This past Thursday, Memorial Chapel was packed with students who had come to do something ostensibly routine: listen to their professors talk. However, over the course of the hour-and-fifteen minute-long event, it became increasingly apparent that the experience of “Wesleyan Thinks Big” was novel for professors and students alike.
This was the outcome that organizers Josh Levine ’12, Max Nussenbaum ’12, Hannah Vogel ’13, Maxwell Hellmann ’13, and Jack Hoskins ’12 had dreamed of as they began planning the event last October.
“The goal wasn’t for it to be a lecture,” Hoskins explained.
The organizers said they wanted to give professors a chance to talk about whatever subject stirred their passion, preferably one outside of the confines of their strict teaching curricula.
“We said: ‘What keeps you up at night? What do you think is the most fascinating thing about your field?’” Vogel said.
Before they could ask these questions, however, the student organizers had to choose and solicit professors to participate. The selection process started in October, with a Facebook group asking students to nominate their favorite teachers. They used this data and their own experiences with professors to create a list of viable names.
“We hybridized other people’s opinions with our opinions,” Levine said.
Once they had constructed a list of professors, they began the process of contacting them. Despite some initial difficulty, the organizers ultimately procured professors from a range of intellectual departments.
The final list consisted of Associate Professor of Religion Mary-Jane Rubenstein, Associate Professor of Psychology Matthew Kurtz, Professor of Economics Richard Adelstein, Assistant Professor of History and African American Studies Leah Wright, Professor of Government John Finn, and Corwin-Fuller Professor of Film Studies Jeanine Basinger.
Each professor was instructed to speak for nine minutes about a topic that excited them. After an introduction by President Michael Roth, Rubenstein gave the first lecture, titled “Asceticosmologies: Modern Science as Religious Practice.”
“MJR [Professor Rubenstein] was my favorite, because she mentioned Monty Python in her speech about cosmology,” said Neha Shafique ’15. “It was exciting to hear her speak outside the classroom.”
Kurtz followed Rubenstein with a lecture about the interrelated causes of schizophrenia, called, “Nature vs. Nurture: the Example of Psychosis.” Then in his speech, “States Without Romance,” Adelstein described the differences between a state and a government.
Next, Wright spoke about how the current discourse about affirmative action is ineffective during her talk, “The Death of Affirmative Action: Rethinking the Debate.”
“For me [Wright’s] lecture seemed to come very naturally,” said Maurice Hill ’14. “It seemed to be something she gave a lot of thought to; she seemed well prepared to talk to students about it. I did notice that she didn’t look at her iPad while she was giving her speech and she clearly cared a lot about the topic. I felt fortunate to be a part of that conversation and witness her speech.”
In his talk, titled “Poor Joshua: Private Space & the Constitution,” Finn spoke of the flawed state action doctrine, which dictates that the protections of the Fourteenth Amendment do not apply to private entities but only to the government.
“I really liked Professor Finn’s speech,” said Maeve Russell ’14. “He took a much more emotional route than I personally think his colleagues and peers did. It was incredibly effective though, and really emphasized how one can both love and hate what they study. For me, the true hallmark of an avid interest in something is studying both its shortcomings and its successes.”
The lecture portion of the event ended with “Can You Teach Creativity?” by Jeanine Basinger, in which she spoke of her experiences as a professor in a creative discipline.
Students said they were excited to see their own professors speaking in the familiar pattern of TED Talks. After each professor gave his or her prepared lecture, they all sat down to respond to audience questions. Individual professors answered lecture-specific questions, and as a panel, they spoke about their influences, passions, and complaints about their disciplines.
“I liked the questions that every professor got to answer, especially as to why they became passionate about [their subjects],” said Kelly Toy ’14. “It’s not something we often get to hear as their students.”
The organizers, inspired by the success of the event, plan on creating a similar event next year, and are talking about the possibility of a version with student speakers.
“Overall it was a really easy, fun process,” Hoskins said. “It’s really easy to do awesome stuff here.”
In the short term, the organizers are excited about the event’s success, and they plan to put the recorded lectures online for the numerous students unable to get tickets due to space limitations.
“We didn’t expect this sort of response at all,” Vogel said. “The success says a lot about the quality and caliber of the student body.”
1 Comment
Guest
While this article summarized “Wesleyan Thinks Big” and the general success of the event well, it holds as another example of The Argus leaving out the “news”, the real stories, behind Wes events in articles so that they tell a bland, summarized account. What were the interesting stories about “Wesleyan Thinks Big”? How about John Finn directly challenging the authority of President Roth or Professor Adelstein saying “I hate Economics” in response to a student question about what these professors made them love their respective disciplines. These are the interesting stories that people are talking about on campus. Why are they completely left out of this article?