President Tony Marx opened the meeting by announcing the receipt of a $600,000 Dean K. Cook grant for use by the Dean of Students and Admission offices. Recalling the much-publicized intent of the College to reach out to lower-income students, Marx explained that the money would allow Amherst admissions to attract desirable community college students. Marx emphasized the continued application of the "same standards" of admissions scrutiny for all students and expounded that the grant is intended to allow the school to broaden its pool of consideration to worthy students who otherwise would go unnoticed.
One of the first topics of interest addressed the ongoing concern that the writing skills of students at the College required more attention than what is currently available. CAP chair and Professor of History John Servos spoke on the proposed institution of a policy whereby all students would be required to take at least one course termed "writing attentive."
Though the proposal made no pretensions to any more explicit plans-as yet unanswered questions include the role of first-year seminars as well as the precise definition of a "writing attentive" course-Servos nevertheless provided a presentation of this broad and generally well-received goal to the faculty.
Discussion quickly shifted to issues more directly pertinent to the CAP's findings. Though the report claims to promote academic goals which benefit the College as a whole-as opposed to particular departments, many teachers voiced concerns regarding the specific priorities endorsed by the report.
Professor of Fine Arts Joel Upton said that the recent history of the College's curricular developmen largely consisted of narrow, polar struggles between academic "monoliths"-particularly those of writing and quantitative science skills-to the detriment of other equally important studies. He observed that of 165 tenured Amherst professors, only nine are artists.
In spite of a popular conception of fields such as law and hard sciences as characteristically "practical" and hence of greater merit, more than a few professors were in agreement with Upton. Playwright-in-Residence Constance Congdon stressed the value of an arts education as one which is as critical "a way of knowing" as any other. "I think it is essential that-in a liberal arts college-this be acknowledged," she said.
"The place of the arts is not sufficiently addressed here," concurred Professor of Fine Arts Robert Sweeney, who suggested that the gaffe was nevertheless unintentional, indicative more of misled priorities than any actual aversion to the department.
In light of what he viewed as a general negligence of fine arts studies at the College, Upton declared a wariness of visions for the future of the College which seem thus "fundamentally truncated."
"We struggled about this," Servos acknowledged. "We recognize the injustices which has been done to the arts over the years."
Though many seemed eager to make appropriations to departments of seemingly insufficient resources, Professor of Chemistry Mark Marshall noted that, while such allocations did not constitute a "zero sum game," it would likely be difficult for the school to strengthen one department without taking away from others. On a related note, Professor of Physics Art Zajonc noted that, as the physics chair, it was largely his responsibility to look out for provisions for his own department, and not necessarily for those of others.
As regards the actual implementation of the goals and policies in question, faculty members spoke at length on appropriations for FTE's ("Full Time Equivalents," or tenure track professors). The meeting was largely concerned with the number of new FTE's that could be counted on as future resources. Many professors were leery of an allegedly vague CAP account of how FTE's could be expected to support various future goals.
Servos concluded the assembly with a speech on the imperative of the College to provide a wholly comprehensive education for its students, and not one fragmented by departmental divisions. "In the past 20 years I've been here, I have seen a general deterioration of this school as a college," he said. "Amherst has grown a culture of departments appropriate for a major research university, not a liberal arts college. [We must] give more weight to the College. That's why students want to come here, not simply for 'X' or 'Y' department."
Above all, Servos emphasized a need for cooperation among the College's faculty as a collective. "It's time to think about integrating education via programs which cut across departments," he said. "We used to do that. There are principles at stake here."