Nostalgia mixed with excitement-- a sit-in, just like the Sixties!
These two courageous students had decided to act rather than sit passively and wait for the administration's silence to cost them their exams.
They organized the event using Facebook (so somewhere in all this, COMM students, there should be a paper about the political uses of social networking sites!).
In their organizing blurb, they make it very clear that this is NOT a partisan protest; they support neither the administration nor BUFA. In fact, they go out of their way to clarify:
NOTE: This is not a pro-BUFA rally, this is an attempt to get both sides talking before December 3rd.I was struck by the wording proposed for signs for the sit-in event:
Suggested signs:I went past again to check out the Tower Cafeteria menu and then came back, stopping to encourage these two brave students who have decided to be pro-active in demanding their right to an education. Evidently, the plea to the administration will continue until Friday of this week.
You have 8 days left, not just one
Keep talking, We're listening
Silence solves nothing
Negotiate now, not later
You have to TALK to be at Brock
We'd rather be in class
All I want for Christmas is to write my exams
If students are frustrated enough to stage a demonstration like this, to plead that the administration come back to the bargaining table, I hope the administration does not simply ignore their plea.
I hope that the administration will keep faith with those students and address the issues that students have raised.
4 comments:
I'm a Brock student who joined the sit-in for only about 30 minutes yesterday, and I just wanted to say that I also admire what the two organizers have decided to do. That said, I think that it is unfair to suggest that as students we all have a responsibility to dedicate so much time to these kinds of things. The fact of the matter is that this is the last week of the term. Everyone is extremely busy working on final assignments (which we may not even get back for a very long time) and studying for final exams (which we may or may not have). Although these may sound like very selfish reasons not to participate in protests, consider this: as students, we pay to be here and to receive an education (an argument constantly being used, and rightly so, to justify why we should have a voice in these issues). Part of that education is based on evaluation and grading. Now, we can talk all we want about how grades are just numbers and how they don't actually "matter," but the reality is that they have material implications for many of us, and there are many students (those who work hard and value their education) who cannot risk throwing grades (and money, since, as I mentioned, we pay to do these assignments to our best ability and to have them assessed as such) away, even for a cause which we realize has a huge impact on us. We're restricted by the rules of this institution which we pay to attend and which holds so much weight in our lives. Again, I recognize that his argument may make me sound like a “tool,” but it is a reality for many people, and one which should be recognized.
I know this probably won't be posted, as the blog is being moderated. Clearly, as demonstrated by the lack of comments on the slanted articles posted here, the author is not allowing much in the way of criticism of his opinions.
It was the decision of the faculty to make the strike date right before exams. This, as we both know, was for two reasons: one, to limit the affect on teachers paychecks. Two, to place as much pressure on students as possible by adding uncertainty to the stress of exams. By doing so, it is hoped that the "customers" (students) of this institution will put pressure on the "management" (administration). The problem: this is an institution of learning, not a business whos concerns do not go beyond profits.
Students are your direct customers and your primary responsibility as a professor. Regardless of the validity of your labour dispute, it is not right to use them as pawns for your ends. The students vastly outnumber the faculty, and are also generally much more vulnerable to a labour disruption: if students lose 2 months out of their summer, they may not be able to afford the next year of school, or else are looking at bigger debts due to not being able to work, and having to extend leases at rental properties.
Furthermore, the faculty is well-paid for its work. St Catharines is not an expensive place to live, and I cannot imagine any faculty members unable to make a confortable living here off of current Brock wages. If being a part-time lecturer is so bad here, it is much worse at U of T, where cost of living is much, much higher.
It is also generally known to students that not all the faculty wishes to strike, and TAs / dissenting profs have expressed their opinions to us. While students remain quietly anxious for the time being, if a strike does take place, it is unlikely they will be sympathetic to professors for long, and indeed this will likely lead to resentment of the faculty that will last well beyond this issue.
Remember: Should you choose to strike, you are no simply disrupting the profits of a business to pressure them into conceding to your demands. You are sacrificing the well-being of the vast majority (who are also the most vulnerable) for the well-being of the few. Please keep this front and center in your mind should you excercize your right to strike.
I just want to say thank-you Prof Barry Joe. I like getting info from your blog rather than BUFA's useless pamphlets. Keep us posted!!
As a Brock graduate in communications studies and a Humber graduate in postgrad public administration, it seems to me that Brock is taking the direction of a corporation that forgets about their most important clients, students and faculty. From an institution so heavily influenced by business, it seems that the Brock administration neglects the most important aspect of business management: service quality!!
In regards to the letter in the Carelton paper, and Brock's low rankings in the maclean's scorecard, it is obvious that Brock's administration lacks a service quality perspective. Pay the teachers less, keep information from major stakeholders, construct unnecessary buildings rather than reinvesting in quality services, etc? Each student at Brock has made a huge investment in their future. Students don't invest the thousands of dollars annually to have to deal with the administration's mismanagement, especially during exam time. They definitely don't appreciate the political strategies used by both parties. It seems that Brock wants to operate without a student body. The administration's moves will deter prospective students from choosing brock. I wouldn't want to enroll there knowing that the faculty is discontent and on the verge of leaving.
From my perspective the university is on a decline, which has negative implications for Niagara. The administration must recognize the various perspectives of the different academic programs available at Brock. Of course, it must operate in the context of competitive capitalism; however, the university serves greater social and economic purposes. There's a reason why universities are publicly funded. They are meant to deliver many services, not just act as a business seeking profit.
Post a Comment