(02/01/11 5:00am)
Enter the long and confusing maze within the science complex. Amid the high-tech corridors, the hum of the busy laboratories, the organized chaos of wires and complicated machinery, Prof. Lizbeth Hedstrom (BIOL) can be found conducting research, tucked away in a place where many never venture. In December 2010, The American Association for the Advancement of Science Council, a nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing science around the world, selected a new group of AAAS fellows. Included in the group of fellows is Hedstrom, chosen for her scientific research that could have an important influence on greener chemistry and new ways to make antibiotics. Individuals will be awarded special rosettes and certificates at the Fellows Forum, which will be held on Feb. 19 during the AAAS annual meeting in Washington, D.C., as a form of recognition for their outstanding accomplishments and contributions to science. "I'm interested in how enzymes work," Hedstrom says of her research. Hedstrom's focus on enzymes, biological catalysts that influence the rate of reactions, is due to the fact that biochemistry is so largely dependent on enzymes, according to Hedstrom. Hedstrom's team researches the way in which enzymes function, how other small molecules interact with them and how scientists could engineer better and more useful enzymes. While Hedstrom says that there is no specific part of the research that is unique, she says it is the entirety of her research that is being recognized by the AAAS. Comparing the honor to a lifetime achievement award, Hedstrom describes the award as a recognition of all her work, spanning from her research and work at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of California, San Francisco to all of her contributions to science and technology that have secured her place as a fellow of the AAAS. Nevertheless, she says that she and her team of researchers have done some fundamental studies on what determines specificity, which consists of understanding how an enzyme chooses what it acts upon. "We are really doing a good job in designing some inhibitors, molecules that prevent other molecules from functioning properly," Hedstrom explains. The applications of Hedstrom's work "are limited by your imaginations," as she puts it. Her research aims to design compounds that could serve as both anti-bacterial and anti-parasitic drugs. Stressing research on a particularly puzzling protein whose mutation causes inherited blindness, Hedstrom and her team are devoting specific attention to studying the protein. "We are really excited about that," Hedstrom comments, hinting subtly at her optimism of the outcome. Hedstrom's research may also have important applications in green chemistry, she says. Her work has the potential to be used in the design of chemical products and processes that are not only safer but also more eco-friendly and cost-efficient. This can be achieved by building better proteins, an area in which she has focused much of her research. Despite being personally named an AAAS fellow, Hedstrom is quick to acknowledge how fortunate she is for her large research team, composed of talented undergraduate and graduate students, as well as postdoctoral fellows from Brandeis. "I didn't do any of this with my own two hands," she says, "All I do is sit back and type, [and] other people do the exciting experiments."A graduate of the University of Virginia, with a Bachelor of Science in Chemistry, Hedstrom, who brands herself the prototypical undecided undergraduate, says she was interested in a myriad of topics in school, not only in chemistry. Although the teaching in the chemistry department of the University of Virgina wasn't perfect, she says she still ended up in chemistry because she enjoyed it. "It was May of my senior year and I had nothing to do. I was walking in the hallway of my chemistry department and my favorite professor asked me what I was going to do and I said I didn't know," she admits. "He took me into his office, and he made two phone calls for me-one to Brandeis and the other to Penn State [University]. If that hadn't happened I would never had heard of Brandeis and would have never ended up here," she says. Hedstrom received a Ph.D. in Biochemistry at Brandeis in 1985. She then went on to MIT and UC, San Francisco for her postdoctoral work. In 1992, Hedstrom returned to Brandeis as a faculty member because it was "the best offer I had," she says. Affable, direct and obviously passionate about what she does, it is no surprise that Hedstrom was presented with the Louis D. Brandeis Teaching Award in 2007 for her oustanding teaching. When asked what she likes most about Brandeis, Hedstrom immediately recognizes the students. "The students are very talented, eager and ambitious," she says, mentioning her colleagues as well. "[Brandeis] is really interactive; you have people who will help you achieve your wackiest ideas." While being named an AAAS fellow was unexpected for Hedstrom, her work is well deserving. "It's wonderful to be recognized by your peers and it's also a great way to start the new year," she says.
(02/01/11 5:00am)
The University hosted a number of small liberal-arts colleges to discuss international sustainability initiatives and their implications at the One Size Does Not Fit All event that took place in the Shapiro Campus Center this past Friday and Saturday. Through a grant given by the Association of International Education Administrators, the Brandeis Office of Global Affairs was able to coordinate the One Size Does Not Fit All event, which emphasized the impact that small-scale institutions can have despite limited resources and financial commitments. According to the AIEA website, the organization was formed in 1982 to promote international sustainability, higher education administration on a global level and to establish and maintain international networks between forerunners of higher learning. Representatives from institutions such as Princeton University, Boston College and Vanderbilt University, came together Friday morning in an opening convocation titled "Understanding Sustained Global Commitments," to begin discussions on international sustainability and efficiency. In addition, sessions such as, "The Special Role of the Liberal Arts in Sustained Global Commitments" and "Partnering With Overseas Institutions," encompassed discussions about effective study abroad programs, building international relationships and faculty involvement. Bryan McAllister-Grande, the assistant director of the OGA and one of the coordinators of the event, said in a phone interview with the Justice that the purpose of One Size Does Not Fit All was to encourage question and dialogue between faculty members of various institutions on methods of promoting constructive international initiatives. In addition, McAllister-Grande commented that since Brandeis is a small-scale institution, it makes having conversations regarding such issues fairly easy. Additionally, McAllister-Grande noted that the Brandeis environment is extremely conducive to internationalization and global engagement because of the faculty involvement and history of the school itself. Daniel Terris, vice president of the OGA, said, "One thing that we would like to do at Brandeis is to find more opportunities for students who study abroad to integrate their experiences into their academic work when they return."Additionally, "we would also like to help and encourage the undergraduate students to take advantage of the experience and expertise of the graduate population here at Brandeis, particularly in the International Business School and the Heller School for Social Policy and Management," Terris said.Terris also explained that despite the strong relationships Brandeis has fostered between its student population and its faculty on an international level, there is still much to be done. "Within the next 10 years we hope to develop more sustained commitments in places of particular importance to Brandeis, such as Israel, India and other key countries," that will in turn strengthen the faculty-student bond, Terris said. Overall, "the AIEA Forum was a terrific success because it is a rare opportunity to be able to really sit down with colleagues who have similar concerns over two days and really explore in depth the ideas and best practices that are at the heart of international higher education," said Terris.-Dina Kapengut contributed reporting.
(02/01/11 5:00am)
Correction appended
(01/18/11 5:00am)
An article in Forum misspelled the writer's name. The writer's name is Rebecca Blady, not Rebeca Blady. (Dec. 7, 2010)The Justice welcomes submissions for errors that warrant correction or clarification. E-mail editor@thejustice.org.
(12/07/10 5:00am)
Last Thursday night, University President Jehuda Reinharz and President-elect Frederick Lawrence spoke to the senior class in the Rose Art Museum's Foster Gallery for an event titled "When We Were Seniors," a forum for the Class of 2011 to ask Lawrence and Reinharz about a variety of topics concerning their experiences in college.Planned and presented by the Senior Class Gift Committee, just under 30 seniors attended the event. According to Aaron Louison '11, the co-chair of the committee, the fact that Brandeis currently has two presidents presented a unique opportunity that he and the other co-chair, Jennifer Shapiro '11, did not want to pass up. "The point of the event was to be able to have seniors ask any question they wanted in order to learn more about [the presidents]," said Louison, "and to ask questions that many of us really need to know about ourselves." The first question asked was whether senior roommates had any impact on Reinharz's or Lawrence's thinking or development. Lawrence said that he had the same roommate his freshman, sophomore and junior years. Both served as residential advisors for their first 3 years and lived in the same building their senior year. "We got each other through a variety of crises," said Lawrence. "We spent a lot of time talking about careers-what he was going to be and what I was going to be-and we went through a number of different career paths together." When asked what career he saw himself pursuing after graduation, Lawrence, who graduated from Williams College in 1977, said that he went to law school because that was what interesting and "larger- than-life" people were doing, and it seemed to be the best path at the time. He also said that he would never have pictured himself in his current role."I would have assessed the likelihood of being a college president at zero," said Lawrence. "But living through my life, there were so many decisions that could have gone the other way." Lawrence said that at the time, he had dreamed of becoming a judge at some point down the road. He also warned the seniors "not to plan too far ahead, because you really can't see that far."Reinharz, who graduated from Columbia University and the Jewish Theological Seminary in 1967, shared that he was the first person in his family to attend college. He applied only to Columbia and was "somehow" accepted, but the transition was not easy for him."Today, we have orientations that are a week long, [with] staff running around you. I showed up the first day of classes on the Columbia campus and I looked around me and had no idea what I was doing," recalled Reinharz. "I had no idea I would get into administration or that I would have this job."Reinharz changed his major "four or five times," but he eventually settled on history. He explained that he took a total of 13 courses over the course of his senior year at two separate schools while maintaining a relationship with his girlfriend and teaching soccer. Looking back, Reinharz wished that he had been more involved outside of simply academics. When asked about their alcoholic beverages of choice in college, Lawrence recalled that on the occasions that he did drink alcohol he usually drank cheap beer or wine. He joked that he would have considered Rolling Rock a high-quality beer at the time. Reinharz replied that he rarely drank in college and is still not a drinker today. He then quickly added, "But we smoked all kinds of stuff."Lawrence reminisced about the days when the dorms were quiet at 11 p.m., he used a typewriter to type all of his papers, and cell phones smaller than bricks did not exist. "Without a cell phone, it meant you were on your own a lot more. . I spoke to my folks once a week on Sundays because the rates were lower." He also described a box of letters that his brother wrote to him during college, a possession that he treasures. Reinharz echoed this sentiment, saying, "In the old days, you treasured phone calls a lot more." Lamenting the loss of "old-fashioned" methods of communication such as letter writing, Reinharz added, "The future is going to write your biography one day, and what will there be? A bunch of e-mails?" Despite these feelings of nostalgia, however, Reinharz also credited students' all-around excellence in the modern day to the age of "instant knowledge.
(12/07/10 5:00am)
Counterprotest was necessaryIn response to your article "Don't fall for picketers' trap; avoid a response" (Forum, Nov. 23):I can understand the intent of Ms. Diamond's opinion. In a perfect world, everyone would hear the call to ignore the Westboro Baptist Church and isolate opinions like this until they die on the vine. Unfortunately, that idealized world doesn't exist. You aren't going to keep people from commuting down South Street on a Friday morning. This is one of the reasons they chose a weekday and not a weekend to protest outside of Brandeis. They will have a built-in audience one way or another. I also disagree that the solution in any case is isolation of The WBC's message. Isolation of that message only serves to condone it. If anyone is unfortunately miserable enough to buy into the church's message, then when viewed on its face with a lack of opposition, it will come out as clarion rather than insipid. Increasingly on the political stage, we've seen the result of attempted "ignore-to-marginalize" campaigns against the provably false accusations and opinions of a limited group of liars and spin-pushers. The result is that the members of the WBC embolden their base to accept the lies in the absence of presentation of the overwhelming truths out there. The lies then reverberate, and the end result by many is their acceptance as facts. When it then becomes expedient to expel those myths, they're hardened in the minds of the willing rather than exposed as they should have been in the beginning. There will always be a certain element that will wholeheartedly accept whatever lie fits the ill-conceived notions that they already hold dear. No amount of the truth will shake that. But we live in an age where to ignore is to tacitly accept as valid, or worse, as fact, the opinions of the ignored. The correct response to such despicable opinions is to address them. -Karl Clodfelter Boston WBC protest is exceptionalIn response to your article "Don't fall for picketers' trap; avoid a response" (Forum, Nov. 23):Ordinarily, I agree with the general sentiment of Ms. Diamond's remarks. However, the Westboro Baptist Church is one of the most universally reviled institutions in all of the U.S. Many have speculated that the WBC's appearances substantially benefit the causes that they protest (especially gay rights) because of a) hyperbole they use and b) the way that their protests unite and recruit counterprotestors, especially counterprotestors who might not otherwise have been likely to take a stand. The WBC's protests outside numerous high schools, for instance, have raised the profile of LGBT rights among high school students far more than gay-straight alliances alone could have.-Matthew S. Meisel BostonRev Cuenin's service is admirableIn response to your article "Chatting with the chaplain" (Features, Nov. 23):As a Brandeis alumna and a staunch atheist, I am so proud to have Father Cuenin as part of the Brandeis community. Even though I never spoke with him directly during my time there, I only heard warm descriptions of him from my fellow students and always saw him as a positive and respectful force in the often ugly world of religion. I wish him all the best and hope he continues to serve Brandeis for many years to come.-Amy Hoffman '10Foster positive discourse on IsraelIn response to your article "Lamenting the fractured condition of Zionism at Brandeis" (Forum, Nov. 16):Thank you for stating your ideas so eloquently. As a Israel History teacher in a Jewish day school and as a Brandeis graduate, I think that you speak for many of us who love Israel and see both its strengths and its weaknesses. I hope that you will continue to share your views and help us (modern Jews and Zionists) reshape the discussion on Israel to focus on the ideas of democracy so that people can see the values of Judaism that care for the widow, elderly and poor as governing values for a country.-Tamara Beliak '00
(12/07/10 5:00am)
Over the past week, I've read many different reactions to the latest WikiLeaks document dump. I've found the commentary on it both scandalous and thrilling and do admit to losing some sleep upon discovering WikiLeaks' fancy Cablegate, which lets you sort through cables based on their country of origin and classification.Of course, once I found this function, I rushed to read all the cables marked "Top Secret," figuring that section would provide me with the most earth-shattering news and mind-boggling stories about my country's diplomats. And then, in the midst of my mad rush, it occurred to me that my instinct upon reading the cables-which many in our nation undoubtedly shared-wasn't very unlike another website I had read before. In a moment of clarity, I realized that WikiLeaks was sort of like JuicyCampus for the government.Remember JuicyCampus? Around two years ago, this website was the subject of great controversy on college campuses. Just to recap: Created in August 2007 by Duke graduate Matt Ivester, JuicyCampus hosted a collection of forums unique to 500 individual colleges (Brandeis included) for users to discuss anonymously and explicitly the newest, juiciest and oftentimes vulgar and mean-spirited gossip. In November 2008, I urged readers of this newspaper not to visit the website:"Although college students created JuicyCampus, the Web site does not embody the goals and needs of students within a university setting. Free speech should not be taken for granted. In a society in which this right is considered an absolute, we must consider its limitations. We are obliged to curb free speech for the sake of our classmates' emotional well-being. Four years of college grant us the opportunity to take advantage of the various media that advance this right. We don't need to take it out on our peers.As college students who claim to positively influence our society, we should encourage free speech. But not in this twisted, libelous manner. Channel your first amendment right into a more productive form, not the profane gossip forums of JuicyCampus."Harsh? Perhaps. But at the time, the site really did ruin people's lives. It called them out by name and exposed their sexual lives and drug habits. Here at Brandeis, the forums had some students so distraught that one student initiated a petition to the administration to ban the website on campus. At the time, Dean of Student Life Rick Sawyer said that blocking access to JuicyCampus at Brandeis was under serious consideration-even though Brandeis had never before blocked any websites of similarly questionable nature. The problem solved itself when JuicyCampus shut down in February 2009 due to plummeting online ad revenue and the loss of venture capital funding, according to Ivester's press release then. Fortunately for many, the site that could have done good reputation damage ended up being a short-lived fad. While JuicyCampus lives on-sometimes fondly, sometimes with horror-in the memories of many college students who are still around to tell the tale, I think it's safe to say that once the site disappeared from our collective mentality, the desire to know everybody's dirty secrets for the sake of knowing everybody's dirty secrets disappeared as well.Now back to WikiLeaks, whose founder Julian Assange probably didn't intend to create a gossip forum for the world's diplomatic representatives. Such a thing would most likely be quite unproductive, considering a diplomat makes a living from being kind to and cooperative with other diplomats. Imagine if the world had access to a website that chronicled the secret lives and private conversations of the diplomats around the world! Wouldn't that be-Oh, wait.It's true that Assange's stated purpose-"to humiliate the U.S. government," according to Bloomberg News' Albert R. Hunt's letter from Washington published in Sunday's New York Times-reflects nothing more than his desire to exploit the functions of a good democracy. But gradually, after reading cable after cable of U.S.-Arab relations and discovering nothing particularly new and exciting (Persian egoism has affected international relations since Biblical times), I think the world has come to realize that WikiLeaks has done nothing but what it planned on doing. Having exposed many secrets of many states, Assange has created a global forum open to any ordinary person to simply humiliate the government.I wholeheartedly agree with the short-term result Hunt predicted, which, to the detriment of open, serious diplomacy among nations, "will be to discourage candor in cables." Why? Because it's just plain embarrassing for people who are simply trying to do their jobs to have a world full of critical citizens have a look a bit too far behind the scenes. Think back to the less significant stories posted on JuicyCampus two years ago. Despite their relative unimportance, at the time, the crucial thing was the mental health of our classmates. It seems that diplomats should deserve the same kind of respect-the ability to work unimpeded by global gossip channels toward a safer, more peaceful world.In the meantime, as long as it's up on WikiLeaks for everyone to see, I may just have to revisit the Cablegate's "Top Secret" classification. Good democracy is good democracy, after all.
(11/23/10 5:00am)
The ad-hoc Alcohol and Drug Policy Committee intends gain feedback from students by holding a town hall meeting, forming focus groups and providing the option for online feedback on its website, according to a Nov. 18 campuswide e-mail from Prof. Len Saxe (Heller), the committee's chair.According to its website, "The Alcohol and Drug Committee's goal is to ensure that Brandeis, consistent with its value-based mission, has policies to assure the safety of all students and an environment that promotes learning and growth." The website also says the committee will ensure "the health and safety of our students and the entire university community." In his e-mail to the Brandeis community, Saxe wrote that seeking student input is the "next phase" in the committee's work, and that the committee aims to present its final report by the end of this semester. Saxe wrote in his campuswide e-mail that the committee is consulting the Student Union regarding the town hall meeting. In an interview with the Justice, Student Union Director of Community Advocacy Sarah Geller '13 said that the tentative date and location for the town hall meeting is Dec. 6 in Salzberg Lounge. Geller described the basic premise of the meeting as "a forum to discuss . progress and . a [question and answer session] for the students about what's going on." In an interview with the Justice, committee member Heddy Ben-Atar '11, senior representative to the Board of Trustees, said that the town hall meeting is going to be held "because the committee is really interested in hearing student feedback about any kind of proposals that they'll put forth. The committee definitely feels like student participation in this process is crucial to any kind of successful outcome." Committee members who are affiliated with the Heller School for Social Policy and Management will conduct the focus groups, according to Saxe's campuswide e-mail. "All information from the groups will be shared with the committee confidentially and individual anonymity will be assured," he wrote in his e-mail.In an e-mail to the Justice, Saxe wrote, "Our goal is to collect student data [from focus groups] and hold the Town Hall before the end of the semester."The committee's website has the option for providing feedback. Regarding the online feedback option, Saxe wrote in his campuswide e-mail, "We are particularly interested in your perceptions of drug and alcohol issues on campus and your thoughts about University policy. Again, all information will be shared anonymously.""It's clearly not enough student participation in this process, but the committee is really working hard to kind of like get as much student participation as they feel comfortable with," Ben-Atar said. -Fiona Lockyer contributed reporting.
(11/23/10 5:00am)
The Office of Global Affairs recently announced that it will be accepting applications for a round of "small seed grants" to support projects focused on the "global dimensions of teaching and learning at Brandeis," according to a Nov. 17 on BrandeisNOW press release. The Office of Global Affairs awarded an initial round of grants in 2007 to 10 projects, according to Bryan Mcallister-Grande, the associate director of the Office of Global Affairs and the coordinator of the global fund. The projects, which received grants in 2007, were put into practice in academic year 2008, McAllister-Grande said. Those projects included the "Global Affairs Table," a forum for students and faculty to talk together about global topics, according to the BrandeisNOW article. Both Daniel Terris, director of the International Center for Ethics, Justice, and Public Life and McAllister-Grande said tha although no grants were given in 2009, the program was not deactivated. According to McAllister-Grande.now that people involved in the initial round of projects may have moved on from Brandeis, the Office of Global Affairs thought it was an appropriate time to provide more funding for the grants. Applications for the grants are due Jan. 31, 2011, according to the BrandeisNOW press release. Terris said in an interview with the Justice that the grants are available to any faculty member, full-time administrator or full-time graduate or undergraduate student. He said team applications are encouraged, adding that preference is given to applicants applying "on behalf of a department, unit, office, school club or program." Grants will be given to projects that will take place next academic year.Funding for the grants is provided through the budget of the Office of Global Affairs. McAllister-Grande said that the new round of grants coincides with the development of global learning goals for Brandeis students. A small committee of students and faculty, according to McAllister-Grande, is working to develop a set of learning goals that focus on world culture as part of a larger effort by the University to set overall learning goals for students. McAllister-Grande said that the focus of the grants this year will be on projects that address teaching and learning at Brandeis. "This focus comes from wanting to connect to these learning goals so that we're really focusing on the curriculum and the cocurriculum at Brandeis, and we're not worrying this year so much about overseas partnerships," said McAllister-Grande. Grant winners will be chosen by a small committee of faculty and staff, according to McAllister-Grande.Terris said that the Global Brandeis Fund is unique because it has a focus on global issues-specifically on bringing together international students and elements of Brandeis' curriculum. McAllister-Grande said that the fund is focused on building partnerships on campus and oversees which "enhance Brandeis' connections to the world."-Nashrah Rahman contributed reporting.
(11/23/10 5:00am)
Cartoon was inappropriateIn response to your article "Don't ban Four Loko; leave the decision to us" (Forum, Nov. 16):While I make no judgment on the content of this article, I am extremely disappointed at the cartoon the Justice chose to run next to it. It depicts a devilish male student pouring Four Loko into the drink of a female student in an effort to get her "BEMCo-ed." Considering the epidemic of date rape on college campuses, it seems wholly inappropriate to use the idea of young men poisoning young women as a topic for humor. It belittles the traumatic experiences many young women----even at Brandeis-have had to go through. Moreover, as far as I can tell, neither the article nor the incidents to which it refer ever indicate that anyone consumed Four Loko involuntarily. Rather than poking fun at a real incident, this cartoon goes out of its way to make sexual assault a gag. Rape culture works by making violence against women laughable. I sincerely hope that the Justice will take serious steps to avoid the perception that it promotes this attitude.-Jonathan Sussman '11State of Zionism is acceptableIn response to your article "Lamenting the fractured state of Zionism at Brandeis" (Forum, Nov. 16):There is an extremely disconcerting tendency to equate Zionism with full support for every policy of the Israeli state. Many of those who oppose Israeli occupation and colonization support the people of Israel and consider ourselves Zionists. Why does Zionism equal full support for every policy of the Israeli state? If you support the interests of the people of Israel, you would have to oppose Israeli policies of occupation and colonization, as they sacrifice peace and security for territorial expansion. This week seems to have shown that the Zionist dream is alive and well, and many people care so deeply about the Israeli people that they do not want to see them suffer for the sake of Israel's territorial expansion.-Matt Gabrenya '13Appreciate disabilities servicesIn response to your article "Disabilities services goes above and beyond" (Forum, Nov. 16):Fifty years ago there was no Brandeis Office of Disabilities Services and Support; there was no Americans with Disabilities Act, and there was no specific office on the campus that dealt with accommodating the unique requirements of my fellow students. And while there was an office of student affairs, there was certainly no one like Director of Disabilities Services and Support Beth Rodgers-Kay, who you speak so positively about. Your column and description of Rodgers-Kay's enthusiasm for her critical assistance gives this old alum an incredibly positive feeling about Brandeis. Kudos to Rodgers-Kay and kudos to you for being very public and upfront in saluting the services that she has offered you and other students in need. And additional praise is given to those Brandeis faculty and staff who understand and do what needs to be done. -Martin Zelnik '61
(11/23/10 5:00am)
Unlike high school, where teachers cling to the belief that students are chronically impressionable to others' opinions, college offers a platform for students and professors alike to discuss their ideas and opinions openly. However, the growing fad of excessive political correctness on college campuses is threatening the candidness of this platform and effectively muzzling academic voices. By threatening free speech at universities, we also eliminate the possibility of ever actually understanding the issues we're avoiding. Political correctness forms a dual reality that nurtures the gap between what we mean and what we say. Never have our words been so carefully chosen as to avoid controversy and discontent while encouraging artificial dispositions. According to a survey conducted in 176 colleges by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, 76 schools restrict speech that would otherwise be unrestrained off campus. Among those 76 is the University of California, Santa Cruz, which prohibits any speech that is disrespectful to others, like the disparagement of one's political views. Intellectual discussions should not be hampered by the possibility of offending someone. True, we should always follow normal rules of social decorum and common sense. But when talking about delicate issues, the classroom is the ideal place to have such discussions.Some universities, such as UC Santa Cruz, have wrongly instituted "speech codes." FIRE defines a speech code as any type of campus policy that punishes, regulates or represses speech that would be protected by the government. They consider the suppression of these fundamental rights on college campuses, usually as a result of extreme political correctness, as a violation of professors' and students' civil liberties.In fall 2007, Brandeis encountered one such violation with regards to an incident surrounding Prof. Donald Hindley (POL). In a course about Latin American politics, Hindley allegedly described to his class that Mexican immigrants are sometimes referred to as "wetbacks." An offended student complained and consequently the University responded with a letter notifying Hindley that he had violated the school's "Non-Discrimination and Harassment Policy." According to the policy available online, the school strives to "be free from discrimination and harassment on the basis of race, color, ancestry, religious creed, gender identity and expression, national or ethnic origin, sex, sexual orientation, age, genetic information, [and] disability." In the end, the Committee on Faculty Rights and Responsibilities determined that the administration abused its power and violated Hindley's academic freedom (Though Provost Marty Krauss overturned the decision and closed the case). While the intention of this policy is commendable, its execution in Hindley's case shows a gross miscalculation of the administration's interpretation of harassment. For these actions, the University has been put on FIRE's Red Alert List. According to the organization's website, the Red Alert List is a compilation of schools with "severe and ongoing disregard for the fundamental rights of their students or faculty members." Although FIRE claims on its website that it contacted University President Jehuda Reinharz multiple times, Reinharz has supposedly yet to reply once to its pleas to acknowledge the wrongful violations against Hindley.Taking a statement out of context where the professor was clearly attempting to educate the students of a historical fact and then proceeding to use that statement to penalize the individual indicates that extreme political correctness is unfortunately penetrating the membrane of this university. If Hindley had chosen to avoid using the word or any ethnic slur, the students' education would have been hindered, and the very real issues of nativism and racism would not have been discussed. That being said, our school shouldn't be written off so rashly for this one faltering incident of political correctness gone awry. Despite the reputation of being ideologically homogeneous, the invitations from various on-campus groups to Prof. Noam Chomsky, Prof. Bill Ayers and Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren show that the University is dedicated to upholding the academic rights of its faculty and student bodies. Knowing that Chomsky's speech would create controversy and that Oren's commencement address would cause tension but still allowing the discussions to take place indicates that we're not afraid to talk about these provocative and sensitive issues. When Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia University in 2007, he caused the entire country to turn and glare at the school for inviting the bigot, anti-Zionist and known Holocaust denier to speak. However, the purpose of inviting the Iranian president wasn't to create controversy or to ridicule him, as Lee Bollinger, current president of Columbia University, did in his frank opening remarks at the event. The purpose was to ask the difficult questions and challenge Ahmadinejad about why he believes what he believes. Inviting the president of Iran is certainly an extreme example in rejecting excessive political correctness. However, the essential idea of having a discussion is the crux of a college classroom experience. Being politically correct doesn't eliminate the offensive mistakes we're trying so desperately to avoid; it merely masks them. By opening up the forum to discuss controversial issues of race, religion, nationality, gender, etc. in an intellectual environment, we eradicate the fear of offending each other and really begin to understand the issues at stake.
(11/23/10 5:00am)
An article in Forum gave the incomplete name of an organization. It is Brandeis Jewish Voice for Peace, not Jewish Voice for Peace. (Nov. 16, pg. 11)An article in Forum incorrectly referred to Israeli settlers' uprooting of Daoud Nassar's trees as "unwarranted action." The original term should have read "violence." (Nov. 16, pg. 19) An article in Arts misstated a character's occupation. Franz is a coachman, not a soldier. (Nov. 16, pg. 19)An article in News incorrectly stated that the Supreme Court decided to hear an amicus brief. The article should read that the Court decided to grant a writ of certiorari, meaning that the court will hear the case. (Nov. 16, pg. 3)An article in News gave the incorrect name of a themed week. Noam Chomsky's presentation was a part of Israeli Occupation Awareness Week, not Israeli Occupation Week. (Nov. 16, pg. 1)The Justice welcomes submissions for errors that warrant correction or clarification. E-mail editor@thejustice.org.
(11/16/10 5:00am)
Chomsky event walkout was unfairTo the Editor:Like many of you, I expected some sort of fracas at the Noam Chomsky speech. However, the staged and coordinated walkout by many students seemed rather tepid compared to the histrionics at the Gold-Goldstone event last year. At first, I considered the walkout as laughably ineffectual: Chomsky didn't seem to care, and many people who were sitting on the floor were able to take the seats of these impetuous dissidents. Moreover, the joke seemed to be on the protesters, who had waited for over an hour to get seats for an event they would ultimately walk out on. However, this got me thinking. Many students wanted to see Chomsky speak, yet the Sherman Function Hall reached maximum capacity, disallowing many students from attending the event. My Facebook wall was besieged by a cavalcade of disgruntled friends bemoaning their inability to hear Chomsky. By walking out, the protesters deprived approximately 50 neutral students of the right to see the speech, and, in my opinion, this was the most egregious effect of the protest.-Scott Evans '12Hosting Chomsky is inappropriate In response to your article "Chomsky to speak during Israeli Occupation Awareness Week" (News, Nov. 9):As an alum and as clergy, I find this event to both appalling and divisive. We need to work toward peace among our own community and those in the Middle East. Additionally, it was problematic to promote this event mere days after we commemorated the 10th anniversary of former Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's assassination. We need to foster a legacy of dialogue not inbred hate and distrust.-Rabbi Glenn Ettman '99Choose majors based on interestIn response to your article "Advertise the advantages of math, science courses of study" (Forum, Nov. 9):This article opposes the fundamentals of a liberal arts education. First of all, I do not believe there is such thing as a "lucrative major" as a college undergraduate. You are propagating a common misconception that certain majors are directly connected to specific careers with high salaries and that others are not. This is simply false. If you are a math or science major and expect your course of study to automatically lead you to a lucrative career, then you have a thing or two to learn about your college education. Your undergraduate education is just that--your education, not training for a job. By fulfilling any major, you learn to think, to write, to argue, to research, to interact with people; to generally become a more informed, reasoned and intelligent person. It is not Brandeis' purpose to train you for the career you will have in 5, 10, 15 or 20 years! The sciences are wonderful subjects to major in. So are the humanities, arts and social sciences. I am not trying to put down math and science majors, but I want to convey that your one-sided view in this article discredits lots of other amazing fields of study. The fact that you correlate Art History directly to unemployment and "financial insecurity" is disappointing and misinformed. You state briefly that "humanities majors are still crucial," but do not explain: why this is, nor to whom or what they are crucial to. Frankly, the steps you choose to take with your major are what make you successful, not the major itself. You ask, "Should American colleges put more emphasis on future salaries when helping their students choose majors?" No, they should not. All students have the power to decide what compels them to learn, and choosing a major is not the time to make students focus on their salaries later in life. We have very few opportunities to dedicate all of our time to whatever topic we choose. No one should try to remove the undergraduate college experience from that short list.-Jonna Cottrell '13Focus on content, not e-mail itselfIn response to your article "Reinharz's Pachanga e-mail was inappropriate" (Forum, Nov. 2):While this article highlights some interesting concerns, I think the space would be better served by discussing the actual content of the e-mail, not merely the fact that it was written. I urge the Forum section to take a closer look at the fact that the e-mail discusses this past Pachanga as an anomaly when there was, in fact, a similar situation in fall 2009.-Joanna Schorr '10The writer is a former editor in chief of the Justice.
(11/16/10 5:00am)
Acclaimed actor Louis Gossett Jr. gave a talk about racism in entertainment on Tuesday in the Rapaporte Treasure Hall in a thought-provoking event sponsored by the Schuster Institute of Investigative Journalism. Phyllis Karas, the woman who helped to write his memoir, titled An Actor and a Gentleman, moderated the talk. Gossett was introduced by Prof. Anita Hill (Heller), who gave a touching introduction. Hill recalled how, when she was growing up, seeing black faces on television was an event unto itself. Gossett was one of the first actors to break down the racial barrier in entertainment, and Hill thanked him for his outstanding work. Gossett is most widely known for playing Sgt. Emil Foley in An Officer and a Gentleman, for which he won the Best Supporting Actor Academy Award in 1983. He was the first African-American to win that award. An Officer and a Gentleman co-starred Richard Gere and Debra Winger, who was also nominated for Best Actress for her performance. The film centers around Zach Mayo (played by Gere), a young navy officer-in-training who learns about friendship and love while attending the Navy Aviation Officer Candidate School. Gossett played his tough-as-nails training officer. Gossett recounted several stories from his time on the set of the movie, describing how he trained at a genuine Marine training camp and how he was allowed to appear in front of the rest of the cast only when dressed in his full military uniform, as per director Taylor Hackford's instructions. He also praised Richard Gere's work as an actor, saying that Gere should have received an Oscar at this point in his career, though he did not mention for which role.An Officer and a Gentleman was the work that launched Gossett into the conscience of mainstream America, but, in fact, the actor appeared in his first professional gig 30 years earlier, at age 17, in the Broadway production of Take a Giant Step. Eight years later, he starred in his first feature film, A Raisin in the Sun, in which he played George Murchison opposite Sidney Poitier. Gossett has worked with many of old Hollywood's most notable figures, including Marilyn Monroe. He told a hilarious story describing an instance in which he and Monroe took a drama class together. One day she called him and asked him to perform a love scene with her from the play Kiss of the Spider Woman. Gossett declined, saying "No way. I wouldn't have been able to concentrate." It's hard to believe anyone could have resisted Marilyn. Gossett himself asserted that "if she had stayed with [ex-husband] Arthur Miller, she would have won three or four Oscars, and she would still be alive today." Gossett himself battled substance abuse, which he recounts in his memoir. He mentioned this period briefly, however, and only in passing during the talk. Most of the conversation focused on his long career and on the foundation he created, the Eracism Foundation. The foundation seems to be doing some impressive work as well as having a totally pun-tastic moniker. According to its website, the foundation "engag[es] youth involved in gang activity with a series of intensive antiviolence camp initiatives and forums designed to promote peace, antiviolence, personal responsibility and re-entry into positive, productive citizenship." It also sponsors "after school programs focusing on mentoring and tutorial services to nurture the academic and professional development of children from diverse communities." Gossett says that at this point in his life (he is 74) he wants to dedicate himself to "an all-out conscientious offensive against racism."The actor has personal as well as moral reasons for taking on this battle. Growing up in Coney Island, N.Y., Gossett describes having friends of many ethnicities. It was the adults in his life who seemed to be the ones who cared about his skin color. He recalled one episode in which he was not allowed in a swimming pool with the rest of his friends because it was for whites only. When he was told he had to leave, the rest of his friends went with him. These demonstrations of support meant a great deal to Gossett, and the actor remarked that many of those same kids from Abraham Lincoln High School are still his close friends today.When Gossett moved out to Los Angeles in the late 1950s to pursue acting, however, his race became a larger issue. On one of his first days in the city, the studio gave Gossett a car to drive. On his way back to his hotel, he was stopped on several occasions by different policemen, none of whom could believe a black man could be driving such a nice automobile. Later that day, when Gossett went for a walk around his new neighborhood, police questioned him and then handcuffed him to a tree for 3 hours. These events, as well as the gang violence that Gossett sees spreading through urban centers like his old neighborhood, motivated him to create his foundation as part of his work against bigotry.Gossett Jr. was an engaging speaker, and I enjoyed listening to his stories, which he narrated in the deep, rich delivery one would expect from a PBS documentary about the Civil War. The one aspect of the talk that I found weak was the question-and-answer section. Several students asked Gossett how they could work toward changing the entertainment community's representations of black culture, how African-Americans could better their attitudes toward their own people and how to fight racism in various aspects of life. On these important issues, Gossett seemed to struggle with how to respond. He relied on the lame answer, "You have to be the one to change it." I expected something more from a man who is the founder of an organization that aims to address these very issues. He also made remarks about wanting to marry three different girls who asked questions. This might have been less awkward if Gossett had not in actuality been married three times already. However, overall it was a good decision to bring Gossett to campus. He was an eloquent speaker who has had a real impact on integrating American entertainment. His current work in race relations also strongly mirrors the importance placed on social justice at Brandeis.
(11/09/10 5:00am)
According to several University administrators, in recent years the University has shifted away from offering merit-based aid to accepted undergraduate applicants. At this time, this editorial board supports the change because it frees up funds for need-based aid, which is being rightfully prioritized by the University. However, this board does not endorse a permanent abandonment of merit-based aid and hopes that the University returns to offering more merit-based scholarships as soon as funds become available.In an e-mail to the Justice, Vice President for Enrollment Keenyn McFarlane stated that while the number of accepted students offered merit aid has declined by 16 percent since 2006, during the same period, the number of students matriculating with merit aid declined by 78 percent. However, Mr. McFarlane also pointed out that the average SAT score of accepted students and matriculating students has remained stable over the same period. As Mr. McFarlane expressed and as Dean of Student Financial Services Peter Giumette stated at an Oct. 21 forum concerning the revised admissions policy, the shift away from merit aid will hopefully allow the University to devote increased funds toward ensuring that all students that should be granted admission to this university will be able to attend. The massive decline in the number of matriculating students that were offered merit-based aid suggests that the University may have been offering smaller packages of that type of aid over the last 4 years. However, due to the stability of the SAT scores of matriculating students, to an extent we agree with the sentiment expressed by Mr. McFarlane in an interview with the Justice that this change does not appear to create a difference in the quality of incoming classes. However, we would like to point out that SAT scores are not the sole criterion for evaluating students for merit-aid scholarships. A student with excellent SAT scores does not necessarily constitute the same caliber of student as one who deserves merit-based aid. One of the main reasons for the University to offer merit-based aid is to attract students who have excellent SAT scores in addition to tremendous promise both academically and non-academically. This board understands that this shift removes a major matriculation incentive for many excellent applicants to this university that, according to financial aid standards, do not require need-based aid. While we agree that offering additional need-based aid is currently the correct course of action, we urge the University to maintain an open-minded view of the situation. Stable SAT scores are not a perfect measure for evaluating the quality of incoming classes. We cannot wrongly assume that merit-based aid is no longer necessary; it may still be able to attract students who not only received SAT scores within or above our averages but have a great deal more than the average student to contribute to the University. The fact is that Brandeis still must compete with top-tier schools for attractive applicants, and merit-based aid is a useful way to do so.
(11/02/10 4:00am)
Newspaper acted inappropriatelyIn response to your article "Pachanga night yields arrests, medical crises" (News, Oct. 26):It is completely inappropriate for a student publication to be doing this to other students. The Justice is a paper with integrity, not a gossip magazine.-Sara Miller '11Officers abused powerIn response to your article "Pachanga night yields arrests, medical crises" (News, Oct. 26):Students called the Brandeis Emergency Medical Corps so that their friend could get taken to the hospital because they feared for his life. The fact that he was never even given a blood alchol test or seen by professional medical staff is a gross neglect of the student's well being. The whole situation would have read a lot different had he died due to alcohol poisoning in jail. The police arresting the student and throwing him into jail is an abuse of their power. He should have been seen by the EMTs who were on their way. How dare they tell an EMT to cancel medical help en route. I am outraged that the BEMCo EMT did so. The actions of the police could have very well killed the intoxicated student. Instead the police chose to throw him into a cell. The beginning of the article states, "The Department of Public Safety responded to several incidents of disruptive student behavior that resulted in two student arrests and the hospitalization of multiple intoxicated students on the night of last Saturday's Pachanga dance, Director of Public Safety Ed Callahan said in an interview with the Justice." Why was this drunk individual never taken to the hospital even though there were many other hospitalizations on the very same night? The officers who arrested him did receive medical treatment. This would be repugnant in the eyes of Louis Brandeis. Also, the students who were arrested that night are being treated as guilty individuals by the University. They have been prohibited from being on campus, prohibited from attending their classes and forced to live elsewhere (instead of their on-campus dorms) while the University decides whether or not it will pursue judicial proceedings against them. Why has the University removed them from campus and not allowed them to go to the classes they pay so much for in the interim? This is not treating them as innocent until proven guilty, which is the fundamental basis for our judicial system. -Elizabeth Agnew Austin, TexasPachanga should be canceledIn response to your article "Pachanga event is inconsistent with our character" (Forum, Oct. 26):I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Cooper. It is an embarrassment to the University that an event which consistently yields multiple arrests and hospital runs should be permitted to take place each semester. We came to Brandeis to receive a top-notch education, not to make fools of ourselves. Mr. Cooper has made a point in saying that he does not advocate canceling Pachanga. But quite frankly, that is exactly what should be done. In the current economic climate, the International Club could make better use of its money. We are a liberal arts university, not a red-light district. Students here should be ashamed of themselves.-Daniel Kasdan '13Substantiate cage-free argumentsIn response to your article "Don't hastily support cage-free initiative" (Forum, Oct. 26):I respect and appreciate those who take the time to consider the cage-free egg proposal rather than blindly following a cause that appears to be simply "better" and "more humane." However, I think it is important that the arguments made either for or against the proposal are based on sound logic as well as a realistic understanding of how we can make decisions that reflect the kind of community we want to be. First, the issue of the poll. Like any campus election or survey, the Student Union poll was open to the entire student body. That only 28 percent of students chose to respond (which was as easy as following the link sent to their inboxes or advertised on Facebook) is an issue of individual choice; it does not invalidate the poll itself.Similarly, turnouts to local elections in our hometowns (which tend to be embarrassingly low) or even to presidential elections (remember Clinton in 1996?) do not lead us to question the legitimacy of the election itself. We accept the results, knowing they could've looked a bit different, and can only do our best to encourage greater voter turnout the next time around. In terms of cost, food at Brandeis is indeed expensive. Unfortunately, many of the healthiest choices are also the priciest-the result of a flawed national agricultural system. While a switch to cage-free eggs would raise the cost of meal plans by $5, as the column states, a greater portion of each person's meal plan would be devoted to eggs. Point taken. But let's be honest: how many extra bags of chips does that mean we can no longer shove onto a meal? How many spare points at the end of the semester does that mean we've lost? A second Student Union poll shows that over two-thirds of students would pay $20 more for their meal plans each semester. Clearly, students are willing to make the financial commitment to adopt a cage-free policy. Finally, I agree that "cage-free" is not to be equated with "humane." Indeed, many of the labels we put on our food are insufficient in truly qualifying the morality and sustainability of a product and the process by which it came to be, but to reject change because it falls short of perfection disqualifies change from the start. The financial burden of buying the most ethically raised meat, dairy and eggs, is tremendous compared to the cost of simply adopting a cage-free policy. Not to mention expanding fresh food options, buying locally grown produce and other local, organic ingredients. It's too much to do at once. Going cage-free is one of many small steps that Brandeis can take toward implementing a more sustainable food system in the longrun. It's a step that, as a campus, makes a difference without placing too much of a burden on any single group or individual.-Sarit Luban '11Horowitz event was disappointingIn response to your article "Horowitz spoke about liberal biases" (News, Oct. 26):I am disappointed that the Justice nor the did not report on my favorite point of David Horowitz's speech last week. Rankled that he did not receive anywhere near the attention or acclaim that some liberal speakers, Horowitz proclaimed that if Brandeis were seriously interested in divergent viewpoints, President Reinharz himself should have offered to come introduce him. This, in a nutshell, encapsulates his point: even though his polemics are neither scholarly nor well-reasoned, "academic freedom" is an affirmative action program for pseudo-conservative claptrap. Which is to say, if real scholars (some of whom happen to be liberal) get a cookie, he wants one too. David Horowitz believes that there is a double standard on college campuses, but it is not between liberals and conservatives: it is between scholars and serious thinkers on the one hand and demagogues on the other. That someone like Ellen Schrecker produces scholarly work based on evidence and logical analysis and is accordingly given serious interest is only useful to him so long as it presents the opportunity to drum up self-pity without a shred of substance. For someone who claims that "tenured radicals" are destroying the university, David Horowitz spends precious little time presenting counter-claims or objections. Indeed, his book denouncing America's "most dangerous professors" is an impressively slap-dash collection of irrelevant anecdotes, misdirection and flat-out falsehoods. I found it illuminating that, after claiming that the hard sciences are a bastion of truth, he went on to promote the long-discredited idea that race has any basis in biology. For all his bluster, Horowitz's agenda is surprisingly simple. As he stated in his lecture, the 1950s-when women, racial minorities, and Jews were consistently excluded from higher education as students, faculty, and part of the curriculum-were a "golden age of the university."Thankfully, the gates of academic legitimacy have long since closed on these bigoted and ignorant ideas. Perhaps, someday, the far-right donors who pay him to assault intellectual freedom will, too.-Jonathan Sussman '11
(10/26/10 4:00am)
Last week, Hedy Epstein, a Holocaust survivor and human rights activist, came to campus to discuss her views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The event was disappointing. The forum did not give context to the criticism made against Israel, and the presentation was misleading. Every person who wanted to give context to Epstein's presentation had to choose between preventing a gross misrepresentation of the conflict and compromising the dignity of a Holocaust survivor. Because of this, I want to give some context to three major claims presented by Epstein in the forum. Epstein spoke about her experiences seeing the security fence, the checkpoints and the Palestinian suffering in the disputed territories. She did not address the fact that Israel captured the West Bank, Golan Heights and Gaza Strip in a defensive war in 1967. Israel tried to exchange land for peace after the war, but the Syrians and Jordanians rejected the overture. Now Israel controls this territory and has to figure out how to address terrorism. After 1967, it is true that the Israeli government encouraged Jewish settlement of the disputed territories. The Oslo Accords in 1993 almost secured peace by returning over 90 percent of the disputed territories to Palestinians; however, Yasser Arafat undermined the peace talks, thereby committing a serious crime against the Palestinian people.Israel is currently engaging in peace talks. The checkpoints obviously make Palestinian life very difficult. And some of them are poorly positioned, which needs to be addressed. But checkpoints address Israel's security threats, and Israel is not the only country that uses checkpoints for that purpose. Although checkpoints are ugly and inconvenient anywhere, there is never an easy answer to security threats.In response to being asked how Israel should respond to Hamas firing rockets at the Israeli city of Sderot, Epstein implied a moral equivalence between Hamas rocket fire and the Israeli response. Every reasonable form of jurisprudence differentiates between intentionally targeting civilians in a terrorist attack and inadvertently killing civilians while targeting terrorists who are using civilians as human shields. Terrorist attacks against Israelis have included targeting and murdering individuals in a nursery school, a Passover Seder in Netanya, a discotheque for teenagers, a Hebrew University cafeteria and a passenger terminal in Lod Airport. Israel targets Hamas operatives who hide among civilians. I'm not justifying the killing the civilians; rather, I'm asking you to put yourself in the position of a government whose populace faces indiscriminate rocket fire. How would you respond? When asked what steps should be taken to remedy the overall situation between the Israelis and Palestianians, Epstein encouraged divestment from Israel. Yes, there is tremendous Palestinian suffering in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. I hope it need not be stated that Palestinian suffering in the territories is far from Israel's fault alone. But divesting from Israel is absurd. Israel's actions are in response to security concerns-this doesn't make Israel a terrible violator of human rights. Should we divest from China and not allow Chinese students, teachers, filmmakers or athletes come to the University because of the way the Chinese government deals with capital punishment, torture and its relationship with Tibet? Isolating Israel with divestment is an example of the double standard applied to Israel.Epstein may have failed to give context to the conflict, but she did highlight Palestinian suffering, which needs to be addressed. People who have concerns about Israel's security should not neglect to recognize Palestinian suffering. Likewise, people with concerns about Palestinian suffering should not neglect to recognize the importance of Israel's security. The groups active in advocacy pertaining to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict should engage in more productive efforts-at least sometimes. For example, they should consider fundraising for the Save a Child's Heart Organization, an Israeli-based charity that provides medical care for children in developing countries. Many of the children who receive care are from the West Bank and Gaza Strip. This organization helps those is need and contributes to a culture of peace. Groups obviously have the right to bring in speakers who present their narratives. I challenge those who are forming their views about the conflict to investigate both sides of the narrative before engaging in any serious activism. It is possible to balance concerns about Israel's security with those about Palestinian suffering. Putting all the blame on Israel is irresponsible and unproductive.
(10/26/10 4:00am)
The Student Union held a town hall meeting in the Hassenfeld Conference Center last Thursday to discuss the recommendations for changes to Brandeis' admission and financial aid policies. According to an Oct. 19 article of the Justice, the recommendation is that applicants to Brandeis University be accepted on a need-blind basis until there are no more funds, in which case the university would review applicants on a need-sensitive basis. Many merit scholarships that the university offers would no longer exist, with the exception of scholarships that are specifically endowed. This change would affect the Class of 2015 and those after it but not earlier classes.Brandeis is currently need-blind, meaning that an applicant's financial need is not taken into consideration. By contrast, a need-sensitive policy takes financial situations into consideration. Dean of Student Financial Services Peter Giumette, who answered questions at the meeting with Dean of Admissions Mark Spencer, said that the current system is problematic because the University had a limited ability to fund the financial needs of all applicants. In the Oct. 19 issue of The Justice, Prof. Steven Burg (POL) explained that the University currently conducts a system called "gapping," in which the University calculates the estimated need for a student but does not provide the student with the whole amount because of the limited funds.Giumette explained that on average, Brandeis currently meets about 85 percent of a student's estimated needs. Giumette and Spencer both said that the change in policy would enable the University to meet 100 percent of a student's estimated need rather than just a fraction of it. The deans explained that the school would admit as many students as possible on a need-blind basis before using financial need as a factor for admission.When drawing a line between students admitted on a need-blind basis and a need-sensitive basis, Spencer confirmed that students would be ranked by desirability, or their chances of acceptance based on academic and extracurricular qualifications. Once the available funds for financial need are exhausted, lower-ranked applicants will be admitted on a need-sensitive basis. This policy would allocate more funds to provide admitted students with aid, rather than admitting more students without the ability to meet 100 percent of their need. Giumette and Spencer stressed that a student's financial need would become one of multiple criteria that the admissions officers analyze before determining their acceptance. Giumette said that factors include transcript grades, SAT and ACT scores, extracurricular involvement and recommendations of students by teachers and mentors, and he explained that financial need would be added to that list.Giumette and Spencer also explained the decision to eliminate many scholarships from financial aid awards. This would allocate more funds to be given to students on a need basis in order to meet 100 percent of need for more students. However, Spencer and Giumette said some merit scholarships will still be available. "[Those scholarships] are specifically endowed," said Giumette, "and those will be continued to the extent possible."According to Giumette, the number of students receiving merit scholarships has declined over the years. In an e-mail to the Justice, Giumette said that the number of merit scholar recipients who enrolled dropped by 60 percent between the Classes of 2013 and 2014. Among the scholarships awarded were Justice Brandeis Scholarships, Presidential Scholarships, Dean's Awards and Merit Trustee Scholarships. "There are very few students in the Class of [2014] that have strict merit scholarships. We've been moving in this direction over the last couple of years," said Giumette. When asked about the possibility of early decision applicants rising, the deans said that they do not expect that percentage, which they said was about 20 percent of the Class of 2014, to rise significantly. Giumette explained that a student who applies to Brandeis early decision is aware that it is a binding decision, meaning that if accepted, the student must attend Brandeis, and that students who apply early decision generally have lower estimated need than students who apply regular decision. The town hall meeting was hosted by the Student Union. In an interview with the Justice, Student Union President Daniel Acheampong '11 said that the meeting was held in order to inform students and get them involved in policy change on campus. When asked why the meeting was held a month after the recommendations for the policy change were announced, Acheampong explained that it was a scheduling issue. "Timing was very difficult," he said. He also said that students wanted to know why these changes were taking place and wanted to create a forum at which students could get answers and be involved. "It's so important to get student opinions," said Acheampong. "Without including students [in these decisions], it's as if we're building something without the foundation. Students are the foundation of this university, and students are the future." Acheampong promised to keep students informed as news about the policy change progresses.Many students were able to attend the town hall and have their questions answered by the deans. Adam Garbacz '14, one of those students, said that his main concern about the policy change was a "de facto financial discrimination," meaning that students who had a higher estimated need would not be as likely to be admitted. He said that the town hall meeting cleared up many misconceptions that he had."I had heard about [the policy change] from other [students] and thought it was a lot worse," said Benjamin Hill '14. "I think [the school] is trying to make the right decisions.
(10/26/10 4:00am)
Guy Raz '96 knew he liked journalism as soon as he entered college, when he joined the Justice and an on-campus magazine. He covered tons of events, became an editor of both the newspaper and the magazine, thought of innovative ways to change his section and fell more in love with journalism, particularly with National Public Radio. Fourteen years later, not only is he still an avid NPR listener, but he is the weekend host of the NPR program All Things Considered. Raz, originally from Los Angeles, came to Brandeis because of the school's strong Politics and History departments. He started his involvement in journalism on campus as a first-year and was already an assistant editor at the Justice by his second semester."We were going through a very creative time. We were doing some new things with the newspaper. [Raz] approached the Forum section in very much the same way; he tried to be very creative and innovative," said Howard Jeruchimowitz '94, the paper's editor in chief during Raz's time as the Forum editor, in a phone interview with the Justice. Jeruchimowitz remembers that Raz was interested in the whole editorial process and would often stay late with Jeruchimowitz after finishing his section's work."[Raz] was motivated by the creativity of his section, and he was interested in what I was doing," he said. During production night, the night the newspaper receives its final edits and is put together, Jeruchimowitz remembers Raz expressing interest in foreign affairs and in NPR. "My senior year, I listened to it all the time. I loved it. I couldn't get enough. I just loved the stories and the voices and the way the stories were told," Raz said in a phone interview with the Justice. Upon graduating, Raz went on to receive his master's degree in History at Cambridge University in England, and, in fall 1997, he applied for a paid internship at NPR. After being an avid listener, Raz listed specific people and programs he had heard in his application. He believes this was the edge to his application that got him the internship."We get a lot of letters at NPR, and I would say 90 percent of the letters are, "I'm writing to you because I'm very interested in pursuing a career in broadcast journalism to broaden my horizons, and NPR would be the perfect place for me to do that." . The problem is when they say that, is there is nothing original," Raz said about the applications he now reviews. "I was specific. I gave names of people I wanted to work with. I gave names of specific programs I had heard and liked. That's why I got an interview," he continued.Raz started at NPR doing research for other journalists at the station, such as the late Daniel Schorr, an Emmy award-winning television journalist and senior news analyst at NPR. He did tedious work searching through encyclopedias and running to the library for Schorr-one of Raz's personal mentors-and other hosts but noted that this was a "transitional period, and was not permanent" Raz has been at NPR since then, with only a 2-year break to work at CNN as its Jerusalem correspondent, according to his profile on NPR's website. After returning to NPR from CNN, Raz covered news happening at the Pentagon and events in the Middle East. In 2009, Raz became the official weekend host of the program All Things Considered. "Being a reporter [was] just a different job than being a show host, because you generally cover one issue. This job is different. We're doing everything from pop culture, to folk segments, to books, to thinkers, . to scientists, to hiphop," Raz explained. Raz approaches reporting and hosting his program with the wisdom he acquired from his time in Brandeis classrooms. He learned about compassion from Prof. Antony Polonsky's (NEJS) "Destruction of European Jewry," which according to Raz, is applicable to journalism. "It wasn't about the science of a historical event but also about the people who were affected by those events. I think that is also an important thing you need to do in journalism," he said. He then told an anecdote about the story of a flood and noted that it is important to tell the facts of the flood, such as why the flood happened and why the city was not prepared for it. It is also important, Raz said, to talk to people whose houses were destroyed. "Part of what makes telling a news story is not just telling the news but also making sure that you can make a connection between people affected by the news. There are real people behind the news," he elaborated. According to Raz, the way that Polonsky taught history maintained that similar balance between "academic detachment" and a "tremendous amount of empathy."During his time at Brandeis, Raz also learned about critical thinking and having an open mind from a campus full of varying political and academic opinions. The focus on strong writing and the heavy workload has also helped Raz in his journalism career."I read a lot, had to read a lot. . The class expectations [were] big, so by having to read a lot and being exposed to a lot of ideas, it just got [me] prepared to do that as a professional," he said. Raz does about 15 to 18 in-depth, highly researched interviews per week. These interviews are with people from all disciplines and walks of life; Eminem and Bill Gates have both been on the show at different points. "All of those interviews require a lot of preparation. I have to read a book, I have to listen to music. If it's a member of Congress, someone involved in national security, ... you have to be prepared. To get to that point, you have to do a bit of reading," he said. Like in college, though, the great thing about all the reading for Raz is that he is learning something new every day. "You're learning about topics and issues that you may not know a lot about, but you have to gain some understanding quickly. That's what I think is the best part of the job," he stated. Before these interviews, Raz and the staff of about eight people met early in the week to come up with ideas for the weekend shows. The team tries to balance out how much a story has already been covered that week and how much they think a story needs to be looked at from a different angle. "We try to use the obvious big stories and kind of a take step back and look at the deeper stories. We come up with the ideas and turn it into radio," Raz explained. Raz works at a job he loves in a field he knew he always loved. He believes that the key to his success and advice that all students could use is simple: hard work. "You have to be prepared for setbacks, [and] you have to be willing to do anything. At the same time, when you come in after you graduate, if you're a Brandeis graduate, you're smart and you're capable and come up with great ideas. [But] you have to do work that you [do] not feel [is] particularly valuable for a while. It ultimately is valuable," Raz said. He understandingly continued that even though starting jobs and internships are not the most glamorous, they are just part of what recent graduates have to do. These days, Raz has a massive audience but still feels connected to the University."I think that, to me, the most important part of [Brandeis] was what I learned there and that sort of thought process I retained, and that, to me, is a very important connection," Raz said.
(10/19/10 4:00am)
I think the most important difference between a good movie and a great movie is that with a great movie, you can become so absorbed in the story that you forget it is a movie; the character development, plot line and cinematography are structured so seamlessly that real life takes a backseat as voyeurism sets in. For the first time in a long time, I had this vicarious experience while watching The Social Network. For everyone living under a rock, The Social Network tells a dramatized story based on how Facebook was created and then launched by Harvard University students in 2003 and 2004. This resonated particularly strongly with me because I am a college entrepreneur. I started a custom-gear outlet with Ari Tretin '12 called Dript that produces clothing, hats, bags, teddy bears, etc. with custom graphics. In the process of starting this business and trying to promote its website, I learned about the resources available-and unavailable-to entrepreneurs, people with a general interest in business and those who want to begin investing in the stock market, at this university. The recent addition of the Business major at Brandeis reflects students' desire to explore entrepreneurial endeavors, investing and financial planning. Therefore, it is time we start taking stock of the tools available to students and see what can be done to improve or increase them. The most important resource available here is social capital. I was trying to figure out how to be a middleman between an artist and a printing press for all of last semester. I posted job descriptions on freelancing websites, and I ended up hiring a team of website developers from Pakistan. Unfortunately, I failed to communicate to the group the details of the website, which I thought would result in the business falling apart. Suddenly, a friend of mine who lived down the hall walked into the room and inquired as to what I was doing. He immediately started helping me and solved all the website problems I had in less than 10 minutes. We are privileged to be part of a talented network of students, from artists to website developers to business people. We are privileged to have forums to communicate ideas and the people who can move an endeavor forward. The best way to access them might just be by checking out the club page on myBrandeis and communicating with the leaders of a club.The second crucial resource this University has is less obvious. It's called a Bloomberg Terminal. It's a computer system that allows you to analyze market data, trades, news and price quotes. All major financial organizations have these terminals. They have two, sometimes four screens, and whenever you hear someone bantering about Wall Street on the news, the people in the background are working on these computers. The International Business School is home to a Bloomberg Terminal lab. It would benefit students to go there and experience this powerful tool in action. While the University may have some great resources, it lacks other amenities that could really enhance an entrepreneur's chances at success. We need a forum to utilize all the talented website developers on campus. This forum could connect students who have ideas for a website but have little or no background in programming. It would enable entrepreneurs to find website developers and begin working on projects. Ideas for business ventures could take form, and both the programmers and the entrepreneurs will reap the benefits. Currently, the University does not have any direct method for students who are interested in entrepreneurship to actually put their website ideas into action. It would serve the ever-growing population of business-oriented students (who often have numerous creative ideas for websites) very well if Brandeis could serve as a testing ground for their ideas. Finally, there are many students on campus with brilliant ideas for entrepreneurial endeavors; however, these ideas cannot be made a reality because of funding. Imagine if there were a forum for students to present their ideas to investors in order to start projects. The University would bring wealthy investors to campus to hear different presentations from students about business ventures. The investors could then choose which venture they deem profitable and the two groups would thus benefit from one another. These 4 years are an incredible investment of time and capital. It's time to start thinking about how we can reap all the benefits of this investment. The access we have to social capital and opportunities in the business school is too valuable to waste. Start investing some time in your entrepreneurial endeavor, and find people with similar interests and talents that compliment your own. Start networking in IBS and learning about the opportunities they provide. Although students' primary focus in college should be classes, starting a business can be an incredible educational experience. I would go as far as to say that starting a business is an exercise of critical thinking and creativity that compensates for lessons left out of the classroom. In the words of Mark Twain, "I never let my schooling interfere with my education." Editor's note: Ari Tretin is an illustrator for the Justice.
