Although I appreciated his response to Tyler Rosenbaum's '11 column ("Banner went too far," April 16), I found Matt Gelfand's '08 letter ("Banner advocacy created the prerequisite fiasco," April 17) both incomplete and misleading. One of greatest problems of the Undergraduate Council of Students and the student body is their lack of institutional memory.
Although I am no longer on UCS, I was, and I have an advantage in this realm of memory because I will see more UCS bodies than most students - six, to varying degrees.
It is neither fair nor accurate to celebrate the legacy of John Gillis '07 while criticizing the tenure of Michael Glassman '09 on the issue of Banner. If Gillis had had the power to address these concerns, Glassman would not have had them on his plate, after all.
I started at Brown in the fall of 2004, with Gelfand '08, I assume; Brown was working to implement Banner then. As first-years we registered on paper, but Banner was coming, even if many were unaware.
In 2005-06 many UCS members tried to warn students about Banner and foster activism while at the same time advocating for students with administrators and the Banner team. For the record, the administration and those who were working on Banner did solicit some student input. Members of UCS and the few community members who chose to attend UCS meetings did have chances to voice their concerns.
That year, when I was actively a member, I can promise that Banner frightened many on UCS. David Beckoff '08, Sara Damiano '08, Jon Margolick '06, Sarah Saxton-Frump '07 and Zachary Townsend '10 - to name but a few of many - were not arguing against eliminating the trek to University Hall; they were concerned about elements that define Brown changing.
As a Development Studies concentrator who has taken anthropology courses and has had the privilege of traveling and living in countries often described as having numerous "cultures," I am reticent to refer to aspects of this institution as part of a single "culture."
Nevertheless, I have heard many students use the word about Brown, and I agree that there are elements of this institution which distinguish it from other undergraduate ones. I would argue that a - or even the - key theme in Brown's "culture" is choice; Banner affects how students make choices and the extent to which they can. Banner gives me more course choices than it provides rising sophomores and fewer choices than it grants rising seniors.
Two years ago this week, students were deciding what classes they were considering taking the coming fall.
This week, instead, more students are deciding what courses they will take in September. The reality is that if one does not preregister for many classes, one is unlikely to get in. It is true that individual professors can institute their own policies and essentially ignore Banner's rules, but, overall, Banner rules.
As the Banner era drew closer, students on UCS and in other leadership positions at Brown remained active. In 2006-07 Beckoff and Townsend on the College Curriculum Council, Damiano as UCS Academic and Administrative Affairs chair and Gillis as UCS president worked together to fight against many of the issues Rosenbaum and others now gripe about - course caps, prerequisite-enforcement, enrollment based primarily on seniority and more.
Based on his letter, I trust that Gelfand himself worked to try to spread awareness about how the introduction of online registration through Banner would mean much more than simply switching from paper to the internet.
Although these self-made activists may have done a poor job making the student body aware, the student body at large did itself harm by not heeding the warnings, some of which were quite loud.
What was once truly a shopping period lies crippled: many courses' enrollment limits are reached during online preregistration. And yes, now prerequisites will be enforced to a degree that they were not before. But this ought not to be news, as this has been in the works for years, and UCS members have been wary of Banner for years.
Gillis did not solve and did not have the power to address these issues as president and neither does Glassman. Over my eight semesters at Brown and three away (I heard anti-Banner sentiments from as far away as Durban, South Africa), I have seen Joel Payne '06, Brian Bidadi '07, Saxton-Frump, Gillis and Glassman; I will see Brian Becker '09 next year and someone else the year after that.
All have and will have their strengths and weaknesses, passions and pet projects. The reality is that UCS only has so much power. Unless Brown students are willing to react to Banner en masse as students did in 1969, the Brown administration will continue to do as it pleases.
Banner was never in students' control or UCS's. Banner was going to be implemented, but it could have been done with greater consideration for students' interests. The warnings fell on dear ears, as those who fought hardest for changes to Banner were ignored by both administrators and the student body.
The harsh reality is that all this will be forgotten in a few years as students graduate and new ones matriculate - and the culture that attracted many of us to Brown will be gone - unless students act now to make Banner work for us instead of against us.
Kate Brockwehl '09.5 believes that credit ought to be given where it is deserved
