‘We’ve been a moving target

for three years, and now the

reactionaries have shot us down.’

               -Dean Charles N. Somers

                   of Nasson College’s New Division

 

DEATH  OF  A  DREAM

 

                     . . . America’s ‘best experiment in higher education’

               succumbs to traditional pressure

 

By Deckle McLean, Boston Globe Magazine (June 22,1969)

 

Let’s use Nasson College as a model of this country and hope that it isn’t.  It is one thing for a vision to die; another for it to die inevitably.  But as we all know, when a man learns to soar he must do so discreetly.  Otherwise, those who cannot, prompted by vast ambivalence, will latch on to him, and wistful of his buoyancy, be content to break him down to their own stumbling rate.  As my father says: It’s the crabs-in-the-barrel effect.  That is what has happened to Nasson College.

   Nasson is a 57-year-old liberal arts college in Springvale, Maine.  Springvale, a village in the township of Sanford, birthplace of the Palm Beach suit, has a partially condemned, heavily weathered and sagging five-story wood frame shoe factory that straddles a littered stretch of the Mousam River; and – it has Nasson College.  The old history of the school is not so important here – for 23 years it was a girls’ two-year college, expanded to four years in 1935, and went co-ed in 1952.  Nowadays, it draws students from over 25 states and several foreign countries, the largest contingent from Massachusetts.

   Three years ago, through action of the board of trustees and “administrative fiat,” as the current acting president says, Nasson set up an experimental new division.  The new program brought the college its greatest glory, but now, a year before the charter experimental class can graduate, most of the new division’s students and many of its faculty are packing their bags, raffling their furniture, and exiting en masse for several other experimental colleges.  Their departure will drop an operating deficit of about $150,000 on Nasson, which relies 98 percent on student fees.  It threatens the building program.  It makes new dining hall and library additions unnecessary.  And its wake of academic confusion leaves the college little definite to tell applicants for next year’s entering classes.

 

                             The New Division has been a learning commune

                         as hip as anything on the American college scene.

 

  This is hardly a common occurrence in American education, but a close look at Nasson dissipates the sense of surprise pretty fast.  Nasson’s New Division has been a learning commune as hip as anything anywhere on the American college scene – no grades; no required classes; co-ed dorms; extensive student participation in social, academic and discipline policy; independent study in ‘provinces of knowledge,’ not in courses or departments.  It has almost been what student revolutionists are demanding on nearly every other major college campus.  “We don’t recommend it for everyone,” one student says.

   Another student, moderator of the faculty-student town meeting—one  man, one vote—that has governed the division, comments that many New Division members have passed through an anxious free-wheeling stage before learning to handle their freedom.  And conversation with these people makes clear what you get after the rites of passage: tough, confident characters of the sort that come to mind when you think of Israeli kibbutzim: wary, the genuine article as far as latter-day social frontiersmanship is concerned.  Furthermore, they are smart.

 

   The First Division, Nasson’s traditional school with 700 students to the New Division’s 200, seems on the other hand a bit of a flaccid place.  Most of its students are nice kids.  Some of them say they would not want New Division freedom; others say they would like a little of it but not all.  Several girls declare themselves social ‘traditionalists.’  A boy thinks the New Division has a right to experiment but he isn’t sure they should.  He says he does not like the New Division’s ‘dress mode’—‘too much like the Boston Common.’  He is a freshman.  Some say they would like to take New Division courses.

   On the whole, the old division seems a cut above a junior college, filled with students cautious of being turned loose, who still need their lives structured by others.  Nasson’s vitality had gone a half-mile up the road to the New Division quarters where the innovators provided their own structures.

 

   The difference in student bodies, though, does not approximate that of the faculties.  The 17-man New Division faculty has been young and somewhat indistinguishable from the student body.  According to New Division Dean Charles N. Somers, the close ‘living and learning’ situation ‘means something to us, is precious to us.’  The programs have had a ‘seductive quality,’ he says, and some of the faculty have turned down other jobs to stay in them.  Some of the New Division faculty was recruited by students.

   Of the old division faculty, what can be said?  A junior from the New Division offers this observation:  ‘In the dining room, New Division professors sit with the students.  First Division faculty doesn’t.’  That tells the tale.  What can be added?  The traditional faculty is competent but straight out of the tweedy boola-boo bygones.  It is a faculty that has apparently been faithful to the school. Jack Lyons, vice president and acting head of Nasson, explains that a conflict of philosophies in education is less a part of the college problem than one might think.  He’s probably right.  It’s a clash of philosophies in living that has destroyed Nasson’s experiment.

   The only real surprise here is that the demise has been so peaceful, so low keyed.  It must be the Down East climate.

 

                           The experimental division could exist only

                           autonomously.  The board ended the autonomy;

                           the New Division saw through the haze of words

                           and was fed up.

 

   This story, it should be made clear, imposes a considerable problem of tenses.  Should Nasson’s New Division be verbed in the present ‘is,’ the past ‘was,’ or the past perfect ‘had been?’  In mid-May, the time of writing, the New Division most definitely ‘is’ – is on the way out. In June, the time of reading, it ‘was’ and is a ‘has been.’  Yet, as of June, the New Division in some sense still ‘is’ and will be even in September, because no one at Nasson has officially abolished it.  The confusion of tenses reflects the subtle de facto changes that have been worked in Springvale.

   It all began in mid-winter when some of the older forces at the school began worrying about re-accreditation -–due in 1970.  The argument, Lyons explains, was: ‘How can an accrediting team understand the New Division if we don’t understand it?’  According to Lyons, ‘re-accreditation is the whip they beat you with.’  To Somers, it was a ‘red herring’ all the way, an excuse of the old division faculty to jab a program it had detested for three years.

   At any rate, the re-accreditation issue prompted the board of trustees to call in an outside consultant.  Dr. Paul Dressel of Michigan State filled the bill and arrived on campus in early January.  The key points of his report were that Nasson’s faculties be united and that Lyons, then a financial officer with only six months at the school, be appointed acting administrative chief.

 

   Almost immediately, Lyons donned the administrative headdress while college president Roger C. Gay quietly repaired to his home in Rangeley, Maine, 90miles to the north; and by March, the board of trustees swung definitively toward unification.  The New Division town meeting didn’t want the merger and decided to picket ‘in defense of the status quo.’  The sit-in at the administration building did not last long – two days plus hour-a-day picketing over a week. It was peaceful, featured a mock funeral for the New Division, and was called off when the board appeared to be reversing itself.

   At about that time, in March, an all-college referendum—both divisions—was held.  Eighty-five percent of the students voted affirmatively to give each student the right to register in either the old or new division.  The New Division faculty supported the proposal 100 percent; but 42 of the 44 traditional faculty members voted against it.  For

the New Division, the vote confirmed who the enemy was.

   Then, on April 1, an old division professor was appointed academic chief of both divisions, a newly created post.  There was concern about who he represented and what he was doing in the role.  On April 21, it all became clear.

      

                            A New Division student explained his indebtedness

                            to the Nasson experiment.  He had spent two unhappy

                            years at a traditional liberal arts school.  ‘I didn’t learn

                            anything until I got here.’

 

   The board of trustees issued a list of resolutions, the first of which, in the service of faculty unification, abolished the organizational structure of the old and new divisions as of June.  While purporting to guarantee the existence of the New Division program, the resolutions put the matter in the hands of ‘the established faculty governance,’ the faculty senate, which in a unified college would be preponderantly an old division senate.  The New Division had heretofore been completely free of the faculty senate.

   There were other resolutions and much more can be said.  But although the factions at Nasson claim their situation is highly complex, it really isn’t.  The experimental division could exist only autonomously; the board ended the autonomy, the New Division members saw through the haze of resolutions and were fed up.  Several other experimental schools in Florida and the Rockies – like Nasson’s New Division, participants in the Union for Research and Experimentation in Higher Education—offered to take transfers.  These solicitations gave the town meeting an idea.  There will now be two major bloc transfers—about 80 to Grand Valley State College in Allendale, Michigan, and about 40 to the College of the Potomac in Herndon, Virginia.  Other transfers will be scattered around, and a few New Division students will stay.

 

  The point of unification, Lyons explains, was to end the polarization of the faculties.  This, he says, was its sole focus.  There was too much friction and hostility and it all stemmed, he says, from an initial mistake: some of the old faculty should have been allowed to participate in forming the New Division.  The unification is designed to correct the error.  Experimentation will slow down, he says, and ‘there is a distinct possibility that the old faculty could ruin the New Division.’  The chances of preserving the current experimental programs, he says, are ‘zilch.  I’m very pessimistic. Whatever happens, the New Division is decimated.  But it can be rebuilt with time.’

  Lyons’ appraisal is what you call straight shooting. His footnote is: ‘A man who has a part in the program has less reason to be hostile or threatened by experimental education.’

   Nasson, in effect, has decided to start over again, to keep its traditional faculty happy. It made its choice.  The old faculty now has its challenge: to experiment in its own style.  The old division dean thinks it will grab the opportunity.  So does the chairman of the faculty senate.  The question is whether they are up to anything relevant; and that remains to be seen.

 

   In the meantime, 200 New Division students think they have been double crossed in mid-career.  And they are more than justified.

  But at this point you might be wondering why the procedure has been so covert, why the board and administration did not simply announce they were abolishing the current experimental program because it resulted in a divided campus.  There are several reasons:  First, a provision had been inserted in the college constitution that seemed to guarantee the New Division until 1970.  But that is hardly the key.  Lyons explains what the other reason is.  ‘The raison d’etre of Nasson is to do something special,’ he says, ‘to experiment rather than fall into the lockstep of traditional liberal education that has been tied up by the big colleges.’ For Nasson to present itself as hostile to experimentation is to dig its own grave.  It needs the experiment-bent student for bread and butter.  Applications to the First Division have been dropping; those to the New Division burgeoning.

   The Nasson dining commons is one of the few places on the campus where old and new division members regularly mingle.  It is well-windowed, bright with a bare-beamed austere feel: high ceilings and low steam tables of unspiced institutional fare.  Students must discard their own paper, separate their own silverware for the dishwasher.

   Two third-year students in the New Division discussed the college over fried chicken and beef pie. One explained his indebtedness to Nasson.  If it hadn’t been for the experimental program, he said, he would not have tried to make it through college. He had spent two unhappy years at a traditional liberal arts school.  ‘I didn’t learn anything until I got here,’ he said.  He traced Nasson’s problem to ‘petty bickering between the faculties that you wouldn’t expect of grown people.’  And he did not let the New Division off the hook.  ‘The students are caught in the middle,’ he said, and if given the opportunity to solve the problem, could do so themselves.

   His companion seconded the appraisal, adding that ‘the New Division faculty can afford to hold out—they’ve been offered contracts; but the students have no place to go—they’d be more willing to compromise.’  He made it clear, however, that he was talking about third-year students.  ‘We are urging first-and-second-year people to leave,’ he explained, then offered a personal note.  ‘I’d prefer the Army to the old division,’ he said.

 

   Late in the evening there was a gathering in one of the New Division common rooms.  From downstairs came hideous screaming.  A play, written by a New Division student, was being rehearsed (I remember the chairman of the faculty senate commenting, unlike anyone else I talked to, that he is ‘not sure it’s true that the New Division brought any liveliness of spirit to the school – not in athletics, not in drama.’ 

   ‘They’re dying,’ one of the students in the room explained.

   Most of the conversation focused on a party planned for the following week-end,  Parents Weekend.  It was to be a bit of a protest, a bit of a put-on, and ‘the last chance to get everyone together.’  The town meeting was prepared to kick about $1500 into the festivities because there was no reason to preserve its kitty for the usual purposes: to finance independent study projects and travel that could be paid for in no other way.

Even though the forum had incorporated itself as The Society For Educational Ventures, to maintain contacts during the coming diaspora, there was no reason to hold back.  As the party turned out, the New Division awarded itself honorary doctorates, and bestowed the same degree on Springvale’s pizza man, who spoke at the ceremony allowing as how he had benefited in other than material ways by having the experimental school in town.  The occasion was highly charged with emotion: ‘it was touching, funny and sad,’ said one participant.

 

Conversation that night also touched a few legal issues.  Some of the students had found lawyers willing to test whether the college could cut short their program. But few were going to stay at Nasson long enough to see a court case.  Other students were in hock to the school and their loans would become due upon departure.  They didn’t want to pay until they could complete the education they set out to get and which Nasson seemed to be refusing them in mid-stream.  The ACLU was interested in some of those cases.

   The tone of talk, though, and the mood of the experimental school, was one of gloom.  One student explained that despite the tough language of tactics against the old college and of plans for transfer, ‘there is a lot of remorse—we’re losing friends.  A lot of these people we’ll never see again.’  From others, however,  came the insistence that the mood was more of anger then of sorrow.  Their comments ran like this:  ‘Even if they guaranteed the whole program, Id still leave.’  ‘If they don’t want us, why don’t they just say so?’  And, ‘This was a fifth rate college when we came; it’ll be tenth rate when we leave.’

   The New Division students have taken it personally, especially the third-year people.  When they arrived there was just an idea.  They built the curriculum, the governance and the social organization as surely as did the faculty.

   And like the students, the New Division faculty has some strong feelings.  Art Webster, social studies professor, had a dream of moving the community intact to the College of the Potomac, a new school opening in September.  His feeling is for the ‘community.’  But his vision was riddled by practicality.  The College of the Potomac is not yet accredited, and going there meant starting all over. Not everyone was game.  Aiming just to finish up, many students sought established experimental programs. Their applications went to Grand Valley State, Goddard, Hofstra, Bard, Windham, and others.  The faculty was also exhausted. According to Dean Somers, it would be too hard to build again from scratch, ‘especially after being slapped down here.

   Somers’ feelings run to scorching invective, ‘We’re not sorry we’ve been here,’ he says.  ‘The forces operating on American education did not touch us internally.  But we’ve been a moving target for three years and now the reactionaries have shot us down.  The way we felt, it was the best experiment in higher education in America, but they killed it.  Murder in Maine, that’s what it is.

   ‘If it had just gone on, the needs of the students would have prevailed, and students in both divisions indicated they wanted to take courses in both divisions.

   ‘Who in his infinite wisdom,’ Somers asks, ‘said two divisions couldn’t exist on the same campus?’

   Well – that is the question.