Tuesday, September 27th, 2016 | TechNews campus@technewsiit,com ‘ 2:!ili i : EEI 3

New campus protest policy causes anger among student activists despite reassurances

Continuedfrom Page 1

TechNews sat down with Dean of
Students Katie Stetz on Friday, September
16th for an interview prompted by these
changes, spanning nearly an hour and a half
of thorough questions directly and indirectly
related to the policy itself. Stetz’s office is
ultimately responsible for the text of the
Code of Conduct, and changes to the Student
Handbook in general. Stetz is also the public
face for any policy changes, and interfaces with
students directly when questions arise from
those changes. As she stated while first turning
to the topic of the new behavior policy, “I’m
the spokesperson for it, and I’ll own it.”

While Stetz’s Office of Student Affairs
bears primary responsibility for the content of
the Code of Conduct, she did not work alone
when revising the university’s rules for students.
The entire code was revamped this year,
spurred by the need to update the university’s
rules for Title IX compliance (which covers
gender discrimination and sexual assault cases
at the federal level), and the significance of
those changes brought Illinois Tech Provost
Frances Bronet and General Counsel Anthony
D. D’Amato to the table to forward a policy
that would benefit the university and its
students while fulfilling all necessary legal
obligations. Bronet has been popular among
student activists for her humanistic demeanor,
often serving as a perceived balancing force
for those who see university administration as
excessively pragmatic when taken as a whole.
Last semester, she spoke highly of the concept
of student activism at the Spring President and
Provost Forum.

When asked directly whether any
portion of the revised Code of Conduct
was written as a reaction to the protests last
semester by USA, Stetz answered emphatically
in the negative. The new Section 9 of the
code was a piece of a larger expansion of the

Staff Spotlight:

Khaleela Zarnan
TECH N EWS WRITER

Riding up the elevator in the Tower
is usually not very exciting. Wouldn’t it help to
be greeted by a smiling face while walking into
the office on the 14th floor after turning right?
Entering the School of Applied Technology
(SAT) office in Suite 14B of the Tower, no one
can help smiling back to Carolyn Nivling. She
is the one sitting behind the desk, ready to greet
anyone who might stop in. Nivling is currently
the SAT Assistant Director of Student Services,
also dealing with alumni relations. Nearly a year
ago, Nivling was promoted from her previous
position with Illinois Tech as the Information
Technology and Management (ITM) Assistant
Coordinator. ITM is a department within the
School of Applied Technology, and the SAT
needed someone to assist with events. Since
Nivling has a background in event planning,
marketing, and mentoring students and
volunteers, she stepped right up to the plate,
assisting with commencement planning for
the SAT in the spring of 2016.

In her current role as SAT Assistant
Director of Student Services, Nivling
handles the event planning for all SAT—wide
events. Some of these SAT events include
the New Student Breakfast, Alumni Day,
Annual Barbecue, Haunted House during
Family Weekend, Senior Week, and Spring
Commencement. Approximately 50% of
the events Nivling plans are new, some of
which are alumni—related as well as the

vocabulary of many sections of the text, she
asserted, and was simply meant to clarify
and detail the university’s pre—existing policy.
“This exists so that we have a way to hold
people accountable if there’s disruption in the
university,” she stated, adding that the key word
of focus for the languages enforcement was in
determining whether an action was “unsafe.”
She also explained that her office would
typically not decide to enforce the policy on
its own, and that the majority of disciplinary
actions under the Code of Conduct stemmed
from complaints by students, faculty, and
staff. The previous, shorter disruption policy
held people accountable “mostly when there
was violence”, Stetz professed, and the new
policy was intended largely to serve the same
purpose.

TechNews asked specifically
whether either of USA’s two demonstrations
last semester would have led to punishment if
the newly expanded policy had been in place
at the time. Stetz answered that the group’s
initial event and March was certainly within
the bounds of the policy, since it did not
obstruct the regular business of the university
or disrupt any university functions. She stated
that a very strict interpretation of the language
could have seen the group running afoul of
the code, since USA’s large slate of speakers
during the President and Provost Forum
prevented students not associated with them
from bringing their concerns forward during
the time—limited event, but stressed that such
application of the policy “would be student—
driven”. If no students saw USA’s actions as
disruptive and no reports were made to that
effect, no disciplinary proceedings would be
initiated. On this point, Stetz expanded by
asking “who am I to decide what is important
to the students?”

Part of the overarching issue,
Stetz claimed, is general student knowledge
of how the investigation and disciplinary

process takes place. “Complaints open up the
conversation,” he said, but a complaint itself
is not destined to result in punishment. While
the new policy is very broad in scope, it is
theoretically only intended to be applied in
extreme circumstances.

TechNews questioned Stetz
about the university’s plans to pass down
that interpretation of the policy to new
administrators over time so that it would not
be used overzealously in the future to stifle
dissent, and compared the relatively brief and
vague statements in Section 9 to the vast set of
enforcement guidelines used by the University
of Chicago to supplement its Code of Conduct.
Stetz said that no current plans were in place
for such guidelines to be drafted, but “if there’s
a proposal to change the language in this
particular number 9, I think between PSAC
and SGA I would be more than happy to review
whatever it is [those organizations] believe is
better for the student body”, referring to the
President’s Student Advisory Council and the
Student Government Association, both of
which are tasked with being a voice for student
input. The biggest challenge to such an action,
she added, was that “when there’s a group of
people who don’t trust, I don’t know how to
respond in a way that will build that trust.”
For those groups of students who inherently
distrust administrative actions, Stetz feared
that any step could be interpreted in a negative
light, a problem that perhaps could not be
totally solved.

TechNews sought comment from
a number of student activists, leaders, and
others to share their stance on the new policy
and the conversation surrounding it. One, who
preferred to remain anonymous, focused on
the university’s private nature, and its ability
to restrict speech rights on privately—owned
property: “Most of us are paying thousands
of dollars for an education and expect the
best possible product for our money. We don’t

come to IIT to listen to protests; we don’t want
to be blocked from going to classes because
of a certain cause . . . IIT has an obligation
to provide their customers with the best
quality product, and preventing disruptions
to the learning environment is part of this
obligation.” Ibrahimovic, on the other hand,
referred to his original Facebook post: “This
was not even communicated to students who
had been here for years, but rather slipped into
the student handbook, thinking that we would
not notice. This is malicious intent. When you
tell students that you are promoting protest
for the sake of bettering the school, and then
simultaneously making it against the rules
of the university to publicly gather, you are
setting up an environment where students risk
being kicked out of the school because you
have a problem with what they want to say.”

Most opinions fell somewhere in
the middle, expressing deep concern about
the broadness of the expanded policy and
the lack of published rules for how it should
be applied while also remaining hopeful for
an ethical approach to its application. While
some remain convinced that Illinois Tech
drafted Section 9 to prevent actions like those
taken by USA last year, others believe that the
definition of “disruption” will be narrow, and
this campus will remain open to protests and
demonstrations as long as they remain peaceful.
As one commenter opined, “only observation
over time will demonstrate whether the policy
is enforced as heavy—handedly as its language
allows, but what’s most important is how we as
students react. If we allow ourselves to feed into
the assumption that this school’s leadership is
out to get us and are incapable of productive
dialog, we won’t ever be able to effectively push
for changes to the policy. If we put some faith
in our administration’s care for its students,
however, and sit down at a table to figure this
out, then we might find a compromise that
benefits us all.”

Carolyn Nivling, School of Applied Technology

 

Haunted House. Nivling also deals with the
SAT ambassadors, who are students in good
standing that mentor younger students in the
college and act as representatives of the School
of Applied Technology.

In her position, Nivling is able “to
wear many hats.” Not only does she enjoy
being involved with planning all these events
for students, she also loves “really getting to
know students, interacting and empowering
them to get more involved in their school.”

Photo by Khaleela Zaman

Nivling likes being busy as well, and since this
position is constantly evolving and changing,
it’s perfect for her. “Probably the other huge
thing” for Nivling is her ability to work with
a team to get these projects done, which she
really enjoys.

No job is completely perfect, and
this position also has its difficulties: “There’s
a perception that events will just presto magic
*snap* happen.” However, there are a lot of
details involved in event planning. There

is another challenge with events, though,
as they depend tremendously on volunteer
participation: “Without that my job would not
be successful.”

Nivling truly appreciates how “the
university as a whole seems very open to
innovative entrepreneurial advancement of
students.” She also likes how Illinois Tech is
very supportive and open to event ideas, as
the SAT works to achieve their goal to create
events that enhance the experience of its
students. For all Illinois Tech students, Nivling
advises that “if you have an opportunity to get
involved in something you’re passionate about
or volunteer for, IIT is a great opportunity for
that. You shouldn’t be afraid to try something.”
She also understands how, especially “in
this digital age,” events provide a great and
unique opportunity for students to create new
relationships and collaborations with other
students and even alumni.

If anyone is interested in
volunteering with the SAT and Nivling for
their Haunted House during Family Weekend
(on Saturday, October 15), please contact her
directly by email at cnivling@iit.edu.

9W gown

W m mam

8mm TechNews may

email editor@technewsiit.com