Comments on Leon Botstein on the 'Tragedy' of Antioch

• Posted by 15 minutes from Antioch , I grew up 15 minutes from Antioch too on June 27, 2007 at 8:00pm EDT

• I, too, grew up 15 minutes from Antioch, and the college and the town of Yellow Springs was my haven from conservative, narrow-minded Middle America. My friends and I went there to see good movies--even of the foreign ilk (yikes!), to buy books (yes, remember when many cities didn't have decent bookstores?), to get good food, to go to the Art fair, to hear real news and programs on the radio station, etc. To remember that there was and is an America that resisted... resisted racism, McCarthyism, and yes, tried to think of ways to keep women safe on their campus. And even though I didn't attend Antioch (too close to home), I did find a similar college and I did become a professor and an author. Antioch helped. To those good ol' average Americans living 15 minutes away who find Antioch loony, who would like Bush's America to crush even those tiny pockets of free-thinking spaces: you do not have the monopoly on Middle America.

• Posted by Paul R. Cooper on July 28, 2007 at 11:25pm EDT

• I hope whoever is serious about re-opening Antioch will interview some of the recent presidents, asking what frustrated them and their hopes for the College. I met and spent time with some of them and heard the inaugural speeches of others. All seemed pleased at the opportunity, clearly were under impression that they could make their own moves to turn around an ailing institution. But even the most energetic of them were blocked by something. I have my own ideas what gave them trouble, but I would like to know from them why they could not change or reform as they planned.

• Posted by Shaun Schlich , Hey Oprah!!! at New Jersey Attorney on September 8, 2007 at 6:45am EDT

• I pulled in front of the Main Building in early summer of 1973 and it was a mess. My Father looked at me and told me about the strike and then he said "you're going here." I thought, my God, there's garbage everywhere. I was a hayseed from Illinois and from my 1st day at Antioch COLLEGE, I changed in ways that are incalculable. The other students were very sophisticated, smart and friendly. They were diverse in their race, religion and sexuality. But differing from the "sexual ascent" rules of the 90s, there were no rules. It was very different for me from the middle of Illinois. I did not know what a bagel was nor had I had any gay friends or black friends. They called it the Antioch "experience" and I took it all in and look back upon my deceased father's intuition that I should attend Antioch as the best decision ever. I became very educated, I looked smart, but no foundation. I can thank many really good professors for giving me a first rate liberal arts education, Ludo Abicht and David Ober come to mind. My English professor for writing was Duane Jones (I found out recently he died in 1988) of "Night of the Living Dead" fame and I can say that I loved that guy - he was such a great man on so many levels. Russian Lit., taught
  by Bob Lewis, changed my life. These were
  good professors in small classes with bright students. I can't every forget Bob Bieri,
  the greatest biology professor ever in the world. So I got smarted because because it
  was challenging and fun. At that time it
  was a gathering of all ideas, not to the
  exclusion of any. There were conservative
  thinkers, they just took LSD and listed to the Greatful Dead. Mr. Dixon was resigning
  at that time and Mr. Bierenbaum took over.
  Their vision of Antioch University was really
  a good idea, but from the beginning it sapped
  need resources from the college. The irony is inescapable. A good idea spread from Yellow Springs, Ohio to the corners of our nation and then destroyed the idea. The idea for my father was for me to get a strong liberal arts education, obtain work experience and turn into a well rounded individual who could get a job. His money was well spent. I have one more important statement to make and that is that there is a bronze plaque on the wall of the 1st floor of the Main Building commemorating the Antioch College students who died in the Civil War. Antioch was closed during the Civil War and its students fought for emancipation. Someone should fight for Antioch College. I see no one has responded here since June, 2007. I think Oprah should save Antioch College. She has the money and it is a place worth saving. If I could, I would. If Coretta Scott King was alive, she would come to the aid of Antioch College. Anyone who has walked down Xenia Avenue at
  3:00 am, knows some of the inspiration for the Twilight Zone. Rod Serling is rolling in his grave. Luxury condos in Glen Helen may
  be the next news of the Antioch revival.

• good riddance, antioch
• Posted by Jim on June 19, 2007 at 10:10am EDT

• Having lived within 15 minutes of Lunatic U (Antioch, Yellow Springs) for more than 20 years, I can tell you that I applaud its closing; this gives me some degree of hope that America isn't totally insane.

  Whatever Antioch used to be, it has become a tightly orchestrated intellectually homogeneous and intensely intolerant environment. Quite frankly, had my children for some obscure reason chosen to attend Antioch, I would have simply told them I wouldn't pay for it.

  In the summer of 2006, my daughter attended an acting workshop at Antioch in their theatre building. One wall in the lobby of that building is a mural given over to the theme of faces, said faces apparently purporting to represent people from around the world. While waiting for my daughter one day, I studied that wall. When my daughter came out, I pointed her to that wall and asked her; "what do you think of that?". Her response; "I don't know, what?".

  I said; "There are no pictures of white males on this mural. What do you think of that."

  Her response: "Hmmmmm. Strange."

  That, along with their highly publicized code of "sexual ethics" about sums it up. Antioch was clear off the charts with respect to their ideology, and clearly there are not enough lunatics in the US to support them. This can only be considered encouraging.

  The university experience is supposed to be a time of exploration. Universities flourish in an environment of openness, in an environment where ideas are freely expressed and exchanged. Antioch had become the literal antithesis of this free exchange, and this is the price that school pays.

  The rest of the University establishment in this country should take note. Antioch was the extreme, but many other universities are marching down the same path.

  Duke University, having recently led with its chin in its determination to find three young men innocent as accused, may soon give us another example to look at as much of its endowment is stripped away to pay the punitive damages.

  We can only hope.

• Posted by cas on June 19, 2007 at 11:05am EDT

• I'm always amazed when people who "live 15 minutes" or "10 miles" from a college purport to know everything about it, despite never having taken a class there. I grew up in Pittsburgh--which has myriads of colleges--yet I cannot claim to know enough about any of them to make an educated judgment. I even attended two of them, yet realize that they are very different from when I attended 10-15 years ago.
  I think Botstein is right on when he says liberals do not support their colleges. Heck, liberals are often too busy attacking each other.
  The loss of Antioch is a blow to the town of Yellow Springs and to the academic community as a whole. But, is it too late to save the school? Many of us hope it is not.

• Alumni support of Antioch College vs Antioch "University"
• Posted by GlennHelen on June 19, 2007 at 12:00pm EDT

• Botstein correctly identifies Dixon's "Antioch University" folly as a factor in Antioch's demise, and he correctly decries the lack of alumni support progressive colleges receive (relative to their mainline counterparts). What Botstein apparently is unaware of is how interaction of these two factors has brought the College down.
  Those who may not have known about the Antioch Independence Fund, what it tried to accomplish, and how it wound up can find a synopsis here, in the Yellow Springs News:

  http://www.ysnews.com/stories/2003/june/062603_antioch.html

  Botstein would amend his diagnosis if he were aware of what alumni tried to do, only to be "bitch-slapped" by the University trustees for their trouble.

• Antioch
• Posted by Griffin on June 19, 2007 at 12:25pm EDT

• Jim,

  I am a conservative who lives in Yellow Springs. For someone who "lives 15 min" away, you show entirely too much ignorance of the issues at the college to even pretend to comment.

  There was an incredible change on the campus between the time you chose to critique (a valid critique) the mural you discussed with your daughter and now.

  I grieve the fact that the good Steve Lawry accomplished there in turning it around will never reach fruition.

• AIF
• Posted by Corey on June 19, 2007 at 12:30pm EDT

• The proposal to seperate the college from the university would have killed the college years sooner. Perhaps under the new plan, Antioch College can return in a few years stronger than ever.

• Shared Demise
• Posted by KED , College President on June 19, 2007 at 1:05pm EDT

• Antioch College's demise has been pending for some time, unfortunately. While its demise is undoubtedly tied to many factors, its uniquely inclusive model of shared governance, where virtually every major decision emerges from a broad-based dialogue and plebiscite, sadly just could not survive for any length of time in the 21st century.

  The pace of change today is so pervasively understood that even to mention it is beyond cliché. The well educated and informed simply take this for granted. Consequently, to operate a college largely by plebiscite in today's environment, as Antioch College did, is to invite the boiling-frog syndrome home to roost (to mix metaphors). Antioch College's demise has been in the making for years, while made all the more tragic by Antioch's place in the history of higher education, as President Botstein points out in his interview.

  A complex institution simply cannot react quickly enough to its changing environment while putting all major decisions through the test of extended dialogue and eventually to a vote of nearly everyone impacted, including students. Nice as this romantic ideal of shared governance is, it is, quite simply, unworkable today.

  An open dialogue leading to informed decisions by leadership, and a governance model to support this, is required today for a college to grow and prosper while honoring the tradition of shared governance to as sincere an extent as possible, and especially one serving a niche market.

  A comprehensive and well endowed or well funded university engaged in cutting-edge research can wallow around a bit in making its academic decisions--if not its corporate decisions--but for the 90% of colleges and universities that live with year-to-year or even month-to-month financing we do not have this luxury, and I do mean the luxury of time necessary to make fully shared decisions much of the time. It would be nice if we all had the time to debate strategic decisions across the campus with anyone willing to weigh in, including students, but the competition will eat our lunch in the process, as has happened at Antioch College.

  Most colleges that close do not close for this reason (while romantic notions of extensive shared governance have often contributed). Ironically and tragically in closing its doors, Antioch College has once again demonstrated its uniqueness. It was inclusive to a fault and it is unfortunate that trustees never hired and supported a president in addressing this.

• Some finer points need correcting
• Posted by AGB at Antioch '92 on June 19, 2007 at 3:00pm EDT

• Dr. Botstein says the student strike took place in the late 1960s. It took place in the spring of 1973.

  He says the strike took place to protest events not taking place on the campus, such as the war in Viet Nam.

  http://www.ysnews.com/stories/2003/november/112003_HistFront.html

  "During the winter quarter of 1973, cutbacks in education spending by the Nixon administration seemed likely. Antioch allocated $300,000 for student loans, but students in the New Directions program, which was created in 1970 to increase the enrollment of minority and low-income students at the college, felt Antioch wasn’t providing sufficient guarantee that they would be supported until graduation.

  "On April 18, 1973, the New Directions and financial aid students said that they would strike within 48 hours if the Antioch Board of Trustees didn’t guarantee financial support to keep the students at the college.

  "The board did not respond to the students’ demand, and two days later, the strike began. New Directions and other students on financial aid chained and locked all the campus buildings and picketed all the entrances. The college workers’ union, UE 767, respected the strikers’ picket lines."

  =AGB=

• Posted by A. R. on June 19, 2007 at 3:20pm EDT

• Unfortunately, Antioch's closing is another sign of a changing social and political atmosphere. I have read many of the comments on the Dayton Daily News regarding the situation, and yes, there are many of them that are glad that the "pot-smoking hippies" are in trouble. In this time of ultra-conservatism, it is sad to say that intellectual thought, free speech, concern for the environment, concern for human rights, and the desire for peace are giving way to misdirected nationalism, intolerance, ignorance and quick financial gain.

  I went to college straight out of high school and spent 4 years (and more for graduate school) getting my education. It was hard work and time consuming. Today's new graduates are more likely to avail themselves of faster programs, much of which can be done online. They also want modern, private apartment housing, and want to be close to all the conveniences of the city. They won't get that at Antioch. Updating the campus will address that concern at least.

  I have worked for some of the "career colleges" that are getting a larger and larger share of the higher education market. I was not impressed. The students were rude (borderline violent in a few cases) and lacked basic communication skills. I was surprised many of them were able to graduate from high school. Modern higher education is modeled around the idea that the student is the customer, and the customer is always right. It scares me to think about the kind of adults that are entering the workforce today.

  We need progressive organizations that can be affiliated with Antioch College—Institutes and centers that can conduct research and find solutions to the problems we face in the world today. I have often dreamed of working for such an organization, but alas, I am stuck in Dayton, where there is no such thing. We need groups to tackle the problems of global warming, dependence on fossil fuels, intolerance, overpopulation, and an unbalanced natural world. We need to train students to go out into the world focused on these issues, and interested in solving them. I would love to see centers of progressive, social science research move into Yellow Springs and become part of the college. While there is the Coretta Scott King Center and Glen Helen, they seem to require support more than give support.

• Posted by Sara on June 19, 2007 at 7:50pm EDT

• There exists an unpublished study of the origin of the multiple problems at Antioch authored by Everett Wilson, (Antioch class of 1939, Former Professor of Sociology, and Joan Yalman, Social Psychology at Wright State and Spouse of the Professor of Chemistry at Antioch). It exists as a near 900 page draft manuscript in Antiochiana, the College Archives. It was completed in the late 1970's and thus does not include efforts to rebuild in the 80's and 90's. None the less, chapters in the Mss are rich with case study materials and analysis.

  The authors point to decisions taken in the late 1950's and early 1960's that in essence took the power over curriculum away from core faculty (then organized as Faculty Senate), and in fact transferred this to administrators frequently more responsive to the interests of foundations interested in unique special programs than in concerns of Faculty. One example would be the new first year program, debated during my last year, 1961-62, and instituted in 63-64. The new First Year Program replaced a system where all of the core Faculty taught size limited lecture-discussion introductory courses, with team taught efforts designed to produce critical thinking, but that forced core faculty to teach in out of area forums, and introduced a new role, a preceptor, who was an upper class student, perhaps in the midst of a major in yet a third field. The idea collapsed after about three years into what the authors characterize as a counseling program. But the upshot was the Faculty's ability to define and structure a very significant part of the Academic Enterprise (the first year program) was lost to the interests of a foundation in an experiment. The Wilson-Yalman Mss contains considerable empirical material supporting this conclusion. In short order after this First Year Program began, other governance issues that arose because of the development of the Network led to significant governance reforms, which in just a few years led to the abolition of the Faculty Senate as a meaningful governing sub-set in the College Structure. Faculty, for instance no longer meaningfully voted on awarding degrees -- they followed administrators lead, without having any data on which to award a degree grant decision. Hiring and tenure decisions were moved to administrative circles. Decisions about accrediting courses or majors were removed from faculty control.

  Faculty moral collapsed in this environment, and led to progressive withdrawal. Junior Faculty on Tenure Track or recently tenured were frequently able to explore the job market, and leave Antioch after perhaps 5-10 years experience. These were the cohort expected to be Faculty leaders in the 1970's and 80's decade. Some Senior Faculty were able to negotiate tenure at other Colleges and Universities, (Wilson, for instance went to U of NC at Chapel Hill), others simply withdrew from community, and hung on till retirement. Others left the Academic World altogether, going to Industry, Government or the Non-profit world. This all proceeded the crisis of 1979 when the College could not meet payroll between May and October, and both staff and the remains of the teaching faculty had to go on unemployment and food stamps. When core faculty left, they very frequently were not replaced.

  Antioch always had students represented on the College Administrative Council (AdCil) that reviewed and recommended to the trustees the College Budget, but until the expansion in the mid 1960's, AdCil operated less as a factionalized voting forum, rather it was much influenced by Quaker Styles of study, discussion and the achievement of Consensus. (Arthur Morgan was a Quaker and brought many aspects of Quaker decision making to the College). With the advent of the Network, and highly particularized interests in decision outcomes, factional parties emerged to the disadvantage of the College. The authors observe that factions began to hold information close, using secrecy to particular advantage to the total disadvantage of well thought through decisions.

  The authors offer a theoretical analysis of all this, (What would you expect of Ev Wilson???) making the point that the clear roles within the institution were destroyed by the process. They believed that the role of a College President was to lead by balancing the interests and indeed the relative power of different groups within the college. Faculty, they contend, should lead the Academic Enterprise -- but consult broadly. Administrators roles involved keeping the institution functioning, moving resources (with consultation) where needed. In the Antioch Model where students were always included in institutional decisions, the point was to recognize that the student community changed, every quarter and certainly every year the population and its representatives turned over. Student involvement had to be meaningful, but limited to matters involving their own ownership of their own education. When the old Consensus model broke down given the complexity of expansion, virtually all power moved to Administrators, backed by the President who had the power to remove those who did not support his agenda.

  Whether this analysis would stand if new and independent analysis were undertaken, I don't know. It was never popular among those on and around Antioch in the mid to late 80's, but also little read. But on the grounds that comprehending "What Went Wrong" is a good place to start, perhaps it needs a new life in some form. I do believe many of the author's arguments track many of Botstein's more general points -- yes it was a good deal of poor decision making, but the details of all that are in a specific Antioch context, and I would add, totally inseparable from the larger Cultural-Political context of the days of LBJ's Great Society, and the backtracking from that during the Nixon Administration. Many of the Antioch Network Plans were developed as private-public partnerships based on a combination of Foundation Grants and HEW and OEO program grants. In 1969 with Cheney and Rumsfeld running OEO, and Cap Weinberger cutting programs at HEW, the financial planning behind Network programs was axed. That too has to be factored into analysis, and it is perhaps an understudied aspect of how and why progressive Higher Ed has encountered such difficulty. Yes -- supporters of progressive Liberal Arts need to support their institutions as Botstein notes -- but there are other fingers in this pie too.

• Let's be Clear...
• Posted by J. Greg Williams at Class of '95 on June 19, 2007 at 9:30pm EDT

• Let's be clear, the board of trustees decided to close down the College, period. This decision is in part based on finances and the recent drop in enrollment. A drop that was precipitated by the board of trustee's decision to mandate it's "renewal plan" a plan that came with a commitment of 5 years of transitional funding. This money spent to change an already successful academic program deferred the maintenance of the physical plant even further. So what we have is a mandated plan that failed, a failure of the board to take responsibility for their poor decisions and the subsequent pulling of their support for the College earlier than the 5 years they promised.

  Closing the college terminates all the faculty and staff contracts and the 30 Million endowment, up from 11 million only a few years prior, will revert to the University (I believe).

  There is no recovery in 4 years from that. Building a high quality College from scratch can not possibly be cheaper than committing to an already existing one.

  I agree that the progressive side of the political spectrum needs to be aware of, and subsequently support educational models that provide future leaders.

  The next year will be spent trying to convince the Board to undo this decision. Once it's closed, it's done.

• Antioch Demise
• Posted by Arnold Oppenheim, M.D. on June 20, 2007 at 2:50am EDT

• I appreciated Dr. Botstein's and Sara's comments very much. They both grasped the causes of Antioch's demise, although there were some minor inaccuracies which I would like to correct> I also would like to add my own views since I had the unique experience of seeing the troubling cascade of horrendous mistakes and miscalculations firsthand.
  I entered Antioch College in the Summer quarter of 1964. Antioch had been known to attract creative, free-thinking, inquisitive students as bright as any in the country. Combining this type of student with a rigorous academic environment carried Antioch to success. It is a tribute to that sort of Antioch that, like a beaten but courageous fighter, the college was able to hang on for so many years though the toll I feel began counting in 1973 with the riot/strike. T
  The Antioch which greeted me in 1964 had a suburb faculty, small classes, and demanded much of their students. I remember giving myself eilther Saturday night or Sunday afternoon to relax but not both. I remember learning much from my fellow students as we talked philospohy or world affairs in our common room. The school required us to pass Level 1's to ascend to the second year.. pass Level 2's to go onto the third year. Before graduating one was required to write a thesis.
  Most importantly, we were socialized into a system of Community Standards, which essentally meant respect for others. The honor system impressed me too.
  Two events led to a giant uphevel at Antioch. One, as alluded to in Sara's thoughtful submission, was the first year plan. For the record this began in 1965. If I remember correctly, the student attended presentations. If they liked the presentation they could then sign up for the seminars which covered the subject in more depth. The huge flaw in this system was that it did not lead to anything else. It did not fulfill requirements to enter more advanced courses. This concept might have worked in literature or history but was ludicrous in the sceinces. The second flaw is there was no consideration given to people in the second year who might need an introductory class. There wer no introductory classes and one had to take those "independently". Obviously, ludicrous. Explain that to a hard-working Dad that your tuttion money is going to a place where you are taking courses "indpendently". The third flaw in this terribly convceived plan was that the tudents were given 36 credits whether they attended class or not. This totally demeaned the value of credits. Thus, was planted one of the seeds of destruction.
  The second was the Rockefeller plan. A large number of disadvantaged youth, proponderantly Afro-American were suddenly, without any advanced preparation, enrolled in hopes that they somehow could breathe in the Yellow Springs air and magically turn into Antiochians. I was suprised and disappointed that there was no creativity or design in this plan. Aantiioch, being a co-op school sent out hundreds of liberal, socially aware students to cities across America. The logical thing would have been for these students to tutor and/or become friends with proscpective Antiochians. When the Rockefeller people came on campus they would have a student support system wailting for them. Conversely, if the tutoring student felt that their tutoree was consumed by hatred of white people, they could make a recommendation that such a person might not make a good fight at Antioch and go elsewhere. Nothing of the such was done and not surprisingly, the Afro-Americans clung to themselves, and made it difficult for the Afro-Americans who wanted to branch out cultivate friends of other races. These unprepared students found it increasingly difficult to compete and became more and more hostile. This was the second seed of Antioch's destruction.

• RE: Shared Demise Comment
• Posted by LAB , '83 at Antioch on June 20, 2007 at 2:50am EDT

• I wonder if KED thinks democracy can stand a chance in the 21st Century? It is a rather romantic ideal? Oh my goodness, shared governance(and power)what a messy notion for these fast times. Your comments remind me why populism is a necessary force in American politics and institutions.

  As for Antioch's governance you are misinformed. I see its structure as modeled after representative democracy. Reading your comment has given me a new word to dislike: plebiscite. It is an inaccurate characterization.

• KED comments
• Posted by SP on June 20, 2007 at 8:10am EDT

• For KED: I work in an institution with minimal staff consultation. It has been this way for 150 years. Nothing destroys staff morale more. Decocratic decisionmaking is slow and painful - but you can put a time limit on it, and then implement. If you don't you end up with managers like Stephen Schwartz, Vice Chancellor at MacQuarie University, who said publicly in March that staff morale was less important than university performance. http://www.vc.mq.edu.au/press/2007/07-Schwartz-outlines-cultural-overhaul.pdf. This is a no-brainer: morale is what boosts that performance. You have your whole argument backward.

• Botstein et al
• Posted by BobBogen , MCP on June 20, 2007 at 3:35pm EDT

• The KED is both factually and philosophically off-base. The most specific complaint and outrage against the Trustees action is that it was, according to first-hand and authoritative reports of former trustees, faculty and at least one former president as well as students, done without any regard for democratic process, or certainly Quaker consensus process, in fact with no attempt to involve staff, students, alumni or the community. This is intolerable and cannot be permitted to stand.

  With millions in the bank, the Trustees cannot declare bankruptcy, but can continue their bleeding of the College endowment to perpetuate the remnants of James Dixon's misbegotten disastrous satellite system they call a university, which can never replace the absolutely crucial role of Antioch College to aid in perpetuating democratic process and societal progress.

  They have been hijacking the reputation, tradition, and other resources as president Botstein says ,"a great, historic institution .... the founding college of the American progressive movement .... for an unnecessary tragedy."

  He also points out that the special, under-girding mission of Antioch has been to train graduates in leadership for participation in democracy, which he says is the basic justification for liberal education.

  Stop the damn moaning and analytical obituaries. Sure the Trustees have failed to do their job, fulfill their promise of a Five Year Plan, provide competent administrators etc etc. The college is not deceased or closed. And if is does close, no one can expect it will reopen some years hence.

  What we need now is to turn around the Trustees’ decision to close next year, obtain a court ordered injunction, or replace them forthwith. As the button says, ‘Lead forward or get out of the way.’

• Botstein College
• Posted by Louis Proyect on June 20, 2007 at 7:05pm EDT

• Frankly, I would have preferred that Bard went under in the 70s then become what it is today, Leon Botstein's fiefdom. It would have been remembered as a special place like Black Mountain than what it has become today, a second rate Swarthmore. Botstein is completely cynical. Family members and supporters of Alger Hiss set up chair in his name but Botstein has seen fit to appoint somebody to occupy it who has called Hiss a spy. The school is a kind of NY Review on the Hudson with characters like Ian Buruma and Mark Danner on the faculty. Back when I attended Bard in 1961-1965, there were no celebrities on the faculty. With an Episcopalian minister running the school, modesty was more important than it is today. The school has sprouted many new buildings since Botstein took over, but it does not have the charm or the intimacy it once had. Gehry's art center is the worst of the lot. Botstein will probably run the school until he dies. I have been at Columbia University since 1990 and have seen 3 different Presidents. I think that is normal. With somebody enjoying what amounts to a lifetime tenure, the school inevitably becomes his personal property. I wouldn't mind so much if Botstein was less interested in functioning as a public intellectual. As with the case of his orchestra conducting, he is not very good at it. He is good at raising money--I'll give him that. Maybe one day, he'll move into his true métier and take a job with Goldman-Sachs.

• Posted by Paul R. Cooper on June 20, 2007 at 7:05pm EDT

• As alumnas and local witness of Antioch since 1945 I have developed my own opinions and heard a thousand others, and I think they are all irrelevant and even obstacles to reviving the college. I hope the next few years will be devoted by someone (I don't know who) to preparing a scheme for a relevant liberal studies institution with a clear and inspiring mission which invites a few hundred applicants who, when they arrive, find what they expected. Antioch, not with evil intentions, baited and switched hundreds of enrollees who promptly departed. The tradgedy is that this went on for 35 years and 15 presidents without remedy.

• Posted by Callie Cary on June 21, 2007 at 4:20pm EDT

• FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

  Contact: Dennie Eagleson
  Associate Professor, Antioch College
  (937) 475-5618

  ANTIOCH FACULTY WEIGH SUING TO STOP CLOSING OF COLLEGE

  CITE BOARD MISMANAGEMENT IN HISTORIC SCHOOL’S DECLINE

  Yellow Springs, Ohio, Thursday, June 21, 2007 – The faculty of Antioch College, slated for closure by the Antioch University Board of Trustees, say the school’s recent decline stems from gross mismanagement by the Board, and are exploring legal action to halt the shutdown.

  Speaking on behalf of the faculty, professor emerita Dimi Reber said the enrollment drop which precipitated the Board’s decision to close the 155-year-old school had actually been projected as part of a Renewal Plan foisted on the College by the Board, which promised financial support to see the plan through for 5 years.

  “In brief, the Board risked the College’s well-being with the imposition of an ill-considered plan, failed to provide promised support and then closed the College,” Reber said in a statement. [The full text of the statement follows this release.]

  Reber’s comments came as hundreds of anguished alumni began arriving in Yellow Springs for the College’s Alumni Reunion, to be held June 21-24. Last week, the Board announced plans to suspend operations of the College after July 1, 2008, saying it intended to reopen a “state-of-the-art” campus in 2012. Reber questioned the Board’s motives and the sincerity of its commitment to reopening the College.

  “Who benefits?” asked Reber. “The University stands to receive all the College's assets, including the $30 million endowment, the land, the buildings, the library, the Glen Helen Nature Preserve and, not least, the Antioch brand.” Antioch University operates adult education and distance learning programs through five campuses, in addition to the original undergraduate program at the College.

  With the support of alumni, she said, faculty are pursuing legal avenues to keeping the College’s doors open. “The faculty will be exploring legal action to stop the College’s closing and preserve tenure and the College’s assets,” said Reber.

  Reber and other faculty will appear at a press conference Saturday, June 23 at 1:00pm in Room 118 of the McGregor Building at Antioch ’s Yellow Springs campus.

  ###

  The full text of Reber’s statement follows:

  STATEMENT OF DIMI REBER, PROFESSOR EMERITA OF ANTIOCH COLLEGE

  June 19, 2007

  The faculty of Antioch College wish to share their perspective on the closing of the College. I am an emerita faculty member speaking at their request because current faculty are in a vulnerable position, being no longer protected by tenure. The story supplied by Antioch University Board of Trustees contains important omissions, questionable assumptions and misrepresentations.

  We want to provide an alternative narrative, because our dignity as faculty and the preservation of tenure as a principle and a promise are at stake. Moreover, Antioch 's current and historic definition, together with its considerable material assets, is hanging in the balance. Our sense of justice is offended as decades-old practices of governance and decision-making have been ignored.

  Antioch College has been in financial crisis since its inception. Ironically, several years ago the Board imposed a drastic curricular revision, the Renewal Plan, on the College at a point when the enrollment had actually been increasing. The College articulated some of the many challenges it faced in its Strategic Plan of 1997, but the overall shape of the curriculum was not the central problem, nor was it perceived as a problem by the NCA in a recent accreditation review.

  The Renewal Plan had disastrous effects on admissions and retention. The student body plunged from 650 to 300 in two years, despite faculty's considerable efforts to make the Plan work. The Board mandated the change abruptly, scarcely giving time for the faculty to develop courses and consider the profound implications of the changes, much less market them. At the time, they promised 5 years of financial support to see the College through the Plan's implementation. Such a promise is not simply an act of generosity but a basic necessity with any academic program facing reorganization on the scale mandated through those initiatives.

  In brief, the Board risked the College's well-being with the imposition of an ill-considered plan, failed to provide promised support and then closed the College. To make matters worse, implementation of the Renewal Plan and the College's financial difficulties overlapped with the Board's authorization of a new building for Antioch McGregor, a branch of Antioch University which had previously shared a campus with the College in Yellow Springs. At the time of its greatest need, the College's borrowing capacity was seriously constrained, and it was the College's assets that provided much of the collateral for the extensive borrowing necessary to develop the new McGregor building. How is it possible that, given their role in creating the College's grave difficulties, the Board did not take responsibility to raise additional funds, consider the College president's plan to merge the College and Antioch McGregor or consider liquidating part of the College's endowment? How is it that the Board moved with such haste, without thorough discussion with and disclosure to faculty, before taking this action?

  We must ask: Who benefits from this? What is Antioch University without the College? The College is the only one of the University's branches with tenured faculty, a unionized staff and self-governance. What of Antioch 's identity do they care about preserving? If they can't raise funds now, how can they start from scratch four years from now with abandoned buildings and an entirely new faculty and student body to recruit? What will become of the abandoned employers in the Cooperative Education program, Antioch 's mark of distinction? How financially healthy are the other campuses of Antioch University – has the College been made a scapegoat?

  Who benefits? The University stands to gain all the College's assets, including the $30 million endowment, the land, the buildings, the library, the 900-acre Glen Helen Nature Preserve and, not least, the Antioch brand.

  Can the Board and University administration -- which conducted their review of the College's recent situation in secrecy, in violation of our governance policies, without consulting faculty and staff who stand to lose their livelihoods and professions -- be trusted with the College's current assets, its legacy and its future? We might further ask what is the Board's responsibility to the town of Yellow Springs? The loss of income to a small town for which Antioch is one of the major employers, the disappearance of an intellectual and cultural center, the abandonment of land and buildings are all terrible blows.

  The faculty will be exploring legal action to stop the College's closing, preserve tenure and safeguard the college's assets. We seek the support of alumni in this endeavor.

  Dimi Reber

  Antioch College professor emerita

• Posted by Offie Wortham , Antioch Revisited at TransCultural Awareness Inst. on June 24, 2007 at 10:50am EDT

• I wrote a book about Antioch for my PhD from the Union Graduate School,(now known as the Union Institute). In the book, written from 1970 to 1974, I predicted that Antioch would not maintain its committment to economically disadvantaged students because of it inability to come up with the money required. The book (which is on file in Dissertations Abstracts International at the University of Michigan) is entitled "An Analysis of the Attempts of Antioch College to Introduce Cultural Pluralism." I was an undergraduate student in Yellow Springs from 1960 to 1962, when Antioch was indeed a Utopian Community, and "The Beatnick College." When I came back on the faculty a decade later it was the most racially segregated campus in the country with the first Black Dorm, and a seperate academic program for Blacks. Because I was working on a degree in Interracial Education I was completely out of phase with Black Studies and the negative slide toward AfroCentric racism. I am also a person of partially African Descent, (and 67% Cherokee) and I have always been opposed to any kind of race-based program or curriculum. What has now happened to Antioch has many explanations and excuses. Blind liberal acceptance of whatever is pushed in front of them has always been pathetic to me. They are so afraid of being call a racist, or anti-this or anti-that. They have no guts to stand up for what they really believe is right. The doing away with academic standards was a major mistake at Yellow Springs (average SAT was 1350 in 1960). The adoption of the school image as a college dominated by homosexuals was a mistake. If the college can ever become the excellent academic institution it once was it will be a miracle. I look forward to having a serious dialogue with any alumni who have the guts and imagination to learn from the past and begin from scratch to built a new college.

  Offie Wortham, 60-62, Faculty 69-72.

• rebuilding Antioch
• Posted by Renwick Jackson on June 24, 2007 at 4:55pm EDT

• During a lunch with James Dixon and Sam Baskin in 1969, I told him that his plan to "franchise" Antioch's name and concept around the country would ultimately lead to
  the closing of the undergraduate college at
  Yellow Springs. I also told him that it was a well established principle that graduate programs take precedence over undergraduate programs, that graduate programs get a disproportional share of institutional resources.
  I perceived that he didn't value my counsel and was determined to move forward with his plan for "Antioch University."
  I write to encourage everyone who is
  commited to the continuity of Antioch as an undergraduate college at Yellow Springs not to give up but to find ways to achieve that goal.
  My experience as the founding president of St. Mary's College of Maryland (1969-1982)as an excellent four-year institution of liberal education is an inspiration to all
  those who have large dreams. The idea was to make excellent liberal education available to those who could not afford elite private colleges. When we began, very few persons thought we could succeed. With the exception of a beautiful waterfront campus, there were few resources on hand for such a mission.
  Please read the story of our success in "The Golden Run, The Story of St. Mary's College of Maryland, 1968-1982," written by me. You will not only enjoy an exciting story; you will also be encouraged to rebuild an excellent undergraduate college at Yellow Springs.
  I feel strongly that Antioch College should not be closed. If it is closed and its resources are distributed to the university centers, I doubt that it will ever be re-opened. Our country, more than ever, needs Antioch's distinctive contributions. Those members of the Antioch College community can succeed. You can do it!

  Sincerely,

  Renwick Jackson