TechNews

STUDENTNEWSPAPER OF ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF
TECHNOLOGY SINCE 1 91 B

McCormick Tribune Campus Center
Room 221

3201 South State Street

Chicago, Illinois 60616

E-mail: editor@technewsiit.com
Website: http://www.technewsiit.com

 

TechNews STAFF

Editor-in-Chief Anoopa Sundararajan

Assistant Editor Annie Zorn
IT Manager Kristal Copeland
Copy Editors David Sobel
Soren Spicknall
Alexandra Detweiler
Layout Editor Jennifer Coelho
Distribution Manager Reno Waswil
Financial Advisor Vickie Tolbert
Faculty Advisor Gregory Pulliam

MISSION STATEMENT

Our mission is to promote student discussion
and bolster the HT community by providing a
newspaper that is highly accessible, a stalwart
of journalistic integrity, and a student forum.
TechNewsisadedicated to the beliefthatastrong
campus newspaper is essential to a strong campus
community.

GENERAL INFORMATION

TechNews is written, managed, and edited by the
students of, and funded in part by, Illinois Institute
of Technology. The material herein does not
necessarily reflectthe opinions of Illinois Institute
of Technology orthe editors, staff, and advisor of
TechNews.Therewillbe no censorship ofTechNews
publication by the faculty or staff of IIT. Sole
authority and responsibility for publication and
adherencetothevaluesset forthinthis policyrests
with the TechNews staff. This paper seeks to bring
together the various segments ofthe Illinois Tech
communityand strives through balanceand content
to achieve a position of respect and excellence.
TechNews strives for professionalism with due
respect to the intellectual values ofthe university
and its community.Allmaterialsubmitted becomes
the property of TechNews, and is subject to any
editorial decisions deemed necessary.

SUBMISSIONS

TechNews is published on the Tuesday of each week
of the academic year. Deadline for all submissions and
announcements is 11:59 pm. on the Friday prior to
publication. Articles, photos, and illustrations must be
submitted electronically to the TechNews website at
technewsiit.com.

EDITORIAL POLICY

The editors reserve the right to determine if
submitted material meets TechNews' policy and
standards. For more information about our editorial
standards, please email assteditor@technewsiit.com.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Letters to the editor may be submitted by anyone,
but are subject to review by the Editor-in-Chief.
All letters-to-the-editor become the property of
TechNews upon submission. TechNews does not
accept or publish anonymous letters or stories.

ADVERTISING

Legitimate paid advertisements, from within
or outside the IIT community, which serve to
produce income for the paper, are accommodated.
TechNews holds the right to deny any
advertisement unsuitable for publication. Media
Kits are available upon request. Ad space is limited
and is taken on a first-come, first-serve basis.
Contact the Business Manager at business@
technewsiit.com for more information.

LOCAL 8' NATIONAL ADVERTISERS
To place an ad, contact us via email at
business@technewsiit.com.

 

opinion@technewsiit.com

TechNeWS | Tuesday, October 4th, 2016

    

Response to university administration's justification for new addition to protest policy

Wes Ludwig
ILLINOIS TECH STUDENT

Having had the opportunity to read
the information from Dean Stetz in Soren’s
piece last week, I’d like to once again offer my
comments: The addition in question: II:A:9:d
in the handbook section outlining the student
code of conduct was added as part of a larger
effort to update the language of the handbook
motivated by the need to maintain compliance
with Title IX regulations for gender and sex
discrimination: The manner in which these
edits were carried out illustrates my concern
for the role of the student in decision making
at IIT These changes were made in a meeting
that didn’t solicit student representation, let
alone input; and were confirmed and added to
the handbook autonomously I understand the
often prohibitive effort that attempting to get
an uninterested party’s input takes, discussion
of policy especially is often mindenumbing:
However, these changes do affect the liberties
of the student body and as such I think that
they could have at least been pointed out in a
meaningful way, rather than left to the students
to find and collectively imagine the worst in
a vortex of Facebook angst: But hindsight is
irrelevant: How will we now move forward
having seen the displeasure, concern, and fear
that this caused for students?

I will allay discussion of the specific
problems of interpretation that the policy
raises for now in order to propose a series of
ideas on how the school could more effectively
represent the interests of the student body in
these types of institutional decisions: But first,
a comment on a statement that was attributed
to Dean Stetz in last week’s article (referring
to students concerned with the intentions
of the new policy, and its possible effects on
student rights) “when there’s a group of people
who don’t trust, I don’t know to respond in
a way that will build that trust" I don’t think
that the relationship between a student and

administrator should be one of trust: I cannot
trust an administrator to hold my interests
above their own, because if the choice were
between the interests of the students and the
interests of investors, it’s safe to assume that
administrators will choose to keep their salaries
over losing their jobs: We shouldn’t be asked
to just believe in our hearts that administrators
won’t choose to use vague policy to silence
groups and individuals: We shouldn’t be asked
to imagine a totally different set of rules than
those that are laid out because of how we’re told
something will be handled in practice: Ours
should be a relationship of mutual respect, and
that respect should be apparent in the way that
our input is sought out and manifested as well
as in written policies on how the university can
treat its students: I should not have to take an
administrator’s word that something seemingly
indiscriminate in its application will be applied
with great concern and sensitivity I won’t, I
don’t believe they’re capable of doing so: With
that being said, my suggestions follow:

A collection of areas of concern
should be determined by SGA and the Office
of Student Affairs (OSA): areas which pertain
to interests of the student body, as such they
will require a student representative to be
present or to be consulted before ratifying
any institutional change in those areas: These
representative positions could be distributed
within SGA or PSAC as seen fit, and could
fall to the appointment of SGA administrators
(these appointments should not be under the
control of professional administration):

A permanent position (or multiple
to represent undergraduate as well as graduate
students) should be made on the Board of
Trustees for a student representative, likely a
high ranking officer from SGA: This position
will hold equal voting weight with the other
board members and can be used to introduce
issues for action:

I would now like to turn my attention to
the issues of the policy itself It may be a
lawyer’s advice to keep wording as vague

and encompassing as possible so as to allow
for the most maneuverability in any case of
application; that’s what I would do if I wanted
to create a system where I can win regardless of
actual circumstance: That principle has been
faithfully applied to this policy, focused on the
word disruption, which is at no point further
defined in order to give a frame of reference
for enforcement: In fact, Dean Stetz’s defense
of the policy is only her good word that the
kind members of administration will only
deign to enforce this nebulous policy when
it suits them: My apologies, that is “when an
action was unsafe”: Why then is it that the
word unsafe, or danger, or violence never
appear in the language of the policy? When the
only way that a policy makes sense is to not
enforce it, what good is the policy (other than
as a convenient back door for the university
to separate itself from undesirables)? The only
sign of good faith that the OSA could offer now
is a collaborative rewrite with representatives
of student government:

To the student who commented
anonymously about vocal protest possibly
devaluing his education in Spicknall’s article
last week:

You should thank protesters for the
free service they provide in educating you
on what I imagine is a much needed outside
perspective: If we can’t be bothered to even
literally hear the complaints of our own
colleagues and contemporaries, we deserve no
place as decision makers and actors of change
in society Our education is (unfortunately
in our world) a privilege, and we have an
obligation to use our privilege to help others:

I do hope that other students,
faculty, and administrators will offer their
own opinions against (or with) mine, so that
we may have a discussion on these important
considerations of the relationship between
our academic, administrative, and political
realities: I will continue to offer my opinions
on these matters and I hope others will join
me:

Kappa Phi Delta holds fundraiser for breast cancer awareness

Andrew Adams
TECHN EWS WRITER

Anyone walking through MTCC
last week would have seen tables of old clothes,
assorted used knick knacks, and other odds
and ends, all hangng under a sign that read
“Kappa Klearance?’ This strange assortment of
items were being sold by Kappa Phi Delta, as
part of their annual campaign to raise support
for breast cancer research and awareness:
Paint IIT Pink: All the proceeds from Kappa
Klearance went to Lurie Children’s Hospital:

According to Kyra Keigher and
Madina Tahmas, two women who helped run
the sale, this is the second time that Kappa Phi
Delta has held a garageesale style event: “We

were giving away a lot of old clothes anyway,
so we figured we should put them to good
use," said Tahmas: According to Keigher and
Tahmas, the sale went well, which can be
explained both by people supporting the cause
and bypeople simply needing a good deal on a
sweater 7 which was apparently the top seller
Paint IIT Pink will continue across
the next week The campaign, according to
a post on the Facebook page for the event, is
“focused on honoring breast cancer survivors
and fighters, and also raising money for breast
cancer research" The week will continue with
more fundraising opportunities, including
sales of raffle tickets, baked goods, and support
pins: Teshirts to support the campaign will be
sold until October 10: All proceeds from these

 

sales go to the Lynn Sage Foundation: The week
will also feature online posts showing stories
of those who have had breast cancer: For those
seeking more information about that, email
womensappreciation@kappaphidelta:com:

The campaign will culminate at the
Illinois Tech Women’s Volleyball game, called
Dig Pink, on October 11: There, prizes will
be raffled off and there will be a display of
luminaria to honor the fighters and supporters
of breast cancer The event’s page intimates
that there will be more festivities and honors
at the halftime of the game: Nearly 100 people
were marked “interested" or “going" on the
Facebook page for this event, making this an
event worth watching out for

 

Photo by Andrew Adams