From the corner of Alder and Park the progress on Whitman’s newest residence hall is clear. What was an empty lot this time last spring is now a building nearing completion. Though the Cleveland Dining Hall isn’t scheduled to open until a few months after the Fall 2018 semester begins, students will file into the new Residence Hall in September. Aside from comfortable accommodations and newfound cohesion for sophomore life, the new hall promises to shake up campus culture by altering the makeup of sophomore living facilities.Contributed by Brahm Coler

The hall has a capacity of 150, though there is no expectation of filling every bed. Sophomores will be the primary tenants, but it is possible that juniors and seniors may live there as well. Its opening will usher in the closure of North, the conversion of Lyman to first-year only living and Tamarac will be repurposed as apartment-style living for upperclassmen.

This new residence hall is part of a larger project which includes renovating the current Jewett dining hall and Reid Café 66, as well as removing the Prentiss dining hall. All together, the school has spent roughly $45 million dollars on all of these renovations. Much of that was financed with gifts, but the College also incurred $17 million dollars of debt. The new residence hall makes up $22 million dollars of the $45 million dollar expenditure.

The new hall will also concentrate much of the sophomore class on the south side of campus. Following extensive internal research, the College found that for students going into their sophomore year without an explicit social group, the transition from living in one of only five facilities to five times that was difficult. Between eight discrete Greek groups, 11 interest houses, College House, Tamarac, North, Marcus and Lyman, current sophomores are spread out in more than 20 locations.

Associate Dean of Students and Director of Residence Life and Housing Nancy Tavelli expanded on that difficulty. “The research that we did concluded that sophomore year can be challenging, largely because students are so scattered … you make friends with who you live near, and that is part of why we want sophomores to be more concentrated on one side of campus.”

Assistant Director of Residence Life and Housing Andrew Johnson echoed Tavelli’s point. “I think it can be especially difficult for sophomores who don’t have an explicit group like a sport, a Greek affiliation, an interest house [or something else like that].”

The research that Tavelli referenced was done in tandem with Neal Christopherson and the Office of Institutional Research. The report is roughly 5,000 words long, but Christopherson puts the main findings concisely: “In short, the organization of where students live has a significant impact on student friendships. What our interviews suggested is that Whitman’s housing options function to create large social networks in the first year, then split them up in the second year to smaller, more intimate friendship groups. I’m not putting a value judgement on that—it’s just what seems to happen,” he wrote in an email to The Wire.

But this new residence hall will not simply provide a community for those who might have otherwise felt disconnected. In the larger context of underenrollment, filling the hall promises to shake up campus culture.

According to the Housing Office, during the 2017-18 school year, 13 sophomores lived in Lyman, 10 in North and 22 in Tamarac. An additional 23 lived in Marcus, though as of yet it is unclear whether or not Marcus will be closed. With a cushion of 5 beds to be filled by staff members, that accounts for 73 of the 150 beds in the hall, leaving a gap of nearly 80 residents.Contributed by Brahm Coler

There are obviously caveats. The numbers above fluctuate from year to year as participation in Greek life as well as total enrollment change. Additionally, the residence hall doesn’t need to be entirely full. In fact, Tavelli emphasized that the College needs unfilled rooms in case issues come up which necessitate housing changes. What is clear however, is that though over the long term the gap may resolve itself, during the 2018-19 school year it may be difficult to navigate.

Chief Financial Officer Peter Harvey stressed that this gap doesn’t necessarily present a budgetary issue for the College. “Our budget is built off of total enrollment, not just one residence hall. There aren’t budget’s specific to each Hall,” Harvey said.

But even if this gap between beds and bodies won’t hurt Whitman’s budget, it does promise to change campus culture. The biggest question is where the students to fill the beds will come from, and there are a lot of possibilities. When the residence hall was initially designed, the College also planned to close Marcus along with North Hall. Though that has not come to fruition, it is still on the table. “It might also free up some space in Douglas, which has been right at capacity for a few years. It can alleviate some pressure on these other living facilities,” Johnson said.

Full enrollment would also mean that the gap would be easily filled. The class of 2021 has 409 students, the target was 435. It is unclear what the class of 2022 will look like, but either way, the first students to file into the new hall will be smaller than the College anticipated. According to Tavelli, this is a hall for the future. She says that in the long run, as the school returns to full enrollment, these pressures will dissipate. But in the short term, the transition may be a bit rocky.

One group that may feel the pressure is another on-campus living option for sophomore men: fraternities. During fall rush, fraternities attracted a total of 53 pledges, down from 74 in 2016. Since then, some pledges have dropped and some new ones have joined. Interfraternity Council President Stuart Ashford says that roughly the same number initiated into the four houses. It must be noted that all Greek organizations are continuing to recruit new members.Contributed by Brahm Coler

Ashford is confident that fraternities will still manage to fill their homes, but also acknowledges that sophomores living in the houses comprise a significant portion of each Fraternities annual budget.

Though this shortfall of residents in the new hall does seem to pose a potential threat for the financial viability of a Greek system already low on members, Ashford remains confident. “We offer an experience that students can’t get in these Residence Halls,” Ashford said. He continued, “The threat to Greek life is that we won’t be able to sustain membership, not that we will be unable to convince members to live in.”

There are also plenty of other pressure valves in Residence Life to take the strain off of fraternity budgets. Ashford predicts that this will have a more direct impact on the Interest Housing Community, Douglas and Marcus.

Walla Walla is changing, fast. Between wine, tech and tourism, the valley is seeing a dramatic influx of white-collar folks looking for homes, and the market is responding. Whitman College is hardly immune to these trends, and the school is taking action to better understand the changes and their impacts on Whitman’s identity as a residential college. Whitman Alum & UB reporter Andy Monserud ‘17 recently published a piece in the “Union Bulletin” detailing the changes.

Though most Whitman students either live on campus or in Whitman owned off-campus houses, there is a substantial group of students renting accommodations through local landlords. Many of those landlords own multiple properties close to campus and have relationships not only with their tenants, but with the Whitman community at large. But the rising housing costs in the valley may jeopardize those student leases.

These changes have prompted administration to conduct research about Whitman’s off-campus community. On January 16, Dean of Students Daren Mooko emailed the student body asking students living in off-campus houses to list their addresses. The motivation was twofold: to have access to the information in cases of emergency, but also to get a better sense for the living situation of Whitman’s off-campus community. Data has yet to be published, and though Mooko suspects that off-campus housing costs are increasing, that is anecdotal until further research is done.

“The primary [reason] is safety. That was something that I started to notice back in September, and once I started talking about it with members of the community we began to find these other issues surrounding a dearth of available homes and at that point I began to think that maybe having this data could serve an additional purpose,” Mooko said.

Mooko is in his second semester at Whitman, coming to the college after Chuck Cleveland retired at the end of the 2016-2017 school year. He moved to Walla Walla from Southern California, leaving behind sunny Pomona in lieu of the sprawling hills of eastern Washington. Whitman and Pomona are similar in many ways; small liberal-arts institutions with a strong residential community. One key difference however is housing. At Pomona, 98 percent of the study body lives on campus. This is not purely a cultural difference, cost of living near the LA area is far higher than in Walla Walla. However, changes in Walla Walla’s housing market are forcing Whitman to begin to ask harder questions.

Though Mooko was clear that safety was the primary motivation for collecting information about off campus student housing, he did acknowledge that the College was thinking about what it would mean to have more students living on campus.

“It’s possible, and this is our first step into exploring this question. I think some juniors were very interested [in an on-campus living facility], but there were also a strong number saying they were excited to get off the meal plan, live in the real world and pay rent/utilities.” Mooko continued, “The thinking has always been, before we launch into this huge investment let’s think more and do more research.”

Central to these discussions is Whitman’s identity as a residential College. Whitman prides itself on not only teaching students about physics and political economy, but also cultivating a community based around a shared space.

Associate Dean of Students and Director of Residence Life and housing Nancy Tavelli has spent 10 years in her current position and many more with the College. In that time she has seen the local community change drastically, and like Monserud, she cites the burgeoning tech and wine industries as central to the changes.

“Twenty years into the future it will look even more extreme … I think that in 20 years it will be harder [for Whitman students] to find affordable housing.”

Though both Mooko and Tavelli are committed to data collection before any bigger decisions are made, the College is already laying the groundwork for creating housing for older students to live on campus, though it has been delayed due to construction on other facilities such as the new residence hall and dining hall.

“We had plans with an architect, we designed facilities near Marcus for Junior and Senior living.” Tavelli continued, “our plan was to build just 50 or 60 units. It’s my attitude that if you build them, students will come. Renting from Whitman is really convenient.”

As of yet, there are more questions than answers. It is unclear if the College intends to build facilities to accommodate all juniors and seniors, just a portion or even go so far as to make on-campus living a requirement, though Mooko doubts that. What is apparent is that the Walla Walla housing market is changing, and Whitman will need to adjust.

“Being a residential college means that students are concentrated in and focused on campus … As the Walla Walla Valley continues to change, economic factors may jeopardize that identity at Whitman and the school will certainly have to think hard about that and respond,” Tavelli said.

Nearing the halfway point in his last year as Chair of the Board of Trustees, Brad McMurchie ‘84 sat down with The Wire News Editor Chris Hankin to chat about Whitman’s Strategic Priorities. What follows is a transcript of that conversation; small edits have been made for clarity and concision.

The Wire: I was hoping to begin by diving into what your legacy may be in regards to the strategic priorities document. I was hoping to focus on the first and third tenets, “Increasing Access and Affordability” and “Innovating the Curriculum.” [Starting with the first tenet,] I was chatting with President Murray this year about the discount rate; how it used to be around 37 percent, but the current freshman class is up 42 percent. Combined with under enrollment that has, from what I understand, …  caused [Whitman] to use up the nearly the entire contingency fund.

Moving forward, is 42 percent the number that the Board is shooting for?

Brad McMurchie: What we are shooting for and what we have clearly enunciated is that our goal is to make Whitman more accessible and more affordable to families from a variety of economic backgrounds. [Whitman’s] is a very high cost model of education. [Students have] a lot of very intimate and extensive contact with faculty and staff, which means that it’s going to be difficult for it to be accessible to as many people as we want it to be. Our job is to figure out ways to overcome that. And one of the ways we do that is by increasing the amount of scholarship that we grant to students. We think about that in terms of long-term financial planning for the College to ensure that the institution is financially sustainable and that the promises we’re making to families are sustainable.

The Wire: You certainly have clearly enunciated that this is a priority. But what I feel has not been clear is how this goal is going to be met. What kinds of markers can students use to assess this progress? Should we look to indicators like the Pell Grant?

Brad McMurchie: [The Strategic Priorities Document] is a tome of information that spells out what’s important to us and how we’re going to achieve all those things. We were trying to undertake what I would call a values exercise. What are the things that we value and that we believe will be strategic in terms of advancing the institution?

[That project] is different than delineating what all the tactics are for achieving those goals. What’s happening now on the campus is a collaborative process, much like creating these goals was a collaborative process. They were approved by the Board but they were constructed by a committee of faculty, students, staff and governing board members. There’s a process going on now on campus to define tactics related to the priorities, which really isn’t a Board driven process. It’s a staff, faculty and student process of putting the meat on the bones [of the Strategic Priorities document] and determining how are we going to achieve accessibility and affordability among other things. So I am hesitant to give too many specifics right now. There are different strategies you can take to becoming more accessible and affordable.

The Wire: So I get the sense that inclusivity is not a new value. Whether or not we succeeded in achieving it, Whitman has valued inclusivity for a long time. So my question is, what about this document will change our ability to actually become an inclusive institution?

Brad McMurchie: I was in the class of 1984. I was admitted in 1980 and started that fall. Ninety percent of the students who applied for admission that year were admitted. If you could fog a mirror, you got in. The ability to even think about access and selectivity is relatively new.

The Wire:  I guess the point I’m trying to make is that from the statistics about Pell Grants it seems that the school [in that period between ’92 and 2001] became less socioeconomically diverse. So my question is, why were [the specific markers to assess success] not fleshed out before they were released?

Brad McMurchie: Our strategy is to accomplish what we defined as the institution’s goals. I could take the “innovating the curriculum” [as an example]. That is the responsibility of the faculty, and the faculty owns development of and implementation of the curriculum. It would be completely inappropriate and sort of unconscionable to think that either the Board of Trustees or the Strategic Planning Committee would tell the faculty how to innovate the curriculum. I think about the other items in much the same way.

We want the College to be more accessible and more affordable. And I would argue that we’re aware of the statistics you’re talking about and find them problematic. I don’t want to focus too much on the Pell Grant number.

The Wire: While I agree that it would be inappropriate for the Board to start dictating how the curriculum is innovated, the “increasing access and affordability” seems different because [Whitman’s] Constitution makes clear that “corporate concerns” are the responsibility of the Board. Surely there are metrics you have for evaluating success towards that goal?

Brad McMurchie: A big part of what’s happening this year at the College [are conversations] about the tactics and how are we going to become more accessible and affordable. What the Board is going to be doing this year through our committee structure is thinking–these are the things we’ve said are important, how are we going to measure our progress over the course of the next five to seven years in achieving these things? What measures might we bring to judge our success? As an example, you’ve used the Pell, and that’s a somewhat commonly used metric, but there are lots of questions about whether or not it’s the right metric. There are there institutions in the country that score very well on that but are probably less socioeconomically diverse than other institutions because they may have students from great wealth and students from very limited means and not a lot people in between.

Part of the process we’re going through now is [thinking] about how we will know if we’re better five or six years from now than we are today. I think that’s going to take some time. We hope to have that sorted out by the end of this year from a Board perspective. That is a process that will involve students and faculty who are members of these committees. It would be crazy to think that we have those answers today.

The Wire: I’m curious about the wording of two things in the “approach” section [of the increasing access and affordability tenet]. Where are funds being reallocated from?

Brad McMurchie: All that is saying is that we should figure out as an institution whether or not there are things we’re doing now that we value less than things we might do differently. That’s what reallocation really comes down to.

The Wire: Ok, but let’s take an example like 20th Century American History.

Brad McMurchie:  Yeah, Chris, I do not want to relitigate that.

The Wire: Fair enough. But that is certainly an example of reallocation.

Brad McMurchie: I think it would be really difficult for any educational institution, governmental institution or business institution to ever make the claim that everything we’re doing today is a thing that we need to do tomorrow. When this document says that we should think about where we could reallocate, that’s healthy.

The Wire: I wonder if perhaps there is some conflict [between the first and third tenet]. What I am getting at is in the reallocation language in the context of the move to return to a ten-to-one student to faculty ratio. In my opinion, it is significant that in the “innovating the curriculum” section, the faculty are not mentioned a single time. As funds are reallocated towards other tenets, is it possible for faculty to innovate the curriculum as tenure lines are ended without their consultation?

Brad McMurchie: Let’s start with a baseline understanding. The faculty’s most recent review of their own work on the campus … endorsed the ten-to-one ratio. As I may have said last year, it’s sort of a historical anomaly that we find ourselves closer to eight-to-one. Perhaps even more important, underlying this whole list of priorities is an understanding and commitment on the part of the institution to financial sustainability. It’s also an understanding that we have to make choices. And one of the choices we did not ever make was to have an eight-to-one ratio.

The Wire: I was reading through the “Now is the Time” Campaign, and it seemed to suggest otherwise.

Brad McMurchie: I challenge you to show me where it says we’re going to a eight-to-one ratio.

The Wire: It certainly doesn’t say that, but what it does say is that a big part of the campaign was to increase the number of tenure and tenure track faculty. If increasing the faculty was a stated goal, I guess it strikes me as a little bit misleading to call it an anomaly.

Brad McMurchie: What we did was increase the size of the tenured and tenure track faculty, but that didn’t necessitate increasing the size of the faculty as a whole. There are colleges and universities all over the country who are able to innovate their curriculum within the context of a ten-to-one student to faculty ratio, which is very low ratio to begin with. I have great confidence in our faculty, and we’re going to go out and try and raise money and resources to help them innovate the curriculum.

The Wire: But I guess for me the thing that potentially inhibits the ability of the faculty to innovate the curriculum in this context is the way we go from eight-to-one, to ten-to-one. When I talked with President Murray, her philosophy was that a lot of [these changes] are not really noticeable. [Sabbatical positions left vacant for a year, other lines consolidated, etc]. But she did also acknowledge that it’s quite possible that there will be painful moments, and perhaps last year with Professors Schmitz and Crockett, we felt those painful moments.

Brad McMurchie: No decisions have been made. There’s no chalk board somewhere with names on it. A lot of Whitman’s Professors are in tenured positions. That means they have that position as long as they choose to stay in it. But there’s also a clear understanding that when people leave a position, that position does not belong to the department, it does not belong to the individual, [it belongs to the College]. The College has to make an assessment of what resources it has and how sustainable it is to continue that [tenure line]. What changes have taken place within disciplines. 

[There are also other ways to reduce FTE aside from retirements. Additionally, there will be tenure lines in which Professors retire and the line is refilled].

The Wire: Does that mean that this number is not set in stone?

[The document referenced here will be made publicly available Sunday, November 12th].

Brad McMurchie: What it means is that we’ve said that over the course of the next five years it is possible for the College to return to a ten-to-one student faculty ratio and we are going to seek ways to accomplish that, because we believe that the College’s mission can still be accomplished with a ten-to-one student faculty ratio. We have other institutional priorities and prerogatives that we want to pursue which include access, affordability, and enhancing diversity and inclusion.

The Wire: Right. So [these are the numbers] the document projects four years out. Will we meet these numbers by then?

Brad McMurchie: We don’t know who’s going to retire. We don’t know when they’re going to retire. We don’t know what changes the faculty are going to make in the curriculum that might influence what decisions are here. We know we have a goal and we’re going to work towards that goal.

The Wire: But I mean let’s just imagine in a hypothetical world in which there are not enough retirements to get ten-to-one within five years. What happens?

Brad McMurchie: Yeah, I’m not going to answer hypotheticals.

The Wire: The last thing I want to talk about is the College’s constitution. The curriculum is the realm of the Faculty, and corporate concerns are the realm of the Trustees. And I guess I’m just curious if in this move from eight-to-one to ten-to-one, does that line get blurred? Does the Board of Trustees begin to kind of make decisions about the curriculum just through the operation of the purse strings?

Brad McMurchie: No. I think those those lines are pretty well understood. Yeah. You know, I guess I just don’t see that as a risk.

Every year during staff training there is one point on which I always harp. As journalists writing for a collegiate newspaper in small-town southeastern Washington, our most valuable local resource is the roughly 170 brilliant faculty members living and working in our midst. Just as we depend on the faculty to guide our intellectual growth in the classroom, we depend on the faculty to contribute to critical articles to our publication.

Though our readership is small, and our budget tight, The Wire serves an invaluable role in the Whitman community. We are the sole locus of free press in this mini-society on campus. Keeping the community informed and engaged, providing an outlet for free and critical speech, and perhaps most importantly, acting as a check on administration are all within our purview. As the editor of the news section, I tell beginning writers to turn to the faculty in that effort because I know how insightful, eloquent and gracious they are.

I worry that my advice may not be heeded. Increasingly as both a writer and an editor, I find faculty unwilling or unresponsive when approached for on-the-record comments, particularly on controversial topics regarding the direction in which College is moving and high-impact policies created by the Administration. The same figures who guide us in the classroom turn their backs when approached for interviews.

Whitman teaches its students to be critical thinkers. My professors have taught me to be, above all else, skeptical. They have taught me to never take anything at face value, and to refuse to accept simple explanations to complex questions. It is baffling that the faculty who push me to embody this philosophy in the classroom are so reticent to work with me in that endeavor when it is applied to the college.

Writing in the news section, I don’t have the liberty to editorialize. If I am writing about the Strategic Priorities document, and I interview the President and Treasurer, without any faculty willing to go on record, I will inevitably publish a one-sided article. It only adds insult to injury when I then read comments online critiquing The Wire for “regurgitating PR points from Memorial.” Most disheartening is that this critique is far too often valid. Without sources willing to oppose the views of the administration, it is simply inevitable that articles will be one-sided.

I see a number of potential explanations to account for faculty reticence about on-the-record comments. These include the fear of retaliation, apprehension about being misquoted or otherwise misrepresented, or an unwillingness to take seriously the enterprise of student journalism. Let me briefly address these obstacles.

In response to the first – I cannot claim to understand the intricacies of the tenure-track system. I do, however, understand that students and faculty cannot critique with equal abandon. While my tuition is logged under “revenue,” faculty salary falls into “expenditure.” My speech is protected by the small fortune that my parents will have shelled out by the time I graduate. As the College works to return to a 10-1 student-to-faculty ratio, it is inevitable that professors who lack job security will be hesitant to go on the record with provocative statements. The possibility that faculty censor themselves for fear of retribution from the administration is frankly terrifying, especially at an institution of education dedicated to fostering open dialogue. But the unwillingness to comment is not confined to untenured or contingent faculty. Some of the most established professors on campus also refuse to go on record.

In response to misquoting. Publications of every type occasionally misrepresent or misquote their sources. We are students first and journalists second, and mistakes are inevitable. Perhaps some faculty are unaware that all of our reporters are required to record conversations and submit quote checks for the purpose of increasing accuracy. We are more than willing to reword a grammatically incorrect quote, or update a factually inaccurate one, but barring a reporter’s failure to record an interview or a blatant violation of the correct context, we reserve the right to publish all quotes. It would be unfair to hold administrators to this standard but not faculty. Everyone makes mistakes, journalists and sources alike. The editorial board at The Wire has no agenda other than practicing the craft of journalism and engaging with the community. To faculty who feel that they are routinely misunderstood, all I can say is that we are your students. We have nothing but the utmost respect for the work and opinions of every professor on campus, and we let that respect guide our journalism.

Finally, and in my opinion most significantly, is the possibility that faculty on campus don’t take their students seriously. When I hear that professors critique policy in their classes or in meetings, but then find those same faculty members unwilling to bring that conversation into the public sphere, it is hard not to conclude that journalists for The Wire are not taken seriously by faculty. In my view, it is incumbent on all of us, students and faculty alike, to be engaged citizens in our common goal of keeping Whitman College accountable to the high academic standards of which we are justly proud.

If nothing else, I urge all faculty, but especially the tenured ones, to rethink their positions on The Wire. Without you, we are doomed to act as a mouthpiece for Memorial Hall. Without us, the community risks finding itself voiceless. I think faculty should speak out because dissent is the critical element of a healthy democratic society. Colleges and Universities are crucibles of democracy and can instill in their students the confidence to speak out against injustice and inequity in wider society. By not speaking out at Whitman, we risk participating in a campus where the sole voices are those of the board of trustees and administration. I urge you to take seriously your students, and to practice what you preach.

Whitman College is updating the Tech Services Privacy Policy. Most recently revised in 2006, the new draft will receive input from faculty, staff, administrators, and the College’s Information Security Officer, Linc Nesheim. The changes raise questions about the ways in which Whitman College will walk the fine line between security and privacy as more and more of the Collegiate functions move to the digital realm.

Nesheim works in the newly renovated Technology Center across the street from College House, on the corner of Main & Tukanon. He has been in Walla Walla since August of 2017. Before moving joining Whitman, Nesheim lived in Bellingham, working for Clarus Fluid Intelligence, a company contracting with the U.S. Navy, as well other industries. As his title suggests, Nesheim is primarily concerned with Information Security on campus.

“That’s where the action is at. Information security is a broad industry and its been around for a number of years, but it’s still relatively new in the grand scheme of the IT industry. My job is to make sure that all of the data that Whitman has, is processed correctly and protected. Confidentiality, integrity, and availability,” Nesheim said.

Nesheim and a combination of other staff members in the Technology Center protect the College’s data, which encompasses a lot. “Your term paper, your grades, your mailing address, all of these things. There are thousands of these information assets and we pay attention to all of these,” Nesheim explained.

Through a complex system of firewalls, Whitman protects its’ data through what Nesheim calls “layers of the onion.” These layers make it extremely difficult for someone who manages to bypass one firewall to breach multiple systems, or even get access to all of the data from one system.

This is the security side of the coin; the Technology Center works tirelessly to protect the College’s data, but in that effort, threats to student privacy inevitably arise. Mediating this tension is the Technology Services Privacy Policy, available on Whitman’s website.

Broken into three sections, the policy begins by stating “the College is committed to protecting the privacy of the Whitman Community”, before outlining the scenarios which would require the College to violate that privacy. Namely, if “it is fundamentally necessary for the functioning of the College’s IT or electronic infrastructure or, there is clear evidence suggesting that the security and/or the integrity of the system is being compromised.”

Daren Mooko, Whitman’s Dean of Students, explained that “‘fundamentally necessary’ usually means cases where the College will comply with local, state, or federal law enforcement should we be ordered by the court or complying with an investigation. ‘Fundamentally necessary’ would also include complying with any investigation where college policies are alleged to have been violated.”

Nesheim added, “this language is here to say that there is a lot of data that exists just as a side effect of how the internet works, and we have a lot of that… We are not the content police. Everyone in this building is privacy first.”

Protecting student privacy is central not only to Tech Services, but also to Whitman staff in Memorial Hall. “With technology advancing so quickly, I believe we all need to be more vigilant about protecting our privacy. On a college campus, privacy doesn’t look all that different for me. Students, faculty, and staff all have a certain right to privacy with respect to their relationship to the College,” Mooko said.

The Privacy Policy covers Email, academic research, grades, and so much more under the Whitman.edu domain. “There are literally hundreds of servers that make up the thing that students think of as Whitman.edu. There is a database server holding your grades, a server used to verify your username and password, a server to use CLEo, and so many more.” Linc continued, “Whitman invests a lot in their technical systems.”

Though there is the potential of widespread surveillance, Nesheim is clear the the College does not violate the Privacy Policy. “We consider [your activity on whitman.edu] by and large your property, although it is a Whitman provided service. I lose my job if I go snooping through your email, unless it meets the [the standards outlined in the Privacy Policy].”

With the policy in flux, however, this could be subject to change. As it stands the Privacy Policy is the only protection afforded to students, faculty and staff interested in protecting their data. Already vague, now thrust into limbo, the Privacy Policy is hardly stable ground to stand on. As the Whitman Community moves into the drafting process, the central questions must concern not only existing protocol, but additionally potential reach of the systems in question. “I’m a computer guy. Ask any computer guy: “Is it possible that…?” The answer is yes without finishing the sentence,” Nesheim said.

Whitman has a budget problem. Caught between the pincer of underenrollment and unplanned growth in the faculty, Whitman is digging into its contingency fund to prevent sudden cuts. Though over the short-term there will be no drastic changes, if the school cannot regain financial stability in the next few years there will be a problem. In her September 14 opening of the year remarks, President Kathy Murray placed budgetary constraints stemming from underenrollment front and center.

The class of 2021 has 409 students. The target was 435, and on a campus as small as Whitman’s, the 26 students deficit puts a dent in the budget. This is also not the first year that the College has failed to meet its admissions goals. The class of 2019 fell 36 students short of the goal of 425, with only 389 enrolled students.

President Murray elaborated on her opening of the year remarks in an interview the following day. “I’m not in a panic about this,” Murray said of the size of the class of 2021. Part of the problem, explained Murray, is the rising discount rate.

The discount rate is the amount of money in financial aid (both merit and need based) that Whitman gives back to students. The national average is 49 percent, while Whitman hovers around 37 percent. The class of 2021, however, is at 42 percent. “Essentially, if everyone were treated the same, we discount our tuition by 42 cents for every dollar,” explained Murray. “But we budgeted for 37.”

Photo by Amara Garibyan

Coupled with a below-expected enrollment, these two factors pose a problem for the College. “This class is both smaller and needier,” Murray said. “Next year, we have a hole to fill in the budget. If the same thing happens again, we will have a capital-P problem.”

“Let’s do the math together,” Peter Harvey, the College’s Treasurer, shares Murray’s apprehension about the enrollment shortfall. “Say we are 25 students short, and for ease of calculation, let’s round off to $50,000 tuition a year. That’s $1,250,000 per year, gross tuition. Of course, you then have to factor in the financial aid packages. So if we give back 37 cents of every dollar, $787,000 a year for four years.”

The enrollment contingency fund should prevent any drastic cuts to the budget as the year winds up, but the pressure is on the newly restructured admissions team to ensure that the class of 2022 meets the enrollment goal and gets the College back on track financially.

One metric favored by the Board of Trustees in evaluating Whitman’s financial security is the student-to-faculty ratio. Historically 10-1, underenrollment caused the ratio to bottom out at 8.2-1 in 2015. Another year of below anticipated enrollment has done nothing to assuage that financial burden.

Returning to a 10-1 student to faculty ratio is central to the College’s financial plans in the next 5-7 years. Full enrollment, however, will not get us there. Whitman hopes to return to a student body of 1,540 over the next few years, which would bring the student to faculty ratio to roughly 8.6 to 1.

“How do we get to 10 to 1? It will take multiple years of attrition,” Harvey said.

The centerpiece of George Bridge’s tenure as Whitman College’s President was the “Now is the Time” campaign, in which the College raised $165.7 million to invest in the curriculum and other facilities. Part of the campaign was also to increase the number of tenured faculty. From 2007 to 2015, the school added 29 new tenured faculty, while increasing enrollment by only 43 students in the same period.

Two years after the completion of the campaign, however, the College is now struggling to decrease the faculty in order to restore a 10-1 student to faculty ratio. President Murray, working at Macalester College during the “Now is the Time” campaign, explained what went wrong. The goal was to add “tenure track lines and reduce our reliance on non-tenure track faculty.” Murray continued, “We did add tenure track lines, but we did not reduce our reliance on non-tenure track faculty. So the faculty grew. There was no strategic priority to grow the faculty that way, and we bottomed out at 8.2-1” in 2015.

Harvey echoed President Murray’s message. “It didn’t work the way we thought it was going to,” Harvey said. “A lot of the [new tenure track positions] were supposed to be conversions, moving non-tenure track faculty to tenure positions. That wouldn’t increase the total number of faculty. For a variety of reasons, it didn’t always work that way. Maybe we had to hire a trailing spouse in order to convince the first candidate to come. Maybe there weren’t enough tenured faculty interested in teaching Encounters, so we hired some part time people. A number of those types of things happened.”

Returning to a student to faculty ratio of 10-1 without increasing enrollment beyond 1,540 will require the departure of more faculty. “I don’t think that students are going to notice, we have to be creative in order to manage the student to faculty ratio.” But, Murray continued, “there may be some painful moments along the way.”

The policy of attrition generated widespread anger last spring when it was announced that Professor Schmitz in the History Department and Professor Crockettt in the Art History Department would not be replaced upon retiring. The class of 2022 will enter their first year at a college without a Professor specializing in twentieth century American history or European visual culture since the Late Middle Ages.

Murray hopes that the faculty can adapt by blurring the lines between specialties and even departments. With departmental lines less rigid, she hopes faculty can approach subjects from multiple disciplines and perspectives. “I think those are phenomenal opportunities to grow enrollment in the humanities,” Murray said.

The prospect of classes being cut generates apprehension regardless of the method, but as the College adds more faculty in the STEM fields while simultaneously working to increase the overall student to faculty ratio, it may turn out that attrition will not be felt equally.

Photo by Amara Garibyan

Murray cautions cynicism in this regard. “Are we going to do it all on the backs of the humanities? Absolutely not.” But she also acknowledges that robust enrollment in STEM classes will impact the decision. “There is probably less [need for attrition] for departments housed in the hall of science … Those departments have less wiggle room to cut back.”

Jason Pribilsky, Professor of Anthropology and Division I Chair, sees returning to 10-1 as a more long term project. “We’re not going to bounce back immediately,” Pribilsky said. “We’re in the season right now in which every department is listing vacancies which need to be filled and putting forward position requests. There are also departments with extreme enrollment pressure or departments which want to expand their curriculum that put forward a request for a new position.”

The issue, says Pribilsky, is that not all of those requests can be granted. “I think last year what you saw were serious issues of morale stemming from the cuts [of Professor’s Schmitz and Crockett’s tenure lines]. They have the potential to hurt the quality of the education, especially in the short run. I don’t think we have seen the full costs of this program. When I say that I mean morale as a cost, the quality of education as a cost.”

But Pribilsky also noted that policies are constantly subject to adjustment and refocus. “This isn’t Walmart, right? Walmart is responsible to the shareholders and the shareholders only. But a college has different levels of governance. The Trustees know that they don’t want to upset the process too much. Professors who leave cannot simply be replaced. People here have 30-year careers, the College has invested enormously in these professors.” Pribilsky concluded, “It’s their strategy now, I don’t know if it will really get us all the way to 10-1.”

Josh Jensen splits his week between the Boyer and Penrose houses. Two days at the former, three at the latter. His movement across campus is the most visible change since the merger of the Communications and Admissions departments.

Jensen has been with the college for just over a year now. He arrived as the Vice President for Communications and Public Relations; a cabinet level position. “In this office, we are responsible for everything from interacting with the media, to building the college’s website, to making admissions publications, to producing the Whitman magazine,” Jensen said of the Communications Department. “We are the public face of the College.”

All those are still responsibilities of the Communications Department. Since the merger, however, their mandate has broadened. The marriage of the two departments saw Jensen appointed to the newly created position of Vice President for Enrollment and Communications, now leading both the Admissions and Communications Departments. Hence his weekly trips between Penrose and Boyer.

Jensen is soft spoken, with a passion for music. As an Undergraduate at The University of Hartford, he studied Music Education before entering an MBA program at the MIT Sloan School of Management. He has worked in Collegiate Administration since 2007, when he was in the Boston College Communications office while completing his PhD. He then moved on to Connecticut College; a small private institution in the North East with 1,900 students. It was in Connecticut that Jensen developed a passion for the liberal arts. “The liberal arts are about building a foundation for life that can carry you through your first years out of school, but then further. Both from a career perspective, but also as a member of society.” Jensen also noted the difficulties that liberal arts institutions face in the modern Collegiate application process.

“In the kind of work that I do, we are living in a really challenging moment where people feel as though they want an immediate payoff.” Jensen continued, “I think [the liberal arts] is a much richer model, but it’s not a very linear model. I think today, with all of the noise outside of the classroom, and with so much financial insecurity, it can be tough for campuses like ours…  There is a real questioning of the value of the liberal arts.”

The merger was announced via email, on August 18. The email, received by the entire Whitman community, was addressed from President Kathy Murray. In it she described “changing demographics that have made recruiting and enrolling new students more challenging for Whitman and other colleges like us across the country.”

Attributed to Bob MacDonnell

Jensen reiterated this point. “The truth is, we are at a moment when, for the first time in many decades, there are fewer students graduating from high school than in previous years. For the first time, we can’t count on more folks being in the pipeline to go to college.” But that is not the only shift that is making recruitment more challenging for Jensen and the rest of his staff.

The proliferation of the Common Application means that students are applying to more schools, and they are being admitted to more schools. “15-20 years ago students were applying to just a handful of institutions. Now we hear stories of students applying to a dozen schools or more, and it’s impossible for us to know which of the students in the pool think Whitman is a top choice, and how many have Whitman as a backup,” Jensen explained.

Director of Admission Adam Miller echoed Jensen’s comments. “Enrollment challenges are common throughout the nation right now. More students are applying to more colleges. So much of what we do is trying to predict how many students we need to admit in order to get the right class size. I think that becomes more challenging as more applications are out there.”

These “shifting demographics” were also present in the College’s Strategic Priorities document. Recently approved by the Board of Trustees, the Strategic Planning Committee (a group consisting of President Kathy Murray, Chair of the Faculty Melissa Clearfield and Vice Chair of the Board of Trustees Nancy Serrurier, among others) has been drafting the Strategic Priorities document since 2015. The document is intended “to guide the College’s efforts over the next five to seven years.” The introduction to the document includes a section which reads:

“At Whitman we face a higher education landscape that has been transformed by this changing world. The United States is increasingly diverse along racial and ethnic dimensions, which changes our understanding of what our campus population can and should look like… And perhaps most challenging, economic and employment uncertainty has led many to preference skills-based training that delivers immediate job prospects over the liberal arts education designed to offer a breadth that prepares students for lifelong personal and professional fulfillment.”

Jensen sees the merger of the Communications and Admissions Departments as one way to address this disconnect. “We are on social media, and we do our best to tell our story there. But for a school like Whitman, it’s more of a challenge to do that.” Jensen continued, “We are busy trying to figure out how to condense that message. Our hope is that this short message can interest someone enough to spend more time with us.”

By formalizing an already intimate connection between the two departments, Jensen hopes that the College can better express what makes Whitman unique to prospective students. The challenge, says Jensen, “is to figure out how to most clearly and compellingly tell our story.”

But this is not merely a change in marketing tactics. This administrative shift plays into a larger trend, enumerated most explicitly in the Strategic Priorities document. Central to the document are five tenets that will be the guiding forces for the College moving forward. “Connecting to life after Whitman” is the fourth tenet, and it speaks most directly to the challenges Jensen described.

The section is dedicated to the careers that the College hopes Whitman students will pursue upon graduation. “Students will be able to draw on the support of Whitman’s robust alumni network through multiple programs and avenues. This work must help them develop the acumen needed to successfully transition from life at Whitman to life after Whitman, and translate their Whitman education into a compelling narrative for their future.”

Jensen was supportive of the message. “I think Whitman is working very hard to help our students understand how to take a Whitman education and go out into a world that is built on sound-bytes, that is very linear and that measures things in primarily financial terms. We want to help our students have a successful transition into that world,” Jensen said.

These shifts are designed to cope with the changing landscape of higher education that Jensen laid out. They do, however, seem to come into conflict with some of the foundational principles of Whitman College as an institution of the Liberal Arts.

Released on April 7, 2010, the Academic Planning document titled “Building on Excellence,” outlines the faculty’s understanding of the Whitman education. The document is, of course, nearly seven years old, but when written it was passed unanimously by the Department chairs and without objection from the rest of the faculty.

“The purpose of a Whitman education is not, first and foremost, to train its students for specific vocations; nor is it, first and foremost, to render our students experts in specific disciplines (although it may facilitate these ends). Rather, first and foremost, a Whitman education seeks to cultivate in students certain virtues that we consider inherently valuable.“

This does not seem to agree with the Strategic Priorities document referenced earlier in which the authors hope to “leverage Whitman’s robust alumni network by increasing the formal and informal opportunities for students and alumni to build connections that help guide students to successful careers.”

For Jensen, these changes are a part of Whitman becoming a more diverse community–another tenet of the Strategic Priorities document. “It’s simply unfeasible when talking to a student who doesn’t have economic security in their life to tell them come to a place that is only about intellectual exploration, without also reassuring them that intellectual exploration will set them up in a way to succeed both in the short term and the long term.”

Jensen continued, saying, “We are at a moment in time with less economic security, and we are seeing Whitman become a more diverse community. There are now Whitman students on all ends of the spectrum economically. There are more differences in terms of students who need to graduate and support not only themselves, but sometimes even their families. We are obligated to make sure that students can graduate here and tell their story in a way that will translate to the world of work… I haven’t seen anyone at Whitman saying, let’s really narrow our focus to things that are career related in the classroom. That’s never something uttered at Whitman. Instead what we are saying is that we want every single student in every single major to know how Whitman connects to whatever comes next.”

There is a choice outlined here between the Liberal Arts as an intrinsically valuable model, the so called “life of the mind” and diversity. Though the two are not mutually exclusive, in a world of scarcity, to survive is to compromise.

The “Building on Excellence” document is premised with the statement that “when resources are limited, of necessity, some measure of tension will be engendered by the multiple and often competing claims of various key components of the Whitman academic program. These tensions will often require that we make difficult choices about the allocation of finite resources.” It continues, “We share the belief that Whitman is a liberal arts college; that a liberal arts college is a distinctive form of academic institution; and that, as such, Whitman offers a uniquely valuable form of education to its students.” As the College continues to travel down the road of Strategic Priorities, it seems necessary to take stock from time to time. In this regard, the seven years of distance between the two documents referenced in this article provides readers with much needed perspective. These two visions of Whitman College as an institution of higher education are quite different.

Where did we come from, where are we going, where are we now?

In November of 2016, Washington State voters approved Initiative 1433 to increase the state minimum wage from $9.47 to $13.50 by 2020. The gradual transition began January 1, 2017 when the minimum wage increased to $11 per hour. Businesses and budgets across the state have been scrambling to adjust to the changes, and Whitman College has not been immune.

On campus jobs provide nearly $1.5 million to Whitman students every year, according to the College’s Treasurer, Peter Harvey. “If you stop and think about it, students work everywhere on campus and we try to provide as many jobs as possible. For a lot of students it’s a part of how they pay for their education. It’s important,” Harvey noted.

As a result of the minimum wage increase, departments are working to see where they can cut back. For many departments, this will include cutting hours at their facilities. For some students this will mean earning as much money as they need while working less. For others it will mean that they are unable to access facilities on campus as often as they are used to.

Because Whitman’s academic year begins in July and the change went into effect in January, the College has been trying to react on the fly until the budget is reworked during the summer of 2017. This has been particularly hard on Whitman’s food service provider, Bon Appétit.

As a contractor, Bon Appétit charges Whitman College a fee and then provides a service: food. The price that they charged the college for the 2016-2017 school year was based on a minimum wage of $9.47. All student employees at Bon Appétit earn minimum wage, so the increase has dramatically affected their budget.

Roger Edens, Bon Appétit General Manager at Whitman, mentioned the financial burden that the minimum wage increase placed on their business. “Bon Appétit employs about 50 student workers, who do a great job for us … The 16 percent increase in the minimum wage will definitely impact our costs.”

Junior Chloe Casey worked at Bon Appétit for two years. Bon Appétit is not cutting student hours, as that would limit the number of meals they could serve. Casey acknowledges however that this may be unique to food service at Whitman.

The increase may also impact the cost of tuition for students at Whitman. Not only will the College have to pay its minimum wage employees more every year, Peter Harvey pointed out that “there are a lot of costs rising in the state of Washington because of a higher minimum wage.” These price increases will most likely be reflected in tuition increases over the next few years.

It is of course important not to oversimplify this issue. College tuition would likely have increased every year regardless of the minimum wage increase. Additionally, Washington State voters overwhelmingly supported the initiative. The minimum wage increase will benefit some of the state’s most vulnerable residents. 

For Harvey, recognizing this nuance is key. “Helping lower paid people is a part of a good society, but we have to understand that higher prices are a part of that,” Harvey said.

After an arduous search process, Whitman College announced earlier today that Daren Rikio Mooko will become the new Vice President for Student Affairs and Dean of Students. Mr. Mooko previously filled a number of positions at Pomona College and has worked throughout the country’s higher education institutions.

Serving Pomona since since 1997, Mr. Mooko has worked as the Director of the Asian American resource center, Associate Dean of Students for Student Development and Leadership, and from 2015 until now, as an Associate Dean, Title IX Coordinator, and Diversity Officer.

Mr. Mooko brings years of experience working within the Liberal Arts community, and a nuanced understanding of sexual violence on college campuses.

Mr. Mooko visited campus on February 7th and gave a presentation to assembled students, faculty and staff. In the presentation, he identified what he saw as the five top issues facing students affairs in higher education. Alcohol and drug use, mental health and advocacy, sexual violence, diversity and inclusion, and accountability made his list.

The presentation concluded with a question and answer session between Mr. Mooko and the audience. Below is a transcript of three of those questions and the response from Mr. Mooko.

Question: I’m curious to know what you as a College administrator envision the position of a Liberal Arts College like ours should be in regards to protecting undocumented students on campus?

Daren Mooko: Let me answer that in two ways. In a practical way, on the ground, I would want to know where our leadership is on the issue. I can’t go out and make promises that aren’t going to be supported or backed by the institution. Should the leadership ask me what my recommendation is, my recommendation would be to support the undocumented students to the extent that we can. That could mean a number of things. Financial support, if the institution is willing. Emotional support, academic support, we would need to find out how we support students who feel like, at any time, their lives might change… I’m coming from Pomona College, who have kind of gone out on a limb with undocumented students. Of course it is circumstantial, Pomona is in a position where it can do something. But I do think that there is a political will there, to resist any efforts by the federal government to do anything to undocumented students.

Question: I think that one of the significant differences between Whitman and Pomona has to do with the residential status of our students. My understanding is that at Pomona, 98% of students live on campus. At Whitman it’s about 60%. It seems to me that at Colleges where upper-class students live off campus it changes the dynamic. I was hoping you could talk about that, and talk about the pros and cons with the label “residential campus”.

Daren Mooko: At Pomona we tried to make living on campus more attractive. But, of course, that means building more buildings because we just didn’t have enough beds. We built two new residence halls and now we are able to do that. One thing that we’re seeing is that because we have upperclassmen living on campus, we are finding that they are assuming a lot of leadership positions on campus. I think that they are buying into the campus culture, and the bond is just that much stronger. Living on campus is a part of their role.

Question: How do you balance the two sides of policy, one side being discouraging irresponsible behavior, and at the same time encouraging students to call for help if they are participating in irresponsible behavior?

Daren Mooko: For, me, it’s all about the ways that the policies are implemented and executed. We have a “Good Samaritan” policy, and that means that if you find someone in need, and you call for help, no one gets in trouble. For us the health of students is more important than disciplinary action. There are obviously caveats to that. Once their health is secured, its all about talking. Meetings with a drug and alcohol counselor, those sorts of things. It’s all about execution. Our RA’s, their instructions are not to be the junior police squad. What’s most important for us is that they can identify problematic behavior. We are less interested in busting a party, and more interested in making sure that students are not developing unhealthy or unsafe behaviors.

Just over a week after the Women’s March on Walla Walla drew historic crowds to Main Street, activists organized a rally at the Walla Walla airport to protest President Trump’s immigration ban on passport holders from seven predominantly Muslim countries.

Whitman students, faculty and staff worked in tandem with the “Walla Walla Progressives” to coordinate action and to stand in solidarity with other airport rallies across the country.

Photo By: Tywen Kelly

Whitman Senior Dessie Weigel was key in spreading the word about the event.

“This isn’t a protest against an airport or against what the airport is doing. It’s a solidarity rally,” Weigel said. “We are standing here at our airport to show that we are standing with the people who are currently being detained in airports in the U.S. as well as people who are being denied access to flights to the U.S. in other countries.”

Whitman Senior Dessie Weigel                                         Photo by: Tywen Kelly

Two days ago Weigel found herself reading about protests at airports all across the country, and feeling as though she wished there were similar efforts in Walla Walla.

“I was disappointed. I wished I lived in a larger city where there was an event like this going on that I could go to. And then I thought, well, maybe I should just make the event that I want to go to.”

Weigel met with the Walla Walla Progressives and proposed a rally at the Walla Walla Airport. They liked the idea, and she made a Facebook event to broadcast the rally. After just a few hours more than 100 people had responded, saying they wanted to take part.

The Walla Walla Progressives worked to involve the local community in the event.

Whitman Alumni Norm Osterman ‘65 has lived in Walla Walla for 12 years and is affiliated with the Walla Walla Progressives. “If there’s a group protesting something down at 1st and Main it’s probably us,” Norm said. “The Walla Walla Progressives were amazed at the excellent organization of the demonstration on short notice and the number of participants. We know that it will take ongoing commitment from  people your age to overturn the present nightmare we find ourselves in. You folks will be a key factor because you can’t buy youth and enthusiasm.” 

Tywen Kelly

The rally kicked off at 6 p.m. Monday night. Activists filled the airport’s single terminal armed with signs and slogans. Testimony from anonymous refugees and immigrants was distributed through the crowd. These statements were read to the assembly throughout the event.

Jennifer Skogland is the Airport Manager at the Walla Walla regional airport. Though she declined to comment on Trump’s executive action, she was supportive of the peaceful action.

“We welcome people here to the Walla Walla airport for a peaceful event expressing their first amendment rights to free speech,” she said.

Despite the fact that no one is being detained at the Walla Walla airport, the rally has more than just symbolic power. Spreading awareness about the transgressions of the Trump administration can impact local politics.

“Hopefully people making decisions and people with the power to change these policies will still hear and see the number of people who disagree, and that we are a passionate community–one that they represent,” Weigel said.