Tag: president

‘SteamCil’ Leaves Red Faces, Disheartened Members

censored.jpgComCil discussion on installation REB to go into new round this week

by Kim-Jenna Jurriaans

“This could very well have been the best ComCil I’ve ever been to.” An impromptu processing session and cigarette consumption on the steps of Main Building revealed the nerve wrecker that was last week’s ComCil meeting. In a heated session last Thursday, discussion on the latest proposal for a Record Editorial Board (REB) turned into a power-measuring exercise that left many members of ComCil disillusioned over the outcome. Still, several members referred to last week’s ComCil as one of the most vibrant in a long time. The meeting was finally adjourned and discussion was tabled until next ComCil, which takes place as this paper goes to print.

Members left last week’s meeting disillusioned after a two and a half hour discussion on the REB proposal, that was brought to ComCil two weeks ago, failed to bring a clear outcome on the installation of the interim board. Instead, questions arose on ComCil’s power to block the proposal, which were initially met with evasive answers by vice-president Rick Juraseck and Dean of Faculty Andrzej Bloch.

Bloch, who together with the vice-president and CM Levi B. Cowperthwaite had brought the proposal to ComCil, stressed the need for accountability beyond RAB in the form of an extra, editorial, board.

In response to Events Manager (EM) Melody Mackowiak’s repeated inquiry whether the initiators would go thru with the installation of the board regardless of ComCil’s decision on the proposal, Jurasek answered by pointing out the need to “fill an editorial gap”.

Feeling that her question was not answered properly, Mackowiak again asked for a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response. The vice-president finally answered, saying there is a need to set editorial policy and that they, the initiators, will go on to create a body that can take on that task. His answer was met with loud gestures of surprise and disbelieve from both members and guests. Many voiced similar feelings as Corri Frohlich, who posed the question: ” what exactly are we doing here If you are not going to listen to us anyway?”
EM Melody went on to ask whether the proposal was at least open for negotiation. Vice-president Rick Jurasek commented: “This document asks for suggestions. We want to launch a process. There is an editorial gap and this proposal is brought forward to fill that gap.” Jurasek underlined that the board will be temporary while “starting a broader conversation in the process of building a community paper”.

In its effort to “build” a community paper, the president’s office has taken it on itself to hire a journalism teacher in order to provide staff-writers and editors of the Record with the necessary journalistic background and to help in supervising the Record. In addition, Jurasek offered to provide the Record with the means to update its close to nostalgic IT-facilities, which, according to co-editor Foster Neill had narrowed down to “a computer and a half” in the course of last week. Neill, however, friendly declined the offer, stating he’d rather work with the limited funds CG can provide than lose independence of the paper: “I’d love to have a new computer and we could definitely use it right now, but if taking on the offer means the Record will become more dependent, I’d rather not have it. I can’t speak for future editors, but I, for my part, will definitely not take it.”

Reflection

Issues over the nature of the publisher, CG or Antioch College, arose, yet again, and remained unresolved. Again, the fact that the Record is payed out of student activity fees was brought up to point out community ownership. The Dean of students countered by saying: “We cannot collect a penny of the students as long as the budget is not approved by the board of trustees.” In response to Andrzej Bloch’s statement that the newspaper carries the Antioch name and is therefor regarded by the outside world to reflect the College, Neill, who is in charge of the layout for the Record, posed the question how The Antioch Review, that also carries the Antioch name can be regarded as reflection of the community.

Andrzej Bloch went on to make a distinction between Antioch College on one hand, and the College Community on the other. He elaborated on his idea of REB and RAB functioning next to and with each other, each representing one of the two entities. Given the inequality in authority installed upon both boards, however, this was met with skepticism by the members of ComCil, who fear erosion of the functions of RAB. In addition, the idea of having two similar boards was widely seen as impractical, “adding layers on top of layers”, as Katrina Dorsey described it.

In light of the efforts to bring more journalistic knowledge into the record newsroom, the need for top-down editorial enforcement was also questioned and, according to Bob Devine, is contrary to the co-op premises set out for the editors, which consist of “learning by experience, being forced to wrestle with complex practical and ethical issues and to make determinations for which they must be accountable.” (from: October 2nd written reaction to REB proposal). Devine underlined his views in last week’s meeting, stating that the Record was a lab Newspaper to learn, adding: “how do you think the editor of the New York Times learned what is appropriate.”

Vice president Rick Jurasek stressed the temporary nature of the board, pointing out the option that: “The editorial board can disappear in time.”

Respect

Gradually the conversation moved towards reviving RAB rather than installing the REB. ComCil member Chelsea Martens pointed towards the Legislative code in front of her and urged the Dean of Faculty and Vice-President to please respect the code, with its strong roots in Community Government, and to respect the efforts that had been made to create it. Martens was backed up by fellow ComCil member Bryan Utley, who underlined that the installation of an ad-hoc board without approval of ComCil would be disrespectful of the deliberative Body that is ComCil. Martens also raised questions on the issue of accountability. More specifically, “how can a board consisting of two students and two staff members be a better representation of the community than RAB with seven members and direct accountability to ComCil?”

In order to provide Antioch College, as institution, with the requested representation in matters concerning the Record, RAB members present brought forward the proposal to write one or two extra seats into the RAB outline in the Leg code for institutional representation to take seat in.

Room temperature rose even more, when a motion to deny approval of the Proposal was tabled and second by another member of ComCil, then however taken off the table again, in order to keep open the option of bringing in an amended, more detailed, proposal into next weeks ComCil meeting. the initiators where give the advise to consult sources outside of the college’s legal council and present a proposal that goes into more detail about the editorial policy that the interim board is burdened to establish, the sources that it will used in the process and the place and amenability of this new policy in future terms. As the discussion goes into yet another round, the meeting, taking place as this edition goes to print, is expected to bring the awaited verdict on the installation of an Editorial Board for the Record, the consequences for the Community’s Newspaper and future role for its current Advisory Board.

Students Grumble as Problems Plague IT Department

broken-laptop.jpg By Paige Clifton-Steele

The staff knows it and the students notice it: the Information Technology department at Antioch College is understaffed and under-funded. “We’ve had consistency issues. We’ve had authentication issues. And it was generally inconvenient in the beginning,� says Shea Witzberger, first year. She isn’t alone in her complaints—many Antioch users of WiFi continue to experience similar problems.

According to a June 2002 study released by the Gartner Group, a respected computer-consulting firm, one IT support person is required for every seventy Macintosh computers, or for every forty-five PCs. The Antioch Information Technology department has six people, in addition to one co-op student and the manager of the website, who lives and works out of state. When measured against the approximately 1,200 users who make up Antioch College and Antioch University McGregor, it becomes clear how disproportionate these numbers are. That’s one staff member for every two hundred users.

The implications of this are many. First year students have complained about the wireless in North Hall—mostly about problems that have since been resolved. However, students continue to lament short-term problems with wireless. “I’m glad that they’ve been so helpful with my concerns online, though.�

Several students report being better able to access support online, while their in-person requests receive less priority. Paul Deardorff, Systems Administrator, acknowledges that questions put to him in his office or the hall may fall by the wayside. “People will come up and say I’m having a problem with this, I’m having a problem with that…And to be honest with you, it’s hard to keep up. It’s much easier for us if someone were to log into the helpdesk and put a helpdesk ticket up.�

Sometimes, students and staff vary on what constitutes a problem; several students are concerned about privacy policies on First Class, while IT staff would like to handle the issue informally.

“I am concerned about privacy in my First Class Account,� says Sean Bradley, straight white male first year. “And most people’s initial passwords were logarithms of their names and some fairly consistent number…�

However, Brown differs, “I don’t know of any policy, but to be honest I don’t see the need for one because every person in the IT department very firmly believes that we don’t mess with your mail unless somebody real, real high up above asks us to.� At MacGregor, policy states that that person is the president of the school. It remains ambiguous who would have the authority to ask that of the department at the college level.

Cassie Collins, a fourth year co-oping in the department, says, “What I have seen would lead me to believe that there is not [a privacy policy regarding First Class moderation].� Asked whether she believes there is a call for one, she says yes, qualifying, “But not because anything that IT has done.�

Another problem hampering the efficiency of the department is its tendency to be pulled into audiovisual maintenance jobs that are not strictly computer related. Collins believes she has a solution: “I think just having one person to handle AV would be useful. Take a coop student, teach them all about the AV, and just have them run AV support.�

Units, in addition to North Hall, has wireless internet, while Birch and Spalt remain connected with Ethernet. Spalt residents complain of few problems with their internet, but North has suffered a series of setbacks since students arrived in September.

The IT department made changes to the North wireless network just prior to the beginning of the academic school year because of a PHD program residency, but the changes caused problems that went undetected for a few weeks. “There was a difference in firmware between the AP2000 and the AP4000,� says Tom Brown. “We couldn’t figure it out for a while because we couldn’t see a trend. We had to make the wireless open, available to everyone.�

During this time, students in North could access the wireless network without a certificate. A few weeks later, it was resecured.

Understaffing isn’t the only problem that plagues the department. On the second floor of the library is a pile of broken computers awaiting disposal. “The village won’t take them because they’re not environmentally safe to dispose of,� says Brown. Though a few of them were removed when Dylan Reiff took them for use in his show. ‘Robocalypse’ last term, Brown still stays, “I think we need to work with physical plan to make that happen. They’re piling up every time one dies.�

Asked what makes the IT department at Antioch unique than that of other schools, Deardorff says with pride that the members of the IT department have a variety of degrees and areas of expertise different from the usual computer-related studies. These range from philosophy to English.

Lunch With President Leaves Bad Taste in Student’s Mouth

By The Cooperative Council for a Non Wack Social Scene 

This past Monday I had the pleasure filled opportunity of participating in a lunch date with our distinguished president Steve “the bulldog� Lawry. This opportunity was one I did not take for granted, as up until yesterday Steve was the sort of legendary character I only found myself within spitting distance of in my dreams. I do not think it would be a stretch to describe him as elusive. I mean I never see him at community meetings, or meals, he never knocks on my door, never stops by just to say hello, not that I’m hurt or anything.

The mood of the meal was a little bit tense as first year students frothed at the bit to ask Steve questions about issues concerning their everyday realities, such as the disappearance of friends, any upcoming curricular changes, or any sort of hint as to the college’s future. I had the fortunate opportunity of getting to actually eat food two people away from Steve. Yes community, Steve Lawry eats. In fact it can be noted he likes beans, mixed with peas if anyone wants to cook him a meal to get in his good graces. I got to know him a little better as we chatted about his background, and he very diplomatically asked us about ours. Turns out Steve-o received his doctorate from the University of Wisconsin in Madison, where he enjoyed the “lively, open and diverse (campus) with much choice in terms of outlets for expression.� Second year transfer student Erin Cizeski inquired as to the difference in campus culture between such a big school as U.W., and a little Liberal Arts institution such as Antioch and Steve remarked “Everyone should be open and welcome, Sexuality is a choice, no group should dominate. Straight culture dominates, but a campus should be open. There is less conflict in a big school, everything can be taken in its embrace. At Antioch it is intensified, people feel strongly and want to challenge others, to make them uncomfortable. We need to challenge and question what is an appropriate level of discomfort; none of us have all the answers.� This statement would be contradicted later on in Steve’s formal Q & A forum, as he was often heard making empirical “I� statements in regard to his opinions on drug use and “radical identity politics� I have compiled the following list of Steve’s responses to student’s questions about the recent expulsion spree, and the subject of identity politics:

“I can’t speak to the issue� (*note to future students who plan on attending these forums; he will not speak to this issue, continuously asking the same questions with fancier wording will not fool him.)

On the subject of the well being of the expulsees:

“I have larger responsibilities to the overall campus climate. Drugs are corrosive, Marijuana deadens peoples minds� or how about :

“I am the President. I am responsible for the intellectual experience. Drug use is corrosive in my opinion, that’s the way it is.�

Steve spoke to a room of Antioch students of his vision of an idyllic Antioch student- “ An Antioch student walks a different path, asks tough and difficult questions, lives a meaningful life not a consumerist or nihilistic one. They want to contribute to the betterment of society.� As long as they don’t smoke pot, or make people uncomfortable with wild displays of deviant sexuality and identity politics, which was the sentiment I got from the comment; “Sometimes I feel there are Antioch students out there who should be here, but are intimidated by drugs, or the insistent argumentative stridency (of the student population) sends people off.�

Transfer student Preston Krafft had to say of the event “ I don’t think he communicated effectively what he wanted to about the drug policy, and the core programs. I felt what he had to say was reasonable, he just didn’t articulate it in a way a younger generation would understand. He used his stature as president as a way of garnering the final say on the topics questioned. Saying “this is the way it’s going to be, and I back this up because I am the president� would make perfect sense to someone of the baby boomer generation, but for the student population that’s a major turn off. He should have tried a more humble approach by asking for our cooperation, not demanding it.�

I apologize if this article doesn’t speak much to the actual content of the question and answer period of Monday’s forum, but unfortunately I don’t feel there is much to speak to. There was a lot of emotion in the room, people feeling like they had been wronged and wanting to have their voice heard to which there was a lot of very defensive responses from Mr. Lawry. He made it clear that his responsibility is to the college’s financial future, giving the sense that the 3rd and 4th year students are disposable and being shepherded out, where as our class is a kind of testing ground for policy and curricular change to benefit the next wave of Steve’s utopic versions of nonoffensive, drug free Antiochians.

I do feel like this luncheon was a good start to bridging the gap spoken about during the meeting between the students and the administration. The general feeling on campus is that Mr. Lawry isn’t very receptive to student voices, so I send out this plea to you community: If you have an opinion on the current state of affairs, go to Steve. He made it very clear at the end of the meeting, that we were all welcome. He urges us to stop by his office and make an appointment with Nancy Wilburn. In fact he can be quoted as saying “Everyone is welcome, and I’m always happy to meet with students.� I feel it is out civic duty to participate in the wonder that is shared governance, and if you have a problem or concern call up Nancy Wilburn, let her know Steve sent you, and schedule a meeting. Steve made us an offer, let’s hold him to it.

Protest and Oppose Censorship of the Record

Protest and Oppose Censorship of the Record

To the Antioch Community:

As adjunct faculty serving as a mentor to students on the Antioch Record staff, I protest and oppose the Lawry administration’s censorship of the Record. I am advising the students to resist all censorship and intimidation.. And I urge members of the Antioch community to support the Record in affirmation of freedom of speech.

Censorship is — of course — grossly unacceptable. It is unethical and immoral. Censorship, or any infringement of people’s rights of free discussion, free expression and free inquiry, violates the most basic values of democracy and community, not to mention liberal arts education.

That students at Antioch College are denied free speech is shocking and absurd.

Censorship of the Record began with its September 22 issue. In a letter to the faculty dated September 20, college president Steve Lawry announced that the dean of faculty, Andrzej Bloch, had been empowered to censor the Record, and that a new board would soon be appointed to “take overall responsibility for the Record.�

In an attempt to justify its censorship of the Record, the administration has made false and inflammatory statements. A letter sent September 18 to faculty and staff, signed by three administrators (Lawry, Bloch, and Rick Jurasek), characterized a feature in the Record (“Question of the Week�) that was clearly satirical — and clearly protected by the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech — as “a crime� that put the Record in “high-risk legal territory.�

This is not true. As a newspaper editor and publisher for 33 years, I can assure the community there is no way that the Record, or any other newspaper in America, would be at legal risk for printing this material. (Record staff confirmed this in a consultation with the Student Press Law Center in Washington, D.C.)

Not true, also, is the charge made by Lawry, in his September 20 letter, that the Record’s “generally poor editorial judgments� and “the persistent presence of anti-social and aggressive speech and prolific use of obscenitites� in the Record “systematically degrade and dishonor� Antioch College.

It is not the Record, but the administration’s censorship of the Record — its denial of basic rights of freedom of speech to members of the Antioch community — that degrades and dishonors Antioch College.

The Record is an essential part of the Antioch community. It is rooted in the values of the community, and it speaks in the voice — or the many voices — of the community. It’s a good newspaper. Despite deep cuts in the Record’s funding, the editors have assembled a large staff of talented, enthusiastic, hard-working students. They have provided the community with a diverse mix of interesting, lively, well-written news and opinion.

Last week’s “retro� issue of the Record, full of articles and pictures the staff selected from Records published down through the years, brilliantly illuminated Antioch’s long and passionate commitment to the struggle for human rights, social justice, and freedom of expression. And fun — the Record brightly illuminated Antioch’s bold, free spirit.

The Record, far from dishonoring Antioch College, honors Antioch in the most essential, meaningful way — by expressing, and embodying, Antioch’s spirit. At the heart of Antioch is the free spirit of Antioch, and all attempts to suppress it must be opposed.

Sincerely,

— Don Wallis

Letter from Daniel E. Solis ‘06

An Open Letter to President Steve Lawry
October 5, 2006

Dear President Lawry,

It is with the heaviest of hearts that I write this letter to you. As a proud alum of Antioch College, I am deeply disturbed by the emerging direction of your presidency. You have taken actions that not only violate the most cherished of Antiochian values and traditions; but also move against the fundamental mission of the College – education.

Given that your actions affect not only the on-campus community, but also everyone who has sweated, cried, and sacrificed for Antioch in its long history, I felt it appropriate to address this letter to you in a very public way. I understand that this will be taken by you as an act of confrontation, for indeed it is. When people in power commit gross violations of the power they have been entrusted with; ethical people have no choice but to be confrontational. That is why I write to you now in the form of an open letter.

In your rather short time as an Antiochian, you have single-handedly chosen to impose a top-down cultural shift at the College. You find a pessimistic “Culture of Confrontationâ€? to be undermining Antioch, and have decided – with minimal input from all sectors of the community- that this culture must be eradicated for the College to grow and be successful.

You have seriously attacked the intellectual freedom of faculty and staff through seemingly arbitrary dismissals or forced “voluntary retirements.�

You have attacked the community’s free press, The Record, by legalistic manipulations and the imposition of an Editorial Board controlled by you. This has very serious implications in an academic community that depends on open and unfettered deliberations.

You have unilaterally moved vast extents of decisions traditionally made collaboratively through the legitimated bodies of the Antioch community, into the hands of a small cadre of relatively new high administrators. Through these actions, you have eviscerated both Administrative Council (AdCil) and Community Council (ComCil).

Most tragically of all, you have birthed a culture of fear at Antioch. Through the strict enforcement of “the President’s Agenda,� the thoughtful deliberation that you claim to cherish has completely disappeared. Faculty and staff members fear for their jobs. Students fear that they will be summarily expelled or suspended for confronting you or your Agenda. The entire community fears honest discussion for how it might offend you.

Given the state of our nation at this present moment, when fear rules our lives, when fear is pessimistically manipulated for the gain of a small elite; it is not only tragic that you too have chosen to rule through fear – it is shameful. Our institutions of higher education have no greater responsibility in our society, than to educate our youth to be responsible members and advocates of democracy. It is reprehensible that your leadership has moved Antioch away from its long-standing role of educating the defenders of democracy.

To further illustrate your own hypocrisy, I quote at length from your welcoming speech to first year students and their families this past September. You said,

An authentically liberal learning environment should be one where complex ideas and problems can be studied, discussed and debated- -openly and freely. This is how we learn; this how we come closer to a truer understanding of ourselves and our world. We are a Community of Inquiry.

From time to time, we somehow convince ourselves that we have possession of the answers to complex problems, and further discussion or debate about them surely is not necessary. And those who express contrary views should be ostracized, and made to remember the error of their ways. This causes pain and anger, and is corrosive of the freedom to learn and inquire that so many have fought so hard to maintain in our society. It is corrosive of the Community of Inquiry that we are and that we must be diligent in protecting.

So, I invite you to an Antioch life, a life of sifting and winnowing, of doubt and discovery, of trying to do better by our families and communities and our planet. The Antioch community, for me, is grounded in a commitment to intellectual freedom and respect among all community members, students, professors and staff. These two qualities—intellectual freedom and mutual respect—must always be present if we are going to continue to succeed as an educational community. I have high expectations that you will embrace these values in your time at Antioch and beyond.

I respect these words for they truly represent what lies at the core of the Antioch Community: thoughtful and critical engagement, contentious deliberation, and respect for one another. While I will be the first to admit that this has often not been the case at Antioch, you cannot address this issue by doing the exact same thing. One does not end a disrespectful and closed-minded discourse through disrespectful and closed-minded actions.

President Lawry, your relentless belief in the supremacy of the executive is not only detrimental to the deliberative process that is the bedrock of a democracy; it is also inefficient and wasteful. Rather than focusing on how to strengthen Antioch College and secure lasting financial stability or ensuring the success of the new curriculum, you have decided to consolidate your power within the College on the backs of Intellectual Freedom, Deliberation, and Democracy.

President Lawry, I hope that you will take this letter as a chance for thoughtful reflection and will truly question your motivation and actions. However, I am not encouraged by your past reception of criticism or confrontation. While I do not expect a radical change of course, I do hope that the faculty, staff and students that agree with the views expressed in this letter will creatively and appropriately rise up to challenge the attach upon Antioch. Antioch is a community of critical thought and action. Only time will tell if the current caretakers of Antioch will accept their responsibility and protect our core values you seem so unfamiliar with. I, for one, remain committed to responsible actions and am willing to dialogue with you on this matter. I do believe that you have strengths that can greatly aid Antioch, but you must be educated first. I look forward to assisting your on-going education as a proud Antiochian. I leave you with a quote,

“If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.”

~Louis D. Brandeis

Respectfully,

Daniel E. Solis ‘06