Hamilton College Alumni for Governance Reform

Funny you should post this. Here is text from an email I sent to spec@hamilton.edu on 10/24:

"Hi,

I was wondering why only the 9/28 edition of the Spectator is available online currently. I was very disappointed that the website was not maintained at all last year and I was unable to keep up with what was going on on the Hill from the perspective of the student body. It seems a bit odd that there was time invested in a new layout for the site, a Website Manager position has been created, and yet only two or three of this semester's issues have been made available online. The lack of an archive section is also strange.

Last year I questioned the dormancy of the Spec website and received the following response from C&D:

After we spoke, it was brought to my attention that you would likely
appreciate the following quote from the Editor-in-Chief of the Spectator, Martin E. Connor, Jr. '09, from last week's (February 23, 2007) edition:

"Aside from our content, we have been working hard to replace "The
Spectator's" outdated and inoperative website. The new website will not only display each week's issue, complete with color photographs, but will also allow for further interaction with the student body, serving as an extended forum for discussion of prominent campus issues, not to mention providing the Hamilton community beyond the Hill easy access to Hamilton news. We hope to have it up and running by the end of next week."


That obviously never happened, and it appears from the online masthead that Mr. Connor is still the EIC. I can understand that things got sidetracked last year, but why the intermittent posting of new issues now? Posting the current text only issues would keep interested readers that are away from the Hill happy and that really can't be all that difficult to do."


I'm still waiting for a reply.

Dear Hamilton Alumni for Governance Reform,

While we appreciate your concern about the lack of available Spectator archives online, we don't appreciate your misconstruction of the situation. Please know that we are doing our best to make archives available online. In fact, one year ago the Spectator had no website, nor was any attempt to provide one underway. Now, we have secured the means to post the Spectator online, which we feel to be a great success. Please know that for each issue that appears online, we must individually copy and paste each article and create a new page. The process of putting one issue online takes around 5 hours, and our website manager is one of the most experienced students on campus when it comes to web design and the site manager program. Archiving efforts are underway. Progress, however, will be slow, and it is likely that the full spectator archives of everything that we currently have stored electronically will not be available for quite some time. Please be patient, not critical, and enjoy the ability to actually read the Spectator online. Thank you for your concern.
-The Spectator

To the Spectator staff:

Thanks for your efforts. Would your work be easier if Hamilton joined the hundreds of colleges using College Publisher?

http://cpsite.collegepublisher.com/index.html

Just PDF 'em.

Paquette Speaks on AHI in Raleigh and Boston
On Saturday, 27 October, the John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy invited Robert Paquette to Raleigh, North Carolina, to speak about the AHI on a panel devoted to the promise and peril of center-building. His talk, "The Rise, Fall, and Rebirth of the Alexander Hamilton Center: A Parable," explained the demise of the center at Hamilton College by leading the audience, step by step, through an imaginary parallel scenario involving a programmatic initiative by a left-wing professor at an Ivy League university. The trail of tears for the center included a broken agreement, public and private dissembling and mendacity by college officials, and unprecedented intrusiveness by board members. He agreed with Dartmouth trustee Todd Zywicki who cautioned attendants not to see trustees as the saviors of higher learning in the campus culture wars. Most trustees spend little time on campus and are spoon fed sanitized information by academic bureaucrats of limited ability, vision, and leadership skills. Various panelists addressed the degradation of of the very ethos of liberal arts colleges under pressure from campus activists and the "quick-fix" of the open curriculum. Paquette warned of the growing corporatization of educational life: thickening layers of bureaucracy and burgeoning public relations departments committed more to information management and spin than to the pursuit of truth. Particularly serious problems ensue, he concluded, when trustees drink too deeply of the beverage produced from their own propaganda machine.



On 29 October Primary Source, a non-profit institution devoted to advancing education in the humanities, invited Paquette to speak to a gathering in Watertown Massachusetts of about fifty secondary school teachers. While discussing in two sessions how to teach the subject of slavery in high-school classrooms, he introduced attendants to the AHI and its website, which offers perhaps the most extensive list of links to primary sources in American history of any website in the country. Paquette distributed syllabi of an introductory course that he had pioneered at Hamilton College almost two decades ago on the history of the Atlantic world during the era of the slave trade.

Reporter, what is the source of this? Is there a url?

http://www.theahi.org/events/2007/11/3/paquette-speaks-on-ahi-in-raleigh-and-boston.html

The students who run The Spectator graciously debunked innuendo (falsehood) that they are being censored by the college and politely said "we appreciate your concern about the lack of available Spectator archives online" but understandably followed by saying they didn't "...appreciate your misconstruction of the situation."

Prior to falsely castigating the college for some manufactured sin, HCAGR principals could have demonstrated sincere support for the "boots on the ground" by talking with students. Not as much fun as putting up conspiratorial theories I grant you but more reflective of people who care about the kids on the Hill and the facts.

Reporter then moved along to recap Dr. Pacquette's recent speaking engagement. Reporter included the statement by Dartmouth trustee Todd Zywicki wherein he "cautioned attendants not to see trustees as the saviors of higher learning in the campus culture wars" which was followed by hb asking for the source for the report. Isn't hb a board member of the AHI? As a board member shouldn't he have known? I caution HCAGR readers not to see AHI board members as the "saviors of higher learning" either.

HCAGR statements about the actions of the college need to be taken with a huge dose of skepticism.

Dear Josh,

It’s pretty simple. The current internet format of the Spectator impairs the ability of alumni to read it. Alumni rely on the Spectator for the scoop, and they basically can’t get it. That’s a downgrade for the role of student journalism because it diminishes the ability of the Spectator and its writers to communicate with the Hamilton community.

‘Technical problems’ with the archive have been ongoing since early 2005, the days of Ward & Susan, and including the trustee elections… problems of this sort would seem discretionary given the manifold and readily available technologies.

As readers of this site will attest hcagr are not technical geniuses, but for a mere $7/mo at http://www.squarespace.com/ we get industrial grade cut, paste & click publishing system complete with a searchable archive. Give it a try.

Some time ago I offered to underwrite a year’s worth of Squarespace service for the Spectator, but was assured that the fix was just around the corner. Guess not… I would consider remaking that same offer if someone made a matching pledge to the AHI.

I don’t know why you presume that we’re not talking to students. In the case of the Spectator, I’m still hoping for a response to my 10/26/07 email. I presume they, like all of us, get busy from time to time.

Cordially,
hb

Josh is correct about at least one thing--the claim that C & D folks or any other College employee has censored the Spec in the last few years is ridiculous and insulting. And these professionals are the same people the petition candidates would be working closely with if they ever become trustees. And I'm sure they know them well enough not to like them.

That being said, HB's concerns about the Spec's website are valid. I have suggested more than once that the Spec reach out to alumni for website help, but it seems as though that solution never came to fruition. The College Publisher route is a good idea.

Quick story--last spring the Spec was supposedly going to do an in depth interview with petition candidates, but that never happened (I know this because I received frustrating non-answers from them). Alumni and students would greatly benefit from getting to know petition candidates on a more personal level.

Spec staff: enjoy the rest of your time as journalists. For the vast majority of you this is the end of your career as journalists. Spec readers appreciate your efforts.

For Josh Billings,

I thought you died in 1885? Aren't you the Hamilton College humorist who said

"About the most originality that any writer can hope to achieve honestly is to steal with good judgment."

Were you thinking of Gene Tobin or Joan Stewart?

Great article in the Sunday Times about the growth of Hamilton's $700 million endowment. Maybe if they grow it by %30 it will pay for an online Spec.

to anonymous & former Spec sports writer

It seems the Continental didn't have the same problem with either access or substantive dialogue with folks.

http://hcagr.squarespace.com/storage/Continental%20extracted%20AHC%20article%20Spring%202007.pdf

nor did the Spectator

http://hcagr.squarespace.com/storage/Sept%20Spectator%20re%20election.pdf

but somehow you did.

Let's not confuse a Sept '05 article with a Spring '07 article that never happened. I've read the Continental piece more than once, and it is a very good article about the AHC disaster.

Neither article--coincidentally archives aren't readily available at either the Spec or Continental website--asks specific questions of the candidates, a la Meet the Press (what I referred to in my last post). During election season I think this kind of info would be useful.

hcagr is on the record in this matter. Oddly enough, anyone can use our searchable archive to find it.

In the interests of time try this:

http://hcagr.squarespace.com/home/2007/2/20/on-what-basis-are-alumni-supposed-to-vote.html

If you want to know why there was no dialogue of this type, I suggest you ask the Alumni Association or the administration.

I don't recall a hcagr candidate ever having been invited to campus nor do I recall any debate or discussion sponsored by the Alumni Association, any formal part of the Hamilton community, or administration. That might stike some as odd given the support of about a third of all voting alumni for hcagr candidates in the prior year.

Again, I don't see any connection between the Spec and the administration or alumni leadership when it comes to articles written or not written. I think interviews of petition candidates conducted by an objective third party (e.g. Continental or Spec) would be the best way to inform alumni and students. The Alumni Council and the administration wouldn't play any role in such interviews.

I also find it interesting that the list of questions for candidates doesn't ask for any proof of involvement with the College as alumni volunteers and/or donors.

has anyone spoken directly with the board?

The Spectator and student journalism at Hamilton are diminished by the obvious and unnecessary limitation on the interchange of ideas & information between alumni & students.
And the trustees and administration know it.

Heard the news about the last faculty meeeting? Student activists put on a show. Mandatory diversity courses demanded. President and dean applauded their efforts.

Why hasn't the AHI said anything?

2010, if you have reliable info please share. When I read "mandatory diversity courses demanded" I get concerned. The recent U. of Del scandal over mandatory diversity classes really blew up in Del's face.