[309] in UA Exec
Re: You are being lied to.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jessica H Lowell)
Tue Apr 6 14:47:30 2010
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 14:47:21 -0400
From: Jessica H Lowell <jessiehl@MIT.EDU>
To: Martin F Holmes <goholmes@mit.edu>
Cc: "Liz A. Denys" <lizdenys@mit.edu>, Andrew Lukmann <lukymann@mit.edu>,
Ted Hilk <thilk@mit.edu>, hwkns@mit.edu,
Nathaniel Fox <natefox@mit.edu>, Alexandra Jordan <amjordan@mit.edu>,
Anthony Rindone <arindone@mit.edu>, UA
Senate <ua-senate@mit.edu>,
UA Executive Board <ua-exec@mit.edu>, cfs@mit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20100406121331.tgiy04lsgckg84og@webmail.mit.edu>
I second Winston and Wartman (and I would add Abelson, Sussman, and Slocum to
the category of sympathetic profs. Gray somewhat varies by issue - I have no
idea what he thinks about Dining. Personally, I wouldn't generally
take senior
admins into my confidence on controversial issues - they can be helpful
to work
with, but there's a difference between a helpful partner and someone
you really
trust. Hastings and Lerman both signed on to today's letter in the
Tech - make
of that what you will.
I would add Matt McGann in Admissions as someone I'd trust absolutely and who
can give good advice.
I *strongly* dis-recommend Randolph.
- Jessie
Quoting Martin F Holmes <goholmes@MIT.EDU>:
> Whenever I got the impression that students were being manipulated by the
> administration, there were a few key people I always went to for advice or
> help. Here's my laundry list of great contacts that you can be very forward
> and upfront with and who will listen to you and provide solid confidential
> advice:
>
> Dan Hastings (Dean for Undergraduate Education, not involved with DSL
> but great
> advocate and still has influence, respect, and power with senior admins)
>
> Bish Sanyal (former Chair of the Faculty, very sympathetic to student
> concerns,
> not sure of his current sway as former chair though)
>
> Paul Gray (former President, hard to get a meeting with, not directly
> involved
> with administration, but can provide you with great advice and still use his
> weight when he desires to add pressure to a situation)
>
> Phil Walsh (Director of Campus Activities Complex, very experienced and
> knowledgeable, able to provide good advice, has some sway within DSL
> and great
> experience with dining in the past)
>
> Anne McCants (former Chair of Faculty Committee on Student Life, huge student
> advocate, likely still has some influence within DSL)
>
> Jim Champy (one of the most influence members of the Corporation, member of
> Executive Committee of the Corporation, very difficult to get ahold of and
> likely requires a meeting request from Mike, Maggie, Vrajesh, or
> Sammi, a huge
> student ally although he usually works behind the scenes, provides very
> reasonable and balanced advice, has a ton of sway withing all levels of MIT)
>
> Steve Lerman (Vice Chancellor, about to leave MIT, provides awesome
> confidential
> advice, listens well to students, has huge sway within the administration but
> that may be subsiding given his pending departure from MIT)
>
> Rafael Reif (Provost, hard to get a meeting with, listens and
> sympathizes with
> students but requires a degree of tact since he's clearly a member of the
> senior admin, has a tremendous amount of sway and leverage)
>
> Dana Mead (Chairman of the Corporation, retiring at end of year,
> strong student
> advocate but also requires tremendous tact since he is a senior
> leader of MIT,
> tremendous amount of sway)
>
> Patrick Winston (Professor, very sympathetic to student concerns and provides
> good advice, limited sway withing DSL)
>
> Jed Wartman (limited sway but provides good sound advice)
>
> Robert Randolph (limited sway but provides good sound advice)
>
> I'd also recommend combing through recent issues of The Tech and Faculty
> Newsletter to identify other members of the faculty, administratior, or
> Corporation that you feel like may be strong student advocates.
>
> Martin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Quoting "Liz A. Denys" <lizdenys@MIT.EDU>:
>
>> I have a pretty well established relationship with Muriel. I'll try
>> to meet with her this week.
>>
>> -Liz
>>
>> Andrew Lukmann wrote:
>>> Hey Ted,
>>>
>>> I'm sorry to hear that, but it certainly makes sense given my
>>> experience with her when she was an Asst. Housemaster at Simmons
>>> (5-7 yrs. ago). I mentioned her mostly for the fact that she is one
>>> of the few people who are usually willing to talk with students and
>>> who, by the nature of her position, has some real leverage over
>>> DSL. In general, she's probably someone that active student
>>> advocates should build a relationship with - even if she proves to
>>> be altogether unhelpful on the dining front, she may be willing to
>>> take a stand on other things that students care about.
>>>
>>> -Andrew L.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ted Hilk wrote:
>>>> Hey Andrew,
>>>>
>>>> The last time I spoke with Prof. Muriel Medard, she was trying to
>>>> justify reducing financial aid by $1400 for students opting out of
>>>> the dining plan when the actual difference in expenses between
>>>> dining hall food and cooking for oneself over a year is only $500
>>>> on average. Nevermind the fact that this would essentially be
>>>> predicating student aid on student choices (should I get extra
>>>> financial aid if I want a new computer?). After half an hour she
>>>> finally admitted that the amount was arbitrary and that the extra
>>>> deduction was solely intended to 'encourage' students to buy into
>>>> the dining system. She is very polite and willing to talk at
>>>> great length about issues, but I'm afraid she does not appear to
>>>> be in support of the student perspective on this matter.
>>>>
>>>> Ted
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 7:12 PM, Andrew Lukmann <lukymann@mit.edu
>>>> <mailto:lukymann@mit.edu>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hey Jessie (and everybody else)...
>>>>
>>>> Like you pointed out, a number of reliable student allies in the
>>>> administration have moved on and on the whole, less cooperative
>>>> people have replaced them. Without a guy like Immer or Larry to go
>>>> to, this generation of student leaders is (I believe) having a
>>>> harder leveraging their relationships than we did. That said,
>>>> there are still a number of people who might have a bit of pull in
>>>> DSL that I would recommend people engage, if they haven't already:
>>>> Phil Walsh (CAC), Ann McCants (former faculty CSL chair), Muriel
>>>> Medard (CSL chair - though her opinions on dining might be
>>>> well-ingrained). Also, even though he is on his way out, I've
>>>> always found Steve Lerman to be a friend to students and he might
>>>> be in the position to speak (or act) a little more freely now that
>>>> he is moving to GWU.
>>>>
>>>> I think it's great to see a number of students realizing that they
>>>> need to hold administrators feet to the fire when they fall short
>>>> of their own rhetoric/promises regarding meaningfully engaging
>>>> students on important issues. If you (and I do mean all of you)
>>>> don't make it difficult (or embarrassing) for them to ignore you,
>>>> they will never have any incentive to act in your best interest
>>>> any time it conflicts with the easiest path to their goals (in
>>>> this case, dining cost effectiveness).
>>>>
>>>> Keep it up!
>>>> -Andrew L.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jessica H Lowell wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Quoting Daniel Hawkins <hwkns@MIT.EDU <mailto:hwkns@MIT.EDU>>:
>>>>
>>>> Jessie,
>>>>
>>>> We tried coming up with our own proposal last year (DPC).
>>>> Admins keep
>>>> calling it "an important piece of student input" and
>>>> completely ignoring its
>>>> contents. What's driving this is the desire to eliminate
>>>> the deficit and
>>>> "build community" around dining, which involves less
>>>> choice and more money
>>>> (but not MIT's money - they need to eliminate the
>>>> deficit). Those are
>>>> principles that everyone in the administration (that I'm
>>>> aware of) agrees
>>>> on. I haven't talked to Matt - I'll send him an e-mail.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, I saw the proposal. It looked like a good step. It's
>>>> the same old story
>>>> with Dining. When I dealt with that, though, it was easier,
>>>> because larryben
>>>> (Columbo's predecessor) was still around and he was on our side.
>>>>
>>>> Who does Columbo listen to? Presumably Phil Clay, but I doubt
>>>> Clay's useful
>>>> here. Immerman's gone, so that's a non-starter. The FSILGs
>>>> generally have a
>>>> stake in students not getting screwed over on Dining, since
>>>> less choice often
>>>> hurts their frosh and on-campus members - is anyone on the
>>>> FSILG side of the
>>>> Student Life staff persuadable and trusted by Columbo? Could
>>>> any of the RLAs
>>>> help here? If Admissions has any influence with Columbo,
>>>> which they may not,
>>>> they'd likely be willing to help you out with him.
>>>>
>>>> It sounds like if you keep working primarily with Columbo,
>>>> you're not going to
>>>> get anywhere. Obviously, you have to work with him,
>>>> communicate with him, not
>>>> antagonize him too much. But that doesn't mean you can't work
>>>> with other
>>>> people (sounds like a good project for a senator or two!).
>>>> And if you can dig
>>>> up administrative allies, they might be able to make more
>>>> progress with Columbo
>>>> than you can.
>>>>
>>>> Have you bugged your rich potential-big-donor alumni? Many
>>>> FSILGs and some dorm
>>>> living groups keep in contact with a lot of their alumni, and
>>>> might be able to
>>>> dig up a few wealthy folks who would be pissed about students
>>>> being screwed
>>>> over on dining.
>>>>
>>>> The UA has little real power given to it - it has to find ways
>>>> to manufacture
>>>> its own.
>>>>
>>>> - Jessie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Liz A. Denys
>> lizdenys@mit.edu
>>
>
>
>
