OP/ED

The Michigan Daily - Thursday, February 21, 2002 - 5A

A look at the Residential College: 35 years later

By CARL COHEN
Residential College Co-Founder; Prof of Philosophy
Three principal objectives self-conscious-
ly motivated the founders of the Resi-
dential College, which opened in East
Quadrangle in September of 1967. Ten mem-
bers of the College of Literature, Science and
the Arts faculty, led by Dean Burton Thuma, of
happy memory, had spent the preceding two
years planning the college within a college that
still thrives at our University.
The first aim was the integration of serious
study into the residence hall environment. It
was an excellent idea at the time and it still is.
We have succeeded rather well in this pursuit:
Students who live together study together in the
same seminars, the same classes and can enjoy
intellectual reflection and discussion as natural
facets of daily life in the quadrangle. That was
the plan and it works.
The study of foreign languages has been
woven into meal times, resulting in an unusual-
ly high percentage of RC students who success-
fully study abroad; recreational activities have
been blended into class projects and the out-

come has been pleasure in research; writing
assignments and writing for fun are not clearly
distinguishable here and the extraordinary suc-
cess of RC students in the Hopwood competi-
tions, year after year, is proof of the pudding.
Faculty offices and student rooms abut one
another, yielding friendships both productive
and satisfying. Measured on the first standard
- grades are not everywhere out of order! - I
give the RC an A.
The second objective was to make possible
curricular experimentation otherwise impossi-
ble. A unit with a few hundred students can ini-
tiate programs, alter them and when appropriate
discard them, with an efficiency impossible in a
college of many thousands. Well, we have
experimented and we do still, but not perhaps
with all the boldness that was once envisaged.
The first year seminars that were introduced at
the RC (and the Pilot Program) proved wonder-
fully successful, and the model has been used
widely outside the College, a result that realizes
the hopes of the founders. We have experiment-
ed with foreign language study methods with
great success; individualized concentration pro-
grams have been devised with originality and
(sometimes) even with courage.

Some of our experiments - we envisaged
comprehensive examinations for all students at
the end of the sophomore year, for example -
have been justifiably abandoned. But most stu-
dents in the RC pursue programs of study not
dramatically different from their peers in the
parent college. Measured on the second stan-
dard I give the RC a B.
The third objective of the Residential Col-
lege was the least tangible and in my judgment,
the most important. It was to capture, somehow,
the spirit of community in a university growing
to mammoth size. We knew how satisfying the
intimate friendships of a small college can be;
we treasured humane and personal relations
between faculty and students and were deter-
mined to preserve them, as the University
enlarged speedily during the 1960s.
We wanted a college that would retain the
richness of LSA and the excitement of the Uni-
versity, but in which those values of personal
good feeling and unity of purpose would not be
overwhelmed as we saw them being over-
whelmed elsewhere. We wanted students and
faculty to feel at home, at ease, engaged with
one another. How well have we done on this
measure? Students and faculty of the RC must

answer for themselves. For my part, invigorated
by unending interaction with my students, and
welcoming back those good friends with real
tears of affection in our eyes, I am unashamed
to give the college a grade I never give to my
students: A-plus.
All that I write here must be discounted by
the fact that I see only through lenses colored
by my own investment. That said, I reckon that
if the founders of the Residential College (most
now deceased) could have been given in 1967 a
magical presentiment of what was to be the out-
come of their devoted work, a vision of the Res-
idential College as it is today, they would have
been supremely pleased. The easy and good-
humored relations that we enjoy, the humane
satisfactions of a devoted faculty working with
intellectually powerful students, would have
made them - as it makes me at times -
euphoric.
Thirty-five years is a long time in one small
college. But it's not half long enough for life in
a truly great university. Like each one of the
thousands of students with whom the RC has
been shared these good years, I have had the
delights of both and the satisfactions of pride in
both. Unbeatable.

Within LSA is a small four-year liberal arts college and living-learning community: The Residential
College. Since its founding in 1967, the RC has provided an academically and socially unique environ-
ment. Based on the principles of close interaction with professors and intellectual freedom the RC is
often poorly understood by the rest of the University. Sometimes derided as "Freaks and Geeks" RC
students come from all walks of life and are proud to maintain their in n nt t t
U U


-.....-

-. .

What it is, where it's going and why you

- an

The RC and LSA A symbiotic synergy

The voice of this
freak and geek:
The RC and MSA
BY JILL BARKLEY
LSA-SG Representative,
Co-founder; Residential College Student Cooperative
As a junior who has been part of the Resi-
dential College for three years now, I
can honestly say that having a voice at
the University when the rest of the campus con-
siders you a freak, a geek or a hippie who fails
to shower regularly, is not exactly easy. In fact,
it has been an uphill battle.
I have received an amazing education in the
RC over the past three years with professors
who know who I am, understand my learning
style and take a vested interest in my life. I have
learned just as much outside of the classroom
by having lunch with my professors to talk poli-
tics and saying goodnight to my classmates and
neighbors after studying a foreign language.
The RC has put quite a spin on my idea of what
an education is, with its unique outlook on how
to contribute to its own population and the
entire University.
However, the RC is often silenced because
of that uniqueness. We are not taken seriously.
We are attached to this campus but not really a
part of it. This was evident to me when I first
became involved in LSA-Student Government.
I had been locked away in East Quad, not even
knowing that a student government existed
before members of the government sought to
correct the problem that I shared with many of
my peers - a complete lack of representation.
I ran in an election and won because several
RC students wanted a voice and took it to the
polls.
Over the last year, I have worked in improving
the RC's communication with the University that
exists outside of East Quad's basement. Along
with fellow RC student Graham Atkin, we formed
the Residential College Student Cooperative to
facilitate communication between the governing
bodies on this campus and the RC. However, I am
the only RC Student on LSA-Student Govern-
ment and there is not one RC Student on the
Michigan Student Assembly. I would argue that
this is not because we do not take these govern-
ments seriously, but rather that they do not seek
to consider us. That is, until now.
On Tuesday night, with the help of Student
General Counsel John Carter and Rules and
Elections Committee Chair John Simpson, I
presented a resolution at MSA to consider an
Amendment to their rigid Constitution to allow
for an RC seat on the Assembly.
This was met with opposition by Assembly
members who claimed that the RC was repre-
sented through the LSA representatives on
MSA. I beg to differ.
The RC, while connected to LSA, is a vastly
different place, with unique struggles and tri-
umphs. We need our own voice because LSA
simply cannot and does not speak to who we
are. We have separate facilities, a separate fac-
ulty, separate academic advising, separate
requirements for graduation and separate con-
centrations from LSA. More importantly, we
have a separate population that can bring some-
thing new to the status-quo of MSA.
We seek not to complain about past issues
the RC has experienced due to the fact that
there was no representation, but rather to start
from this point and make the RC a player in
what does occur at this University. Because the
goal of MSA is to represent the entire Universi-
ty, this seat is long overdue. Perhaps it is my RC
education speaking, but I see no problem in
having more representation on the assembly. In
my mind, increased representation is no threat
to the democracy of the central government of
this campus.
Apparently, enough Assembly members
agreed with me and this resolution passed.
Enough people felt that all students on this
campus deserve to speak and be heard when

issues come up that pertain to them.
However the fight for RC Representation
is not over and the next obstacle will be get-
ting this question on the ballot in the upcom-
ing Spring elections so that the RC can have
it's voice heard this fall .
Barkley is an RCjunior:

BY CHARLES BRIGHT
Residential College Interim Director
Prof of History
When asked to discuss the dif-
ferences between the Resi-
dential College and the
College of Literature, Science and the
Arts, my first thought was that the dif-
ferences are not as great as they were
supposed to be. The original 1967 plan
had the RC on a separate campus out by
the Huron River, with residence halls for
1,000 students and a curriculum that
was genuinely "alternative" to LSA.
There were to be distinctive writing and
foreign language requirements, a core
curriculum instead of distribution and a
comprehensive examination at the end
of the sophomore year that led to indi-
vidualized concentrations. As many as
150 faculty members on loan from LSA
departments were to be involved.
Much of this never happened, mostly
because the money never materialized.
But the RC flourished in East Quad,
forming a distinctive community in the
University and becoming in time one of
the pioneering and most highly regarded
living-learning programs in the country.
I could go on about the unique
aspects of the RC curriculum - the
intensive language instruction, the inter-
weaving of writing, drama, music and
studio arts with interdisciplinary aca-
demic courses, the extensive links
between courses and the wider world,

both nearby and abroad. However, with
limited space, I'll focus on two aspects
of RC pedagogy that bear on the ques-
tion of difference.
The RC expects its students to
become active learners, combining seri-
ous engagement in the classroom (ideas,
reflection, study) with direct action (par-
ticipatory, community based and of
service). All aspects of the curriculum
stress this. Students must master a for-
eign language and they are encouraged
to take this proficiency into community
service or study abroad. All students
must engage in a sustained hands-on
study of the creative arts and exhibit the
results. Many courses have community
outreach components. This is an
inquiry-driven pedagogy that moves
back and forth between practice and the-
ory within a learning community that
values engagement and continually eval-
uates its returns.
The RC supports its students in tak-
ing risks - pushing beyond their limits
- in ways that are planned and evaluat-
ed, but with outcomes that are not pre-
packaged or pre-ordained. RC classes
and the practices of active learning they
foster, emphasize intellectual self-
reliance and artistic boldness; we value
virtuosity and applaud student experi-
ment. It's in this context that the RC his-
torically offered written evaluations in
place of grades. It's not that RC faculty
couldn't give grades (we grade LSA stu-
dents all the time) or that RC students
couldn't take grades (they have lots of

grades on their transcripts), but grading
suppresses risk taking. In moving to a
graded system, we are determined to
sustain the community's strong culture
of evaluation and critical assessment that
gives students courage to take intellectu-
al risks.
The values sketched here are about
practices and stances that any University
student can learn. They speak of educa-
tion as a process in which learning
shapes the whole person and drives
active inquiry. They foster a different
kind of rigor (not better, not less, but
distinct) from that of specialization in
departmental training. And they culti-
vate the basic languages of communica-
tion, expression and engagement in a
community where these languages are
practiced, tempering careerism with the
practices of life-long learning. As one
alumna put it: "The RC is a 40-year col-
lege."
The RC has always been somewhat
misunderstood - how should a unit
committed exclusively to undergraduate
teaching within a world-class research
university be understood? It has always
operated on a shoestring and in a retro-
fitted and jerry-rigged facility, yet the
educational value it has squeezed from
inadequate funding has always aston-
ished external observers. This produces
a certain defiant pride among us that
some read as standoffishness. But in
fact, the RC makes full use of LSA
resources. Lots of RC faculty are on
joint appointments or collaborate with
colleagues in LSA. RC students take 70
percent of their courses in LSA and in
recent years, 60 percent of RC graduates
had at least one LSA departmental
major. The number of LSA students
enrolled in RC classes has doubled in
the past decade and LSA students make
up nearly half the enrollment in our
upper-level courses.
These patterns will increase in com-
ing years as the RC uses its interdiscipli-
nary traditions to build a series of
problem-centered undergraduate
minors (open to all) that combine RC
and LSA courses around issues like
crime and justice, globalization, urban
community studies, science, technolo-
gy and society. This is one of several
ways we are working to strengthen
those educational aspects of the RC
that are unique and unavailable else-
where in LSA, while promoting
increased traffic between RC and
LSA. If we can do both effectively,
there is no clash of purpose, only
mutual benefit.

'rrw iG
Hill of these characteristics of the RC help to make
it unique - and controversial at the same time.

Admisioa
.The RC is a branch of LSA but only acctsaa
few hundred studients into each class. Admis-
sion is oM~ to anyone who is applying to LSA.
The Requlremits
The RC has some different; more 'inch-
vidaly oriented -- and more contro-
versial -- requirements' than LSA.
Creative expression
All RC students must tal.. e 'a
00"creative expression" class f
First year seminar
All freshmen must take an t
RC first-year-seminar in lieu
of English 125. These are
small class environments
with directed themes.
Foreign Languiage
An intensive 20 credit for-~.
eign language program thatt
features two, eight-.credit
intensive classes that meet
twice a day and also includest
flitch-table discussions.
East Quad
Al RC stu env oWEast Q ad for
their first two yearsVith very &N fe eccipos.

The Grading
Written evalua-
tions are given by
professors along
with letter grades.
Letters or no'
The issue of grades..
has been one of the
most contentious
issues concerning.
the RC, with Dean
Shirley Neuman as
the strongest advo-
sate of the elimnina-
tion of the old written
evaluation syste.
The decision
Up until this fall let-.
ter grades were not?
required and stu-
de'nts had no offi-
cial (3PA. Over the
protests of both fac4-
ulty and students,:
all incoming fresh-
mhen are now sub-
ject .to. letter grades.

I

K.-

This Weekend in
Michigan Athletics

Presented by:
ar
' cuELESr
wmt-


FILE PHOTO
The Residential College provides a unique living and learning environment, but many
of its unique characteristics are highly contentious at the same time.



--- -


Hockey
Michigan vs.
Ohio State
Friday, February 22
7:35 p.m.
Saturday, February 23
7:35 p.m.
Yost Ice Arena

ldmkL

2002 Big Ten Conference Women's
Swimming and Diving Championships
February 20 - 23
Canham Natatorium
Hosted by the University of Michigan

Wrestling
Sunday, February 24
#2 Michigan vs.
Michigan State
1 p.m.
Cliff Keen Arena
Senior Day!
Admission is $4 for adults; $2 for children
& senior citizens. U-M students admitted
FREE with a valid ID!
2002 Big Ten
Women's Swimming

Mens Tennis 1