(Continuation of last tape)

 

DYER:  Now the guiding philosophy of the college certainly has to be described as unique in many ways. When you think back, Dusty, did you see this as a philosophy that was similar to the philosophy you had, either as a personal philosophy or as a written philosophy for the adult education at Modesto Junior College?

 

RHODES: I think it was a combination, Dick. I think that this philosophy is I think a reflection of me as an individual as well as a reflection of those that were involved in the initla planning of the college. It has always seemed to me that the most effective education process, and the most effective education in my opinion, takes place in kindergarten and first grade and adult education. I think that those of us involved in the elementary grades and the mid-elementary grades and the upper elementary grades, the junior high, the high school, and colleges – have much to learn from the two spectrums of the ??? segment. It seems as though – as I spent some twelve years on adult education and I observed with pleasure the games, the satisfaction, the knowledges that were developed by adults in adult education courses and even classes. Far and above any degree of expectation based on their mental ability or test scores, whatever they happened to be. So we tried to analyze this, to find out why this happened. And it was apparent to us, and I believe this with a passion, that the reason adults do so well is because they are able to assume the responsibility for their own learning. They’re highly motivated, and they assume the responsibility for their own learning. Instructors in adult education programs and adult education classes working with adults are primarily friends, guidance people. They’re information-givers, but the adult really digs in and takes responsibility for his own learning, he becomes highly involved in his educational program, and therefore success is inevitable.

 

RHODES: This was reinforced in a highly successful program that we were involved with at Modesto, the New Hope Adult Retraining program, which took undereducated, unemployed adults and put them through a training program that was based on a foundation of a high degree of motivation and involvement and tried to expose them to the world in which they lived and tried to present to them some techniques and some directions on how to survive. The success of this program was tremendous.  So I think probably it stood in my experience in adult education, due in some degree to the New Hope experience seeing what could happen in underdeveloped, educationally disadvantaged adults, partially due to my military experience, I think. And a general, as I perceived, dissatisfaction with the traditional student in the traditional program at the traditional college. And the philosophy and guiding principles really came out of this, in which we tried to recognize as the central core of a college operation the worth and dignity of the student. And the question is, how do we involve him in the educational process and how do we so motivate the student so that he will accept these ??? ??? ???. And this is what we’re talking about in our philosophy and guiding principles.

 

DYER:  So actually it was something that was not gleaned from all of the books or from the colleges of education per se, but it was something that came through being exposed through a variety of work that you’d done in the profession and even out of the profession.

 

RHODES: I would say so, yes. I don’t think you’ll find a philosophy such as Columbia has in any other institution of higher education in the nation. I think it’s a common-sense philosophy, I think that it’s a philosophy that has an awful lot going for it, it’s a philosophy that we use as a baseline for bringing the faculty aboard, it’s a philosophy that we hope to use for evalution of our staff, evaluation of our programs. To me, it seems that it’s the only type of philosophy that can work in the 1970s.

 

DYER:  Now of course, this would create a lot of innovations even if Eagle Cottage, certainly in the construction of the campus here – when you think of some of these unique features, are there several that seem to stand out in your mind?

 

RHODES: Yes, we were always interested in a modular or an ???-orial approach as one technique that had some degree of interest for us. Doctor Dodge, who came aboard as our dean of sciences and natural resources, agreed with us that this is an area that we ought to expand in depth, and see just what could be done using the modular technique in the teaching of sciences. But after ??? ??? ???, the father of this idea, had some significant success with this technique, we contacted Dr. ??? and had a discussion with him. And under Dick’s leadership a science program was developed using this mode of instruction as a primary thrust. Now we did this for a number of reasons. One, because educationally we thought it was sound and we wanted to give it a good look. Secondly, we just did not have the financial resources to develop a laboratory in chemistry, a laboratory for biology, a laboratory for physics, a laboratory for forestry, ad infinitum. By using this technique we could use one laboratory, an open lab, keep it open all day and the night if necessary, cut down on our expenditures of equipment because students would be moving at their own pace on their own time, and it would be logical to assume that we would not have an excess number of students working in one unit at one time, therefore we could eliminate much of our capital expenditure. This proved true. We found that we could have 500 students enrolled in various science courses, and need only 6 to 10 microscopes in order to handle the needs for these students moving independently throughout the curriculum. If we had not used this technique we would have needed 35 to 40 microscopes. So changes were necessary because of financial limitations, the fact that it is educationally sound and the students have had astounding success on their transfers make us most happy, because I think this modular approach, especially in the skills courses and science and technical education, is really the cutting edge of the future.

 

DYER:  What about the learning resources center and unique features of this time?

 

RHODES: In order to have a facility that gave us the capability for a student to become involved in his own education, we came up with the concept of the learning resources center. The learning resources center at Columbia really is in four different segments. One is our library resources center, that probably is the only traditional part of this building which we have respect in our table. Adjacent to this, and really in the same structural area is our independent study center that is composed of significant number of individual ???, with tape, instructional checkout possibilities which which students can go in and involve themselves in a ??? by themselves with a tape recorder, slide projector and really involve themselves in the learning process. We have about a third of the building is composed of the instructional material center, which is the area in which this college is assuming responsibility to prepare professionals and through support services support our excellent faculty with development of materials for their use. The fourth thing, which could be one of the most important parts of this building, is the Learning Skills Center. Realizing that a community college in California is an open door institution in which we are legally must accept any resident of our district who completes high school or is over 18 years of age who can profit from instruction, we have a great diversity of abilities, backgrounds, and experiences coming through our doors. We have a age difference, we have a achievement difference, we have any number of wide variances in students. It seemed to us that let’s recognize this fact, and let’s be one college that has the courage to set up a Learning Skills Center. If a student is having a reading problem, let’s have an area where that student can go and work with an instructor individually, and become involved in attacking this learning skills problem, because it seemed to us that any possibility of success from an educational point of view without some understanding of the basic skills was not possible.

 

RHODES: So our learning skills area was developed, where instruction in reading, study skills, math skills, writing skills, are given. Given in group situations, as well as the fact that our staff is available for students on an on-call basis, because it seemed to us then that the teachable moment occurs when a student runs into a problem. I – for student and instructor both, that’s right. I came through the science discipline. And none of my students failed chemistry. They failed mathematics. They could not assimilate the mathematical concepts that were necessary to understand and succeed in chemistry. So philosophically and ideally, the learning center set up to be the learning skills center is set up to serve students when they run into problems. Theoretically, we’d like to have – when we get our physics and chemistry and individual modular flow mapped completely, that when a student runs into a problem in physics or chemistry and they’re having a math problem, that that student then is referred to the math instructor in the learning skills center, the concept, the mathematical concept that he’s having problems with is gone over, the problem itself is gone over, the attitudes and the skills are developed, and once he is able to solve this particular problem, which may take one day, it may take two weeks. But at the end of that time then he goes back into chemistry or physics and takes off. This seems to be – seems to us – to be an interesting and a realistic agreement for the ???. That’s the function of the learning skills center.

 

DYER:  It’s certainly exciting to be involved when you think of this.

 

RHODES: It seems, Dick, that we as a faculty have a responsibility to – well, not a major responsibility, seems to me – is to ensure that our students will come through this college, have a basic foundation of skill. And if we can do nothing else at Columbia but to teach them how to learn and give them the tools with which to learn, we’re doing them the greatest favor an educational institution can ever do. If – you and I know that learning is a lifelong process, and if we teach them how to learn they’re going to be learning and educating themselves for the rest of your lives.

 

DYER:  Another thing that always strikes me is the openness of things here on the campus, whether it’s the instructor’s office or whether it’s your office here or any of the other places on the campus. Was this something that just happened or was it a part of the guiding philosophy too?

 

RHODES: It’s part of the plan. It’s part of the plan. The reason is my administrative educational experience  - I can recall the hours I spent as a student, as a teacher looking for my colleagues, and as an administrator for my colleagues. I can remember the endless hours that I spent trying to find instructors. Trying to find instructors – And I can understand this completely. The instructors many times like to hide themselves behind walls and doors. This just is not consistent with the Columbia philosophy. We feel that Columbia is a community of students and faculty working in one direction to assist the student to succeed in his goals and objectives. So ??? ??? ??? of this relationship – instructors had to be available for students. So you will find at Columbia all faculty offices open to the outside. We have tried to eliminate in every possible way – eliminating artificial barriers in between students and faculty. The only faculty offices that do not open to the outside are those that are – those four offices around the Learning Skills center. And the reason that they do not open to the outside is we want those faculty members to be there in the Learning Skills Center so that they’re available for students and have constant observation of the people in the Skills Center.

 

DYER:  Evidently it is sort of a unique feature because I’ve noticed many of the new students who have been on the campus for only a quarter or less find it very very difficult to adjust to the openness of the campus. They don’t believe the sign over your door that indicates you are available. They don’t believe that faculty members are available. It takes them some time-

 

RHODES: – I think this is significantly different than found on most campuses, and I hope it always remains this way.

 

DYER:  Dusty, through the years, do you see a kind of evolution of the philosophy that now exists as the college changes, as the enrollment goes up, can you envision an evolution?

 

RHODES: I think the pressures, Dick, are always there. I think the pressures to move to the middle, traditional, are always out there. I think the only way that we can maintain what I think are the very desirable things we have at Columbia would be to be most selective with our faculty, most selective in our administrative staff, and to just constantly attempt to reinforce the things that we feel Columbia is trying to ???. It’s a tough one, it’s one that is everyone’s responsibility. It certainly is something that cannot be developed by one person whoever he is, whether he’s the custodian or he’s the president. It seems to me, Dick, that the greatest watchdogs in the Columbia philosophy are the students. And I think that the students are not going to let this college vary too far away from what Columbia it is, what it’s going to be and what it’s ???.

 

DYER:  IN order to implement this you’ve referred to this several times, Dusty, - whenever you select a new member for the team, paramount in your mind is whether or not he fits into the philosophy that’s been evident.

 

RHODES: This is absolute. This is an absolute. In fact, did you know that when you came aboard, Dick, and every other instructor – they almost have to sign their name in blood that they subscribe to the kind of – as the direction and the philosophy, and the guiding principles. This is what I look for – Our screening process is interesting, it’s somewhat – probably a little different than most. The original screening – the papers come in, the applications are in a position that’s open, referred to faculty within that discipline for review. Those that the faculty feels will have the abilities to have the strength that they feel they need in their particular area are referred to the Dean of that division. The Dean talks to these people, along with the faculty, and over the time that I see a person, there is no question in my mind that he has been screened for academic competence. SO my entire thrust of an interview is Number One: “Is he the sort of a person that can operate comfortably and happily within the Columbia philosophy“, second “Is he the type of person that can live in a rural, isolated area and be happy?” and three, “What is his wife or her husband – what are their drives, because moving into an isolated area – and if the mate is not happy in that living condition, it cannot be a happy experience for the faculty member. So these are the things that I look for. What kind of a human being are they? What kind of a person are they? Do they really enjoy students, or are they in education because they didn’t make it somewhere else? Are they committed to the fact that the student is the most important aspect of the college, as opposed to the discipline being the most important aspect of a college? Are they interested in living in this area? Are they coming to Columbia because of what Columbia is or because they perceive it as if they move up here they can retire early. And these are some of the things that we look for as we screen new potential applicants.

 

DYER:  It’s a unique team and it’s a real joy that I’m a part of the team like this, because you sense a different kind of attitude toward the institution as well as the students with a team like this.

 

RHODES: I think we have a tremendous faculty. Generally speaking we just have a magnificent group of people involved at Columbia. Because of these people, I feel that Columbia’s successes in the future are going to be significant.

 

DYER:  Dusty, going back to the Eagle Cottage days, what was your position like back there as you were with the pioneers trying to withstand all of the primitive features?

 

RHODES: Well, my basic responsibility here in the Eagle Cottage days was trying to activate and rush and push the buildings – the primitive buildings on this site. Bill Haskins, who was the Dean of General Education person who I feel is one of the upstanding educators, certainly in this or any other state – he has a deep, keen mind, a tremendous planner, and did a magnificent job in the development of Columbia. It’s unfortunate Bill chose to leave education. But Bill was given the primary responsibility for the initial development of the curriculum and the correlation of the curriculum between the three divisions. As such, Bill was the person that – his office was at Eagle Cottage in Columbia, my office at the time was still at 77 Washington Street in Sonora, although I would be out of Eagle Cottage in Columbia every day, most of my time was spent on site on the building of the permanent campus. So Bill in many ways was the initial thrust that first year. I think it was because of Bill Haskins – who Bill Haskins was, the type of person that he was. He really gave our curriculum thrust, a greatly forward. I can’t, I really can’t say too much about Bill Haskins and my appreciation for him and what he’s done for this institution, as well as what he did with us in Adult Division, Modesto, ten years before he came up here. Outstanding person.

 

DYER:  Did you have a lot of public relation commitment at the time to coordinate things between college and community, or –

 

RHODES: Yes. One of the real problems need not be evident and wasn’t evident to me at first, but it showed, and once it’s related I think you can see where it is a question – Moving a college into any community causes a traumatic impact on that community. Developing a college in an isolated rural community doubles this anxiety and frustration. So I found that my first three years of involvement with this college, I spent much of my time – Dick, I would say 75 percent of my time and I know 75 percent of my evenings were spent with community groups, trying to interpret what this college was going to do, what this college could do for them. Wonderful people living in an isolated area many times do not have the sophistication found in urban areas. When the term “college” is mentioned to the average citizen in Tuolumne County, the first indication – and many of the people in this area still hold to it – that fine, Columbia is a two-year college, as soon as it grows up it will be a four-year college. When they speak of “college”, they’re speaking of University of the Pacific, University of California Berkley, a four-year college. This is a college to them. I’m not sure how well I have been able to interpret this community that Columbia will always be a two-year college. There are still many in this community that feel as soon as you grow up, as soon as you’re there for a while, you’re going to be a four-year college. And that probably will not be unless there’s some significant change in the legal structure of education in the state. So it was one of interpretation, and trying to involve the community within the development of the college. We developed a presence advisory committee of 25 citizens that cut across the entire economy of Tuolumne County and involved them in the preliminary planning. We had them approve and make suggestions for architectural design, for programs, for philosophy and guiding principles – these were all, these really important decisions were cleared with the citizens’ advisory committee before they went to a board of trustees. We tried to involve the community.  We think it’s so important to involve the community in a community college that’s organized in California. Because it’s their college. We’re there to serve them. It’s necessary for them to know what we’re doing, what our goals are, what our dreams are, what our desires are. And it’s important for us to know how they perceive this college ???. The eternal conflict between town and gown is always evident. But I think even more evident in a small community.

DYER:  Well, Doctor Rhodes, we’re almost at the end of the tape and I do want to thank you because certainly you deserve more credit than anyone else for translating some of these lofty philosophical statements into what has become Columbia Junior College.

 

RHODES: Oh, thanks, Dick, very much. It was relating this to you – I feel however I’ve rambled, but maybe this is the best way to handle ??? situation.

 

DYER:  Thank you.

 

END OF TAPE

 

General Information:

Interviewer: Dyer, Richard

Interviewee: Rhodes, Harvey (Dusty) B.  (The first president of the college).

Name of Tape: (a section of) History of Columbia Junior College (CC_hist_3_1)

When: Late 60’s early 70’s

Transcriber: Alden (3/24/08)

Transcriber’s Note: CONTINUED FROM CC_hist_3_0