Actually the bit about Steve Weisler doesn't surprise me in the least, although I'm not sure whether he wants Hampshire to change because he doesn't have a satisfying amount of Actually Responsible Students and he thinks more traditional methods will attract them, or he thinks financial viability is the be-all and end-all of college administration, and has come up with the syllogistic logic that Smith has grades, and Smith's endowment is close to a cool billion, therefore if Hampshire had grades, in 100 years or so it would be similarly well-off.

Or maybe he's just sick of people showing up to his Chomsky class and wanting to discuss US foreign policy.

Utter bunkum.

Look, I like the "re-radicalization" kids and have been following their progress online with interest. I'm all for continued advocacy for independent projects in the curriculum, and I think they will end up being a good check on the conservative tendencies in the administration.

But I was around (working) at Hampshire when the new first-year plan was being hashed out, and talked to Weisler about it all the time, and let me tell you, nobody proposed grades, ever. And honestly, picking Weisler for the role of evil enemy is just silly -- granted, he's been known to propose more conventional approaches as fixes for **obviously broken** parts of the Hampshire curriculum, and granted, he enjoys being a gadfly and provocateur, but he has basically the same goals as the (good) Hampshire students (i.e. make it harder to slack off unproductively for years, make expectations clearer, support students better). Sometimes I wish that people would pick their enemies more carefully.

Look, you can probably read the new first-year plan on the web somewhere; if not, I can probably find you a copy. Draw your own conclusions.

I'm posting via long-distance call from the woods, so that's it for now.

Oh, and I'm too lazy/modest to self-link, but you already know that I think handing out "The Making of a College" to incoming students might, in some ways, end up DE-radicalizing the college. That book is not the manifesto everyone thinks it is.

Oh-- I'd nearly forgotten-- The Making of a College is up online, thanks to tireless librarian/archivist Susan Dayall: http://library.hampshire.edu/archives/makingcollege.html

And the link to his own commentary that Roger mentioned but didn't post: http://alum.hampshire.edu/~rb97/archives/themakingofacollege.html
and just to be totally ridiculously self-referential, my response thereto, in which I blithely confound Roger's politically-charged use of the word "critical" with the more modern, scientific "analytical": http://gus.protest.net/MT2archive/000295.html#000295

Thanks, Roger, I figued the kid was flying off the handle in traditional Hampshire student style; it's nice to have your reassurance (though of course I'd like a clearer sense of what it WAS the kids were reacting to). I *don't* agree that current students are likely to provide a check on the administration, except inasmuch as they spout off to the alumni network. (hubris and ill-advised project-taking-on! I still think It's Up To Us!)

And yeah, it's true, the book is far from a radical manifesto. But every generation of students needs to understand why Hampshire isn't the radical utopia they believed it to be when they walked in the door, and that book is #1 best quality highly nuanced way to learn that, if they act like good historians in reading it.

Hampshire's also introducing ROTC.

And frats.

And Big 10 football.

Look -- the Re-Radicalizing Hampshire students have discovered MovableType comment spam!

(And sex!)