Hampshire College is often misunderstood by the uninformed as a place where rich kids manage to do nothing for four years and still come out with a college degree. As a Hampshire alum who attended during the mid-70s — some of the school’s liveliest and most experimental years — I can say nothing could be further from the truth.
The kind of students who choose Hampshire are people who aren’t content to just be told what we should learn but want to push the boundaries of accepted knowledge. We want to be ask, and be asked hard questions. We want to think outside the box. Hampshire encourages exactly this kind of innovative thinking and creative problem solving, as well as a sense of responsibility to a community beyond oneself.
But a Hampshire education is not a free-for-all. Most naysayers are not aware that Hampshire’s commitment to experimental education is supported by a structure that guides students through three “divisions” of study, with each division becoming more specifically focused. Division III, a student’s final project, is akin to a graduate thesis, with an oral exam overseen by three advisors. As someone who went on to defend a graduate thesis at UMASS/Amherst, I can attest to the similarity.
There may have been students who didn’t make use of the resources and potential of Hampshire, or who only wanted to slide through. There are students like this at any college. MIT is known as one of the biggest party schools in Boston, but that doesn’t mean important work doesn’t get done there.
I grieve the loss of Hampshire for my own sake, for the sake of my fellow alums, for current students, and for the faculty and staff who will have to find new jobs now. But I grieve it most for what it means to higher education and to American society in general to lose a place like Hampshire College where people are open-minded.
Trish Crapo
Leyden