<p>Over the past several months, the President led a series of more than fifty small group discussions with faculty, students, staff, alumnae, and trustees focused on three questions:
1. What are the distinctive strengths of the college and what opportunities do they provide for the future?
2. What capacities should we develop in all students in their time at Smith?
3. How can the college best anticipate projected changes in the world of higher education?
Reflecting on these discussions, the committee has developed eight strategic directions to guide the next phase of their planning effort. During this next phase, they will seek ideas for specific initiatives and strategies to advance their progress in each of these critical areas.
<a href="http://www.smith.edu/planning/strategic/directions.php%5B/url%5D">http://www.smith.edu/planning/strategic/directions.php</a></p>
<p>How do you feel about this important discussion? Personally, I especially like the initiative to promote a culture of research, inquiry, and discovery. Smith already does a great job on many of these fronts, but it appears that they are determined to move forward in even more positive directions. Many of us on these Smith threads have been talking about perceived changes at Smith, and many of us have discussed some issues in the past that we found detrimental to the college. It appears that President Christ is listening, and these discussions, and this initiative, is to me, just what the doctor ordered. Every fine institution undergoes strategic planning processes, but it appears that Smith does not just settle for the ordinary in topics, but rather, takes on some rather meaty subjects for change.</p>
<p>I have heard a lot of negative things about what president Christ is doing with the school. Apparently, she is trying to create a core curriculum and tearing down a lot of the long standing traditions that make smith what it is. As I don't go to the school yet and have therefore not been in the mix long enough to form a decision, I am giving this as second hand information. But the idea of focusing more on critical thinking skills and increasing funding in research and the sciences sounds great- although I have heard that this is more for engineering than any other science :(</p>
<p>Interesting! I did hear about the probability of a core curriculum. IMHO, that would be a mistake. One of the most important aspects of Smith that my D wanted in all of her college selections was no core curriculum. She hates the idea of having to take courses she has no interest in. Are they talking about adding an entire core curriculum, or just a couple more necessary courses...like their writing intensive one you must take?</p>
<p>That's what has not been cleared yet. I think a quantitative thinking course like the writing intensive course would be great but I do agree that a core curriculum would be unecessary.</p>
<p>[[Interesting! I did hear about the probability of a core curriculum]]</p>
<p>Never say never, but when surveys are taken, a significant number of students chose Smith b/c of the open curriculum. The college is in no position to jeopardize losing students to other colleges because of a change in the course requirements. Christ is well aware instituting a core curriculum would be disastrous</p>
<p>Having said that, adding a quantitative and qualitative reasoning course requirement is a real possibility. The requirement can be accomplished in various ways, that is painless to most students.</p>
<p>A major issue, as Im sure youre aware, is getting Smith better well known around the country and dispelling myths or exaggerated perceptions associated with womens colleges. With so many 1st generation children attending college, parents often arent familiar with the plethora of college choices, or why one college might be more suitable than another, much less the advantages of a womens college. The Southwest, West and to a degree the South are ripe for recruitment, if Smith can make the financial and personnel commitment.</p>
<p>fwiw- I talked to an alumna recruiter for Holyoke today. She wishes Holyoke would go to an open curriculum too.
Its her opinion Holyoke has lost more a few students to Smith b/c of the open curriculum.</p>
<p>There are NO proposals for a core curriculum. Zero. None. Zilch. And I have read every single one of the alumnae reception reports - it hasn't come up even once. It is not part of ANY of the strategic initiatives, not from the faculty and not from the administration.. </p>
<p>Three themes have come up: in KEEPING the open curriculum, should there be any kind of math requirement (like the writing one), which can be fulfilled not through any specific course, but from a range of academic opportunities? Should there be an opportunity to teach/learn about the trajectory of women's lives in the world, so that students are invited to come to a better understanding of their options? Can there be better integration and encouragment of cross-departmental research opportunities? </p>
<p>Frankly, I think Christ has been fantastic! Fundraising has been way up (after Simmons left Smith in a hole.) She brought about a much better dining system, more flexible, with more choices, meeting the needs of more women who require such flexibility and choices. Committed Smith to becoming the number one destination in the country for women scientists. Expanded outreach to low-income students, and provided the funds to have them attend. And now she is tackling deferred maintenance on the houses, finalized the science center proposals, built new housing for ADAs (especially those with children). And embarked on a new strategic planning process. It's really quite a record of achievement in such a short time.</p>
<p>Committed Smith to becoming the number one destination in the country for women scientists]]</p>
<p>There's a very good reason for that; its the hope of the administration that by attracting women scientists, they can combat the lower rate of application growth and increase yield. Needless to say, the aforementioned is only one of many reasons for substantial financial investments in the sciences and engineering. Obviously Smith would like to be a leader-although it already is to a degree- in the sciences and engineering for women because, well, its Smith.</p>
<p>If anyone wishes to volunteer to totally revamp the website and add a virtual tour, feel free to contact the college.</p>
<p>Some students act as if the emphasis on science & engineering is a zero-sum game, taking assets away from the arts, humanities, and social sciences. I haven't seen anything to suggest that this is actually happening.</p>
<p>The changes in dining have been a mixed bag, imo, though generally positive for the reasons Mini cites. D's house still has Friday tea, etc. Fwiw, her house still has the option of inviting a prof over for dinner but hasn't exercised it. I think there's some friction over the fact that it's the profs of the larger majors that would be chosen...I have insufficient information to form a clear picture.</p>
<p>===</p>
<p>I would think that Holyoke loses more students to being located in the relative boonies but that's my jaundiced opinion.</p>
<p>Blame the morons who had the endowment at far greater risk than necessary. When an inevitable market downturn occurred (1999/2000), Smith took a significantly greater loss than most comparable colleges. If a simpleton such as me could manage not to lose money during those yrs, you have to believe money mangers being paid millions could have accomplished the same. All the bozos had to do was use options and other financial vehicles to mitigate any percitious market drop. They did at Yale, Harvard, etcetera, etcetera. Harvard, Yale and many other colleges made money during the downturn.</p>
<p>Due to the efforts of Ruth, Smith has the engineering program. Praxis, Poetry Center, Kahn Institute and, I believe, she doubled the percentage of Blacks and Hispanics enrollment</p>
<p>
[quote]
There are NO proposals for a core curriculum. Zero. None. Zilch. And I have read every single one of the alumnae reception reports - it hasn't come up even once. It is not part of ANY of the strategic initiatives, not from the faculty and not from the administration.
[/quote]
Thanks Mini! YAY! There's been so much talk lately about that potential, but I really believe that Smith would lose students to other colleges who do not have a core curriculum. Adding a qualitative and quantitative reasoning course would do no harm to anybody, and probably is not a bad idea anyway.
[quote]
Obviously Smith would like to be a leader-although it already is to a degree- in the sciences and engineering for women because, well, its Smith.
[/quote]
Yep!! Nuff said!</p>
<p>I am so impreseed with their strategic planning agenda because it is so rigorous and challenging. It appears that President Christ has taken on a lot of responsibility in her tenure, and this new science building along with the planning efforts are extraordinary.</p>
<p>Don't get me wrong - I think Simmons was a fine President. But she'd put all those new initiatives on the boards, and then left without a strategy for paying for them. Meanwhile, the number of Pell Grant (low-income) students at Smith has increased by more than a quarter since Christ became Pres., and all of Simmons' initiatives are paid for - not out of endowment (which was also resurrected, with new managers under Christ), but out of new fundraising.</p>
<p>I would think that Holyoke loses more students to being located in the relative boonies but that's my jaundiced opinion.]]]</p>
<p>Probably, but the location can't be changed, the curriculum requirements can. Thats why I believe many would like the administration to take a closer look at going to an open curriculum. If they were to increase acceptances by only 30 women, that would make a significant difference (lower) in the accepted student percentage needed to achieve the optimal yield. There are many students, my daughters friend for one, who actually love the bucolic setting of Holyoke. I, otoh, am in full agreement with you and those who find it too rural, even though I love the campus.</p>
<p>OT-Speaking of yield, did anyone see Trinity oversubscribed by so many students they have to house students in a hotel about a mile from campus owned by a culinary school? </p>
<p>Id love to see Smith have to place students in the Hotel Northampton. Talk about the ultimate housing and dinning experience.</p>
<p>not out of endowment (which was also resurrected, with new managers under Christ), but out of new fundraising.]]</p>
<p>Mini, I think the world of Christ and will give her the credit due with regard to fundraising. But the endowment increased not so much b/c of new managers, but the market rebound that took place at the same time she became pres. Timing is everything. ;)</p>
<p>Yes, but the new initiatives were NOT paid out of endowment but out of Christ's fundraising ($43 million in 2005, double that of Williams and triple that of Swarthmore), and the rate of endowment increase after the hiring of the new managers has been higher than at comparable colleges (there was a chart at the Chronicle of Higher Ed. showing it third out of 40 liberal arts colleges.)</p>
<p>There's been so much talk lately about that potential, ]]</p>
<p>What am I missing Bjm8? Where have you seen everyone talking about it? I've always been under the impression, and rightly so, a core curriculum was a nonstarter. I talked to the girls to make sure I wasnt hallucinating, and they said the core was never up for consideration. I believe the threat of 1982.5 women submitting transfer apps might have had something to do with it. :)</p>
<p>[[Yes, but the new initiatives were NOT paid out of endowment but out of Christ's fundraising ]]</p>
<p>We aren't in disagreement. I understand that Mini. Christ has done an amazing fundraising job. Hell, who do you think got called every other day? </p>
<p>Im also aware the endowment has been doing better than most LACs. My wish is they would do as well as Harvard or Yale. But Im a greedy capital pig and want 2 bil in the endowment kitty so Smith can curb the rate of tuition increases. It wont effect me, but it would be a great selling point if Smith was 5-7 k less than Wellesley, Amherst etc and students could be awarded more grants than loans.</p>
<p>You're not missing anything, RLT.. I had read some info about this on the Jolt...and we all know about the Jolt! I had also read about the talk of a core curriculum somewhere else, but my senile mind is not working at the moment. I am glad that there is no possibility to change the lack of a core. I think it is what makes some colleges very special. and popular amongst students who have a good head on their shoulders.</p>
<p>I think I deserved to be punished! I spend more time on the Jolt as days go by. Funny little site, isn't it? Much more interesting when school is in session though.</p>