Send us your questions, your comments, your reports. The Quad is by students, for students. Do you want to help us ask the questions students want answered? We've got plenty of interesting stories for you to cover. E-mail us for more info.
The Quad discusses student life at Tufts. We ask the questions that you want answered.
Recently, ResLife announced that it is moving upperclassman Healthy Living next year from Carmichael Hall to Lewis Hall, often considered the worst dorm on campus. This announcement has led to controversy. As a member of the Tufts community who lived in Lewis for two years, I have been asked to assess (a) if Lewis is as bad as its reputation and (b) if moving Healthy Living to Lewis is a good or bad idea.
Starting with the first part of my assessment:
Rumor: Lewis’ rooms are very small.
Fact: Yes, they are smaller than rooms in other campus buildings (including Carmichael) but they are livable. The doubles are narrow, but they are also long, and clever rearrangement of the furniture can make them seem bigger. The singles are small, but they are no smaller than some of Carmichael’s. It’s just a matter of using space efficiently.
Rumor: The plumbing doesn’t work very well.
Fact: It depends on where in Lewis you live. The first year I lived on a floor where the bathrooms rarely had problems, and the water pressure in the showers was amazing. The second year, the girls were usually using the men’s bathroom by the end of the weekend due to toilets backing up, and the showers were very weak and way too short, leading (on my part) to several bumped heads.
Rumor: The walls are thin.
Fact: True. But it's Healthy Living, so hopefully there should be early bedtimes and no parties!
Fact: True. The main lounge is really only used by dance groups because the TV is at least ten years old, and the couches are disgusting and randomly arranged. The lounges in the different hallways generally have more people in them, but that’s more for the company than the facilities.
Rumor: Downhill is worse than uphill.
Fact: Not really. I always liked being in close proximity to Dewick, Hodgdon, and the campus center, and the walk to Davis Square generally seemed a bit shorter. However the walk to class can be irritating (I counted at least sixty steps just going up the hill, and that was after coming down sixty from the fourth floor in Lewis), and the fact that one of the Lewis exits leads directly to the Dewick dumpsters doesn’t really get you excited about going to school in the morning.
Conclusion: Yes, Lewis is bad, but it could be worse!!! And the people are generally great.
Whether Lewis is the best choice for Healthy Living is a different question. On the one hand, moving Healthy Living to Lewis might decrease the amount of people who apply for the sole purpose of having guaranteed housing before the lottery. On the other hand, people who are actually interested in Healthy Living might decide to take their chances in the lottery and live healthily elsewhere, away from the Lewis smells that make its healthiness debatable.
You don’t have to live in Healthy Living to live healthily, and it seems possible that with Lewis’ (admittedly well-deserved) reputation, people might seek living situations outside of the Healthy Living program. In that case, your Healthy Living hall can become composed of people just seeking a guarantee of housing—only this time, people who were more desperate for such a guarantee.
Students who agree to Healthy Living are agreeing to hold themselves to a standard that at least some students do not reach—a standard that the university is actively trying to promote. ResLife should be attempting to make Healthy Living an attractive option, and pushing Healthy Living residents to Lewis won’t do it. The fact is, whether people apply to Healthy Living for the experience or for the guaranteed housing, they are making a commitment to follow the Healthy Living policies. ResLife should support that, not punish it.
Why? Because Stuart is also co-president of Tufts Roundtable (the parent organization of The Quad). Tufts Roundtable is a campus media outlet. And the public editor critiques campus media outlets. For some reason, the Daily has concerns that Stuart could be biased.
Granted, finding truly unbiased individuals is more difficult than convincing people to stop alleging bias right and left. After Jeremy White (LA '09) was selected as the first public editor, some took to the Daily's anonymous comment boards to criticize the decision, since White was a Daily news editor until he became public editor.
If anything, the public editor should have an extensive campus media background so that critiques can be better informed. And past affiliations don't automatically mean bias. (I spent four enjoyable semesters as a copy editor for the Daily, but that hasn't stopped me from critiquing it here on The Quad.)
But for Stuart to be the public editor for Tufts campus media is like if Arthur Sulzberger (A '74) became the ombudsman for both The Washington Post and The New York Times. I don't doubt that Stuart will strive to be impartial, but he is the public face of Tufts Roundtable's website, with the goal of increasing readership and the number of writers. This creates quite a conflict of interest if he wants to argue that there are too many campus print publications (a criticism that former public editor Duncan Pickard '10 made), or if he writes to analyze a Roundtable post or organization (such as The Quad).
Stuart will serve as public editor until the end of the semester, and his writings will find a home online and in other publications, according to his op-ed. It remains to be seen which publications would take his pieces, since the Daily refused and The Primary Source has called on Stuart to resign either as public editor or as Roundtable co-president.
At the end of the day, I'm reminded of this: Media Advocacy Board (MAB) chair Scott Silverman '10 had told The Quad that there were two applications for the position this semester. Perhaps the other applicant is no longer interested in the role -- else what does it say about the other applicant when MAB chooses a notable conflict of interest instead?
Update 3/10/10 2:22am: An official announcement regarding alcohol policy for Spring Fling is due this week, said Senate Vice President Antonella Scarano '10 at Sunday's TCU Senate meeting. Just speculating -- it's possible that Concert Board may be aiming to announce performers in conjunction with this announcement. Or that Concert Board may try to wait until the dust settles from whatever alcohol policy changes may be announced.
Update 3/10/10 2:11am: The phrase "private location" was used by performers as a placeholder for several other university names that are currently listed as part of the Campus Consciousness Tour.
Update 3/10/10 1:56am: It looks like Drake is part of Reverb's Campus Consciousness Tour, and as of now, there is no performance listed on May 1 on the tour's website.
Update 3/10/10 1:52am: Concert Board co-chair Nicole Goodwin '12 tells The Quad that Concert Board will not confirm or deny any Spring Fling rumors "until contracts are finalized," and that once that's done, it will "release names ASAP."
Original post:
A website is reporting that several performers have announced a tour date on May 1 in Medford, Mass.
The community rep discussion just took a turn for the interesting. Tonight's Senate meeting went down two paths regarding race and ethnicity -- one which makes things more confusing, and one which may indicate the importance of Senate liaisons with minority groups on campus.
First, the confusing part. In Senate discussion of a social justice workshop sponsored by the Office for Campus Life last week, observer Matthew Kincaid '11 said that including minority representation on Senate is important because "everything has to do with race. Even issues such as [whether to raise the ResLife housing commitment charge], issues that seem colorblind, have to do with race."
That's right -- just when you thought it was enough to address the perils of discrimination, now you have to address the perils of colorblindness. Senate Historian Tomas Valdes '11 asked Kincaid to elaborate on why the housing commitment charge debate was racial, and Kincaid did not provide specifics, instead stating that Senate must look like the student body in order to represent it. (By my calculations, using Tufts data and making guesses from Senate's members page, senators resemble the student body to within a few percentage points -- quite close when you take into account how hard it is to reflect the demographics of 5,000 people in a group of 28 senators.)
Another observer (whose name I did not catch -- generally, I only identify those observing Senate meetings if they're known to me or if they state their full names in the vicinity of saying their statements) elaborated that "socioeconomic and racial lines can be fairly similar," and that decisions "can affect some communities more than others."
This partially addressed why a housing commitment charge debate could be looked at as racial -- but it fails to take into account that Senate, at the insistence of Sen. Xavier Malina '10 and others, passed a resolution saying that Senate only endorses increasing the charge if it didn't affect financial aid students or Greek life, taking care of any socioeconomic argument. This also presents a question that I posed tonight via e-mail to Institutional Research -- what is the correlation between race and socioeconomic status among Tufts undergraduates? (I'll let you know when I receive a reply.)
Second, the redeeming moment of the night. Out of nowhere came a question from Pan-African Alliance community rep Marie J. Murphy '12: "Does Spring Fling have metal detectors?"
The answer is no, but the resulting discussion led to several observers claiming that in terms of campus events where non-Tufts college students are allowed to attend, it is more likely that events attracting a primarily non-white crowd will require metal detectors than events attracting a primarily white crowd.
The events referred to are parties and similar events that take place at Dewick-MacPhie Dining Hall and Hotung Café.
One observer, who identified herself as the Caribbean Club's vice president and an Event Staff worker, said that her observing a variety of events in both capacities has led her to the conclusion that there is a double standard in which events are required to have metal detectors.
A Caribbean Club event made news in October 2008 when a TUPD officer used pepper spray to disperse a crowd at the event.
Senate Vice President Antonella Scarano '10 said she plans to look into this and another concern brought up by observers, the differences in campus access and advising afforded to Greek chapters based at Tufts versus cultural Greek chapters that span multiple universities.
Assuming that both issues are what they're said to be, these are issues that were not brought up in the normal course of the 28 senators sharing campus concerns. That should be taken into account as the community representative task force considers how to best liaison between senators and minority groups on campus.
Update 3/8/10 12:11am: I forgot to include Tufts' stated policy on when metal detectors are required for campus events (from Roadmap, linked to here):
METAL DETECTOR POLICY
Tufts requires the use of metal detecting equipment at the entrance to certain campus functions. This requirement will generally apply to all types of events hosted by any campus organization or department where: - advertising and admission is open to non-Tufts attendees**, and, - the event is not primarily a performance with a seated audience, or, - the nature of the event requires special security arrangements
** Note: For events to be considered open to the Tufts community only (and thus generally not require metal detecting equipment), the number of outside invited guests may not exceed 25.
In many cases, the costs associated with the use of metal detecting equipment will be borne by the university. Other costs related to the hosting of the event will remain the responsibility of the hosting organization. Final determination of whether metal detecting equipment will be needed for a particular event will be the responsibility of the Department of Public and Environmental Safety. The process by which events must be approved and determination of funding will be through the event registration process described on the website of the Office for Campus Life.
Please note that all events must be hosted by a recognized Tufts organization or department, although they may be co-sponsored with an outside organization. All guests at open social events must show a current I.D. from a college or university.
The TCU Senate will consider the following matters tonight:
Course evaluations are going online in the near future, meaning you will be able to see numerical ratings for instructors and courses. But should instructors and departments be able to opt out from having their ratings available to view? Senators Nunu Luo '12 and Alice Pang '13 and trustee representative Emily Maretsky '10 say no, and have drafted a resolution to that end.
The fall semester can get pretty cramped when it starts after Labor Day each year. I have drafted a resolution asking the faculty to start before Labor Day in years when they're considering axing Veterans' Day as a day off, when finals will run way late in December, or when the number of weekdays in Reading Period is shortened. This is a potential implementation of Senate's vote last semester to oppose having classes on Veterans' Day. An amendment to my resolution will suggest swapping Columbus Day for Veterans' Day as a less-preferred, but viable, alternative.
Additionally, on the agenda (as of Thursday) are updates on the community representatives task force and campus center renovations, and the introduction of a resolution recommending changes to the university's sexual assault policy, which has been under revision this past year.
