanities professor argued that the recent Academic Planning Report, put forth by the Provost, was heavily science-centered. The report put forth a scientific model not appropriate for all departments. Under this science model, a professor explained, a student aids the professor in their research and does a small part of a much larger experiment. In the humanities, however, a student runs their own experiment and, although in itself the work is not groundbreaking, it is paramount to students. However, if the standards are more and more geared to what the faculty is able to produce and not what he or she can get a student to produce, an important aspect of many students’ education can be lost.

The current state of the Education department is a perfect example of the dangers brought by an emphasis on research and Dartmouth's desire for preeminence. For years, the department, loved by students, has been in need of greater resources and more faculty members. Now that two new permanent faculty members have been hired, many might be surprised to find out that one will be half-time in the Education department and have-time in the Psychological and Brain Sciences department. The other professor who is top in her field and without question brilliant at what she does, does not focus on education. Her research certainly has educational implications and she is more than capable of teaching courses like child development and education psychology, but her specialty has to do with the functions of the brain. However, those who hired the two new faculty members would probably consider them an incredible victory for Dartmouth. If they both taught in Psychology, where they truly belong, then maybe Dartmouth might have a reason to celebrate. But given that they are now permanently in the Education department and the amount of grant money they will bring with them to Dartmouth, a quality that the Dean of Social Sciences regarded as a priority, you can be guaranteed that one or both of them will "buy" themselves out of class time and the Education department is left again without enough permanent faculty members. We're probably a few steps closer to preeminence, but is it worth getting there?

One professor who felt that the best scholars were also the best teachers criticized Dartmouth's recent actions. This professor argued that Dartmouth was trying to take a "shortcut" to preeminence and in the end, this would hurt Dartmouth. Although some would argue that Dartmouth can continue to balance teaching and research and also become nationally known in certain fields, others would strongly disagree. One senior faculty member lamented, "I'm troubled by Dartmouth's path to preeminence. Most of who are involved in these academic decisions don't know what life is like at research universities. The notion that the best scholars are the best teachers is usually the case when you are talking about full professors at the height of their careers." For someone who's been at Dartmouth for many, many years, such concerns should strike a chord. What are the consequences of Dartmouth's ambitions and goals?

The road to preeminence is not only tricky, it may eventually lead Dartmouth away from its mission and its dedication to teaching. In fact, many would agree that it already has and Dartmouth is already less formally dedicated to teaching than it once was. President Wright, quoted in the Academic Planning report, spoke about the balance between teaching and research in his inaugural address, "Each strengthens the other. Our direction is clear. We seek to build upon and expand our dual commitment." However, despite these words, our direction is not clear and many faculty members have expressed deep concern about this very issue. One junior faculty member argued passionately, "This talk of research and teaching going hand in hand is bullshit. Those of us who care deeply about teaching and want to be good teachers, know that it is." For someone who is currently undergoing the tenure process, this professor's comments should be given special consideration. Where is Dartmouth headed?

Supporting Teaching vs. Emphasizing Teaching

“Does the college do enough to emphasize the importance of teaching? Well, there is a level of talking about teaching that does not happen at bigger universities. Yes, the importance of teaching is expressed. However, if you ask me if the college does enough to SUPPORT teaching, the answer is no.” It is such a small distinction and yet it’s central to the question of where the college is headed and what it wants to be.

When interviewing professors the question, “Does the college do enough to emphasize the importance of teaching?” was asked again and again. Given the level of rhetoric dedicated to teaching and the rich history that teaching and interaction with students has at Dartmouth, the easy answer is always yes. Compared to other institutions, the answer is once again yes. Teaching is of extreme importance at Dartmouth. However, when the question is turned around and professors are asked about the support structures, the future of Dartmouth’s balance between teaching and research is not so certain.

To begin with, the grants and monies available for research far exceed those available for teaching. One out of 10 fellowships is for teaching. Furthermore, every professor gets a set amount of money over three terms to aid in research. There is nothing similar when it comes to curricular innovation, except for a little given for College Courses. One professor commented that “expanding your teaching abilities should be held in as high regard as enhancing professional work.” But right now, this is not the case. Improving one’s teaching takes time and presently the college has not made it enough of a priority. Given all that’s expected of professors, especially tenure-track professors, they are not able to look critically at what they’re teaching and consider how they can become better teachers. Just as research takes time, so does good teaching. As one professor commented, there is no “ongoing basis to talk about course development, pedagogical issues, teaching.” Although some faculty members end up doing so anyway, the institutional support is not there.

One of the biggest problems with the current support structure is that there aren’t enough rewards or incentives for great teaching. Although someone might argue that teaching is an award in itself, and some professors do say that recognition from student is most important, the fact is that there are many more structures in place to award professors for research. When they hear as junior faculty that research will make or break their review during the tenure process and then some of the biggest recognition occurs because of scholarship, the message becomes clear. The entire reward system for faculty, including salary increases, is geared towards scholarship. In April, professors fill out a “faculty record supplement” in which they detail everything that they’ve accomplished. Increases in salary come as a result, and teaching does not matter in these decisions. This is not to say that teaching awards do not exist. They obviously do. But when compared to how the college actively rewards and supports research, once can hardly call it a balanced relationship. One professor writes, “There are awards [for outstanding teaching] here and there. I may be patted on the back. But who cares?” There needs to be more.

Another issue is that advising (for both first-year students and upperclassmen) does not get recognized as part of a professor’s teaching load, as a requirement towards tenure, or in any way by the college. In fact, many junior faculty members are discouraged from advising because it will waste precious time in which they should be working on their research. For students, the one on one time spent with faculty members working on a project or doing independent reading is invaluable to their education. And yet for professors, it in no way enhances their careers. One professor said that they felt teaching was rewarded but that “the exception is independent work - we don't know how to fit that into reward system. There's no difference between those who do and don't. There needs to be more explicit acknowledgementÉAll I get out of the system for supervising honor students is the joy of doing it.” This is a major gap between Dartmouth’s espoused mission and reality. Oftentimes when students visit the college, the Admissions Office describes the smallest class at Dartmouth as being the one on one interaction between students and faculty. This may be true but as of now, the college does not do enough to support or encourage this interaction.

Research, for faculty members, often means the need to take time off and travel. Because Dartmouth departments are much smaller than bigger universities, we are forced to rely on visiting professors. Therefore, one issue that came up was the use and often the abuse of adjunct and visiting faculty Ð faculty that do not have permanent positions at Dartmouth but may teach for years on end. One professor commented: “Dartmouth exploits its adjuncts and visiting professors. Why should people who do great with [teaching] not have a permanent position? Forty percent are not regulars and many do great. We need to ask who comprises the faculty? I think we’d be surprised by the answer.” As professors who often do not do research and teach as many as five or six courses a year, these faculty members end up being the professors that most students interact with. In fact, most students probably don’t realize that they’re not permanent because many are here for many years. In additional problem was mentioned by one professor, "If we are hiring the academic hot shots who buy off and teaching is just incidental, and they are then replaced by adjuncts, can we say that Dartmouth is really valuing teaching?"

Another huge gap in Dartmouth’s commitment to teaching is an evaluation system. With all the talk that Dartmouth does about teaching, bigger research universities spend more time trying to evaluate teaching and take it more seriously. One professor commented, “The fact that there’s no standard evaluation of courses is VERY surprising. At other places, it's public and published. Here - it's not done. Evaluation of courses isn’t even mandatory. Once you're tenured, most senior faculty don't need to or want to.” Students fill out evaluations each term but the information never goes beyond the department, and in fact, it’s up to each department whether or not to do it. Once again, because the dedication to teaching has always existed at Dartmouth, the expectation is that it will always remain. As Dartmouth continues to change, this notion needs to be re-evaluated.

In all, as more attention is given to research, the same institutional support is not there for teaching and student interaction. We need to do a better job. As one professor said, “In all this talk of preeminence, Dartmouth has missed the one field where it could be most preeminent: teaching.” We are known as a university dedicated to teaching and yet so often it is taken for granted. If this report has focused more on teaching than research, it is only because recently, the opposite has been true. We seem to be so concerned about emulating the performance of research universities that we fail to acknowledge that, as the Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates' recent report recommended, more and more research universities are making teaching and student interaction higher priorities. Dartmouth must commit more resources to teaching and student interaction and it needs to support it, not just talk highly about it.

The Tenure Process

When interviewing professors, the first question we often asked them was, "In your opinion, are teaching and research equally valued by the college?" Very often we got the same answer: "No, they are not equally valued. What is valued is research." Nowhere is this more evident then in the tenure process and the implicit and explicit messages sent to junior faculty.

At the most fundamental level the tenure process and the values that are reflected in it set the academic values for the college. Professors are generally trying to gain tenure, and thus the values that they hold are shaped by the demands of receiving tenure. Those virtues that serve to grant professor tenure become the most important values of the institution. With this in mind we set out to learn more about what is valued in the tenure process.

A common theme among most of the professors we interviewed was that while a professor who has great research but mediocre teaching will almost always be granted tenure, a professor who has great teaching but mediocre research will almost never be granted tenure. Obviously both attributes are sought, but it is clear that research and being published are far more important in the tenure process. Furthermore, although community service (advising organizations, serving on committees, interacting with students in various other capacities) is supposed to be the 3rd criteria for tenure, it is rarely a consideration.

One of the ways to describe this disparity is to focus on the process and method. One professor explained: "It is also a lot easier to evaluate research. Students have lower response rates in the tenure process. There's a problem with how it's done. On the other hand, there's a 90% response for research evaluations from o/s scholars." Simply in terms of reliability and numbers, scholarly work takes precedent over other areas like teaching and student interaction. This is perhaps one of the reasons why Dartmouth’s past is full of times when popular, well-liked, student-focused professors have been denied tenure. There just isn’t an effective means to judge or evaluate teaching and student interaction.

However, not all would agree that the attempt to evenly consider teaching and research is even made. One professor commented regarding the question of whether teaching and research were treated equally in the tenure process: "Absolutely not. You're tenured on your scholarly work. You are not tenured on your teaching. You have to be an okay to good teacher and that's about it." Once again, comments similar to this came up again and again.

Another problem which often plagues faculty who teach in programs like Women’s Studies, African and African American Studies, Native American Studies, etc., is involvement with the community. For these faculty, advising student organizations or participating in events is not extracurricular but often central to their academic focus. However, like most activities outside of research, community service of this kind will not help a professor get tenure. In fact, seen as a time drain, it will actually hurt a professor’s chances of gaining a permanent place at Dartmouth.

And as mentioned earlier, advising students and spending time with students is looked down upon in the tenure process, as it might take away from a professor’s time researching. This not only means first-year advising but one on one advising with majors who may be working on an independent project. One member of the faculty referred to this as the “tyranny of numbers” where the important face to face, one on one teaching is lost in the face of lists of publications, recommendations from distinguished scholars, and grant money obtained.

One faculty member added that professors are discouraged from taking on broad time-consuming research topics, as being published will take longer, meaning that there is a pressure to focus on small non-controversial subjects.

To junior faculty the message is clear. One tenure-track professor commented, “When professors first come they're advised to use their time carefully so they don't get caught up in student lives at expense of scholarship.” In many cases, the emphasis on research is not implicit but very explicit. Professors are taken aside and advised on how to obtain tenure. What is important to the institution is that which is important in gaining tenure, and while teaching and student involvement are important to the college in word, what is really important is making sure you have good research and that you are published. These values are then reflected in the academic attitude of the college and help to shape the future of Dartmouth.

Both junior and tenured faculty, as well as students, expressed concern with the current state of affairs. They did not believe that research should be valued less, but that the college should institutionalize into the tenure process more clearly the importance of teaching and interaction with students. Many believed that such a change would improve the academic climate at Dartmouth.

A Distinct Dartmouth

When we asked one professor what he thought the academic direction of the college should be, he simply replied, "Be Dartmouth." Many faculty and students shared this sentiment. Dartmouth is in and of itself a different kind of institution, and it is that difference which makes Dartmouth unique. Respondents often believed that they were receiving the best undergraduate education in the nation.

Dartmouth is an institution where undergraduates not only matter, but are the number-one priority. It is a liberal arts college that offers many of the opportunities of a research university. There is general agreement that Dartmouth could do this better, but most felt like Dartmouth should continue to seek this balance.

There is a great deal of fear among both students and faculty that Dartmouth is instead trying to become more like Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, the University of Chicago and other similar research universities. This prospect was met with skepticism as to whether Dartmouth would ever be able to become equals with those schools on their level because of its size, location, and financial situation. Instead Dartmouth competes with, is equal to, and in the words of many is better than these institutions because it is fundamentally different. Dartmouth is a place where teaching matters. Dartmouth is a place where undergraduates matter. Dartmouth is a place where professors care about undergraduates. Indeed, just recently, Stanford University launched a billion dollar capital campaign centered around improving undergraduate education. We're trying to become more like research universities yet research universities are beginning to question how they support teaching and student interaction.

Again, both students and faculty were quick to point out that Dartmouth must improve in many ways, in bringing more research to undergraduates, in creating a better advising system, in improving student-faculty relations, in involving more student input in the academic decision making process, and in bringing more notable scholars to Dartmouth, etc. The key is to do all of that within the niche that Dartmouth has created for itself.

Students were quick to say that they came to Dartmouth because it was Dartmouth, and that if they had wanted a school like Harvard or Princeton they would have applied there. Dartmouth is not is not a safety school for those students who couldn't get into Harvard or Stanford, but the premiere institution of its own type.

The more students felt that Dartmouth was moving away from this the less satisfied they were with it. In fact, several students attributed the drop in the number of applications to the fact that Dartmouth is losing its own identity in a sense and that students simply don't want to go to "a Harvard in the woods."

The message was clear: academically Dartmouth must retain its core identity. Positive change must be pursued, but the most important thing is that Dartmouth's identity is not lost in pursuing those changes. Dartmouth at its best is the balance between a liberal arts college and research university, offering the benefits of both, and in doing so offering the best undergraduate education in the nation. This is what makes Dartmouth so wonderful and this is what cannot be lost.

In closing, one professor captured the current state of Dartmouth best: “Right now, Dartmouth is incredibly schizophrenicÉMy colleagues that value teaching are really discouraged right now. And that includes me. When I look in the future, I don’t see signals that the balance [between teaching and research] will be maintained. And I think research will win out. This institution thinks that because in its past it has cared about teaching, it can take it for granted. And I don’t think you can do that.” This report is a call to Dartmouth to stop taking teaching for granted and to give it the institutional support it so greatly deserves.

The Recommendations

Impress the Importance of Teaching and Involvement with Students on New Faculty

New faculty are often told that they are expected to be good teachers, but this is not stressed enough as compared to the importance of research and publishing. In fact, some faculty noted that spending time with students is frowned upon as it might take away from time spent doing research. If the undergraduate education is truly the number one priority at Dartmouth, teaching and involvement with students should be stressed as priorities. There are so many demands made of the faculty that unless teaching is stressed as much as research, it will, and does, fall to the wayside.

Stressing teaching and interaction with students more does not necessarily mean that research must be stressed less. Faculty could be encouraged to seek research that can involve students in some way, or perhaps tenure track professors could be given more time to establish themselves before they are reviewed for tenure. Either way, impressing the importance of teaching alone will never be enough unless the college shows this commitment by also supporting teaching and rewarding it. Right now, although the college pays teaching a lot of lip service, the message is diluted by the larger institutional structures at work.

Orient Research to include Undergraduates

The best kind of research is research that is both notable scholarly and helps students learn more about the field. In its charge towards more research Dartmouth has often failed to ensure that what is being done can somehow enhance the Undergraduate experience, and often serves to hurt it.

For example, the area of neuroscience that the often lauded Psychological and Brain Sciences Department is well known for is almost never relevant to undergraduates. Furthermore, the focus on this area alone has meant that many other areas of psychology that interest many undergraduates are left unaddressed both in research and in course offerings. While it is good that the department is nationally known, if the undergraduate education is a priority it is important to bring this research to the undergraduates, and to ensure that every area of diverse fields are represented in the curriculum.

The college should thus pursue research primarily in areas that can involve undergraduates. In this way the college can both serve the educational needs of students and attain further preeminence.

Additional Recognition for Teaching, Student Interaction, and Community Service

Teaching, student interaction, and community service are all values that Dartmouth has; yet these values fail to be translated into the institutional workings of the college. Professors, and especially junior professors, feel over-burdened with high expectations of both research and teaching. Scholarly expectations are much more institutionalized into decisions regarding pay raises and tenure decisions. The incentives are simply not there for faculty to be outstanding teachers, interact meaningfully with students, and become active in the community. As much as the institution values these things, unless they are institutionalized they will often be sacrificed.

The college should create incentives that stress the importance of teaching, interaction with students, and involvement in the community. If these are indeed values of the institution (which from both surveys of students and meetings with professors they should be) they should be institutionalized to ensure that they live on in an active way at the college. Some ideas put forth were: finding ways to award faculty for one to one advising, monetary incentives to improve teaching just as there are incentives to do research, time off for curricular development, salary increases based on high teaching evaluations, money to go to conferences and seminars on teaching, and recognition for faculty who are deeply involved in the community

Create a Center for Teaching and Learning

Many centers of research have been created at Dartmouth, yet a center for teaching remains as nothing more than an idea. Several professors mentioned that such a center would show Dartmouth's commitment to quality teaching and serve as a valuable research for faculty. The center would help interested faculty with new tools of learning, especially technological tools. However, as many faculty mentioned, the center should do more than show professors how to create websites.
The center could also help to measure the success of Dartmouth in pursuing outstanding teaching. In addition, the center would help graduate students and new professors to become great teachers and would serve as a resource for other members of the community, including undergraduates, who are interested in teaching. Most importantly, the center will show that Dartmouth is committed to remaining a bastion of excellent teaching. It is important that the center not become a way to impose teaching standards on faculty and it can’t just focus on the technology in the classroom. The greatest hope of the center would be to be a resource for faculty members, as one professor described it, “a composition center for teaching.” It should be created from their vision and faculty input should be essential.

Formal Student Input into Academic Decision Making

Although the college argues that academic decisions are ultimately the business of the faculty, student involvement should be integral in this process. Many students feel that their input is meaningless, a sentiment that is reflected in the low response rate for tenure evaluations. Earlier this spring the Student Assembly met with the Dean of the Faculty, Deputy Provost (soon to be Dean of the Faculty), and the Divisional Deans as part of the assembly’s Student Involvement Summits. Several ideas were proposed and will be followed up in the future.

For instance, each department should work with majors in the area to create means of involving students in faculty searches, three-year reviews, departmental decisions, and the tenure process. A formal group, whether a steering committee or a coalition of all the majors, would help to create a sense of academic ownership and involvement for students. Each department should have the autonomy to create its own method but the overall goal of involving students and seeking out their input should be universal.

Furthermore, the current tenure process could and should be improved by changing the means in which tenure evaluations are sought. The Dean of the Faculty office should move to a system where the Internet or even e-mail is used to contact students, rather than written evaluations over the HB system. Ensuring the privacy of the faculty member should be most important but there are several ways in which the response rate can be improved simply by better methods of communication.

More Advancement Opportunities and Benefits for Non-Tenure Track Professors

Currently professors who are non-tenure track are listed as visiting professors or adjunct professors. There are, however, professors who are here on a long-term basis yet are not tenure track. These professors often focus solely on teaching. Often times, their contract needs to be evaluated from year to year. Under the current system there is no opportunity for career advancement. The College should create positions that are not tenured, yet reflect the more permanent nature and the value of such professors. This would help to impress the value of teaching undergraduates at the college. Given that the college relies so heavily on them, professors who focus on teaching should not considered and treated as second-class faculty.

Official Professor Evaluation System

"Attention to the quality of instruction is a prominent value at Dartmouth, and teaching excellence has long been a hallmark of education at the College. The accreditation committee agreed with the self-study that Dartmouth needs to develop more reliable and consistent measures of teaching performance." From the Report of the Evaluation Team Representing the Commission on Institutions of Higher Education of the New England Association of Schools and Colleges.

Currently the professor evaluation system is not universal and is not even done for many tenured professors. Student evaluations are often only solicited sporadically, usually around times of tenure decision. In addition, there doesn't seem to be any formalized process for using evaluations. This means that students often believe that their opinions are not important and have no effect on academic decisions.

The college should develop a formal and universal system of evaluation a professor's teaching. Such a system would better involve students in academic decision-making, and would give faculty a better sense of what they can do to improve their teaching. Such an evaluation system would extend past tenure decisions and help to institutionalize the college's value of quality teaching.

The Student Assembly has already taken the first step in creating such an evaluation system, in the online Professor and Course Evaluation Guide (www.dartmouth.edu/~assembly/pcguide). As of now, only students are allowed to log onto the website and read the reviews. For two years the Student Assembly tried to work with the college, the dean of the faculty and the provost office, but it was made clear that creating this guide was not a priority. With the support of the college in making the Course Guide more widely used and accountable, for instance by using Banner to insure that a student can only evaluate courses he/she is enrolled in, it could not only serve students’ needs but could help evaluate professors both for departmental and personal use. Sometime in the future, the Student Assembly plans to meet with members of the Dean of Faculty office for a presentation of the Course Guide and collaborating in the future can hopefully be discussed.

Create More Student-Faculty Common Space

One of the most important changes that were recommended in the 2000 Student-Faculty Relations Report completed by the Academic Affairs Committee was increasing the amount of common space between students and faculty. Faculty and students continue to stress the importance of creating more common space. The campus is largely divided between student space and faculty space. More common space, like the space in the Great Hall at Thayer and in the Rockefeller center, would go a long way to improve student-faculty relations. In addition, it would help to create a more intellectual climate on campus.

Develop Dartmouth as the Balance Between a College and a University

Dartmouth's greatest strength, according to many faculty and students is that it is both a liberal arts college and a research university. Dartmouth is in a sense the definition of such an institution. Students come to Dartmouth because they feel like they can have many of the opportunities they would at a research university in an atmosphere of a liberal arts college, where students and quality teaching are valued.

A major fear is that this is changing. Dartmouth does need to expand its research capabilities, but the wonderful element that is the liberal arts college at Dartmouth cannot be lost in that process. Dartmouth does not need to become a Harvard in the woods. Students don't want that. Students want Dartmouth because it walks the line between college and university, offering the benefits of both. Dartmouth should seek to be the best in being different, in offering the best undergraduate experience. In seeking to enhance one aspect of Dartmouth the other cannot be lost.

Appendix

Student Voice

In seeking the student voice on the academic direction of the college we surveyed 800 random students (200 from each class). What follows are some of the results and quotations from what students said.

- 79% of students surveyed believe that Dartmouth is a college in practice, despite President Wright's remarks to the contrary.

- 88% of students rated the quality of teaching as either excellent or good.

- When asked how much research compliments the academic experience 20% believed that it greatly improved it, 55% believed that it only marginally improved the academic experience, 9% thought that research hurt the academic experience, and 16% thought it had no effect.

- 72% of students felt like teaching was either a high or the highest priority of Dartmouth while 53% listed research as a high or the highest priority of Dartmouth.

- 59% of students believe that the college values student opinion when making tenure and hiring decision either not very much or not at all.

- The priorities in selecting professors were as follows, from first to last: teaching ability, personality, scholarly notability, ability to add to the department, research ability, and finally ability to bring money to the school.

- Student Quotes:

“[In an ideal world] there would be an opportunity for students to get involved in various types of research at all stages of education while at Dartmouth, from freshmen year to senior thesis."

“Ideally, Dartmouth would be full of well-rounded academics who love their subject matter, and love to spread their knowledge."

“I don't think Dartmouth should try to become more of a research institution just to try to fit in with the other Ivy League schools. Dartmouth has something very special which sets it apart from other schools-professors who actually teach classes and care about students. It should preserve and flaunt the fact that it provides the best undergraduate experience."

"Dartmouth should remain focused on teaching undergraduates. Research is good, and it is good at Dartmouth, but Dartmouth will never be able to compete with the other, larger schools in this area. Most students came here because it wasn't a research university."

"I think it is important for Dartmouth to support the research of its faculty, but emphasize that it comes after teaching."

"The general academic direction of the college should be to remain small and cater to undergraduate students. I would hate to see Dartmouth become a big university where the students never see the professors."

"The academic direction should be towards offering the highest-possible undergraduate education one can receive, providing students with the opportunities to learn from the best professors as well as have the most recent technology at their disposal."

"I would like to see a Dartmouth where research is valued as a way to make a better professor, not just for research's sake."

"The first priority by far should be for students to learn and expand themselves intellectually. Professors should be teachers first, researchers second. We are a college, not a university, and that is how it should be."

"Dartmouth is a college, first and foremost. I think the recent trend towards graduate education is absolutely misguided and destructive to the Dartmouth spirit that has for so long infused our alumni and supporters of the school. As Dartmouth loses its vision of a teaching college and drifts closer and closer to the false dream of a research university...we lose the very thing that makes our home a special place. We come to Dartmouth because we are not satisfied with institutions that believe in TA's instead of professors, we come to Dartmouth to have names, not numbers in a class list five hundred strong. We come to Dartmouth to learn, and only here is where the value of research abides. We do not come to research; we come to be taught. Dartmouth will retain that unique aspect which distinguishes itself from the Stanfords of the world only so long as this vision is recognized. Dartmouth is a college, first and foremost, and that is a wonderful thing."

Generally, students expressed the desire that the undergraduate education remains the top priority of Dartmouth. When asked to rank a variety of different values in faculty members they listed teaching ability overwhelmingly as the most important skill. At the same time, many students commented that research and teaching are not mutually exclusive, and only become so when pursued in a certain way. Many students hoped that the college would work for more research, but ensure that research is accessible and pertinent to undergraduates. Finally, many students expressed a fear as to where the college was going academically. Comments were made arguing that Dartmouth should work to be the best as a combination between liberal arts college and Research University. Some students felt like the college was starting to abandon this vision and believed that in doing so Dartmouth is losing what is essential to Dartmouth. On the other hand, many students were excited at the prospect of more cutting edge research and distinguished faculty members.

Overall, students expressed the strong desire to keep the undergraduate education as the top priority. In doing so they saw research playing in an increasing role, yet hoped that the college would develop a unified vision for a Dartmouth where research complimented the undergraduate education. To students, Dartmouth is special because it walks the line between college and university, and it is that aspect that makes Dartmouth so wonderful.