[1925] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Re: [Mit-talk] [UA-SCATR] New Card initiative
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jacob Faber)
Mon Jul 3 12:53:03 2006
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 12:51:53 -0400
From: "Jacob Faber" <faber@alum.mit.edu>
To: "Steven M Kelch" <kelch@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.62L.0607031229320.16993@ptolomaea.mit.edu>
Cc: reubano@alum.mit.edu, ua-scatr@mit.edu,
"Pius A. Uzamere II" <pius@alum.mit.edu>, mit-talk@mit.edu
Reply-To: faber@alum.mit.edu
Errors-To: mit-talk-bounces@mit.edu
This is a very good question and an important point. Most of the
high-up admins are decent politicians. I originally wrote "excellent"
and changed it to "decent" because they can be beaten. I've beaten
them, as have many others. This is the attitude you need the student
members of this committee to have. You need members who have a high
level of political and bureaucratic savvy as well, so they can realize
when they're being misled. This is a skill that can be learned, as I
didn't possess it when I took office. Basically the trick is simple:
ask a lot of questions to a lot of different people in various
situations and look for consistency. For example, asking a dean the
same question in a group and when alone with him/her often results in
different answers. When responses from Dean 1 and Dean 2 don't match
up, push on both of them. If Dean 1 says "I haven't talked to Dean
2", realize he/she is probably lying and just stalling.
The student members also need to have a great deal of resolve to not
be intimidated by the admins. The most effective tactic I've ever
seen to fight admin political maneuvering was when the top leaders of
the UA, IFC, and DormCon walked out of a meeting with two deans
because we were fed up with their tactics.
I'm mostly rambling here, but because I care about this issue, and
honestly think it can be accomplished. You can find students who have
these characteristics.
Jacob Faber '04 '06
Former UA Something or Other
On 7/3/06, Steven M Kelch <kelch@mit.edu> wrote:
> 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
> the panel, how do students know that they are not still being given the
> run around?
>
> This is not to say that we are opposed to working very closey with admins.
> 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.
> >>
> >> 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.
> >>
> >> Now we focus less on the "relations" part of our name and more on
> >> transparency. Students who feel frustrated on administrative
> >> 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.
> >>
> >> In the Fall, I hope to convince the Senate to recharter the committee
> >> with
> >> this new idea in mind.
> >>
> >>
> >> Steve Kelch
> >> Senate Speaker
> >> SCATR Chair
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, 3 Jul 2006, Jacob Faber wrote:
> >>
> >> > 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
> >> administrator:
> >> >
> >> > This is intended to reduce confusion and complaining among parents
> >> 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."
> >> >
> >> > 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,
> >> 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
> >> need
> >> > subsidy (in the form of the socialist [not that socialism is bad]
> >> > programs implemented in Baker, Simmons, Next, etc. or this plan,
> >> 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
> >> 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
> >> MIT
> >> > policy.
> >> >
> >> > When these changes started to happen around campus when I was at
> >> 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.
> >> 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
> >> 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
> >> administrator:
> >> >>
> >> >> This is intended to reduce confusion and complaining among parents
> >> 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
> >> to
> >> >> cause
> >> >> more, and I said so when I first heard about this. I think it's
> >> 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
> >> 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
> >> excluded.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The primary motivation for the creation of this account seems to
> >> 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
> >> control
> >> >> over
> >> >> > the way their child spends the money they put into the account.
> >> Many
> >> >> > students that I have talked to feel that the system is redundant.
> >> A
> >> >> few
> >> >> > have expressed concern also that the incoming freshmen will not
> >> 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
> >> 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
> >> is
> >> >> going
> >> >> > to be has yet to be confirmed.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Let me clarify that this information is second hand, and I only
> >> want
> >> >> to
> >> >> > begin a discussion. Additionally, THIS IS NOT AN ATTEMPT TO
> >> 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
> >> would
> >> >> like
> >> >> > a discussion so that concerns can be raised and addressed. What
> >> 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
> >> 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
> >> >
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> MIT-talk mailing list
> >> MIT-talk@mit.edu
> >> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/mit-talk
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jacob W. Faber
> > Phone: 857.928.2838
> >
>
-- =
Jacob W. Faber
Phone: 857.928.2838
_______________________________________________
MIT-talk mailing list
MIT-talk@mit.edu
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/mit-talk
