PIONEERT he

This Week On WebStudents speak about Professor Galindo and their thoughts on his tenure denialat www.whitmanpioneer.com

Opinion pg. 7

Pioneer editors argue that the tenure review process is flawed, out of touch with spirit Whitman claims to embody

A&E pg. 4

This weekend: Student-written One-Act plays feature stories of love, siblings, post-apocalyptic wasteland

The news that Assistant Profes-sor of Spanish Alberto Galin-do did not receive tenure came

as a surprise to many on campus, provoking confusion and sparking conversation about the tenure pro-cess among students and faculty.

Achieving tenure is among the defining events in a pro-fessor’s career. For many stu-dents, however, the particulars of this process remain locked in the ivory tower of academia.

“Personally, I was upset and concerned because I didn’t know if my experience of his teach-ing was something that had been overlooked somehow,” said sen-ior Meghan Bill of the decision.

Galindo, who arrived at Whit-man in the fall of 2006 directly after completing his doctorate in Spanish and Portuguese Languages and Cul-tures at Princeton University, sought tenure and promotion to associate professor in the fall of 2011 at the start of his sixth year of teaching.

This timeline of Galindo’s ca-reer at Whitman is standard for ten-ure-track professors. According to Provost and Dean of the Facul-

ty Timothy Kaufman-Osborn, af-ter three of years of teaching ten-ure-track professors may have their contracts renewed for another three years, eventually going up for ten-ure in their sixth year of teaching.

The subsequent decision to deny Professor Galindo tenure by the Faculty Personnel Committee, a faculty-elected group of six faculty members representing all three aca-demic divisions as well as the Presi-dent and Provost and Dean of Facul-ty as non-voting members, elicited significant reaction from students in the Spanish and Race and Eth-nic Studies Departments. The cur-rent voting members of the Facul-ty Personnel Committee are Profes-sor of English Roberta Davidson, Professor of Biology Heidi Dob-son, Associate Professor of Chem-istry Frank Dunnivant, Professor of Economics Denise Hazlett, Associ-ate Professor of Philosophy Patrick Frierson and Associate Professor of Anthropology Jason Pribilsky.

Several students convened to prepare letters to President George Bridges and Kaufman-Osborn in support of Galindo at the beginning of the semester un-der the name “Students Support-ing Professor Galindo.” A meet-ing with President Bridges has

since been scheduled for Feb 15.“I welcome the meet-

ing. Among the goals I have are to give students an opportuni-ty to speak with [Kaufman-Os-born] and me about the tenure and promotion process and to lis-ten very carefully to students’ con-cerns and views,” said Bridges.

“We would like to meet with President Bridges and to basical-ly express our support for Pro-fessor Galindo and to communi-cate how much he has affected our Whitman experience,” said sen-ior Spanish major Grace Evans.

Chair of the Spanish Depart-ment Nohemy Solorzano-Thompson echoed this support for Galindo’s promotion and noted that profes-sors in the department wrote letters of recommendation on his behalf.

“From the Spanish Depart-ment’s perspective, we are support-ive of Professor Galindo, would like to see him receive tenure and were surprised and very disappointed by the committee’s decision,” she said.

In accordance with the Faculty Handbook guidelines, Galindo has requested that a Review Committee be formed to evaluate the decision of the Faculty Personnel Commit-tee. The Review Committee, com-prising the three most senior mem-

bers and two most junior members of the full-time tenured teaching faculty, will determine whether ad-equate consideration was given to Galindo’s qualifications for tenure.

Kaufman-Osborn chose not to comment on any specifics regarding Galindo’s denial of tenure. The Fac-ulty Personnel Committee and col-lege administrators are prohibited from discussing personnel cases be-cause of rules about confidentiality.

Galindo also declined to com-ment on the particulars of the case, but emphasized his appre-ciation of his students’ support.

Galindo noted that one of his advisees was struck by the deep connection made between the late Dr. George Ball and his stu-dents after attending the memori-al for the late professor on Jan. 28.

“My student explained that the memorial was an amazing archive of the connection that took place be-tween an excellent teacher like Dr. Ball and his students. To my stu-dent, the parallels were evident. I have immense respect and gratitude for this student and all the other students, former and current, who in these Kafkaesque times, make words and take action,” he said.

Students have certainly tak-en action in the last month, using

various platforms to voice opinions about the Faculty Personnel Com-mittee’s decision around campus. For the last several weeks, a peti-tion has circulated to the broader Whitman student community in an effort to gauge support for Galin-do beyond the Spanish and Race and Ethnic Studies departments. As of Monday, Feb. 6, the petition had garnered over 700 signatures.

“The idea of circulating the petition is to gather a sense of how many people’s Whitman experienc-es have been affected by him and how many people on campus would be sorry to see him go,” said Evans.

Evans pointed to Galindo’s visibility around campus, wheth-er as a panelist in various symposi-ums or a judge at Mr. Whitman, as part of the reason so many Whitties have coalesced behind this issue.

The petition states: “We be-lieve Professor Alberto S. Galindo embodies the spirit of excellence in teaching through his consistent ef-forts in the classroom and the broad-er Whitman College community. In recognition of the strong commit-ment the college makes to a rich stu-dent experience shaped by dynamic and passionate professors, we urge the Board of Trustees, the President

by KELSEY KENNEDY& SUSANA BOWERSFeature Editor, Staff Reporter

Change is coming to Whit-man’s Off-Campus Stud-ies program, at least

where the class of 2015 is con-cerned. The new model, which is to be implemented in the 2013 fall semester, will expand the college’s list of partner pro-grams and charge Whitman tu-ition for all offered programs.

“We realized that it wasn’t really financially sustainable for us to continue to allow aid to go off-campus and not have some actual revenue coming back to the college. Like many colleg-es, in order to continue to have financial aid be able to be ap-plied to study abroad, we’re go-ing to be charging Whitman tui-tion,” explained Director of Off-Campus Studies Susan Brick.

Students currently have the option to participate in ap-proved programs, which are run through separate institu-tions and have their own sepa-rate tuitions. Whitman financial aid doesn’t apply to these pro-grams. After the change, some of these approved programs will become partner programs, ex-panding the partner program list from around 45 options to over 70, and students who elect to take a semester abroad through a partner program will pay what they would normally pay for a semester at Whitman plus the cost of room and board.

Brick said that this new model ensures that students with financial aid are able to choose from a variety of programs if they opt to study abroad. It will also allow the Financial Aid of-fice to package a student’s on-campus aid with the cost of go-ing abroad, lightening the fi-

nancial burden of traveling to more expensive destinations.

“The main principle is that we want students to be able to go abroad regardless of their financial need,” she said.

The change is also de-signed to more closely align off-campus programs with the academic goals and cur-riculum of Whitman.

“We’re meeting with each department and asking them what kind of program-ming would really help stu-dents in their major: for their intellectual development, for their careers, for their glob-al awareness,” said Brick.

Studying abroad is gener-ally a popular option for Whit-man students, but recent-ly there has been a downturn in the percentage of the stu-dent body choosing to take a se-mester abroad. Approximate-ly 37 percent of this year’s jun-ior class is going abroad, com-pared to last year’s 49 percent. Brick said the administration is not certain what is causing this change, although the econom-ic downturn could be a factor.

Some students confirmed that finances were a major factor in the decision to study abroad.

“It is fairly expensive to study abroad in certain are-as of the world depending on the exchange rates. I personal-ly would have had to fund my way there and my own living situation, which is what made me decide not to study abroad,” said sophomore Jane Carmo-dy. “I think the switch shows that the Study Abroad and Fi-nancial Aid office are now more sensitive to cost issues when choosing to study abroad.”

“Sometimes I go by it, and I’ll remember it and I’m like, I don’t

ever want to go back there.”When Kirsten Ratliff passes by

the Christian Aid Center on Birch Street, she recalls the months during her adolescence when the building was her only home. At age 11, Ratliff and her family lost their house, and, with no other options available to them, moved into the family house operated by the Christian Aid Center, where they stayed for a summer and into the beginning of the school year.

Ratliff’s mother and fa-ther didn’t discuss the details of their financial troubles with her.

“They were just like, we don’t have anywhere to go, this is what we’re going to have to do, you’re go-ing to live here whether you like it or not, because there’s no other op-tion,” she said. “I remember starting sixth grade in the homeless shelter.”

Ratliff, her parents and her three sisters lived two to a bed in a one-bedroom apartment unit. The strict rules at the Christian Aid Cent-er, cramped quarters and—most

of all—the sense of being home-less were very hard for Ratliff and her family. But the facility provid-ed them with two meals a day, cloth-ing and school supplies. Most impor-tantly, it put a roof over their heads and helped Ratliff’s parents find jobs and transition out of the home.

Ratliff’s family was able to benefit from the resources avail-able to them in Walla Walla. If Ratliff had been alone, however, her story would be very different.

“There’s no actual youth shel-ter where its just youth by them-selves that are homeless, but there’s a lot of homeless youth in Walla Wal-la,” said Marcus Hepler, housing co-ordinator at Helpline of Walla Walla.

Walla Walla has emergency shelters for women, men and fami-lies who find themselves without a place to stay the night. But there is nowhere for homeless youth to go.

“There’s nothing,” said Su-san Kralman, Homelessness/Pov-erty Response & Grant Coordi-nator for the Department of Hu-man Services in Walla Walla. “No-body has resources for them.”

Kralman is working to start a shelter for homeless youth aged 13-17 in Walla Walla with Tim

Meliah, Regional Coordina-tor of Catholic Charities of Wal-la Walla, and Teri Barila at the Wal-la Walla Community Network.

There are funds in Walla Wal-la to support youth to some ex-tent. The school district can pro-vide small things such as shoes, inhalers or an emergency cell phone call. But for a teen with-out a place to sleep at night, shoes aren’t going to solve the problem.

“It doesn’t give a kid stabil-ity so that he or she can excel in life or even think about their fu-ture,” Kralman said. “They’re just worried about survival.”

In Kralman’s work for the De-partment of Human Services, she compiles data from “Point in Time” surveys of homeless populations in Walla Walla county. The surveys are collected on one date each year; the idea is to get an estimate of the amount of homeless people in the county on any given date. These surveys are part of a statewide directive from 2005 that required each county to come up with a plan to reduce home-lessness by 50 percent in 10 years. Seven years in, homelessness in Wal-la Walla has only declined slightly.

GALINDO TENURE DENIAL PROVOKES OUTCRY

Whitman news since 1896ISSUE 3 | February 9, 2012 |

NOWHERE TO GOHomeless youth in Walla Walla have few resources availableby PATRICIA VANDERBILTEditor-in-Chief

Off-campus studies to add programs, change tuition

model for class of 2015by EMILY LIN-JONESStaff Reporter

see QUESTIONING TENURE, page 5

see STUDY ABROAD, page 3see HOMELESSNESS, page 2

SHUTOUT

BERFIELD

BERFIELD

Feb

092012

PAGe

5FEATURE

ADVERTISEMENT

and the Provost and Dean of Faculty to grant Professor Galindo tenure.”

“Students Supporting Profes-sor Galindo” also tabled in Reid all last week, encouraging students to sign the petition and wear white rib-bons to raise awareness. As part of this effort, concerned students in-itiated a “whiteout” last Thursday, calling for students to wear white in support of Professor Galindo.

Senior Spanish major Zoe Kunkel-Patterson also argued while tabling in Reid last week that students should play a more visible role in the tenure process.

“Their decisions impact our day to day lives and we are paying greatly for it,” she said.

Despite her surprise at the Faculty Personnel Committee’s decision in the case of Galin-do, Bill emphasized that she can’t presume to know the com-plexities of the tenure process.

“I can see how there is pos-sibly a need for distance between Whitman as an institution and fac-ulty as members of that institu-tion and students that are just pass-ing through. I see the value in hav-ing some kind of distance in that process, but as a student of [Galin-do’s], while he was still in the pro-cess of awaiting a decision, I would have liked to have had a chance to voice my opinion,” said Bill.

Frustration over student repre-sentation in the assessment of pro-fessors is also felt by many students in the art department, who dispute the college’s decision to deny Lec-turer of Art Mare Blocker a tenure-track position. According to Kauf-man-Osborn, the lecturer position held by Blocker was converted to a tenure-track position after the col-lege was awarded an Andrew W. Mellon Foundation grant last June.

“In the case of Studio Art, we conducted a national search in order to identify the most qualified can-didate for the position. In this in-stance, Nicole Pietrantoni was rec-ommended as the most qualified by the search committee, and that rec-ommendation was endorsed by the Committee of Division Chairs as well as the president. She signed a

contract with the College in Decem-ber 2011,” said Kaufman-Osborn.

“All I can say about this issue is that Professor Blocker was hired as a visiting assistant professor. She was not hired on a tenure track. Con-sequently, she has never been eligi-ble for tenure and never been eligi-ble to apply for tenure,” said Asso-ciate Professor of Art and Depart-ment Chair Charles Timm-Ballard.

Blocker declined to com-ment on the specifics of her case.

Blocker’s students are dis-appointed by the college’s deci-sion, and wish they could have had more of a say in the process.

“All the art students that I’ve talked to about it are very upset and disturbed at what little atten-tion seems to have been paid to the people Mare taught, who should be considered the most informed judg-es of her teaching ability. The facul-ty in every department at Whitman should be taking a very critical look at their tenure processes, and see-ing whether they accurately reflect the needs and desires of the student body. I think it’s pretty clear that right now they’re failing to do so,” said senior art major Sam Alden.

Senior art major Sarah Canepa also emphasized Block-er’s popularity among students.

“I knew that conflicts over her rehiring had come up before, but her students, including my-self, had successfully advocat-ed for her in the past, and I was optimistic that the strong sup-port demonstrated by the student body on her behalf would contin-ue to have an impact,” she said.

In addition to calls for reas-sessment of their particular cas-es, Galindo’s and Blocker’s deni-als have raised more general ques-tions about the role of students in the decision-making process.

Currently, student input in ten-ure decisions comes mainly from

the course evaluations that stu-dents complete for each of their classes at the end of every semes-ter. The evaluations are includ-ed in the Faculty Personnel Com-mittee’s assessment. Students may also submit letters of recommenda-tion on behalf of a professor, how-ever, these letters are not open-ly solicited by the administration.

“Students have on occa-sion submitted such letters, but, at present, there is no for-mal policy for soliciting such let-ters,” said Kaufman-Osborn.

Bill and Evans both regret that they did not submit letters of rec-ommendation on behalf of Galindo last semester, and wish that the ad-ministration advertised this outlet for additional student perspectives.

“We really weren’t aware I think until the very, very last minute [that] we could have written let-ters, that we could have done some-thing. It was literally sort of the day before the Personnel Commit-tee was meeting that we were made aware that we could write letters of recommendation,” said Evans.

Student evaluations weigh heavily alongside peer reviews, as well as a written statement by the professor seeking tenure and his or her course materials, in an effort to measure what Whitman terms “Ex-cellence in Teaching,” the “most important criterion” in the Facul-ty Personnel Committee’s decision, according to the Faculty Handbook.

Evaluations of a professor’s “Excellence in Professional Activ-ity” and “Service to the College” are considered after this Excel-lence in Teaching criterion. A pro-fessor’s writing and research that appears in peer-reviewed publi-cations, other peer-reviewed pro-fessional activities and involve-ment in professional organizations are among the elements includ-ed in the Faculty Personnel Com-mittee’s assessment of a tenure-track professor’s qualifications.

Service to the College encap-sulates a professor’s involvements outside of the classroom. A pro-fessor’s service to the Whitman community may include involve-ment on college committees, ini-

tiation of new programs, mentor-ing and more general efforts to en-hance student life and Whitman’s commitment to diversity, as out-lined in the handbook guidelines.

Associate Professor of Reli-gion Melissa Wilcox argues that the Service to the College cate-gory may not receive the atten-tion it deserves in Faculty Per-sonnel Committee decisions.

Wilcox noted that professors who belong to under-represent-ed groups often engage in service to the college that is not openly recognized in the tenure process.

“Women faculty are far more likely to see students in their office hours or in private meetings else-where who are dealing with things like sexual assault. For the queer faculty, the queer students come to us with coming out issues or just any issue because we are some-one they are more likely to identify with. For faculty of color, students of color disproportionately come to them. So there is all of this unac-knowledged service time that most of us are very passionate about put-ting in . . . but how often, or do we even feel that it’s right to put it on our annual self-review?” she said.

According to Wilcox, this service to the college of-ten detracts from research time, which is weighed more heav-ily in the Excellence in Pro-fessional Activity category.

While there are concerns about the juggling of these various components in the tenure process, in recent years the number of ten-ure-track professors awarded per-manent positions has been high.

“[Of] the 10 persons con-sidered for tenure over the course of the past two years, nine were awarded this sta-tus,” said Kaufman-Osborn.

“Students Supporting Profes-sor Galindo” is hosting an infor-mation session for those interest-ed in learning more about the ten-ure process and Galindo’s case. ASWC representatives will be present at the event, which will take place Thursday, Feb. 9 from 7-9 p.m. at La Casa Hispaña.

Committee decision to be reviewedTenure:seven quick facts

compiled byALYSSA FAIRBANKS

Feature Editor

1. Professors are re-viewed for tenure in their second year. Assistant Professors are reviewed for tenure in their sixth year.

2. Tenure is indefinite.

3. In 2010-2011 there were 123 full-time tenure-track positions.

4. The Board of Trustees may award indefinite tenure at any time with a special vote.

5. Excellence in teaching, excellence in professional activity, service to the college are considered.

6. Course reviews are considered by the Personnel Committee.

7. If a member of the faculty has not been given tenure by the end of their sixth year, he or she shall not continue in service of the College beyond the end of their seventh year.

SOURCE: FACULTY HANDBOOK, SEC. 4

from QUESTIONING TENURE, page 1

“Their decisions impact our day to day lives and we are paying greatly for it.”Zoe Kunkel-Patterson’12