[1923] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Re: [Mit-talk] [UA-SCATR] New Card initiative
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven M Kelch)
Mon Jul 3 12:46:59 2006
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 12:35:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: Steven M Kelch <kelch@MIT.EDU>
To: Jacob Faber <jacob.faber@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <e9cc53d60607030925j56e312b8ja9efe09522c2d1bc@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: reubano@alum.mit.edu, ua-scatr@MIT.EDU,
"Pius A. Uzamere II" <pius@alum.mit.edu>, mit-talk@MIT.EDU
Errors-To: mit-talk-bounces@MIT.EDU
This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text,
while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
---300783356-2071004768-1151944559=:16993
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
You are absolutely right, and this has been suggested to me before.
The only thing that makes me hesitate is an issue of trust. With admins on=
=20
the panel, how do students know that they are not still being given the=20
run around?
This is not to say that we are opposed to working very closey with admins.=
=20
After all, the information we need usually comes from them.
skelch
On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Jacob Faber wrote:
> So this is a UA committee? If so, I would push for Institute or
> Presidential committee status with a mixed membership of
> students/staff/faculty/admins. The problem with UA committees that
> deal with admins is that admins will usually just give students the
> run-around until a policy is at a stage where it is too late to really
> be changed. This is especially true when dealing with controversial
> subjects. I can remember specifically when I was in the UA and we
> were in a fight with admins about orientation/rush issues, the admins
> used this tactic. They would tell different committees and different
> governments (UA, DormCon, IFC, etc.) different, and often conflicting
> information. This is similar to the GOP's various strategies to pit
> various minority communities against each other. But anyways...It was
> not until the heads of these governments came together and actually
> demanded transparency and input did any change really happen.
>
> That was somewhat a long and rambling story, but the just of it is
> this: a committee really dedicated to improving transparency could be
> a fantastic accomplishment. It's too often that the admins spring
> some unacceptable policy on the student body, which they have actually
> been planning for months/years, and claim they got "student input" by
> talking to a couple of students or a UA committee at the 11th hour.
>
> I realize this sounds like a bash on UA committees, but it is far from
> it. My point is that with such an important issue like policy
> transparency, it's useful to get a wide array of voices (and most
> importantly ears) at the table. Every community can benefit from
> this, and while a unilateral effort is a good first step, the next
> leap should be to involve a more diverse (in terms of constituency)
> group of leaders. Also, Institute or Presidential status does add
> significantly more oomph to the work the committee does and improves
> longevity.
>
>
> On 7/3/06, Steven M Kelch <kelch@mit.edu> wrote:
>> SCATR is a very new committee, less than a year old. It has changed
>> slightly in concept, and is still trying to find its niche in the
>> community. It was chartered in December, but the records are a little
>> fuzzy.
>>=20
>> It was originally conceived as a facilitator for student/admin
>> communication, and focused on a "get to know the administrators" plan
>> which included interviews of upper level admins. However, students and
>> admins alike seemed disinterested in the direction the committee was
>> going.
>>=20
>> Now we focus less on the "relations" part of our name and more on
>> transparency. Students who feel frustrated on administrative=20
>> committees
>> can come to us for advice, support, or rallying the troops if need be.
>> Likewise, admins can come to us to help clear up miscommunications,
>> facilitate feedback gathering, and whatnot.
>>=20
>> In the Fall, I hope to convince the Senate to recharter the committee=20
>> with
>> this new idea in mind.
>>=20
>>=20
>> Steve Kelch
>> Senate Speaker
>> SCATR Chair
>>=20
>>=20
>> On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Jacob Faber wrote:
>>=20
>> > This is a longer email than I planned, but I'd like to think i bring
>> > up some good points :)
>> >
>> > "What I know, having heard it directly from an involved=20
>> administrator:
>> >
>> > This is intended to reduce confusion and complaining among parents=20
>> who
>> > don't understand why we don't have campus-wide meal plans and for=20
>> some
>> > reason can't get their heads around the idea of TechCash's declining
>> > balance system."
>> >
>> > I am not surprised to hear that this is how the administration is
>> > rationalizing this potential plan. In reality, this plan is just a
>> > way to subsidize the ridiculous monopoly that is MIT campus dining,=20
>> as
>> > were the plans that "were not meal plans" implemented in Baker,
>> > Simmons, and Next while I was at MIT. The intention was as obvious
>> > then as it is now.
>> >
>> > The complaints from the vendors on campus about losing money and=20
>> need
>> > subsidy (in the form of the socialist [not that socialism is bad]
>> > programs implemented in Baker, Simmons, Next, etc. or this plan,=20
>> which
>> > will have the long-term effect of forcing students to only eat on
>> > campus) are completely ridiculous. I always thought that a good way
>> > to make money in any business was to offer a good product at a
>> > reasonable price. The vendors should stop whining and look to=20
>> improve
>> > their practice.
>> >
>> > Imagine if a restaurant in Central Square was losing money and
>> > demanded a tax increase? This is the kind of absurd logic driving=20
>> MIT
>> > policy.
>> >
>> > When these changes started to happen around campus when I was at=20
>> MIT,
>> > a few students spoke up about how ridiculous this policy stance was.
>> > Don't get stuck with mediocre, over-priced food, which is the
>> > inevitable outcome of such unimaginative policy. Demand
>> > accountability from the vendors and the MIT administration.=20
>> Remember:
>> > you're paying both of them to serve you, and you shouldn't have to
>> > settle for this.
>> >
>> > Good luck with everything, especially keeping MIT honest,
>> > Jacob Faber '04 '06
>> > Former UA Something or Other
>> >
>> > PS =96 Is the Student Committee on Administrative Transparency and
>> > Relations a real committee or just something clever to put in a sig?
>> > If it's real, please reply privately, as I'm curious to hear about=20
>> its
>> > history/makeup/charter/etc.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 7/3/06, Jessica H Lowell <jessiehl@mit.edu> wrote:
>> >> What I know, having heard it directly from an involved=20
>> administrator:
>> >>
>> >> This is intended to reduce confusion and complaining among parents=20
>> who
>> >> don't
>> >> understand why we don't have campus-wide meal plans and for some
>> >> reason can't
>> >> get their heads around the idea of TechCash's declining balance
>> >> system.
>> >>
>> >> What I think:
>> >>
>> >> I'd be surprised if this actually reduces confusion. I'd expect it=
=20
>> to
>> >> cause
>> >> more, and I said so when I first heard about this. I think it's=20
>> kind
>> >> of dumb
>> >> and redundant, but if it creates a justification for not putting in
>> >> mandatory
>> >> meal plans when the relevant admins are being pressured to put them
>> >> in, that's
>> >> convenient.
>> >>
>> >> What I've heard:
>> >>
>> >> Students will be able to move money from their Dining Dollars=20
>> account
>> >> to their
>> >> regular TechCash account, meaning that parents don't actually have
>> >> more
>> >> control, even if they think they do.
>> >>
>> >> - Jessie
>> >>
>> >> Quoting Steven M Kelch <kelch@MIT.EDU>:
>> >>
>> >> > Hey everyone,
>> >> >
>> >> > It's come through the grapevine that there will be an addition to
>> >> the MIT
>> >> > ID card. In addition to Tech Cash, there will be a new account
>> >> created
>> >> > that will be "food only". Where Tech Cash can be used at any
>> >> location that
>> >> > currently accepts it (and, so I hear, possibly a few more being
>> >> added),
>> >> > this new "food only" account will be accepted at places that sell
>> >> > only food items. This means that the Coop, La Verdes, and
>> >> > student groups that accept Tech Cash for ticket sales are=20
>> excluded.
>> >> >
>> >> > The primary motivation for the creation of this account seems to=20
>> be
>> >> > appeasing parents who are either confused about the way Tech Cash
>> >> works
>> >> > and want a simpler plan, or parents who want a little more=20
>> control
>> >> over
>> >> > the way their child spends the money they put into the account.=20
>> Many
>> >> > students that I have talked to feel that the system is redundant.=
=20
>> A
>> >> few
>> >> > have expressed concern also that the incoming freshmen will not=20
>> know
>> >> that
>> >> > the system is optional and that there is an alternative system
>> >> already in
>> >> > place. On the other hand, the new account will help strengthen
>> >> on-campus
>> >> > dining, nearly all of which has been steadily losing money.
>> >> >
>> >> > It is rumored that a press release from the Dining Office is
>> >> expected. The
>> >> > system has already been set up, and is expected to go live near=20
>> the
>> >> first
>> >> > of August. An informative mailing to the freshmen class is also
>> >> expected,
>> >> > though whether this is going to happen and what the information=20
>> is
>> >> going
>> >> > to be has yet to be confirmed.
>> >> >
>> >> > Let me clarify that this information is second hand, and I only=20
>> want
>> >> to
>> >> > begin a discussion. Additionally, THIS IS NOT AN ATTEMPT TO=20
>> CREATE A
>> >> MEAL
>> >> > PLAN. The system is completely optional, and is intended as a
>> >> convenience.
>> >> > Dean of Student Life Larry Benedict has been quoted on numerous
>> >> occasions
>> >> > that there are no attempts to create meal plans currently in the
>> >> works.
>> >> >
>> >> > I bring the issue up because it has met with resistance, and I=20
>> would
>> >> like
>> >> > a discussion so that concerns can be raised and addressed. What=20
>> are
>> >> > people's thoughts? Will you use the system? Even if not, do you
>> >> think that
>> >> > others will? What benefits/problems do you see? What would you=20
>> like
>> >> the
>> >> > students and admins close to this project to know?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > (SCATR)
>> >> > Student Committee on Administrative Transparency and Relations
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > ua-scatr mailing list
>> >> > ua-scatr@mit.edu
>> >> > http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/ua-scatr
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> MIT-talk mailing list
>> >> MIT-talk@mit.edu
>> >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/mit-talk
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Jacob W. Faber
>> > Phone: 857.928.2838
>> >
>>=20
>> _______________________________________________
>> MIT-talk mailing list
>> MIT-talk@mit.edu
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/mit-talk
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>
>
> --=20
> Jacob W. Faber
> Phone: 857.928.2838
>
---300783356-2071004768-1151944559=:16993
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
MIT-talk mailing list
MIT-talk@mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/mit-talk
---300783356-2071004768-1151944559=:16993--
