(04/16/13 4:00am)
If elected as Student Union president, you will take over the reins of a Union that has both many strengths and weaknesses. What is the biggest flaw in the current state of the Union, and how do you plan to rectify it? David Clements '14 * The biggest flaw in the current state of the Student Union is the perception students have of both its role and its potential. The goals of the Student Union, according to its website, are to "improve University life, advocate for student needs, and protect student rights." Unfortunately, as of late, the Union has not succeeded in accomplishing these goals. As Student Union president, I vow to refurbish the image of the Union from being a governing body looking down on clubs to being a true service for the student body through which they can voice their concerns, propose initiatives and have a real voice. As president, I will accomplish this goal through a more aggressive approach to the administration and Board of Trustees-treating them as partners, not superiors-more advertisement of Union projects and accomplishments, increasing our co-sponsorship and support of individual clubs; promoting and advertising the accomplishments of individual students and clubs; and ensuring that I, along with the rest of the Union, is more approachable, open and responsible to student needs. I truly believe that once the Union gets more "out there," its image will change for the better, thereby improving student life and the trust that the student body has in us. After all, the Union belongs to the students. * David Clements '14 is the Student Union treasurer, the Undergraduate Departmental Representative for the Politics department and a former member of the Student Advisory Board to the Dean of Arts and Sciences.
* Ricky Rosen '14
* I would say that the most prominent flaw in the Union is that its mission has become somewhat unclear; we are not here to cater to the needs of the administration-the Student Union exists to represent students and act on their behalf. The Union president should not be afraid to speak up on behalf of the 3,500 students he or she represents. I would remedy this weakness by raising my voice on the things that matter most to Brandeis students: one, dining; two, housing; and three, tuition. I would advocate for more compromise in all of those areas; In dining, I would work on reforming the structure of the meal plans and push for more on-campus dining options during vacations. In terms of housing, I would speak up on behalf of those students who cannot afford to live on campus. Finally, I would fight for transparency in the budget process; students should know where every penny of the 59,000 we're paying for tuition goes-we should also know what changes are being proposed before it is too late to change them. I am not afraid to speak up for students on the issues about which they care the most. * Ricky Rosen '14 is the Student Union executive senator, Class of 2014 Senator, a Student Conduct Board member and former Vice-President of the Brandeis Libertarian Conservative Union.
* Daniel Schwab '14
* As the senator of Charles River/567 over the past year, I have been exposed to a number of major issues within the student government. The most important issue we can improve upon is transparency of the Student Union's role with the student body, particularly strengthening the role of the senate. The senate's role in the union is to voice the issues of their constituents. However, over the past year senators have been both ill prepared for their responsibilities and not fully informed of their capabilities. To prevent a loss of information between annual elections of senators, I believe that a one-week senate-training program should be instituted. This program will entail having elected senators sit down with more experienced senators to discuss past initiatives and the overall role of a senator. Through this program the legislative branch of the student government will be more effective in voicing the student body's concerns to the administration. These smaller changes will aid in creating a more cohesive Student Union. * Daniel Schwab '14 is the current Charles River/567 senator, a member of the Hunger and Hopelessness for Waltham Group, and a member of the Services Campus Operations Work group.
*
(04/16/13 4:00am)
Like many of my peers, the past few weeks and months have been spent editing r?(c)sum?(c)s, writing endless cover letters, eagerly awaiting responses and doing phone interviews. March and April is internship season, when many of us search for working opportunities and experience in fields we are interested in. Of the three government internships I applied for this summer, all of them are unpaid. Of the internships during the school year I have had, they too have been unpaid. As an intern, I did secretarial and research work, made copies, wrote letters, found background for upcoming legislation and I enjoyed my experience and found it incredibly worthwhile, regardless of pay. However, unpaid internships are unethical, and not because high school and college students work between 20 to 40 hours a week, doing work that an adult secretary or staffer would get paid to do. Unpaid internships give students and young people the experience they would otherwise not be able to get and also can help students get ahead faster. They are unethical for social class reasons. I am lucky enough to be from a family that can support me so that I can come home for summer break and take an internship for no pay. Not everyone is that lucky. Many young people who might want to intern at a law firm or a science lab or for a professor, cannot do so for financial reasons and must get a job in the service industry or retail instead. There is nothing wrong with holding a part- or full-time job during the summer. Summer and school year jobs provide students with work experience and money. However, there is a big difference between being able to put down on your r?(c)sum?(c) that you served an elected official or an esteemed scientist versus waiting tables or babysitting. In no way am I trying to say that one is superior to the other. Unpaid internships and paid work experience are equally beneficial and important, and I wish I had more of the latter. However, not every employer or graduate school will necessarily think so. Like it or not, some schools and employers will be impressed by work experience and work ethic, while others would rather see internships at big-name firms. I'm not saying that every single employer or grad school will feel this way, and many do look at work experience, but that cannot always be guaranteed. There are a few solutions I've come up with for fixing this problem with unpaid internships, and the inherent ethics issues that come with them. The easiest, and best, option for students, obviously, would be to pay students minimum wage or above for the time they spend working. Not only would young people get the necessary work experience that they need to get ahead in their fields, but everyone, regardless of socioeconomic class, would have the opportunity to pursue their passions without worrying about the financial cost. Students wouldn't have to give up on an internship because it is not financially feasible. Obviously, this is not the best solution for firms and employers, and therefore is very unrealistic. Companies have no legal reason to offer any sort of compensation for those who would be working for free. However, given that some of the best and brightest students cannot afford to work for free, companies should try to figure out some balance between profits and attracting young minds who otherwise could not work an internship over a paying job. A more realistic idea would be to provide unpaid interns with some sort of stipend for areas like transportation, food or other common necessities. For example, if a student wanted to intern at a bank, the bank could provide them with some money to buy work appropriate clothing, or if an internship requires public transportation, the intern would get a Charlie Card for free from the company. Alternatively, internships could only be part-time jobs. That way, students could work a paid job and still have the opportunity to try out something they are passionate about. It does not cost a business or the government or a hospital any extra to have two unpaid interns splitting a full work load than it would to have one unpaid intern doing the work by themselves. If anything, part-time internships could increase productivity. Unpaid internships are great, and I've enjoyed all the ones I've done. Employers and groups that offer unpaid internships can and should consider how to make the socioeconomic factors that restrict smart young people from pursuing such opportunities less of an issue. Anyone who can intern, should be able to take an unpaid internship and not worry about the financial burden. *
(04/16/13 4:00am)
The Union presidential candidates expressed their ideas and platforms to the Justice. Daniel Schwab '14 I consider myself ... very social ... I believe that I'm able to communicate very well and efficiently with the student body ... I'm not a candidate who's going to get stepped on by the administration, I'm going to be the voice of the students and push the administration to get what we need and make life more suitable and convenient for the students at Brandeis. [T]here's a problem on campus ... [T]here's not a lot of time to study ... I believe as a very academically-driven university, that 24/7 library hours is something that should be established year-round ... Also, the funds that can be diverted from Einstein's [Bros. Bagels] to EcoGrounds, in addition to keeping at least the green room open 24/7 ... Additionally, I'd like to open the bar on campus, at the Stein, as a sports bar, keeping it open throughout the week ... I feel like it would promote a safer environment if [the bar were] controlled by the University, in addition to the fact that it would have a nice place for the students to hang out and collaborate, talk and socialize. David Clements '14 I've proven myself as the treasurer, which is probably the hardest, most rigorous position .... As part of the Union, I was an assistant treasurer as a freshman and sophomore and then treasurer for this year ... I also understand that I was not able to do this alone. Thankfully, I have 10 assistant treasurers who were able to do a lot of the work with me. I was able to delegate and because of this, I understand the need to delegate in order to get things done but at the same time maintain a responsible and business-like atmosphere within the Union. I've proven myself to be not only accessible to student leaders and student clubs, but I've also been a past club leader ... I think the main issue with the Student Union now is that we're viewed as a governing body looking over the students, and looking over student clubs and controlling their finances ... I plan on changing the image of the Student Union to being a resource for students, to being the segue for students through which they can voice their concerns, propose an initiative ... I just plan on getting more out there, having a presence on campus, Ricky Rosen '14 In my two years in the Student Union, I have demonstrated that I am a proven leader and a proven representative who will not stop until the needs of his constituents are satisfied. As the Class of 2014 Senator, I achieved nearly all of my goals to reform dining, including creating the Senate Dining Committee, adding items to the [Provisions on Demand Market] meal plan, extending [its] hours on Saturday nights and Einstein's hours on Sunday afternoons. Students have come to me over the last two years with a multitude of issues, and they have trusted me to address their concerns with university officials ... I am driven and endlessly determined to carry out every single one of my goals. If elected ... [i]f Aramark stays the provider, I would push for students to have the ability to use more than one meal per meal period and allowing unused meals to carry over into additional guest meals until a limit of 15 guest meals is reached. If Aramark is not the service provider, I would fight for students to have a say in what dining options are available ... I would work to expand Brandeis's work-study program since there are a considerable number of students eligible for Federal Work Study who were not able to find on-campus employment (myself included). By working with the Provost, the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, and Hiatt, I would be able to create more jobs in offices across campus for which only Work-Study students are eligible. My other major goal is for the Union would be to find new ways to connect with the student body-this would involve working with BTV and Getz Media Lab on creating entertaining monthly video updates to inform the student body of Union initiatives.
(04/16/13 4:00am)
At Thursday's faculty meeting, Provost Steve Goldstein '78 announced that Prof. Robin Feuer Miller (GRALL) has been awarded a prestigious Guggenheim fellowship to work on a book project. Dean of Arts and Sciences Susan Birren also named the winners of several teaching awards, as well as the five Student Achievement Awards given to current sophomores with impressive academic and extracurricular accomplishments. According to a BrandeisNOW press release, Miller is one of 175 academics awarded a 2013 Guggenheim fellowship out of 3,000 applicants. Her project will be about two 19th-century Russian novelists, Fyodor Dostoevsky and Leo Tolstoy, both of whom she has written books about previously. "I was deeply honored that my proposal ... garnered enough support to result in my becoming a Guggenheim Fellow," she said in an interview with the Justice. "I think what is most special to me is to receive an award that is shared by so many creative artists in fields like photography, poetry and fiction writing. It seems to me that the Guggenheim Foundation strives to honor creativity in a wide variety of fields. In our day and age that is especially affirming to the values which I most cherish." "I am so excited about tackling this project and by the Guggenheim Foundation's support of it-I can't wait to start," said Miller, according to the press release. Miller will be a Visiting Fellow at St. Edmund Hall next year at the University of Oxford, according to the press release. Teaching Awards Also at Thursday's faculty meeting, Birren announced the four 2013 winners of the teaching and mentoring awards for the School of Arts and Sciences. Prof. Don Katz (PSYC) won the Lerman-Nebauer '69 Prize for Excellence in Teaching and Mentoring. "My Brandeis students are the ones who inspire me to perform, ... which is enough of a 'gift' for me (my interactions with the Lerman Neubauer fellows, who carry the same name as my award, have been particularly inspiring)," he wrote in an email to the Justice. "The fact that they then turn around and give me ANOTHER gift-the gift of good evaluations-makes me feel ... lucky and well loved." Prof. Sara Shostak (SOC) was awarded the Michael L. Walzer '56 Award for Teaching. "I was absolutely thrilled to receive the Michael L. Walzer '56 Award for Teaching," said Shostak in an email to the Justice. "I love teaching at Brandeis. I am inspired by the students in my classes, and those with whom I've worked on independent research projects. So, receiving an award based on student nominations is deeply meaningful to me." The third teaching prize, the Louis Dembitz Brandeis Prize for Excellence in Teaching, was awarded to Prof. James Morris (BIOL). "I am very grateful to receive this award," said Morris in an email to the Justice. "My sincere thanks goes to all of the students I have taught over the years, as well as to my own teachers. Both have provided me with inspiration and guidance in and out of the classroom." Prof. ChaeRan Yoo Freeze (NEJS) received the Dean's Mentoring Award for Outstanding Mentoring of Students in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. According to Birren, one of Freeze's students said that "by mentoring others, she has trained many of us to be mentors ourselves." In addition, Heller School for Social Policy and Management Dean Lisa Lynch presented the Heller School teaching, mentoring and staff awards, which went to, respectively, Prof. Carole Carlson (Heller), Prof. Tatjana Meschede (Heller) and Norma DeMattos, program administrator for both the MBA and MPP programs. "I feel very honored and deeply touched by the comments students wrote about my work with them," said Meschede in an email to the Justice. As I often say, my work with students is one of the most gratifying job I can think of, watching them learn and grow right in front of my eyes, taking in what I can offer and make it their own, and at the same time myself challenged to learn and grow together with them." Prof. Laurie Lesser also won a teaching award from the Rabb School of Continuing Studies. Brandeis Achievement Awards Also at Thursday's faculty meeting Birren announced the winners of the Brandeis Achievement Awards, an annual scholarship prize given to "currently enrolled sophomores who have distinguished themselves by their outstanding scholarship and academic achievements at Brandeis." The students awarded were Gloria Cadder, Paul Kim, Iosefa Percival, Alva Stux and Dana Trismen, all '15. Cadder, who is majoring in English, Creative Writing and Politics and minoring in Legal Studies and Women's and Gender Studies, is the editor of the Brandeis Law Journal and a member of the Mock Trial Association. "I am very honored to be a recipient of this award and to be considered part of such a fantastic group of students," said Cadder in an email to the Justice. Kim, who is double majoring in Chemistry and Biology, works in a chemistry lab, rows on the crew team and is a co-founder of Education for Students by Students. "I definitely feel very blessed and honored to have been chosen," said Kim. "The whole experience has been really humbling, and if anything having now won the award, I feel motivated to work even harder now." Percival studies Environmental Studies and Economics, is president of the Brandeis Surfing Club, and works at the technology help desk. His recommenders said that he has "all the characteristics of a leader, he's personable, inquisitive, intelligent, responsive, empathetic, and wants to make a difference in the world." Stux, an Anthropology major and Legal Studies minor, is part of the Middle East Music Ensemble and a member of SCRAM. One of her faculty recommenders called her "one of the most rewarding students I have worked with over my 17 years of teaching at Brandeis." Trismen, a triple major in English, Creative Writing and Psychology, is an editor of both the Brandeis Hoot and Where the Children Play. Her faculty recommender said that she was "a leader, place her in a small room and she will organize it and make it better." None of the award recipients besides Cadder and Kim could be reached for comment by press time. -Tate Herbert contributed reporting
(04/09/13 4:00am)
President Obama's new science initiative, Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies, will have a Brandeis touch as Prof. Eve Marder (BIOL) has been named to the advisory board of the initiative, according to an April 5 BrandeisNOW press release. She will join 13 other scientists who will form the "brain trust" to direct the project. "This is an extremely exciting time for neuroscience research," wrote Marder in an email to the Justice. "The new initiative is to foster development of technological innovation in support of understanding how the brain works." "I was pleased to be included in the delegation to the White House in support of the BRAIN initiative," she continued in her email. The initiative will research all levels of brain function, ranging from individual neurons to entire circuits, according to the press release. One of the goals of the initiative is to "provide insight into devastating diseases like Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and autism." The initial goal of the advisory board will be securing funding for the project to go forward. "As a member of the 14-person BRAIN working group for the [National Institutes of Health], I will be part of intensive discussions that will start very soon and will be designed [to] formulate some of the implementation of the funding plans for the NIH's part in the initiative," wrote Marder in her email. According to the press release, President Obama is planning to ask major scientific institutions such as the NIH, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and the National Science Foundation for help with funding for the project. Brandeis is the smallest research university represented on the advisory board, according to the press release, joining Stanford University, Harvard University, Brown University, Princeton University and the California Institute of Technology. Marder, who has been a member of the Brandeis faculty since 1978, has a distinguished professional history, picking up numerous awards, prizes and recognitions, including the 2012 George A. Miller Prize in Cognitive Neuroscience and the 2012 Karl Spencer Lashley Award. She is also a Massachusetts Academy of Sciences Fellow. In the press release, Marder expressed unwavering enthusiasm about the potential of the project. "We're at a very interesting and exciting moment in neuroscience research right now because the technological innovations of the last decade have completely transformed the kinds of experiments we can do today," said Marder. "We couldn't even dream of these experiments 15 years ago." "Do I think new technologies will drive exciting new experiments?" she continued. "Absolutely. Will there be completely unanticipated breakthroughs in health? Absolutely."
(04/09/13 4:00am)
Last Wednesday, University Registrar Mark Hewitt announced via email that a change in policy will require students who plan to enroll in over 23 credits worth of courses to pay an additional fee. "Starting with Fall term 2013, students who are approved to enroll in more than the 22 credit maximum will be charged additional tuition for any credits beyond 23. The additional charge will be at the per credit rate," the email read. According to Hewitt, for the 2013-2014 academic year, the price per credit for students who entered after spring 2012 will be $1,387, while the price for those who entered before spring 2012 will be $1,375. "The tuition model the University uses is based on students taking an average of four courses [or] 16 credits," said Hewitt in an interview with the Justice. "I believe the feeling was that students who were taking additional courses beyond the 22-that is the maximum you can get without petition-should pay some additional tuition because they're actually accessing additional services." "[I]n 1996, we did charge for overloads, and that was for any number of credits beyond 22. Then I believe it was in 2003 or 2002, the policy was changed as part of the packaging around residency and so on ... [I]t was determined not to charge for overloads. Now recently because of looking more closely at the budget and how things are working, the decision was made that we really should reinstitute that." According to Hewitt, during the fall 2012 semester, 48 students requested to exceed the credit limit of 22. "I do recall that when there was a tuition charge involved that there were many, many fewer students who chose to do an overload. There was typically no more than 10," said Hewitt. "It's mainly juniors and seniors, occasionally sophomores. The current pattern is we'll see students who are trying to accelerate and graduate in [less than eight semesters]. They'll try to take additional courses," said Hewitt. In the 2002-2003 University Curriculum Committee report, a proposal was revised to change the academic residency requirement to eight semesters, with a minimum of seven under specific circumstances. The report stated that under the plan, "a student could graduate by studying at Brandeis for eight semesters; or seven semesters plus the equivalent of four additional courses from AP, IB, etc.; or six semesters at Brandeis, one abroad, and one from a combination of AP, IB, etc.; or six semesters at Brandeis and two abroad." The UCC unanimously approved the proposal, and it was forwarded to the faculty meeting for legislative approval. Currently, according to the University website, students who enter as first-years are required to complete a minimum of seven full-time semesters at Brandeis during fall or spring semesters, approved fall or spring study abroad programs or approved Justice Brandeis Semester programs, while transfer students must complete a minimum of four full-time semesters. Students who enter as first-years must complete 128 credits worth of courses at Brandeis, meaning that an average of 16 credits must be completed during each spring or fall semester for a student who wishes to stay for eight semesters, not including summer or outside courses, and an average of about 18.3 credits for those who wish to graduate in seven semesters and do not have IB or AP credits from high school. Transfer students must complete a minimum of 64 of the 128 credits from Brandeis fall or spring semesters. Therefore, the average number of credits per semester for a transfer student to graduate as anticipated is also 16. These averages all fall below the maximum number of credits per semester, and therefore the number of credits at which the University will begin to charge per overload credit. Making seven the minimum number of semesters for a student entering as a first-year allows for a student to complete courses at a pace that does not require overloading. However, allowing students to graduate in seven semesters rather than eight leaves an opportunity for students to graduate earlier. Some students consider taking an overload of courses in order to complete their major and minor requirements so that they can graduate early. In addition, as the minimum number of courses a student may take per semester is three, if a student takes only three courses for more than four semesters, students might have to exceed five courses and take an overload of courses during later semesters in order to graduate on time. According to Hewitt, for students who graduated between August 2011 and May 2012, the average of total credits accumulated per student was 136, or 17 credits per semester for those who spent eight semesters on campus. In addition to those who are looking to graduate early or need to include courses in their schedules as seniors, other students who request overloads are "[s]tudents who are doing really well and want to challenge themselves, they have multiple majors, they're trying to be pre-med and something else at the same time, or they're looking at engineering schools. Students who are doing the 3-2 Columbia program often do overloads," said Hewitt. Surrounding schools in the Greater Boston area share similar policies in terms of the maximum number of courses a student can take. However, each university differs in terms of whether or not it charges for exceeding the maximum number of credits. According to the Boston University website, "[a]dditional tuition will be charged for all credits in excess of 18, except to students with a cumulative GPA of 3.3 or higher, or students in their senior year who have accumulated at least 88 credits. Additional tuition will be charged to all students for credits in excess of 20." At BU, the credit system is similar to Brandeis' in that 18 credits is equivalent to approximately 4.5 courses. According to a representative from the BU Registrar, the additional charge is per credit, and is about $1,400 at the school of Arts and Sciences. However, students still have the ability to petition the fee. Schools such as Boston College and Tufts University currently uphold policies that do not require students to pay an additional fee for overloads. According to a representative from Tufts Student Services, the maximum amount of credits is 5.5, which is equivalent to 5.5 courses. According to the Boston College website, "Students are eligible to overload if they have earned at least a 3.0 overall cumulative GPA or a 3.0 GPA in the semester immediately prior to the one for which the overload is sought, in which case they may register online for a sixth course of three credits or more and a maximum of 24 credits." Hewitt sees value in the new policy, but acknowledge the disadvantages. "In some sense I think it's important that there be some equity so that students who really are taking advantage of more services should pay some more to fund those services," said Hewitt. "At the same time on a personal level, it's nice to see students taking advantage of things, because that's why you're here ... I can see both good and bad here."
(04/09/13 4:00am)
Ardak Meterkulova '13 and Mangaliso Mohammed '13 have each been selected to receive this year's Davis Projects for Peace, a $10,000 prize to implement programs this summer that they have designed to promote peace. Each has created projects that address HIV/AIDS prevention in their home countries. Meterkulova will be working in Kazakhstan to "help young students in [the] Almaty region protect themselves from the disease and to be more educated about their sexual health," she wrote in an email to the Justice. Mohammed will work in Nkwalini, Swaziland with orphans living with HIV to create a vegetable garden and free-range chicken farm and to promote healthy eating and traditional methods of food production, according to an email from Peace, Conflict and Coexistence graduate program administrator Cheryl Hansen. The Davis Projects for Peace is an external program that works with over 90 universities, according to its website. Brandeis has worked with the program for four years and submits two applicants each year, said Hansen in an interview. Though the program typically chooses only one recipient per school, this is the second year that both applicants from the University have been selected, Hansen said. Meterkulova will work to create a bilingual education film in Kazakh and Russian to raise HIV/AIDS awareness and that will be used, along with exercises and text, in summer camps in the primarily Muslim Almaty region, wrote Hansen in her email. Meterkulova said in the email that her project proposal was influenced in part by receiving the Presidential Scholarship of Kazakhstan in 2008, which allowed her to study internationally and "entrusted [her] with the responsibility to use the knowledge from [her] education to improve Kazakhstan." As a double major in Business and Health: Science, Society, and Policy, Meterkulova wrote that classes she has taken at Brandeis have taught her about working to create healthy environments in communities that are "raised in conditions of adversity." "Choosing Brandeis University for my education has also alerted me to the importance of being a world leader by creating peace for a sustainable future," she wrote. Mohammed, a double major in Economics and Environmental Studies, said in an interview that the Anthropology courses he has taken at Brandeis have helped shape his project and place the concepts he has learned at Brandeis in a larger context. Mohammed said that the fact that both his and Meterkulova's projects deal with HIV/AIDS prevention is a coincidence and that he looks forward to seeing how the projects begin "dealing with it in totally different ways and in different settings." He has focused his project on promoting healthy eating, he continued, because the medication provided to patients to treat HIV/AIDS is ineffective without food and because he hopes to start with "fundamental" steps to improve conditions for those living with the virus. "It's about finding ways ... to empower people to overcome whatever stresses they're facing, and if I can help do that, I'll be happy," Mohammed said. "I expect really good things from both of these students," said Hansen. "They're both just dynamite." The PAX program will host a reception to honor Mohammed and Meterkulova on Monday, Apr. 22 from noon to 1:30 p.m. in the Shapiro Campus Center Art Gallery.
(04/09/13 4:00am)
Last Friday, Paul Anastas Ph.D. '89 delivered a presentation in Rapaporte Treasure Hall about innovations in green chemistry titled "Designing a Sustainable Tomorrow" in the third-annual Saul G. Cohen Memorial Lecture. Anastas, a professor of chemistry at Yale University, has served as President Barack Obama's assistant administrator for the Office of Research and Development at the Environmental Protection Agency. He also worked with the administrations of Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. The yearly lecture honors Cohen, a Chemistry professor at Brandeis from 1950 to 1986, who passed away in 2010. According to the program for the event, "[t]he Cohen Lecture was established through the generosity of his family and friends, and reflects his wide variety of interests." The award was presented to Anastas by Cohen's son, Jonathan Cohen. Other members of the Cohen family were also in attendance. In an introduction to the event, University President Frederick Lawrence said that because of Cohen's dedication to establishing Brandeis as both a research and a liberal arts university, "his work and his vision continue to work through everything we do." Prof. Irving Epstein (CHEM) introduced Anastas, stating that Cohen would have been "delighted" with the recipient for three reasons: that he is a Bostonian, that he is "acutely concerned with the effects of science on people" and that he is a Brandeisian, "one of our own." According to Epstein, Anastas coined the term "green chemistry," or sustainable chemistry, in 1991 and has worked since then to bring it to realization. Anastas quoted advice from his mother to begin his presentation: "Any award is only as valuable as the amount of respect you have for those bestowing the award," noting that his respect for Brandeis and Cohen gave the award "immense value." Anastas added that his work in chemistry focuses on "the human side of the equation" and the impact of our actions on the future. In his discussion of unsustainable production practices, he said that he is a "strategic optimist," meaning that his approach to sustainability and renewability is that "it's not just that everything can be fine; it's that it will be fine, if we do the right thing." Anastas discussed the issue of toxins-including endocrine disrupters, which impact reproductive health-that are unable to be broken down and that are present in everyday products. Examples of the impact of these toxins, he said, are that human breast milk cannot be sold on the open market because of its contamination and that pharmaceutical substances persist in water systems to the point of impacting human health. "It's one thing to pursue immortality," said Anastas. "It's not OK to impart that immortality on the materials that we create." Concerning the quest for a sustainable future, Anastas posed the question, "Is it possible to be doing the right things but doing them wrong?" He discussed the fallacy of thinking in terms of systems and separating elements of sustainability into categories such as water, energy, biodiversity and climate, when in fact these elements not only overlap but are the same. This philosophy may result in working to improve one sector while harming another, examples of which include producing solar energy while depleting rare earth metals and creating energy-saving light bulbs while using toxic mercury. The definition of green chemistry, Anastas said, is the "design of chemical products and processes that reduce or eliminate the use and generation of hazardous substances." He added that the concept is "not a noble wish about being good to the birds and the bunnies" but rather a rigorous set of principles that are taught in courses across the country, including in his own. Researchers are applying these green chemistry principles to reassess current production methods, which generate waste even at 100-percent efficiency, and to assess how chemicals and toxins build up in the human body, Anastas said. He added that more companies have been integrating these principles into their products and that they have been applied to industries such as aerospace, cosmetics and agriculture, not only in theory but in practice. Rather than making products and production "a little less bad, a little bit more efficient" in incremental improvements, Anastas proposed that a more effective solution is transformational innovation and "leapfrog technology." An example of such innovation, he said, is biomimicry, which creates products that mirror techniques found in nature, such as adhesive substances that imitate the feet of geckos. In response to an audience question about maintaining strategic optimism in both chemistry and the political sphere, Anastas responded, "I do not think people are aware of the power and the potential of the possible, and I think that's an essential transformation that has to happen."
(04/08/13 4:00am)
It was the day of commencement and Abby Kulawitz '12, a recent graduate, was relaxing on campus with her parents, Carrie and Harvey Kulawitz. It was a beautiful summer day, but surprisingly, there were few places to sit outside. "We were walking around campus and thought, wow, this place could really use some benches," Mr. Kulawitz said. Out of this need, the Justice Louis D. Brandeis Bench Program was founded by the Kulawitzes as a way to raise money for the school in a way that also brings new outdoor social spaces to campus. When the Kulawitzes introduced the idea for the program to some people in the Brandeis community, the idea received a lot of positive feedback from the start. "We were having dinner with President Fred Lawrence and his wife and a group of parents and trustees at the house of Bruce and Susan Pollack. I mentioned it to them and everyone thought it was a great idea," Kulawitz said in an interview with the Justice. Harvey and Carrie Kulawitz decided to cleverly name the initiative after Louis Brandeis, who served "on the bench" as a Supreme Court justice for over 25 years. The program was devised toward the end of last year, with the help and support of Gayle Gordon '08, the advocate director of parent giving. "It was quite easy on my end," said Gordon. "They [the Kulawitzes] had a vision for the project and were passionate about the project and wanted to take the lead." With a minimum donation of $10,000, a bench on campus and a personalized plaque is installed in honor of a person or group of the donor's choice for the enjoyment of students, faculty and anyone else visiting campus. The plaque can include an inscription in remembrance of a loved one, or in dedication to a student or faculty member. For $25,000, a premium bench can be donated. The goal of the project is to get 50 donors, which would, in total, raise about half a million dollars. All the money from the project will go to the Brandeis Parent Bench Project Fund, a fund that "supports the universities greatest needs," including student scholarship, faculty salaries and extracurricular programs, according to Gordon. Kulawitz hopes the benches will, "Contribute to communication on campus [and become] a place to relax in the middle of everyone's busy and crazy day," he said. The Kulawitz family donated the first bench in honor of Abby. The bench is located on the path leading across the Great Lawn. The location holds special significance to Abby, who requested that the bench be placed there, having had some of her greatest memories on the Lawn as an Orientation Leader. Abby hopes that the benches will make students think of Brandeis as a place where memorable experiences, like hers, can occur anywhere on campus. "I want students to be aware, be aware of their surroundings as they walk outside and utilize the space outside of the classroom," Abby said. The benches on campus have campured the interest of the student body. As it turns out, they are a more divisive topic than one might imagine. Some students seem happy with their ability to socialize outdoors. Harrison Goldspiel '13 explained that to the justice "the campus really shines during the spring and fall, when hundreds of students are out and about in their quads, on grassy fields and in Sachar Woods," he said. Gathering outdoors is not perfect. Elior Moskowitz '16 explained that while she enjoys laying out a blanket on Chapels Field while socializing or doing homework, she thinks the campus could benefit from more designated sitting places. "Picnic tables or maybe even social congregating spots that could also contribute to the aesthetic nature of campus, such as a fountain with seating." Susannah Stern '16 also commented on her disappointment with some the structured outdoor seating on campus. "I do however find that the benches are a bit randomly placed and out of the way," she said. The bench program is intended to address a growing need on campus for more outdoor seating. The culminating desire for more outdoor living spaces has resulted in the installation of numerous new benches within the last few months. Vice President for Planning and Institutional Research Dan Feldman has worked with the Facilities department initiative to place benches in areas such as the patio in front of Goldfarb Library and modern-looking wooden benches on the Fellows Garden between the Shapiro Science Center and Shapiro Campus Center. Gordon explained that because so many new benches have already been installed because of the facilities initiative, many of these already existing benches will be given plaques. "We are lucky to have a beautiful campus. "There are a lot of great indoor spaces and it is nice to improve them," said Gordon. Harvey Kulawitz hopes more people will come forward and make this generous contribution to the bench program that enhances the campus atmosphere. "It's nice siting on the grass sometimes, but it is also really nice to have a bench," he said.
(03/19/13 4:00am)
DNA provides the body with an extremely intricate blueprint by which it functions, but how does it notice and correct itself when it is damaged or filled with errors? Professor of Genetics at Harvard Medical School Stephen Elledge is working to answer that question. Last Thursday, he talked about his progress as the latest recipient of the 2012 Lewis S. Rosenstiel Award for Distinguished Work in Basic Medical Science. The Rosenstiel Award is given to recognize researchers whose work has made a significant impact in the field of basic science research by a panel of Boston-area scientists who are appointed by the director of the Rosenstiel Basic Sciences Research Center. In an interview with the Justice, Elledge said he was "deeply honored" to receive the award. "I looked at the list of previous awardees and it's a stellar group of scientists, and it's really an honor to be considered among them," he said. Prof. Jim Haber (BIOL) opened the lecture by introducing Elledge as "one of the most creative inventors of technology that [researchers] all use." Elledge himself then took over, presenting an overview of the work that led to his involvement in researching the DNA damage response. Elledge had originally studied DNA damage and repair as a Ph.D. student at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "I decided after doing that and getting my Ph.D., the last thing in the world I wanted to do was work on DNA and repair," he joked at the event. "And so I went as far away from it as I possibly could." Eventually, Elledge said that he found himself interested in working on gene targeting. In an interview with the Justice, Elledge explained that he had located a gene in E. coli that coded for RecA, a protein involved in genetic recombination, the process by which new genetic information is produced by the crossing over of segments between alleles or homologous chromosomes. Elledge intended to locate and clone the equivalent of the gene in yeast cells, and eventually in mammals. "I thought genome engineering would be a great thing to study and I would just see where that would take me from there," he said. However, Elledge discovered that the yeast gene he cloned did not code for RecA, but rather for ribonucleotide reductase, a protein important in the synthesis of deoxyribonucleotides, the building blocks of DNA. "Of course, I found this to be incredibly depressing because I didn't want to work on nucleotide synthesis," said Elledge. "That wasn't the goal." However, Elledge said that he noticed the RNA of the gene was activated in response to ultraviolet light, which causes mutations in DNA and agents that block DNA replication. This observation led Elledge to the idea that there must be a large response that transmits information about these errors to these genes. This pathway, according to Elledge, is referred to as the DNA damage response. Elledge said that each person's DNA undergoes tens of thousands of "events" or modifications each day, providing plenty of opportunities for mistakes to occur. The cell must be equipped to respond to these errors, either by correcting them if possible or by killing off the cell in order to prevent it from dividing and amplifying the damage. According to Elledge, the response to this damage is more adaptive than innate, meaning that the cell must be able to transmit information about the type of damage in order to generate a specified response rather than having one general response for all types of damage. In short, Elledge said that sensors circulating the DNA pick up information regarding the DNA damage and send the information to a control center in the cell, much like the brain. Here, information about the error is processed and a response is activated. The response, said Elledge, must be highly specific, as many enzymes that can be activated by the response can also be destructive to the gene itself if turned on at the wrong time or place. Elledge went on to summarize his work, focusing on two specific proteins that are involved in some pathways of the DNA damage response, SMARCAL1 and ZRANB3. According to Elledge, both of these proteins seem to be related to each other, as parts of their DNA sequences are similar. They also share common functions. Both SMARCAL1 and ZRANB3 appear to be involved in restarting one of the steps of DNA replication. Elledge's work also showed that SMARCAL1 is required for resistance to DNA damage and that ZRANB3 is necessary for the cell to survive after its DNA has been damaged during replication. Elledge said in the interview that he hopes his work will provide the scientific community with a "different way of looking at how cells recognize and utilize" information about damage to DNA when they attempt to correct the genetic information affected.
(03/19/13 4:00am)
The recent, automatic, across-the-board federal government cuts, known as sequestration, will significantly impact university research, according to Paul O'Keefe, assistant provost for research administration. "[The National Institutes of Health] has been cut by 5.1 [percent] this year, and [the National Science Foundation] has already announced that it will fund 1,000 fewer projects this year, a decrease of around [nine percent] from the number they usually fund," explained O'Keefe in an email to the Justice. "The impact on Brandeis will be significant, but it's hard to predict exactly how significant at this point." "We're working hard to produce a strategy for responding to whatever may come our way," O'Keefe added. Over the past three years, Brandeis has received an average of $48 million per year in federal research funding, according to O'Keefe. Two thirds of those funds, about $32 million, come from the National Institutes of Health, while 12 percent, almost six million dollars, comes from the National Science Foundation. The remainder of the federal funds Brandeis receives-about 21 percent, equaling about $10 million-comes from other federal agencies. Within Brandeis, 76 percent of those funds goes to the sciences, while the Heller School for Social Policy and Management receives 21 percent of the funds, leaving about one percent to other departments. "I think the sequestration business coming out of Washington is just a good example of [how] sometimes things are going to be out of your control, that can give us a pretty solid kick in the head," said University President Frederick Lawrence at a faculty meeting earlier this month. "That's not just a Brandeis story, that's research universities generally. I can tell you that my inbox is filled with correspondence from fellow presidents in the [Association of American Universities] about how are we going to deal with this." "None of us is in a situation to simply absorb that without taking pretty careful attention," Lawrence added. -Andrew Wingens
(03/12/13 4:00am)
The Brandeis Asian American Student Association celebrated the beginning of the 41st Asian Pacific American Heritage Month last Friday. This year's APAHM performance was markedly different from those in years past, creating an innovative show that entertained the audience while addressing social issues relevant to Asian Americans and reaching them on a personal level. "We wanted to create an APAHM that was more about social justice rather than just entertainment, but still have both components," said Esther Lee '15, one of the two event coordinators. APAHM has always been fun, and this year continued their tradition of bringing in YouTube celebrities and talented performers to the stage in the Levin Ballroom-but BAASA reached new ground this year with its theme, "Breaking the Bamboo Ceiling." The theme refers to "the factors that limit Asian-Americans from achieving the same professional goals that more privileged groups can accomplish," as written in the event's program. However, the show sought to demonstrate the ways in which Asian Americans surmounted this barrier, rather than the disadvantages of the "bamboo ceiling" itself. Brandeis alumna and singer-songwriter Sophia Moon '02 was first on the stage, encouraging the audience that the best way to break the ceiling is "doing what they were passionate about." She used herself as an example, stating that her musical performance was her way of fighting the stigmas she has faced. She performed three songs from her first album Back at Me, including the single "Five Star Recovery," which peaked at number 17 on the Boston Pop Charts after its 2009 release. Brandeis' South East Asia Club also stepped up its game this year with a moving skit about Southeast Asian stereotypes, which featured Kaiwen Chen '16 and Eddy Zheng '16 as two best friends from Vietnam studying in an American high school. One rejected his culture and attempted to act "white," while the other remained true to his background. In an endearing conclusion, the two friends reconciled their differences and realized together that the key to fitting in at an American high school did not require being ashamed of their culture, but rather embracing it, coming to accept it as part of who they are. Kris Sun Liu, a beat boxer and neuroscience student at Harvard University, took the stage next. He performed an exciting freestyle piece that sampled Taylor Swift's "I Knew You Were Trouble" and the Black Eyed Peas' "Boom Boom Pow," dropping heavy beats and high-speed rhythms. BAASA also hosted Project Plus One, a non-profit organization founded at Brandeis whose mission is to support the Bairo Pite Clinic in East Timor, represented by Leila May Pascual '15. After explaining the mission of her group, Pascual performed a rousing rendition of Beyonce's "Halo." After the intermission, Calvin Wang '16 and Emily Huang '15 presented their documentary-style video titled "What Does It Really Mean to be Asian-American?" Professionally done, it addressed a sensitive topic involving identity and race without heavy-handed directing, creating a discussion which "sought to dismantle stereotypes," as stated by Associate Dean of Arts and Sciences Elaine Wong. The film's concluding lines, lettered in white against black, stated "Don't let the label 'Asian-American' define you." Following the video, the Wellesley Aiko group, whose name means "Blue Drum," performed a traditional musical art of Japanese culture, demonstrating "how an old art can be made new." Eleven girls lined the stage, each with a large drum played in unison to an orchestrated, haunting beat. In traditional BAASA fashion, the ceremony concluded with two high-energy modern dance performances by members of the club.APAHM continues this Saturday with the SKIN Fashion Show, which will be held at 5:30 p.m. in Levin Ballroom. *
(03/12/13 4:00am)
Fire and ice-that's what the words brand and eis mean in German. That's why to me Brandeis is the most exciting place to be-a place of radically high aspirations that embraces difference and transformation. We don't shy away from tackling questions others may deem too big, or too small, or too controversial. Brandeis students are made of that same stuff-they thrive in an environment that allows them to seek "the truth even unto its innermost parts" without giving a hoot about whether it is considered appropriate or fashionable by the rest of the world. Brandeis is different from other universities in that everyone in this community shares in these aspirations. We're not na??ve. We truly believe that we can make a big difference. And our students go out into the world and do just that. If we know so well who we are and what we want to accomplish, why do we need a strategic plan? This plan is a pragmatic document for the president. It aims to streamline fundraising efforts and direct attention to areas that need expansion. It is not a "rallying cry" or a call to action on our part. It does not say "we've gone astray and need to refocus our attention." It does not try to reinvent us. We know who we are, and we know we're good at what we do. The strategic plan just presents our portrait to those who don't know us yet so they, too, will fall in love with us and be inspired to join our community. The plan is more like Brandeis' Match.com profile. Which is why we need to get our profile right and not try to 'retouch' it beyond recognition or avoid saying things about ourselves that people may not like. There are a few places where the current profile could still be improved. As it is currently written, the plan does not do justice to the very foundation of our academy-the liberal arts. The humanities and the social sciences are the bedrock on which a liberal arts education thrives. Our largest school may be called the College of Arts and Sciences, but its foundation is not only in arts and sciences, but also in the classical and modern languages, philosophy, history and literature. And it is in the social sciences (from economics to psychology) where most students choose their major. The plan also proudly tells the story of how the Jewish community's gift to U.S. higher education has become this gem among the top research universities in the country, and how Albert Einstein dared us to achieve the name Brandeis. But that includes embracing our history, not just our future. Brandeis, after all, was not only a Supreme Court Justice, but also a Zionist. The controversies that come with this are part of what makes Brandeis unique. If we want others to recognize us in this document, we have to own it. We can check 'non-sectarian' and still acknowledge our Jewish family background. Overall, students should be very happy with this plan. It puts their experience first, not faculty research ambitions or lofty goals for a fancier campus. Many objectives outlined in the plan will lead to more small-class experiences for all students, to even closer contact with faculty from first-year seminars to capstones for seniors. Students will have more flexibility to complete their degrees and more options to pursue their multi-dimensional interests.When our alumni talk about Brandeis they don't typically talk about their major. What they often remember most about Brandeis is a class they dared take that lay far outside their chosen path, a class that challenged them to think differently. If funded, many initiatives in this plan will make more such experiences possible. The plan's most important goal is its embrace of diversity, especially of diversifying the faculty. This is an ambition truly worthy of Brandeis, and one that's long overdue. Just last Thursday Prof. Tom Shapiro from the Heller School for Social policy and Management's Institute of Assets and Social Policy spoke at the Women's and Gender Studies' annual Lubin Symposium about the devastatingly increasing wealth gap between whites and minorities in the United States. By embracing and expanding the work of the Posse Foundation, and by training and promoting new leaders with diverse backgrounds, Brandeis shows its commitment to walking the talk. All our students stand to benefit from this initiative. My personal favorite, an emphasis on sustainability, still needs elaboration in the plan. It's not just a "domestic" issue about health and student retention, but one that aims to tackle the fires and loss of ice our whole world is facing. Our very name urges us to become leaders in the fight against climate change. We have expertise in all schools to tackle the many open questions that are crying for answers, from chemistry, to economics, to sustainable development, to philosophy. Here is a perfect opportunity to align our commitment to cutting-edge science and research across the disciplines with our mission to protect and heal our world, tikkun olam. All our prospective students know that their future depends on the knowledge we produce in this area. We owe this commitment to them. Ultimately, the best part of this strategic planning exercise will not be the document that forms its conclusion. It's the very Brandeisian process that's getting us there. The many meetings, discussions and drafts meant many in our community had to learn more about the University as a whole and grapple with each other's different opinions. Everyone who participated understands Brandeis a little bit better as a result. Which is why this plan will ultimately strengthen us as a community, no matter how many well-heeled new lovers it attracts. We will continue to be hot and cool... (and that's not just meant as a pun on the HVAC system in Shiffman...) Professor von Mering is an associate professor of German and the Director of the Center for German and European Studies. She also served as the chair of the faculty senate in 2009-2010.
(03/12/13 4:00am)
"What can-and should-Brandeis University be? What will this institution look like a decade from now, when we celebrate our 75th anniversary?" These are the questions that the recently released "work in progress" draft of the strategic plan starts with. The answer that the plan produces, however, is not a forecast of the coming years, but rather how we can follow the path that has already been laid out for us by the very founders of the University. In order to fully appreciate the strategic plan for what it accomplishes-and it accomplishes plenty-we must first define the goals of the strategic plan. In his email to the Brandeis community upon the release of the original framework, the first step of the strategic planning process, Provost Steve Goldstein '78 stated "The framework seeks to ensure that Brandeis University remains a clear first choice for exceptional students, faculty, and staff committed to making a difference in the world." The focus of the entire strategic planning process is to further the model of the University that makes Brandeis so attractive. The goal is to "remain a clear first choice," not become one. Therefore, excessive and costly maneuvers such as creating a Brandeis law or medical school were never in the cards. The mission of Brandeis was never vocational; rather the mission was always to facilitate students and professors to positively influence the world, something commonly referred to in both Jewish liturgy and the strategic plan as "Tikkun Olam." So how does Brandeis fulfill that mission? Or, a better question to ask is, why does Brandeis need a strategic plan to accomplish that mission? Why can't we simply continue on the course that we have been navigating since 1948? What changed that forced the administration to re-evaluate everything from the physical aesthetics of buildings to decreasing the admission rate of students? Only once we answer these fundamental questions can we then in fact see what exactly the strategic plan achieves. The answer lies in an interview conducted by New York Magazine with now infamous ponzi schemer Bernard Madoff, published on Feb. 27, 2011. Madoff states the following about his "friend" Carl Shapiro: "Let's put it this way: Shapiro probably built more hospitals in Boston and put more buildings in Brandeis University than you can imagine" with money Madoff says he earned. According to both Business Insider and the Boston Globe, the Carl and Ruth Shapiro family foundation lost 145 million dollars in the ponzi scheme. Who knows how much money Brandeis' largest and most famous donor lost from his own wallet. The financial hit to both the Shapiros and many other donors to the school left the University in a financial pickle with then President Jehuda Reinharz stating in an email to the Brandeis community in 2009, "Brandeis is feeling the effects of the global financial downturn. The value of our endowment has fallen, the forecast for fundraising is unclear, and student financial-aid needs have grown." He goes on to say "the Brandeis endowment is down about 25 percent from its peak of more than $700 million." Obviously, all of these quotes and numbers are from 2009, the heart of the economic recession. However, according to a recent article published by the Justice, the endowment is currently around 700 million. Only now are we financially back to where we were pre- Madoff, pre- 2009, pre- changeover in the presidency of the University. The fact remains that Brandeis needs new donors. We need funds to allow Brandeis to "remain" a top-tier research University with a focus in the liberal arts. And that is precisely what the goal of the strategic plan is, a pitch to donors. The institution of Brandeis needed to quantify in writing for what the potential donor's funds would be used. The University needed to give potential donors a reason to sign on the bottom line. With that lens, the entire strategic plan becomes clear. Why were so many pages devoted to recounting the history of Brandeis? Simple: we must sell the mission statement of Brandeis to the greater world. The morals, ethics and social justice agendas of the University are precisely what are ingrained in this campus and that is what we so desperately want to continue to accomplish in the future. Social justice and impacting the world are precisely why Brandeis must continue to be a flourishing University. These are goals that potential donors can get behind. However there still must be content; something concrete that donors know their money is going toward. Why were some of the few things quantified in budget amounts the continued remodeling and extending of buildings including the Heller School and the International Business School? Simple. Those are dollar amounts that can easily be pitched. We, Brandeis University, need money to accomplish this and that (whatever this and that may be). Quantifiable objects are a much easier sell, with a higher success rate, than simply asking for blank checks. Look at professor's salaries. The strategic plan states: "Brandeis must also compete for faculty-and this will become increasingly important as a large proportion of our faculty approaches and reaches traditional retirement age." A professor or student might wonder why this seemingly obvious point needs to be included in the plan. To a donor, hiring new faculty to replace those retiring is a concrete aspect of university operations that requires funds. In layman's terms, "we need your money to hire top tier faculty." Is the plan perfect? Far from it. Why virtually no mention of the social sciences or humanities, including pillar departments like Near Eastern and Judaic Studies, exists is beyond me. The social sciences are just as integral to Brandeis as is the call for social justice, and hopefully those are concerns that will be raised and addressed in the feedback sessions. However, the success of the strategic plan will always be dependent on the strength of the endowment and the increase in donations in the years to come. As the saying goes, "money talks." *
(03/12/13 4:00am)
The draft of the strategic plan released this past week details the administration's vision for Brandeis for the next decade. The draft contains encouraging mentions of infrastructure renovations and increased attention paid to the sciences, the International Business School and the Heller School for Social Policy and Management. Yet the plan lacks significant detail about the liberal arts. Moreover, the plan shows virtually no concern for the cost of attendance for students. This board appreciates the practicality of prioritizing some areas over others with the handicap of scarce funds. However, that does not mean the University should completely neglect certain areas in order to improve others. The floor of the University should not be lowered; the ceiling should be raised. We believe that in order for the University as a whole to be seen as a world-class institution, the liberal arts departments must continuously be improved and further developed. The plan states, "The founders of Brandeis conceived a distinctive model: a small university, bringing together the virtues of a liberal arts college and a research institution." However, the draft focuses on the specific improvements for the science and research aspects of Brandeis rather than the humanities and social sciences. If the liberal arts are not constantly evaluated and improved, we worry they may fall behind the standard that we have come to expect. In an email to the Justice, University President Frederick Lawrence addressed the concerns regarding the future of the liberal arts at Brandeis. He stressed that the University's dedication to the liberal arts goes without saying. He added, though, that the lack of humanities within the plan would be addressed. Another point of concern stems from the affordability of the University for students. The University has raised tuition each of the past two years by at least four percent, despite the University already being the second most expensive school in Massachusetts before this year. Although the strategic plan mentions the need to offer "sufficient financial aid to enable admitted students to attend," it does not directly address the increasingly expensive cost of attendance. The cost of attendance must be considered when the University allocates money to all of the various projects that the plan calls for. Affordability is a key aspect in attracting students and the escalated price is something that the University must stabilize to remain a top-tier University. The strategic plan is labeled on the cover as a "work in progress." With an addition relaying the University's continued dedication to the liberal arts, as well as a course of action in response to the lack of affordability for students, this "work-in-progress" plan can become a plan the entire Brandeis community can be proud of.
(03/12/13 4:00am)
"What can-and should-Brandeis University be? What will this institution look like a decade from now, when we celebrate our 75th anniversary?" These are the questions that the recently released "work in progress" draft of the strategic plan starts with. The answer that the plan produces, however, is not a forecast of the coming years, but rather how we can follow the path that has already been laid out for us by the very founders of the University. In order to fully appreciate the strategic plan for what it accomplishes-and it accomplishes plenty-we must first define the goals of the strategic plan. In his email to the Brandeis community upon the release of the original framework, the first step of the strategic planning process, Provost Steve Goldstein '78 stated "The framework seeks to ensure that Brandeis University remains a clear first choice for exceptional students, faculty, and staff committed to making a difference in the world." The focus of the entire strategic planning process is to further the model of the University that makes Brandeis so attractive. The goal is to "remain a clear first choice," not become one. Therefore, excessive and costly maneuvers such as creating a Brandeis law or medical school were never in the cards. The mission of Brandeis was never vocational; rather the mission was always to facilitate students and professors to positively influence the world, something commonly referred to in both Jewish liturgy and the strategic plan as "Tikkun Olam." So how does Brandeis fulfill that mission? Or, a better question to ask is, why does Brandeis need a strategic plan to accomplish that mission? Why can't we simply continue on the course that we have been navigating since 1948? What changed that forced the administration to re-evaluate everything from the physical aesthetics of buildings to decreasing the admission rate of students? Only once we answer these fundamental questions can we then in fact see what exactly the strategic plan achieves. The answer lies in an interview conducted by New York Magazine with now infamous ponzi schemer Bernard Madoff, published on Feb. 27, 2011. Madoff states the following about his "friend" Carl Shapiro: "Let's put it this way: Shapiro probably built more hospitals in Boston and put more buildings in Brandeis University than you can imagine" with money Madoff says he earned. According to both Business Insider and the Boston Globe, the Carl and Ruth Shapiro family foundation lost 145 million dollars in the ponzi scheme. Who knows how much money Brandeis' largest and most famous donor lost from his own wallet. The financial hit to both the Shapiros and many other donors to the school left the University in a financial pickle with then President Jehuda Reinharz stating in an email to the Brandeis community in 2009, "Brandeis is feeling the effects of the global financial downturn. The value of our endowment has fallen, the forecast for fundraising is unclear, and student financial-aid needs have grown." He goes on to say "the Brandeis endowment is down about 25 percent from its peak of more than $700 million." Obviously, all of these quotes and numbers are from 2009, the heart of the economic recession. However, according to a recent article published by the Justice, the endowment is currently around 700 million. Only now are we financially back to where we were pre- Madoff, pre- 2009, pre- changeover in the presidency of the University. The fact remains that Brandeis needs new donors. We need funds to allow Brandeis to "remain" a top-tier research University with a focus in the liberal arts. And that is precisely what the goal of the strategic plan is, a pitch to donors. The institution of Brandeis needed to quantify in writing for what the potential donor's funds would be used. The University needed to give potential donors a reason to sign on the bottom line. With that lens, the entire strategic plan becomes clear. Why were so many pages devoted to recounting the history of Brandeis? Simple: we must sell the mission statement of Brandeis to the greater world. The morals, ethics and social justice agendas of the University are precisely what are ingrained in this campus and that is what we so desperately want to continue to accomplish in the future. Social justice and impacting the world are precisely why Brandeis must continue to be a flourishing University. These are goals that potential donors can get behind. However there still must be content; something concrete that donors know their money is going toward. Why were some of the few things quantified in budget amounts the continued remodeling and extending of buildings including the Heller School and the International Business School? Simple. Those are dollar amounts that can easily be pitched. We, Brandeis University, need money to accomplish this and that (whatever this and that may be). Quantifiable objects are a much easier sell, with a higher success rate, than simply asking for blank checks. Look at professor's salaries. The strategic plan states: "Brandeis must also compete for faculty-and this will become increasingly important as a large proportion of our faculty approaches and reaches traditional retirement age." A professor or student might wonder why this seemingly obvious point needs to be included in the plan. To a donor, hiring new faculty to replace those retiring is a concrete aspect of university operations that requires funds. In layman's terms, "we need your money to hire top tier faculty." Is the plan perfect? Far from it. Why virtually no mention of the social sciences or humanities, including pillar departments like Near Eastern and Judaic Studies, exists is beyond me. The social sciences are just as integral to Brandeis as is the call for social justice, and hopefully those are concerns that will be raised and addressed in the feedback sessions. However, the success of the strategic plan will always be dependent on the strength of the endowment and the increase in donations in the years to come. As the saying goes, "money talks." *
(03/12/13 4:00am)
"What can-and should-Brandeis University be? What will this institution look like a decade from now, when we celebrate our 75th anniversary?" These are the questions that the recently released "work in progress" draft of the strategic plan starts with. The answer that the plan produces, however, is not a forecast of the coming years, but rather how we can follow the path that has already been laid out for us by the very founders of the University. In order to fully appreciate the strategic plan for what it accomplishes-and it accomplishes plenty-we must first define the goals of the strategic plan. In his email to the Brandeis community upon the release of the original framework, the first step of the strategic planning process, Provost Steve Goldstein '78 stated "The framework seeks to ensure that Brandeis University remains a clear first choice for exceptional students, faculty, and staff committed to making a difference in the world." The focus of the entire strategic planning process is to further the model of the University that makes Brandeis so attractive. The goal is to "remain a clear first choice," not become one. Therefore, excessive and costly maneuvers such as creating a Brandeis law or medical school were never in the cards. The mission of Brandeis was never vocational; rather the mission was always to facilitate students and professors to positively influence the world, something commonly referred to in both Jewish liturgy and the strategic plan as "Tikkun Olam." So how does Brandeis fulfill that mission? Or, a better question to ask is, why does Brandeis need a strategic plan to accomplish that mission? Why can't we simply continue on the course that we have been navigating since 1948? What changed that forced the administration to re-evaluate everything from the physical aesthetics of buildings to decreasing the admission rate of students? Only once we answer these fundamental questions can we then in fact see what exactly the strategic plan achieves. The answer lies in an interview conducted by New York Magazine with now infamous ponzi schemer Bernard Madoff, published on Feb. 27, 2011. Madoff states the following about his "friend" Carl Shapiro: "Let's put it this way: Shapiro probably built more hospitals in Boston and put more buildings in Brandeis University than you can imagine" with money Madoff says he earned. According to both Business Insider and the Boston Globe, the Carl and Ruth Shapiro family foundation lost 145 million dollars in the ponzi scheme. Who knows how much money Brandeis' largest and most famous donor lost from his own wallet. The financial hit to both the Shapiros and many other donors to the school left the University in a financial pickle with then President Jehuda Reinharz stating in an email to the Brandeis community in 2009, "Brandeis is feeling the effects of the global financial downturn. The value of our endowment has fallen, the forecast for fundraising is unclear, and student financial-aid needs have grown." He goes on to say "the Brandeis endowment is down about 25 percent from its peak of more than $700 million." Obviously, all of these quotes and numbers are from 2009, the heart of the economic recession. However, according to a recent article published by the Justice, the endowment is currently around 700 million. Only now are we financially back to where we were pre- Madoff, pre- 2009, pre- changeover in the presidency of the University. The fact remains that Brandeis needs new donors. We need funds to allow Brandeis to "remain" a top-tier research University with a focus in the liberal arts. And that is precisely what the goal of the strategic plan is, a pitch to donors. The institution of Brandeis needed to quantify in writing for what the potential donor's funds would be used. The University needed to give potential donors a reason to sign on the bottom line. With that lens, the entire strategic plan becomes clear. Why were so many pages devoted to recounting the history of Brandeis? Simple: we must sell the mission statement of Brandeis to the greater world. The morals, ethics and social justice agendas of the University are precisely what are ingrained in this campus and that is what we so desperately want to continue to accomplish in the future. Social justice and impacting the world are precisely why Brandeis must continue to be a flourishing University. These are goals that potential donors can get behind. However there still must be content; something concrete that donors know their money is going toward. Why were some of the few things quantified in budget amounts the continued remodeling and extending of buildings including the Heller School and the International Business School? Simple. Those are dollar amounts that can easily be pitched. We, Brandeis University, need money to accomplish this and that (whatever this and that may be). Quantifiable objects are a much easier sell, with a higher success rate, than simply asking for blank checks. Look at professor's salaries. The strategic plan states: "Brandeis must also compete for faculty-and this will become increasingly important as a large proportion of our faculty approaches and reaches traditional retirement age." A professor or student might wonder why this seemingly obvious point needs to be included in the plan. To a donor, hiring new faculty to replace those retiring is a concrete aspect of university operations that requires funds. In layman's terms, "we need your money to hire top tier faculty." Is the plan perfect? Far from it. Why virtually no mention of the social sciences or humanities, including pillar departments like Near Eastern and Judaic Studies, exists is beyond me. The social sciences are just as integral to Brandeis as is the call for social justice, and hopefully those are concerns that will be raised and addressed in the feedback sessions. However, the success of the strategic plan will always be dependent on the strength of the endowment and the increase in donations in the years to come. As the saying goes, "money talks." *
(03/12/13 4:00am)
The first detailed draft of the strategic plan-a centerpiece of University President Frederick Lawrence's administration since its start-was released last week, and it drew criticism for what some perceived as its focus on the sciences and graduate schools, while ignoring the humanities and social sciences. The draft-which administrators have stressed is a "work in progress," requiring more feedback-focuses on the academy and ways to improve education in areas such as the sciences, graduate schools and research, and indicates a desire to invest in hiring new, young faculty. The draft frames Brandeis as "a small university, bringing together the virtues of a liberal arts college and a research institution." In this way, the draft states, Brandeis is distinctive among its peers. Embedded in the draft is the tension between all that the University seeks to achieve and its finite financial means. It states, "we cannot afford to invest equally in every field, and so we must make strategic judgments about where we are able to attain and sustain national prominence." Among its concrete initiatives, the draft promises to quadruple the budget for renewal of campus facilities to $10 million and create an updated campus master plan, two areas particularly relevant to student life on campus. But the focus of the draft is the educational experience. It calls for the University to "grow and nurture key academic programs" and "strengthen selected departments," although it does not specify which departments or programs will benefit from these "strategic investments." At the faculty meeting last Thursday, some faculty expressed general approval and appreciation for the development of the plan, but also addressed concerns about the draft's coherence and focus on graduate schools and sciences. Prof. Peter Conrad (SOC) said at the faculty meeting that there was little mention of the humanities and social sciences in the draft and that, "this volume, as it's written now, attaches the future of Brandeis to the two professional schools and the sciences." "I think we need to rethink, do we really mean it that we're going to be led by the Heller School for Social Policy and Management and [International Business School] and the sciences and everybody else is subservient or tied to that, or do we have a larger vision?" Conrad said. Some faculty present at the meeting, including Chair of the Faculty Senate Prof. Eric Chasalow (MUS) seemed to agree that the document didn't necessarily capture the social sciences. "I agree with what you're saying here. In fact, it occurred to me also, meaning the part about the sciences, that we think of all the work we do here as changing the world and that that document doesn't really capture that," said Chasalow. Prof. Len Saxe (Heller) said, "The first transformation of fundamental scientific discovery, if I'm remembering correctly, could be transformative, but why limit it to-I'll call it-the hard sciences, the biological sciences; how about the social sciences? The social sciences are more at Brandeis than global integration. Rebuilding the physical space of the social science quad is only part of the social science story at Brandeis." Saxe added that the draft lacks coherence. "The way in which it forms the mosaic that we are and what we want to be didn't come through to me, and I think the next step in the process is 'how do we develop the coherence of the story?'" In an email to the Justice following the meeting, Lawrence said the University's dedication to liberal arts and social sciences is sometimes taken as a given. "As we move forward toward the final stages of the planning process, it is important that these commitments do not go without saying; we should explicitly state our commitment to the humanities and social sciences, which with the creative arts are the core of a liberal arts education," wrote Lawrence. Alumni, and their potential to function as a base of fiscal support, also play a part in the draft. "Our alumni are essential to the future of Brandeis. We must look to them not only for reliable and robust financial support. We must also draw upon them as a vital resource for recruiting students, for providing entr?(c)e to internships and employment, for making connections between Brandeis and the worlds of business, government, and the professions - in short, for extending the reach of Brandeis, nationally and internationally," states the draft. Another goal is to "strengthen graduate education at Brandeis" - a theme prevalent throughout the plan, with proposals in later pages to strengthen the postdoctoral programs, build an additional complex for the IBS, and continue sustenance and repositioning of the Heller School. The draft also wants to make Brandeis a first-choice destination for students. Among the actions that would affect the admissions process is an effort to decrease the acceptance rate. "Gradually decrease admission rate while steadily increasing yield (number of students accepting offers of admission), raising students' academic qualifications and expanding student diversity," for example, is an action item. Student Union President Todd Kirkland '13, who is on the Strategic Planning Steering Committee, said he thinks the draft is "very well done." "In terms of student participation, I believe student input has been an essential component of this process from the start," wrote Kirkland in an email to the Justice. "Although no students wrote the document, it is evident to me that administration understands and plans to help relieve many issues facing the student body." Executive Senator Ricky Rosen '14 wrote in an email to the Justice, "I think that the Strategic Plan succeeds in outlining Brandeis' transformation over the next decade into a world-class academic institution." Provost Steve Goldstein '78 said in an interview with the Justice following the faculty meeting that he welcomed the feedback. "I think the feedback is exciting. ... I love the way they process, I love the way they analyze it because they're such broad thinkers," he said. This week, the administration planned three discussion sessions open to the entire community. One took place yesterday and the next two will be tomorrow from 11:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. in the Rapaporte Treasure Hall and Thursday from 9:30 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. in Levin Ballroom. The planning process began in fall 2011, when Lawrence appointed Goldstein to head the Strategic Planning Steering Committee. The initial timetable was to have a plan framework announced by the end of the 2011-2012 academic year and a final draft of the plan distributed by December 2012, according to Lawrence at an October 2011 faculty meeting. The process was then delayed several times to allow more time for discussions to take place. Now, the draft of the plan will be discussed at the March Board of Trustees meeting and approved as a final version at the May Board meeting. Brandeis has retained Elaine C. Kuttner of Cambridge Concord Associates, a consulting firm, to help with the strategic plan. -Tate Herbert contributed reporting
(03/12/13 4:00am)
Strategic Goal 1
(03/12/13 4:00am)
The $85 billion across-the-board federal spending cuts that took effect last month, known as sequestration, could significantly affect research funding at Brandeis as well as many research universities, according to University President Frederick Lawrence at last Thursday's faculty meeting. "I think the sequestration business coming out of Washington is just a good example of sometimes things are going to be out of your control, that can give us a pretty solid kick in the head," said Lawrence. "That's not just a Brandeis story, that's research universities generally. I can tell you that my inbox is filled with correspondence from fellow presidents in the [Association of American Universities] about how are we going to deal with this. ... None of us is in a situation to simply absorb that without taking pretty careful attention." "About three-fifths, or $40.8 billion, of all university research funding in Fiscal Year 2011 came from the federal government," according to a Huffington Post report on the recent National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics survey. Brandeis' peer research institutions are facing similar cuts to research funding. Stanford University, for example, is planning for reductions of about $51 million of its $685 federal research revenues, reported the Stanford Daily. According to the Harvard Crimson, Harvard University received $650 million from the federal government during the last fiscal year, meaning that "researchers across the University will have to cope with the impact of sharply constricted federal funding in the form of both decreased availability and reduced size of federal research grants." Harvard President Drew Faust traveled to Washington earlier this month to urge government officials to avoid cutting research funds. Boston University receives $300 million in federal funds "mainly from the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation," which "goes to federally funded research expenditures in grants," according to the Daily Free Press. The University did not respond to requests to provide information about the federal funds that Brandeis receives by press time. -Andrew Wingens *
