Talk:Hillsdale College

Controversies section

It keeps getting deleted. I assume that the College's PR department is removing anything from the article that is negative about the college. This is NOT a free advertising space, people! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.0.15.225 (talk) 06:24, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Three recent entries were made that are poorly written and contain factual errors. These entries need to be cleaned up. The first entry is sourced, but it makes statements that its own source does not support. Here is an example. The current wikipedia entry states that distinguished assistant history professor Warren Treadgold was fired after publicly disagreeing with the dean of women Carol-Ann Barker. If you read the source that is given for this claim, the source states that Hillsdale College decided not to renew the probationary appointment of Dr. Warren Treadgold, an assistant professor of history. Being fired and not having a probationary appointment renewed are not the same thing. The entry as it stands now does not lead readers to conclude that his probationary contract was not renewed. This entry needs to be changed to reflect the source that is used to support it.

The second entry is sourced through a parenthetical citation (Academic Questions, Fall 1991). Can this source be verified? It is essential that readers are able to read the sources that support each entry. Is there a way the verify this source?

The last entry contains no source. I just removed it and encouraged the person who made the original entry to re-post the entry once they had a source for it. People are always encouraged to contribute to the Wikipedia community, but it is important the we maintain the reputation and standards of Wikipedia when making new entries. This section needs to be cleaned up and checked for errors. These are the errors that I have seen through an initial review of the first part of the section. Lets improve this section! 74.10.197.215 (talk) 16:25, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

One more thought on this topic...I am glad that this section is being improved, and I want to ensure that it is done correctly. Correctly providing sources for each entry that can be checked by readers is an important step in improving the quality of this entry. What is the Academic Questions? It is the source for the second controversy entry, and I would like to post a link to this source so that readers can easily read the source. Knowing what Academic Questions is and how to access it would be very helpful in our effort to improve the quality of this article. 74.10.197.215 (talk) 16:50, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I thought I saw a note about notability of this section. The Treadgold story has been referenced elsewhere, to my surprise honestly, and so yes I would vote to keep it. Though it is very, very short. noncompliant_one (talk) 03:07, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Good job on the Treagold entry. It looks a lot better. Does anyone know what the academic questions source is for the second entry? I have tried to verify the entry and have been unsuccessful. 74.10.197.215 (talk) 22:40, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I just removed the academic questions section of the section. I was unable to locate the source and my repeated requests for a source went unanswered. If you would like to re-post your entry, please provide a source that others can read and verify. Thanks! 69.142.67.55 (talk) 05:14, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Original work?

Is this original work? -- Zoe

The information is paraphrased from various college publications, including the Imprimis, admissions packets, alumni mailings, and calendars distributed by the college. No works were quoted directly. -- a significant contributor to the Hillsdale College entry.

Hillsdale was not the first coeducational college in Michigan. Olivet College was the second coeducational college in the nation. The first was Oberlin College in Ohio, which, like Olivet, was founded by Rev. John J. Shipherd.

No opinion on whether Hillsdale was actually the first in Michigan or second in the nation, but Olivet did not receive a state charter until 1859 [1], which apparently was after Hillsdale graduated both women and blacks AND was chartered by the state [2]. Olivet was even after Albion, which was chartered and became coeducational in 1857. The Olivet web site makes no claims about being second in the nation or in the state for that matter. older≠wiser 01:53, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

Delve a little deeper into the website. I'd check the 2004-2005 Olivet College catalogue under "Introduction." [3].

The History of Olivet College by Rev. Wolcott Williams states that on the close of Olivet's first year (June 27, 1845) Misses Mary and Harriet Barnes and Miss M. J. Edsell presented essays at the public exercises. By 1846, 39 of Olivet's 72 students were women. And as far as charter goes, it was the first in the nation to be coeducational by charter. You see, it was granted a charter by the State of Michigan in 1848 as Olivet Institute, which gave it legal standing. (Page 28)

You are right that Olivet College didn't receive a charter until 1859, as it was prevented obtaining a charter by Superintendent of Public Education, John D. Pierce, who was a proponent of the State system of education (fearing that denominational schools would detract from State school success). He had considerable interest in the fledgling University of Michigan (which, incidentally, graduated one student in 1845).

And if Hillsdale "was the first American college to prohibit in its charter all discrimination based on race, religion, or sex," as its site says, what does that do to Oberlin's claims?

If it first got a charter as Olivet Institute, a two-year school, then it was not chartered as a college and can't make the claim that it was the first coed "college" in Michigan. One of the first, perhaps, or a leader, but not the first four-year college. Also for second in the nation, Otterbein College also makes some claims. older≠wiser 03:43, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

I guess I need to locate the author of the Olivet College catalogue to find out on what information he or she bases the claim that Olivet was second in the nation and first by charter. Thanks for the information. Since I see by your profile that you live in Albion and are interested in local history, I wonder if you have ever read about the college Pierce was going to try to start in Marshall back in the late-1830's. (Before he became Superintendent.) P.S. Like your politics.

Thanks. My guess is that the catalog was just being a little overly laudatory and a bit imprecise in conflating a two-year intstitute with a four-year college and assuming that no one reading the catalog would really notice or care. But it might be interesting to find out what they have to say. No, I'm not familiar with any school planned in Marshall. older≠wiser 04:22, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

This is what I was able to find out: though denied a charter in 1844 or 1845 (rejected by the state, which said "as long as your college has the radical reputation of Oberlin" there would be no charter), Olivet's catalog of 1846 still refers to itself as "Olivet College," and it offered a four-year program despite the state's wishes. Women in the previously established four-year program at Oberlin actually transferred to finish their education at Olivet in its first year. In the year the catalog was printed, 1846, more than half of Olivet's student body was women. As far as the charter it gained in 1848, that legally incorporated it as an institute, but such incorporation was not required, as institutes could run without a state charter. Besides, two years meant more then than it does now, as two years was all that was required to become a fully qualified teacher in the public schools.

I thought the Methodists and Baptists of the time were pretty closed-minded in their attitudes about women? Surprising the colleges of these denominations would be the first to admit them.

Not really; Baptists and Methodists as groups were no worse than anyone else of the time. Early feminist movements actually tended to root themselves in the churches (not something you'll hear much about from your state-run school systems). Think that has more to do with modern political stereotypes.12.150.117.30 21:04, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Mark Nehls' student newspaper

Questioning the Mark Nehls matter. Carol Anne Barker, Dean of Women, gave me a quite different version soon after Mr. Nehls was suspended. She told me at the time that he first asked the school to fund a second student newspaper and was told the "Collegian" is a teaching arm of the English dept. and that the school saw no need and had no funds for a second paper. At the start of the next school year (Aug/Sept. 1991, I think it was) Mr. Nehls distributed the first edition of his new paper to incoming students. This was fine with the school leadership until a local businessman happened to read it and called the school. Seems that Mr. Nehls, soliciting ads for the Collegian that summer, had also solicited ads for a second paper he'd led--or at least allowed--the man to believe was also college-sponsored.

Investigation disclosed numerous similar stories, and the college asked Mr. Nehls to refund all monies to misled advertisers and suspended him until that was done. It was never done, far as I know. PhoebeHB 17:59, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

bias??

does anybody else agree that this page is not following the neutral point of view guideline? as a grad of the school, i'm very used to getting this type of information, but i think it would be beneficial for other points of view to be noted (ie our ongoing feud with Oberlin College). any other sources but HC sources would be a great place to start, I mean wikipedia is not a forum to advertise. Plus, there's not a single mention of hillsdale's great science programs! Shushiepie 16:33, 5 July 2007 (UTC)shushiepie

We have a feud with Oberlin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.7.195.92 (talk) 02:15, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes I agree, most of it sounds like an advertisement for the school. The scandal, which was significant news, is minimized, and the numerous lawsuits and firings are missing too.

• You think this article lacks NPOV - go look at Siena Heights University - reads like a brochure for the school, its even worse Ejfetters 13:24, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

What scandal?

I see nothing wrong with the information presented in this article, but do agree that it could be worded less like an essay. 72.22.16.202 (talk) 20:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Much of the history article is taken directly from Hillsdale's website, and I would agree that much of it reads like an advertisement, but, in all fairness, there really hasn't been enough published on Hillsdale apart from the college itself. I have tried doing EBSCO host searches and have looked for titles in my university library (the largest library in my state, mind you), and I have been unable to find a single title that is exclusively about Hillsdale College. I suspect the reason is that, while it was once a radical college, it has become more conservative as the world has changed. It was expected to become more radical, in the way that Antioch College did; but it didn't. I think that the best solution is for outsiders to acknowledge Hillsdale's impressive history while still writing about it from an objective point-of-view. If there are other people willing to write about the school, there will be less need to visit the "Imprimis" website to compose a wikipedia article on the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.110.60.68 (talk) 05:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Hillsdale logo.gif

Image:Hillsdale logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

Notable alumni

"John Drake" is not notable and does not have his own wiki page, so I deleted him. There is no reason for him to be on this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.0.15.225 (talk) 07:05, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

BetacommandBot 08:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

"Future Rotarians"

It amuses the Princeton Review to go well beyond rankings for normal things and put stuff like "* #3 for "Future Rotarians and Daughters of the American Revolution". This is clearly WP:CRYSTAL besides being WP:POV and a bit sarcastic about Rotary and DAR (pov again). It should be rm IMO. Student7 (talk) 21:14, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Notable Professors of the Past

Didn't Carl F. H. Henry, one of the founders of Neo-Evangelicalism, teach there?