As it stands, there is no objective mechanism to look at what is missing from the College's curriculum other than when students themselves complain. Even when students can point out the lack of a range of study, they are encouraged to take "special topics" courses in the subjects they are interested in but can't find directly addressed within any department. This might not be saying much in, say, the American Studies department, which has only three courses of its own, but many very important subjects are being kept on the back burner and are trivialized as special topics, when they deserve their own departments-or at least attention in departments that might encompass them.
For instance, there is no Latino Studies department at Amherst, nor does the American Studies department seem interested in addressing perspectives on the Americas other than that of the white middle class. One example of this is that a few years ago the department had a junior faculty member who specialized in Asian-American perspectives. After his time as junior faculty was up, he was not reappointed and no one has since been hired who teaches from a similar perspective.
I'm not saying that the faculty is making a "concerted" effort not to diversify. After all, it may be difficult to find applicants for faculty positions from diverse backgrounds. What I am saying, however, is that it is time for them to make it a priority, not only to hire more professors, but to make sure that those they do hire are advancing towards meeting the needs of the students according to the world of today and tomorrow, not those of times past. If it takes extra recruiting and changing what we offer potential professors to be more competitive in today's hiring market-so be it.
Recently, the American Studies department has once again proven their disinterest in offering more than one view of "American" studies by failing to reappoint Assistant Professor of American Studies and Anthropology/Sociology Karin Weyland. Weyland has done extensive research in Latino Studies and and she is constantly educating herself about emerging issues in the Caribbean and other Latin American countries-the only person in the American Studies department to do so. So as it stands, what we have is a United States studies department, not one more general to the "Americas." And it is one that doesn't even consider the experience of non-whites in popular culture as a topic important enough for a class-being that you cannot take a class without this "American" focus and count it for the major.
If American Studies can exist with only three courses and all its cross-referenced ones, would it really be so impossible to develop a department of Latino Studies? And even if it were a struggle, are they saying that it's not worth it? Where does student interest fall in their priorities?
I know that when I asked a member of the Committee of Six, I was told that student letters, comments and recommendations were being heard, but that there were larger issues to consider. What might those be? Politics within departments? Controversial perspectives on American policies and rewriting of history? I'm not saying that these things wouldn't be important; I would just like to know, when it really comes down to it, how important is student sentiment to the administration? They do all they can to recruit us here, but once that's done, it seems that the burden of making our experience fruitful falls, for the most part, on us.
As it is now, the American Studies department totally lacks anything even resembling Latino Studies, and the students have no one with as much knowledge or interest in the field to guide them in their pursuits in the genre. If the Anthropology/Sociology department fails to reappoint Professor Weyland (which is an issue that has gone to the Committee of Six, since the Anthropology/Sociology department technically has no openings for full-time faculty), the campus will be losing one of the few professors who is interested and educated in a subject that has otherwise been ignored.
For students interested in Latino Studies (who have been trying to get the College to develop an entire department for these studies), the news is not only grim but insulting. If the "American Studies" department does not want to deal with issues of identity and cross-culturalism in America, it wouldn't be a problem, as long as some other department was created that did the job. When I think about the issue we are facing with the lack of Latino Studies and other ethnic perspectives on America, I can only recall the trials and tribulations that went into bringing about our Black Studies department-including taking over Converse for a student sit-in and demanding reaction by the administration. Must we really go to such extreme lengths to get the attention of our faculty?
Requiring students to fight for intellectual exposure to non-traditional perspectives is an undue burden. If we are to truly have a diverse curriculum, it must reflect the changing times, and the fact is that in 20 years, Latinos will be the majority in the U.S. and it will be necessary for people to be knowledgeable about Latino culture and society to have an impact. Will Amherst students be left behind? And this problem is not only limited to Latino Studies; the College's lack of courses in environmental studies is another glaring hole in the curriculum.
We, as an institution, must meet the challenges of each new day, which include adapting to emerging issues in our country and throughout the world, including changing the ways we work within our arenas of education. If we fail to do so, we run the risk of producing graduates who lack the extensive knowledge of the world that such an institution is expected to provide, and we may start seeing more and more prospective applicants going to other institutions where the educational options are more current and vital. It is in the College's best interest to diversify its curriculum and look at how behind the times we are, and they might want to begin their education right here with us-the students who recognize some areas of failure and are attempting, despite all of the College's daunting twists and turns of operations, to find a way to be heard.