home about us peter's writing pictures contact us sitemap
What is EPEC?
EPEC as it exists this semester can be conceived as three main things: student sponsors of courses (or anyone; however, the only two non-student sponsors - alumns - canceled their courses because of low interest), a student director of the program, and a particular pedagogy. (I had originally intended to have several more things included: a common living-learning space on campus, common governance and administration of the program, and peer advising. However, I had only 24 hours in a day - a limitation I hadn't expected, as it was new to me; previously, I'd been limited by not using the time I did have to actually create something.) My classes were all organized using a pedagogy based on encouraging students with lots of ideas for thought and action, making no requirements or expectations, allowing people to join late or leave early, and working with and evaluating exactly whatever happens. Some of the suggestions I made were contracts, particular reading materials, field trips, and that the course members should also think of learning experiences on their own. Each of these suggestions was sometimes carried through, sometimes ignored. This pedagogy could as easily have been organized without sponsors (as was the case with the student-led education class in the fall of 1995 in which case the suggestions were made in the course description and in occasional meetings with course members), or with faculty sponsors. (And I realize, that to some extent, it is. It is, however, not ordinarily as central to the learning experience as I have made it. ) Likewise, a staff member could have administered the program - given, in both cases, that the particular person was capable of doing it without undoing the pedagogy. The most important part of EPEC is for me personally is the pedagogy. I doubt if there are any other people who have recognized that EPEC is made of these three distinct things (I only separated them in my mind recently). I think the common perception of Hampshire community members is that EPEC means student-led courses per se with some diverse opinions about whether this means experiential learning, rebelliousness, stupidity, community-building, or fun.
To proceed with these reflections, one might ask how EPEC has fit in to Hampshire. Perhaps I can start by addressing whether it has been accepted as academic and/or community-building by the faculty, administration, non-EPEC students, EPEC students, EPEC sponsors, and me.
Is EPEC Academic?
Before entering into those questions, we should first examine some definitions of ``educational value.'' There are, first of all, several common definitions of the commonly-used word ``academic'' which make it unwieldy for communication without clear agreements for usage. Most (if not all) members of the Hampshire community would agree on a definition for academic as ``pertaining to the development of scholars by development of the skills of analysis of a particular discipline.''[SEE FOOTNOTE] Another definition equally accepted is ``fulfilling some of the requirements for graduation.'' However, the problem comes in that some believe these definitions are synonymous and others do not. One faculty member, for instance, asked at the beginning of the semester, ``These courses are in no way being construed as being central to the academic divisions, but rather as complementary to the divisional work, right?''[SEE FOOTNOTE] Students often tell me that this sentiment is stressed by their advisors as well. My response to this concern is to explain to students the difference between practical and philosophical advice. I shared with many faculty practical concern of whether the new program could fulfill its mission, but I did not share the same philosophical concern about whether the mission was appropriate to our educations at Hampshire. You as a student, I say, will have to make your own judgment about each. In the case of the particular question I mentioned above, this faculty member's concern was definitely philosophical, as is the concern of most faculty with whom I speak - though it is more often than not confused in their thinking with the practical issues. Essentially, they have qualms with student-led courses being a suitable environment for developing scholarly skills, and therefore with these courses being seen as included in courses of study. There are, to be sure, also faculty who are philosophically in agreement, as well as those who acknowledge they are still waiting to understand the philosophical question.
I personally prefer to think in terms of goals for education, to avoid that lurking notion that the first definition of academic is synonymous with education. Greg Prince's definition of a liberal arts education, for instance, is the ``development of capacities: to think clearly, critically, and creatively; to judge wisely and act humanely, responsibly, and collaboratively; and to communicate effectively.'' If we take the radical notion that the divisions should reflect the development of these capacities, it becomes clear that philosophically EPEC could contribute to any of these (whereas it is so much more unclear when asking whether EPEC is ``academic''). I will proceed using this definition of goals, though the following discussion could have take place with the goal of education as building awareness and working from awareness, as described in the first chapter of part II, or as learning to take the world of ideas seriously, as in the op-ed article in the Documentation (document 64). It seems to me that these are simply separate ways to view the same goal - ``capacities'' being the most practical perspective, ``awareness'' the most mystical, and ``taking ideas seriously'' encompassing both - and I am working for all of them whichever language I use.
Does EPEC fulfill this potential? It is my perception that these kinds of learning do happen in EPEC courses. In fact, as I expected, I have already seen growth in several areas that exceeds what typically happens at Hampshire. Two second-year students, for instance, have taken initiative in constructing cold frames, for the dual purpose of growing food and analyzing the suitability of several designs in our ecosystem. They believed that this would be a valuable learning experience, and they undertook it. Typically, I find that Hampshire students have the most terrible time even admitting to others that they have ideas for their education, until at least their third year - let alone working collaboratively. This example is one of many of what I consider to be the greatest successes of EPEC: the increasing of the ability to act responsibly. For responsible action means precisely doing what one thinks one ought to.
Another instance where my pedagogy is very effective is helping to develop clear thinking (which goes hand in hand with effective communication). I have conversations where I try to draw out students to communicate what they are curious about. Sometimes this ends up being appropriate technology, or organic gardening; sometimes, learning about plants so the student can ``live in the woods.'' My goal is to ask questions so that the student generates a complete thought - containing their passion for learning, doing, and a path for action (when ``how should you do that?'' doesn't work, I sometimes have to resort to ``how about doing that like...''). The action students have undertaken as a result of these conversations has been reading or projects outside classtime, organizing a presentation, discussion, or field trip for class, and in a few cases even dropping the class. Admittedly, sometimes students aren't able to recognize or share what they are thinking about, or don't act on what they claim to be thinking about. For some of these students, I think this first semester of having been listened to and being responsible was a real shock, and that this opportunity may contribute to their ability to think and act based on their perceptions later. There may also have been some students who didn't notice, even unconsciously, that they were being listened to, and thought instead that EPEC was ``freedom'' or easy. However, it seems that the people of this type who might have once been in my classes dropped out quickly, because I've felt like all people I've dealt with had at least some notion that they were really being listened to.
Course sponsors, I think, have also developed these skills - in many cases starting and ending at a higher level than the participants. By the nature of the role, they are necessarily acting to fulfill exactly what they believe they should, and are exercising thinking and communication at every interaction. As it turns out, I haven't spoken much with other sponsors about their learning or the learning of the people in their courses. The little I have gleaned is that my perception is correct that they are learning tremendously. Some of most clear results, in fact, might well have been the classes themselves as projects of the sponsors.
One of the difficulties in assessing EPEC's success in developing these capacities is that many of the beneficial results are delayed. I had originally wanted to see more impressive concrete results this semester I saw from most EPEC participants. I had hoped, for instance, that my agriculture class would research greenhouse designs and the needs of the Hampshire community, and then design and build an inexpensive greenhouse for season extension. It didn't happen. In fact, in the first two weeks, it became clear that no one in the class could conceive of such grand themes; rather, they were interested in finding out what agriculture and sustainable agriculture are. For many people, it was challenging enough to identify and work for one simple goal. It seems to me, however, that each of the students in that class are several steps closer to being capable of working collaboratively on a big project, even if they are still not quite there yet.
Kate Reedy and I did a survey of EPEC participants at the end of the semester, which gives a slight indication of the perception of EPEC participants about these issues. I don't think we did a very good job writing the survey (my first one - most of the questions weren't clear). Additionally only 20 people responded, out of about 60 who meet at least weekly with an EPEC group. Two questions in particular are relevant here. The survey was organized so that respondents picked ``strongly agree,'' ``agree somewhat,'' ``disagree somewhat,'' or ``strongly disagree'' for each of the questions. For the first, ``My participation in EPEC courses has helped facilitate my personal learning and growth,'' the results were 13, 7, 0, 0. For the second, ``My participation in EPEC courses has helped in my divisional work,'' the results were 3, 12, 3, and 1. Certainly, this would suggest agreement with my idea that EPEC courses are (at the very least in the impression of the participants) important parts of the education. At the same time, it also suggests that it is not yet clear to students precisely how they can fit these educationally valuable activities into the divisional system. I think this will come with time as individuals file and complete their Division IIs. In fact, one of my intentions throughout EPEC has been that its success will be recognized as it is incorporated into Division IIs, not the other way around.
Does EPEC Build Community?
Although there is not yet a shared perception at Hampshire about the educational value of EPEC, there seems to be widespread agreement among the faculty and students that EPEC is an important community-building effort. The Community Council (delegated some responsibility, by the faculty, for the general well-being of the community, and in particular for the distribution of thousands of dollars of student activity money) might be the only group on campus which seems to have some issue with this. Community Council has twice turned EPEC down for funding because it perceives EPEC as academic, and it perceives itself as not permitted to fund academic groups. Peculiar bunch.
Participants in EPEC responded in the survey to ``EPEC fosters a sense of community'' with 12, 7, 1, and 0 - indicating a general agreement.
Goals of EPEC as a Program
I think it may also be interesting to see whether the goals I formulated for my August 8 meeting with Greg Prince still seem applicable and my perspective on the progress towards these goals.
1. Provide interaction between new and veteran students to help new students understand themselves in a Hampshire context (Kawecki 1995). Definitely still applicable, and an important part of what has been successful.
2a) Building an awareness of the value of non-scholarly professional skills (see part b) and carrying out project ideas Still applicable, and in quite a few cases, we have been successful here - including the practical work done in the agriculture course perhaps most of all.
2b) Work to use Hampshire staff as resources in learning, by students working with the staff or by the staff teaching small project-classes or independent studies where students work on the things that staff member is working on (computers, electronics, publications, construction, grant writing, and more) Thus far, no progress. There is one proposed course for next semester taught by a house staff member.
3) Provide a way for the Hampshire staff to be more involved as community members and learners in the student community Still a worthwhile goal, but we never consciously tried to achieve it, and didn't. I would have liked to personally invite staff members to the potlucks each week, and to personally invite several to join or sponsor courses, but I ended up being overcommitted.
4) Help students find ways to fulfill their ideas for their education Very applicable - and EPEC is effective, on the teeny scale (projects in classes), micro (starting EPEC classes), but also on the macro scale (students are recognizing that their entire education can reflect what they think it should).
5) Give students a way to develop projects that are meaningful to the community and to their education. The best experience isn't one where everything is perfectly designed by someone else, but where the student is engaged in improving their community. Applicable, and fulfilled, for different people in different ways - in classes (making the class work), in EPEC (making a class happen), and in Hampshire (making EPEC happen).
6) Increase the domain of student study to include more hands-on research off-campus Several of my courses had some contact with the outside world - visiting farms, intentional communities, and schools. Several students worked with a man from a nearby intentional community (Sirius) to begin setting up a network of internships and projects shared by Hampshire and Sirius. One course, which I provided the idea for but in which I did not participate, attended weekly religious services at different churches. I would like to see more, but this will perhaps come with time.
7) Bring more of the outside community to Hampshire, as learners and as resources. Applicable as a goal, and we made slight progress. In August, I wrote press releases to all area newspapers, delivered brochures and course catalogs to Applewood, and contacted the new Pathfinder homeschooling group in Amherst. Several students and parents from Pathfinder, as well as three community members, attended the introductory potluck and meeting, but none ended up participating in the program. With the chaotic nature of the way these courses started, it almost seemed as though the homeschoolers were too young and the community members too old! I also did a mailing of 300 brochures to all Hampshire alumns in the Valley; several came to the introductory meeting at Hampshire, including two who volunteered to teach courses - neither one of which had sufficient interest to continue as an official course, however.
My Personal Experience with EPEC's Development
Here are a few slightly haphazard ideas about the importance of tactics, why EPEC happened, and whether it will continue.
Indeed, the most important learning I have made in terms of how to make something happen is the importance of tactics. EPEC happened and worked whereas my previous attempts at educational reform at Hampshire did not, precisely because I figured out the practical details, and spent hours and hours working out practical problems. I suspect for some people, the problem might well be the reverse - the tactics come easy, but they are not driven by a working philosophy. A balance of these things is important. (In the section on my leadership, I discuss particular tactics; others are clear from the Documentation.)
Finally, before I begin to discuss my reflections on teaching, I should briefly address the question of what it means that EPEC was started by students (mostly, one student, me). Some students and faculty find it to be a positive mark of EPEC and Hampshire that EPEC is organized by students. I disagree. I find it rather strange that upon my arrival at Hampshire four years ago I felt there was no way to design my education around my own needs. Why did EPEC start? As a learning experience of a group of students? No, EPEC started because I, an individual, perceived that something was wrong and dedicated over half a year of my life to fixing it.
Will EPEC continue? This semester there have been several exceptional new students who will be able to continue making EPEC happen in the spring. I suspect the continuation or end of EPEC has more to do with the choices of these students than with the value EPEC provides to the community. Ultimately, the success of EPEC rests on individuals doing the things I have done: trust people, work hard, make lots of suggestions, and try to work whatever happens - perhaps everything Hampshire already is, but more of it. I think at one level my work will be a success insofar as the goals I had for my August 8 meeting continue to be taken seriously as part of the interaction at Hampshire, whether in the form of EPEC or in the rest of the institution.
Specific EPEC Classes I Sponsored
To Know Is Not Enough, and Not To Know Is Not Enough
Last spring, I proposed organizing the Radical Departure around two themes: ``to know is not enough'' and ``not to know is not enough.'' Relevant intellectual activity would arise from the experiences and questions of the moment, and thoughtful action would arise from the intellectual activity. The integration of thought and action. However, I realized that the other members of the Radical Departure did not have the faintest idea what I was talking about. As the Radical Departure became the Experimental Program in Education and Community, I decided to suggest EPEC courses instead of the two learning themes, because it seemed like I was the only one for whom these two themes were meaningful. These two learning themes then became the focus of one of the courses I proposed, ``Not to know is not enough, and to know is not enough,'' in case anyone was ready to take that leap. We also proposed several additional courses.
At the introductory meeting in the fall, each course was described, and a time and place for the first meeting announced. Quite a few people at the meeting were intrigued by the idea of the course ``Not to Know is Not Enough, and To Know is Not Enough.'' Several even told me later that they felt it was at the heart of EPEC. But only one person came to the first meeting - and he was simply interested in seeing who else would come. We added some brake fluid into my car and canceled the rest of class. Apparently, the goal of students was not to avoid structure!
The Dream Girl, Prince Charming, and other Dreamy Archetypes: A Workshop on Bringing the Unconscious into Consciousness
About eight students came to the first meeting, evenly distributed among men and women, first-years and second-years. I made it clear that my goal was understanding my feelings and not understanding theory, but that if others wanted, we could also read and discuss some theory. Most people said that they wanted both, and I told them I might bring in some samples of things to read but by and large they would have to be responsible. I also told them that I had an entire shelf of books about psychology that I strongly encouraged them to come look at, borrow, and read. Once, someone borrowed a book in this course for some reason when these college students were supposedly curious, they weren't particularly inclined to read a book about it. It turned out that no one else brought in any reading materials for the group. I made photocopies of relevant reading material three times.
The first month, we often met twice a week, and I put a lot of energy into the class, and felt like when we had good discussions, they most often started because I started them (by talking about what I was feeling or asking questions I was curious about). Other class members were often able to participate, but I felt like they were not catching on that they could start things, or how. We did, however, have some amazing discussions, concerning our own lives as well as the group's dynamics. Several times in the second month, I didn't have the energy to start things off, and class limped along with everyone looking at one another. We began to have class once a week. Meanwhile, the class was down to two women and two men (including myself). The main two issues of the remainder of the term were leadership and communication styles.
Leadership became an issue because when someone was frustrated with the group not going anywhere one day. I told her it was because I was not devoting myself to making it happen. I said I would engage with them but was feeling responsible for too many people at the moment to be responsible for three more right then. The two women expressed their feeling that I was not really the leader of the class; the other male clearly expressed his impression that I had always been the leader, and that he liked it that way. I think that ended up being a particularly good class - we each brought many unspoken and unnoticed assumptions out into the open. Later, the women decided that I actually had been the leader.
The next big issue we addressed was communication styles - in particular, the male versus the female dynamic. We were gifted in this group with two women who tended to sit by as we two men ran the meetings, including or not including the women as we felt inclined. Eventually, all together we identified this dynamic; we noticed how each of us was using fairly typical methods of interaction - the men solving the problems, the women noticing them, or talking about them - often after class rather than during, unfortunately. I feel like every single one of us made significant progress in developing our nondominant sides through these interactions. We all also increased our ability to be clear about wanting something and doing what we can to achieve it. For the women, this meant being more clear about what they wanted; for the men, becoming better listeners.
In addition to these more thematic issues, each of us also addressed personal issues (of our own or relating to the other group members).
Applied Sustainable Agriculture
Originally, I had very lofty goals for this course. I wanted to have learning about agriculture, and I wanted students to pursue real scientific questions. But I also wanted us to have impressive and immediate results at the farm center. In my proposal to the Lemelson Program to cosponsor the course, I addressed four goals (The full proposal, of which I am extremely proud, is in the Appendix):
1) to investigate the educational value of new students working with advanced students on common projects, and to provide a model by which Hampshire can institutionalize this interaction
2) to develop students' abilities to investigate and solve real-life problems
3) to make Hampshire College a more sustainable community
4) to incubate student project ideas for work in later semesters and work with students to make these projects happen
The first goal was successful in an unexpected way. Whereas I had intended the project to research the needs of the Hampshire community for season extension, then research and build a greenhouse, the members of the course were not ready for, or interested in, this task. ``We want to learn about agriculture, and sustainable agriculture. What are those things?'' So I agreed to shift the entire focus of the course. Because of this, the second goal was also met in an unexpected way. I had expected the students to be ready to solve real problems in their community. Well, they weren't. They were ready to solve more local problems: how to organize their class, and what it should cover. I think the third goal will be achieved, but has not been yet: I think the students who participated in this class will in future semesters make a significant impact on Hampshire's sustainability. Finally, I think we were definitely successful with the fourth goal. Several students have research projects they are planning to do; several others have organized EPEC classes around things they would like to learn - still learning projects, rather than actually doing something projects, however; one of them was so impacted by the course that he has gone on leave and will be working on an organic farm in spring; one student will be doing his a video about agriculture for his Division III; several students have already started projects they will be continuing in the spring.
One of my goals for my orientation group this fall and for this class was to help students feel that an interest in agriculture can be studied by combining classroom work with figuring things out on committees and projects at the Farm Center. This was somewhat in response to my being frustrated that the faculty and the Farm Center people have not been more devoted to this effort themselves. (As a student, I did not feel invited to become involved at the Farm Center.) When I recently attended a Farm Policy Committee meeting, there were about 6 students. All but one was either from my class or my orientation group or both. I think this has to do both with me and with them - it is their choice, and they are the students from the entering class who were most likely to become involved with the Farm. But it also does have to do with me - otherwise, 5 first-years would have been at FPC meetings in previous years, and as far as I know this has not been the case. As with many of the other things that will only be more clear in several years, the impact that I have made on these students will only be known once they become more skilled and confident.
At the end of the semester, it was clear to me that although course members had learned quite a lot about agriculture and science (in addition to learning how to do what they wanted), they hadn't chosen to write much that demonstrated how much they had learned. I therefore planned a half-hour to hour oral ``survey'' that I gave to each of them, to give them a chance to formally express their learning and for me to make sure that I knew what they had and hadn't learned. The interviews worked out well for the students, and were also helpful for me in writing evaluations.
Hampshire College Assessment Squad
Two first-years and one third-year participated. We met weekly, and shared some ideas about what we might do, and each of the first-years did a little project. But for the most part, not much got done. The two biggest differences between this course and the agriculture course (both of which had mostly first-years) was that I put much more energy into helping direct the agriculture course - providing readings and field trips when people expressed a particular interest - whereas I was simply a resource for the assessment group.
Building the New Society: Intentional Communities and Alternative Schools
This course, cosponsored by myself and Rebecca Saunders, started out enormous - about 20 or 25 people, distributed as about half first-years, and half older students. We had lots of ideas about what we could do; I thought I would make an early example, and I told the class I was going to visit the Pathfinder homeschooling center in Amherst. Six people said they would take the bus there with me (out of 20); one showed up. The class dwindled. In particular, about the fourth week Rebecca and I both skipped class (thinking that the class could handle itself because, for the first time, it had made a plan for what to do: watch a slide show provided by one of the class members); however, every single student, walking by the mod, decided that because the common area (where we met) was dark, the course must have been canceled. Not a single student went inside, turned on the lights, sat down, and waited to see. Oh well.
By halfway through the semester, the course was down to about 6 students - all women, and only one of whom was in her first-year. But they were also getting clear on what they wanted to do. Quite a few of them went to visit several schools and intentional communities, and they invited four or five guest speakers in.
For these students, I think the course was an absolute success; it seems clear that they have each made significant progress in becoming directed learners, as well as in learning about the subject material. The surveys returned by the students from this course were the most positive of all the surveys - about EPEC and their experience. For the students who dropped out, I think they would have lasted if I had been more facilitative rather than just setting an example and then saying ``okay, go ahead...'' But I know that I didn't have the energy to put out any more, and I'm not even sure whether this might have been a fine learning experience for them. Only later research will be able to tell the impact on the students who dropped out.
Two final interesting comments - in the first few weeks, I said to the class several times that I was interested in having people meet with me individually to help them figure out what they could do in the course. I also said, however, that I wanted them to have at least one sentence written down on a paper, or have at least one idea that we could discuss, or at the very very least have done five minutes of thinking about what they could do in the course, because I didn't have a lot of time and didn't want to feel used. After I'd said this, I feared that these comments would make people feel that I thought I was above them and make them not want to talk to me at all. Indeed, no one from the group came to talk to me. I asked several people what they had thought of my invitation, and told them my fear. But they said that the group's feelings had been exactly the opposite of what I had feared: I had made everyone want that much more to be good enough to come talk with me; had made them desire to meet with me more, not less. Perhaps they did not talk to me because they were afraid of me; but I think it was a more common fear: the fear of doing anything at all.
My last final interesting comment about this course was that it created a group with common interests, in which course members were able to integrate their other learning experiences, to gain new perspectives on and energy for their classes with faculty, and to give them friendship and a place to discuss possibilities for their future in education. This was the closest to what I had originally intended by the living-learning center.