- EphBlog - http://ephblog.com -

Details on the ECCE

There are 7 pages of Word document proposal that CC will take up on Wednesday. In those, there is one big decision: on if the committee should talk about faculty behavior (something that has not been ideal for some people). The two forms proposed are 9-6-3 (non-voting), with a clear student majority but a large group of faculty, or 9- 2 (non-voting) -3 (non-voting), with only students, but with several advisory positions.

Excerpts in the link, though the bullet points might not reproduce well.

• If covering faculty behavior:
• 1 chair
• 8 others
Staff (advisory – not voting)
• VP diversity
• Deans’ office rep
• Chaplain
• 6 appointed by steering committee (or if that doesn’t work dean of faculty)
• If not covering faculty behavior:
• 1 chair
• 8 others
Staff (advisory non-voting)
• VP diversity
• Deans’ office rep
• Chaplain
Faculty (advisory non-voting)
• 2 appointed by steering committee (or if that doesn’t work dean of faculty)

o Draft a comprehensive report
 Including details of the process
• Who the committee spoke with
• A report summarizing the structures we have and the way they are implemented (including precedents established by past decisions)
• A report summarizing the structures at the other institutions analyzed by the committee
 Meeting Minutes
 Analysis and statement of the problem (or proof that there is no problem)
 Details and justification for any structures or mechanisms proposed by the committee
 A open letter to the campus community summarizing the contents of the report and the committee’s proposals

o Publish minutes after every meeting
o Publish the agenda of the upcoming meeting with sufficient time for the community to give input through the anonymous opinions structure and other feedback mechanisms established by the committee
o Hold at least two open forums a semester (including winter study)
 The committee must hold one open forum between the completion of its written work and the formal submission of the work to CC and the administration
 After CC and the faculty (if appropriate) vet(s) the proposal, the committee (in conjunction with CC) must hold one open forum at least one week before the all campus vote
o Create mechanisms for input
 A mechanism for anonymous input
 Smaller public comment sessions (a time for smaller groups of students—not a large open forum—to meet with the committee members and ask questions)

o Final Approval Process
 The committee will submit the final version of the report and recommendations to CC and the Dean of the College no later than the second Wednesday of Winter Study 2009
 Once the final version has been submitted
• At least three days after the report has been distributed to the student body and one week before the voting opens, CC shall organize and host an all campus debate on the committee’s recommendations
o The committee must designate one of its student members or a student appointed by the committee to argue in favor of the proposal
o The CC appointments committee shall solicit and appoint a student to argue against the proposal
o The debate shall be moderated and the format shall be set by the CC co-Presidents
o The debate must occur before the final all campus forum
o The entire student body must be invited to both the final open forum and the debate
• CC shall organize a vote of the student body
o The vote shall not take place less than two weeks after the final version of the report is distributed to the student body and one week after the all campus open forum
o In order pass, the following conditions must be satisfied
 A simple majority of the student body must vote yes
 Of those voting, 2/3 must vote yes

Comments Disabled (Open | Close)

Comments Disabled To "Details on the ECCE"

#1 Comment By kthomas On March 4, 2008 @ 2:23 am


I have been thinking about FM and Larry’s request, and what I might say of use here, to the group at Williams.

If I can manage a general point: if we can’t manage a reasonable semblance of democracy and self-rule at the level of institutions the size of Williams, we can’t possibly manage it as nations.

Deep Springs hands ultimate responsibility to its students and accepts the fact that they may, and will, fail and face the consequences. There is nothing easy about governance at Deep Springs– which easily consumes 20 hours or more of each student’s time per week– and its conflicts. As a form of education, it is far from perfect– but I might assert that it is better than all the alternatives.

After so long, I am heartened to see the renewal of these traditions at Williams and worldwide. We live in interesting times, and we are going to need them.

#2 Comment By dkane On March 4, 2008 @ 8:17 am

Any chance we might post the whole document? If you send it to me, I can take care of it. (I realize that our file upload is broken. Damn you, WordPress!) Or you can just save the document as html and then copy/paste.

#3 Comment By FROSH mom On March 4, 2008 @ 10:38 am


Have there been any thoughts to having a representative of Security brought into the loop? Or at least discussing their role and actions on campus…especially since the ‘incident’.

#4 Comment By FROSH mom On March 4, 2008 @ 11:14 am

One more thought, Will. And this is inspired by a recent thread where a couple of comments were made about negative relationships between athletes and non-athletes.

Out of curiosity, do you have a decent representation of them at your discussions?

#5 Comment By FROSH mom On March 4, 2008 @ 12:11 pm

Re above comment:

“Them” being Varsity athletes.

#6 Comment By Will Slack ’11 On March 4, 2008 @ 1:26 pm

Re: Security –

I’m sure that the committee will look at Security as a part of its analysis, and probably talk to people involved in various parts of the administration as part of its review.

Re: Athletes

I’m not sure how many athletes are in CC or in the group I was involved in, but my guess is they were few or none. Though I do nothing more than IM, my guess is that doing athletics here eats up a LOT of time and energy, which is one reason I think the campus may feel apathetic to some – we do too much already.

However, the committee will need a good representation of students, or else it will not have the legitimacy this process is designed to give it as representing the entire student body, and not a vocal interest group.

#7 Comment By FROSH mom On March 4, 2008 @ 3:40 pm


I’m not sure I understand. Are you saying the campus feels apathetic towards athletes because the non-athletes are doing so much more in the way of committee and council work?

I am not trying to put you on the spot. I just think an honest and clear answer is important…and to the benefit of all.

As far as Campus Security goes, I think it could be important to also get the take of students (as well as administration) re Security’s role; how they help or hinder good relations on campus.

#8 Comment By Rory On March 4, 2008 @ 3:47 pm

i think he meant that some students (as has been true since my time) feel that williams is an apathetic student body, not that athletes are particularly apathetic.

#9 Comment By FROSH mom On March 4, 2008 @ 4:07 pm

Ahhh, I see. Thanks Rory.

All I’m getting at here, is that if every kind of divisiveness is to be addressed, then everyone needs to be represented… at least in some discussions, if not in actual membership.

I know, I know…easier said than done.