100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

January 31, 2020 - Image 3

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Collins was the Joan and
Sanford Weill Dean of Public
Policy for 10 years. When she
left her post in 2017, Collins
described
her
efforts
to
improve the school’s visibility
in a farewell letter.
“I was a really staunch
supporter that you don’t talk
until you have something to
say — you don’t want to be
known as the wind bag; you
want to be known for having
done the analysis, for having
depth of understanding of
what the challenges are,”
Collins wrote. “It’s one of
the
reasons
I’ve
always
cared about having a foot in
academia, because that’s one
of the things academics stand
for.”
Collins also sits on the
Board of Directors for the
Federal
Reserve
Bank
of
Chicago and is a research
associate
at
the
National
Bureau
of
Economic
Research.
She
is
also
a
member of the Council on

Foreign Relations.
She
holds
a
bachelor’s
degree
in
economics
from
Harvard
University
and a doctorate from the
Massachusetts Institute of
Technology. She has taught
at Harvard and Georgetown
University,
during
which
time she was also a senior
fellow
at
The
Brookings
Institution.
Currently, Collins oversees
a global engagement seminar
that takes 15 undergraduates
to
Costa
Rica
to
study
prevalent policy issues in the
Central American country.
In a message to students, she
confirmed she will continue
to teach the course and will
still travel with the class to
Costa Rica over spring break.
Public
Policy
senior
Brianna
Wells
took
the
course
with
Collins
last
year. Wells said she found
Collins to be personable and
is excited for her to take on
the role.
“She definitely pushes you
to be a better student and
has really high standards for
quality,” Wells said. “For part
of the class we went to Costa

Rica over spring break and
she’s a really great professor
in the classroom, but then I
just realized how good of a
person she is on a personal
level. She’s very kind, very
understanding
and
cares
about students.”
As acting provost, Collins
fills the position Philbert
vacated earlier this month.
Philbert
was
placed
on
administrative leave Jan. 21
after multiple allegations of
sexual assault were reported
to the University on Jan.
16-17. An investigation is
currently underway.
The provost is the second-
highest ranking official at
the University and the chief
academic officer. The provost
works with the president to
determine the University’s
academic goals and distribute
resources
to
achieve
these
goals.
The
provost
previously
oversaw
the
Office of Institutional Equity,
which
investigates
sexual
misconduct
allegations,
though this duty has been
moved to Richard S. Holcomb,
associate vice president for
Human Resources.

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
News
Friday, January 31, 2020 — 3

TRUMP
From Page 1

“What I find particularly
important is President Roth,
as he has done consistently
throughout his career, writes
to his audiences, not about
problems that are solved, but
issues that he serves in real-
time,” Young said.
Roth
began
his
talk
by
explaining the title of his book
and lecture, defining what “safe
enough” spaces were to him as a
university president.
“A safe enough space at a
college or university is a space
in which students are going to
not be subject to harassment and
intimidation,” Roth said. “But
not so safe that you go to class
and you never contribute.”
Roth
wrote
his
book
as
a
defense
of
students
who
protest speakers on campus,
who critique professors with
differing opinions and who serve
as activists on college campuses
fighting
for
marginalized
groups. He said these students
are often criticized for placing
too much emphasis on political
correctness and social justice,
but
he
disagrees
with
this
characterization.
“People like to make fun of
this stuff,” Roth said. “I’ve read
so many books that criticize
college students, especially this
generation of students, and they
criticize them in such a way that
the picture is unrecognizable to
me … I see a lot of students in my
class when they come to protest
my decisions or my lack of
decisions. Even when they came
to protest, I just didn’t recognize
this caricature of the ‘snowflake’
or the ‘intolerant social justice
warrior.’”
Roth also criticized professors

who feel threatened by students
protesting
their
courses
or
protesting university decisions,
pointing out professors have
a duty to work with and teach
all students no matter their
opinions.
“I do think when you start
complaining about students as
a professor, you’ve got to start
planning your retirement,” Roth
said. “Because you get the cards
you get, you don’t get to complain
about your students. You figure
out how to teach them.”
He also dove into political
correctness on campuses. Roth
noted all presidents from the
President George H.W. Bush
forward
gave
speeches
on
political correctness, using the
concept as a weapon.
“It’s
just
something
you
use against your enemies,” he
said. “It’s weaponized. Trump
brought that forward in a really
dramatic way during the primary
campaign. When there was a
question he didn’t like, he’d say
political correctness was killing
our country, and this seems to
work because there is a view …
that what happens to colleges
and universities is a kind of
hothouse
environment
where
professors can indoctrinate their
students.”
In response to this view,
Roth said he has yet to meet one
professor aiming to indoctrinate
their students in a course. At the
same time, he said professors
want to have the freedom and
right to teach what they want in
their courses.
“There is a tension there
because, after all, professors
should have academic freedom
to teach their courses in the way
they want to,” Roth said. “They
certainly react to pressure from
students
to
change
courses,
sometimes from pressure from

administrators... but they do
insist that even if someone has an
intention, they have the right to
teach their course a certain way.”
To
end
his
talk,
Roth
emphasized higher education as a
public good, encouraging faculty,
educators and administrators to
widen their lenses, particularly
in intellectual diversity.
“If we take diversity of ideas
that we cultivate on campus
and increase the ability of our

neighbors, and others who live
in this country, to work together
to solve more problems, I think
we’d be doing a great service to
the country,” Roth said.
Rackham student Jeffrey Grim
attended the lecture as an affiliate
of NCID to hear a university
president’s perspective on free
speech on college campuses.
“From a scholarly and practical
standpoint, and I thought it’d be
interesting to hear,” Grim said.

“I’ve heard scholars talk about
it, I’ve heard practitioners … it
was helpful to hear a perspective
from a college president who
is intellectually interested in
this, but also has to manage an
institution.”
Grim
said
he
appreciated
Roth’s discussion of the impact
outside forces can have on
on-campus issues.
“His
overall
speech
kind
of talked about institutional

context matters, how political
climate and personal background
matters,” Grim said. “When
we’re thinking about the impact
it has on people, the impact
speech has on people. Another
takeaway was thinking about
the role of executive leaders or
leaders on college campuses and
promoting different types of
views and perspectives and the
structures that come along with
that.”

A/PIA
From Page 1

KOREMATSU
From Page 1

PROVOST
From Page 1

He
also
expressed
his
excitement
with
both
the
USMCA and Trump’s choice
of the warehouse as his first
stop after signing the deal
into law yesterday.
“Many
are
aware
that
we are a strong supporter
of
USMCA,”
Kamsickas
said. “We’re excited to host
President Trump and the
first official White House
event following
signing
(USMCA) into
law,
and
to
hear from him
directly on a
topic
that
is
important
for
our
company
and
for
our
industry.”
Trump began
his speech by
promoting the
newly
signed
trade deal and
continued
to
boast
about
it
throughout
the approximately 30-minute
speech. He noted the deal’s
projected ability to create
approximately 80,000 auto
manufacturing jobs.
“The
USMCA
is
an
especially
big
win
for
American
auto
workers,”
Trump said. “We’re producing
jobs like we’ve never seen
before. We’re producing jobs.
So I just want to say that I’ve
kept my promise.”
Trump
also
mentioned
other provisions of the deal
that are aimed to create more
auto industry jobs in North
America,
strengthen
labor
laws in Mexico and allow for
more trade between Mexican,
Canadian and American wine

and cheese products.
He wrapped up his speech
by sharing why he felt the
Dana Inc. warehouse was the
perfect place for him to speak.
“Dana Corp. is the perfect
place to honor the immortal
legacy
of
the
American
worker,” Trump said. “I just
want to congratulate all of
the people at Dana. You have
all been outstanding and it
really is the great people right
now — the great people that
work here — those people that
can do such precision work.
You’re the ones that are doing

it, and you’re the ones in our
country and the people who
we have great respect for.”
Congressman Andy Levin,
D-Bloomfield
Township,
posted a video to his Facebook
page
criticizing
Trump’s
policies prior to his visit,
saying the policies negatively
affect the working class.
“I’ve looked at this in great
detail,” Levin said in the
video. “I wish I were wrong,
but I’m afraid to tell you that
the USMCA is gonna continue
the stream of U.S. jobs, middle
class jobs, good paying jobs
in manufacturing, down to
Mexico where they’re turned
into super low-wage jobs.”
Mark
Arrowsmith,

longtime Dana Inc. employee,
spoke to The Daily after the
event about his excitement for
USMCA and Trump’s choice
to come to Dana to talk about
the new trade deal.
“I
was
excited
about
(USMCA) because I’ve been
a manufacturer for over 42
years and to see (jobs) come
back to Michigan and the
United States, really makes
me
excited,”
Arrowsmith
said. “The biggest challenge
was getting workers back in
here because manufacturing
was almost a lost trade where
people didn’t
want
to
do
it, but more
people
now
seem
like
they
want
to get back
into it. Dana
has a history
with building
tanks,
so
I
think
this
was a good
setting
for
him to talk
about
the
trade (deal).”
LSA
freshman
Nicholas Schuler, freshman
chair
of
the
University’s
chapter
of
College
Republicans,
said
he
was
happy with Trump’s decisions
to leave NAFTA and visit
Michigan, though he did not
attend the speech.
“He is keeping in touch
with the people who got
him elected — they love
him, he loves them,” Schuler
said. “The trade deal was so
important because NAFTA
was an American job killer.
Plain and simple. It made our
labor market less competitive
and a more America friendly
trade agreement was needed.”

In an interview with The
Daily, Korematsu spoke on
the legacy of her father and
the message she hopes Fred
Korematsu Day will impart
to the public.
“You
have
to
say
something
in
order
to
make
that
difference,”
Korematsu said. “It’s about
courage. It took courage
for the coram nobis legal
team to reopen the case.
It’s about upholding and

abiding by the civil liberties
in the constitution. Our
democracy is at risk.”
LSA
freshman
Haneen
Tout
said

her
biggest
takeaway from the event
was how necessary it is to
look back.
“All these things that
have happened in the past
are there for us to see and
learn from,” Tout said. “The
Supreme
Court
and
the
government seem like they
are choosing to look back on
these things.”
LSA
freshman
Grace
Stephan also commented

on what students can do
regarding the issues brought
up during the event.
“As students, we should
stay educated about issues,”
Stephan said. “Going out
of your way and learning
things from people who
have different experiences
than
you
and
maybe
that’s novels, movies or
attending events like these.
People who have had these
experiences and have lived
them, which I think is the
most meaningful way of
getting involved.”

“We
thought
it
was
important to have a dialogue
surrounding A/PIA women in
the community,” Guytingco
said.
“Coming
from
an
intersectional context and
viewpoint, we thought it’d
be cool to have this dialogue
about stereotypes and what
it is to be an A/PIA woman
within these contexts.”
Co-Chair Michelle Byun,
an LSA freshman, moderated
the event and set the norms
for everyone to follow when
discussing sensitive topics.
Presentation topics included
racism,
sexism,
historical
stereotypes,
discrimination
and colorism.
During
the
group
discussions,
students
discussed
the
“model
minority” myth surrounding
the A/PIA community. Other
experiences
brought
up
include being asked “Where
are you from?”, racialized
catcalling and fetishizing of
multiracial babies.
Byun talked about colorism,
specifically mentioning skin
lightening
products
and
beauty
stereotypes.
Other
attendees brought up the

different beauty standards
in America compared to Asia
and
how
the
differences
of
skin
color
between
siblings has impacted their
experiences as an A/PIA.
Students
who
were
A/
PIA and also identified with
another identity discussed
the
intersectionality
that
exists within their cultures
and how this impacts their
experience as a person of
color. Business sophomore
Sarah Morgan said she was
able to share her perspective
as
a
biracial
Black
and
Filipino woman, which was
unique
compared
to
the
majority of the attendees at
the event.
“As
a
bi-racial
Asian
woman, I decided to come
because I knew this would be
a good opportunity to speak
on
my
experiences
with
my
Filipino
background,”
Morgan said. “I really enjoyed
talking about the stereotypes
because as a Black person,
I was able to talk about the
model minority myth as well
as colorism that I’ve seen in
the Filipino community. I was
able to bring that perspective
into
the
group
dialogue
tonight.”
During the presentation,
many
examples
of

misrepresentation of A/PIA
womxn were shared with the
audience. One example was
the dragon lady stereotype
and lotus flower stereotype,
depicting that womxn were
either seductive or easily
seduced.
Students
shared
examples of discriminatory
incidents within a personal,
professional and academic
setting.
Co-Chair Dim Mang, an
LSA senior, said the event
was not meant to represent
all perspectives within the A/
PIA community, but rather to
start a dialogue among those
who have something to share.
“I think the event went
really well. We tried to be
very aware of the fact that
especially
when
you’re
talking about a community as
diverse as Asian Americans,
you can’t cover every topic
well and you can’t cover
every facet well,” Mang said.
“Something that we wanted
to be really conscious of was
using our own experiences
and not trying to speak for
other voices and experiences.
In those terms, I think it went
really well and we’re really
trying to improve as the
semester goes.”

WESLEYAN
From Page 1

DOMINICK SOKOTOFF/Daily
President of Wesleyan University Michael Roth discusses his new book, “Safe Enough Spaces: A Pragmatist’s Approach to Inclusion, Free Speech,
and Political Correctness on College Campuses,” Thursday morning at the Michigan Union.

The biggest challenge was getting
workers back in here because
manufacturing was almost a lost trade
where people didn’t want to do it, but
more people now seem like they want to
get back into it.

Back to Top