The Adventist Advantage: President Heather Knight’s Debut

Posted on 24. Sep, 2009 by Peter Katz in Feature

Change has come to PUC, and it has a plan.

On the morning of September 15, Dr. Heather Knight, the new President of PUC, spoke for the first time to the faculty and staff. Knight, who holds a Ph. D. in English from Stanford, comes to PUC after eighteen years at the University of the Pacific in Stockton, followed by several years as provost of Andrews University.

Knight expressed her desire to make PUC into “the best Christian, liberal-arts college in California,” stating, “I believe that PUC is at an inflection point where we can choose to remain good, or we can choose to envision and enact greatness, and in bold innovative moves, make the leap from good to great.”

To make this change, Knight called upon the theoretical frameworks of business authorities such as Jim Collins and Peter Senge, ultimately coming to the conclusion that, in her words, for PUC to “survive and thrive in the new century,” it needs to capitalize on assets that make it unique. For Knight, that asset is what she called the “Adventist Advantage,” a series of seven facets which she identified as specific benefits of an Adventist education. These seven aspects fall into three basic categories: spiritual strength, personal health, and communal involvement.

As might be expected, Knight placed a great deal of emphasis on the spiritual benefits of an Adventist education and the hand of the divine in PUC’s future. Her first facet was, perhaps predictably, “Having Christ as a personal savior,” which she felt provides a “sense of security and salvation [that] adds meaning and purpose to [the faculty’s] lives, to our students’ lives.” This purpose, she later discussed, is integrally entwined with the ability of an Adventist education to bestow upon the students a “moral and ethical compass.”

Regarding the personal benefits, Knight cited the health message, noting that “the world is very focused on health and wellness, and we can trumpet” the advantage that our own emphasis brings. She also pointed out the environmental health and stewardship of the earth she finds in the message of the Sabbath as yet another benefit of Adventist education, noting that as far as nature is concerned, PUC is the epitome of “Location, location, location.”

Communally, Knight vaunted Adventism’s commitment to generous service via social institutions like the Dorcas or simply neighbor to neighbor. Drawing on her previous experience in positions regarding diversity, Knight discussed the aspect of diversity. She noted that PUC is currently ranked first for ethnic diversity in its category, and affirmed that multiplicity, stating that diversity is a means of “embodying the way of the kingdom of God” by demonstrating that despite disparate origins, faith is the “glue” that keeps us together.

All of these aspects came together to form the final communal, personal, and spiritual facet, which is that of education, in which Adventist schools attempt to integrate faith and reason. While she noted that PUC is “good” in many of these ways, she also declared that “Good is the enemy of great.” It is her goal, by understanding that “Just as individuals must continue to grow and to renew themselves, so must organizations,” students at PUC might become “intentional learners, empowered through the mastery of intellectual and practical skills.”

While Knight was understandably light on specifics, given the nature of the occasion, she did make a point of insisting that her goal of helping PUC achieve greatness would involve a policy of “Not nearly maintaining the status quo,” but rather, creating, cultivating, and culminating “B-HATS: Big, Hairy, Audacious Goals.” Surmounting the challenges presented to a shifting institution, Knight maintained, requires a complete “turnaround.”

The structure of this turnaround Knight intends to bring is a simple sounding but realistically daunting three-tiered structure:

1) Restore financial health.

2) Create marketing programs and brand the revived institution.

3) Redefine the educational mission and culture.

Though her statements were broad, the intentions and inspiration behind them was brilliantly clear. A change of presidency is an indicator of change for any institution, and Knight intends to utilize the opportunities presented by a restructuring to take PUC toward more fully realizing the goals she outlined. Her speech was something between a sermon and a business presentation, invoking the communal ties she lauded while insisting on a need for a new direction.

What does this mean for the students of PUC? It is, as of yet, difficult to say. Knight certainly comes with a history of creating financial security, stability which PUC currently lacks, even with an happily surprising quantity of new freshmen. While Knight told the Weekly Calistogan over the summer that she had no comment regarding the Eco-village, it could be that part of both financial health and marketing would entail a go-ahead for Triad’s project. An emphasis on the fiscal and creating a viable market for PUC may in fact be a movement toward further outsourcing and increased importation of services and companies to the Angwin area and PUC’s means of recruiting.

As for the academics and culture, it may be even more impossible to gauge the implications of this shift. The desire to push forward presents the culture of PUC and Dr. Knight with a paradoxical quandary. Radical change inherently implies liberality and a departure from tradition, but collective change requires communal solidarity—and Adventism tends to be a community that holds tightly to its traditions. What makes this paradox perhaps even more complex when discussing PUC is that the culture of PUC has, as of late, tended to be one that prides itself on its collective liberality.

Exactly where all of this will lead is, as of now, obviously rather nebulous. With Dr. Knight at the helm, however, there will be change, it will at least initially have structure. She has her goals solidly in mind, and a plan to achieve them. We wish her the best of luck, and look forward to beginning the journey of her new presidency here at PUC.

Look for more information on Dr. Heather Knight and the beginning of her experience at PUC in later C² issues.

Capturing the Zeitgeist of PUC: The C2 Motto and Why YOU Matter

Posted on 24. Sep, 2009 by Peter Katz in Editorial

When our online editor, Jonathan Pichot, suggested our motto, we were all confused, to say the least. Some of us thought he was just making up words, but he was incredulous and insistent. He looked it up just to prove to us that it was a real word, and its definition was, in a word, perfect. “To capture the zeitgeist of PUC,” for those of you who don’t speak German, means to capture the essence, the true spirit, the very nature of what it is to be PUC. And that is our motto. The C² is the medium through which the essence of PUC will be articulated, examined, questioned, defined. It is an essence that stands the test of time, yet shifts with every incoming freshman class. We want to explore the core of the culture that is PUC.

And we cannot do that without you. The line between our staff writers is the line between socialism and anarchy: we either have no staff writers, only people who write for us, or all of you are our staff. You pick; the outcome is the same. The C² staff is a team of people whose job it is not to write, but to find writers, not to define, but to be the conduit for your own definition.

Certainly, we will be asking specifically for some articles, and we may even have specific people in mind. But the seven of us alone can hardly account for the zeitgeist of a school of over one-thousand. The “PUC culture” is a multifarious culture built of myriad subcultures. Does PUC not hear your culture’s voice, or not hear it loud enough?  Speak up!  Send us an article.

The process is simple. You want to write about something? Do it. Then send it in. Or talk to us, then do it, then send it in. We have no pet writers, no people whom we publish every time simply because they are our “staff writers.” You want to critique a movie made in Fisher Hall? Do it. You want to write an investigative piece about the presence or non-presence of X on campus? Do it. You wrote a great piece on anything, something academic, something silly, something somewhere between, and you want to see it printed? Send it.

Here is the logistical breakdown. You have an idea. You contact Peter, Craig, Melissa, or Erika via our emails or in person, and talk to us about your idea. We almost invariably give you the thumbs up, and you send us a draft. We work it over, rinse and repeat, and viola. You’re a staff writer.  For that issue. Enjoyed it? Do it again. It’s that simple.

Want to write, but not sure about what? We’ll be sending out emails, using the BigScreen in the caf’, and advertising in the back of every C² for ideas we’ve had, or articles we’d like to see in the next issue. Or stop by the office from 1:00pm-5:00pm Tuesdays and Thursdays; if those times don’t work for you, email, and we’ll figure out a good time to meet. Not to mention our open planning sessions, which we will announce via BigScreen and announce emails.

Want to write, but you’re not sure if we’ll take it? Of course we will. Perhaps with some work, but good news: most of the staff members are English majors. That means we were born with a condition that makes us actually enjoy working with words, and helping other people learn to write. It’s tragic, and we’re trying to get over it, but until then—take advantage. Nobody starts out at New York Times quality, and none of us on the staff are there yet, so you shouldn’t have to be. Just like the culture of PUC grows, so too do writers. If you want to write, we’ll make it happen.

If it’s not clear yet, we’ll repeat what we said at the end of last year: we want you to write. This is your school, your paper, your zeitgeist.  Let it be known.