From slavic@u.washington.edu Fri Jun 9 14:03:46 1995 Return-Path: Received: from homer21.u.washington.edu by lists.u.washington.edu (5.65+UW95.05/UW-NDC Revision: 2.33 ) id AA07359; Fri, 9 Jun 95 14:03:44 -0700 Received: by homer21.u.washington.edu (5.65+UW95.05/UW-NDC Revision: 2.33 ) id AA79539; Fri, 9 Jun 95 14:03:43 -0700 X-Sender: slavic@homer21.u.washington.edu Date: Fri, 9 Jun 1995 14:03:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Karl Kramer To: slavic-uw@u.washington.edu Subject: Regents/Statement from Karl Kramer Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE My name is Karl Kramer and I am the chair of the Slavic Department. It probably goes without saying that the faculty members of the Slavic=20 Department believe the dean=D5s decision to recommend elimination of the=20 Slavic Department is short sighted. I shall try to summarize the reasons=20 for our belief. We are an extremely productive department in several different ways. Six=20 of the eight members of the Department who are expected to do=20 research=D1six of them=D1have produced eight book-length manuscripts which= =20 have either just appeared or are about to appear. This is probably one of= =20 the reasons why the Gourman report, which ranks graduate and=20 undergraduate departments across the United States, currently ranks our=20 Slavic Department as eighth in undergraduate programs and sixth in=20 graduate programs. But there are several other ways in which we are productive. Our=20 graduates have gone on to distinguished careers in a number of fields.=20 One of our graduates was the official translator for Presidents Bush and=20 Gorbachev at the Malta summit talks. Another established the American=20 consulate in Ukraine. A third was appointed ambassador to Rumania.=20 (Rumanian is not of course a Slavic language, but it has found a home in=20 the Slavic Department because one of our faculty knows the language and=20 has promoted its study here.) A large number of our recent graduates have= =20 entered the world of business and have established firms which have=20 economic ties with Russia, particularly with the Siberian region. I=20 cannot resist an anecdote which illustrates the connection between=20 business, language, and cultural study. One of our graduates was=20 representing a business organization attempting to form a contract in=20 Siberia. Negotiations had gone from bad to worse. In fact, they had=20 broken down. During a recess our former student, chatting with her=20 Russian counterparts, got involved in a discussion of Russian literature.= =20 The Russians were amazed to discover that she knew Russian literature=20 very well. Talks resumed the next day. The Russians insisted that our=20 student be the chief negotiator, and a contract was signed by the end of=20 the day. The moral: never underestimate the importance of knowing Russian= =20 literature when doing business in Russia. Elimination of the Slavic Department will have serious consequences for=20 other programs on campus. The Russian, East European and Central Asia=20 Studies program depends upon the existence of a vibrant Slavic Department= =20 to bring in the biennial $800,000 of federal support for graduate=20 students, library acquisitions, faculty travel, outreach services and so=20 on=D1all of which would be lost if the Slavic Department is gone. The=20 departments of history, political science, economics, geography have=20 flourishing programs in Slavic areas of study, all of which are dependent= =20 on the language offerings of our department. Without a strong Slavic=20 Department, one can well imagine an administrator asking the history=20 department chair, for example, "Why do you need a Russian historian when=20 the field of Slavic studies is so weak on this campus?" In addition,=20 talented people in these areas may well be attracted elsewhere if the=20 Slavic Department is eliminated, because there would be no visible=20 commitment on the part of the administration to this area of study. The view that the cold war seems to be over may have had an impact on=20 those who recommend the downsizing of the Slavic program here. Again, I=20 would emphasize this is short sighted. Trade with Russia from Washington=20 state alone went from $60 million in 1992 to $200 million in 1993. Over=20 the last four years trade between Washington State and the former Soviet=20 Union has increased 546%. This would seem to point to the need for a=20 strong Slavic Department here, one which the University currently has,=20 and one which is unique to the area. Students and businesses would have=20 to go as far afield as the San Francisco area or Madison, Wisconsin to=20 find comparable programs. Let's keep this one here. .