For those who may not be aware of the effects of the motion passed by the senate, the Poly has been doing a wonderful job reporting, and is available online. They do an excellent job of detailing members of the administrations response, as well as incorporating some of the previous issues surrounding discussion.
There are also a number of editorials which bear examination.
This post is addressed to many of the cabinet members who seem to be “hurt” by the senates motion. We do, sincerely, and without sarcasm, regret the fact that these statements have caused you personal issue. Again it will be stated: we recognize your good intentions, and respect your commitment. That not withstanding, this is not about anyone’s ego, or personal feelings, it can’t be, as this place and the idea it embodies are much to big and much to important. That is why the senate’s motion clearly attempts to establish a tone of professionalism, to address issues that inherently invoke a visceral response in the best manner possible.
Despite that effort, the response they received, to a specific request for increased collaboration, was a closure of communication.
Make no mistake, we have been, and are still watching. Trust that this will not go away, and that failing to address these issues will only make things worse. The discontent you see today is not spontaneous, it has a cause and it is cumulative. Past movements have seen little response, and even in this present case, where lack of meaningful response was specifically mentioned, decisions have been made not to respond to the facts presented, but to the celebrity of the issue by discussing the feelings of the cabinet.
This isn’t helpful. To anyone. If there are inconsistencies with the facts address them. If there are problems with proposed solutions, discuss them. Dr.Sams himself stated you don’t “back your opponents into a corner”. We are not opponents. This simply cannot be an Us vs. Them situation. We are on the same side, and a failure to recognize that will only drive down the quality of the Institute until problems can’t be ignored. At that point the game is over, the pieces go back in the box and energy goes into addressing problems rather than skirting them. We’d like to skip the chutes and ladders, it’s not very fun.
All of us at RPI are interested in seeing her do well. We are asking that you work with us to fix what we’ve had problems with. We ask no more, and will settle for no less. You cannot cite the tenacity and commitment of your students as a source of pride, and patronize them when it comes to being apart of the decisions that shape the core of the school. The senate has stated, and we agree, that it is best to address these issues internally, but there are other options available.
No, we are not opponents. Do not make us out to be and back us into a corner.