(04/28/09 4:00am)
Cheers can be heard from almost any point on campus. "Yes, we can!"Students embrace with a sense of urgency. "Yes, we can!"Blue state. Red state. Electoral votes. CNN projections. "Yes, we can!"It is 11 p.m. on November 4, 2008, and Barack Obama has just been elected the 44th president of the United States of America. Contained chaos has erupted.At Brandeis, a consistently left-leaning university, Barack Obama's election swept the campus with a feverish frenzy. One hundred days after Inauguration Day, most of the emotions surrounding Obama's election have cooled, and students have begun speaking more rationally of his presidency. The April 19 event hosted by Gen Ed Now, "Obama's 100 Days: A Progress Report," featured a distinguished panel of experts who evaluated the Obama administration's conduct in three key areas: the economy, foreign policy and health care.Speakers at the event included Greg Mankiw, a Harvard professor of economics and former chairman of President George W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers; Stuart Altman, professor of national health policy (Heller) and former deputy assistant secretary for Health Policy; and Charles Dunbar, professor of international relations at Boston University and former ambassador to Qatar and Yemen. Prof. Peniel Joseph (AAAS) moderated the panel.The calm, bespectacled Mankiw, gave his insight into the current financial crisis and how well he thinks Obama's economic policy has dealt with it. He started off by describing what makes the United States' current financial situation unique and said it was caused by a "lack of imagination." He said that in order to fix the situation, the administration has to fix the bank system because it goes to the "heart of the problem." He said that Timothy Geithner "rolled out a plan . that is quite reasonable." However, he went on to criticize Obama's proposed fiscal stimulus package."The biggest long-term problem has to do with the [proposed] budget. [It's] unsustainable," Mankiw said. "We set up a social safety net for the elderly that is going to cause government spending to rise above tax revenues."Still, Mankiw was optimistic about Obama's environmental reform policy. Describing himself as a "fan of global climate change," he said, "What [Obama's administration] is proposing basically makes sense" by putting limits on the amount of carbon we can emit, among other things.Despite his general doubts regarding the Obama administration, Mankiw said he was "not forecasting another Great Depression."Still, Mankiw also expressed concern about Obama's health care reform plans. "I am personally skeptical that we are going to save a lot of money through health care reform. Health information technology may be a good thing, [but it] may be a bad thing. What's driving health care [costs are] advances in technology-which are not going to be changing," he said. Altman, who had reddish hair and a warm smile, also talked about his views on Obama's health policy. Although he said the "stars are aligned for significant health reform," he also described some of Obama's major obstacles. Firstly, he said, Obama needs to create universal health care coverage. Secondly, America needs to reduce the rate of the growth in health care spending."We spend 50 percent more than any other country in the world, and we really don't get the [benefits]," he said. Altman said Obama has adopted a philosophy that is working toward universal health care coverage and shared responsibility among the government, the individual and the employer. He also said Obama put off debate on controlled health care spending. Charles Dunbar said that in his opinion, Obama has had the most difficult first 100 days in office in American history. Dunbar praised Obama's progress in forging America's relationship with Russia. He also praised Obama's approach to relations with the Muslim world as "quite reasonable." Dunbar also addressed U.S. affairs with Cuba and Obama's increased effort towards friendly relations. "[There is] a new beginning with Cuba, [which is] interesting. [There are] substantive changes [being made]," he said. "[By] easing travel with Cuban Americans, [it is] making it possible to make remittances. We already see the Cubans ready to respond in kind. That's substantive tilling of the garden in the way the garden should be tilled."In reponse to a question from a member of the audience about how he thinks Obama will handle the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Dunbar answered, "The two states solution.""All around the world," Dunbar concluded, "Peoples and governments are prepared to say, 'This is a new beginning.'"Benjamin Bechtolsheim '09 praised how informative the event was and said, "I was pleased that students took the initiative to present this forum, and I found it to be a valuable way of looking at the beginning of the Obama administration."-Greta Moran contributed reporting
(04/28/09 4:00am)
Last Wednesday, the Union Judiciary heard a case in which petitioners Gideon Klionsky '11 and Ryan McElhaney '10 argued that barring Mr. Klionsky from running for the position of senator for racial minority students because he was not a minority both violated the Rights and Responsibilities Handbook and contradicted the Union Constitution. The UJ simultaneously discussed whether it had the right to rule on this issue.While the UJ ultimately found against Mr. Klionsky, only Associate Justice Julia Sferlazzo '09 wrote that "this case should not have been heard by the UJ." We agree with Ms. Sferlazzo: The UJ's authority extends only as far as interpreting the Union Constitution. Mr. Klionsky and Mr. McElhaney's petition claims that the Union violated Section 7 of Rights and Responsibilities, which prohibits Brandeis from discriminating on the basis of race. However, cases of alleged discrimination are under the purview of the University Board on Student Conduct, not the UJ. We feel that the justices who decided that the UJ could rule on this case interpreted the Union Constitution too loosely. Associate Justice Judah Marans '11 and Chief Justice Rachel Graham Kagan '09 both cited Article I Section 3: "This Constitution shall be enacted in accordance with all . University policies." In our opinion, this says that the Union Constitution is inferior to Rights and Responsibilities and that the UJ cannot interpret Rights and Responsibilities.Furthermore, even though the UJ decided it had jurisdiction over this case, the justices should have dismissed it on an ideological basis: All white petitioners, respondents and justices held the rights of minorities on trial, requiring analysis of Brandeis' interracial relations. As Ms. Sferlazzo pointed out in her concurring opinion, "None of the justices have degrees in constitutional laws nor are we scholars of race and sociology." We appreciate the UJ's efforts to be fair in this trial by altering protocol to allow the testimony of friends of the court and the entry of amicus briefs into evidence; however, that the UJ had to modify its procedures just to hear this case shows that the UJ was not the proper venue for this issue.While the UBSC should have decided Mr. Klionsky's individual situation, the student body should decide whether the University's minority undergraduate constituency should have its own Union senator and Finance Board representative. We agree with Ms. Sferlazzo's opinion that "a series of open forums and town hall meetings" would be more appropriate than a UJ trial in which only a few proponents of either side could speak. The students who were shushed in the back of the Shapiro Campus Center's makeshift courtroom should be exactly the students the Union should look to for feedback.The Union should have settled the issue of minority representation by proposing a Constitutional amendment. This is both within the Union's authority and a means of involving the community.
(04/28/09 4:00am)
To the Editor:The case of Klionsky and McElhaney v. Student Union exploits the legal spirit and intention of our Constitution through co-opting of the letter of law. Within this case, the prosecution argues that two Union positions reserved for racial minorities are discriminatory and therefore unconstitutional. Klionsky's unsuccessful attempt to be included in the election for the position of racial minority senator spawned the petition. He was then told by the Union that he could not do so since he did not officially identify as a minority at Brandeis. As a result, the two petitioners claim that the positions violate the Union constitution and should therefore be abolished. Despite outcries from many parts of the minority community as well as the Union regarding the inappropriateness of this case, the Union Judiciary brought it to trial. After reviewing the facts of the case, in my mind, the initial argument of discrimination does not match the proposed solution of eliminating the racial minority positions raised by the petitioners. I acknowledge that perhaps there is legal merit to the claim of exclusion in being denied participation in the election of the RMS. When a person feels disenfranchised and silenced, he or she has historically taken action by fighting for equal rights and representation. However, the suggested abolition of the position does not acknowledge the need for or value of the representation offered by these Union seats. A response that would alternatively match the initial claim of discrimination would be to advocate for changing the constitutional jargon dealing with the two positions to make them more inclusive. I admit that the relationship between the petition's claim and solution is irrelevant to the official legal discussion, yet it becomes significant when discussing how the majority of people that must abide by these laws do not feel that these statutes protect them. I therefore believe it is necessary, when approaching a legal suit that has potential to destroy rather than build up, for the participating bodies to honestly articulate their intent. Thus, I would hope that such bodies ask themselves the following question before they bring their case into a public forum: Does the possible change for which we are advocating benefit the community it would affect? The disparity between the argument of discrimination and the suggested solution of the elimination of the racial minority positions in the Union leads me to believe that the petition presented does not consider this question. Additionally, though an argument may have legal merit, sensitive issues of race and representation have historically blurred the law's monopoly of what is both moral as well as in the best interest of the people under that law's jurisdiction. Therefore, more than a legislative matter, race is sociological; race is a social construction with extremely real consequences. These consequences are experienced in a variety of everyday institutions with which we all engage, such as schools, political offices and legal bodies. The unfavorable treatment these examples too often bestow upon racial minority groups materialize in inadequate resource distribution. Yet these covert practices of institutional racism are habitually ignored since they are simply deemed part of the status quo. In order to rectify these subtle but shamefully normative injustices, I believe our university community must address issues of race on a theoretical level in order to understand its practical implications. This strategy has a higher chance of eradicating prejudice in contrast to debating the semantics of the Union constitution, for the solution proposed does not directly rectify the initial problem. I believe that discrimination is therefore not confronted and destroyed by changing words but rather by changing minds. Yet the process adopted in the case brought before the Union Judiciary ignores the need for these conversations. In order to bring this discussion into another needed forum, I plead that the Brandeis population does not limit the relevance of this case to the space of the Union Judiciary trial; rather, I hope that as a community we initiate needed dialogue in a sensitive manner to do justice to the complex issue of race and the experiences of institutional racism many of our fellow students encounter everyday.-Rachie Lewis '09
(04/28/09 4:00am)
An Arts teaser last week incorrectly spelled the name of a musical group. It is called Mochila, not Mochilla. (April 21, p. 1). A photo caption in the Leonard Bernstein Festival of the Creative Arts pullout last week misidentified the series the painting "José" is a part of. It is a part of last year's "Faces of TYP," not this year's "Public Memory, November 4th, 2008." (April 21, p. 24) The Sunday schedule in the Leonard Bernstein Festival of the Creative Arts pullout last week incorrectly stated the time of the second Rose tour. It took place from 3:30 to 4 p.m., not from 1:30 to 2 p.m. (April 21, p. 22). An article in Arts last week incorrectly stated the name of the last movement of the Trio for flute, cello and piano, H. 300. It is called an Allegretto, not an Andante. (April 21, p.19). An article in Arts last week incorrectly spelled the last name of a cellist. She is Laura Shechter (GRAD) not Laura Schechter. (April 21, p.19). An article in Arts last week incorrectly stated the last name of the composer of Ruckert Lieder. It was composed by Gustav Mahler, not Gustav Nahler. (April 21, p.19). An article in Arts last week implied that Alicia Kaszeta (GRAD) stopped playing for a period of time because she wanted to pursue a scholarly career. Kaszeta briefly stopped playing because of a performance related injury. (April 21, p.19) An article in Forum last week incorrectly stated when Jonathan Kane '10 ran for the position of racial minority senator. He ran in 2007, not 2008. (April 21, p. 10). The Justice welcomes submissions for errors that warrant correction or clarification. E-mail jsw5@brandeis.edu.
(04/28/09 4:00am)
The visit of Bill Ayers, co-founder of the Weather Underground and professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, to campus this Thursday has raised the ire of members of the surrounding community such as prominent Boston conservative radio host Michael Graham, who has led a campaign to get Brandeis to bar Ayers from speaking. On his blog, Graham further criticized the upcoming visit, writing, "The Unibomber, Timothy McVeigh, Osama bin Laden-hey, they've all got something to say and we should give them a forum at Brandeis to say it." Ayers was a radical anti-war activist in the 1960s and a co-founder of the Weather Underground, a radical protest group blamed for several bombings at the Capitol and Pentagon. The Weather Underground was suspected to have been involved in the shooting of Walter A. Schroeder, a Boston police officer, during a bank robbery in Brighton.Dennis Nealon, the executive director of media and public affairs for Brandeis, said, "We told the [Boston] Globe and the [Boston] Herald that allowing the talk to proceed does not mean that Brandeis condones the views of the speaker.""The University does not unilaterally bar someone because some will oppose their views. . This is about freedom of [educational opportunity]," he said. When asked about his response to Boston College's decision to cancel a planned visit by Ayers, Nealon said that Boston College faced similar criticism to Brandeis but "there just didn't seem to be a solution in saying, 'You just can't hear this speaker.'" Liza Behrendt '11, an event coordinator for the visit and a member of Democracy For America, a group co-sponsoring the visit, spoke about the importance of the Ayers visit's appearance on Graham's show, The Natural Truth, on Boston radio station WTKK. On April 23, Behrendt and Graham engaged in a debate for about 10 minutes during which Graham referred to Ayers' ideas about education as "bizarro and lunatic."During the show, Graham asked if, when Behrendt had referred to Brandeis' tradition of activism, she had been referring to Angela Davis, Susan Saxe and Katherine Howard. These three Brandeis alumnae appeared simultaneously on the FBI's most wanted list, representing the only time in American history that three women have been listed. Behrendt replied that she was proud of those women and said that she didn't believe "sharing a tradition of radical behavior is the same as endorsing a death." In the closing moments of the show, Graham asked if Behrendt would invite Adolf Hitler to speak at Brandeis. In a later interview with the Justice, Behrendt said "I didn't know what to say; it was such an absurd question." Graham could not be reached for comment by press time.When asked if she felt that she was experiencing a personal backlash from the event, Behrendt responded "No, I didn't, because I was just a person from Brandeis who ended up on that show. . I don't think that it's anything personal. I just feel that many people made comments from another ideological place.""It's interesting to see some of the passion that comes with the backlash," Behrendt added.Behrendt said that going on the show "seemed like an interesting opportunity because part of the reason why we brought Ayers was to try and spark dialogue, and this seemed like a good way to do that." Behrendt also said that she thought it was good that Brandeis hadn't backed out, because universities should be the place in society that stands for ideas. On March 29, the Boston Globe reported a statement released by BC regarding why the institution had canceled Ayers' visit to its campus. The statement said, "In light of additional information that was shared with the students on the actions of the Weather Underground, including their alleged involvement in the killing of a Boston police officer in nearby Allston, and out of concern for the safety and well-being of our students, we believe that the appropriate decision was reached." Brandeis student reaction to the upcoming visit is mixed. Doug Moore '11 said, "I've been kind of against [Bill Ayers'] presence on campus," citing "the message we're sending by bringing him here. . It kind of damages that image [of an activist institution that Brandeis has]." Shanna Rifkin '11, however, said "Within an activist community, you have a whole spectrum of activism. It's important to .. get a well-rounded and broad education. You don't have to agree with [Ayers], . but [we should] at least appreciate the fact that he's bringing a different perspective and view than we have [now]." -Daniel D. Snyder, Joel Herzfeld, Shana D. Lebowitz and Nashrah Rahman contributed reporting.
(04/28/09 4:00am)
The recent recommendation made by the Curriculum and Academic Restructuring Steering committee to convert the Classical Studies department into an interdepartmental program has caused much dismay among the department's professors and students, who staunchly oppose the proposal. In response to the release of the CARS report, several students stood outside last week's closed faculty meeting holding protest signs with phrases such as "Save the Classical Studies Department" and "We Love Prof. [Cheryl] Walker." Undergraduate Department Representative to the Classics department Alex Smith '09 explained that the protest was held to promote "awareness of the Classical Studies department as a very dedicated department. We're willing to sit outside the faculty meeting, not saying anything, completely peaceful, just [to] show them how much we care about this," he said. Lee Marmor '10, also a Classics UDR, explained that in addition to the protest, Classics students have attended the three CARS proposal forums and are asking alumni for support. The investment of students in the Classics department did not go unnoticed by administrators, and Provost Marty Krauss explained, "Both [student forums] were pretty much dominated by students from the Classics department, and they made a very impassioned plea to the committee about the quality of their experiences with the Classics department, and I thought they did a lovely job and a thoughtful job of expressing their views." Prof. Ann O. Koloski-Ostrow (CLAS) explained the Classics department's opposition to potentially being turned into an interdepartmental program. "It's a very serious thing to turn a department into a program," Koloski-Ostrow said. "We have some very distinguished programs with very distinguished faculty on campus. This is not a slight at those existing programs, but none of those programs were created by the demotion of a department. A department of Classical Studies does do a lot of interdepartmental work, we don't deny that, but to turn us into an interdisciplinary program would be a real demotion in prestige already achieved by the department, and we are concerned about it first and foremost in terms of the reputation of Brandeis University." Koloski-Ostrow said that she believes that eliminating the Classical Studies department would damage Brandeis' reputation because almost all of the universities Brandeis competes with for the best students have Classical Studies departments. "We are trying to explain this to the administration," Koloski-Ostrow said. "We understand the administration is in a bind [and] the CARS committee's mission is to try and be more efficient and save money, [but] this is not going to save money; they have admitted that," she said. Koloski-Ostrow elaborated in an e-mail to the Justice that "the administration and CARS were asked several times (in private meetings and in front of the whole faculty last week at the faculty meeting on April 23) how closing down the THREE departments recommended for 'demotion' into interdepartmental programs would save money? Each time the question comes up, the administration and CARS members say that this recommendation is 'not about money.' Instead, they say that the restructuring is aimed at eliminating duplication of courses and strongly encouraging various academic units to reach across disciplines to fulfill needs that a smaller faculty (in the future) will not be able to fulfill in any other way."Walker said that upon reviewing the CARS proposal she did not see "any documentation to suggest that [turning the department into an interdepartmental program] would a) save money or b) facilitate faculty reduction, which is the charge of the committee." Johnston said that she was "appalled [and] really disgusted" about the CARS proposals. Prof. Patricia Johnston (CLAS) said she was "very proud" and "gratified to have so much support" from the Classical Studies students who held the protest.Walker (CLAS) agreed that she could "not be happier with the students.""I have been so pleased that on their own volition they have taken up the torch and decided that [supporting the department] is something they want to spend time doing," she said, "not only the students on campus but [also] alumni. I have gotten three notices from people who have graduated in recent years. Can we turn all that energy into something positive? I have hope.
(04/28/09 4:00am)
The Curriculum and Academic Restructuring Steering committee recently recommended that the Classical Studies department, an integral part of the academic fabric of our liberal arts University, be reorganized into an interdepartmental program. In its report, the committee praised the department for the "heroic" and "sterling contributions" of its faculty and students to the University. Although "the committee recognizes the irony" of its recommendation, it suggests that Classics be converted to an interdepartmental program, reducing the faculty from four to three. CARS believes that because of the small size of our department, our "organizational structure is not optimal."On the contrary, our faculty and students arrange a wide array of events for the Brandeis community including a popular film series, two prestigious lecture programs that attract world-renowned classicists, undergraduate academic fellowships for majors and minors and an internship program through the Classical Artifact Research Center. In the CARS student forum on Wednesday, representatives of the committee cited "departmental barriers" as an impetus for our reassignment as an interdepartmental program. We firmly believe these barriers do not exist in Classics. Every semester, the Classics department crafts courses that link diverse disciplines including but not limited to Physics, Anthropology, History, Fine Arts, Near Eastern and Judaic Studies and Theater Arts.The committee also conceded that the University would not save much from this change; rather, the private donations that help fund our dynamic lecture programs, undergraduate fellowships and the CLARC could be significantly diminished or withdrawn due to the lack of a departmental status. In fact the University could potentially lose money due to a retraction of alumni donations to the Classics department.Furthermore, our professors- who many members of the Brandeis community know personally-have fostered an inviting and intellectually engaging community worth maintaining as a department. Admittedly, we are a small department, retaining only four full-time professors; however, we are on par with the national average of 3.5 professors in Classical Studies departments. If you know a Classics student, you probably are familiar with our unique atmosphere of scholarship, warmth and-indeed-nerdiness.We welcome everyone with an enthusiasm for classical subject matter to come enjoy our events or a course with Profs. Ann O. Koloski-Ostrow, Leonard Muellner, Cheryl Walker or Patricia Johnston. We ask that the Brandeis administration, faculty, and students help us to preserve the prestige of our small department so that we may continue to offer the vibrant environment that both our faculty and students have created. Valete Omnes!Editor's Note: Alissa Thomas '11, Alex Smith '09 and Dianne Ma '09 are Classics majors.
(04/21/09 4:00am)
The April 30 visit of Bill Ayers, co-founder of the Weather Underground and professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, has engendered a wide range of opinions from students, faculty and administration that will be further explored at an upcoming series of town hall-style meetings scheduled for April 27 and 29. In the days leading up to the town hall meetings, some students have expressed their interest in attending the event, while others like Douglas Moore '11 have decided to protest against the upcoming visit through an anti-Ayers Facebook group named Bill Ayers is Coming to Brandeis, Seriously? WTF. There is also a Facebook event, Students Against Bill Ayers Coming to Brandeis, which is scheduled to take place the same day as the Ayers visit.The town hall-style meetings will take place in Lown Auditorium and will be open forums between students and professors, according to Liza Behrendt '11, event coordinator and Democracy for America member. She said that DFA has not yet received confirmation on which professors will be present at the town hall meetings. "We hope to discuss people's reaction. We hope that people who have negative opinions about the event will show up and express their opinions. . We're going to talk about the history, . [and] on Wednesday we're going to watch the film The Weather Underground," Behrendt said.Ayers' visit will take place April 30 after being postponed from its initial March 30 date due to mounting security costs surrounding the event. DFA members and event coordinators Behrendt and Lev Hirschhorn '11, as well as Director of Public Safety Ed Callahan, declined to discuss the total cost of the event or the cost of security, but Behrendt and Hirschhorn both said that DFA would be paying approximately $1,400. The event is being sponsored by Democracy for America, Students for a Democratic Society, the Brenda Meehan Social Justice in Action Grant and four academic departments: Peace, Conflict and Coexistence Studies; Education; History; and Social Justice and Social Policy. The event will be held in the Carl J. Shapiro Theater. Tickets will be $5 each and will be available on a first-come, first-served basis. Only 230 tickets will be sold. Hirschhorn, who is also a Student Union senator for the Class of 2011, said that it was important to invite Ayers to campus and hear what he has to say because "there are a lot of activists on campus, and I think people are very interested in the lessons to be learned from the antiwar movement of the 1960s and the limits of activism." Moore, on the other hand, said, "I think that the problem with him coming to campus is his past involvement in a lot of violent acts, compared to nonviolence and other forms of protest. I think [nonviolence and other forms of protest] should be taught and should be appreciated here on campus, not something like the bombings that the Weather Underground were responsible for." Moore added that he believes the event reflects poorly on the entire campus and that the visit is "kind of pointless." Moore is undecided on whether he will attend the event. Students Against Bill Ayers Coming to Brandeis criticizes the sponsors of the Ayers visit for "donating money to fund a terrorist, rather than use that money for something useful on campus (like saving the Rose Art Museum)." This Facebook event encourages anyone who disagrees with Ayers' outlook to come together to protest, and as of last night there are seven confirmed attendees. Behrendt said that she thinks it is important to listen to Ayers because "he is a very well-respected person now, yet in the past [he] did horrific things in the name of justice, and that is a very challenging puzzle for current activists to work out." The event is also eliciting reactions from several administrators and faculty members. Provost Marty Krauss said about the event, "I've never heard him speak, so I don't know what he will say. I think that Brandeis has always been a place where different speakers come, and if this is a speaker that students are interested in hearing from, I think that it is good that he is coming."Prof. Bernard Yack (POL) said that he had no problem with the decision to invite Ayers. When asked what Ayers could add to the conversation about social justice, Yack said, "He has strong opinions on the subject, and he represents the somewhat more radical view so it certainly adds to the conversation."Robert Mesika '12 said that he was fully behind the invitation extended to Ayers. He said, "We should get everyone's opinions and views on any matter, even if we have to get the radical left or the radical right."-Nashrah Rahman contributed reporting
(04/21/09 4:00am)
On April 20, 2009, the Curricular and Academic Restructuring Steering Committee released its recommendations. These are designed to strengthen Brandeis' curricula and organization while positioning the University to effectively deliver the Brandeis experience in the face of the challenging fiscal environment. The full report can be found online at https://secureweb.brandeis.edu/transformation.We began in February, and dozens of faculty, students and staff have worked incredibly hard on multiple CARS subcommittees and produced the innovative Justice Brandeis Semester, the new Business major, creative new Web site designs, ideas for more flexible requirements and ideas for removing barriers to flexible and creative curricular innovation.There is no doubt that the financial crisis requires tough decisions and sacrifices to be made. At Brandeis, a university with the atmosphere of a small liberal arts college with strong research faculty, we are committed to having faculty and students jointly engaged in learning and scholarship. This is what makes us special, and the CARS process reflects that precious trait of our community.Together we have worked to create a process for communicating and discussing these recommendations that is as inclusive as possible. Multiple town hall meetings, online forums, meetings with faculty and various departments and constant outreach to affected parties have all led to better results.The CARS recommendations will make Arts and Sciences more flexible and effective, so that we can be lean and strong rather than feeling undernourished. The report includes targeted reductions in the size of the faculty, and it also includes changes in how we operate so that this reduced faculty can still deliver. In the end, the Committee decided not to recommend the closure of any undergraduate major or minor or any graduate program, but instead to rely on more efficient and flexible provisions of the courses necessary for these programs.In particular, the recommendations are designed to make the process of constructing each year's curriculum more flexible, so the courses that need to be taught will be taught with minimal duplication and maximum variety. As the number of courses taught each semester is reduced slightly, better management of course rotation will ensure that variety and depth are maintained.The recommendations also include transforming some existing departments into interdepartmental programs in order to increase the extent to which faculty from multiple departments contribute to those majors and to ensure that faculty currently in those interdisciplinary departments contribute to maintaining the strength of other departments.Implementation of the recommendations will lead to some shrinkage of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. This reduction will allow the University to focus its resources on undergraduate education, while still maintaining the crucial core of the research university.Read the report -- you will agree with some of the changes and disagree with others. Although no programs are disappearing, there will be changes to the way our existing majors, minors and graduate programs are delivered. Get involved and make your voice heard.When the community is involved in making change, we can better ensure that as many voices and perspectives are as heard as possible. If we are all involved in the process today, our University will be better positioned for tomorrow.Students, please attend one of a series of forums with the provost announced in her April 20 e-mail, and give your feedback. Faculty, please attend the faculty meeting on Thursday.The provost will be reviewing these recommendations and your feedback and comments before any final decisions are made.It has been a challenge and a privilege to participate with our fellow faculty and fellow students shaping our University for the future. Thank you to all who have been, and the many who will continue to be, engaged with us in the process of making change.Editor's Note: Adam Jaffe is the Dean of Arts and Sciences and Fred C. Hecht Professor in Economics. Jason Gray '10 is the president of the Student Union.
(04/21/09 4:00am)
In the aftermath of yesterday's release of the Curriculum and Academic Restructuring Steering committee's report, many faculty and students affected by the proposals immediately began to express initial reactions to the committee's recommendations.The committee's recommendations included making American Studies, Classical Studies and African and Afro-American Studies interdepartmental-programs instead of departments and implementing a 10-percent cut of faculty and staff across all departments, reducing the size of most Ph.D. programs. The recommendation of converting AAAS, AMST and Classics into interdisciplinary programs-meaning the majors are still intact, but the classes will be cross-listed with other departments-was one on which committee members received the most feedback from those affected. Dean of Arts and Sciences and Chair of the CARS committee Adam Jaffe said that the CARS committee met with the African and Afro-American Studies and Classical Studies departments last Friday and with the American Studies department yesterday to discuss the committee's recommendations. "I would say in all cases they were unhappy with the recommendations," Jaffe said.Prof. Joyce Antler (AMST) said, "there's a difference between a program and a department. [American Studies] has been highly successful, and it's not a new program that's come into being. And I think that the rationale for making a transformational change is not convincing. We don't see the cost savings in it at all." Prof. Wellington Nyangoni (AAAS) said he would "be extremely disappointed" if the AAAS department were converted into a program. "Programs are not equal to departments," he said.Nathan Robinson '11, a declared AAAS major, said, "I believe the University has shown a weak commitment toward the AAAS department. I am concerned the studies of African-American issues will merge into the study of the social justices or race and gender issues generically, and I think it's very important for those of us who are genuinely interested in African or Afro-American studies that we have an intense focus on that particular subject."Lee Marmor '10, a Classical Studies major, was one of two students who organized a Facebook group called Save the Classical Studies Department last night to "protest the recent decision to reduce the status of Classical Studies to an interdepartmental program," according to the group's Facebook page."It's outrageous, and universities were founded originally, basically, on the study of classics. I know they're not getting rid of this, but still, it's ridiculous," he said.Prof. Steven Burg (POL), a member of the CARS committee, explained to the Justice Sunday that he understood the department's initial reactions. "If somebody came to me and said, 'Steve, we're doing away with the Politics Department,' ... I'd be shocked . But if you make a strong institutional argument, if there may be benefits to me as an intellectual in terms of closer relationships with colleagues in the University with whom I can share some overlap, then there are certain benefits to be had." He added, "These are what are called 'difficult conversations.'"Also released in the report was a recommendation to reduce the number of low-enrollment courses taught each semester.Prof. Jonathan Sarna (NEJS), whose department has several courses that routinely draw fewer than eight people after pre-enrollment, believes these classes will be shifted to graduate classes to which some undergraduates could be invited to take the class. He explained that this could allow for some specialized classes."But at the same time ... we now have to realize that if there are going to be 10 percent fewer faculty and 10 percent more students, then all of us have to carry a load," Sarna said.Another recommendation in the report is a 10-percent cut of faculty across all departments over five years."Certainly, these are difficult times ... This is a burden that should be shared across the University, and [we need to] find ways to continue to offer an effective curriculum with whatever attrition is necessary," Antler said.The report also included a recommendation that would increase the variety of courses taught by each faculty member over a three-year rotation, which would, in effect, mean that each course would be offered less frequently. Antler expressed concerns about this. "Beyond [every other year], it gets very difficult for students who might want to catch courses in their first two years or last two years, and [the courses are] just not available," she said. "[The classes] can't be so irregular that students can't plan for them."Several faculty members declined to comment because they had not yet read the report. Provost Marty Krauss said that she will issue a preliminary response May 4, which will be discussed at a special faculty meeting May 7. She will then issue a final report May 11. Faculty members will begin discussing the report at this week's faculty meeting, and there are open forums scheduled for tomorrow, Thursday and Monday where Brandeis community members can provide their input to Krauss directly, according to a campuswide e-mail sent by Student Union President Jason Gray '10. Krauss said, "I don't want to say very much now about my reactions to it because I really want to hear from the community." Burg said Sunday, "It's not clear to me whether those recommendations will in the end find enough support in the faculty," but he added that, "I believe there are strong arguments for them."-Hannah Kirsch, Shana D. Lebowitz, Miranda Neubauer and Daniel D. Snyder contributed reporting.
(04/21/09 4:00am)
What do we gain from wonder? What can imagination teach us? How do we think about these concepts in a world that puts increasing emphasis on the concrete and the tangible elements of life, especially in education?These questions were central to the Second Annual Symposium on the Pedagogy of Imagination. Held on April 1 in the Lois Foster Wing of the Rose Art Museum, the symposium provided a forum to discuss the abstract elements of life: how our imagination works, why it is so difficult to understand, what creates wonder and how the abstract can be used to create in an educational setting.Prof. Dirck Roosevelt, an assistant director of the Education program, director of the Master of the Arts in Teaching program and assistant professor of education, was the keynote speaker of the event. However, there were many other speakers, including graduate students and other professors. The event was co-sponsored by the Master of Arts in Teaching program, the Philosophy department, the Cultural Production program, the Mandel Center for Studies in Jewish Education and the Rose Art Museum.The theme of this year's event, titled "Arresting Moments: Wonder and the Pedagogy of the Imagination," focused on the position of wonder in education institutions and pedagogic endeavors. In the symposium, participants considered the "drop-dead" moments of wonder felt in the face of a great work of art or performance. How are these moments to be understood usefully, framed and built upon?The audience, which was composed mostly of adults, heard presentations from Brandeis professors and graduate students as well as scholars from the greater artistic community. Emily Mello, director of education for the Rose, said, "I think that wonder is a huge motivator, and I think that you can't have true education without wonder. You can have memorization, you can have training, but you can't have the kind of deep learning that involves critical thinking, that involves letting things slowly unfold in the mind."Mello began the evening by introducing the topics to be discussed and the role that the Rose had played in advocating creative instinct and the importance of imagination on the Brandeis campus. She also said that there has been some confusion since the announcement was made in January about the planned [closing] of the Rose and the plans to liquidate its collection. She took a moment to clarify that the final day for the staff of the Rose is still set at June 30. "There are no exhibitions currently planned beyond the exhibitions that are up now, which close May 17, . and there are still ... plans to go forward to sell some of the art in the collection," Mello said.After Mello's introduction, Roosevelt, one of the original minds behind the Pedagogy of Imagination symposium, quickly remarked on the theme of the evening. He said, "We meet in the Rose Art Museum, and it's hard to imagine what would be a more appropriate setting than this for consideration of the most precious human capacity, the capacity of 'what if?'"As Roosevelt introduced the human propensity to wonder, Prof. Andreas Teuber (PHIL) described his interest not in wonders but in the power that wonder has as a teaching tool. This was the central theme of the symposium: how the feeling of wonder can be understood and to some extent be used in an educational setting.Teuber spoke of the abstract nature of wonder. He said, "there was a distinction between miracles and the marvelous. . Miracles were things that defied the laws of nature and were really, truly, incomprehensible. Therefore, you would be struck by a miracle, but you couldn't get it, and the fact that you couldn't get it confirmed the existence of some supreme being. . The marvelous were something in between the ordinary and the miraculous but something that was accessible to human faculties and could be opened up and maybe understood."The presentations that followed focused on examples of imagination and wonder as well as their effects in real-life scenarios from housing developments to the Rose itself.Professor Mark Auslander (ANTH) and a group of students from his class "Engaged Anthropolgy" presented what they had achieved through their work with the Waltham Family School, an Even Start Literacy program that improves educational opportunities by combining childhood and adult education in literacy as well as parenting activities. Auslander and the students had been working with immigrant women in an anthropological context discussing the meaning of clothing and human appearance. This process involved the women creating images of clothing as well as visiting the Rose and discussing what they saw.Finally, Roosevelt gave the keynote address. He explained that "making art . is a structured experience for elementary-age youngsters, who come here [to the Rose] for five sessions, . and discussions are designed to combine looking at, thinking about and discussing one or more of the current exhibits and making their own art and thinking about and discussing that art." Although the symposium ran well beyond the scheduled time, it seemed to take on the very sort of nature that infuses imagination: a process of thinking and wondering about things that can never be truly understood but is immensely powerful and can achieve amazing things.
(04/07/09 4:00am)
Senior administrators and the Committee on Faculty Rights and Responsibilities agreed on a modified process for the consideration of proposals by the Curriculum and Academic Restructuring Steering committee, which will be released later this month, Provost Marty Krauss announced in a campuswide e-mail sent April 2 and at the faculty meeting last Thursday.The new process will have Krauss presenting an initial report of the CARS recommendations to the community May 4 and presenting a final report at the May 14 faculty meeting. The May 4 announcement was originally the final report. CARS recommendations will be released April 20, according to Krauss.The CFRR "wanted to be sure . that if people wanted to have a comment on [the May 4 report], that wouldn't be considered the final report," Krauss said. The final report would be binding on the issues that she is authorized to make decisions about, she said. Chair of the CFRR Prof. Aida Wong (FA) said that the committee had been concerned about the transparency of the deliberation process of the CARS proposals. She said that with the timeline change, "the faculty meeting will still be a forum for discussing [the proposals] . rather than having the deliberative process [for the CARS proposals be] independent of the regular governing procedure."CFRR had also asked for an enumeration of the criteria for the restructuring so that faculty members could "have a common ground to assess the merits of the forthcoming recommendations." Wong said.According to the April 2 campuswide e-mail, Dean of Arts and Sciences Adam Jaffe stated at the meeting that CARS had considered eight criteria, including a program's contribution to the University's multiple missions, its contribution to the undergraduate experience, its excellence compared to similar programs at other schools, the extent to which it is required, its distinctiveness regarding the Brandeis profile and the extent to which it contributes to other programs.
(03/31/09 4:00am)
An article in News last week incorrectly spelled the last name of a student. She is Rebecca Erenrich '12, not Rebecca Eisenrich. (Mar. 24, p. 1).An article in News last week incorrectly stated the position of Brian Koslowski. He is the Massell Quad Community Development Coordinator, not the Quad Director. (Mar. 24, p. 1).An article in News last week incorrectly stated the postion of Stephen Costa. He is a budget analyst in the Office of Students and Enrollment who also handles Student Union finances, not just a budget analyst for the Union. (Mar. 24, p. 3).An article in News last week incorrectly stated Jason Gray's class year. It is 2010, not 2011. (Mar. 24, p. 5).An article in News last week incorrectly spelled the last name of a student. He is Charlie Gandelman '09, not Charlie Gandleman. (Mar. 24, p. 5). The Op-Box in Forum last week quoted Brent Arnold at an improvisation workshop hosted by Nettle: Music for a Nu World. Arnold is the cellist for Nettle. (Mar. 24, p. 10). An article in Features last week incorectly spelled the last name of an alum. She is Amy Debra Finstein, not Amy Debra Feinstein. (Mar. 24, p. 9).An article in Features last week mistakenly omitted the class year of an alum. Amy Debra Finstein's class year is 1998. (Mar. 24, p. 9).An article in Features last week incorrectly stated the year Pachanga started. It started in 1997, not 2001. (Mar. 24, p. 8).The Justice was informed that Pachanga began as a house party in the former Ridgewood Quad. Pachanga became an officially funded party in 1998.
(03/24/09 4:00am)
THE SCOOP
Bill Ayers, a former member of the Weather Underground who remains controversial to this day, was originally scheduled to come to campus on March 30. This development has been met with skepticism by faculty members and students alike. These critics of Bill Ayers' character argue that Brandeis should not welcome a formerly unrepentant bomber of the Pentagon, the U.S Capitol, and other federal buildings-an individual who seems to appeal only to the most radical of students. Although these criticisms are legitimate, the school should welcome Mr. Ayers to speak and express his views. Brandeis ought to serve as a forum for all different kinds of perspectives. Even if individuals offer points of view that are deemed radical and unpopular, they should nonetheless feel comfortable expressing them at our academic institution. We celebrate diversity in our student body and faculty; we should also celebrate heterogeneity in what people think.Preventing Mr. Ayers from coming here would discredit a view held by many members of Brandeis students and faculty. Among those who work at Brandeis and call it their home are individuals whose beliefs represent an entire spectrum of thoughts and philosophies. This vast array of ideas, radical ones included, is what gives our school an intellectual atmosphere. Also, it is one of the most important factors that draws bright students to this corner of the world. Are we to deny someone whose ideas and association with us can only add to this diversity?Another reason to grant Mr. Ayers this opportunity is that he has many positive virtues that override his seemingly dubious past. Currently, he is a professor of education at the University of Illinois and a leading advocate for education reform. He has also served on the board of directors for the Annenberg Challenge, which raised millions of dollars to improve the quality of Chicago public schools, as well as the Woods Fund, a philanthropic organization devoted to fighting poverty. The city of Chicago bestowed its Citizen of the Year award upon Ayers in 1997 for these admirable efforts.In addition, the Weather Underground was in actuality not as horrifying as the caricature its harshest critics continue to paint it as: a destructive and violent group of communist radicals. True, its members bombed several important governmental buildings. However, these acts were not meant to hurt anyone, and they didn't. Rather, they were primarily symbolic and a form of protest against the Vietnam War. Were they a little extreme? Perhaps. But ultimately, the organization had understandable intentions. It was born out of the chaos of the late 1960s and early '70s and not out of some malicious desire to hurt people.In fact, one can consider Mr. Ayers' past admirable in the sense that it can inspire our own activism and desire to engage in political affairs. Although we shouldn't necessarily emulate the tactics that were exercised by the Weather Underground, we ought to view their spirit and fervent desire for change in a positive fashion. That is, we can take from them the fact that, with enough motivation, people can ultimately incite their government to act in ways that better represent their values.Lastly, by rejecting Mr. Ayers, one of the only things we gain is a reputation for being parochial and narrow-minded-a kind of worldview that typified the Republicans in their attempts to demonize Barack Obama by linking him to Mr. Ayers. And personally, I would rather not be associated with the likes of the Alaskan governor who claimed that President Obama is someone who "sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect, imperfect enough, that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country.
(03/24/09 4:00am)
CORRECTION APPENDED SEE BOTTOMStudent Union President Jason Gray '10 praised students for becoming more involved in making University-related decisions in his State of the Union Address last Tuesday. Gray spoke about the effect on the student body of the the University's attempt to discontinue merit aid portability to study abroad Jan. 16. He said that the lack of student input in the process of reaching the decision prompted the Union to express its disagreement with this policy. "We worked with Academic Services to create a representative committee including faculty, students and staff and an online forum for greater student input. Soon after, the decision to restrict the portability of merit aid was reversed," Gray said.Gray also addressed the University's sudden decision to close the Rose Art Museum without the campus community's involvement. "After the initial statements regarding the Rose and during the ensuing controversy, the Union worked with the administration to hold multiple student forums, giving students an opportunity to directly engage with the administration and to be active members of our democracy."He reflected that as a result of such open conversation, the Rose committee, composed of students, faculty and administrators, has been created to make recommendations for the Rose Museum's future. Gray acknowledged the impact of the financial crisis on club funding and that "clubs want to do more, but they have had to cut back on the number of events, decrease the scale of programming and have had difficulty expanding."He emphasized that because there is no more rollover from the Student Activities Fund, which is traditionally 1 percent of student tuition, club leaders are still in need of funding. "[The Union has] asked, in no uncertain terms, that the Board of Trustees uncap the [Student Activities Fund] and give clubs the money that they deserve."A new Student Activities Fund management system has also been implemented, Gray said. The system will "allow club leaders to, in real time, know how much money they have and what have they spent. It will create more responsive and more transparent finances," according to Gray. Gray listed the creation of the Senate Outreach Committee, a new taskforce on communications, as one of the Union's accomplishments this year. The committee aims to keep students in the know about Union activities by posting flyers and sending campus-wide e-mails about Union events. He also talked about the Union's new Web site, which will soon be online and which he hopes will "create as many ways as possible for students to speak and for their government to listen." He listed some of the accomplishments of on-campus clubs, such as the Brandeis chapter of Colleges Against Cancer raising $90,000 last year in a Relay for Life and the English Language Learning club gathering 100 students to tutor Facilities Services and cafeteria workers. "We have come a long way in a year, but we can go so much farther. . If we embrace and emphasize outreach, student involvement and student rights, there is no limit to what this Union and this community can accomplish together," Gray saidIn an interview following the address, Gray emphasized that the Union has "created a culture in which students need to be involved in the decisions made by the administration in a way that has never existed before, and I think that this idea needs to be taken and run with in the future.""I think his speech was one of the most outstanding you can imagine from a student leader," said Rena Olshansky '56, a member of the Board of Trustees' Students and Enrollment Committee, who said that it was her first State of the Union address. Commenting on the Union Rena said, "I think the [students] set their agenda, and that's important." University Provost Marty Krauss, who attended the speech, said in an interview with the Justice, "[Gray] has a tremendous amount of respect among the members of the administration because he's a mature person; he's diplomatic; he thinks about the perspectives of many constituencies; he's smart; and he makes really good recommendations, and he gets things done." Senior Vice President of Communications Lorna Miles, who also attended, added that Gray "has been incredibly vital; his legacy is having created a consciousness in the University among the administration and the faculty that students are part of the day-to-day governance of this community." Nipun Marwaha '12, senator for Massell Quad, said, "What [Gray] has done for the Union and the student body is outstanding."Correction: The article originally incorrectly identified a student's class year. Jason Gray's class year is 2010, not 2011.
(03/10/09 4:00am)
The International Business School is in an ongoing discussion with former Chairwoman and Chief Executing Officer of Playboy Enterprises Christie Hefner '74 about how she can become affiliated with the International Business School, according to IBS Senior Associate Director of Communications Matthew Parillo.Hefner became the chairman and CEO of Playboy Enterprises in 1988 before stepping down this January. In an e-mail to the Justice, Hefner wrote, "Now that I have stepped down as Chairman [and] CEO of Playboy Enterprises, I have the time to become more involved in a variety of activities that I care about."Hefner wrote that she is interested in collaborating with the IBS for three reasons: "I believe passionately in the idea and the ideal of [IBS] that, as Justice Brandeis put it, 'business can be a force for good.' The fact that [two thirds] of the students are from outside of the U.S. makes the school especially relevant to today's global challenges and of [particular] interest to me. And as Brandeis is my alma mater and [IBS] is a relatively young business school, I feel that I could make a larger contribution here than [at] other business schools."Hefner wrote, "It is early in the discussions, but I expect that my involvement will certainly include coming out to speak and to interact with the students [at Brandeis]."Parillo declined to comment on the specific options that the IBS is discussing with Hefner regarding how she can become more involved in the IBS community. He said, however, that the IBS wants to enlist Hefner's help in achieving its mission statement, which, according to the IBS Web site, aims "to advance knowledge on globalization and to train principled leaders for the global economy." Parillo said that talks with Hefner began last December and that "it was [Hefner's] decision to reopen discussions when she decided to leave [Playboy Enterprises]." In an e-mail to the Justice, Executive Director of Media and Public Affairs Dennis Nealon confirmed that Hefner was only interested in colloborating with the IBS and not the University in general. In an e-mail to the Justice, Parillo confirmed that as a volunteer leader Hefner will not receive any monetary compensation.Dean of the IBS Bruce Magid declined to comment. Hefner is a participant in the IBS CEO forum, which brings leading business executives to speak at the IBS. As a participant of the CEO forum, Hefner last visited the campus Feb. 25 of this year. Angelique Ahmed (GRAD) recalled finding Hefner's discussion "very interesting as a business student."Ahmed said, "I think that it's a brilliant idea that [Hefner] may become more involved with the IBS." Parillo stated, "There is no time table and the decisions that need to be made are going to be thoughtful." He said that an important issue to consider is the fact that Hefner is located in Chicago whereas "some of the executives that help [the IBS] and serve [the IBS] on various aspects . are local." According to Parillo, "What we're doing is pretty common. .. where we're always in touch with business leaders and we try to engage them as best as we can." "We would be excited to work out a process by which she can help our students," he said.
(02/24/09 5:00am)
CORRECTION APPENDED SEE BOTTOMA subcommittee of the Curriculum and Academic Restructuring Steering Committee is proposing a new graduation requirement in the form of semester-long experiential learning programs both on and off campus in order to increase the undergraduate student body, while another subcommittee is proposing a Business major to attract more applicants.In addition, a separate group of faculty is proposing a major in Communications, Media and Society in order to attract more applicants.All proposals are intended to increase revenue from tuition-paying students, faculty members said.Dean of Arts and Sciences Adam Jaffe posted all three proposals on a special Brandeis Web site dedicated to the curricular changes in advance of an open forum that will be held Wednesday in order to gain feedback on the proposals and to make further changes. The Undergraduate Curriculum Committee will consider the proposals Thursday, several faculty members said. The subcommittee on a possible summer semester and experiential learning is proposing a new graduation requirement, the "Brandeis Semester," to be completed by 800 to 1,000 students a year either during the summer, fall or spring after a student's first year. The new program would apply to incoming students entering in the fall of 2010, according to the proposal. Students could fulfill the Brandeis Semester requirement through programs such as an Environmental Field Semester, expanded work in a lab over the summer, a Brandeis Summer Arts Festival, Summer Study Abroad opportunities, an internship away from Brandeis during the fall or spring or intensive summer language study, according to the committee's proposal. "I would really have appreciated the option of doing the summer research with courses specifically geared toward people interested in scientific research," Lydia Flier '11, a student representative on the committee, said. Increasing the student body, by having more students live off campus instead of having a Brandeis Semester would be difficult because of a shortage of affordable housing in Waltham, Prof. Tim Hickey (COSI), chair of the subcommittee, said. Additionally, some Waltham neighborhoods might be less used to college students. The goal is to maintain the number of on-campus beds at 2,850 while the undergraduate student body increases from 3,200 to 3,700 over five years, according to the proposal.According to the committee's proposal, the committee members estimate that between $500,000 and $700,000 may be needed for increased staffing in the Hiatt Career Center and the Study Abroad Office. "If we were going to do this, it would definitely require an investment," Hickey said.The committee's proposal also states that students would take the equivalent of three courses as part of their Brandeis Semester, either on campus or through online courses, which is equal to 12 course credits instead of a full semester of 16 credits. Therefore, according to the proposal, students would only have to pay 75 percent of full tuition during either the fall or spring semester. Hickey explained that requiring just a summer semester would be difficult because some students cannot apply their federal and state financial aid to a third consecutive semester. To address this problem for students who choose a summer program, the proposal suggests that midyear students could complete their Brandeis Semester during their first summer or that juniors could spend their last summer as a Brandeis Semester with the intention of graduating early. The proposal also suggests that the University consider opportunities for students to take a semester off and possibly complete a not-for-credit paid internship after a summer Brandeis Semester.At the Feb.12 Academic Open Forum, Prof. Sasha Nelson (BIOL), a member of the subcommittee, explained how adopting a mandatory summer session with a quarter system such as Dartmouth College's would be difficult because it "would take a large amount of faculty resources out of the fall and spring" in order to offer enough courses in the summer.The members of the Business major subcommittee note that their proposal has the potential to attract more students to Brandeis. According to the proposal, 17 percent of college applicants nationwide express interest in a Business major, while only five percent of admitted Brandeis students do, signifying untapped interest in business. Students will need to take classes in both the areas of Business Administration and Business and Society. "[At other schools] the student ends up leaving after four years having had half their degree in business. In our case, the student leaves Brandeis and still has two-thirds of their degree outside of business," Prof. Ben Gomes-Casseres (IBS), chair of the subcommittee, said. According to the proposal, the committee was not asked to estimate the program's costs or revenues. Gomes-Casseres said that more sections would likely be necessary for core courses but that the program would mainly build on existing offerings. According to an online student survey conducted by students, 52.3 percent of Brandeis Business minors expressed interest in the idea of a Business major. Adam Eisenberg '09, student representative to the Subcommittee, noted that "one of the things that a lot of employers look for is students who have business skills." In another effort to attract more students, the preliminary draft proposal regarding a Communications, Media and Society major submitted to the Academic Restructuring Steering Committee by five faculty members from American Studies, Journalism, Anthropology and Sociology notes that "courses of study that consider how, why and to what end we communicate with one another have become increasingly popular." According to their proposal, journalism is the third most popular minor after Business and Legal Studies and a number of students are completing Independent Interdisciplinary Majors in the area. "Our thought is, let's formally recognize what is already happening at Brandeis," Prof. Maura Jane Farrelly (AMST), director of the Journalism program, said. The major would build on a large number of already-existing courses at Brandeis, according to the proposal. "What we are probably going to propose is that the existing Internet Studies minor program and the existing Journalism minor program be subsumed into this major," Farrelly said. In order to incorporate a Liberal Arts aspect to the program, the proposal suggests that students be required or encouraged to double-major or minor in another Liberal Arts discipline. The faculty members suggested that students could concentrate in three different tracks in Journalism: Technology, Commun-ication and Society as well as Politics, Commerce and Culture.Correction: The headline and first sentence originally abbreviated CARS as the "Committee on Academic Restructuring." It is actually the "Curriculum and Academic Restructuring Steering Committee."
(02/24/09 5:00am)
Those looking for evidence of the growing unrest among college-aged students need search no further than New York University. This past Friday, police ended a nearly two-day occupation of the school's Kimmel Center by a student organization called Take Back NYU. Though the protest may seem reminiscent of our own fabled Ford Hall occupation-whose 40th anniversary we recently commemorated-and our own struggle against an often-opaque administration, the reality is that the NYU protest has little in common with our own revered rebellion and stands as an example of poor organization, noncooperation and unrealistic expectations.On the surface, it seems that our peers' concerns do not differ greatly from our own. Transparency took precedent at NYU as well, with the protestors demanding access to the University's operating budget, investments and endowment.However, a quick glance further down the list reveals many more ill-considered requests. Lacking any serious comprehension of the school's budgetary situation, NYU protesters demanded a freeze on tuition increase and the full recognition of all need-based scholarships while simultaneously mandating that all the school's excess supplies and materials be sent "to rebuild the University of Gaza." In all, the list included 13 separate demands, none of which was met by NYU administrators. This scattershot protest serves as a warning to both students and administrators about the need to speak the same language. Administrators need to remain transparent in order to give students the information they need to reach well-reasoned conclusions. At the same time, students need to remain civil and focused in their efforts as well.Brandeis students should be proud of the progress made in getting the administration to cooperate with students through peaceful protest and active participation. The many open forums alone, well attended by both students and administrators, illustrate the positive relationship that can be achieved when the appropriate lines of communication are followed. Out of NYU's undergraduate population of nearly 20,000, only a few dozen participated in either the Kimmel Center occupation or the subsequent protest against the school's disciplinary actions, which included the suspension of 18 students who participated in the occupation. It may be tempting to join our peers in these more extreme forms of protest, but the evidence for progress points to the more cooperative approach that we've adopted at our own University. Students need to keep their channels with administrators open, not barricade them shut.
(02/24/09 5:00am)
It has been nearly one month since the University administration shocked the Brandeis community with an e-mail announcing its decision to close the Rose Art Museum and sell art from its collection. Since the Jan. 26 e-mail announcing the passage of the Board of Trustees' resolution, the decision has been restated to the point where it may seem as if the administration has backed off its initial intentions. But while the language of the initial decision may have changed, the University's intentions have remained the same. The Rose will still transition from a public museum to a teaching space for the school, and the University will still sell the art if necessary in order to help alleviate its financial troubles. The confusion that has permeated the Rose situation lies in the University's words, not its intended actions."The new statement from the University president, Jehuda Reinharz, proposes certainly a much milder way of phrasing where we're headed, but I still think we're headed in the same direction," Prof. Eric Hill (THA), the chair of the Committee to Review the Closing of the Rose, told the Justice Feb. 13.The initial Jan. 26 press release stated that the Board of Trustees "voted unanimously to close the Rose Art Museum," adding that "the University will publicly sell the art collection." Two weeks later, following extensive publicity in national publications like the Boston Globe and the New York Times, Reinharz seemed to backtrack from the original decision in a Feb. 5 e-mail to the Brandeis community. The e-mail read: "The Museum will remain open, but in accordance with the Board's vote, it will be more fully integrated into the University's central educational mission," and also stated that "The [initial public statements] gave the misleading impression that we were selling the entire collection immediately, which is not true." Reinharz blamed himself in part for the misunderstanding, channeling President Barack Obama by writing, "I screwed up."But Reinharz's second e-mail did not violate the initial Board of Trustees resolution. The original resolution stated, "The University administration is authorized to take the necessary steps to transition the University's Rose Art Museum to a teaching center and exhibition gallery. These steps shall include, to the extent appropriate, review by the Office of the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and court approval, followed by an orderly sale or other disposition of works from the University's collection." The resolution does not mention the word "close," and as Reinharz said in the first student open forum held Jan. 28 and organized by Student Union President Jason Gray '10, it merely gave the University proper authority to sell art. It did not mandate that the University sell any pieces.When the decision first broke, Provost Marty Krauss told the Justice that "Ultimately, [closing the Rose] was a decision by the Board, not the administration." Like Reinharz's initial statements, Krauss' words were somewhat misleading. The miscommunication occurred in representing the Board's words in a sufficiently concrete way to the public. As Reinharz wrote in his Feb. 5 e-mail, "[my initial statements] did not accurately reflect the Board's decision."Reinharz first mentioned this communication failure three days after the original resolution, after the story began to receive attention from national publications. Reinharz said at a Jan. 29 faculty meeting that "no one had anticipated that we could have" what he later called "an avalanche of bad publicity," to audible discontent among the faculty. Prof. Marc Brettler (NEJS) echoed the opinion of many faculty members when he said, "Many of us are worried what kind of mechanisms will be put in place [so a further] public relations disaster does not occur." While the University regretted a part of its decision, its regret was in its miscommunication with the public and not in the content of the decision itself.And so as students protested the museum's closure and sought answers to their questions at open forums, the faculty voted to establish the Committee to Review the Closing of the Rose, concerned about future University decisions that could lead to similar public outcry. At a second student forum a week after the Jan. 29 faculty meeting, Reinharz seemingly affirmed the CRCR's importance when he told the audience, "How [the Rose] will function is up to the faculty."But even with the committee's formation, Hill said the University's intentions with the Rose remained as they always have. "I don't necessarily see any changes of course from what the administration originally announced," he said. This interpretation echoed Chairman of the Rose Board of Overseers Jonathan Lee's Feb. 9 comments. "They still intend to sell the art, and they still intend to kill the museum," Lee said.The confusion therefore emerges out of the University's language in describing its original intentions. Brettler's comments at the Jan. 29 faculty meeting underscore the public's confusion over University semantics. Brettler criticized the administration for saying, "In one official document everything will be sold, in one interview [only some things will be sold], and then today maybe nothing will be sold." The language of the original Board of Trustees resolution, however, did not mandate any of those possibilities.The only backpedaling that has occurred has been in the interpretation of the original unspecific language of the Board of Trustees resolution, not in the University's intentions. The intent all along appears to have been to end the Rose's tenure as a public museum, sell art to fill funding gaps if the University must do so and instead use the Rose as a studio and teaching space. But the language used has obfuscated the University's actual intentions. "I think this is what you call spin doctoring," Lee told the Justice.
(02/10/09 5:00am)
An article in News last week did not finish. The last sentence should have read, "'[The Rose] is not a dead corpse; this is somebody that needs life support,' she concluded, to all-around applause." (Feb. 3, p. 8).A photo credit in Forum last week incorrectly spelled the name of the photographer. The photographer's name is Max Breitstein Matza, not Max Breistein Matza. (Feb. 3, p. 11).An article in Sports last week incorrectly spelled the first name of the University president. The University president is Jehuda Reinharz, not Juhuda Reinharz. (Feb. 3, p. 13).An article in News last week incorrectly identified the position of Diana Pisciotta. She is a spokeswoman for the Carl and Ruth Shapiro Family Foundation, not the executive vice president. (Feb. 3, p. 6).
