The Office of the Provost’s original email on March 27 made several references to a “required number of minutes,” but it did not specify what this requirement is. The College continued to be inconsistent on this point, taking several days to construct a direct answer.

On March 31, Coile and President Paula Johnson presented to the College Government Senate on the topic. The slide on credit hours was prefaced with the helpful “warning: confusing!” and cited the notso-confusing definition “A semester hour must include at least 37.5 clock hours of instruction” (Federal Register, Vol 75 No. 209, page 66950). 

Throughout this presentation, Coile reiterated that calculating the number of minutes is confusing. As a Wellesley student who has fulfilled my Quantitative Reasoning, Data Literacy and Mathematical Modeling distribution requirements, I — and many others — do not find multiplication confusing.

This plan was announced on the ninth week of classes. Because the strike began on a Thursday, NTT courses were likely able to meet on Monday and Tuesday, but not Thursday and Friday. Thus, we will assume 8.5 weeks of class had elapsed by the start of the strike. 150 minutes per week times 8.5 weeks is 1,275 minutes. If 1,950 minutes are worth 1.0 credit, we must divide 1,275 by 1,950 to get 0.65 credits. Thus, students whose classes are being cut short by the strike are receiving less credit than they actually completed. The College’s argument against awarding the amount of credit is because the College gives credit in units of 0.25. However, if the Registrar is able to frequently award study abroad and transfer credits in units of 0.8, there clearly is a way for Wellesley to adjust the amount of credits to accurately reflect student learning.

Another point of contention is that the new courses that students will complete in presumably the last four weeks of the semester are also equal to 0.5 credits. If students register for new classes on March 29, between March 31 and the last day of classes, they will have nine classes to attend. Nine class days times 75 minutes is 675 minutes. 675 minutes of class attended divided by the 1,950 minutes required for 1.0 credit is equal to 0.346 credits. Clearly, the classes students are forced to add at the last minute are not equivalent to their classes that have been cut short. 

If the math seems nonsensical, that is the point. Of course, I’m sure the process of ensuring Wellesley’s credit hours align with accreditation standards was a thorough and intentional process that might not map out with mathematical precision. However, make no mistake: the Provost’s decision was not made to preserve the integrity of Wellesley academics — it was a last-ditch union-busting effort, and now administrators would rather save face than meet their responsibilities towards students. The Provost’s decision is extremely disrespectful, implying that our courses are interchangeable with each other. It suggests that Wellesley students take courses simply to get the credits for a degree, rather than to design an enriching academic experience. If there was a genuine concern to maintain Wellesley’s academic standards, the administration would not disregard how Wellesley students chose a liberal arts education to be intentional with their intellectual pursuits, minimize the learning students have put in so far by reducing their credit, and force students to take on new classes purely for gaining credit hours. If this was a genuine effort to support students, the administration would not disrespect tenure-track faculty by pressuring them to take on new students in the last few weeks of the semester and imply that any student could easily master their curriculum in only nine classes. If this was genuine, the administration would have bargained with the Union in good faith, avoiding the strike entirely.

The College justified announcing the credit plan on the first day of the strike by arguing that they needed to take action early in the event that the strike lasted all semester. Nearly twenty days into the strike, we see the College’s self-fulfilling prophecy materialize. Now with this plan to fall back on, the College presents the image that they do not need to bargain urgently to end the strike. 

However, like with the original credit plan, this too has holes in it. It is expensive for the College to pay for picket line security each day. Thesising students have had to hurriedly reorganize their thesis panels. Delaying the strike puts summer courses and the Fall 2025 semester in limbo, as students are unsure as to which courses will be offered. Media attention will be on the College on Marathon Monday, families will come to campus on Commencement, and alums will come to campus for Reunion. Waiting out the strike is not sustainable. The College must swallow their pride and return to the bargaining table. 

No amount of condescending Senate meetings, dismissive Zoom webinars or backtracking email blasts will salvage the situation. Administration has irrevocably destroyed whatever trust the Wellesley community have held for the administration. There is only one clear solution. First, the administration must substantively demonstrate their commitment to Wellesley academics by bargaining in good faith with WOAW to bring the strike to an end. This includes agreeing to WOAW’s offers for additional bargaining sessions, engaging with WOAW’s big ticket items and not pressuring the Union to engage in private mediation. Second, the administration must issue an apology to students (particularly international students, students on financial aid, and graduating seniors) and faculty (both tenure-track and NTT) for the chaos and damage the 0.5 credit plan has created. 

Finally, we as students cannot lose sight of the issue at hand. Faculty teaching conditions are our learning conditions. We cannot sit on our hands and wait for the grown-ups to figure things out. Our education is being materially impacted, and we must take action. We are the students of this college. Our money pays senior leadership’s paychecks, and our money should be used to pay our educators. We have a voice in calling for the College to return to the bargaining table. We must use that voice to uphold the Wellesley education, for ourselves currently on campus, for the alums that came before us and for the students that will follow up. 

Our community has been demonstrably shaken up by the College’s actions. As we reach the third week into the strike, we can tell that this is not a situation that will casually blow over. As a community, we have a responsibility to ourselves and future generations to preserve this institutional memory — as painful as it may be — and work to create a better future, one that values the labor of those who make Wellesley what it is.

WOAW and the College reached tentative agreements for Union Rights and Access and Recognition for union members. However, the session did not address major proposals, such as compensation, workload and appointments and reappointment. The Union did not consider there to be enough progress made to end the strike.

Movements made

The College came with 16 proposals and a package of various benefits, including child care and paid medical leave.

The College offered a $5,000 child care benefit for BUEs with dependents six years and younger.

WOAW members said this proposal came unexpectedly and were hopeful the College could extend this policy to tenured faculty and staff.
The College also offered two semesters of paid medical leave that BUEs may take over the course of their careers. 

While the Union recognized the progress, they hoped to see a longer, more generous timeline for illness.

In another movement, the College guarantees that any case of alleged discrimination, harassment, or bullying can proceed to grievance and arbitration, reversing a firm stance they took in the past that would only allow the Union to proceed to grievance after arbitration and the College’s final actions.

  They did not provide definitive answers on the Union’s proposal to include a statement of non-discrimination on the basis of immigration status, in the case of a federal law change in the future.

The Immigration and Nationality Act already prohibits employers from discriminating against individuals based on their citizenship status, immigration status, or national origin in hiring, firing, recruitment, or referral for a fee. 

Disagreement remains

The College wrote in a campus-wide email that it presented the Union with “significant moves.”

Anne Brubaker, Senior Lecturer in the Writing Program, acknowledged the College’s efforts in benefits but said they failed to present a comprehensive package that included all their articles and top-priority issues. 

Despite going on strike, the Union members are frustrated by the lack of urgency and slow progress of bargaining from the College side. 

The Union offered to extend the Tuesday bargaining session and meet on Wednesday, but the College insisted on meeting on Thursday on their previously agreed-upon schedule.    

“It just seems they’re almost acting unbothered…There’s no sense of urgency from the College’s bargaining team,” said Jacquelin Woodford, Lecturer in Chemistry.

The College strongly disagrees with that assertion, said the College in a statement to the News. They continued to propose third-party mediation, through a neutral private mediator, as federal mediators are no longer a viable option.

“The union continues to strike and shows no urgency around the College’s request to pursue private mediation – a tried and true method of resolving labor disputes,” said the College.

Brubaker rejected the College’s characterization of the strike as premature.

“We feel like in some ways, yes, we were striking because of the sticking points, but we were also striking to get them back to the bargaining table,” said Brubaker.

Brubaker also rejected the idea that bargaining has reached a point where mediation is necessary.

“And I know that they have suggested that we were at an impasse, and we needed mediation. But an impasse isn’t the same as not showing up and countering our proposals in a meaningful way,” said Brubaker.

“We call on the union to end the strike, focus on the critical work at the negotiating table, and allow students to return to their usual classes,” Coile and Slaboden wrote in the email.

In an email statement to the News, Brubaker wrote, “The College announcement from Provost Coile mentions ‘retirement benefits’ but this was not in the proposal package.”

In the meantime, WOAW’s bargaining update stated that on the evening of Apr. 1, the bargaining team sent another comprehensive package to the College ahead of bargaining on Apr. 3. This is the second comprehensive package, which includes information about all articles, that the Union has sent to the College.

The College and WOAW-UAW will return to bargaining Thursday, Apr. 3.

“The plan must be implemented now so that students will have enough contact hours to support the 0.5 credit by the end of the semester,” wrote Coile. 

In a statement to the News, the College said, “Since the length of the faculty strike at Wellesley is currently unknown, the College has developed a plan that will be effective no matter what the duration of the strike may be. If we were to wait to see how long the strike ends up lasting before taking action, we would have missed the window to put in place a plan that will be needed if there is a long strike.”

The College also said, “If the strike ends quickly enough, it will not be necessary for students to remain enrolled in these new classes, as students will be able to return to their original classes and earn full credit.”

The Wellesley News has asked the College to clarify what “quickly enough” means.

The News previously reported that the College is suspending courses taught by striking union members not covered by a substitute instructor. The initial announcement, which came Thursday morning, informed students that, unless they were enrolled in WOAW-taught courses with a “high number of minutes,” they would only be awarded 0.5 units upon receiving a satisfactory grade. 

Feasibility of College’s plan

To address how the plan may affect students on visas and financial aid, the College will reopen registration on Saturday, Mar. 29. 

“Tenure-stream faculty … have been asked to open up their classes to allow some number of students to join the class in progress…Students who join the class now will be signing up for a 0.5 unit, mandatory credit/no-credit version of the course,” read the Provost’s first email sent Thursday morning. 

To understand if there would be enough seats in tenure-stream faculty courses to support the number of students who courseload now drop below full-time status, The Wellesley News conducted a preliminary analysis based on data from the course browser

As of Mar. 27, Workday and the Course Browser show 425 classes with open seats, totalling 2,672 open seats. 

These figures exclude PE classes, First-Year-Writing classes and QR 140. 55 of these classes are labs, and 304 classes have registration restrictions, such as prerequisites, instructor’s permission or class-specific restrictions. 165 of these classes are taught by Non-Tenure-Track (NTT) faculty.

It is not immediately clear to the News how many NTT members in the Union choose to teach their classes. 

Students will be able to register for classes taught by tenure-stream faculty. This leaves 245 classes with open seats, totalling 1,674 open seats. This number excludes laboratories, but includes classes with registration restrictions.

As many NTT faculty are assumed to teach introductory courses, students who are most likely to be impacted by the strike will be primarily underclassmen who may lack the prerequisites to easily bypass registration restrictions. This leaves 86 classes with open seats, totalling 725 open seats. 

As of midnight on March 28, it is unclear to the News how many courses will be available for registration. Although tenure-stream faculty were asked by the Provost Office to allow affected students to join their courses, professors could decide for themselves whether they would open their classes. 

The Registrar’s Office will confirm on Friday at noon which courses will be subject to credit changes, and the Course Browser will display which classes will accept new students.

Performance

Students will take these newly-added courses as mandatory credit/non-credit, raising questions about how the new plan would affect academic performance for existing and new students.

An email template circulated among students by the Union and Labor Advocacy Taskforce (UniLAd) raises concerns about how the new plan could influence learning for both students already enrolled in tenure-stream courses and students who plan to enroll in said courses.

“Reopening courses will devalue the students already in class, who have put in half a semester of work. It devalues the students who would have to scramble to add classes, forcing them to catch up with a tremendous amount of coursework,” said the document.

“Instructors are expected to be mindful that students will not have seen content from earlier in the semester, but are not expected to re-teach this material. Having classes be graded CR/NCR will help with any learning gaps students may have,” read the Provost’s first email.

Contact hours and credit hours

The main reasoning the College has provided for the credit change and course registration is the requirement for Wellesley to comply with federally-mandated contact hours.

“It is important to understand that federal regulations govern both the number of contact hours required to earn college credit and the number of credits a student must be enrolled in to maintain full-time status for financial aid and visa eligibility purposes,” the Provost wrote in the latest email sent Thursday evening.

According to the Code of Federal Regulations, a credit hour is “one hour of classroom or direct faculty instruction and a minimum of two hours of out-of-class student work each week for approximately fifteen weeks for one semester…or the equivalent amount of work over a different period of time.”

The New England Commission of Higher Education, which awards Wellesley’s accreditation, uses this same definition.

A typical Wellesley course meets for 75 minutes twice a week, so has 2.5 contact hours per week. Wellesley’s registrar states that “One (1) unit of Wellesley College work typically equals 4 semester-hours or 6 quarter-hours.”

Even though there is a minimum requirement for credit hours, the Department of Education wrote in a Q&A page that “there is no ‘seat time’ requirement implicit in the definition of a credit hour.” 

It further clarifies that “the credit-hour definition does not dictate particular amounts of classroom time versus out-of-class student work.” Some striking faculty have encouraged students to continue to submit assignments and work as outlined in their course syllabi.

In a similar union dispute at Columbia University in November 2021, all of Columbia’s undergraduate schools adopted a pass/fail policy for the semester after graduate student workers of the Student Workers of Columbia-United Auto Workers went on strike.

In Columbia’s case, since many classes did not meet the state-mandated 126 hours of teaching and learning per semester, Columbia adopted a “credit-pending policy” where students were required to make up classwork and instructional time through makeup essays during winter break and summer courses.

In a statement to the News, the College said that the Columbia strike, and other strikes mentioned in a recent Wellesley News opinion piece, “occurred under very different circumstances than the strike at Wellesley,” with differences in time of the semester, duration, and the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Wellesley News cannot locate or identify the specific policy or definitions that Wellesley College currently follows and interprets for its plan regarding contact hours and credit hours and their connections for compliance matters.  

The News has reached out to the College for comments on their interpretation of contact hours and credit hours. 

Community Responds

The student executive board of Slater International Center expressed frustration with the announced plan, in an email sent Thursday night, specifically citing concerns about the disproportionate effects on international students. 

“By implementing this sudden policy without proper consultation or consideration, the administration has recklessly put us at risk…We, as international students, are already at heightened risk, and now we are under the threat of not being eligible to maintain our visas and qualify for financial aid,” the students stated in the email.

Contact the editors responsible for this story: Valida Pau, Galeta Sandercock

Updated at 4:26pm on March 28th to reflect College comments.

At first glance, ADR’s actions appear to be a step in the right direction: Wellesley is joining the ranks of peer institutions to provide a resource to support student learning. However, the move has the potential for more harm than good — it directly threatens student employment and raises a host of ethical issues that harm both professors and students. ADR should stop using AI software for note-taking accommodations, and instead continue to provide peer notetakers.

First, ADR moving to AI software directly affects student notetakers. There is already a striking shortage of on-campus jobs, with many students who have Work-Study as part of their financial aid package struggling to find a job to pay that expected contribution. This problem is a combination of two issues: first, there are more students on Work-Study than there are on-campus jobs, and second, securing an on-campus job often requires a connection. This second issue especially impacts underclassmen and transfer students who are new to campus. The student notetaker job, for the most part, provided a solution to this second issue.

Generally, the professor announces to the class that there is a note-taker position available, and it is usually a matter of first-come first-serve. When I was in my first-year, working as a student notetaker was often the only way my friends and I could make money on-campus. By the time I was a sophomore, I had amassed the connections to find better-paying opportunities with steadier hours, but my ECON 101 note-taking job kept me afloat in my first two semesters at Wellesley.

Of course, the student note-taker job was not perfect — merely $100 at the end of the semester is a joke of a payment. However, it was at least an on-campus job. Phasing out this student position demonstrates a lack of consideration from college decision-makers who did not feel the need to consult students. It was not enough to underpay students for their labor — now they must eliminate one of the few consistently available on-campus jobs.

Second, Glean presents ethical issues in the classroom. Students do not have to reveal their notetaker accommodations to their professors as a matter of medical privacy. However, this poses a problem: professors and classmates might not know if they are being recorded. According to Massachusetts law, all parties must give consent before recording an in-person conversation. However, if classmates or a professor do not give consent, the student with accommodations cannot learn properly. This puts classmates and professors in an uncomfortable situation.

Wellesley’s smaller class sizes lend themselves to more discussion-based learning. If a student shares a personal story during class or asks a “silly” question, there is now a saved recording of that moment. A human notetaker would have the discretion to decide between omitting the personal details a student shares versus the overall takeaway from the discussion. An AI software that provides a transcript of the entire class cannot do this.

In addition to the lack of consent from those who may not want to be recorded by an AI software, other issues may arise. Some professors are against their intellectual property being inputted into AI, explicitly stating in their syllabus that students are not to put problem-set questions into ChatGPT for this reason. However, what will happen when an entire lesson — an entire course — is recorded by AI? Also, in a political climate that is increasingly hostile to academia, many professors are against their lectures being recorded entirely. Additionally, if a course does not permit the use of AI assistance, a student using AI to fulfill their notetaking accommodation could also face issues with the Honor Code.

The ethical issues that arise also put the student with the accommodation in a difficult spot. Aside from having to navigate these challenges with classmates and professors, the student with accommodations could themself be opposed to using AI. While there may be an opportunity for a student to possibly insist on having a human student notetaker, students might feel hesitant to challenge ADR.

While we do have to acknowledge that AI will continue to play a greater role in our lives and can be used as a tool to help students, it should not be our first choice. Perhaps the AI software can be provided if a student finds the peer notetaker unhelpful and the professor consents to the recording. While the student notetaker position is not perfect, it should not be replaced entirely by AI before taking steps to improve the existing role and carefully considering the consequences for both the classroom experience and student employment.

Contact the editor(s) responsible for this story: Caitlin Donovan

The Japanese program’s request to expand its faculty with a part-time lecturer was entirely rejected. The Chinese program’s previously hired part-time lecturer was removed, and the Korean program’s full-time visiting lecturer was reduced to a part-time visiting lecturer, resulting in the nonrenewal of Professor Eun Ha Hwang’s contract.

Professor Mingwei Song, the chair of EALC, said that while the rejection to expand the Japanese program was expected, the change to the Korean program was surprising.

“Indeed, we were suffering the loss of the FTE [full-time equivalent faculty] across the programs, and for the Korean program, … Professor Hwang has been with us for four years, and she has been a truly remarkable teacher and devoted member of the department,” said Song.

Professor Sun Hee Lee, director of the Korean program, noted her surprise at the College’s decision to remove Hwang’s visiting lecturer position. Visiting lecturer positions are typically reviewed after the faculty member’s fourth year, where they are either promoted to non-visiting or let go. 

The College had warned the Korean program about possible cuts, but professors remained hopeful.

“I naively thought we are the exceptional case, because losing this person – our whole curriculum gets into danger. I didn’t see this kind of cut from this side, because Korean is quite popular these days; since 2021 our enrollment has almost doubled,” said Lee.

According to the College, the FTE staffing approvals did not change much from previous years.

“The Provost’s Office regularly receives more staffing requests than the budget can support; not all requests can be approved,” said a spokesperson for the College.

The move has been very unpopular with the student body. The News previously reported that over 850 students signed a petition in protest of Prof. Hwang’s contract nonrenewal. As of Feb. 18, that number is over 950.

“I think immediately students were like, ‘We’re not gonna let this just happen … we’re going to stand up for this professor who we really care about and [who] had a really positive impact on our experience at Wellesley,” said Sophie Larson ’27, a Korean major.

In the early 2000s, student activism helped to bring Korean language classes to Wellesley, according to Lee.

Organizers of the petition wrote to the administration but have been unsuccessful in reversing the staffing change. The Dean’s Office assured the petition organizers that the staffing change should not adversely affect student access to the Korean program.

“ … There are no plans to close or downsize the Korean program … For the 2025-2026 academic year, we anticipate that the program will offer eleven courses. This is highly consistent with the Korean curriculum over the past five years, and we are confident this will meet student demand for both the introductory language courses and a set of upper-level electives,” Megan Nunez, Dean of Faculty Affairs, wrote in an email response to the petition.

However, faculty remain concerned that this staffing cut will affect available courses. According to Lee, the Korean program had planned to offer 13 courses for the next academic year, 11 of which would be language courses. The change would require her to fill in for Korean 101 instead of offering another upper-level course. 

“We have to cut one third-year class out of two, [have] no fourth-year language class, no content course for the first semester and maybe [offer] one content [course for the spring,]” said Lee, “I don’t know how I could manage for the future of the Korean major and minor.”

Still, the EALC department remains in negotiation with College administration.

“We have been making efforts to have a constructive dialogue with the college leadership and trying to at least save as much as possible some FTE for the Korean program,” said Song.

Despite these efforts, students remain concerned about the future of the Korean program.

“Already, I’d consider [the program] understaffed,” said Larson, “[For] her contract to be terminated, just takes away resources that were already being stretched thin.”

Joanne Kim contributed to reporting.

Contact the editors responsible for this article: Jessica Chen, Galeta Sandercock, Sazma Sarwar, and Valida Pau

The theatrics of signing executive orders before a cheering crowd, the dramatic changes and reversals brought upon by the orders and their sensationalist titles that could be mistaken for a histrionic social media meltdown all resemble a provocative reality show environment. Everything about the executive orders are provocative because Trump is, first and foremost, a showman. However, the ostentatious nature of Trump’s policy does not make it any less dangerous — quite the opposite. Within the past week, we have seen ICE raids tear families apart, recent grads have their job offers rescinded and the CDC take down several web pages that do not align with Trump’s gender views.

Within our own Wellesley community, the effects are apparent. The federal freeze has threatened funding for labs and left students scrambling as their job and internship offers are rescinded. Trump’s changes to immigration policy has resulted in family members targeted and deported and students on visas facing stricter scrutiny. The order on sex and gender explicitly erases members of our community.

The year has begun with Project 2025 unfolding before our eyes, with even some of the more incredulous policies seeming like a possibility in our current reality. Trump’s abuses of presidential power have wreaked tangible havoc, and it feels almost as if we are trapped and powerless as we watch the world around us crumble.

Yet on another level, we can see that these chaos-fueled orders do not make sustainable policies. Nearly a week after issuing the federal freeze, the White House rescinded the memo, and a U.S. district judge blocked the freeze. Although the language is still a bit unclear (White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt claims the rescission refers to the memo issuing the freeze, and not the freeze itself), the backtracking suggests that perhaps finally, someone in the White House realized that firing off several sweeping, nonsensical orders does not make a good long-term plan. A platform built on riling up the most extreme emotions cannot last — authoritarianism’s facade is cracking.

I know I’m preaching to the choir when complaining about Trump’s executive orders to the Wellesley College student newspaper. We all know that these orders are not great. However, I want to examine where we stand, and what path we will take next. We stand at a confusing crossroads. On one hand, we see the fragile nature of Trump’s politics. Yet on the other hand, we see the immediate destruction it can cause. We cannot deny the most vulnerable in our society, whose livelihoods are being threatened. We cannot downplay the danger they face.

I think that in the face of this paradoxical mix of incompetent danger, we cannot hope the problems will sort themselves out, we cannot wait out another election to reverse the damage. Even though cracks will likely emerge, the time we spend waiting is just more time for people to get hurt. Now is the time to organize. Now is the time to fight back. 

Stay informed on what Trump is doing and what effects these decisions will have, but don’t fall into the trap of overwhelmed doom scrolling. Connect with students on the Wellesley campus and beyond. Listen to the experiences of those who are impacted by these decisions, and center their voices in your activism. Join mutual aid networks to support our communities when they come under attack. Keep talking — don’t let these orders become our new normal. We see the cracks in the surface, which means that if we come together, we can bring it down. We just can’t let them bring us down first. 

“We were all incredibly shocked … because of the fact that she’s been such a pivotal person in the Korean department since we’ve all gotten here,” said Aiquana Maye ’27.

Professor Hwang, who joined Wellesley in 2020, is one of three professors in the program, and is one of its two non-tenure track faculty. Hwang teaches 200-level Korean language courses, including KOR 201, KOR 202 and KOR 232, instructing approximately 30 students per semester. 

Hwang’s departure could affect nearly 43% of students enrolled in the Korean program. Still, the percentage of students affected may be more: since 2005, the Korean program has seen a rapid rise in enrollment. 

“She created a lot of the curriculum for the entire department’s language learning. In our classroom, we learn through a storyline of characters. This storyline has been used since our first semester, and it helps us be familiar with how Korean native speakers interact with each other,” said Maye.

Beyond teaching, Hwang researches language learners’ identities and connects with students through K-Table and K-Corridor, language-speaking and cultural activities which allow students to engage with Korean outside of the classroom.

“Every week, Professor Hwang would show up [to K-Table], and that's how I met her. The other professors would also come, but I think she is the most consistent,” said Vivi Li ’26.

In response to Hwang’s departure, Maye and Li organized a petition urging the Provost’s Office to reconsider the administration’s contract decision. On Jan. 23, they sent the petition to students who had previously enrolled in the EALC courses. 

Within six days, the petition garnered over 850 signatures and more than 120 personal statements from students, alums and faculty. As of Feb. 2, the petition had received 904 responses.

“Most notably, we had alums from the class of 1980 up until 2024 responding … Most of these alums don't actually know Professor Hwang, but they were very passionate in their responses. And also, a lot of these alums were either language majors or they have Korean heritage, or they have kind of a deep care of the education system at Wellesley,” said Li.

Maye received a response from Megan Nunez, Dean of Faculty Affairs on Jan. 31, but remains concerned about the future of the Korean program, which is approaching its 20th anniversary.

“[The email] had said, there's a potential 11 classes to be taught next year, and I just don't see how that's feasible with two professors, unless they plan on hiring another professor,” Maye said.

Additionally, The Korean Student Association (KSA) and Wellesley Asian Alliance (WAA) are organizing an open discussion on Feb. 5 from 4 to 5:30 p.m. at PNE. This discussion, featuring Professors Lee and Hwang, will invite students to learn about the EALC department and language corridor program while sharing perspectives on language education and the program's history.

“I'm hoping to get a sense of what the professors would like to see from us as students, because as students, I recognize that there are limitations in what we can do, but we want to support them the best we can,” said Nico Jo ’25, KSA’s Social Justice Chair and one of the event organizers.

Ultimately, students hope that their efforts will create change for the Korean program and beyond.

“Every major at Wellesley is important no matter how small their department is, and every professor isn't just someone who they're paying to teach something. They're a part of a community that is helping students discover who they are and find out what they love in the world,” Maye said.

Contact the editors responsible for this story: Jessica Chen, Sazma Sarwar, and Valida Pau.

This comes as part of a broader trend as humanities programs, and language programs specifically, face cuts and under-enrollment across the country. 

From the 2007-2008 academic year to the 2023-2024 academic year, there has been a roughly 37%decrease in the average language department enrollments. Language course enrollment, which peaked at 198 students during the 2009-2010 academic year, has declined to a low of 118 students in the 2023-2024 academic year.

“Our classes always tend to be fairly small, but I think that if you look at the languages and also the humanities more broadly, there have been decreases in enrollment across the board,” said Professor Anjeana Hans, chair of German studies.

This trend is similarly reflected in the number of language majors in the past ten graduating classes. There was a peak of 95 language majors in the class of 2016, but that number has since dropped to 62 in the class of 2024. Most language majors were also majoring in an additional subject. Between 2014 to 2023, more than half of language majors graduated with a second major, with 15% of these second majors being a STEM subject. 

Even though fewer students chose to major in languages, the number of language minors has been on the rise, with only 8 minors in the entire class of 2015 and 20 in the class of 2024. 

Students Miss 101 Window

Enrollment in introductory 101-level language classes at Wellesley College has almost halved over the past 15 years, falling from 312 students in the 2008-2009 academic year to just 184 in 2023-2024. 

Typically, students take four semesters of a language to complete the language requirement, starting with 101, with exceptions for native speakers or students who studied languages at high levels in high school to take fewer classes or no language courses at all. 

This declining trend raised questions and concerns among faculty that students might miss the window to optimize their language journey at Wellesley. As language courses require a year-long sequence, students cannot start with any introductory language classes in the spring, delaying completing their requirements and qualifying for advanced study. 

“It’s important to start your first year if you think of studying abroad,” said Scott Gunther, chair of French and Italian studies. “[Our language courses are] in two semesters that go together … if you miss the fall semester, you usually have to wait.”

Language Immersion Study Abroad Declines

This late start then affects study abroad enrollments, where students largely chose English-taught study abroad programs over immersive language programs.

Over the past ten years, the percentage of students studying abroad in a language immersion program has declined from 26% to 18%, according to data from the Office of International Study.

“All of our immersion programs have a high prerequisite in terms of languages, and students are not starting language when they get to the college in their first semester,” said Jennifer Thomas-Starck, director of International Study.

English-taught programs, such as DIS Copenhagen and Oxford, are becoming increasingly popular, partly because these programs appeal to students and parents alike due to their perceived familiarity, safety and brand recognition. 

“Students see the ease,” Thomas-Starck said. “They can pull out the syllabus and hand it to their faculty member. They know there’ll be a group of people they know — it’s a very comfortable experience.”

As part of efforts to increase student support and visibility about language immersion programs, the Office of International Study hires students who have returned from abroad as “Study Abroad Ambassadors.” 

Those who came back from immersion programs see their role as crucial to helping students make more informed decisions about whether an immersive program is right for them.

“People have very different experiences with immersive programs, because they are hard and exhausting, and they're sometimes very different from the way that a Wellesley semester would work,” said Abby Frankel ’25, a student ambassador for immersive French language program Wellesley-in-Aix. “I think people also get scared because people who have bad experiences tend to be more vocal.”

Challenges to Language Study

To encourage students to start taking their language requirements and thinking about their studying abroad options earlier, Wellesley’s language departments hope to make available courses and program applications more visible to students. Faculty note that awareness of language programs is hindered by outreach hurdles. Unlike peer institutions, such as Middlebury College, Wellesley does not market itself as a school for language learning, explained Gunther. 

“There are a lot of languages taught here. There are a lot of languages just spoken here,” said Gunther. 

Students may also be discouraged due to external pressures and the time investment of learning a language.

“It takes a long time to get real fluency, real command of a language,” said Josh Lambert, professor of Jewish studies and English.

Moving Forward

The College has already cut down on course offerings taken in response to lower student enrollments in language courses. Starting in the 2022-23 academic year, 100-and 200-level courses in the Hindi/Urdu department were offered every other year, instead of every other semester. 

“I think it obviously adds to the problem of enrollments, right? Because if you're a first year and you're ready to take introductory Hindi/Urdu but you find out that, oh, it's not offered this year, you're probably not going to be able to wait until next year,” said Nikhil Rao, professor of History and South Asia studies.

The administrative change has had a noticeable effect. During the 2021-2022 academic year, prior to the change, the program had 21 enrollments. After the change for the 2022-2023 year was instituted, enrollment dropped to 10.

Wellesley students can no longer take Hebrew at Wellesley, and must instead cross-register at Brandeis University. 

Wellesley’s Hebrew classes often ran the risk of not running due to extremely low enrollment. The Jewish studies department chose not to fill the position after the previous instructor left.

“I said, I don't think [hiring a new instructor] is the right thing to do, because … I've personally seen how difficult it is for students and for the professor,” recalled Lambert.

Despite the setbacks, administrators and professors remain actively engaged in thinking about ways to improve communications with students.

Eve Zimmerman, Professor of Japanese, described feeling “encouraged” after meetings with language chairs and members of administration, including Michael Jeffries, dean of Academic Affairs, and Stacie Goddard, associate provost for Wellesley in the World.

In an email to The News, the College said that there are no administrative changes, such as mergers or cuts, currently planned and any future changes would result from “collaborative decisions between academic departments and the Provost’s Office.”

Looking ahead, faculty suggest that addressing these trends will require a multi-pronged approach that involves students as well as administration.

“It’s students speaking to other students. That’s what’s going to make the difference,” Zimmerman observed.

With these efforts, faculty members remain optimistic that language learning supports professional and cultural leadership, a core goal of Wellesley’s liberal arts education.

“I would be much happier if we taught and had full classes of 10 more, 15 more languages.” said Lambert, “We would forward that mission of what they call now Wellesley in the World. And what I believe, in a real way, is the possibility for Wellesley students to be leaders.”

Contact the editors responsible for this story: Galeta Sandercock, Sazma Sarwar, and Valida Pau

Celebrated annually, Wellesley Giving Day is a day dedicated to raising money for The Wellesley Fund, a fund used for all aspects of campus life. According to The Wellesley Fund’s website, the funds go towards students’ financial aid, residential life curriculum, teaching and research opportunities, and physical and mental health services. 

The Wellesley Fund is “a 25.1 million dollar goal that is unrestricted money used for what we call immediate impact,” said Amy Burke, Senior Director of Annual Giving Programs. 

Alumni who have a particular affinity for a specific cause, such as sports teams or certain academic departments, can specify that when they make their donation.

Burke explained that the fund is not a “slush fund,” rather it accounts for 5% of the college’s operating revenue. 

“[The Wellesley Fund] doesn’t seem glamorous, but the operating money empowers the mission [of the college],” said Burke.

Because The Wellesley Fund acts as immediate impact money for the college, it can be used to address unprecedented financial needs. For example, the pandemic could not have been anticipated and was not budgeted for, but according to Burke, millions of dollars were available to address the unique needs of the student body during that tumultuous time because of The Wellesley Fund. 

According to the Wellesley College Annual Report 2020-2021, there was a 21.1% increase in the Fund’s contribution to operating revenue, from $14,165 in 2020 to $17,154 in 2021. These changes in expenses included health and safety measures to increase ventilation and keep students socially distanced, as well as technology to support at-home learning. 

In tandem with the federal Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund (HEERF), The Wellesley Fund supplemented financial aid grants for students whose financial circumstances differed due to the pandemic. According to Burke, The Wellesley Fund provided a necessary safety net for unexpected costs associated with the pandemic, highlighting the funds’ importance in times of unexpected need. 

This year, there was an effort to appeal to millennial donors by showing how the causes that they’re passionate about are being put into action at Wellesley. However, older generations remained the most likely to give: the classes with the most donors were 1977, 1983 and 1994. The classes with the most dollars raised were 1977, 1981 and 1994.

“Some of the top causes– environment, library research, equity and inclusion– things our alums are supporting, we have at Wellesley,” said Burke.

Burke expressed her gratitude for the generosity of donors.

 “I have not found a more empowering community than Wellesley… Our alumni show that it’s okay for us as a community to support things we care about,” said Burke.

The success of Giving Day means that Wellesley will have the funds to continue to provide financial aid, as well as supporting academic programs and other resources to help Wellesley students achieve their goals. 

Burke said that students should remember the support they have from alumni: “[There are] 30,000 alums behind you, watching it from afar … You may never meet, but the bond current students and alumni share is so valuable.”

Contact the editors responsible for this story: Ruby Barenberg, Lyanne Wang, Sazma Sarwar, and Valida Pau.

Correction: Amy Burke’s quote “Even with our graduates making 85 cents on the dollar compared to Harvard alumni” was removed from the article as Burke was speaking about women’s salary compared to men, not specifically Wellesley graduates compared to Havard graduates.

This is not meant to slight the hard working dining hall staff who work all day, nearly every day of the year to feed students. Instead, this piece is meant to bring attention to the issues that arise from the inflexibility of the current meal plan. Wellesley students either have unlimited access or no access to the dining halls — a stark contrast from other schools that often offer a varying number of meals per week.

At Wellesley, students on the meal plan can enter the dining halls anytime they are open and freely take meals or snacks. The meal plan also provides students with $75 of Flex Points, which can be used in the Emporium, the Leaky Beaker and Collins Cafe. Students living on campus are required to be on the meal plan, with an exception given to students living in the Scoop residential co-op. Further, students who live off campus are automatically opted out of the meal plan.

The meal plan costs $5,060 per semester, totalling to $10,120 for the entire school year. In contrast, MIT’s most expensive meal plan is $7,220 for the 2024-2025 academic year, Brandeis’s “All Access” plan is $7,984, and Babson’s average meal plan costs $7,426. Various factors could contribute to Wellesley’s meal plan costing significantly more than similar plans at partner institutions. However, a key detail is that in addition to a high-cost, “unlimited” plan, these schools – unlike Wellesley – also offer cheaper meal plans that allow for more flexible dining options.

Further, MIT makes note that while they budget for the most expensive meal plan for financial aid purposes, they do not change the amount of financial aid in response to the student’s “actual expenses.” Thus, offering multiple meal plans should not affect Wellesley’s ability to determine financial aid packages. By expanding meal plan options, Wellesley would be able to make the $92,060 price tag more affordable for students.

Because of how the meal plan and housing are so closely tied, students that stay on campus during winter and summer breaks are required to pay a fee to cover the cost of meals during breaks. There is often no financial assistance in paying these fees, and nearly every student staying on campus is required to pay this, including financially-independent students and students who list Wellesley College as their permanent address.

Additionally, there is usually only one dining hall open during breaks with limited hours and options, and many students might not even go to the dining halls during these times. Because of the unlimited meal plan monopoly, the College is able to get away with charging students for housing during breaks under the guise of the meal plan, even if students might not have the financial means to pay for this.

Another issue that arises from the lack of flexibility in the meal plan is how people who need accommodations for dietary restrictions or allergies struggle to get off the meal plan. Students have reported difficulties getting off the meal plan even after providing medical documentation that Wellesley Fresh cannot meet their dietary needs. Accommodations to get off the meal plan are rarely granted, as students must provide several rounds of medical documentation, attend meetings with the on-campus dietitian, and possibly receive a referral from the Stone Center. This exhausting process traps students in a predicament where they are paying over ten thousand dollars for food they cannot even eat without getting sick.

Providing an unlimited option as the default plan for students appears to be in good faith: it ensures that students can eat enough throughout the semester without feeling burdened. However, the current system is also riddled with logistical issues, and in order for students to escape these issues, they must escape the meal plan entirely. For the most part, this can only be done by moving off campus, which is not realistic for every student.

Wellesley Fresh and Wellesley College need to work together to expand options for the meal plans. Instead of the current all-or-nothing system, there could be multiple options, including the current unlimited option, varying levels of a set number of meals per week, or simply allowing students to load Flex Points onto their OneCard. These expanded options would better reflect the various levels students want from the dining halls, including the students who eat at the dining halls for every meal to the students who might only stop by the Emporium a few times a semester. 

Not only would the expanded options be more economical for students, but they would also help reduce food waste and improve the quality of meals. If students gravitate towards these newer options, the dining halls would have a more accurate headcount of how many students to expect for each meal, allowing them to prepare accordingly. The expanded options would also allow more students who live off campus to eat on campus, as expanded options would give them the flexibility to grab meals in between classes.

Contact the editor(s) responsible for this story: Caitlin Donovan