Posted on May 1, 2001

Ruth Anne Evans, former associate librarian and unofficial College historian, died Feb. 2 in Schenectady's Ellis Hospital after a long illness. She was seventy-six.

Professor Evans, a native of Schenectady, first worked in the College's library during the summers of 1944 and 1945, when she was a student at Smith College. After graduation, she returned as a general assistant. Encouraged by Helmer Webb, the librarian, she went to Columbia University in 1947, earning a B.S. from the School of Library Science. After working briefly at Colgate University, she joined the library staff at Union in 1952.

In her years at Union, she held a variety of posts — cataloguer, reference librarian, acquisitions librarian, circulation librarian, assistant librarian, and, on occasion, acting library director. To many students and faculty, however, she was best known as the principal reference for anyone wanting to know anything about Union's history. As a colleague once said, “If Ruth Anne doesn't know it, it didn't happen.” If a project demanded historical knowledge, she was involved, from helping students design Fitzhugh Ludlow Day festivities in honor of a nineteenth-century alumnus to researching the original design of the chandelier in the president's house.

At her formal retirement in 1989, Ann Seemann, then the librarian, said, “She serves as campus historian, albeit informally, with an acute sense of humor and almost total recall. Her wisdom and her wit abound in anecdote and fact.” After her retirement, she continued to come into the library on an almost daily basis to help with a variety of projects and to continue her lifelong pattern of mentoring younger librarians.

Professor Evans was a member of the Schenectady Historical Society, where she held several positions; the American Library Association; the American Association of University Professors; the American Association of University Women; Phi Beta Kappa; the Capital District Library Council; and the New York Library Association. She was a volunteer for the Literacy Volunteers of Schenectady and was a member of St. John the Evangelist Church and its Rosary Society.

Her campus service included membership on the Conservatorial Committee, the Phi Beta Kappa nominating committee, and the committees to choose student candidates for Watson Fellowships and the St. Andrews Exchange. She received the Faculty Meritorious Service Award from the Alumni Council in 1975. She also was elected to honorary membership in the Delphics, a student service organization, in recognition of her many contributions over the years to student life on campus.

Survivors include a niece, Madelaine Ann Estabrook, of Waltham, Mass.; and three nephews, Carl G. Estabrook, Jr., of Champaign, Ill.; Joseph E. Estabrook, of Centereville, Va.; and David M. Estabrook, of Arlington, Va. Contributions in her honor may be made to the Literacy Volunteers or the Schenectady Historical Society.

Posted on May 1, 2001

Foreword
The committee was formed by the Board of Trustees to review the report of the U2K Steering Committee of the College and the related recommendations of President Hull. More specifically, it was asked to make recommendations to the board with respect to (a) the future of Greek life at Union, and (b) the proposal [of the U2K Steering Committee] to adopt a house system.

The work of this committee is the latest in a progression of important steps to transform Union. The very successful Bicentennial Campaign allowed us to renovate our signature structure, the Nott Memorial, improve classrooms, make our campus more attractive, strengthen our faculty, and expand scholarships. The Olin Center added important science and technology resources. Schaffer Library was expanded and brought to state-of-the-art condition. Seward West, the most significant urban renewal project ever undertaken by a college such as Union, has expanded housing options, made the campus safer, created considerable goodwill with the city that is our home, and generated much favorable publicity.

Another important step was the decision in 1998 to move the “rush” period for student fraternities and sororities from freshman to sophomore year. This decision was taken following an overwhelming vote by the faculty which reflected a judgment that ” … pledging and rush practices had a deleterious effect on academic performance and the academic mission of the College.” The final recommendations of the Committee on Sophomore Rush, which included representatives from the faculty, students, and administration, embodied a “… commitment to creating a social life at Union which includes both a reformed Greek system and a strong non-Greek social life, addressing the problems identified in the current Greek system without abolishing it.”

It was then up to the U2K Steering Committee to develop a plan for implementation. “U2K” had as its concerns “(1) to anticipate the effects of sophomore rush and … (2) to propose a set of reforms that would preserve the traditions of Greek life that are consistent with an academic community that values open inquiry, seriousness of purpose, diversity of opinion, and a broad and equitable choice of residential and social options.” The U2K Report was presented to the Board of Trustees at its October 2000 meeting, and this committee was formed to conduct a comprehensive review and make independent judgments.

Relatively early in our deliberations, we came to appreciate that the issues before us concerned the very fundamental culture of Union College. By this we mean the kind of place it is; how new ideas are accepted and put into practice; how one makes his/her needs known and how easy it is for someone to have his/her needs met; what is seen, heard, and felt by people who are part of the community; the feeling that parents, prospective students, and faculty candidates get when they visit; and, at a deeper level, what these sorts of things imply about Union's values, about what is encouraged and discouraged, and about what is neglected or overlooked. As a consequence, while our required judgments are focused primarily on Greek life and the proposals of U2K for a house system, this report will offer some observations and recommendations that might seem at first glance to be beyond the scope of our charge. We see them as being all of one piece, for the real issue is the nature of Union's social systems and their relationship to the mission and purposes of the College.

Our committee comprised nine trustees plus the chairman of the board, ex officio. The chairman did not participate in any of the committee's deliberations. All are alumni of the College and represent a range of classes from 1954 to 1975. Five were members of fraternities as undergraduates, four were not members of any Greek social organization. Six are men, three are women. One is an alumnus trustee, eight are term trustees. Two are parents of Union students.

Informing our work was several inches of very rich reading materials. Included were campus studies on many of the same themes going back to 1990 and continuing throughout the decade (underscoring the centrality of “residential life” to the college experience, a 1991 study observed that there had been five reports on the subject since 1979). Results of several surveys provided concrete and valuable insights ranging from the amount of drinking on campus to satisfaction with intellectual life outside the classroom, from the views and attitudes of potential and actual applicants to the reasons given by students withdrawing from Union prior to graduating.

Equally helpful were source documents from several colleges that have undertaken their own cultural assessments and reforms of their residential and social systems going back as far as the early 1980s. We also received prompt, helpful responses to our questions from the deans of students and admissions and the vice president of finance and administration. Finally, we received many letters or e-mails from students, hundreds from alumni, and even a couple from parents. We read every one of them and factored into our deliberations all viewpoints so presented. For all the above resources, we are grateful.

We make many assertions in this report. Our sources for these are the documents and, in part, the quotations from those documents.

Conclusions of the Committee
Throughout our work, we have been guided by one principle — to determine the best course of action that will allow Union College to be among the nation's most highly-rated and respected liberal arts colleges. To achieve this, Union must attract premier students and faculty, which in turn requires that it provide top-notch facilities and programs and a cultural environment that nourishes intellectual pursuit and academic excellence as well as a fulfilling social life.

With respect to student social life at Union and our need to attract top talent, the U2K Steering Committee identified three problems:
— Inequity in student housing and social space;
— Dominance of Union's social life by the Greek system;
— The negative effect on recruiting certain students and faculty that a dominant Greek image imposes.

It is the conclusion of our committee that the U2K Steering Committee accurately identified the key issues related to student social life that block Union from being better-perceived among the most highly-regarded liberal arts colleges in the United States. We also conclude that if these problems are not solved soon, or their impact mitigated, Union will fall further behind competitor institutions that act to improve their academic and social environments. Our committee accepts without reservation that fraternities and sororities generally provide their members a variety of valuable experiences. We also believe the problems cited, however unintended, accurately depict unacceptable social conditions. In consideration of these judgments, therefore, and pursuant to our instructions, this committee concludes that the Greek system cannot survive unchanged. As we will outline, however, many other changes beyond Greek life are also necessary.

As delineated later in this report, this committee comes to much the same conclusion about residential and social life as did the U2K Steering Committee. We also endorse the additional “Recommendation for the 21st Century” outlined by President Hull in his memorandum to the Board of Trustees of October 26, 2000.

However, whereas abolishing the Greek system was not an alternative for the U2K Steering Committee, it was an option available to our committee. We considered recommending elimination of fraternities and sororities. In the end, however, we concluded that abolition of the Greek system was too simplistic and would not in and of itself move Union to where it needs to be. While they are contributing factors and reform is clearly called for, fraternities and sororities are not the root cause of the problems we must address.

Judgments of the Committee
It is important to underscore that the College has made considerable progress over the last decade. Our hallmarks of undergraduate research, international study, and community outreach are unique strengths in which we can take justifiable pride. The quality of our student body has improved. We are about to launch an exciting new phase in engineering that will realize our potential for cross-disciplinary education, unique among liberal arts colleges.

While we should always be willing to acknowledge our progress and appreciate our strengths, we believe that the kinds of improvements cited will never be sufficient to improve Union's stature unless we solve the problems listed below. Earlier in this report, we asserted that the real issue is the nature of Union's social systems and their relationship to the fundamental mission and purposes of the College. Social systems include students, faculty, and administration and have many influences. Our committee identified the following problems and contributing factors:

Issues relating to housing and social space
— There is substantial inequity in access to prime, center-of-campus housing and social space, especially for women, but also for men who choose not to join fraternities;

— We are not the residential campus we say we are, housing only about seventy-five percent of our students, and too many upperclass students live off campus. One consequence of this is that student culture is at key times deprived of the moderating influence of their relative maturity; to not have upperclass students fully engaged in residential and social life outside of classes creates an undesirable imbalance in campus culture;
— In addition to housing an insufficient number of students on campus, Union's housing is also deficient compared to our competition and the expectations of our times; we need smaller, apartment-style options, at least for juniors and seniors, and more modern, attractive housing for all;

Issues relating to recruiting top students

— Union College's reputation has suffered because of the culture we have allowed to evolve, hurting its ability to attract high-end students and faculty; without improvement soon, it will be increasingly difficult to raise our relative standing among peer colleges;
— Some of our best inquirers/prospects/applicants/admitted students turn away from or don't choose Union due to the culture they perceive, a one-dimensional social scene dominated by the Greek system;

— Union College's public relations efforts have fallen short in communicating the truly positive intellectual endeavors and achievements of our students.

Issues relating to dominance of the social scene by the Greek system
— There are too many parties, too much emphasis on drinking, and perhaps too much time available for both;
— Prime time for social life (the party scene) at Union begins late at night (11 p.m. and later), making it almost impossible for other social events and activities such as concerts, dances, etc., to compete; in this regard, these activities are not really alternatives, but serve more as warmups for late night/early morning parties;

— Virtually all Union social life seems to revolve around alcohol. Though three-quarters of our students are not of legal drinking age, alcohol is easy to come by and largely unsupervised within the fraternities that host parties and other gatherings. In view of this, it is not hard to understand how other social activities have difficulty taking root; the consequence is a very one-dimensional social scene, especially among underclassmen, that excludes those who don't wish to participate and precludes alternatives;
— There is considerable evidence that the party scene interferes with intellectual pursuit and academic achievement of many students; cultural norms and peer pressures exist that discourage “intellectualism,” particularly outside the classroom and in social settings;

— We (the administration, the faculty, trustees, parents) have accepted the heavy drinking paradigm of current students as a given of “modern” college life as if we are helpless, sending the message that we don't care enough about our kids — or our college — to strive for something better;

— Many students indicate they wish the social scene were different but do not (or do not know how to) mobilize to change it; they don't seem to realize how many others feel similarly; there is a sense of powerlessness to change things.

Additional contributing factors
— Most faculty are essentially removed from campus, campus life, and student relationships after 5 p.m. and on weekends; students express a wish that faculty were more willing to attend campus events;
— Faculty, in general, are not sufficiently demanding of our students academically, sending a message, however inadvertently, that intellectual pursuit may not be our highest core value and that a substantial party scene is consistent with their standards and expectations;

— The advising system, especially for freshmen, is weak and varying in consistency, sending a message that students, during a crucial transitional period of personal discovery, growth, and development, are on their own to find their way through a complex new maze that requires the making of important decisions. Advising has been identified on campus as an area of vital concern and efforts are under way to make improvements. We view this as an extremely important initiative and, if conceived and executed properly and well, an important ingredient in creating the cultural change envisioned by this report.

Recommendations

A. Related to housing and social space
— As delineated in The Plan for Union, renovate existing housing stock to meet the standards of our competition and the expectations of twenty-first century students.
— Move Alpha Delta Phi, Chi Psi, Phi Delta Theta, Psi Upsilon, and Sigma Phi fraternities from their current houses to other dedicated spaces on campus, as recommended by the U2K Steering Committee. In this regard, we trust the administration will recognize that fraternity chapter houses sometimes have unique artifacts and physical space requirements that are different from non-Greek residences, and we urge the administration to work closely with the leadership of the affected fraternities exercising particular care to do all it reasonably can to make the physical and psychological transition as smooth and painless as possible.

— Renovate or replace the five buildings previously occupied by these five fraternities to create suitable housing as envisioned by the U2K Steering Committee.
— Establish a “house system” along the lines contemplated by the U2K Steering Committee. As conceived, we believe such a system will create an immediate “sense of belonging” for every Union student. We also believe the house system will create much new opportunity for all students to influence and create their own social, intellectual, and cultural environments through processes having great practical and educational value.

— As soon as financially feasible, create additional housing stock, preferably on campus, to make Union a fully residential college.

B. Relating to the social scene and attraction of top students
— Establish a policy that reduces and limits the number of sanctioned parties.
— Permit no parties with alcohol in any residences as recommended by President Hull.

— Establish and enforce a total ban on the possession or use of hard liquor by students anywhere on campus.

— Create a variety of social spaces and venues around campus as envisioned by the U2K Steering Committee.
— Create social and entertainment alternatives. As envisioned by the U2K Steering Committee, this would be the students' responsibility under the house system. However, the administration should work closely with the students and assist them where necessary in creating their own environments and alternatives.

— Renew and solidify commitment within the faculty to be more involved in campus life “off hours” (evenings and weekends) and to be more a part of the whole student experience at Union.

— Establish new commitment within the faculty and administration to raise academic expectations and standards and to challenge students to new levels of effort and achievement.
— Create a “matriculant-to-graduate” advising system that reflects a complete and total commitment to the standards articulated above. Standards for advising should be set and results measured. The result should be an advising system that is a true partnership between professors and students that leaves nothing to chance and lets no student “fall through the cracks” while demanding and coaxing the very best from each student.

C. Relating to all
— Change Union's culture by changing the language, values, expectations, and standards of the College's social and intellectual life. Involve all constituencies of the College — administration, students, faculty, parents, alumni, and trustees — in creating and championing an ethic that alcohol and drug abuse are not cool and that intellectualism and seriousness of purpose are core values; in developing and nurturing a community of social openness that supports and encourages individuality and resists pressures to conform; in building and projecting cultural values that are wholly consistent with Union's fundamental mission as an academic institution preparing young men and women for active involvement and leadership throughout their lives.

NOTE: Some of these recommendations can be undertaken almost immediately. Others will need to be deferred until construction and renovation or other steps are completed. We foresee a phase-in period, much like that envisioned in the U2K Report, necessitated in part by practical realities but also by a desire to allow currently-enrolled students to complete their undergraduate experiences under the same circumstances, in most respects, that existed when they made their initial choices about Greek and residential life.

The primary burden for successful transition to a new cultural reality will fall on the administration and faculty, along with students. It is essential that the recommended changes be well-planned and coordinated in a manner that maximizes the sense of community involvement and spirit on campus and minimizes the inevitable disruptions. All campus constituencies should be included insofar as feasible in the planning, preparation, and execution of these changes. Additionally, the administration should provide frequent progress reports easily available to all members of the Union family.

Afterword
The recommendations offered here will not please all members of the Union family. Some will be disheartened with the suggestion that fraternities be relocated from their historic homes. Others who hoped that the Board of Trustees would decide once and for all to abolish all Greek life will also be disappointed. Our conclusion, which we share with the U2K Steering Committee, is that the experiential opportunities so important to those who choose and support Greek life should remain available, while the unfairnesses in housing, social space, and social alternatives must be remedied.

For many on this committee, the issues faced and the judgments required were personally difficult. Positive fraternity and social experiences, and fond memories of those experiences, were ever-present for some, and maintaining objectivity was sometimes challenging. However, regardless of personal experiences, emotions, and sentimentalities, we are unanimous in our judgments and united in support of all the recommendations in this report. We are sympathetic to the fact that some of the changes contemplated will be difficult at first for some to accept and have written our report in such a way as to provide the reader every opportunity to understand the many factors and considerations that led to our conclusions.

We are confident that all who are committed to the proposition that Union College be the best academic institution it can be will applaud and support Union's willingness to change in pursuit of its highest calling as a small liberal arts college of international caliber. Indeed, our College's proud heritage of academic and social innovation over two centuries has prepared us well to see the virtues of thoughtful change and constructive action.

The future envisioned by our committee will require of all who wish Union well a rebirth of spirit and renewal of commitment. There is no constituency — students, faculty, administration, parents, alumni, or trustees — without important roles to play in creating and expanding the bright future we see for Union's academic and social environment and culture. It is our fervent hope that all “soeurs et freres sous les lois de Minerve” will join in this important calling. We, each and every one of us, have been blessed by the generous devotions and wise decisions of those who have guided Union to the present day. Whatever shortcomings our College may have, it remains one of a very limited number of extraordinary small liberal arts institutions that are unique to America and envied throughout the world. It is now our turn to preserve and enhance this precious jewel for generations to come.

Respectfully submitted, this fifteenth day of February, 2001

Thomas E. Hitchcock '66, Chair
Philip R. Beuth '54
Janet D. Black '74
Stephen J. Ciesinski '70
Robert F. Cummings, Jr., '71
Robert DeMichele '66
Fred G. Pressley, Jr., '75
Christine I. Reilly '75
Valerie J. Hoffman '75

Posted on May 1, 2001

Throughout Union's history its leaders have acted on the conviction that knowledge is not static. If we are to serve the needs of our students and, through them, our society, we must be willing to constantly examine what we teach and how we teach it.

In the past decade – a time of accelerating change – we have added and revamped a number of academic programs. We began new programs such as Africana studies, biochemistry, computer systems engineering, and international studies and management. We expanded environmental studies and geology. We restructured and strengthened anthropology, sociology, and the visual and performing arts. We revamped our engineering curriculum. And we encouraged the development of new courses to reflect the world's changes, from “African-American Women Writers” in the English Department to “Pacific Rim Politics” in Political Science to ten team-taught courses in liberal arts and engineering such as “Construction for Humanity,” which combines the technology of construction and the social uses of buildings.

Since students graduating from college these days must be able to interact with people of different backgrounds, we added substantially to our international programs, to the point where we are among the leaders in American colleges. Recognizing that we are all increasingly connected to one another, we provided financial incentives to encourage students to enter public service, and we enhanced our institutional commitment to our community.

Accompanying these changes has been a feeling of momentum engendered by such measurable signs as an increase in both the quantity and the quality of applications for admission, and the successful celebration of our bicentennial with its campaign that raised more than $150 million. We note with pride that our graduates make a difference in an enormous range of fields – doctors and lawyers, business and government leaders, entrepreneurs and venture capitalists, artists and teachers. We are pleased that so many of them are grateful for the encouragement given by their teachers and others on campus. And we are honored that our efforts have been widely recognized by foundations across the land.

We must recognize, however, that the mere asser­tion of our historic distinctiveness does not guarantee a successful future. We cannot be content with our achievements if we are to enhance our strengths and advance our academic excellence. We must – again – embrace the future; we must – as always – nurture change.

The plan that we are presenting will do that. The result of two years of strategic planning, it will enable the College to:
– Continue to attract and retain the best possible faculty in the face of growing competition from other colleges and universities, and support them at a level that will enable them to do their best creative work.
– Attract and support bright, energetic, and committed students, and ensure that they are properly taught, advised, and given a variety of social options.
– Support academic programs founded on the philosophy of lively students working closely with professors who are both dedicated teachers and productive scholars.
– Keep our classrooms, laboratories, residence halls, library, and athletic facilities in condition to meet the demands placed upon them.
– Marshal new financial resources to guarantee our continued progress through the growth of our endowment and annual giving.

Bringing this strategic plan to life will ensure that the intelligence, creativity, resourcefulness, and motivation of our faculty and students can develop to their fullest, and that society will continue to benefit from the contributions of broadly-educated and committed Union graduates.

Academic Life