Alexander Hamilton Institute starts group on Facebook
The Alexander Hamilton Institute has started a group on Facebook. Check it out.
Notes from a recent meeting with alumni about the Alexander Hamilton Institute
Supporters might be interested in these notes from a recent meeting hosted for the Fellows by alumni supportive of the Alexander Hamilton Institute.
In response to specific questions about the mission of the Institute:
i. There is a difference between advocacy and scholarship. For example, the difference between the Institute and the Heritage Foundation is that the Institute will not issue policy papers or take positions on political issues. Our mission is scholarly.
ii. We are not a right-wing counterpart to the Kirkland Project. The Kirkland Project advocates; the Institute informs and analyzes.
iii. The Institute provides benefits for students at Hamilton through the four groups that meet periodically at the Institute to discuss issues based on prescribed readings or to present speeches.
iv. The Institute does not offer courses for credit.
v. We rely on the generosity of donors to fund operations and are grateful for their support.
vi. A donor has indicated that he intends to support programming at the Institute by providing a series of gifts of $100,000 per year for the next five years. The first of such gifts has been completed. Those monies are not available for bricks & mortar or other occupancy expenses.
vii The AHI has reached an agreement in principle for a long term lease of its headquarters at the former Alexander Hamilton Inn at favorable rates. The terms will include an option to buy its headquarters, and we expect to close on the lease shortly. The annual cost of operating the building is for the account of AHI, and is an ongoing funding requirement.
viii The directors of the Institute welcome questions from prospective benefactors about the governance, organizational, and financial structure of the Institute.
Members of the alumni group were generally concerned by Hamilton’s open curriculum and what was perceived as a lowering of academic standards. The group applauded the effort of the Institute to address the deficiencies of intellectual life on the campus of the College. We emphasized that the Institute is not an adversary of the College, that the Institute is not an ‘anti-Hamilton’ at the foot of the Hill, that we look to provide opportunities through which the students can enrich their education.
So much for cultural literacy
Fresh from the Christian Science Monitor: Scholars discover the comic book
“…Now, comics are coming into their own in classrooms of all kinds, gaining an unprecedented level of respect and spawning serious debate over their greater meaning.
“Comics have changed. They’re not the comics that we grew up with,” says Peter Coogan, an organizer of the academic-oriented panels at Comic-Con. “They can stand up to literary and critical analysis,” he says.
Across the country, hundreds of professors and college students spend their days analyzing comics, and the University of Florida even allows postgraduate English students to specialize in comics studies.
Meanwhile, teachers in elementary, middle, and high schools are embracing comics as tools to help students learn to read and enjoy words.”
How does a Hamilton History major graduate without having read the Federalist papers? An English major without having read Shakespeare? No problem. No core requirements whatsoever and proud of it.
Hamiltonians of old might consider literacy and numeracy as baseline requirements to get in the place, let alone get out.
Are the trustees in any way engaged in or associated with for the core mission of the institution? Or have we taken a base on balls? We saw how effectively the Committee on Instruction from the Board of Trustees of Hamilton College was during the Kirkland Project follies. Last we looked the By-Laws of the Board of Trustees established the Committee on Instruction as a standing committee and requires that “This committee shall keep itself informed and shall advise the President and the Board on all matters relating to the educational program of the College…” Perhaps its been reinvigorated to help the College, well, Move On.
Hamilton College finally acknowledges Paquette's nomination to National Council on Humanities
Hamilton College finally acknowledges the nomination of one of its own to be seated on the National Council on Humanities. Here is the College’s write up found under Faculty News, not to be seen under College News
You wouldn’t know it from reading the release, but this is a first such nomination in the history of Hamilton College.
The release does not mention that Prof. Paquette is a Charter Fellow and Founder of the Alexander Hamilton Institute for the Study of Western Civilization, Inc. which the College declined to have on campus. Nor does it mention that Prof. Paquette was denied a raise this past year.
No courtesy call prior to the release, no quote, no photo, not a peep from the President or Dean of Faculty … nothing. But someone has a sense of humor: right above Bob’s announcement is one about “An Implicit Association Test to Measure Relational Aggression: Preliminary Results and Directions for Future Research”. Relational aggression is therein defined as the deliberate attempt to harm someone through the manipulation of relationships and social status.
The posting now appears on College News.
Robert Paquette nominated to National Council on the Humanities
We are pleased to announce that the White House has put forth to the Senate the nomination of Robert L. Paquette to be a Member of the National Council on the Humanities for a term expiring January 26, 2014.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2008/07/20080710-4.html
Congratulations to Professor Paquette.
In Hamilton's case
“In Hamilton’s case, she [Inzer] said, the college was doing a better job of attracting the kinds of applicants it wanted without merit aid…” source: Doing the Right Thing – and Thriving
Kind of begs the question: what kind of students does Hamilton want? Merit is no longer in the calculus, and in fact it seems by implication to be the wrong thing.
Anyone with exposure to Hamilton’s students gets the sense that, in the main, they are of extraordinary quality…perhaps more resistant to what many suspect is growing flaw in process. The students attending the AHI’s colliquium did not hesitate to vigorously and effectively defend Prof. Ambrose from the challenges of the Harvard students. That said, anyone with any exposure to Hamilton’s students also knows they increasingly are dealing with something most alumni never had to and would not tolerate: explicit politicization of the classrooms on the Hill.
We hope that a Command Turnover Review would accompany the ascension of a new Chairman. It’s been painfully obvious that President Stewart didn’t bother with one at inception, primarily because the board didn’t want or expect one.
This one should include a broad, confidential survey of students’ on the Hill in this regard. It’s needed.
This month, Oxford University Press will publish Stanley Fish’s long anticipated new book, Save the World on Your Own Time. The title says it all — this book represents the culmination of Fish’s evolving thinking about what professors should (and should not) be doing in the classroom. Once a leader in the move to politicize humanities departments — during the 1990s Fish transformed the Duke University English department into a top-tier, cutting-edge center of politically motivated teaching and research — Fish has since recognized that many college teachers go too far. He has posted eloquently on what academic freedom is and isn’t at his New York Times blog, and now he has developed his thoughts into a book. The timing is vital: In an interview with Inside Higher Ed, Fish estimates that around 5 to 10 percent of college faculty “are always imposing their loyalties on the students in an attempt…to recruit students into a political agenda.” Given that the American professoriate numbers about 1.7 million, that’s somewhere between 85,000 and 170,000 professors who are abusing their positions in unconscionable ways. If Fish is anywhere near correct, that’s a pressing problem that requires immediate attention.
Fish’s estimate tallies with figures ACTA uncovered in Politics in the Classroom, a 2004 survey of college students done by the University of Connecticut. Politics in the Classroom revealed that 46 percent of respondents said “some professors use the classroom to present their personal political views;” 49 percent said “that professors frequently comment on politics in class even when it has nothing to do with the course.” When both students and experienced faculty members are reporting the same problem, there’s reason to believe it’s real — and there’s reason for trustees to initiate institutional self-studies to identify and address problems on their campuses.
———-
Hamilton is not immune.
Way to go, Doug!
Congratulations to Doug Ambrose on his promotion to full professor at Hamilton College. Prof. Ambrose is a Charter Fellow of the Alexander Hamilton Institute for the Study of Western Civilization. The omission of that fact from Hamilton’s announcement is no doubt an oversite.
On the Sadness of Education: KP to DSJP
“This University believes that your sons and daughters are the racist, sexist, homophobic, Eurocentric progeny or victims of an oppressive society from which most of them receive unjust privilege. In return for tuition and massive taxpayer subsidy, we shall assign rights on a compensatory basis and undertake by coercion their moral and political enlightenment.”
Naming U. of C. research center after Nobel Prize winner has faculty split
Critics says proposed Milton Friedman Institute would be a right-wing think tank
“It is a right-wing think tank being put in place,” said Bruce Lincoln, a professor of the history of religions and one of the faculty members who met with the administration Tuesday. “The long-term consequences will be very severe. This will be a flagship entity and it will attract a lot of money and a lot of attention, and I think work at the university and the university’s reputation will take a serious rightward turn to the detriment of all.”
For the full monty see: the story in the Chicago Tribune
hcagr challenges Alexander Hamilton Institute & colloquium participants
Without doubt the inaugural colloquium was a huge success. Beyond all expectations.
As noted on the AHI website “Liberty and Slavery: The Civil War between Gerrit Smith and George Fitzhugh,” integrated three undergraduate classes—from Harvard University, Colgate University, and Hamilton College—into an intensive conversation with a diverse group of fifteen academics and informed citizens. They included a judge, a museum curator, a Methodist minister, an award-winning high-school teacher as well as some of the most influential historians of their generation. The result exceeded the ample expectations of the AHI’s founders. Professor Stauffer called the event “one of the highlights of his career, if not the highlight.” Tim McCarthy, a professor at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, informed one of the founders of the AHI a week after the event, “My students are still talking about it!” Video of the opening night’s events and audio of the colloquium’s six sessions are now available at the AHI’s Papers & Publications for examination by interested parties.
________________________________________
We’ll keep the challenge short and present it as an idea for discussion.
Let’s up the stakes and broaden the tent.
- Leverage the existing intellectual work product
- Repackage the substance of the colliquium & retarget to the high school level as the preeminent explication of the abolitionist/apologist dialogue in all the dimensions you explored so wonderfully in the colliquium
- Utilize internet and other media/technology to leverage national distribution as a free good available to public & private high schools across the United States and the world
Civic literacy & superior scholarship created by AHI, its Fellows, affiliates & associates, leveraged by the technologies of new media and the internet to a near zero marginal cost of distribution for the benefit of high school teachers and students across America. QED
_________________
What do you think?
Behind Closed Doors
Last spring, Paquette received his annual salary letter but there was something absent from the letter … a raise. In a letter dated May 25, 2007, Dean of Faculty Joe Urgo wrote to Paquette, “Bob, despite your publications in 2006 and your efforts at teaching effectively, I cannot see clear to increasing your salary in 2007-2008.
AHI Open House Reunion Weekend
AHI Open House Reunion Weekend
The AHI cordially invites alumni returning to Clinton for Reunion Weekend ‘08 on the Hamilton College campus to attend an open house at our headquarters on 21 West Park Row, Friday, June 6th, 9 am to 4 pm and Saturday, June 7th, 9 am to 1 pm.
Refreshments will be served. Visitors will receive a priceless gift. Founders and fellows will be on hand to discuss the future of the AHI. We will use the opportunity to share with visitors exciting news—to be made public in the forthcoming weeks—about a major gift and initiative.
Even the NY Times?
You know its getting pretty wild when even the New York Times notices something’s up. Enjoy the Reunion. Skip the Check : “These universities have a modern mentality about investing,” she told me, “but they still have an old-fashioned mentality about spending.”
How about negative pedagogical alpha?
Good luck to Dartmouth alumni: it's their last chance
“the college approved a plan that would transfer real oversight to an unelected executive committee – and give unelected trustees a 2-1 numerical advantage on the board, down from the 50/50 split today….
Which brings us back to the current election. Right now, the Association of Alumni is supporting a lawsuit that is the only thing stopping Dartmouth from implementing its board-packing plan. In other words, the election for the association’s leadership is in fact a referendum on the board-packing plan.”
source: WSJ Dartmouth Against Democracy
Thanks Pete & Ben
Loyal readers will notice we took down Peter and Ben’s pages that were remnants of their campaigns as petition candidates. hcagr thanks them for their commitment of time, effort and money to try to improve the school.
In case you missed it: AHI open house May 24
The AHI will open its doors to graduating Hamilton seniors and their families on Saturday, May 24, from 9 a.m. to 1 p. m. AHI founders and fellows will be on hand to answer questions about the history and mission of the Institute and its scholarly agenda. Since a good deal of misinformation is in circulation about the AHI, we encourage all interested parties, including Hamilton College trustees, to pay us a visit and help clear fog from the air. The AHI has an archive of materials related to its history and available for perusal by interested parties.
Refreshments will be served, and we promise to each visitor a tour of our headquarters as well as a priceless gift.
Continental reports Paquette denied a raise
From the Continental, the only source of real student journalism on the Hill. It is very well done.
from Behind Closed Doors
Last spring, Paquette received his annual salary letter but there was something absent from the letter … a raise. In a letter dated May 25, 2007, Dean of Faculty Joe Urgo wrote to Paquette, “Bob, despite your publications in 2006 and your efforts at teaching effectively, I cannot see clear to increasing your salary in 2007-2008. While we were disappointed in the outcome of discussions surrounding the Alexander Hamilton Center, it is incumbent upon us all to handle such disappointments in a professional manner.”
And speaking of professional comportment, a reader sent in the following account of a recent Alumni Association event in upstate
Last night I attended the reception for Dean Urgo. It was indeed a lively evening. I enjoyed meeting the hosts, alumni, and guests. I learned a lot from Dean Urgo; for example, that swimming is a subject required for graduation — but economics, Shakespeare, and American History are not… I also learned that the founders of the AHC were “where they wanted to be from the beginning,” which is not on campus.
It seems Mr. Ugro is simply not constrained by the truth, but rather is more interested in talking his own book and disclaiming his own participation in what is quite obviously the largest failure of competence at Hamilton this side of Ward Churchill and Susan Rosenberg.
Reference is made to Urgo’s own words in another good article in the Continental, the alexander hamilton center, or perhaps in the Colleges own announcement of the formation of AHC on campus:
A press release by the College on Sept. 6, 2006 announced the founding of the AHC with unbridled enthusiasm. Urgo “characterized the center as “an exciting faculty initiative, one that will draw renewed attention on this campus to the considerable scholarly interest in the life and work of the founder who leant his name to our college.”
Anyone having any questions as to the intentions of the founders of the AHI or C as the case may be is welcome to address the founders directly. Their website is www.theahi.org. Urgo’s disingenuous conduct is unfortunately tolerated by the administration and evidently, the trustees.
We had higher hopes for the new crew.
And all along we thought Ward Churchill was worthless…
In The Myth of Academic Freedom - Personal Experiences of a Liberal Principle in the Neoconservative Era (Fragments of a Work in Progress) [Social Text 90, Vol. 25, No. 1, Spring 2007, Duke University Press] he provides previously unknown information about what happened during the great unpleasantness at Hamilton.
The world we have lost
Prof. Robert Paquette has published a new piece in the New Criterion: The World We Have Lost: A Parable on the Academy It’s no parable.
