To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
Languages
Recent
Show all languages
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

Donald J. Pease

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Don Pease
Donald J. Pease 97th Congress 1981.jpg
Member of the U.S. House of Representatives
from Ohio's 13th district
In office
January 3, 1977 – January 3, 1993
Preceded byCharles Adams Mosher
Succeeded bySherrod Brown
Member of the Ohio Senate
from the 13th district
In office
January 3, 1975-January 3, 1977
Preceded byRobert J. Corts
Succeeded byRonald Nabowski
Member of the Ohio House of Representatives
from the 54th district
In office
January 3, 1969-December 31, 1974
Preceded byHenry Schriver
Succeeded byScribner Fauver
Personal details
Political partyDemocratic

Donald James "Don" Pease (September 26, 1931 – July 28, 2002) served eight terms as a member of the United States House of Representatives from Ohio's 13th District, an area in northeast Ohio. He was a Democrat.

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/2
    Views:
    2 665
    29 362
  • ✪ The Liberal Arts at Dartmouth: What Lies Ahead?
  • ✪ What Can Body Language Actually Tell Us?

Transcription

[ Applause ] >> Michael Mastenduno: Welcome everyone to this inaugural panel discussion on the future of the liberal arts at Dartmouth, what lies ahead. This panel is hosted by a distinguished member of the class of 1977. He's also a professor of mathematics. And equally important, he's the 18th president of Dartmouth College. Phillip J. Hamlin. [Applause] Phil, stand up. [ Applause ] My name is Michael Mastenduno. I am a professor of government here at Dartmouth and the Dean of the Arts and Sciences faculty. And I am honored to serve as moderator for this event. Now, the title of the panel, The Liberal Arts at Dartmouth, I think is appropriate, because after all Dartmouth prides itself on being a premiere liberal arts institution. Some 4,400 undergraduates at any particular time in the contemporary era are treated to a liberal arts education. It's a core part of the Dartmouth identity and the Dartmouth mission so I think it's appropriate to take the opportunity in inaugurating a new president to reflect on the meaning and the value of the liberal arts. But of course, the issue of a liberal arts education is far broader and far more important than just what happens at Dartmouth. It is in fact become an issue of national and even international debate. And I have to say the national debate is not going very well for the liberal arts. I think it's fair to say that a liberal arts education is on the defensive in the American political and social discourse. For all sorts of reasons. Right? Liberal arts education is prohibitively costly. Something that only a small fraction of the American socioeconomic elite can afford any longer. It's impractical. For all that money it trains you for nothing [laughter]. It's like having a fleet of five BMW's. Cost about the same thing. It's really nice to have but how much [laughter] of it are you really going to use? Right? And it's anachronistic. New technologies are emerging that are going to be able to deliver education much more efficiently and in that way you can think of the liberal arts and the liberal arts education as a little bit like the mail. Something we used to depend a lot on but maybe it's becoming overtaken by events. At least some people believe that. All right. Internationally the liberal arts have become a matter of some interest in a way that cuts against I think interestingly the national debate in the United States. I've been struck over the last five or 10 years at how many university administrators from places in Central Europe and Asia and in the Middle East have come to Dartmouth seeking insights on how to construct a liberal arts education on their own campuses as they look to reform education. So there's an interesting juxtaposition there. Do they know something we don't know? Or are we telling them something they don't know? What's actually going on? Many, many other important questions are raised in this debate. Right? What is the future of the liberal arts and its changing economic, demographic, and technological environment? And by the way, what is a liberal art? Is science a liberal art? How about business? Are those part of the liberal arts? And what's a liberal arts education for? Why do you come here? It's it supposed to be a voyage of personal discovery? To get a better job? To become an ethical person? To become a leader? To think critically? All of the above. What is the manning of this education we call a liberal arts education? Well like any experienced professor I'm far better at asking questions than I am at answering them [laughter]. And I plead guilty. But luckily, I have a distinguished panel here that's going to answer all those questions and many more including many of yours. Let me introduce them. Start with Leslie Butler who is a Professor of History and an intellectual leader in the study of intellectual history. Leslie has written on public intellectuals in the 19th Century and how they reshaped public debate in the United States and Britain. She's currently working on a book on the suffragists and I think the broader theme of that book is the connections between education, democracy and citizenship. Very relevant to what we're talking about today. Next to Leslie is Don Peeves. Legendary Dartmouth professor. Been serving students of the liberal arts since 1973. Don is the guisal 3rd Century professor at Dartmouth. He's also one of the world's leading scholars in American Studies and he's the head of Dartmouth's liberal studies program. Next to Don is Stephan Alexander. Stephan is the EE Just professor of physics and astronomy. He's a specialist in both cosmology and particle physics. I think that means he studies really big things and then tiny, tiny, tiny [laughter] little things. I don't know about the stuff in the middle [laughter] if he does that. The EE Just program is a critical program at Dartmouth. It is a program that seeks to provide support for and attract students in particular representative minorities into the sciences and I'm happy to say that that program has increased in significant by leaps and bounds with Stephan at the helm. Joe Helbly is next to Stephan. Joe is a chemical engineer who works at the intersection of energy and the environment. Joe has served with distinction as Dartmouth's Dean of the Thayer School of Engineering since 2005 and under his very capable leadership Dartmouth has achieved national distinction in certain areas of engineering including energy, the environment, and bio-medical engineering. Annette Gordon Reid is sitting on the far left and that is a member of the Class of 1981, which is probably the most important thing for Dartmouth audience. She happens to be a professor of history and a professor of law at Harvard. She is a Pulitzer Prize winning author and she is the recipient of one of those highly coveted, how do I get one MacArthur genius grants. And she's also serving as a Dartmouth trustee. Okay now, the format here will be conversational. No big speeches. What I just gave you is the biggest speech of the day. And in fact I am going to open the discussion by asking each of the panelists a question and having them reflect for say five to seven minutes. I have not told them in advance what the questions are because these are liberally educated people [laughter] and they should be capable of thinking on their feet [applause]. All right? I suppose we'll see [laughter]. After that which should take 30 to 35 minutes, I would like to throw the floor open for questions and we have multiple means of obtaining questions. I have a whole set of questions I have already been submitted and that magically appear. They will be delivered to this iPad. There are also microphones around the audience and we will ask people to raise questions, as well. And at the very end I will give President Hanlon just a chance to say a few words if he -- if he so chooses. Okay? So I think I'm going to start with Leslie. [Laughter] And Leslie, whenever we get engaged in passionate contemporary debates historians always somewhat smugly say, "We've seen this all before." Have we seen this all before? This debate over the value and meaning of the liberal arts? And maybe more broadly is there a historical context that can be helpful for us here? >> Leslie: First let me say I'm glad I got the history question [laughter]. I thought I might get the physics one [laughter]. I was a little nervous about that. Yeah, and historians tend to do better at what came before rather than what lies ahead. So that is a little more comfortable for me. But yes actually. In answer to your question we have seen some version of this before and we see some version of this quite often. I actually brought a few quotations that I want to start with just to sort of frame -- frame this a little bit. So let me read them. So bear with me. Here's the first one. "In the utilitarian and scientific age like today our colleges fail to prepare students for the work they have to do in their actual life that awaits them." Another one, "The throbbing life of today demands from our college something besides learning and culture. The world cares not for pedants steeped in useless knowledge. It calls for men who know something of the real problems of the real world and are fitting to grapple with them." And then this is my last one. It's one of my favorites. "While a college student has been learning a little about the barbarous and petty squabbles of a far distant past or trying to master languages which are dead, the future captains of industry is hotly engaged in the school of experience. Obtaining the very knowledge required for his future triumphs." Now that last quote probably gave it away. Captain of industry probably tells you that these are late-19th Century quotations. Not early 21st Century. Although they sounded a little bit how [inaudible] might began. And they all come from this period of the late-19th Century which historians call the Gilded Age. But I think there's some real echo's today in a lot of them. You've probably heard the echo there. The Gilded Age as historians call it, we use that phrase coming from -- borrow that phrase from Mark Twain. A novel from 1873 of that title. It's the post-Civil War period and it's really a period of just staggeringly enormous change. Technological change. Economic change. Social/demographic change. Cultural change. And when we teach this in history classes we tend to sum it up with three -- what we call the three voweled processes. Industrialization, Immigration and Urbanization, which tells you a lot about what's going on. So and it's the -- this context of really extreme change. There's a lot of skepticism right? About the -- the college, the 17th and 18th Century college. Right? How could it possibly be fitted to the modern era? And certainly the late-19th Century considered itself the modern era and that's -- as historians we look back and we call that the making of -- that's the moment of modern American emerged. Was it relevant? Was it useful? Was it scientific? Should it be scientific? What -- what were the liberal arts good for? So there's a lot of questioning that happened as you can hear from these quotes. And -- and what happens over really from about the 1860s to the early-20th Century, is this period of major -- just a kind of explosion of reform, innovation, renovation, modernizations, secularize of the colleges. You know part of the story that I'm not really going to deal with today because it's not as relevant, but part of that story is very much about the land grant colleges. Right? 1862, so right in the midst of the Civil War that gets passed, the Laurel and Land Grant Act. So all those Ag schools that we think of or the great state universities get founded in that period. Or a bunch of them. Another piece of the story is about the major almost pure advanced research university. The Johns Hopkins, that model. Kind of based on a German model, PhD granting institution. But the story I want to focus on today is what the traditional colleges do. Because they also -- a big part of that story is the adaptation and reformation that they undergo. So just to give you a sense of that -- and I should say, when I look at -- I think the process is slightly reactive. The colleges are -- are looking out at the world and thinking, "Oh my gosh, we" -- you know, they're fearing their relevance or marginalization. All these alternate paths. But it's also expansive and visionary. It really gives us, the institutions that Mike started with that the rest of the world has admired. The -- the American liberal arts college. Liberal arts college/university. However you want to call it, really comes from this period and through this moment of reformation. So some of the things they do -- and I'll just give you a sense quickly of some of the reformations that colleges, places like Dartmouth undergo. And this is over about a four year -- four-decade period. Sorry. They removed requirements. Right? Things like you no longer had to have Greek and Latin to be admitted. And you no longer had to study them here. So removal of what one of my quotations said, "languages which are dead". Removal of mandatory chapel. Right? I'm sure the students would love to see that one come back but [laughter] -- yes, that one went away too. You know, different places, different time periods. The curriculum changed tremendously. So you had sort of the introduction of modern language. Right? Modern languages studied. History. History was studied. And the really big story in some ways is this kind of catch all umbrella piece of knowledge called moral philosophy. This was kind of the catchall subject that all the senior class studied with the college president. They took a class with the college president called Moral Philosophy. That went away and that splintered into all the disciplines that we know today. All the social science disciplines, which did not really exist prior to this moment as disciplines. So economics, political science, sociology, anthropology, all those. Of course, the other big story is the physical and natural sciences. Right? Which get incorporated. I mean there's a very clear sense on the part of colleges that the country needs science. That's absolutely important. Both pure and applied. Right? So they're looking at both these things and I think we'll probably hear a lot more about this from the other panelists, but just to frame it in really big terms, at Dartmouth you can think about something like the Chandler Scientific School, which is actually from the 1850s. It's kind of a stand-alone science school but like a lot of other schools, Harvard had one, Yale had one, as well. But it got wholly absorbed in the college by -- by the 1890s. It sort of comes in -- in to be integrated. Similarly Thayer. Right? It's a story from the 1870s. But it's going to become absorbed a little bit -- integrated more carefully with the college. Tuck, the School of Business. 1900s. This is all in this era and Dartmouth is very much, you know, in sort of the front of this vanguard which is changing the liberal arts college to make it modern and new. Another big change is the concept of choice or election. You don't come and study everyone else studies anymore. Right? You have a major. And with majors -- the major system comes the elective system as well. That -- that whole depth and breath concept that we talk about at the liberal arts. Right? You study -- you find your passion, burrow in on that but along the way make sure you have a kind of breadth of learning and breadth of knowledge that comes with that. So but the big thing I just kind of want to emphasize here is that while this is a really major period of change, places like Dartmouth -- I'd say Yale and Princeton as well, schools like that -- they don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Right? They don't go full on science research university or full on practical knowledge only. They really keep the core of something that's recognizable to us still of the college. And so just bear with me. Here's another quotation. So they're embracing new scientific knowledge, new ways of learning and knowing. Addressing "real problems" of "actual life" as the quotation said. But careful to maintain the core. So one of my absolute favorite reformers, who is a really big figure in my first book, so I have a real soft spot for him. He wrote, "The traditional liberal arts college, those colleges serve as a perpetual protest against the strong tendency to make all American culture hasty and superficial. They stand for learning which makes no money but helps to make men.' And that's kind of a cliche but I think it's significant that he's writing this of course and it's the Gilded Age which is a period that's really quite famous for it's dedication to making money [laughter]. And having lots of it. And the significant thing here is while they're undergoing this change but yet staying true on some level to the old college, the early-20th Century is going to see this major second thought on the part of a lot of those land grant universities and pure research universities who start to realize maybe we actually don't have the baby. Maybe we never had the baby and maybe we threw it out with the bathwater. Maybe we're missing something. And so they start to kind of look again. So here's just a quotation from a -- this is an inauguration of an early-20th Century president at a big university. "The residential liberal arts college can give freedom of thought, of breadth of outlook and training for citizenship which the professional schools in this country cannot equal." So it's really looking at the college. And what we see is a bunch of these schools, universities starting to imitate and ape and emulate places like Dartmouth, Yale, and Princeton. [Inaudible]. So if I have time for just the take away which I try to give my students a take away. What's the point [laughter]? Just real quickly three points. One is that higher education. Right? It's always in flux. It's always changing. Maybe you could say it's always in crisis. You know, the crisis and the change come together. It is always changing even though it has this reputation of being the most conservative of all institutions. And there is a truth to that as well but it -- it is always in flux. It does not look exactly like it did in any other period. Liberal arts institutions I think, you know, clearly exist in a culture and they must be responsible to the needs and problems of that culture. That's -- without a doubt it changes in response in all -- in every period. The Progressive Era, the Cold War. Right? The -- the modern university. So that's the second take away. The third one however, that is that as much as they're part of a culture, colleges tend to stay apart from the culture on some level, as well. They don't give in fully to the cultures specific needs and problems I think. Because those needs and problems will not be tomorrows needs and problems. Right? I mean they're always changing and so you can't give over fully. So I think it's important to sort of think of it as sort of this process that culture, counter culture or accommodation, resistance. And the importance of, you know, not only thinking of specific knowledge to meet specific problems but a kind of broader set of skills and, you know, things that we like to talk about. Sharpening the critical faculties of our students. Nourishing the creative faculties you might say. And encouraging the sort of independent thought and judgment and -- and that sort of thing that will help them face the new challenges that we can't actually anticipate. I mean we try to anticipate but we don't actually know what tomorrow brings. So that's -- those are my three take away's. >> Michael Mastenduno: All right. Not bad, thank you. [ Applause ] There's a lot to think about there. The arts and sciences are conducting a curricular review right now and I think Leslie's comments tempt me to pose this choice to the students. We can either bring back mandatory chapel [laughter], or every senior has to take a class with the president. In this case, advanced calculus [laughter]. So you guys make the call. All right? Don. You are in some ways an institutional figure at Dartmouth and I would like for you to reflect on the liberal arts at Dartmouth. Have there been key transitions, turning points, times that something that really important happened at Dartmouth that's relevant to the kinds of debates and arguments that Leslie pointed to? >> Don: Since Leslie talked about history I guess your question is asking me to embody history [laughter]. I am history. Leslie gets to talk about it. [Laughter] But I first want to say before I respond to that question how grateful I am to be part of this discussion on this occasion. Which is the inauguration of the next president of Dartmouth. And that occasion is especially meaningful to me because President Hanlon came in the same year I began teaching at Dartmouth, 1973. And we both served. I taught, he learned. I learned form the students I taught under a great president, John Keminy. Who in one of the earliest addresses to the students, and faculty, and alumni, and administrators of this institution said what you said. That is that you can't be doing liberal arts education well, unless you know you're always going to be in contestation. Liberal arts education learns by addressing challenges and meeting them. That's why the liberal arts draws its history from [inaudible] liberals. The arts of the free person. And the arts of the free person can be understood as individually as a student saying, "My years at Dartmouth changed my life." And it can be understood at a much more encompassing level when the institution itself undergoes a change of heart or a change of mind. When John Kiminey talked to those of us who did not know the history, I'm still learning from what's edifying about this history. He mentioned his great predecessors. Specifically, William Jewett Tucker who was the president who ended chapel by the way if you want [laughter] to thank a former president. He came in in 1893 and he was the last of the great preacher presidents. But he came in in 1893 and he said he wanted to remove an institution that had only 350 students, only 28 faculty, and was identified with a region and with a religious sect and liberate it. Both from its sectarianism, and its regionalism. So Dartmouth grew from 350 to 1,067. From 28 faculty to 88 faculty. He added 11 buildings and it was Tucker who decided that the students would no longer take the same curriculum. This man who emerged at precisely the moment you cited. The Gilded Age when the United States was entering what for Dartmouth would be a long 20th Century. From 1893 to the beginning of the 21st, on tomorrow's day. He demanded that students have a major as well as electives. And in order to signify that in the plant he said, "We're going to have intensive relation to one subject and broad acquaintance with a multitude of subjects, and I'm going to put a heating unit at the center of this institution to let you know what intensity means or on bad days what it might not mean." The heating was challenged even then [laughter]. William Jewett Tucker was a president who felt that Dartmouth had to liberate itself form it's own prior understanding of what it was and what it represented in order to become a world class institution in the 20th Century. Another great precursor who was the embodiment of a transition. Kiminey acknowledged him and revered him. It was his immediate precursor John Sloan Dickey who decided he would memorialize William Jewett Tucker on this campus by inaugurating the Tucker Foundation in order to acknowledge the continuity between a once sectarian school and a great school of the liberal arts. John Sloan Dickey said, "Well sustain the best of Tucker's social gospel by adding to the competence of a major, a sense of conscience that direct competence into leadership and judgment. And something close to wisdom." In order to get the students to experience that practically he introduced the great issues to Dartmouth. If you want to practice the liberating arts as he said, as he called them I want you to do it by confronting the great problems of the day so you can begin to feel your capabilities translate themselves into forms of knowledge that can lead. When John Kiminey became president he said that Dartmouth had to undergo a second liberation from sectarianism by becoming coeducational because an institution that only taught men could not claim to be truly liberated either from region or sect. John Kiminey in order to make it practicable for that change to transpire developed the Dartmouth plan, which made it possible for students on terms away from Dartmouth to translate the knowledge they're received in the classroom into the way of practicing it outside of Dartmouth on their terms off. So that when they returned they could share lived experience and transform the institution into an institution in which knowledge becomes a common good because the sharing of it produces a common wealth that makes artes liberales a reality as opposed to simply an educational ideal. When I taught my first class at Dartmouth, Mr. Hanlon as I then called him was a student [laughter]. And we had to teach in the English department, students how to write succinct, precise sentences at the same times as they were to make sense of John Milton's <i>Paradise Lost</i> [laughter]. And there was no succinct sentence and no [laughter] precision to be found, in any of the 12 books of <i>Paradise Lost</i>. Mr. Hanlon one day observed to me that, "I guess what we have to learn in this class Professor Peeves is to learn how to write sentences that are precisely the opposite of John Milton's [laughter]." And that educated me. When a Dartmouth student returns to the place she or he loves in order to turn all that Dartmouth was and supremely is into the imagining of what it can be, it becomes a moment of true transition. And that becomes a moment of inaugural transformation. If I taught Mr. Hanlon how not to write like John Milton I'm looking forward to President Hanlon teaching all of us how to let <i>Paradise Lost</i> become part of our past, and the paradise regained become Dartmouth's future. I'm delighted to be part of this occasion. [ Applause ] >> Michael Mastenduno: I think Professor Peeves just threw down a challenge [laughter]. But you have some time. [Laughter] I'd like you instead to ponder how Tucker in 1893 could add that many faculty and build that many buildings [laughter]. And not incur the wrath of the man sitting for seats down from you [laughter]. You work on that. We're going to do some other things here. Stephan. I have really two questions for you. >> Stephan: Oh. >> Michael Mastenduno: You are a liberally educated man. You went to an outstanding liberal arts college. Haverford College. You're also a scientist and maybe you can do two things for us. Can you talk a little bit personally about how that liberal arts experience may have led you to your current career and passion? But also can you reflect a little bit on whether scientists actually think of themselves as doing the liberal arts in their research and teaching or are they doing something else? >> Stephan: That's a tough question but I will try my best to answer. [Inaudible] I got to be nice. So yeah, so I think the best way to start with this is with a little story. I grew up in the Bronx in New York, originally from Trinidad, and I went to a very large high school. [Inaudible] High School, 6,000 students at the time. And most of my classmates were from working class backgrounds. Mostly black and Latino. And so the few of us that were thinking about going to college had pressure from our parents to go and do pragmatic things. Go make some money. And so every school I applied to -- most of the schools I applied to were first of all things that I was good at. I actually used the word was because I don't feel like I'm [laughter] -- I'm good a physicists as I once thought I was [laughter]. My students hopefully are not hearing this [laughter]. Yeah, so -- so I applied to places like MIT and like, [inaudible] RPI and, you know -- and I was looking at these places and then a small liberal arts college reached out to me and gave me a free trip. So I went on this weekend with other students of color. This is a very successful program. It's something also that the admissions office here does very successfully. And so I went out to this thing and went there for a couple of days. Stayed over at some other student's dorm room and partied. Not parties [laughter] but studied. And one random morning we were -- a group of us were being led, given a tour around the campus. This was Haverford. And some strange man walked by with -- with a strange walk. And he approached us as if like by mistake and he goes, "How many of you are here are interested in physics?" So it was me and this guy named [foreign name]. It was this 16-year-old genius who was applying to college. He ended up going to Columbia instead. We both raised out hands because well, we like physics. So we ended up in this guys -- he took us to his lab and now we are in the lab of Jerry Calub by the way, who did -- had the first experimental confirmation of chaos theory. Right? So this is Nobel Prize notable work. So we're in this guys lab and he's like, "Oh yeah, this is chaos theory" and all this stuff. And he's talking to us as if we're already scientists [laughter]. So me and -- we're looking like, this guy actually thinks we're smart. [Laughter] You know? And so anyway, I had this dilemma because when I was thinking about colleges and all I had this dilemma about where should I go? Should I go to a liberal arts college or should I go to MIT? Right? And of course at the time my parents thought I was going to do such a thing. Right? Which is there's a lot of pressure here. How you going to make money going to a liberal arts college? Because by the way, the things that you were hearing at Haverford, at places like Haverford -- don't worry, just go pursue your interests. You know, pursue passionately and, you know, you'll land on your feet after you graduate. So, okay fast forward -- fast forward, you know, 20 years into the future. It's really interesting that the institutions that I became interested in in terms of teaching are liberal arts institutions. And the reason why is because well -- I don't know why. No, that's not true. [Laughter] I need -- the reason has to do with another interesting thing. And I'm going to -- this is a recent story. Something that I just -- beautiful surprise. So I run the EE Just program here, so holler to all my EE Just scholars. And we decided to do something interesting. We wanted to have a more informal study session. Right? So for the physics, math and chemistry classes we decided to do something informal and with, you know, the support of John Cole, the Dean of the Graduate School we managed to get a couple of warm and fuzzy graduate students to jump in and, you know, just work informally with -- with freshmen mostly. And these are mostly underrepresented students. And, you know, they're working on the problem sets and I decide to step out the room and leave them to be while they're working on, you know, calculus or what have you. Just working on the problem set. I come back an hour later to see the graduate student and the students -- these are [inaudible] students and [inaudible] undergraduate students working -- talking about the graduate student's research. So somehow, you know, the problem that they were working on segwayed into a research problem. And I think this captures a spirit of the liberal arts. Which is what you have going on there were freshmen who were informing graduate students on their research actually. They started asking questions that the graduate students wouldn't think of asking. In fact, that's actually what happened -- happens with me. I'm attracted to that, as well. So I very -- I feel very much that my research and the ability to take the research to the next level requires a serious engagement with our students because they ask actually -- I walk into a class the first day of class I usually say, "I want nothing but dumb questions from you guys [laughter]. Okay. So just please, I only want dumb questions." And I'm serious about that. Because I believe that this is the idea of liberating ourselves and taking ourselves outside the box is -- is coming from the spirit of the liberal arts. And you know, an anecdote for that too -- one final thing I will say is that one of my mentors, my great mentors Leon Cruper who won the Nobel Prize for [inaudible] activity, you know, he told me that, you know, the -- the -- you know, the application -- so application is very important. The -- you know, I think and we'll have the Dean of Engineering tell us about that, so I'm not going to try to even go there. But it's kind of interesting this interplay between the innovation that comes from the liberal arts from that sort of introspection. And how it's related to the unchartered directions of the -- the surprising directions that it may lead to for applications ultimately. >> Michael Mastenduno: Great, thank you. [ Applause ] >> Michael Mastenduno: You know, colleagues often ask well, you don't teach graduate students in your particular field at Dartmouth. You know, how -- where do you get these ideas and can undergraduates help with that? And it's just striking how much help undergraduates are to faculty members in their own research at Dartmouth. I mean across the divisions I hear over and over again from faculty members that say precisely what Stephan said which is the ability of an undergraduate, a liberated undergraduate to ask the question that people steeped in the field are either afraid to ask or somehow have been rendered incapable of asking because of how close they are to it is -- is really both refreshing and also edifying for faculty members here. And I wish I had a nickel every time I saw an undergraduate's name in an acknowledgement section of a published article or a book by a Dartmouth faculty member. Because then we'd be able to pay for some of those buildings that we actually [laughter] -- we need. So, Joe! >> Mike. >> Michael Mastenduno: [Laughter] You are a distinguished engineer and because we're friends and because you too are a New York kind of guy and don't mind a little bluntness, can I ask what are you doing on this panel? [Laughter] Isn't engineering like a technical professional kind of thing? What... >> Joe: You know I'm tempted to give the glib answer. I was on my way to my lab, I made a wrong turn [laughter] I came through the door and this is where I ended up. Thanks for the question Mike [laughter]. You know I -- I think -- and it is kidding aside, an interesting and serious question that's worthy of some discussion. I think if you -- and I did a little reading beforehand. I didn't pull quotes as Leslie did but I was looking for terms that people use to describe engineering education and terms that people use to describe the value of a liberal arts education. And you find when engineering education is discussed in the media or in -- in books, people use terms like training. Whereas for the liberal arts we talk about education. Engineering we talk about pre-professional or vocational. The liberal arts we talk about leadership. Engineering we talk about focus. Focusing on a particular problem. The liberal arts we say things like expanding your horizons, building your learning, building knowledge needed to thrive in a democracy, thrive in society. Leslie earlier spoke about the liberal arts being a training for citizenship which the professional schools cannot provide. And, you know, I read this and I think about my experience here at Dartmouth and the approach to engineering and the liberal arts here at Dartmouth and -- and I have to say I think this is flat out wrong. I don't think the goals are that separate. I don't think the approach is that separate. I don't think the mission is that distinctive or different. Liberal arts certainly has a place in engineering. It teaches our students to think about the context of the problems they're trying to solve. Think about the world they're solving problems for. Think about the community they're trying to develop solutions for. We pride ourselves on helping engineers learn that when you're posed with a problem, posed with a challenge the immediate solution isn't necessarily an engineering solution even if you are an engineer. You have to step back and ask what's the broader problem that this community needs solved? What's the broader challenge that the world is facing that we're trying to address? And maybe it's a technology based solution, maybe it's not. And I think a big part of that certainly here at Dartmouth comes from the broad exposure and the deep entrenchment in the liberal arts that engineering students have. And I think while it's something I would say we do particularly well here at Dartmouth, we're the only institution in the country that requires our students to get a Bachelor of Arts degree in Engineering before they earn the professional degree, the Bachelor of Engineering degree here at Dartmouth, the BS, Bachelor of Science elsewhere. And this is an an era where over the past decade or two other institutions have reduced the graduation requirements to engineering, taking out some of the liberal arts context. We remain very proudly a five year integrated program because we think it's the right way to do it. We think it produces thinkers. We think it produces leaders. But I would also argue that I think particularly when we think about the liberal arts today and where the liberal arts are heading that you can make a case or at least I would certainly make a case that engineering has an equally important role to play in a liberal arts education. In a contemporary liberal arts education. If you think about the world that our students are experiencing, the world that they're going to inhabit immediately after graduation it's hard to argue that technology -- that the built environment, the human created technology is not a significant part of their daily lives. And I don't mean simply their professional lives but it's going to inform anything and everything that they do on a daily basis. And to have some comfort with technology, to have some understanding of how it's developed, why it's developed, the trade-offs that go into developing technology, would be hugely enriching to students regardless of discipline and undergraduate major in liberal arts. You know and I think the great thing about the liberal arts when I -- when I discuss this with colleagues here at Dartmouth, when I read, when I think about my own education and ask what is the liberal arts do? What does it really bring? I mean of course you get core knowledge in a disciplinary area but it really teaches us to -- to question, to explore broadly, to not accept a particular truth as a given, to ask how and why in addition to when and where. And I think engineering very nicely compliments all of that by saying and the next question is why not? Right? Once we understand all of this, why do we accept things like as they are? Why not develop a solution that will address a pervasive problem that the world's facing? And whether you're talking about things in health care, climate change, renewable energy, the environment, communications, access to clean water, supplying food to growing -- to feed a growing population. All of these are complex problems. All of these require leading thinkers and intellectuals. And policy makers and public officials to help address. But I think there's a technology component in each of these and helping students as part of their liberal arts education understand getting some comfort with engineering and technology is part of that would be hugely enriching. And so that's my pitch actually. My view is certainly I think we recognize -- many institutions do but at Dartmouth in particular we do long recognize that the liberal arts are broadening and enriching and for this pre-professional program in engineering. But I think similarly and conversely we need to think about how some exposure to engineering could really help Dartmouth distinctively broaden the understanding of what a liberal arts education is. [ Applause ] >> Michael Mastenduno: I must say I'm really glad you took that wrong turn Joe [laughter]. Actually, you know, academics like to run around saying why, why? And very few say why not. And I think introducing that into the discussion as you have is critically important. Especially, in an era when the students who come to Dartmouth ask why not before they ask why. So thank you. Annette. I think you are exceptionally well positioned to really answer two questions. >> Annette: Okay, great [laughter], here it comes. >> Michael Mastenduno: I mean the first is you are the only panelist who actually experienced a liberal arts education at Dartmouth. So if you would... >> Annette: Okay. >> Michael Mastenduno: ...indulge us and just reflect a little bit on your own personal experience with the liberal arts here in this context. >> Annette: Okay. >> Michael Mastenduno: But secondly I think of you as a leading public intellectual and we're in the throes of a great debate, so I really -- I think the audience needs to hear from you as well on your take on this debate about the liberal arts. >> Annette: Okay, well I came to Dartmouth in the fall of 1977. We missed each other. And I had definitely in my mind that I wanted a college experience that would be liberating in a way that you -- that Don has suggested. That it was a place where you could explore areas of interest. Find your passion, all those kinds of things that people say that you're supposed to do. I originally thought that I was going to be -- at the same time I thought well, at some point I have to make a living. So I thought about law school as a possibility I had the notion of going off to New York and becoming the great American novelist which had been number one on the list. I thought well maybe that might not be so practical. Law school would be a thing to do and so I came here thinking that I was going to be a government major. Everybody thinks that if you want to go to law school you got to be an EC major, or a government major, or whatever. But my love of history was always there. And I took classes in government and I like them. But I took history too my freshman year and I said, what's the point of coming here, being in this place, having this resource, Baker Library if you don't do what it is that you love? And something that you think is a natural part of you. So I switched. I decided as a freshman I was going to be a history major. And I proceeded to take history classes but I also proceeded to continue doing something that I loved to do even before I came to college and that is, read old newspapers, hang out in the stacks [laughter] of the libraries. I think a lot of the stuff that I'm doing today -- I mean grated I learned a lot in my classes at Dartmouth, but there's something to be said for being away off into the -- you know, away from the world, from the hustle and bustle of the world in a place where you can concentrate on reading and thinking. Having your friends, doing those kinds of things, as well. But for me it was the perfect environment for me. The notion of being able to explore, to be liberated, to do those kinds of things was what I was looking for, and so it was perfect for me in that regard. My professors were very helpful. My classmates, the kinds of discussions that you have in this environment where people are asking, you know, why, why not? Debating, contention, contesting things. All those kinds of things were important to me and so I took it for granted that that's what education was about. And one of the things that I've learned and you were -- stole a lot of what it was that I wanted to say [laughter]. That [laughter] haven't understood -- the sort of separation that people... >> That's called borrowing. >> Annette: Borrowing. [Laughter] No, historians would call it stealing -- no. [Laughter] Anticipating would be... >> Refining. >> Annette: Refining is the word I was going to say. But this idea that they're these separate categories and that you're knowledge is -- you know, you have knowledge that you learned over here. The knowledge you learn over there. But so many of the things that I learned could be applied in lots of different fields. Problem solving, issue spotting, all those kinds of things we do in all these professions. And so I really think that people who have a well- rounded -- or well- rounded in liberal education -- liberal arts education can do lots of different things, or technical things that you have to learn, math, and so forth. But the notion that you can't -- that we're not doing the same things, that this problem of critical thinking is sort of confined to one area is wrong. So I think that this was a place -- the environment was conducive to it. Quiet. Some people might have said too quiet. The resources that were available, teachers who were available, it was a wonderful place for me. It was liberating to me in that sense and it's sort of set me up for all the things that I've been able to do. As a public intellectual I suppose I'm sort of engaged in this issue because I was very honored to be asked of the National Commission on the Humanities by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences decided to -- to set up this commission. They were asked by members of Congress and the Senate as well. Bi-partisan effort to try to make the case for the liberal arts. I mean STEM has made its case and is winning its case. But wanted to say -- not defensively because I do think you're right. There is some defensiveness on this part. But we wanted to do something that suggested not just -- you know, STEM isn't important, look at us. But to say that it's part. It should all be together. And we met over a course of two years in various places; San Francisco, Chicago and Washington and once in New York. Presidents of universities, actors. John Lithgow whose -- who's at Dartmouth quite a bit and George Lucas who by the way, was one of the most dedicated [laughter]. Showed up at every meeting, stayed at the beginning to the end. You think somebody like that has other things to do. But he's very, very focused on education and this is very, very important to him. And we came out with a report, "The Heart of the Matter". That was released recently and the idea was to get not just the federal government involved, but state humanities counsels and we went to all the various regions and met with people who were very, very excited about this. And so even though there's not anything to be defensive about because the wellspring of good faith -- good -- of -- of support that we got in so many different areas suggests a lot of people understand this. That they understand that it ahs to be both things that we're doing. And that's why people are coming from all over the world to places like this to say, look we've had -- we focused on the technical side of it but we understand it has to be all of it. So we've had a good response. I just got an email today to say that lots of people have been doing fundraising on the basis of that report. Have gotten people really, really excited. People who understand that you need all of it. Technical side, the humanities, the arts all together. So it never -- it sort of struck me as odd as I said before that we should come to a point where we have to make this case. Because it's so obvious to me that this -- this is the core of civilization and that engineering, math, all of those things I think are a part of the liberal arts, as well. The sort of questioning spirit that it -- that it requires. And so I'm just grateful and very thankful that I was able to be able to be here and be away from it all. Stanford was a second choice but Stanford was too big. This was small. This was just right. It was just right for -- as an experience for me. [ Applause ] >> Michael Mastenduno: I think there are so many good insights in what you said. I think one that particularly important to undergraduates is this idea of getting away from hustle and bustle, you know. Sometimes we feel here that we bring these tremendously accomplished students who've made their pre-college career by being experts at hustle and bustle and think they need to replicate it when they get here by continuing to do everything they can possibly -- I don't want to break this, it's not mine [laughter]. Everything they -- they can possibly do and I think that's -- this is great advice to think this is the chance in your life -- and you know, you want to call it a luxury, call it a luxury but it's actually more a necessity to actually step back and reflect and think deeply and read widely and do things you wouldn't ordinarily do. And every chance I get I tell undergraduates that and -- and I hope those of you who've been through it and know on the other side of it what a privilege it is, can help spread that -- that word as well. Well first let's thank all the panelists for opening us up. [ Applause ] I'd like to turn to some questions. I know there must be questions in the audience but I -- there are a couple that were sent in in advance and I think I'd like to address some of those first. Just two or three and then I promise we -- we will get to audience sort of real time audience questions. One that really struck me -- I'll read it -- was this one. And I'll ask whatever panelist would like to take a crack at it to take a crack at it. It seems to me that American liberal arts education was designed to train the elite. Then was universalized for a few decades. But now it's facing economic challenges to its sustainability. Therefore, will it return to just be training for the elite? >> Leslie: I'll start just on the history piece of that and I think that's a really great question. I mean of course places like Dartmouth were founded originally to train the elite or ministerial elite. Right? But part of that -- that period of reformation I was talking about, college -- the percentage of the population that went to college was still really tiny. But there was a very aggressive effort to democratize the university. Democratize college. And this was also that period I discussed was the period of the rise of women's colleges, so all the women's colleges that you've heard of, Seven Sisters. All post Civil War period, 1860s through1890s. Historically black colleges, liberal arts colleges, great schools like Fisk, Howard, Morehouse. Those are also stories of 1860s and 70s. So there's a real effort I think and a real urgency actually to make that democratic. To bring people in. And I think what the questioner asks, you know, that it's this kind of story of opening, increasing democratic access to, and now is it sort of closing. I think that is a real fear that a lot of people and of course it's the cost is the story here. And that's where the -- this is where the crisis, the crisis talk -- we've been there done that. But the crisis talk around the concept I think actually is a real crisis. And it would just be absolutely counter to what every -- I think every academic reformer from 1860 on wants. I mean that's just -- that would just be a terrible thing if that were -- were to happen. So I'll just say that -- frame that historically that that's very much counter to the spirit of -- and the democracy of liberally educating a citizenry, of all countries in the world a democratic country needs that. And it would just be an absolutely horrible thing. I think it would be devastating for something like that to reemerge in the 21st Century. >> Michael Mastenduno: Thanks. I'm going to resist the temptation to let each panelist address each question, although there might be a temptation. But Don if you want to just jump in on this one and then I... >> Don: Yeah, because this is a really, really important question. And every time an institution produces leaders retroactively then that's described as an elite's institution. When John Kiminey wished to transform this institution he refounded it by recalling the charter. Which is not to train elite students, but to train Native Americans. And when John Kiminey refounded Dartmouth around its chartered ideals he opened it at the same time. A liberal arts education is the heart of a democracy. You cannot have deliberative, reflective, critical thinking which is the basis of freedom and equality without acknowledging not as an ideal but as a truth that has to be actualized, practiced. The liberal arts, the arts of free beings in a world you wish to be free for all. >> Annette: And that's why it's so tragic the withdrawal of public support for public universities. That gave people an opportunity. I mean I'm all for Dartmouth and so forth but gave thousands of people, you know, opportunities that they wouldn't have had... >> Right. >> Annette: that is a part of a -- a common contribution to making the greatness of the country. And so that -- that's the real -- it's a matter of priorities. That's what we're choosing to do. It doesn't have to be that way. But go ahead. >> Michael Mastenduno: Thanks. Let me try just a couple more here. Here's one that's future oriented. In the next 20 years are we going to see changes in the world of higher ed, which are going to completely change our current notion of the liberal arts? >> Stephan: I'll go with that. >> Michael Mastenduno: You want to go with that? >> Stephan: Because I think in a lot of ways I think Dartmouth actually epitomizes what that future might look like and it gives me an opportunity to talk about an upcoming symposium. [Laughter] The EE Just symposium. The future of science. The reason why I said future, that's... >> Shameless. >> Stephan: That's interesting is because one of the -- one of the reasons why this thing is -- okay, I have lots of colleagues who I've become friends with in different departments. In the music department for example, and anthropology department. In various departments. Don. And a lot of those friendships come about because we end up talking -- we end up having crosstalk's and those things end up becoming projects. So for example me and Mike Casey, the former chair of the computer science department we were thinking about, you know, quantum physics and music. Okay? It sounds weird, right? [Laughter] But in a lot of ways I think the next 20 years, that's going to be common ground. Because, you know, science is not over yet. Right? What we -- there's a lot of crap we don't -- things [laughter] we don't know and might be related to music for example. Might be related to something we have no idea it should be. So I think the next 20 years [inaudible] we're kind of headed for leading those next 20 years. >> Michael Mastenduno: Joe I'm tempted to... >> Joe: And I think just briefly -- although I'm going to keep coming back to -- to the role I think engineering might play in a broad view of what the liberal arts represents -- I think we have an opportunity to talk more about the outward focus. The opportunity for an outward focus of a liberal arts education. We here in the campus, on this stage come back and back -- come back over and over again, to this notion that the world's problems are our problems and we should be educating our students, preparing them to go off and be leaders in tackling these problems. And I think if the focus of the liberal arts education is helping build the knowledge, build the awareness, build the education and build the skills and skills are not a bad word here. To go out and build your career, dedicate your life towards tackling those problems, facing those challenges. I think that's a very powerful message. And I will of course say I think engineering has a role to play in that [laughter]. >> Michael Mastenduno: You've convinced me. Questions? Please, there's a microphone. Let's see, right over here. Please, yep. >> Nia Lorman: Nia Lorman class of '84. Two days ago I was at the New York Times symposium on technology, education, etcetera. I wanted to hear from the cool-aide drinkers as I might refer to them about what changes were being considered due to MOOKS, Coursera, Khan Academy, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. One of my favorite pieces of it at the end was the undergraduate student who happened to be at MIT who first took the MIT X -- did some really interesting things. He's an interesting person. But now he's at MIT and he was asked, "So which one?" And of course an education is far more than a bunch of courses. How do we respond to the cool-aide drinkers? >> Joe: I think when we're talking about some of the transformations we're seeing and technologies are enabling us to deliver educational content in different ways, we have to think about this as something that's helping us transform the delivery of information. And bring students perhaps to a different place at the start of their education. And so, what do I mean by that? You know, I -- when we think about things like MOOKS or online delivery of content we need to be clever in creating it. Thinking about ways that this frees up time in the classroom and so we can do what we really do best. The one on one engagement with the student. Questioning, face to face. Around -- in my world and Stephan's world, around an experiment or around a question. Around a piece of equipment that you're trying to diagnose. Around a problem you're trying to solve. You can't get that from an online delivery. That kind of interactive engagement and questioning. But with the interactive delivery of core content can do is help you come to that discussion, prepared at a higher level. What it would also enable us to do perhaps is draw on content from elsewhere to provide lectures that are covering broader material, broader range and maybe we could rather than flying someone in in person, delivery one or two lectures from an expert in the world who's a leading teacher at a particular field. As a way of augmenting what we do in the classroom. But I also think these kinds of things if we use them smartly to help free up time in the classroom, in the laboratory for that kind of individualized attention and engagement, questioning, probing, pushing, and inquiry that works best in this environment then it's a positive for us. And so yeah, transformation will take place to get us to that place and we're just starting to ask questions about how we might go about it. But I see it as a -- as an opportunity for us. I don't see it as a threat. >> Michael Mastenduno: Great. Annette please and then. >> Annette: Obviously the [inaudible] -- Harvard is very big on this and I have been approached about doing a MOOK, but have resisted that in favor of something -- something they call modules. With the idea that I would do like a legal history module that could be used to supplement class. Because one of the thing is find teaching first year law students is that people don't have an understanding. You need to have an understanding of the history of the country I believe to understand -- to think about how property, contracts, torts, all those things came into being and how they work. So things like that. A segment that could be -- that I'm going to do that can be used in other classes I could use in my own. I'm not very much interested in doing quite frankly a class that people are going to use to -- so that they don't have to hire a teacher at a state university. I think that that's something that people might be thinking about. I don't know that Harvard X -- well, I guess with Sandel's class there was some controversy about that. But I do think that using it smartly is something that's important but I don't -- I don't think it's -- I mean for me not -- not something that would be transformative in the sense of replacing what's supposed to be the classroom experience. >> Michael Mastenduno: Great. Thanks. Don you have a thought on that? >> Don: I think the MOOKS are comparable to the commons called Google. Where you have the opportunity to get some knowledge that's produced by a specific framer of the knowledge in an efficient way. But you loose the creative community of sharing knowledge in residence. Where through the exchange of ideas after you emerge from Google or MOOK and the creative collaborations that are generated by what's missing from what you either received from Google or MOOK, will vitalize the importance of a residential community of co-learners. There's a difference between the real world of education and the virtual. Make the virtual real by living it as a community of active learners where the relationship between teaching and learning is an endlessly reciprocal act of gift giving. I don't see it as a threat. I see it as a resource. >> Michael Mastenduno: Thanks. >> [Inaudible] primarily to Professor Peeves and also, the other panel members could chime in. I would like to know whether I'm remembering correctly what John Sloan Dickey -- because I was a student during that era -- meant by the liberating arts. And if I recall correctly he used to refer to it liberating arts from the realm of ignorance into a more exciting realm. And then secondly if I can get another question in, could you please explain to me what has taken the place of my favorite course, "Great Issues" and is there another opportunity for it to return to Dartmouth? >> Don: That's a great question. John Sloan Dickey actually as a great rhetorician constantly re-described what he meant by the liberating arts. Sometimes he described it as the means of moving from ignorance to knowledge. Sometimes he described it as the movement from being a lesser self to a greater self. Sometimes he described it as the art of liberating your various senses. He said -- and this is where he always emphasized the importance of the humanities -- "If you stop learning how to see you might lose the power of sight." If your imagination isn't educated by say an art historian in how to regard with patience the most nuanced of movements, of a line across a canvas or if you don't learn the art of listening, or the art of patiently deliberating -- not turning it into a twitter line, but patiently deliberating over a passage by Shakespeare or Melville or yes, even John Milton [laughter] you're going to lose the capacity to listen to each other into free speech. What's taken the place of the "Great Issues" course is the great issue Dartmouth presently is, and that I look forward to seeing inaugurated into a new reality over the next decade. >> Michael Mastenduno: Dale. >> Dale: First of all my congratulations for the panel for providing six distinctly different good examples of rhetoric, not in the sense that sometimes people use of saying, oh, that's rhetorical. But in the sense of being persuasive about what the liberal arts are. Now if I'm being flattering that's because I'm going to say something else, [laughter] ask a question and the question is this. We talk and Mike raised this in the beginning about global Dartmouth. But except for a few attenuated things stated we haven't heard much about liberal arts internationally. Since I'm kind of engaged in the Middle East and parts of Europe for that I thought this questions. If I use the term liberal arts in Western or Eastern Europe it's often bemusement unless I explain what I'm talking about. And as for the Middle East, even if English speaking on an Arabic background, but the same problem I have in Israel. It's mere puzzlement. And the best I can do in translation into whatever language that I know that I'm using is to say -- as a few of you have -- critical thinking. And then when I'm pushed in a way that people would -- as Andrew Carnegie would have been in the 1890s, at the Philadelphia Typewriter School, where he said -- as our first speaker was saying, he said, "I'm so glad I'm speaking to you because you're learning something useful typing and shorthand and not the useless dead languages or anything else." But he became, you know, big on that later on. The best I can do in places like Kuwait where we have a program and elsewhere is to say, what we're trying to do with critical thinking is -- is give you an idea of how you can reach the challenges that you're going to be facing in 20 or 30 years where you don't know what the world's going to look like. And when I speak to parents in Kuwait I say, "Did you ever imagine this sort of thing before?" It works better in Bulgaria and Azerbaijan where you say, "Did you ever imagine that you'd be talking with an American about these sorts of things when you were of school age?" Why aren't we hearing too much from this very distinguished panel -- there goes the flattery again -- about how the liberal arts are perceived internationally? >> Well we'll try and give it a shot at it. >> Dale: Let's do that. >> Okay. >> Stephan: I was actually -- thanks for asking that question. I did my first post doc at Imperial College which is a technical place. Spent a couple of years out there and you know it's very interesting because a lot of my -- a lot of my colleagues were aware of -- and this was in 2000. What I find interesting now is that I just got back from Geneva. I was at the large Hadron Collider. And, you know, I gave a talk. I gave a seminar and of course here's this Dartmouth professor giving a seminar to [inaudible] Hadron Collider. Most of my colleagues and the audience were from technical universities around Europe. And -- and let's say that my style in giving that talk was very different than what they expected. But after spending a whole week there and with -- you know, they -- they pretty much took my head off and fed it back tome. It was good though. It was good. It turned out to be a really good thing. So I mean it as good. But my point was that after, you know, subsequent days, some -- some of those very people came up to me and said, "You know, you actually got me thinking about something really interesting. Can we talk some more?" So I think that again, this thing I was speaking about earlier on, this -- you know, why not ask that question and be comfortable with doing that is I think something that people are starting to perceive differently at, you know, places like Cerne. From my personal experience. That's a very specific answer though so, I'm not speaking generally. >> Michael Mastenduno: Joe? >> Joe: Dale in my world you know, in places like China that have been largely driven by a manufacturing economy there's a real interest in diversifying their sources of economic output. In the Middle East right, there's an interest in moving beyond an oil driven economy, to having more diverse sources of income and revenue and a sustainable economy for the future. In each of those places leadership talks about something like innovation and entrepreneurship. Now that's very economically focused. But they approach the U.S. with questions related to how do we build programs that would enable that? How do we build that into our educational system? So our students, our graduates, our leaders are thinking more broadly, are more entrepreneurial, are more creative and open to producing what our society needs and building an innovative economy. And when we're approached and other institutions in the U.S. are the answer is, it's the integration with the liberal arts. It's the broad education that teaches you to see a problem from many different perspectives and think about it in a way that a purely engineering or a purely science driven educational background wouldn't be. So they're not calling it the liberal arts right now, but I think there's growing recognition at least in these places where we've had contact that this model of education actually is hugely beneficial to where they would like their countries and their educated citizenry to go. >> Annette: And in some of those places there might be a little bit of pushback because the by product of this kind of questioning and this kind of thought is a change in political systems and change is a cultural thing. And so do you want people out there asking questions? Do you want people out there critical thinking and thinking and they have expectations that are -- that are heightened by this notion that you are liberated in that way. So it's -- depending upon the country it's a tricky business. >> Michael Mastenduno: One of the disadvantages of this technology is that I can't in good conscience ignore the text messages that the event planners are throwing at me [laughter]. Telling me that it's time to wrap up. So first what I'd like to do is thank our panelists for a terrific perspective. [ Applause ] And secondly I'd like to invite President Hanlon if he's like to come up and say a few words. This panel by the way was inspired by President Hanlon because when asked what kinds of things he might like to see at inauguration, one of the first things he said was a reflective discussion of the liberal arts. And I'm glad we said, why not. [ Applause ] Yes I do have a question and I think it's only fair that since I asked everyone a put you on the spot question that I ask the same of [laughter] President Hanlon. Now, I have two options here. There's a question here. It came from the audience, but I didn't think anyone on the panel would want to answer. It is the following. Could you please name the 18 members of the [inaudible] succession. In reverse order starting with number [laughter] 18. And that's like writing your name on the SAT. That ones an easy one. >> President Hanlon: that one I can get. So one of the phenomena [laughter] that happens when you -- when you get to my position is that you get media training. [Laughter] And one of the first things you learn in media training is to answer not the question you were asked [laughter], but the question you wish you were asked. And so Dean Mastenduno I'm going to tell you why I thought this was such a stimulating panel [laughter]. >> Michael Mastenduno: Thank you very much [laughter]. >> President Hanlon: So I would say this was -- this was an inspiring and thought provoking way to start the inauguration activities and I also want to thank all of the panelists. Speaking of Leslie's comments, I believe we are in another period like the Gilded Age of just profound change in the external environment in which higher education's working. I think more so than we've really seen perhaps, in the 1960s was a -- late '60s there was another period, but since the Gilded Age I don't think we've seen anything quite like this transformation outside higher education. I think Don's -- Peeve's comments about -- were really informative and helpful about how we have actually transformed the delivery of the liberal arts over a period of time. And so you know we can do that again. We can -- we can rethink in the view of the external context and how we're going to make impact on the world to our graduates. How do we need to -- to train them. But, I also think that all of the panelists talked about what are the enduring objectives of the liberal arts and that's what's really important. Not how we deliver but what are we trying to achieve. And it's all about the ability of mind. The flexibility of mind. Stephan talked about the questioning mind. About how students were questioning the PhD graduate students about their research. Annette talked about critical thinking. Joe talked about I'll call it the creative mind. Going to -- not only analyzing what the issues are but then going the next step. How are we going to create a solution to those? And I would just say in conclusion that I agree with Mike. There is a national debate on this topic but I would say there's no debate in my mind. I think the liberal arts are more important today then they have ever been. So thank you all for coming. [ Applause ]

Contents

Education and early life

Pease was born in Toledo, Ohio. He attended Ohio University in Athens, Ohio, supporting himself through college by working summers as a laborer at a Toledo oil refinery. Pease was the president of the student body, the editor of the student newspaper (The Post), and a student reporter for the Athens Messenger. He graduated from Ohio University with a bachelor's degree in journalism in 1953. He earned a master's degree in government from Ohio University in 1955 and completed graduate work as a Fulbright Scholar at King's College, Durham University.

After serving two years in the U.S. Army from 1955 to 1957, Pease moved to Oberlin, Ohio. Pease became editor and copublisher of the weekly local newspaper, Oberlin News-Tribune. He was a member of the International Society of Weekly Newspaper Editors (ISWNE), winning ISWNE's Golden Quill Award for editorial writing in 1962 and serving as president of the Society in 1965.

Political career

Pease's political career began with his election to the Oberlin City Council in 1961. He served in the Ohio Senate from 1965 to 1967. Redistricting contributed to his defeat in the 1966 election[citation needed], but in 1968, he was elected to the Ohio House of Representatives, where he served from 1969 to 1975. In 1974, he was again elected to the Ohio Senate, where he served from 1975 to 1977.

Early in his career, Pease established a reputation for honesty and integrity, which he maintained throughout his political career. Pease was a member of the Democratic Party and was regarded as a liberal (supporting progressive tax reform, advocating for universal human rights, linking respect for internationally recognized worker rights to international trade, aid, and investment agreements, upholding civil liberties, emphasizing education reform, and other liberal causes). He was well respected as a reasonable and ethical public servant, even by his conservative colleagues, who saw him as a "straight arrow."

In 1976, Pease was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives (95th Congress). He served eight terms in Congress, easily winning all eight elections in the Democratic-leaning 13th Congressional District of Ohio. His long-time Chief of Staff and Legislative Director was Bill Goold. Pease had hired upon his graduation from Oberlin College.

Uganda trade ban

Pease quickly distinguished himself as a skillful legislator and staunch human rights advocate. Over the opposition of the Carter Administration, Pease, in his first term of Congress, sponsored legislation, which passed, to cut off US trade with Uganda, which was enduring a brutal reign of terror at the hands of the infamous dictator Idi Amin in which at least 500,000 Ugandans perished.

Within months of the establishment of the enactment of the trade ban, Amin was deposed. The trade ban resulted in the sudden loss of hundreds of million of dollars in hard currency to Amin, mostly from coffee exports to the US, which had been used by Amin to buy arms, luxury goods, and the loyalty of his mercenary army. It is widely considered one of the best examples of the most effective uses of economic sanctions in modern US foreign policy.

Trade-linked workers' rights

Pease was the legislative champion of the rapidly growing movement inside and outside of Congress in the early 1980s to link respect for internationally recognized workers' rights, such as prohibiting exploitative child labor in the production of products for export, to international trade, investment and aid agreements to which the US is a party. He successfully authored six different laws in this regard before he left Congress.

Tax legislation

Pease authored controversial legislation within the United States Internal Revenue Code (income tax code) that partially disallowed itemized deductions for taxpayers with adjusted gross incomes above certain thresholds, known as the "Pease Limitations."[1][2]

Later life

Pease decided not to run for re-election in 1992. After leaving Congress, he taught as Visiting Distinguished Professor of Politics at Oberlin College. He was also appointed by Bill Clinton to the Amtrak Board of Directors and served five years.

Pease married Jeanne Camille Wendt August 29, 1953, who still resides in Oberlin. One daughter, Jennifer, was born on August 30, 1964.

Pease died in Oberlin, July 28, 2002.

See also

References

  1. ^ http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/econpers.nsf/Web/450E878669CD77BB852566DB0063DABA?OpenDocument
  2. ^ "Ohio Rep. Donald Pease, A Democrat, Dies at 70; Tax, Labor, Trade Were Key Concerns". The Washington Post. July 31, 2002. Archived from the original on October 22, 2012 – via HighBeam Research.

External links

U.S. House of Representatives
Preceded by
Charles Adams Mosher
Member of the U.S. House of Representatives
from Ohio's 13th congressional district

1977–1993
Succeeded by
Sherrod Brown
This page was last edited on 19 September 2019, at 00:11
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.