The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Wednesday, September 27, 2017— 3A
M AGIC MUSIC
JOSHUA HAN/Daily
The University Philharmonic Orchestra performs their first concert of the year at Hill
Auditorium Monday. Their piece, Felix Mendelssohn’s Scottish Symphony, envokes an
image of the artist’s visit to the ruins of th ePalace of Holyrood in Edinburgh in 1829.
The whole work progresses through a musical stroll around the stones, arches, and half
walls of the palace. The pieces are marked by somber tones, a folky section, magical
textures, and a triumphant ending.
University officials would have
had tangible solutions, especially
because they have spent many
years on campus dealing with
these issues.
“Hearing another person higher
up than me who has been here
endless years — I’m a freshman,
I’ve only been on this campus for
three weeks and if someone else
asks me, ‘Well what should we do’
— how are you going to ask me?”
Washington said. “I’ve only been
in college for three weeks. You
work here, you’ve been through
college, you have a degree, you’re
doing your job, you should know
the facts, you should know what
you should be telling us.”
After most of the protesters
had filed out, the panel and forum
began again as originally planned.
History professor Martin Pernick
opened the panel by discussing the
topic of eugenics in a broad sense
and what role Little played in it.
Pernick made the argument that
being in support of the idealistic
form of eugenics was not cause
enough to remove a person’s
name from the building they were
named after.
“Eugenics
meant
a
lot
of
different things to a lot of different
people,” Pernick said. “Charles
Darwin’s cousin, Francis Galton,
defined it as the use of science to
improve human heredity. Who can
argue with that? Using science to
improve things.”
Pernick
explained
Little’s
interpretation of eugenics was
what merited a renaming of
the building named after him.
According to Pernick, the type of
genetics Little supported was one
that promoted the advancement
of those who held power in society
in the early 20th century, through
any means necessary.
“The kind of eugenics that
Little promoted included all of
the American Eugenics Society’s
most
controversial
methods:
compulsory
sterilization,
ban
on
interracial
sex,
selective
immigration and restrictions by
ethnicity,” Pernick said.
After Pernick concluded his
speech, panelist and LSA senior
Joshua Hasler explained Little’s
life story. Hasler discussed Little’s
work promoting eugenics before,
during and after serving as the
University’s president from 1925
to 1929. He noted Little’s close
personal relationship with Charles
Davenport, a man that Hasler
described as the “godfather of
American eugenics.” During his
time at the University of Michigan,
Little helped organize and was
the president of the Third Race
Betterment Conference held in
Battle Creek, Michigan.
“And as president of both the
conference, a member of the
American Eugenics Society, and
president of this University, he
played a crucial role in bridging
the gap between East Coast
eugenicists
and
Midwestern
eugenicists,” Hasler explained.
American
Culture
professor
Alexandra
Stern
spoke
after
Hasler and focused the majority
of her time discussing parallels
between the current debate over
renaming the C.C. Little Building
to those debates which have been
held on other college campuses
concerning their own buildings’
past history. Stern specifically
cited the University of Virginia’s
decision to change the name of
their medical research facility from
that of a eugenicist, as something
she believes the University of
Michigan should emulate.
All of the panelists, along with
several other professors, have
submitted an official request to
have the C.C. Little Building be
renamed and have created an
online petition to garner support
for their proposal. As of Tuesday
night, the petition has received
485 signatures since it was created
on Sept. 1. That total includes
over fifty signatures by University
professors and deans, many of
whom expressed their views on the
issue of renaming in the comments
section of the petition.
Mika LaVaque-Manty, director
of the Philosophy, Politics and
Economics
program,
offered
one of the most strongly worded
comments in support of renaming
the C.C. Little Building.
“It is to honor, not degrade,
the past and the present of the
University of Michigan to revisit
its values and commitments. When
a thoughtful examination, such as
the one that informs this petition,
concludes the past commitments
are inconsistent with our real
values, it’s necessary to make
changes. We should teach and
learn from the legacy of Little;
our buildings should not bear his
name,” LaVaque-Manty wrote.
The petition has also gained
support from the student body
leadership with signatures from
Central
Student
Government
Reps. Jacob Cutler and Hafsa Tout
as well as CSG President Anushka
Sarkar, all of whom are LSA
seniors.
Sarkar
said
Little
was
a
problematic
figure
in
the
University’s past and that he
should not be honored with his
name on a University building.
“C.C. Little is emblematic of
what is incredibly wrong about
this University’s history, including
putting big tobacco and eugenicism
on a pedestal, quite literally on
one of the largest buildings on
campus,” she said.
Sarkar voiced her support for
the decision last week by LSA SG
to pass a resolution supporting
the renaming of the C.C. Little
Building. She also outlined a plan
for how CSG should approach the
resolution.
“I think that the resolution
should be passed in every school
and
college-specific
student
government and that it should
then be passed in Central Student
Government to show that all
nineteen schools and colleges
individually
support
it,
and
therefore the entire University
supports it, which is why our
assembly passed it,” she said.
Those who have proposed the
renaming acknowledge that there
are still large swaths of students
who have not heard about Little’s
past and his beliefs on race.
According to Hasler, part of the
blame for this lies in the hands of
the University itself. Hasler noted
last semester’s Stumbling Blocks
exhibit, though it outlined failures
in the University’s past, failed to
mention anything about Little and
his advocacy for eugenics.
“They
didn’t
engage
with
C.C. Little and I think that’s
an intentional choice, perhaps
because it adds to the political
climate
and
makes
things
potentially divisive when you talk
about renaming a building,” he
said.
Hasler would like to see the
University rename the C.C. Little
Building by the end of this school
year.
“I think it’s something that
we as a student body deserve …
especially since we are living in
such divisive and decisive times,
this really requires immediate
action.”
After the panel concluded, some
student activists felt their concerns
had not been adequately addressed
by the forum and that there was
continued work to be done on the
issue of renaming the C.C. Little
Building.
“After going into the meeting,
there
was
this
façade
that
everyone is on the same page as us
and moving forward we shouldn’t
have any issues, but the fact that
we have to go through to the
president, to get to the regents, to
get C.C. Little changed is going to
be ridiculously hard for us because
we can’t even get the president to
listen to open racists on campus,
so how are we going to get him
to listen to white supremacy on
campus?” Washington said.
LSA SG President Nicholas
Fadanelli,
an
LSA
senior,
concluded the forum by expressing
his support for future dialogue
about renaming the C.C. Little
Building.
“And I just hope that all these
people that came out here tonight
sign the petition and we keep
having this conversation … because
this is an important conversation
to have, as much as possible,”
Fadanelli said.
LSA
Student
Government
released a statement after the
protest that acknowledged the
protesters’ efforts and implored
the University to rename the
building.
“We would not only like to
thank the activists who, for years,
have fought for the name to be
changed, but also faculty members
who have dedicated years of their
careers to investing who C.C Little
was,” it read. “We continue to urge
the University to change the name
of the C.C Little Building to further
the University’s mission of making
an inclusive campus for everyone.”
CC LITTLE
From Page 1A
years ago and we wanted to build
a stronger interface between
the biological and behavioral
sciences,” he said. “We realized
that one area of exciting new
development is around the smart
home, but what if we added
biology to that? Sensors on
the body that are recording all
kinds of stuff. … So we thought
about making a home lab. This
way we can study these new
possibilities.”
Collaboration
is
a
big
component of the HomeLab.
It’s how it will run effectively,
but it’s also how the lab was
built. Jeannette Jackson, the
managing
director
for
the
BioSocial Methods Collaborative,
said students and faculty from
the
engineering,
kinesiology,
psychology
and
medical
programs, among others, worked
on putting all the pieces for the
lab together.
According to Jackson, student
involvement has been a big part
of
the
HomeLab’s
creation.
Over 33 undergraduate students
from all different disciplines
have
been
involved
in
the
HomeLab, including Engineering
sophomore Cyrus Najarian, who
has been working on the project
since last August.
He said the teamwork and
collaboration he’s experienced
while working on the HomeLab
have been very impactful and
will make for a great research
environment.
“In
the
collaborative,
we
obviously work as a team, but
working
on
the
HomeLab
specifically really took that to the
extreme,” Najarian said. “There’s
always something that we were
collaborating on other people
for. I was working on multiple
different things at the same time
… and we were always trying
to synthesize all of our own
perspectives and experiences to
getting things as close to perfect
as possible.”
Thanks to this collaboration,
the lab was finished less than a
year after construction began
last November.
“This is a new space for
research that facilitates what
we’re calling collaborative team
science,” Jackson said. “(People)
aren’t working on one little slice.
When you work with us, you
work with everything we’ve got
going on.”
And the HomeLab already
has a lot going on. The lab will
be used to study mobility and
cognition in older adults, and a
research project from outside
the University has already been
lined up with Procter & Gamble
to study adult incontinence.
Gonzalez thinks the HomeLab
will bring more data to these
projects than researchers would
otherwise be able to collect.
“The (current) state of the
art for that work is that you just
ask people in a survey, ‘Do you
have trouble washing dishes?’,”
Gonzalez said. “And they say
yes or no or rate on a five-point
scale. But what our facility
allows someone to do is actually
observe people in a controlled
environment like at a kitchen
sink.”
Many
future
projects
are
planned. Gonzalez emphasized
the
lab’s
compliance
with
Americans with Disabilities Act
standards, so disability research
would be a possibility. He’d also
like to see intergenerational
experiments in the lab.
“We’ve had lots of inquiries
about mother-child interaction
studies, and right now they
just do those in a classroom in
East Hall where Psychology is
located,” he said. “It would be
much more natural to run those
studies in the HomeLab where
there’s a bathroom, a playroom,
maybe a sibling involved. You just
get higher-quality data.”
However,
running
experiments in the home is
not
always
straightforward.
Psychology
professor
Jacqui
Smith, who will do studies
in the HomeLab on health in
elderly populations, said the
one-of-a-kind nature of the lab
is exciting, but will require some
extra thought when it comes to
designing projects.
“We need to be really creative
in the way that we design studies
to be able to do this, and of
course we need to get funding
to actually do it,” Smith said. “I
think this is very unique and my
colleagues that I’ve spoken to at
a recent international conference
in San Francisco, everyone was
really excited about this idea …
I hope we can encourage people
from many different disciplines
to write this into their studies.”
HOME
From Page 1A
‘M’ on the Diag for 21 hours
to emphasize the difficulty
of being a Black student at
the University — an action
supported by over 100 students,
faculty and staff who lent their
support, water and presence
throughout the day. Greene
took after the #TakeAKnee
movement many professional
athletes are participating in
to protest racial injustice and
police brutality.
In
the
email,
Dumbeck
provided a link to a video of
Red
Skelton,
an
American
entertainer,
performing
a
monologue on the meaning of
the Pledge of Allegiance. She
drew upon personal beliefs
and implied Dana’s actions
disrespected her religion.
“Although I can understand
Dana’s feelings I feel that he
must be reminded that it is not
through ‘man’ that ‘man was
create (sic) equal,’ but through
GOD,” she wrote. “And it is a
testimonial to GOD that we live
as he would want us to, for we
only answer to him in the end.”
Dumbeck did not respond to
the Daily for comment.
Social
Work
student
Lawrielle West responded to
the email thread, calling on
Dumbeck to apologize for the
harm she caused within the
community and educate herself
on the difference between one’s
original intent and the actual
impact it can have on a group of
people.
“Intent versus impact is a
thing, meaning that regardless
of how you meant something,
it can still negatively impact
someone,” she wrote. “And
that’s what this email did.
Honestly, I personally don’t
need an apology because I’m
interested in you educating
yourself, and spreading what
you have learned from this in
your
community.
However,
an apology is needed to the
public in an effort to start the
process of restorative justice
in a case where a staff member
crossed the lines and triggered
some students in the SSW and
others.”
Dumbeck responded to West,
writing she did not mean to
offend anyone, yet continued to
express a belief in her right to
hold her own opinions.
“First let me say that I did
not insult or diminish what
Dana is doing by any means.
That is not what I said or what I
meant,” she wrote. “My opinion
was expressed just as the
emails opinion was expressed
when sent out to all. The video
I felt was something that all
‘Americans’ would benefit from
hearing, or so I felt. I did not put
race into my thoughts at all. I
only meant that we as ‘humans’
can do better when we look into
ourselves and for what purpose
do we serve. To each his/ her
own.”
West explained the group
of students showed up outside
of Dumbeck’s office at 10 a.m.
to begin the sit-in, but she had
already left the building. After
sitting in the hallway for a
brief period, different faculty
members told the group they
had to move due to fire code and
then called DPSS to assess the
situation at hand. The students
later moved to a larger space
outside the dean’s office, after a
DPSS officer advised they would
be better seen there.
In an email interview, Lisa
Raycraft,
communications
manager for the School of Social
Work, affirmed an associate
dean called DPSS because the
protestors
were
blocking
a
narrow hallway.
“Space
was
available
for
students
to
continue
their
protest at either end of the hall,
where the area is open. Students
continued to sit and block the
hallway. DPSS was called to
assist with opening the hall so
safety codes could be met,” she
said.
However,
Raycraft
stated
the School of Social Work
recognized
the
protesters’
concerns
as
legitimate
and
various
faculty
and
staff
members discussed the matter
over the course of the event.
She said she could not comment
on Dumbeck’s email, as it is a
personal matter.
“The School of Social Work
respects peaceful gatherings
and the right of demonstrators
to express their views,” she
wrote. “The students today
engaged in a peaceful protest
in the SSW building sharing
their concerns. SSW faculty
and staff engaged with students
throughout the sit-in.”
West
expressed
disappointment
in
how
the School of Social Work
responded to the protest —
especially in the context that
most of the students there had
studied community organizing
in classes within the building.
“My
major
is
literally
community organizing, so this
is what I do,” she said. “When
they tell me to move, I’m like,
‘You tell me not to move, in my
textbook it tells me not to move.’
”
She questioned where most of
her classmates were during the
six-hour sit-in, as they missed
an opportunity to truly engage
in their field of study.
“I’m Team 96, meaning that
we’re the 96th class of School
of Social Work, so everybody in
my class is usually graduating
this December or in April,”
she said. “I’ll be graduating in
April. I see some of us here, but
like, that’s 400 people. So I’m
like, OK, maybe 50 graduated
already from one year. Maybe
50 percent, like I said, are in
field or in class. Where are the
rest of the people? We’re all
social workers, what does social
work mean?”
Brendon Holloway, recent
graduate of the MSW program,
expressed the importance of
ensuring that the voices of
students of color remain in the
center of discussion. He shared
an email, signed by the MSW
program as a whole, in which
they expressed disappointment
in Dumbeck for using such
insensitive language towards
such a diverse group of students.
SIT-IN
From Page 1A
the
non-affiliated
interfaith
organization Interfaith Youth
Core to gather information
on religious and worldview
perspectives of the student
body.
The survey, also known as the
Values, Interfaith Engagement
and Worldview Survey, designed
by the IYC, aims to empirically
assess students’ perceptions of
religious diversity on college
campuses as well as students’
engagement
with
their
corresponding worldviews.
According to Tout, the survey
would provide CSG and the
administration with a better
understanding of the campus
climate
and
perspectives
throughout
the
University
to help guide public policy
construction.
“I
think
knowing
and
understanding on the whole
what
students
perspectives
are will be beneficial to us
as student leaders in central
student government and even
more to the administration and
it ultimately does play a part in
policy formation,” Tout said.
Addressing concerns about
student participation in the
survey among the assembly,
Tout stated that the survey
would be conducted externally
by
the
IYC,
along
with
coordination by the Center for
Campus Involvement’s Kelly
Dunlop, who has signed on
as
the
official
institutional
representative.
If
passed,
the
survey
would be conducted during
the
spring
2018
semester,
followed by a comprehensive
report by CSG’s Research and
Polling Commission for use by
University administration and
student governing bodies.
A vote for the resolution will
be held next week.
CSG
From Page 1A
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com