(05/20/13 4:00am)
"Writing wall, writing wall, to you we do all speak. Shouldn't we be studying? Alas, our wills are weak." Anybody who studies in the carrels of Goldfarb Library knows that the oak-wood desks are havens for self-expression. Each year, they are scattered with messages of hope and of hate, obscenities and art, love notes, doodles, shout-outs and debates. No, they don't often relay the most earth-shattering ideas. And I certainly hope that their contents are not indicative of the intellectual quality at Brandeis. Nevertheless, there are some that reflect the greatness of Brandeis, like one note that reads, "Never give up, you can do it!" At commencement last Sunday, University President Frederick Lawrence noted that places do not belong to people; people belong to places. Graduates would always belong to Brandeis, even though we would no longer be present on its campus after graduating. But if we inherently belong here, why is it that we feel the need to leave our mark, both physically on the desks and figuratively, by immersing ourselves in an endless list of activities and initiatives? Graduation gives you the opportunity to better understand how you and your peers utilized your college experiences differently. Some may be graduating with the highest academic degrees, some in Phi Beta Kappa, and others with medals for community service. But just because you may not have adornments on your gown also does not mean you have not affected Brandeis in a positive light. Last year, Daniel Leibman '12 gave the senior commencement speech and he spoke about the "butterfly effect," which prescribes that simply by being at Brandeis you have changed it. You may have started the Quidditch team, the Eco-Reps Rooms for Recovery, the Experiential Learning fellows program, or maybe you revolutionized the inner workings of an already established club. Perhaps the changes will be there 10, 20, 30 years down the line. Possibly, however, the times will call for funding and resources to be channeled somewhere else. The reality is that changes are difficult, but they are inevitable. While our marks as students are part of the University's history, they are not everlasting in the revolving door of college graduates. Recently, the Justice held its first alumni reunion, in which several generations of the newspaper's editors and contributors returned to campus and spoke about what the newspaper was like at the time. In the early 1950s, for example, the newspaper had a copy editor; somehow by 2003, the position no longer existed. Over the course of this past semester, we have had several debates of unfettered speech instigate controversy on campus-cases where actions or words have changed campus. The Facebook page "Brandeis Hookups" reflects the new freedom, and concern, for anonymity in the digital age. Student initiatives like Take Back the Night were allegedly countered by hurtful comments shouted out across the quad. Free speech in a small, close-knit community like Brandeis has never been an easy topic, and working on this newspaper, we have learned that all too well. Campus newspapers, especially posted online, undermine the security and isolation that is our intellectual utopia on a hill. Sometimes it feels like Brandeis is not the real world. We have community advisors looking over our shoulders, academic advisors ensuring that we finish what we are supposed to do, and constant access to an ever-expanding web of friends. Furthermore, we do not have to worry about our clubs' "selling values"-after all, unlike the mainstream American media, student journalists can grapple with different ethical standards and reporting techniques without worrying about ad revenues or subscriptions. In my four years as an editor on the Justice, we exposed financial student mishaps, covered clashes between police and inebriated students and reviewed theater productions in highly critical ways. Each of these instances led to students mentioned in articles requesting that their names be removed from the Justice website. After all, these trials of young adulthood can often reflect badly on future Google searches by employers. But in the digital age, the impetus is not solely on reporters. At a recent panel held by WGBH in April on "embedded journalism," the reporters agreed that journalists pose less of a threat to national security covering the war effort than the soldiers posting YouTube videos of torture online. In today's world, actions, whether in person or in online forums, speak just as loud as on the record reporting It seems that the expansion of public access to media has magnified the problems journalists have faced all along. No longer do the Justice and the other campus publications define the history of Brandeis by recording the marks we've left on campus. The responsibility to think about one's actions is placed into the hands of all students. People make mistakes; they experiment, learn and grow. The Internet requires, both in college and out, that we recognize these human shortcomings, because at some point in our lives we will all inevitably want to hide from something we did or posted. If there is something inevitable about free speech, we must ask ourselves "how do we respond, especially in the small close-knit community that is Brandeis?" How we do this as a community, as an institution, is what will define us in history. "I feel lonely at Brandeis," one note writes scribbled in the crevice of the desk before me. Next to it in a fine black print one person writes back, "The counseling center is really helpful." Another chimes in, "I agree, they're really nice." The last note added, "I'll be your friend." Justice Louis Brandeis advocated for free speech in the Supreme Court because there is an inherent value in public discourse. History is not defined by the erroneous opinions of the people who have lived through it but the places that still stand in contrast to them. *
(05/20/13 4:00am)
As of Saturday, almost 60 faculty members had signed a letter intended to be mailed to the University's Pension Committee, advocating for more options in socially responsible investments for retirement funds. The signers argued for a minimum of one socially responsible mutual fund option and one socially responsible bond option. Other options, besides the currently offered College Retirement Equities Fund, should be offered to Brandeis employees, they said. "Many of us at Brandeis are committed to socially responsible investing (SRI)," the letter read, "which we see as in line with Brandeis's teaching, research, and public programming on human rights, climate change, women's rights, promotion of peace, and so forth." As mentioned in the letter, the CREF fund screens broadly, but imperfectly. Another fund, the Neuberger Berman Socially Responsive Fund, does not screen for issues such as clean technology, pollution and toxins, community development, board issues and executive pay, according to The Forum for Sustainable and Responsible Investment. It also does not screen for human rights or community investment, according to SocialFunds.com. In an email interview with the Justice, Prof. Bernadette Brooten (NEJS) wrote that she and other faculty members were working to resolve the issue internally. "I am confident we will find a solution that accords with Brandeis' commitment to social justice," wrote Brooten. Brooten and others spoke about the issue at the April 11 faculty meeting, during which Chief Operations Officer Steven Manos fielded questions and concerns about changes in retirement fund options. "I would like to ask that we have an additional fund be added that is more stringent on screens," Brooten said at the meeting. "We have 40 options. I think that at least two of them should be socially responsible." As Manos and University President Frederick Lawrence explained, the investment options had been reduced to 40, down from 190, due to legal changes that obligated such a restriction. "None of this involves any change in contributions that are being made to retirement plans," said Lawrence. "This is not about reallocation of costs away from retirement plans. ... The entire effort ... was to focus and restrict to a certain extent our options so our fiduciary obligations can be fulfilled in an appropriate way." However, Lawrence admitted, communication with employees about the issue has been lacking. "It is clear to me that the best efforts of communicating this aside, that we did not do a great job of getting information out in a way that was useful to everybody in the community," he said. "We will continue to try to do better." *
(04/30/13 4:00am)
Let committee fulfill its purpose In response to the article "Campus aesthetics should reflect top-notch status" (Forum, April 23, 2013): While it is clear that there are areas around the campus that need to be repaired and maintained better, the way in which you cite the shortcomings of campus upkeep seems to me to be against the fundamental principles of Brandeis; it would be more appropriate to voice your opinions in a constructive manner as to better the community. As a Student Union, specifically the Senate Campus Operations Work Group Committee, it is our job to be in contact with these administrators and be the eyes and ears of the student body. COWG has enjoyed a very positive relationship with the administration that has led to our seeing vast improvements across campus including renovations in residence halls, academic buildings, road pavement, our campus grounds and other areas on campus. The issues that you talked about within your article are ones that could have been easily resolved through the COWG committee. In addition, we would like to point out that Mark Collins, the senior vice president for administration, is responsible for campus operations and the facilities department. Anyone who has ever worked with Collins knows that he is an ally of the students and is always willing to listen to and resolve student concerns regarding facilities and many other aspects of this campus. The COWG committee would like to make it known to all students that your voices are heard when you have concerns regarding facilities. During the next academic year, we will continue our efforts to bring student issues to the attention of the administration and to work toward resolving them and make sure that our committee has a known presence on campus. I would encourage all my fellow students to chip in and contribute to making our campus look top notch: When you see trash on the ground, pick it up; when you smoke your cigarette, put the butt in a cigarette post; when there are small facilities issues, fill in a work order (http://www.brandeis.edu/facilities/); and when there are larger issues, reach out to us. It takes a community of proactive members to work together to make our campus and home the place we want it to be. -Theodore Choi '13 -Charlotte Franco '15 Theodore Choi is a Senator at Large and chair of the Campus Operations Work Group Committee for the Student Union. Charlotte Franco is a Senator at Large and Vice President elect of the Student Union.
(04/30/13 4:00am)
Round two of Student Union spring elections took place last Thursday from midnight to midnight, leaving three of the 14 available positions vacant by the end of the day. The Associate Justice of the Union Judiciary, Senator-at-Large and Racial Minority Senator positions remain unfilled. One of the two seats for Senator at Large was filled by Daniel Schwab '14, while the other remains vacant. The second seat was not filled due to the fact that 33 percent of voters chose abstain, making abstain the second most popular choice. Schwab was unable to comment by press time. Andre Ve Tran and Annie Chen filled the Class of 2014 Senator positions. According to both Ve Tran and Chen, the two are looking forward to working together next year and already have plans for new initiatives. "I will continue to sit down with all our graduating Student Union members and discuss the work they have done this past year," wrote Ve Tran in an email to the Justice. "I would like to not only work on my own initiatives but continue and complete projects my predecessors started." Chen said she plans to get acclimated as quickly as possible. "The first thing I'll probably do is go around and collect knowledge, information, and tips from all our current senators to compile a scrapbook/'cheat sheet' as a resource for future senators," she wrote in an email to the Justice. Anna Bessendorf and Alison Zheng filled the Class of 2015 Senator positions. Bessendorf said she looks forward to increasing sustainability on campus. "When the administration announces their choice for our dining services provider, the first thing I'd like to do is to meet with them to discuss tangible improvements that can be made to the quality and sustainability of the food we eat," Bessendorf wrote in an email to the Justice. Zheng said she looks forward to working closely with the student body as a member of the Union. "The first thing is definitely to do some research on what people want and need so I can better voice their opinions," she wrote in an email to the Justice. Jon Jacob and Andrew Chang filled the Class of 2016 Senator positions. Neither commented by press time. Four out of five available seats for Associate Justice of the Student Union Judiciary were filled. Claire Sinai '15, Sarah Park '14, Maris Ryger-Wasserman '16 and Michael Abrams '15 were elected to the Union Judiciary. The seats were not all filled due to the fact that 33 percent of voters chose abstain, making abstain the second most popular choice for Judiciary. Abrams told the Justice that he looks forward to helping to ensure that Brandeis remains a just community. "I want students to view the Union Judiciary as a forum where they can voice concerns about clubs, the Student Union, and the system that organizes all of this," wrote Abrams in an email to the Justice. "We as Justices are there to defend the Constitution and the Student Body, but we need student engagement and support to best achieve that end," he added. The Racial Minority Senator position remains unfilled due to the fact that 31 percent of voters chose to abstain. Special elections will be held in the fall for seats that remain unfilled following this round of elections. Editor's note: Micahael Abrams '15 is a staff writer on Forum. -Tate Herbert contributed reporting
(04/30/13 4:00am)
On Jan. 29, a Brandeis first-year filed a Community Standards Report indicating that she had been raped about a week earlier at an off-campus party. She said that her CSR launched a University investigation of the incident by way of the special examiner's process, the first known utilization of the highly confidential practice since it was adopted in the 2012-2013 issue of the Rights and Responsibilities handbook. This first-year told the Justice that on April 10, she was informed that the accused, another Brandeis first-year, had been found responsible and would be expelled. As of April 29, the Office of the Registrar declined to give the Justice any enrollment information. As of April 24, the accused was still listed as enrolled in the University, scheduled to graduate in spring 2016, according to a staff member at the Office of the Registrar. University Registrar Mark Hewitt wrote in an email to the Justice that when a student is expelled, it usually takes a few weeks until that individual is no longer officially enrolled, due to formalities and paperwork. The alleged victim said that the rape in question took place at a party thrown by the Zeta Beta Tau fraternity on Dartmouth Street in Waltham, and was committed by another first-year who was a member of the fraternity at the time. The Justice confirmed that a ZBT member had been suspended in a Feb. 5 article, but no connection could be made with the allegations of an assault taking place two weeks prior. Dean Gendron, director of student rights and community standards, told the Justice that he could not confirm or deny any of the above information. The special examiner's process governs the University's handling of sexual assault cases. According to Section 22.6 of the handbook, which outlines the process, any alleged violation of sections regarding "sexual responsibility" or "Equal Opportunity, Non-Discrimination and Harassment," will not be heard by the Student Conduct Board, but instead will be investigated by a "special examiner." The examiner presents his or her findings to the Dean of Student Life, and the dean makes a final decision regarding the outcome of the case. Dean of Student Life Rick Sawyer declined to comment on whether or not the special examiner's process was used this year. He also would not comment on the results of any such use of the process. However, according to accounts provided to the Justice by both parties in this particular case, the process they experienced was in line with what Rights and Responsibilities describes. Although Section 22.6 does not describe the special examiner position in detail, both the accused and the accuser told the Justice that the examiner in their case was a third-party attorney. The accuser said that the University hired this attorney after she filed the CSR. She then was able to talk to the examiner and present her story, providing information in the form of "text messages, witnesses, so on and so forth." The accused also was able to provide witnesses and other evidence, she said. "The third party attorney heard both sides of the story. There are only two people who know what happened." The accused would speak to the Justice only on condition of anonymity. He agreed to answer a limited set of questions in an email to the Justice. He wrote that he felt the investigation and the special examiner were "biased" and that he was "automatically accused." "The process on paper is fair, but in practice it was not. I was not even allowed to eat in Sherman," he wrote, referring to the University efforts to keep the two parties separate. He declined to say whether or not he was represented in the special examiner's process by anyone other than himself. The process After the initial shock wore off, the first thing she did was call the police. It was the urging of her friends that convinced her to take action, she said. "Had they not told me to call the police, I wouldn't have. I would have stayed in the dorm, I would have had to deal with that," she said. "I knew I had said I didn't want it, I knew I told him I didn't want to, but I was just so shocked with what had happened that I didn't know how to deal with it," she added. In the morning, she got in touch with her Community Advisor, who promptly helped move her to another dorm, she said. A couple of days later, she completed what is commonly referred to as a "rape kit.," undergoing an examination to collect forensic evidence that may have been left behind from sexual contact. The special examiner's process formally began soon after. According to the Rights and Responsibilities handbook, the process starts with the statements phase, which lasts five to 10 days. In this step, the accuser and accused compose written statements and present any textual evidence, such as emails or text messages, to the special examiner. The examiner discusses the process and the choice of an adviser with the accused, who has the option of accepting or denying responsibility at this stage. The process then continues to the fact-finding phase, in which the examiner interviews witnesses, the accused and the accuser, in addition to examining other physical and textual evidence. Rights and Responsibilities describes this phase as lasting about 30 days. After the examiner compiles his or her final report, the accuser and the accused both have the opportunity to meet with the dean of Student Life and discuss the examiner's findings. In light of their discussions, the accused can accept responsibility or the accuser can withdraw allegations before the Dean submits his final decision. Either party can appeal the outcome to the University Appeals Board on Student Conduct. According to the victim, a member of the Feminist Majority Leadership Alliance served as her adviser throughout the process. "The goal of the adviser is just to listen and take notes and support," she said. She described her adviser as "a very strong, intelligent woman ... I wanted to surround myself by strong, intelligent women." Aside from the special examiner, herself, and her adviser, she said that no one else was involved in the hearings. "I never had to look at him, I never had to be near him. The school did their best to keep us away from each other, because I didn't feel safe with him, I didn't want to be near him," she said. Gendron confirmed this aspect of the special examiner's process, although not specifically in regards to this case. "During the actual Special Examiner's Process, that is, as the steps in the process are being engaged the parties are never in the same room or engaged with the Special Examiner at the same time," Gendron wrote in an email to the Justice . The outcome "For what happened, the best outcome came from it," the victim said, referring to the expulsion of the accused."I've heard so many awful things about Brandeis and how they've dealt with [sexual assault], but they have been nothing but helpful and wonderful, and their main priority was making sure I was taken care of." While the University took measures to protect the involved parties' identities, the alleged victim was more vocal about the case, often writing about her experience on public forums such as Facebook. "I was not quiet about it," she said. "I made sure everybody knew, because I didn't know if the school was going to get rid of him." The alleged victim said that she withdrew from Brandeis about a month ago, and plans to come back to campus in the fall or spring. She said that she expects a negative reaction or retribution when she returns. "I'm afraid. I was really vocal about it, and I know a lot of people did not like that," she said. "I know there's going to be some person who's going to say something rude, because there is rape culture at Brandeis." She declined to comment on the possibility of pursuing legal charges. Still, she said, "I'm not going to let this happen again, especially at a frat party or a sorority party. I want people to report it; I want people to know that they're not alone in that something can be done." -Robyn Spector, Jeffrey Boxer, Marissa Ditkowsky and Sam Mintz contributed reporting
(04/23/13 4:00am)
* Brandeis has an ugly campus. * There, I said it. No 'ifs,' 'ands' or 'buts.' No soft-pedaling or apologetic qualifications. Brandeis has an ugly campus. * I'm not talking about the eclectic architectural style of our campus. Some people may like it, others may not yet, either way, that's not exactly something the university can change. * What I'm talking about is basic, routine campus maintenance. For reasons I do not understand, Brandeis has the money and resources to build beautiful new buildings all over campus and buy new furniture for the Shapiro Campus Center and Olin-Sang, but we can't seem to concern ourselves with the simple campus upkeep that would make Brandeis a more attractive place to live and learn. Let me offer you a catalogue of the kind of thing I'm talking about. Multiple signs on campus are missing letters and have been missing them for years. When students head to Sherman Dining Hall to eat, they are greeted with a sign welcoming them to the "Sherman Student Cent r." After the arduous trek up the Rabb steps, students find themselves staring at a sign for the "Olin-Sang Civil zat on Center." * The brick fa?ssade on each of the chapels is literally crumbling. The front of Harlan Chapel looks as if the building has been abandoned for years. * For my entire four years at Brandeis, several bricks have been missing from a corner of the Usdan Student Center. Broken glass windows in the castle have been carelessly replaced with blocks of wood. * Buildings all over campus have missing or broken ceiling tiles for months at a time. It seems as if it takes weeks to replace light bulbs that have burnt out in the SCC library. Paint has been ripped off part of the wall in the Mandel Humanities Center. Our campus is littered with trash. * I could go on and on. * "So what?" you ask. These are mostly small imperfections on a large campus, the kinds of things you barely notice day-to-day. Besides, who cares about aesthetics? After all, Brandeis certainly has plenty of things going for it other than the campus aesthetics. There are, however, a great many reasons this unwillingness to maintain the beauty of our campus should concern both administrators and students alike. * First of all, we students spend a lot of time here. The vast majority of us live on campus. And you know what, it's nice to live somewhere that looks nice. Given the vast sum of money we all pay to spend four years at Brandeis, it seems living on an aesthetically pleasing campus is the least we can expect. * But there is an even more important reason we should care about how our campus looks. It's simply embarrassing to present the Brandeis campus to prospective students and their families. No matter how much we touch up the campus' appearance in our brochures and on the website, people come here and they take tours. And it would be near impossible for them not to notice how little Brandeis seems to care about how we present ourselves. Don't believe me? Take a look at some comments from online forums discussing college admissions I found. "My husband took my daughter to visit. They called it 'the projects.' My husband wanted to leave as soon as they got there." "I have heard negatives regarding Brandeis' 'ugly' campus." "I applied to Brandeis before I visited. If I knew how sad looking the campus was, I would have never applied." * Again, this is just a small sampling. * For prospective students, should their college choice come down to a decision between Brandeis and one of our peer universities (e.g. Tufts University, Wesleyan University, Boston College), campus appearance could be a deciding factor. If the Brandeis administration does not seem to care about the University's dumpy appearance, it signals to a prospective student that the administration is unwilling to put in minimal effort to maintain a beautiful environment in which students can spend their time. It makes Brandeis look lazy and unserious. * These maintenance issues are small and easy to fix. It would take minutes to replace the few missing bricks in Usdan. I can't imagine that replacing the missing letters all over campus would be so expensive. How hard would it be to be a little more prompt at fixing leaking pipes and replacing old ceiling tiles? * The administration should make sure that members of our maintenance staff are consistently monitoring wear and tear all throughout the campus. Repairs should happen as quickly as possible and not wait until breaks or Admitted Students Day. In fact, if there is no one on the maintenance staff who can do this competently, I'll volunteer to personally take Vice President Andrew Flagel or Dean Rick Sawyer around the campus, pointing out exactly what ought to have been repaired years ago. * Brandeis is a wonderful university. The students here are friendly, outgoing and ambitious. Our academics are top-notch. A school as wonderful as Brandeis deserves to be housed on a campus with a physical beauty that reflects Brandeis' greatness. *
(04/16/13 4:00am)
With Student Union elections approaching, students will have to choose representatives who can lead the student body, initiate change in the Union and best advocate on our behalf to administrators and the Board of Trustees. This board had the privilege of meeting with all three candidates for president: David Clements '14, Ricky Rosen '14 and Daniel Schwab '14. Schwab raised many concrete points, including suggestions for necessary improvements in the arts and athletics. However, we feel Clements and Rosen have proven, both in our interactions with them and throughout the election process, to be remarkably professional and presidential. Clements and Rosen exemplify characteristics that we strongly feel a Student Union president should have, and for that reason, both deserve our accolades. Yet, after much deliberation, this editorial board believes that Mr. Clements has the ideal combination of experience, diligence and responsiveness to be our next Student Union president. We offer Mr. Clements this board's endorsement for the position of Student Union president. Over the past few weeks, Mr. Clements has unveiled a new plan to restructure clubs at Brandeis. While this board harbored reservations about the plan at first, Mr. Clements took the suggestions in stride and worked tirelessly to reform the plan. He incorporated student feedback through a survey to the student body and an open forum for all students to attend. Clements combined all aspects of feedback-both those he agreed with and those he may not have-and incorporated them into the plan. It is this responsiveness to the student body, combined with his ability to look at big-picture issues that affect all students, which makes Mr. Clements a formidable candidate. Moreover, Mr. Clements' experience as Union treasurer underscores his responsibility and diligence. Club leaders respect Mr. Clements for having brought a level of previously nonexistent efficiency to the treasury. Additionally, Mr. Clements has proven his ability to delegate efficiently by re-organizing the treasury under the domains of different assistant treasurers. The ability to delegate is a key component of any leader and it is clear Mr. Clements holds that skill. We hope Mr. Clements will bring a similar level of efficiency and reorganization to the Union as a whole, so that it ultimately runs smoothly and effectively to benefit the student body. Through his role as treasurer and his club restructuring initiative, Mr. Clements has had occasion to interact and build a rapport with all sectors of the University. We think these skills will certainly prove to be beneficial to a Union president. Mr. Clements' attitude towards working with the administration and the Board of Trustees is refreshing. He promises to work with them as a partner rather than a subordinate, and we are confident he will not be afraid to advocate on behalf of students. Mr. Clements' platform features a wide array of specific-yet-broad ideas. Mr. Clements intends on demanding fiscal transparency from the University, specifically in regard to the consistent tuition raises. He expressed the need to expand BEMCo and Brandeis Police service to off-campus students, while also affirming his intent to pressure the Board of Trustees for more campus renovations. His desire to remake the Stein as an on-campus social destination is just one of the highly beneficial measures he has proposed for the student body. Although this board endorses Mr. Clements as the strongest candidate for president, we applaud Mr. Rosen for his strong ideas and evident passion for the Union. Mr. Rosen's track record as executive senator is strong, displaying many accomplishments of his own. His work in reforming the senate committees as well as in advocating for extended hours at both the P.O.D. Market and Einstein's Bros. Bagels deserves praise. We agree with Mr. Rosen that this is a crucial time for the University in terms of its dining contract, especially as the current contract with Aramark will soon expire. We hope that the next president will use this opportunity to pressure the administration, Board of Trustees and dining service provider to tailor the meal plans to students' needs. A student voice in this process is crucial. The Brandeis student body is fortunate to have well qualified candidates for Student Union President, and yet, only one can win. Ultimately, we hope that the president-elect will seriously consider incorporating the best aspects of the other candidates' platforms into his own plans. Additionally, we hope that all candidates will continue their involvement in the Student Union to enact this necessary change. *
(04/16/13 4:00am)
Last Wednesday, Student Union President Todd Kirkland '13, Treasurer David Clements '14, and Senator at Large Charlotte Franco '15 held an open forum regarding the proposed club restructuring plan. Student Union leaders and staff devised the new structure proposal to try to resolve organizational problems within the current free-for-all system of 275 on-campus clubs. The structuring plan strives to foster communication, organization and fiscal efficiency between clubs. The new proposal still features 12 associations separated by categories such as performance, dance, sports and competition. Each association would exist to foster communication between both the clubs under their umbrella and other associations. According to the Student Union leaders, a club would formally fit under one association and its council, but would be able to attend open meetings for other associations. According to Clements, in addition to following in the path of models that are currently in place at many schools such as Tufts University, Columbia University and the University of Pennsylvania, the plan would be similar to existing structures of the Intercultural Center and Club Sports Council. Regardless of size, all clubs would elect seven people to hold voting power in each association's council. "The main difference [between the first and newer club proposals] is eliminating the main fiscal attribute to it," said Kirkland in an interview with the Justice. "What I mean by that is the first draft said that if you are a club requesting money, instead of going directly to F-Board you would go to the council for which your club falls under and you would put the request through there and then they would look over it." Still, according to the Student Union representatives, the recently revised proposal seeks to create fiscal efficiency. Associations would be sent a list of events and items clubs ask to obtain. In this way, collaboration would be possible when groups' goals align. However, funding would be approved by the F-Board and not the association under the revised proposal. The requirement to share activities and plans in order to gain funding would be solely to promote collaboration and avoid overlap. "Clubs won't suffer at all," said Clements, but he emphasized that this new plan will be an investment for the future. The new structure would allow for associations to receive some funding from the account of rollover funds from previous years. Associations' votes would serve primarily to use discretionary funds for any type of collaborative work, such as larger events, with multiple clubs' sponsorships. After the Student Union representatives gave a presentation, there was a feedback session during which students scrutinized the plan's details. These students voiced a number of concerns. One student expressed concern over whether an unpopular club could be negatively affected by these new guidelines, especially if they do not hold secured club status. The Student Union leaders assured the student that the new structure would not serve to oust or marginalize certain clubs. An advisor assignment for each association is also part of the plan. Clubs would be able to ask these faculty or staff advisers for help in areas such as hiring any teachers clubs might need and providing ideas for club progress. The Student Union representatives said that advisors could be especially useful when clubs are created and need help developing their activities. Some staff members have expressed interest in these positions, said Franco, but suggestions for advisers would be welcomed from councils and the student body. "If our adviser is from the Politics department who has coached Model U.N., et cetera., they maybe wouldn't be familiar with working with other wider national groups. So who are these people; where do they come from?" asked Avi Snyder '13, the president of Mock Trial Association and a columnist for the Justice. Another forum is planned for next Friday. A meeting has also been held where faculty and staff from the Intercultural Center, the Hiatt Career Center as well as Senior Vice President for Students and Enrollment Andrew Flagel discussed the proposal. According to Kirkland, criticisms from that meeting and from the student body will be taken into account for proposal edits. "I would say that how the council is defined would have to change because we're sort of pulling on two ends where it's like, you don't want to give no definition to what a council is and just let the association make it up, but on the other hand you don't want to put too much regulation on it because then it seems too bureaucratic," said Kirkland in the interview. Kirkland emphasized the hope that people will continue to be proactive in giving their input. "I hope people provide feedback, otherwise we won't be able to identify what the issues are," said Kirkland. He urges people to contact him with any further input and to participate in these forums. The final vote and amendment referendum for this proposal will take place when it is felt that the proposal has been formulated at the student body's satisfaction. A two-thirds vote in favor would allow it to pass. "We have our niche kind of interests and it's great because everyone works toward their own causes, but there's a huge lack of communication and bigger lack of collaboration and that's detrimental to everyone who is involved in campus life... I think this plan does increase efficiency," said Jessica Goldberg '13, who is part of Hillel and the Brandeis Interfaith Group, in an interview with the Justice. She added her support of passing the proposal this year, saying that whether we pass it now or later, it will need to be done in order to proceed to fix any issues that should arise. "I think it's a really good idea, it will allow for better events with more funding going toward each one, and more creative ideas will be in place as different clubs will be in contact with each other," wrote Harris Cohen '16 from WBRS radio in an email to the Justice. Clements said in an email to the Justice that gathering feedback is a necessary part of creating good policy. "This is just another step in the process, we're going to see where it goes," he wrote. "We don't want to just put up a proposal that's going to be forced upon students, we want the students to be happy with it and to understand it before it's even put to vote." Kirkland hopes to have the student body vote on the club proposal before the end of the year, although it may not be ready. "[W]e don't want to put anything to a vote until we believe that it's a solid plan that most people agree upon. You can't really just say like, 'We're going to vote on it on this day no matter what,' because that's just extremely rigid and that shows that we are not caring about what people are saying," he said. -Marissa Ditkowsky and Sam Mintz contributed reporting.
(04/09/13 4:00am)
College women are four times more likely to be raped than any other group. This statistic seems incredibly foreign to the Brandeis experience. I remember well being introduced to the Brandeis Counseling and Rape Crisis Hotline during orientation and thinking that it seemed like such a superfluous resource at a place like Brandeis. It's such a tiny campus and we never hear about rape, so it must not happen here. The sense of security that the Brandeis bubble gave me was shattered two years later when I joined the Student Conduct Board. During our trainings I learned that not only does rape happen at Brandeis, but also that it happens about as frequently as at other colleges. Since the 2008-2009 academic year, there have been five official Community Standards Reports (CSRs) of sexual misconduct to date. In addition to official CSRs of sexual misconduct, The Department of Student Rights and Community Standards (SRCS) also receives a number of disclosures of sexual misconduct, which can range from a detailed account from the survivor, who does not want to go forward with official proceedings, to a vague question from a third party, which does not specify who the perpetrator is or where the incident occurred. SRCS does not compile statistics on disclosures of sexual misconduct that do not advance to a CSR, however it is important to note that there is a larger quantity of unofficial disclosures. The fact that both reports and disclosures happen and that it is estimated that between 75 and 95 percent of sexual assaults go unreported suggest that with regard to sexual assault, Brandeis is just like every other college campus. With this knowledge in mind and with the knowledge that there are many survivors of sexual assault on our campus-whether or not they choose to identify themselves as such-I was nauseated to learn about our community's newest Facebook page, "Brandeis Hookups." The premise of "Brandeis Hookups" is that anyone can anonymously submit their "raunchiest, craziest Brandeis hookup story" to the page's administrators, who then supposedly vet the stories for content before posting them publicly on the page. Admittedly, I deactivated my own Facebook page at the beginning of March to better focus on my thesis, so I have been lucky enough to never lay eyes on the page. The idea that a public forum for sharing private sexual moments exists, however, makes me squirm. When I first heard about the page, my visceral reaction was an overwhelming sense of panic. What if someone decided that an unfortunate or uncomfortable experience they had shared with me would be appropriate fodder for the page? No one would ever know that the story was about me but that would not stop them from jeering and excitedly whispering about whatever humiliating detail someone decided to share about me. On the flip side, what if someone decided that an experience with me was an accomplishment they wanted to share so that they could get public approval for their "conquest?" Then a moment that I expected to remain private and personal has suddenly turned me into an object-a trophy to be put on display. Given my fears about my own consensual experiences, I cannot imagine the fears of someone who has had a sexual experience at Brandeis that was not so clearly consensual. To wake up one day, log onto Facebook, and see that a traumatizing and violating experience, which perhaps has not been fully processed, dealt with, or understood, has been publicly posted for the whole world to see has the potential to be just as traumatizing as the original experience itself. It is irrelevant whether or not a post was submitted by an actual perpetrator of an actual incident of sexual assault. If the details of any post are similar enough to someone's experience of a forced sexual contact, the traumatizing effects will be the same. Publicly displaying forced sexual experiences in this way is what survivors of rape and their advocates call a "trigger." What makes the triggering effects of the "Brandeis Hookups" page all the worse is the fact that people can and, as it seems, frequently do, comment on any post encouraging, condoning and applauding the sexual conquests of their peers. The potential bragging rights that any of my consensual partners have about their experiences with me are humiliating and objectifying, but those of a perpetrator of forced sexual contact are degrading, further traumatizing and incredibly perverse. Perhaps Brandeis is no different from any other college with respect to the incidence of sexual assault, but do we really have the kind of community where we applaud sexual assault when it happens as well? Unfortunately, the existence of a public page like "Brandeis Hookups" makes it seem like we do. Despite our ideas about our safety inside the Brandeis bubble, the fact of the matter is that we still live on a college campus, and women at Brandeis are still college women, who are, like all college women, four times more likely to be raped. Given that this statistic applies to us, we need to be more sensitive than anyone about the potential effects of the way we talk about sex. By allowing the "Brandeis Hookups" page to exist, we are denying the impact that our sexual discourse can have on survivors of sexual assault. Whether we actively participate in the page or tacitly support it by saying nothing against it, we are promoting and participating in the kind of culture that not only allows rape to happen, but also says that it is OK, and that the traumatizing experience of the survivor is not valid. The "Brandeis Hookups" page has shattered my perceptions of Brandeis once more. I want to believe that Brandeis is a safe, supportive and respectful environment, particularly for members of our community who may be survivors of sexual assault. As long as this page exists and is considered acceptable however, the safety and well-being of our community is compromised. *
(04/08/13 4:00am)
The Senate convened on Sunday to discuss and settle a number of issues on its agenda. In Student Union Secretary Carlton Shakes' '14 address, he discussed efforts to revamp voting in an amendment to the Student Union Constitution. The amendment would get rid of the instant run-off system so that there would be no more ranking; each student would only be able to cast one vote per seat. A student is currently working on a system to replace BigPulse, which according to Shakes is "way too intricate" and costs about $2,500 per year. In the event of a tie, the Chief of Elections would hold special elections with only those two candidates, leading Shakes to propose an added section making better guidelines for special elections. Ten signatures were procured to go forth with allowing the student body to vote on the amendments to the Constitution. Student Union President Todd Kirkland '13 sent an email to the student body on April 5 describing the proposed amendments. He announced that the vote to eliminate the instant run-off system and add special election guidelines will take place on April 17. Along with the aforementioned proposed amendments, the proposed amendment to add requirements to run for Student Union Vice President and President, which were written and proposed by Class of 2013 Senator David Fisch and the Student Union Senate Ways and Means Committee, will be voted on by the student body on April 17. Anyone running for President would be required to have served on the Union previously, while anyone running for Vice President would have to have served on the Senate, a Senate committee or the Executive Board previously. Only if there were no candidates following the criteria would anyone in the student body be eligible. According to Kirkland's email, the final proposal would not go into effect until next year. In Kirkland's address to the Senate, he discussed the club proposal revisions that were made. The funding process for clubs is now going to remain the same; clubs will have to submit plans to their respective associations, but they will not have to provide the amount of money they are requesting to receive funding. Initially, club financing requests would have had to go through the association council, which would request an "efficient budget" from the Finance Board including all of the combined requests. Clubs would have maintained their own gifts and money earned through fundraising. The change allows for club financing requests to remain on an individual basis. Clubs would still have to list their activities and provide the lists to their respective associations in order to receive funding, but the requirement to share projects with associations would now be for the sole purpose of collaboration; the funding would no longer be from one "efficient budget." A club could also now be a part of multiple associations, but must designate a primary association. Kirkland hopes to hold a vote on the amendments within the next few weeks, but timing will depend upon student feedback. Kirkland sent an email to the student body yesterday containing the revised proposal. An open forum will be held tomorrow at 8 p.m. in the Lurias rooms in the Hassenfeld Conference Center. Kirkland also discussed a resolution for the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, which is currently being supported by other Boston-area universities. The resolution calls for an increase in T service hours and repairs. The Senate voted to support the resolution with no opposition. Students who wished to begin a chapter of Liberty in North Korea at Brandeis sought to be recognized and chartered. The purpose of the club is to raise money for North Korean refugees and spread awareness, shifting the focus away from nuclear threat and onto the human rights violations in North Korea. The club was recognized and chartered with no opposition. Union Vice President Gloria Park '13 addressed proposals to change the shuttle services. By the Senate meeting, Park mentioned that 362 responses to the shuttle service survey that was sent in an email to the student body on April 5 were received. Park mentioned the possibility of adding a $20 fee per student to make it possible to augment shuttle hours not only Thursday through Sunday, but also to add hours during the week and add service to the Riverside T station. The Brandeis Academic Debate and Speech Society is seeking to become a secured club, meaning the club would be guaranteed a set amount of funding per year. After much deliberation, BADASS procured 10 signatures from the Senate, so it will be up to the student body to vote to secure the club. Two Senate Money Resolutions were approved: one for a $360 hookah event to be run by the Class of 2015, and one for a barbecue at the Charles River Apartments, which will cost about $500. The SMRs were both approved unanimously. -Marissa Ditkowsky
(03/19/13 4:00am)
At the beginning of this month, the Fine Arts department unveiled an exhibition that showcases the latest work of its devoted students, the "Dimensions 3" exhibit. On view in Dreitzer Gallery in the Spingold Theater Center through March 22, "Dimensions 3" features work from students in the Sculpture, 3D Design and Digital Photography classes. This exhibit levels the playing field, so to speak, among the different levels of skill among Fine Arts students at Brandeis, as the work it features was created by first years, sophomores and juniors. As the Fine Arts department at Brandeis aims to cultivate well-rounded artists who are skilled in many art mediums and confident in their work, the "Dimensions 3" exhibit, and others like it, are essential opportunities for students who are serious about their careers in art. The semicircular shape of Dreitzer Gallery lent itself to a tidy organization of the pieces so that the inevitable architectural disjunction caused by dividing walls within the gallery did not make for a great aesthetic divide within the exhibit. Collections of digital photographs were hung on the concave wall of the gallery, and light from the high windows seeped in and illuminated the exhibit. The digital photographs selected for the exhibit fit under the umbrella title "The Ink Can Bury A Blade," an idea conceived by students Joseph Jacobowitz '14, Sofia Retta '15 and Anna Yatskar '14. "Once in a while," the students wrote on a title page displayed within the exhibit, "we happen upon a circumstance of such overwhelming and terrifying might that we temporarily neglect our sense of self and feel awe and security rather than fear." Each collection of photographs fit this invocation beautifully. The photographs range in subject from nature to cityscape, from close-ups of scenes to places and people, from objects to bodies. Yatskar's collection was by far my favorite-close-up, purposefully focused shots of the human body. The solid, un-textured black background and soft yellow lighting that Yatskar's collection used complimented its subject well. The body parts portrayed through these pictuers-unclothed, rippling with lean muscles, slenderness queued by skin stretched over protruding bones-were nothing short of haunting. In contrast, a collection of nature photographs by Jonathan Greengarden '15 showed an intimate point of view with a mood entirely different from Yatskar's works. His photographs focused on leaves, branches and blooms and captured sunlight shining against these small treasures of nature in rays shaded amber, yellow and blue. The closeness that one was able to feel to the subjects of the photographs and the integral stillness of each shot were absolutely sublime. Along the outwardly-curved wall of the gallery, the array of sculptures was organized into a gradient of subjects and materials. The sculptures were made of a range of materials: black wire, painted clay, found or salvaged objects and even X-Acto blade sliced pieces of cardboard. While the sculptures were placed throughout the gallery into groups organized by sculpting material, the exhibition did not seem choppy or segmented. Rather, one concept of art flowed into the next with a pleasant ease. The sculptures made of found materials had written titles and descriptions mounted next to them, establishing the humorously-executed theme for the sculpting assignment: Each sculpture was created of an amalgamation of found objects to solve an everyday problem. For example, Briana McCalmon-Bailey '14 created a "Silverware Necklace" of several forks, knives and spoons strung onto a piece of wire, so that one will never be without silverware as he sits down for a meal. Kerry Morse '13 crafted a dangling pair of "Earplug Earrings," so that the wearer would always have earplugs at his convenience. Conversely, the sculptures crafted from medium-thick black wire were less practically-minded and more stoically displayed. Each of these sculptures was accompanied by a nameplate crediting its artist, and none of these works were titled. Some of the wire sculptures depicted objects from nature, like a beautifully crafted three-dimensional tree, while others were shaped into box-like dioramas that housed wire-crafted shapes or scenes of nature or of the city. The "Dimensions 3" exhibit is overall both an aesthetic and conceptual delight, and proudly shows students' work as they practice using art as a forum for expressing emotional insurmountability. I genuinely look forward to seeing more exhibits like this one in the future.
(03/19/13 4:00am)
Comments on "Brandeis Hookups," a Facebook page where people can anonymously post their "raunchiest, craziest Brandeis hookup [stories]," have exploded recently following an opinion article published in The Hoot that said the page promoted "sexism, body-shaming and rape culture." The author of the opinion piece proceeded to repost her article to "Brandeis Hookups'" Facebook page, which elicited a flurry of feedback and comments. While the article has generated a number of comments concerning the validity of its argument, the comment that particularly concerns us is that of Student Union Secretary Carlton Shakes '14. In response to The Hoot writer's post, Shakes used profanity that we feel served to intimidate, denigrate and provoke the author, and by extension, those who merely question the Facebook group. Students elected to the Union serve as representatives of the Brandeis community. We rely on them to listen to the wide array of student opinions present on this campus and expect that they will be receptive to viewpoints that differ from their own. Shakes' use of offensive, coarse language explicitly undermined this commitment, and the position he is meant to hold. As the Union Secretary, Shakes is required to be one of the most accessible contacts to the student body, sending weekly email announcements and communicating as a mouthpiece for the student body. However, his comment concerns us as an affront to the value of civil discourse. Even if he were not the Student Union secretary, using profanity to degrade another person's viewpoint is not the proper manner of discourse that we expect from our fellow Brandeisians. We recognize that Shakes' comment is protected by the First Amendment, and as a newspaper, we deeply believe in the value of free speech. Legally, Shakes is allowed to speak freely, but as an elected official and a Brandeisian, his public speech in a public forum is not beyond reproach by his constituents. As a public official, Shakes must represent the best interests of this diverse and multi-faceted student body, regardless of his personal positions. Shakes' position as secretary makes his choice of words in this situation all the more serious an offense. Shakes' comment represents a serious lapse in judgment that left many Facebook commentators angry and offended. This board hopes that Shakes recognizes the need for civility and respect in all discussions and conversations-whether it be online or in person. Shakes must come to his own conclusion about the appropriateness of an apology, but we hope he realizes that his position carries heightened responsibilities and a more exacting focus on propriety. We urge Shakes-and those Facebook commentators defending him-to realize that even on Facebook, Shakes must uphold the standards of the office that he represents. The comments he makes from his personal Facebook page in a public forum, such as "Brandeis Hookups," are subject to the same moral standards as would be an op-ed piece written by him in the pages of this newspaper.
(03/19/13 4:00am)
In response to your editorial "Club Proposal Concerns" (March 12, 2013): Like the editorial board, we too are excited about a change in the club structure at Brandeis, which will improve collaboration, communication and fiscal efficiencies for all clubs. In your editorial, you presented a number of questions that must be answered before any new plan is voted. We understand that these questions are ones that are a concern to many club leaders, including ourselves. As we mentioned in the presentation to the Senate, this proposal is still a work in progress and we appreciate the input we have received. Prior to answering your questions, we want to reiterate that the primary objective of this proposal is not to save money and cut wasteful spending; rather, the ultimate goal is to create a culture of collaboration, communication, shared ideas and organization. The fact that money will be saved and used more efficiently is a mere by-product of the proposal. Therefore, even if no money is saved, the execution of the plan will be successful given that it creates a new culture on campus of communication and organization among clubs. This clarification of the overarching goal also leads to a greater understanding of the role of the Council members: while there is a financial aspect to their job descriptions, their main roles will be to foster a community of clubs with similar interests and needs through programming, advice and dialogue. In response to your concern of how "it is unclear how this plan actually remedies the current situation," it must be noted that by having 275 independent and disconnected clubs, there is no structure ensuring that clubs communicate with each other and share ideas and resources. By grouping them in associations, a system that promotes a norm of communication and collaboration will be created, thereby improving the overall student life. This is our goal. You also note: "If the council deems these requests illegitimate, the club, according to the plan, can still go directly to the F-Board and request the funds they seek. In theory, all that is being accomplished is adding an extra layer of decision-making and approval seeking." This is a misunderstanding. Early and regular marathon requests will always go through the council. However, in the event that a club feels that it was misrepresented or mistreated by the council, they will be able to appeal the decision directly to the F-Board. This direct request will only be available during appeals. This is an extra layer of protection of the proper treatment of the autonomous clubs within an association. In your editorial, you present a number of questions regarding the makeup of the councils and how the council members are elected. This process needs clarification. The council will be comprised of seven individuals. Two seats will be reserved: one for someone representing a secured club and another for a representative of an unchartered club. The other five seats are available to anyone who can run as individuals, not representatives of the clubs to which they belong. Each club within an Association will have one vote per seat-seven votes in total. By nature of the fact that they run as individuals (and not club members), the Council members will serve as a representative of the clubs within the association, not merely the club to which they belong. Regarding the concern of a Council member having his or her own club interests at heart: during allocations meetings with the clubs, if a council member feels that there is a conflict of interest, then that person can remove himself or herself. This same process is done by the current F-Board with great success and honesty; consequently, we anticipate similar results with the councils. The discretionary/emergency funds will be made available for use within certain guidelines established by the association. Additionally, in the event that these funds run out, the Council can request additional funding from Finance Board. F-Board's decision of whether or not to allocate additional discretionary/emergency funds to a council will be based on a review of the worthiness, efficiency and effectiveness of the council's prior spending. Another concern raised is the feasibility of dividing every club into 12 associations. We, the planning committee, were able to successfully (and tentatively) place every club into an appropriate and fitting association. While many clubs have broad scopes, we anticipate that every club will be able to fit into one group. In this plan, if a club does not feel they belong to a specific one, they can petition to switch associations. Similarly, this plan does not prohibit clubs from cosponsoring events with clubs in other associations. For instance, TAMID: Israel Investment Group would be placed in the Pre-Professional/Academic Association but will be free to work closely with not only the clubs in its Association with which it shares similar goals and missions, but also with the culture clubs as well. We, in conversations that we have had with various members of staff and administration, believe that there is significant interest from current staff and faculty members to serve as association advisers. Such positions could also be offered to graduate students as well. These advisers will by no means threaten the autonomy of the individual clubs or the associations. This was made very clear in the proposal's text. The role of an adviser is to provide professional and expert input to the club leaders and Councils. However, it must be stressed that the clubs will never be required to adhere to the advice of the adviser. This dynamic is in place with the current F-Board, which has Stephanie Grimes present at all allocations meetings. While she is able to provide professional input, the F-Board is by no means required to follow it. And it doesn't always. But it must be noted that with her insight and guidance, F-Board allocations have never been this efficient. Therefore, while the adviser can serve as a great asset to the association and its clubs, the position will not threaten the autonomy of the student-run clubs. We believe that this adequately answers your questions and provides you with a great understanding of the proposal's goals of creating a culture of collaboration, communication and organization that will be able to sustain the number and quality of clubs we have at Brandeis. In the next couple weeks, we will be releasing the finalized version of the proposal to the student body and will be hosting a forum for any comments and concerns. We look forward to continuing this conversation further. David Clements '14 is the treasurer of the Student Union and one of the architects of the new club proposal.
(03/12/13 4:00am)
Library and Technology Services announced on Tuesday that it is upgrading the University's online learning tool, LATTE. The LATTE system is used by faculty and students to organize course syllabi, notes and assignments, as well as forums for course discussions. LATTE was established in 2007 using the software Moodle, and still runs on the same version of the software that "is starting to get up in age," said LTS Associate Director for Academic Services Adam Lipkin in an interview with the Justice. "We want to bring LATTE up to date." The new LATTE will be upgraded from Moodle 1.9 to the latest version, 2.4. LATTE is actively used in 75 percent of courses, and there are an estimated 40,000 log-ins per week, according to Lipkin. The new LATTE is scheduled to be available for faculty by November 2013, and for students in January 2014. The LATTE team is in the process of development testing, and will be conducting beta testing with students and faculty later in the spring. The announcement of the plan for LATTE was released during the same week as the the long-awaited draft of the University-wide strategic plan. "With the strategic plan emerging on campus and strategic directions becoming clear, we'll be launching updated LATTE in time to help support those new initiatives in appropriate ways," said Joshua Wilson, LTS director for academic support and user services. "A lot of elements in the strategic plan are actually well-positioned for LATTE use," Lipkin added, including the second-year course initiative, increased flexibility in education and creating new models of intensive educational options. "A robust and flexible online system is one of the core pieces of technology that can help for a lot of those things," said Lipkin. LATTE is used by many members of the Brandeis community, and the new LATTE will be geared toward everyone's needs. "One of the things we are trying to do in this project is to get as much community input as we can, so we've been consulting with an oversight group that's composed of faculty, students and staff, all who have a key stake in the future of LATTE," said Wilson. The oversight group has been asked questions pertaining to the availability of course material and syllabi, among other issues. One change that has already been implemented is the option for faculty to make syllabi publicly available beyond LATTE. This is "a preview of coming attractions," according to Wilson. "It is the kind of thing we want to put into the updated LATTE when it emerges in 2014." Additions include more compatibility with mobile devices such as smart phones and tablets, as more students are using these devices to access LATTE on the go. The system will also be integrated with GoogleDrive and GoogleDocs, which will make it easier for professors to upload both course material, readings and other assignments. LATTE will also have "a new look and feel," Lipkin said, which does not affect the functionality, but "comes to affect the way people approach these systems." A survey was sent out for students and faculty to vote on what the new LATTE logo should represent, and it has already received a large response. Despite the changes to be implemented, Wilson and Lipkin guaranteed that the LATTE experience would be familiar to students and faculty. "LATTE has been a very well-accepted system at Brandeis, and we want people to have a consistent experience with what they are already used to," Lipkin said.
(03/05/13 5:00am)
This week, sexual violence awareness and prevention will be highlighted both locally and nationally, with Brandeis' Feminist Majority Leadership Alliance's Sexual Violence Awareness Week running through Friday, and the pending renewal of the Violence Against Women Act by President Barack Obama. While Brandeis has sought to address gendered violence in the past, the prevalence of this issue on college campuses demands continued attention from both Brandeis students, faculty and administrators. FMLA-sponsored events scheduled for this week include a consent and empowerment workshop, a panel on sexual violence in queer communities and the Clothesline Project, an "interactive art display" in which shirts bearing messages against sexual violence will be displayed in the Shapiro Campus Center Atrium. This board commends FMLA for its much-needed work to facilitate discussion of an issue that is important for colleges nationwide. Dating violence, sexual harassment and stalking are issues that are frequently underreported on college campuses. Regarding sexual violence, transparency is not simply an issue of reporting it; it is an issue of accurately representing its magnitude so that it can be prevented. This board is glad to see the continued efforts of student-led groups on campus as well as the further use of University resources to promote gendered violence awareness. In addition to initiatives by groups such as FMLA, leaders of first-year Orientation alerted Orientation Leaders this past week that issues of "[s]exual education and health will be more prevalent" in the 2013 program. With the national attention VAWA has garnered recently and its likely renewal, we feel that this is a good opportunity for the University to build upon its efforts of preventing sexual violence and protecting its victims. Passed in the U.S. House of representatives on Thursday, the Act now has only to be approved by President Obama. Added to the original bill is the Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act, an amendment to the Higher Education Act of 1965, which aims to dismantle environments on college campuses which tolerate or overlook sexual violence and harassment. "SaVE," as it has been nicknamed by advocates, would create a national standard for transparency in college reporting of sexual violence and stalking crime statistics and require colleges and universities to provide prevention and awareness programs for students and employees. VAWA would also provide grant money for sexual violence prevention programs, including a specific allocation for colleges. Currently, a committee headed by Prof. Bernadette Brooten (NEJS) and Director of Athletics Sheryl Sousa '90 is working to draft a grant proposal for Brandeis. A town hall forum at which members of the Brandeis community can share their ideas for an awareness and prevention project will be held, as part of Sexual Violence Awareness Week, tonight at 5 p.m. (location TBD). We hope that the University will invigorate its awareness efforts as an institution, as well as within student groups. We especially look forward to seeing the results of the VAWA grant-writing committee's efforts, and applaud them for placing Brandeis at the forefront of sexual violence prevention on college campuses.
(03/03/13 5:00am)
You're Invited!
Did you work on the Justice at all during your time at Brandeis? Pull all-nighters in the basement of Usdan or the Shapiro Campus Center? Rush across campus to report on or photograph events? There are over a thousand people who've done it too. Whether you were editor-in-chief, a columnist or a once-in-a-while contributor, we cordially invite you to attend the first ever Justice alumni reunion and media conference on April 26-27, 2013. Media at Brandeis grew as the university did, and members of the Class of '52 quickly organized the Justice to report. The longest-running student publication on campus, the newspaper's multiple generations of student journalists have documented and analyzed the in's and out's of the University. We possess unique perspectives on the early days of President Emeritus Abe Sachar, controversies on campus including the housing "open-door" policy, the "closing" of the Rose Art Museum, and the student takeover of Ford Hall. We've captured student reactions to civil rights, the draft, wars, and elections, as well as spirit weeks, athletics, and the wide variety of other campus events. Today, the Justice continues to redefine itself in the face of the 21st century, bringing our coverage online. Yet it continues to invoke the camaraderie of it's origins and serve as a historical record of Brandeis to date. There is no doubt that the Justice has had a profound impact on this university, and as current students, we can attest to the fact that your hard work and dedication during your years at Brandeis have left a lasting legacy. Please join us to celebrate the Justice, and learn from the individuals who've defined it. Register Here: The cost for alumni to attend is $50, which includes a cocktail reception on Friday, and continental breakfast and lunch on Saturday. You can pay with your Visa, MasterCard, American Express or Discover. You can register here. * Reunion Schedule
Friday, April 26
Open Undergraduate Journalism Courses 9:30-10:50 a.m. "Ethics in Journalism" Professor Eileen McNamara (former Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist for the Boston Globe) Location: Brown Social Science Center 115 12:30-1:50 p.m. - "Media and Public Policy", Professor Eileen McNamara Location: Shiffman Humanities Center 125 3:00 p.m. Registration Opens Location: Justice Office, Shapiro Campus Center (SCC), 2nd Floor 3:30-5:00 p.m. Campus tours led by current Justice editors Meeting point: Shapiro Campus Center Atrium 5:00-6:30 p.m. - Cocktail reception, with welcoming remarks from one of the founding editors of the Justice, Sanford Lakoff '53 Location: the new Shapiro Science Center, atrium and patio Please note: At around 6 p.m. towards the end of the cocktail reception, there will be a panel discussion discussing professionalism in the media and how well the media covered the recent Boston marathon bombings. All students, faculty, staff and alumni are invited to attend. Location: the new Shapiro Science Center, atrium [The Leonard Bernstein Festival of the Arts will be holding several evening performances open to alumni to attend. For more information, please see below. The featured event "Late Night with Leonard Bernstein," featuring his daughter Jamie Bernstein, is free but requires ticket reservations in advance. To reserve, please call 781-736-3400 or visit: go.Brandeis.edu/BrandeisTickets] * Saturday, April 27
All events on this day will take place in Sherman Function Hall unless otherwise noted. 8:30 a.m. Continental breakfast 9:00 a.m. State of the News, Justice Senior Editor Andrew Wingens '14, with Q&A 9:10 -10:15 a.m. How the Justice Influenced Careers (Both In and Out of Journalism) Featured Panelists: David Zimmerman '55, author of Sankofa; Alex J. Goldstein '06, Executive Director of the Deval Patrick Committee (DPC) and the TogetherPAC (TPAC); Jeffrey Greenbaum '90, Managing Partner in the Advertising, Marketing, and Public Relations group at Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz, PC; Steve Heyman '06, Features Editor at the New York Times T Magazine. Student Moderators: Joshua Asen '13, Senior Sports Writer and former Sports Editor, and Janey Zitomer '13, Senior Photographer and Journalism Undergraduate Department Representative. 10:30 -11:45 a.m. Covering Campus Politics: The Justice as the Arbiter (and Sometimes Instigator) of Conflict Featured Panelists: Lindsay Gardner '82, Senior Advisor at Oaktree Capital Management and former television journalist; Arnie Reisman '64, award-winning writer, producer and performer as well as Vice President of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts; Benjamin Freed '06, Editor-in-Chief at DCist.com. Student Moderators: Samuel Mintz '14, News Editor, and Sara Dejene '15, Online Editor and former News Editor 12:00 -1:00 p.m. Keynote Address by Ted Gup '72, and lunch 1:15 p.m. University Update from Senior Vice President of Students and Enrollment Andrew Flagel, followed by a Q&A 1:45 p.m. -2:45 p.m. Ethical Decision-Making in the Justice Newsroom Featured Panelists: Dana Coffield '86, co-metro editor at the Denver Post and chief investigator in the publication's Pulitzer Prize-winning coverage of the Aurora theater shooting; Jon Fischer '07, Managing Editor at the Washington City Paper; Dan Hirschhorn '06, national politics reporter at the New York Daily News. Student Moderators: Glen Chesir '15 Forum Editor and Jessie Miller '15 Arts Editor 2:50 p.m. -3:00 p.m. Concluding Remarks, How to Stay Involved Andrew Wingens '14 and Robyn Spector '13 3 p.m. Campus tours will be offered by current editors [Please note: from 3:00 -5:00 p.m. there will be a folk festival on the Great Lawn outside of the Shapiro Campus Center as part of the Leonard Bernstein Festival of the Arts] ____________________________________ Further Information
Panel discussions: In addition to Friday's panel discussion on Journalism Education, Saturday's panels will touch on a variety of subjects: Educating Student Journalists, Covering Campus Politics, Ethical Decision-making in the Justice Newsroom, and How the Justice Influenced My Career (inside and outside of journalism). If you are interested in serving on a panel or suggesting a panelist, please email us (alumni@thejustice.org). Keynote Speaker, Ted Gup '72: Ted Gup is a former investigative reporter at the Washington Post who revealed the location of the underground bunker for the U.S. Congress in case of nuclear attack. He has also written for Time Magazine and more recently, The New York Times. In addition, he is the professor and chair of the Journalism Department at Emerson College, and formerly taught journalism at Case Western Reserve. He has received several awards including the George Polk Award for foreign reporting, the Worth Bingham Prize for investigative journalism, and the Gerald Loeb Award. In addition, he is a former Fulbright Scholar and Grantee of the John D and Catherine T MacArthur Foundation. Accommodations: The Marriott Hotel in Newton (five minutes from campus) has been designated as the official hotel for the Justice Reunion. A block of rooms has been reserved with a special Justice Reunion rate of $149 a night (the usual rates are around $205 a night). You may call the hotel (617 969-1000 or 800-228-9290) to make a reservation. When reserving a room, please indicate that you are attending the Justice Reunion. Reservations must be made by March 29th for the preferred rate. For more information and to make your reservation with the discount online, please click here. Festival of the Arts 2013: The annual Leonard Bernstein Festival of the Creative Arts will be held on April 25-28 at various locations around campus. Highlights of this year's festival include the Brandeis Theater Company production of "Visions of an Ancient Dreamer"; a concert by the Brandeis-Wellesley Orchestra; and "Late Night with Leonard Bernstein," hosted by Bernstein's daughter Jamie, with performances by acclaimed soprano Amy Burton and pianists John Musto and Michael Boriskin. Tickets to the "Late Night with Leonard Bernstein" performance are free but must be reserved in advance. Please email alumni@thejustice.org for ticket reservations. * Reunion Organizing Committee Mr. Paul Levenson '52 Dr. Sanford Lakoff '53 Mrs. Barbara Krasin Kravitz '57 Mr. Sy Raboy '57 Dr. Judith Walzer '58 Dr. Jeffery Golland '61 Dr. Allan Jay Lichtman '67 Mr. Paul D. Broude '79 Ms. Anne R. Exter '80 Mr. Daniel H. Adler '85 Ms. Mari J. Cartagenova '88 Ms. Michelle Leder '88 Mr. Martin R. Lieberman '96 Mr. Dan Friedell '97 Mr. Adam M. Greenwald '98 Mrs. Pam Garretson (Isaacson) '98 Dr. Jodi R. Eichler-Levine '00 Mr. Lex Friedman '02 Mrs. Jennifer (Klein) Seadia '02 Mr. David Dagan '03 Ms. Caroline Litwack '03 Mr. Dan Hirschhorn '07 Ms. Andrea Fineman '10 Ms. Miranda Neubauer '10 ____________________________________ For more information please contact Robyn Spector '13, Deputy Editor at: alumni@thejustice.org
(02/12/13 5:00am)
*
(01/29/13 5:00am)
An article in Forum cited the federal debt limit at $16.4 billion. The debt ceiling is, in fact, $16.4 trillion. (Jan. 22, p. 12) A photo caption in Features implied that the photo was of Daniel Smith and his wife. The photo actually pictured Daniel Smith and his mother. (Jan. 22, p. 8) A photo credit in Arts misspelled the name of a photographer. The photographer's name is Brianna Mussman, not Briana Mussman. (Jan. 22, p. 20) The Justice welcomes submissions for errors that warrant correction or clarification. Email editor@thejustice.org. *
(01/17/13 5:00am)
This past week, President Obama announced plans to introduce legislation that includes a ban on assault weapons, limits on high-capacity magazines, expanded background checks for gun purchases and new gun trafficking laws to crack down on the spread of weapons across the country. This represents the broadest push for gun control this generation has seen. What do you think of the proposed gun control legislation? Submit responses in the comments section or email forum@thejustice.org for a chance to be featured in next week's issue of the Justice!
(12/04/12 5:00am)
Colleges in a campus enviroment have a unique responsibility in addition to offering a quality education; providing a high standard of living for their students. An integral part of any college living situation is the quality of the food. The end of this academic year will mark the end of the contract between Brandeis University and Aramark, the dining services provider on campus. Brandeis is a unique dining services account because of the need for both kosher and non-kosher options, in addition to its lack of nearby alternatives. The attractiveness of the account, coupled with the student body's apparent lack of satisfaction with Aramark, may have been contributing factors that led the University to send out requests for proposals from outside caterers. This board hopes the decision as to which food service company will be chosen will be made on the overall balance between quality and affordability, not solely on the price of each bid. In almost every facet of University operations, this board advocates for transparency-the dining service bid is no exception. The student body has many opinions about the current dining services, evident by the near 50 percent response rate from the recent dining survey conducted by Senior Vice President of Administration Mark Collins, and deserves a voice in the selection process. This board was pleased to see the administration steering initiatives like the dining survey and future open forum meetings about dining services, expected to occur in early spring. However, attempts to include the student body in the selection process should not end here. The results from the dining survey should be made public. Additionally, condensed proposals from each food service company should be presented to the extended Brandeis community, facilitating the proper conversation that is needed for such a decision. Initiatives such as these will lead to both a fiscally responsible and quality assured choice for dining services. The current University dining services require major improvements and the upcoming selection process should bring those improvements to light. We hope the University keeps the goal of improvement in mind when selecting a food service company, not just the bottom line. *
