In recent weeks, there has been significant debate within the Graduate School community concerning the changes that have been made in the enforcement of outside work requirements. Graduate students receive stipends from the University, but many work in appointed positions, such as teaching assistantships, as well as non-appointed positions, like those in the Writing Center. The latter jobs, however, have been threatened by recent proposals. The Graduate Student Handbook currently states that it is "recommended that such students work at an outside job no more than 20 hours per semester," but officials at the Graduate School are seeking to change the "recommendation" to a "request." This change would limit grad students' opportunities to work in positions that could be beneficial for future careers, and it would pose a significant obstacle to those who financially depend on supplemental income for incidental living expenses. We strongly recommend that the Graduate Student Council keep the handbook the way it is, as graduate students of good academic standing should have the ability to judge their own needs and limits.
An online petition to "Stop the Proposed Ban on Graduate Student Employment" has so far garnered 342 signatures from both professors and graduate students. While Peter Weber, dean of the graduate school, maintained "there's no new policy" in this change, the petition alleges that "instituting a ban is a significant change in practice" because grad students are customarily given "flexibility, support and encouragement in seeking out additional work opportunities for reasons of both professional and economic necessity." Changing a policy from a request to a rule would, indeed, constitute new policy and should be considered as such. While Dean Weber said the change is necessary because students in the past have not notified deans or directors of their outside work, we believe that a compromise should be made: Students could be required to notify supervisors of outside work, while compliance with the recommendation of hours remains optional.
Along with preventing graduate students from working at resume-building positions and earning money for expenses not covered by stipends, the work limit would certainly discourage some prospective graduate students from matriculating at the University. In a recent column ("Work ban for grads bad for students, U., future," Oct. 23), Andrew Tobolowsky GS asked, "Who, with options, would choose Brown over a school where, when life demands it, they'll be able to make a little extra cash to survive?" He also alleged that this ban would make the University "a school whose PhD programs boast one of the highest bars to entry of any comparable school." The University should do everything in its power to attract the most qualified graduate students possible, and this nonsensical ban would certainly be a deterrent to some of these students also considering peer institutions. Finally, the petition notes that this work-limit ban would be most damaging for prospective low-income, first-generation and non-traditional students and would be "likely to disproportionately impact students of color," contrary to the University's commitment to achieving ever-greater diversity. To his credit, Dean Weber appears to be actively listening to the concerns of the graduate student population, and Lulu Tsai GS noted that though she did sign the petition, she felt confident in a happy resolution because "Dean Weber is completely open to changing the rules and doing whatever the students feel would be necessary." At a University so proud of its principles of individual freedom and charting one's own course, it is hypocritical to prevent students from pursuing options that would impact their education and livelihoods.
Editorials are written by The Herald's editorial page board: its editors, Daniel Jeon and Annika Lichtenbaum, and its members, Georgia Angell, Samuel Choi and Rachel Occhiogrosso. Send comments to editorials@browndailyherald.com.
ADVERTISEMENT
