On this rock…
November 3, 2005
Hannah McKeeth
The future of IDIS 102 is a controversial issue at Trinity Western University. Many people misunderstand the goal of the course. To set the record straight: the vision of IDIS 102 is to introduce students to what is expected of them by this university and faculty. It gives them an intellectual history of the university and a framework for the rest of their academic career. This allows students to be interdisciplinary in their thinking, even as they specialize in their respective majors.
IDIS 102’s future is contingent on changes in perceptions of the course and involves a complex relationship between academics and administration. Dr. Harold Faw was chair of a task force that was in charge of studying IDIS and bringing recommendations for change to the Undergraduate Academic Council (UAC).
The student response to IDIS 102 has steadily improved every year through various changes, including the addition of Professor Calvin Townsend, the discussion groups led by upperclassmen, and the use of a course text, written by Dr. Jens Zimmerman and Dr. Norm Klassen. Students’ perceptions of the course are changing; they are increasingly catching onto the idea that IDIS is something distinctive and worth pursuing.
But who will implement these ideas, this vision in which so many people are starting to believe? Last year, Dr. Klassen and Dr. Zimmerman taught IDIS 102 together. This year, Dr. Klassen is leaving TWU, so Dr. Zimmerman is teaching IDIS 102 alongside Professor Townsend. Next year, Dr. Zimmerman is expecting to take a research chair and will not be available to coordinate or teach IDIS 102.
Dr. Zimmerman hesitated to answer who would teach IDIS in the future, although, he named Linda Schwartz as a possibility. He pointed out that having two people from different disciplines would be the best solution; this would make the course truly interdisciplinary. When asked about this issue, Dr. Faw mentioned, with a question mark in his voice, names like Calvin Townsend, Peg Peters, or Mike Goheen. Dr. Klassen did not give any names, but said,
“The future of IDIS could be challenged by a certain desire to divide the world along secular and Christian tracks. IDIS is intended to be an approach based on intermingling of faith, secular, pagan, enlightenment ideas, and an understanding that these ideas are not mutually exclusive.”
The book used for IDIS 102 was required reading for all who went to the Faculty Retreat this year. The faculty thoroughly discussed the book and gave it substantial praise. Nevertheless, IDIS does not have enough ownership from any side of TWU’s academics. It is difficult to find professors to teach IDIS, but it remains the only statement of a unified academic vision of the university taught to students.
In the past, the administration has not considered these academic questions as central to the university. The funding split between Student Life and academics demonstrates this. For example, University 101 gets generous funding, runs without many bureaucratic difficulties, and has full-time staff running the program. IDIS 102, on the other hand, has found itself struggling each year to receive funding and has no full-time department or staff. This dichotomy is not the fault of Student Life or academia, but is the result of deeper issues.
If IDIS is the central academic vision of this university, why does it have to fight for financial survival? IDIS needs to be its own department and have its own budget and staff. It should not need someone to champion its cause; everyone concerned about the university should rally for the success of IDIS as the central vision of the TWU. What happens with IDIS 102, if the vision is lost or not, will be a telling statement about the commitment that TWU is willing to make to academic excellence and interdisciplinary studies as a Christian liberal arts university.
Now you go...
9 Responses to “On this rock…”
Got something to say?
Students at TWU have a really distinct opportunity to pick up some great material from some very passionate profs. And if the random fortune assigned to men like Cal Townsend holds out, the students will be matched up with competent and satisfactory mentors. But the majority of the material is stuff that needs to be sought after… it won’t come to you like the relationship talk in UNIV 101 or the 4 year plan each student gets to do for 101.
The future of IDIS is easy. It should be eliminated. The course already overlaps with other classes such as PHIL and RELS anyway. So why make students take a short annoying class that will not help academically in any way.
The other issue is the professors teaching it, such as Townsend, who thinks it more important to indoctrinate, than to apply a liberal arts approach.
The idea behind IDIS is a good one, but the follow through is a major disappointment. Does anyone under the age of 40 understand the coursepack for 102? It is filled with large words that even the mentors have a hard time explaining. The coursepack is written for a book, not for IDIS, much less students in their first year of university, so we can’t understand it!
Granted, university should enlarge our vocabulary, but start us off slow, will you? What I remember from the lectures is the amount of movies that were referenced… and something about worldview but I can’t remember what.
Here’s a tip: instead of getting insight from the scholarly faculty members, who obviously use large words in their everyday vocabulary, ask for students feedback (and by this I mean not just the 4.0 students, we are not all like that). We are the ones who have to sit through the class. We want to learn, but as of now, we can’t understand it.
I hold deep, sincere sympathy for those who “can’t understand it”. First off, its not mathematical equations, IDIS deals with words, perhaps long ones, but hey what do we do when we don’t understand what the algorithm of 3500 to the power 484 is? We ASK QUESTIONS! This is also what university would like to teach you! It’s a good tool it really is. And, yes, I am a 19 year-old student who has taken the course and I find the competing ideologies taught in IDIS fascinating and at times disorienting. Thus, I would like to contend that I understand it, in the sense that it is faith-seeking understanding (one of the worldviews taught in the class;)
As for Mr. Townsend, I am displeased that he is heading up the interviews only because I find him a daunting, intimidating mass of a man who has power to enforce some type of quasi-authority over others. I find that unnecessary and unappealing for students who would like to partake in an interview but fear they might be in jeopardy if they answer a question incorrectly. I’m sure this is not intentional and that Mr. Townsend is a gentle giant, however, in a world that values perceptions and not authenticity, it is a relevant opinion.
P. S: Hey ‘CAB’, my GPA isn’t 4.0 ;)
ahh, Idis 102. Those days are (thankfully) far behind me. Don’t get me wrong - i think that disciplinary integration, and high expectations are great (including the expectation that one will significantly increase their vocabulary whilst in this esteemed institute).
However, i must agree that the execution of the class (at least when i took it 3 years ago) was extremely poor, and that a lot of it had to do with the tone of Townsend’s lectures. One phrase was burned into my mind during a lecture that still echoes in my brain today - “You are all stuck in little bubbles, little caves. Fear not though - I am here to help rescue you!” . Though i have come to actually appreciate the Platonic reference over the years, i still question the arrogance of that statement. Perhaps he was looking to provoke discussion, but the only thing from that class that i ever remember fiercely debating with others was why it was wrong to assume that one’s entire audience was a crowd of ignorant fools.
I agree with CAB and JAM. I was interested in IDIS - until I met Townsend. He was consistently arrogant, and I seriously think he believes he knows everything. As for the rather supersized vocabulary presented in the class - is it simply to make us feel stupid? Or because it hides the fact that they really don’t grasp what they’re talking about either? Because when we asked exactly what ‘incarnational humanism’ was, we got a long answer (full of other similar terms) that really boiled down to a vague theory.
IDIS didn’t seem interdisciplinary to me - especially when Townsend commented that every discipline was useless save for the humanities. Where would the world be if everyone sat around coming up with phrases like ‘incarnational humanism’ and trying to tell everyone else that they were wrong?
If they can ‘fix’ IDIS and make it relevant to the audience they are trying to reach (18-19 yr old firstyears), I think it could be a great class. Instead it simply confuses and frustrates most students who feel it pointless to take a class that Townsend admits is 3rd year level and therefore NOT a great introductory class to the university.
Wow, I’ve never heard so many negative comments about Cal Townsend at one time. I must admit that I did not take Idis 102. I did not have a class with Prof Townsend until I was 21 years old. However, arrogant and know it all seem to be the farthest words from truth when describing Townsend. Humble and knowledgeable would be the worlds I would use. The man has read more and retained more than any one that I know. I wish people would refrain from attacking a mans character just because they do not understand the concepts that he happens to think about on a regular basis. Cal Townsend is one of the best profs and TWU and I feel indebted to him for the way he invested in my life and undergrad education.
I agree with Chris here. Never have a learned and retained so much than from the unbelievable excitement that Cal brings to class each day. I did not have IDIS with him (unfortunately I had Goheen), however my experience has been nothing but eye opening with him as the philosopher leading me out of the cave and into the light of pursuing excellence…
Cal Townsend is the best. Hands down.