He also said each campus gets
individual funding from the state of
Michigan and sets its own tuition rates.
He said the U-M Flint and Dearborn
campuses’ tuition are around 80
percent of the cost of tuition for the
Ann Arbor campus.
Schlissel said there are different
communities on each campus, and this
is reflected in the faculty on the three
campuses. He said Ann Arbor is part
of a global market, while U-M Flint
and Dearborn are focused on hands-on
education for students from the areas
they are located in.
“It wouldn’t really be either right
or good for Flint or Dearborn for me
to sit here in Ann Arbor and tell them
how they should spend their money and
who they should be serving,” Schlissel
said. “I don’t think if we had three
Ann Arbors, one of which was in Flint
and one of which was in Dearborn, we
wouldn’t be serving the people of the
state the same way or as well, as if we
have one global research university and
two regional campuses that are much
more local in their focus.”
He said he oversees the chancellors
at U-M Flint and U-M Dearborn, but the
campuses are ultimately different with
only partially overlapping populations.
Schlissel noted the University’s Ann
Arbor campus is the most selective
university campus in the state and
the Flint and Dearborn campuses are
accessible to a broad range of students
within their communities.
Part of this, he said, is because
the Ann Arbor campus is noticeably
comprised of students who come from
wealthier
backgrounds,
while
the
Dearborn and Flint campuses better
reflect the diversity of the state in the
student populations on those campuses.
He said this was one reason for the
creation of the Go Blue Guarantee on
the University’s Ann Arbor campus.
“The demographics of the campuses
are different, so they really are three
very
distinguishable
campuses,”
Schlissel said. “The socioeconomic
diversity of Flint and Dearborn much
more closely mirror the diversity of
our state, whereas Ann Arbor is skewed
much more to students from wealthier
background. The reason we’ve begun
the Go Blue Guarantee here is to try to
improve the socioeconomic diversity of
students here on this campus.”
1U listed the Go Blue Guarantee’s
nonexistence at U-M Dearborn and
Flint as one main campaign issues,
though 42 percent of U-M Dearborn
students and 39 percent of U-M Flint
students are eligible for the Pell Grant,
a federal grant awarded to high-
achieving students with financial need.
Schlissel said financial aid is a priority
of all three campuses and a higher
percentage of students receive financial
aid at U-M Flint or Dearborn compared
to students at the University’s Ann
Arbor campus.
Schlissel
also
addressed
1U’s
complaints over the University’s Flint
and Dearborn campuses not receiving
any of the $85 million earmarked for
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion over
five years nor any of the $1 billion in
funding for student support from the
Victors for Michigan campaign. He
said the three campuses have separate
fundraising and budgets for these
University services and act differently
within the contexts of the campus.
According to Schlissel, leaders from
each campus have the opportunity to
lobby independently for more resources
to be allocated to their respective
campuses and plans to continue to
work with those leaders to increase
funding
allocations
for
all
three
campuses. Additionally, he said he
would like the state to increase direct-
to-student
financial
aid,
meaning
a student can receive a need-based
scholarship directly from the state that
can be taken to whichever university
the student chooses to attend.
“We’re lobbying together to try to
grow the pot for each campus, keeping
in mind each campus serves different
communities
and
has
different
resources come to it,” Schlissel said.
“I’m committed to working with Flint
and Dearborn to grow their state
allocation at the same time we work
to grow the state allocation for Ann
Arbor.”
Carbon Commission
Schlissel then addressed questions
concerning
student,
faculty
and
corporate involvement in his new
Commission on Carbon Neutrality. At
the beginning of February, Schlissel
officially announced the charge and
members of his new Commission on
Carbon Neutrality. The commission
will define a goal and clarify the
parameters for the University to
achieve carbon neutrality, looking to
achieve and surpass the University’s
2011 goal of a 25 percent carbon
emission reduction from the 2006
standard by 2025.
Noting the presence and direct
involvement
of
students
on
the
commission, Schlissel said the shared
motivation between students and other
commission members will be beneficial
for the productivity of the board.
“We share the same goal,” Schlissel
said. “The goal is to figure out as
quickly as possible how to put us on a
pathway to becoming carbon neutral in
a way that’s sustainable, that allows us
to continue our mission and continue
to be an attractive place to come and
study and to learn and to do research,
and to do it in a way that serves as an
example and in collaboration with the
city around us, the county, the state,
and to do it as a permanent rather than
a short term fix.”
The
committee,
composed
of
University
students
and
faculty
members, also includes two members
from
major
energy
corporations.
According to Schlissel, the members
were meticulously chosen for their
input.
“I quite purposefully asked those
two
major
energy
companies
to
suggest someone they thought would
be helpful, and the reason why is they
provide the overwhelming amount of
energy throughout our state and region
and to say we don’t want to hear their
thoughts and learn their plans because
of their emissions of greenhouse gas,”
Schlissel said. “They’re not going
away, they are the major suppliers of
electricity for the University, the city of
Ann Arbor, et cetera, so ignoring them
because of past behavior, I don’t think
that serves any purpose.”
Schlissel also noted that the two
corporations, DTE and Consumers
Energy, have personal incentive to
improve their sustainability practices.
“Each of those companies recognizes
that they are as adversely affected by
global climate change as the University
is,” Schlissel said. “Their business may
go out of business because of it and
they’re incentivized how they are going
to shift from non-renewables and high
carbon to low carbon sources of energy.
One of them, DTE, their CEO told me
our trajectory to get to 80 percent
carbon free in their renewables in their
portfolio over the coming decade so I
would like to understand how they’re
going to do this at the scale of the
state of Michigan in a place where it
gets to be minus 30-degree wind chill
factors in the winter, so I wanted their
expertise.
He also noted that because the
individuals from the energy industry
only make up a small portion of
commission, he is not too concerned
about
their
opinions
being
too
domineering.
“The two industry folks are two
members of a 16-person commission
advisory so I’m not incredibly worried
about the thoughtful students and
the faculty and the campus leaders
being overwhelmed by two people of
industry.”
According
to
Schlissel,
the
commission’s first town hall will be a
good opportunity for pressing student
issues and concerns to be recognized.
“I’d
love
to
understand
which
questions
are
front-of-mind
for
students,” Schlissel said. “In the
flipside, I’d love the students to see the
thoughtfulness and seriousness with
which the members of the commission
are taking this really important task.”
Felony Self-Disclosure
The University has implemented
a new policy this February requiring
members of the community to disclose
all charges and convictions of felonies
within a week of the charge or
conviction. The policy applies to all
faculty and staff, including student
employees, volunteers and visiting
scholars. According to the policy,
those who do not disclose felonies will
potentially face serious consequences,
possibly including dismissal.
While University officials have said
the policy was intended to ensure
campus safety, some have raised
concerns with the policy. Those against
the policy say it infringes on rights,
unfairly targets minorities, adds to
invasive hiring procedures and lacked
community input.
According to Schlissel, the creation
of the policy is motivated by student
and faculty safety, however there is
a challenge to ensure the process is
conducted in a fair way.
“The core of the policy change is
to make sure we can provide a safe
environment on our campus, in our
health system, in all the different
things we do as possible,” Schlissel
said. “I think the advocates are very
correct to be concerned about the
disproportionate impact of the legal
system on different subpopulations in
our country. I think the evidence that
that happens is incredibly strong. What
we have to balance is being fair to every
individual employee or applicant one
person at a time, with the responsibility
to keeping our community safe.”
Though he agreed it is a challenge
to maintain fairness in the process,
Schlissel said disclosing felony charges
or convictions is important to ensure
specific people are not a risk to certain
positions on campus.
“Let’s
say
we
have
somebody
working in the Treasurer’s Office
of the University that had been
convicted or charged elsewhere with
embezzlement, with stealing money,
and they do the same thing here and
we never asked (about the charge or
conviction),” Schlissel said. “It’s not an
unreasonable thing for an employer to
know whether a particular job a person
is doing poses a particular risk based on
them having been charged or convicted
of a serious crime — not a trivial crime,
but a serious crime. The challenge, in a
way, is how to do that in a way that isn’t
unfair to people.”
While the policy requires all faculty
to report these felony charges or
convictions, Schlissel said the findings
are not always applicable, depending on
the job the individual has.
“Just because you’ve been convicted
of a serious crime doesn’t mean you
should never work — you have to be able
to support yourself,” Schlissel said. “So
the idea is to do this as a confidential
process where the leadership and our
campus-wide human resources group
looks at these self-reports and says,
‘Well, this person was arrested or
convicted or a crime that has nothing
to do with their job, they’re not a risk,
we’re going to keep that information
confidential, the supervisors are not
going to know about it,’ and that person
will go about their business.”
Schlissel
also
stressed
the
importance of keeping track of the
demographics of those impacted by the
policy.
“It’s a balancing act,” Schlissel
said. “What we’re going to have to
do prospectively is look at how the
demographics
works
out
in
this
program. If we were to get 100 reports
a year out of our 40,000 employees of
someone being convicted of a felony, we
want to make sure the peoples whose
jobs are being moved or changed or
lost aren’t disproportionately in one
identifiable group or another.”
Free Speech
Schlissel then moved on to discuss
free speech and the upcoming visit from
conservative
political
commentator
Ben Shapiro. This is not the first time
the University has dealt with issues
regarding the First Amendment, as
seen with last year’s potential visit
from Richard Spencer and a lawsuit
from Speech First.
Shapiro’s visit, which will occur on
Tuesday evening, will be hosted by
the University’s chapter of the Young
Americans for Freedom. While Shapiro
has been accused of using transphobic,
homophobic and anti-choice rhetoric,
free tickets reserved for students sold
out in less than two minutes of being
released.
Schlissel explained it was important
for the University to allow student
groups to invite the speakers they want
on campus, even if the individual may
have offensive rhetoric.
“To be a University we have to be
open to ideas, even ones that many of
us may find offensive,” Schlissel said. “I
don’t have to go listen to the talk, but
similarly we can’t set up a way to tell a
student group who they’re allowed to or
who they’re not allowed to invite. Once
you give away that right, someone will
decide they don’t want to hear about
your issue because it’s too difficult.”
He also explained the University
remains neutral with issues regarding
free speech because deciding what
qualifies
as
“offensive”
can
be
challenging.
“Who would you trust to make the
call about what’s offensive?” Schlissel
said. “No one has figured out how to do
that. So, you really have to be content-
neutral. Just because someone speaks
here at the University, in no way means
the University as an entity is endorsing
what they have to say.”
However,
more
than
issues
of
the
First
Amendment,
Schlissel
emphasized his responsibility is to
protect students’ rights to choose
whom to listen to and whom to invite
on campus.
“Some people say we’re protecting
the
First
Amendment,”
Schlissel
said. “The First Amendment, I’m not
responsible for that. I’m responsible
for you. So what I’m really protecting
is your right to decide who you’d like
to invite and come give a talk, or your
choice about who you want to listen to.
Who you shouldn’t be allowed to listen
to, I think we should be cautious about
that.”
Ethical Food Practices
Lastly, Schlissel discussed ethical
food practices on campus, which
comes after public comments from
the last Board of Regents meeting,
as well as conversation in Central
Student Government and Ann Arbor
City Council, about the presence of fast
food chain Wendy’s at the University.
The Coalition of Immokalee Workers,
student organizers and community
members were concerned about the
chain’s presence on campus because
of its refusal to join the Fair Food
Program.
While Schlissel noted that Wendy’s
decided not to pursue a request to
come back to the Michigan Union
when it reopens, he acknowledged the
importance of discussions regarding
ethical food practices on campus. He
explained how, a few years back, the
University made an effort to look at
where athletic apparel — anything
with a Block ‘M’ — came from, and
considered the possibility of a similar
process for food on campus.
“Students have proposed that we
consider a similar approach to the
sourcing of other things the University
buys, and that’s a reason issue to look
at and explore, and the same committee
(President’s Advisory Committee on
Labor Standards and Human Rights)
has been tasked at looking at this issue
… and to do an analysis,” Schlissel said.
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Tuesday, March 12, 2019 — 3
SCHLISSEL
From Page 1
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com
Stephen Berrey, associate professor
of American culture, said blackface
appearing in yearbooks is a prime
example of how this form of racism
was considered “safe” or acceptable
in
many
communities,
including
Northam’s medical school, relatively
recently.
“There’s a reason why this 1984
yearbook pops out there and then kind
of disappears for however many years
it’s been,” Berrey said. “It’s because,
at the time, it was not a big deal in that
community for these white people.
And that’s important to note — if it’s in
the yearbook, it means that it was safe
for those white people. Which means,
of course, that blackface was safe and
normal all over the country well into
the 1970s.”
Berrey
explained
a
blackface
photograph in a yearbook does not
only represent the beliefs of one or
two students, but instead reflects the
culture of an entire community.
“If we look at that yearbook, we may
think that’s Ralph Northam or maybe
somebody else,” Berrey said. “It’s those
two students, but it’s more than that.
It’s the layout person, it’s the editor,
it’s the staff, it’s the faculty, it’s the
administrator, if it’s a high school it’s
the school board, it’s the community.
There’s a complicity. The reason why
we don’t know about all of these axes
is that nobody cared about them at the
time who was in these communities.
There’s a complicity that is perfectly
okay.”
Similarly, Bethany Hughes, assistant
professor
of
American
culture
and Native American Studies, said
appropriation
of
Native
American
culture did not arise from offensive
Halloween
costumes
or
school
mascots, but actually began as early as
the Boston Tea Party in 1773. Hughes
said the Americans’ choice to dress
in what they believed was Native
American clothing reflects the deeper
history of cultural exploitation.
“It was not necessarily to disguise
their identity, maybe a little bit, but it
was a way of taking on a persona and
in some sense claiming indigeneity
to America, that we are made here,
and also claiming this sort of warrior,
aggressive action,” Hughes said. “The
history of redface doesn’t start in
popular culture entertainment — it
actually starts in civic and political
protest as far as an American identity
around redface. There is a longer
history
of
redface
in
imported
European entertainment and theater.”
Hughes noted how the popularity
of redface in contemporary American
culture disregards and undermines the
differences between Native American
communities.
“There’s this embodied knowledge of
what it means to see and recognize an
Indian, that then is imported directly
into film and television,” Hughes said.
“The markers that are identifiably
Sioux … that are Oglala, that are
Lakota, all of those get imported into
a generic Indian identity that then get
picked up and can be utilized in film
and television.”
LSA
freshman
Caroline
Reed
attended the panel and said the
discussion
made
her
think
more
deeply about a blackface incident she
experienced.
“I was at a relative’s house helping
them clean out some stuff and came
across a photo of them in blackface,
and I got nervous so I put it back in the
box and didn’t say anything about it,”
Reed said. “I didn’t acknowledge that I
even found it, I just kind of went about
my life. Obviously it’s a generational
difference, but as an 18-year-old, I felt
really angry at why they would even
do that. I was just wondering how to
address it and learn from that negative
problem.”
Reed said the panelists’ presentations
on redface and yellowface allowed
her
to
understand
that
cultural
appropriation is an issue that affects
many different communities in equally
devastating ways.
“I hear about blackface a lot, but
I never really thought about the
implications of redface and yellowface
and how that affects other races,” Reed
said. “I think that stood out to me a lot,
that it’s not limited to one stereotype
and extends to all kinds of different
people.”
APPROPRIATION
From Page 1
“There
will
be
plenty
of
opportunity for the public and
community to comment suggestions
and priorities and so on, but you
have to keep in mind that this is an
advisory panel only,” Forrest said.
“We make recommendations, we are
not the ones who make the decisions,
that is the sole purview of the Board
of Regents, the president and the
executive officers.”
An
audience
member
asked
how
residents
can
ensure
the
commission’s work will not be
guided by interests of corporations.
Haverkamp said the commission
needs to take in the perspective of
different stakeholders in order to
have accurate representation.
Forrest
said
because
the
commission
does
not
make
decisions, corporate interests are
not as relevant.
“There is not a lot of self-interest
here,” Forrest said. “This is a
volunteer board. Again, we do not
make the decision. So it separates
the money interest from the decision
making conference. Our job is really
to distill data and to do the best we
can to recommend the best path
forward.”
Another audience member asked
how the commission is going to
foster long-term solutions and keep
the community updated on any
progress made. Haverkamp said the
commission will produce interim
reports along the way that will be
made public, and the committee is
always open to suggestions from
residents.
Forrest said open communication
between the commission and the
community is integral to reducing
carbon emissions.
“So much of the commission’s
work
will
be
communication,”
Forrest said. “If we can’t engage the
entire University community, that
is a sign that people just don’t care.
But that’s not something I believe, I
think people care.”
Rackham student Aaron Gladstein
said he attended the event to have
an accurate understanding of how
the University is working to reduce
its carbon footprint. He was pleased
with
the
receptiveness
of
the
commission.
“I like how open the commission
currently
is,”
Gladstein
said.
“I thought I was coming into
something, like a premade game
plan, and instead this is more they
are ready to listen.”
LSA freshman Lena Swirczek is
the co-president of the University’s
chapter of Citizens’ Climate Lobby.
She
said
she
also
appreciated
how open the commission was
to audience suggestions and how
dedicated they seemed to the cause.
However, she discussed how she is
worried the Board of Regents will
not put as much effort into reducing
the University’s carbon emissions.
“I’m more confident now that
the commission is actively working
towards making recommendations
and solutions,” Swirczek said. “My
one concern is how regents are going
to handle that. My biggest takeaway
is that they’re going to do their best
to do their research and put in the
time and the effort and consult with
who they need to consult so that we
can move forward on this issue, but
I’m just concerned that the regents
will not act with the same urgency
and expertise.”
TOWN HALL
From Page 1
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com
about cutting long hair,” Dascola said.
For more than 50 years, Dascola
has continued the family tradition.
But he said it may end soon.
“There
isn’t
anybody
coming
behind me at this point in time,” he
said. “My granddaughter was talking
about becoming a hair person, but
she’s still in high school, so it’s hard
to say what’s going to happen at this
point … you can’t make your children
or grandchildren do stuff they don’t
want to do and if she decides not to do
that, that’s okay. That’s her choice.”
Though none of his children aspire
to become barbers, he said they help
out at the shop in different ways. His
youngest daughter used to clean his
shop as a child, his oldest daughter
helps out financially and his son has
built him his website. Dascola said
he’s proud of his kids because they
find different ways to help him out.
Dascola said he has had to hire
outside people to help out in the shop.
He added it isn’t easy to find qualified
people.
“Everybody has their own talents
and finding people that are good with
people and their skills with doing the
haircutting is not the easiest thing in
the world,” Dascola said. “It takes a
combination of things: You have to
have the right personality for this
type of job … and you have to shave
skills to be able to accomplish good
hair cutting because if you can’t do
the good haircutting, there’s no point
in doing a good haircutting at all.”
Dascola is proud of his shop’s
location in the heart of downtown
Ann Arbor and the University of
Michigan campus.
“At one point in time, when we
were getting close to closing the
original store, somebody tried to get
me to move off of the campus, and
I wouldn’t leave and I said, ‘I’m not
leaving downtown,’” Dascola said. “I
was born and raised downtown and
I’m going to continue my whole career
downtown. And the reason is, I love
being around the University because
I need the cultural and intellectual
experience
from
my
professor
friends who love to teach outside the
classroom. For the last 50 years, I’ve
gotten a pretty good education.”
Dascola said his business has an
impact on community and culture,
which he said differentiates his
business from others in Ann Arbor.
“I would say that when people
come to my place, it’s more of a
cultural and intellectual experience
as opposed to the sports scene and all
that business,” Dascola said. “I mean,
I’m okay with football and stuff. I’m a
really big hockey fan, but I don’t bring
sports to my business. I bring cultural
and intellectual things because I’m
pursuing knowledge and I want to
learn as many things as I can from
people because we’re always teaching
each other things.”
One
of
Dascola’s
long-time
customers and University alum Chris
Kushmaul said he’s built a strong
relationship with Dascola since 1993
when he first began going to his shop.
“He’s far more than just a barber,”
Kushmaul said. “I mean, he’s literally
become a friend. He’s like a father to
me. And it’s one barber visit at a time.
We’ve just built a relationship.”
When customers sit down to get a
haircut, they face a mirror filled with
pictures of his clients. Some pictures
showcase customers from birth to old
age.
“I call it my happy mirror,” Dascola
said. “Every day when I walk in
there, and I turn the light on the back
counter and I hang up my fanny pack,
the first thing I see is all those smiling
faces looking at me and so it’s like
welcoming me back to work.”
LSA junior Eric Donarski said he
is very excited for the shop’s 80th
anniversary and added he feels at
home whenever he gets a haircut
there.
“Not only is he excellent at
cutting hair, but Bob has a breadth
of
knowledge
to
keep
anybody
entertained and barely focused on
their haircut,” Donarski wrote in an
email interview. “Dascola Barbers has
become a place that feels like home to
me and I’m sure it will for anybody
who schedules an appointment.”
BARBERSHOP
From Page 1
Read more at
MichiganDaily.com