On Tuesday, November 13th, SIPA students gathered in the 6th floor Cafe to hear the SIPASA hopefuls speak. Below are the University Senator Candidate speeches.

Kristen Jestin

Kelechi Mbiamnozie

On Tuesday, November 13th, SIPA students gathered in the 6th floor Cafe to hear the SIPASA hopefuls speak. Below are the speeches by the candidates for Career and Alumni Affairs Chair.

Carlos Petersen

Houda Sahyoun

If we on the Communiqué Editorial Board had it our way, we’d combine the aspects of all five SIPASA Presidential candidates – Nick Mider, Olivia Snarski, Rachel Boehr, Shreevardhan Sinha, and Marmik Joshi — to create our ideal President. Each candidate has an impressive resumé, commendable past achievements, and reliable leadership qualities. After our interviews with the candidates, we believe that they all have the talent, capacity, and persistence to achieve their self-written goals. In our endorsement, we looked for a match between the candidates’ aspirations and goals and the needs of the SIPA community, rather than focusing on their past achievements and experience.

Mider hopes to strengthen OCS and build stronger relationships with alumni. This is important and extremely relevant, given that OCS and our alumni are critical platforms to launch our careers.  On the same lines, Snarski promises to work to revamping the Professional Development Program to make it a powerful career tool for students. Snarski, either through personal experience or by hearing the voices of her peers, has understood the strong sentiment to make the program more effective.  The current employment market has raised concerns and anxiety over the job search task. Both Mider and Snarski deserve recognition for putting this on top of their agendas.

Sinha, on the other hand, places a larger emphasis on academics – the reason most of us come to SIPA in the first place. He promises to work on improving the quality of courses, as well as provide students the option to work on a ‘thesis’ in lieu of a capstone project, thus offering students more options and better content.

Boehr’s candidacy comes with a unique offering – more experience with Columbia University by virtue of being an undergraduate student here. She was involved in student government then, too, and claims to understand the system better. Her big ideas for SIPASA are to integrate the student groups better and interact more with other schools in the University.

Finally, Joshi has many big ideas, a few of which are far-fetched. He plans to launch a website for students to raise their concerns and track SIPASA’s progress. Formation of this public opinion sphere sounds feasible, given that SIPA has two large student-run websites already – Communiqué and The Morningside Post. Joshi also addresses a major whine among the student body – the registration process. He proposes an alternative system like bidding for classes, something that is currently practiced at Columbia’s Business School. While this change does not seem likely in the immediate semester or year, it is important that a President communicates the students’ voices to the concerned authorities.  The same goes for his other more ambitious promise to work with the SIPA administration on a loan assistance program. Although this program would benefit the majority of SIPA students, the change seems far beyond the jurisdiction of a SIPASA President and more like an empty promise.

However, we at Communiqué like the way Joshi thinks. He seems to understand the biggest concerns of the student body at large, and promises to work on finding solutions for them. For this reason, we endorse Marmik Joshi for SIPASA President 2012.

Food for thought for the next President-elect would be to draft a longer term vision for the school that addresses the larger issues that cannot be resolved or improved within one year. Strengthened career services, a better registration processes, and more effective collaboration among student groups are some of them. It will be highly beneficial in the longer term if no President loses sight of these larger goals.  We also thank the current board for their contribution in improving student life at SIPA and appeal to them to make an effective transfer to the new board.

On a more serious note, we asked each of the candidates their position on an important policy question:  the plight of the poor-quality bags given at orientation. Each of their responses had great solutions and big promises. Whoever wins the election, in this area, it looks like we have hope!

Remember to vote on Monday, November 19^th from 9:00am—4:00pm using SIPASA’s online ballot!

By Aly Jiwani

The current tobacco policy for the Morningside, Lamont and Nevis campuses, passed in 2010, states: “Smoking is prohibited outdoors within20 feet of all University buildings.” However, the 2010 resolution called for the policy to be re-examined within two years.

The Senate External Relations and Research Committee Co-Chair and SIPA professor Sharyn O’Halloran convened a Smoking Policy Task Force in spring 2012, which was responsible for conducting an evaluation and reporting back to the Committee by fall 2012. After investigating the Morningside and Lamont campuses during the summer, the Task Force concluded that the “no smoking within 20 feet of buildings” policy is poorly implemented across the Morningside campus and not at all implemented at the Lamont campus.

The Senate External Relations and Research Committee, on which I serve, has since deliberated extensively on how to move forward with the policy. The American Nonsmokers Rights Foundation documents more than 1,300 smoke-free campuses. The current Columbia policy, however, is consistent with policies of other schools, including Brown, Cornell, Dartmouth, MIT, Oberlin, Princeton and the University of Pennsylvania. Harvard’s medical school, business school and Kennedy School campuses are now smoke-free indoors and out; elsewhere smoking is prohibited within 25 feet of buildings. However, the 20-foot rule at Columbia is hardly being enforced.

For many, a full smoking ban is the easiest policy to enforce. However, given Columbia’s urban campus, this could simply push smokers into adjacent neighborhoods. Further, the actual geographic limits of “campus” are hard to define. Columbia owns many buildings on Broadway and Amsterdam between 112th and 122nd streets. Would a smoking ban apply in those areas? What about East Campus, where SIPA resides? And what about the Lamont and Nevis campuses, which are all suburban campuses? The medical campus is already smoke-free.

These are all the questions that the Task Force and the Committee are grappling with, to which there are no easy answers. The Senate hosted a Town Hall to discuss the smoking policy on Jan. 24th. The Town Hall received a variety of opinions from faculty, staff and students with no clear consensus. Smokers generally want to be able to smoke within reasonable restrictions and non-smokers want to enjoy their right to not encounter second-hand smoke. There is also the issue of littering from cigarette butts, especially if cigarette receptacles are located away from popular smoking spots.

The Task Force has been working on a compromise proposal that includes easily accessible smoking cessation programs, widespread publicity and community involvement in implementation of the policy and carefully selected designated smoking spots. I’ve been working with the Task Force to further develop an idea of what these designated smoking spots would look like and how they will be financed and constructed. Further, I’d like to ensure that the selection of these spots take into consideration not only the health of nonsmokers but also the convenience of smokers. At SIPA, smokers often only have 10 minutes between classes to smoke and they cannot walk too far. Our location on East Campus also presents specific challenges with regards to the implementation of a restrictive policy. Therefore, a clear definition of “campus” that limits any policy to Morningside’s main campus (basically within the gates) would be best. The Task Force’s proposal will be voted on by the full Senate at the March 1 Senate plenary.

This article appeared in the Feb. 19th print edition of The Morningside Post.

By Ariel Stulberg

SIPASA will meet tonight at 8 p.m. to resolve a dispute over the budgetary process that culminated in a heated disagreement over the decision to fully fund SIPA Follies.

The new SIPASA constitution, ratified only last November, created a Budget Committee charged with allocating funding to student groups, but does not specify committee procedures. Thus Follies, as a one-off event that is unaffiliated with any student group, raised questions.

According to “Mismanager” Kaitlin Love, SIPASA’s initial budget, announced less than a month before Follies was scheduled to occur, granted only a quarter of what the Mismanagers had asked for and previous teams had received. Both Love and Duane Bruce, SIPA’s Assistant Dean for Student Affairs, stated that this reduced funding would have forced the school to cancel or significantly scale down Follies.

Love’s subsequent request to make her case to the committee was granted, after which Follies received the full amount.

This decision has proved controversial though. According to Bruce, a SIPASA officer aired concerns about the budgeting process and about Follies in particular last Friday at the SIPASA Student Leadership Conference, directed at SIPASA President Rachel Boehr.

Bruce said he was surprised and felt the comments weren’t in keeping with theme of the event. He said he was aware that SIPASA members had had ‘communications issues’ in the past.

Representatives of SIPASA have refused to comment until they have met to discuss the issue and say there is only “a very small chance” that the meeting will be open to the public.

Boehr sent a statement that explained, in part: “We are guided in [our] mission by the newly adopted Constitution that has created new processes and roles, and, like any organization, we have experienced a certain amount of internal disagreement and growing pains.”

TMP’s coverage of this story will continue with a more detailed report tomorrow.

By Ariel Stulberg

Members of the SIPASA board have accused President Rachel Boehr of dishonest and unprofessional behavior  and have called for immediate action to remove her from office.

The Morningside Post has obtained a letter addressed to Assistant Dean Duane Bruce signed “Majority Members of the SIPASA 2013 Board.” The letter accuses Boehr of impropriety, mismanagement and fostering a hostile environment. The document calls for her resignation and threatens an official vote to dismiss her from for the board.

Bruce has confirmed the authenticity of the letter.

A member of SIPASA’s Executive Board, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed Boehr’s potential dismissal was the subject of last night’s meeting, but said a vote on the question was postponed.

The letter tells of “over 12 board members” (of 22 total) who have approached Bruce individually, “expressing their intent to resign unless changes are made.” It asks for Bruce’s intervention before “further action is taken (i.e. a vote of dismissal or multiple resignations).”

According to the SIPASA constitution, drafted this past November, “Any SIPASA Officer can initiate dismissal proceedings against any other SIPASA Officer for failing to uphold the mandate, principles, and/or integrity of this Constitution.” Officers can be dismissed with a three-fourths majority, A dismissal would therefore require 17 votes if all General Board members attend Monday’s meeting.

In the case of dismissal, the Vice President of SIPASA, Maria Covalenco, would replace Boehr as President.

SIPASA has issued a statement saying: “SIPASA had a very frank discussion tonight regarding internal leadership concerns from some members of the board and ways to improve the working relationship within the board. Given the heavy nature of the discussion, we decided it would be best to meet again on Monday for a follow-up discussion, once all board members have had time to think everything through.”

The letter contains four single-spaced pages of detailed and wide-ranging complaints. It accuses Boehr of “illegally” shifting funds to Follies at the expense of other groups. It claims she dishonestly “attempted to take more Gala tickets than earned through tabling by manipulating the Gala Master list.” Throughout, it accuses her of poor and often hostile communications, lack of professionalism, and failure to adhere to protocol.

Boehr said in part, “It’s very saddening and disappointing that SIPASA is in this state and I’m very sorry that all of this is happening. Personally I’m focused on moving forward constructively and above all I’m most concerned with protecting the integrity of the organization.”

“It was my hope in the beginning of the year that as the board that inherited this new constitution that we would take this document forward and further develop the detailed processes which would allow us to bring these principles to life.”

Pressed to answer specific accusations, Boehr  said, “I think transparency is important and that the student body has a right to know the entire context behind these decisions.”

SIPASA treasurer Nikita Hira said on Tuesday that, while the final financial reports are not yet completed, “as far as [she] knows, ‘nothing is missing’ from the Gala fund.”

Asked to clarify today she wrote, “There are these allegations and since it is a delicate situation SIPASA needs to check facts and really be sure something like this happened. It is a very delicate issue and I don’t want to jump to any conclusions.”

Bruce, when asked if Boehr shifted funds by executive fiat, said “I don’t think that’s right.” He identified the problem as a “lack of processes and procedures in this new structure. It’s caused confusion and that confusion has caused conflict.”

The SIPASA constitution requires a three-quarters majority of General Board members who are present at the meeting to pass a vote to dismiss.

In an email Bruce wrote, “as far as I know, in recent history we have not seen a SIPASA President removed from office.”

The Morningside Post questioned members of SIPASA as to whether they were among the letters’ authors, but was told that all members had agreed not to speak publically except through official communications. SIPASA Communications Chairs Sarah Goldman and Nick Mider declined to comment on the record.

Max Marder and Jay Pinho provided additional reporting for this story.

An earlier version of this article did not mention the possibility of Vice President Covalenco’s ascension to the presidency.

By Ariel Stulberg

SIPASA President Rachel Boehr was dismissed tonight in a secret ballot by a vote of 17-2, with one abstention. After over three months of disputes, a three-hour discussion last Wednesday night, and a weekend of informal conversations, SIPA’s student association has finally resolved its leadership crisis.

Vice President Maria Covalenco will now assume the presidency, in accordance with SIPASA’s constitutional protocol.

Boehr left the meeting room immediately after the vote and, as of Tuesday afternoon, has not replied to requests for comment.

“What happened was ugly, but it was reasonable, legitimate, and constitutional,” said SIPA University Senator Aly Jiwani.

The mood after the vote was somber. “No one’s popping champagne. No one’s clapping their hands,” said SIPA University Senator-elect Kelechi Mbiamnozie.

The reasons for Boehr’s dismissal were not discussed — having been the subject of last Wednesday’s closed meeting — and board members offered little additional information.

Communications and External Relations Chair Sarah Goldman spoke of “tensions” from early in the semester, saying communication was often so poor that “ideas could not exchanged,” preventing SIPASA from accomplishing normal business.

An internal letter delivered to Dean Duane Bruce and signed “Majority Members of the SIPASA board,” obtained by the Morningside Post, accused Boehr of poor and often hostile communications, lack of professionalism, and failure to adhere to protocol. It also alleges she shifted funds to Follies at the expense of the SIPA Energy Association (SEA) and SIPA Students of Color (SSOC) and dishonestly “attempted to take more Gala tickets than earned through tabling by manipulating the Gala Master list.”

As the meeting opened, Treasurer Nikita Hira, addressed the issue of Gala tickets, saying “[the accounts] are adding up as of now,” seemingly discounting the allegation of manipulation by Boehr.

Bruce, when asked last week if Boehr shifted funds by executive fiat, said “I don’t think that’s right.” He identified the problem as a “lack of processes and procedures in this new structure. It’s caused confusion and that confusion has caused conflict.”

Before the vote, Boehr addressed the group: “This turned into a little bit of a circus. People really got into the drama of it. I failed in a lot of ways but have apologized publicly and individually. Some of the things I’ve been accused of are not, as I said last week, what I’ve undertaken.”

General Secretary Estakio Beltran, who sponsored the motion to dismiss Boehr, made a short speech as well. “It’s my duty as secretary to make sure protocol is met,” he said. “I proposed this vote in response to the issues I observed that we’ve been discussing.”

The stakes were high regardless of the vote’s outcome. Just before the ballot, Academic Chair Itamar Hauser declared, “If there is no majority [to dismiss Boehr], that means a lot of people will resign.”

Afterwards, board members stressed how difficult and unsettling the situation had been, and expressed their collective desire to move past the struggle.

An official statement released after the meeting said, in part: “The SIPASA 2013 board will resume its functions immediately and serve through the end of the term until January 2014 to serve the student body per the SIPASA Constitution and at the highest standards.”

Communications and External Relations Chair Nick Mider expressed the same sentiment in person. “The show will go on,” he said.

Ariel Stulberg is a second-year Master of International Affairs student. This article first appeared in the May 1st issue of The Morningside Post. 

*This article was edited to include additional information about the reasons for Boehr’s dismissal. A comment by Mbiamnozie

Section 1.1 of the SIPASA Constitution reads: “SIPASA is fully committed to upholding and exercising the principles of good governance, including transparency, accountability and responsibility.” However, in the past week, the SIPASA board has failed to live up to its mandate.

The SIPASA board agreed as a group not to speak publicly about the dismissal proceedings. The Morningside Post was forced to rely on anonymous sources to confirm even the most basic elements of the story, such as the fact that Boehr’s dismissal was the subject of the meetings and that a large number of SIPASA members were considering resignation in the event that she was not removed.

Facing anonymous allegations, even Boehr herself declined to address the accusations until her hand was forced by an internal leak.

Throughout the crisis, SIPASA members have strongly resisted calls for transparency and have largely refused to be accountable for their actions before the SIPA community. This stance is unacceptable in light of SIPA’s stated values and the principles stressed in our classrooms.

We are encouraged by the board’s decision during Monday night’s meeting to allow one of our reporters to sit in and take notes on the record, and even more so by board members’ stated future policy that members of the press will be allowed to attend all future meetings.

Nonetheless, an organization’s commitment to transparency is best gauged during a time of crisis, when concealing information becomes instinctual. Thus the board’s opacity for these past months remains a source of concern.

SIPA students deserve to know what is happening at SIPASA. This is especially true when it concerns the fate of the organization’s president, who is elected by students through an open and democratic process. We feel such a decision is too important to be made in secret.

This editorial first appeared in the May 1st, 2013 print edition of The Morningside Post

By Ariel Stulberg

Maria Covalenco-Tietz, who goes by Masha, is the new president of the SIPA Student Association (SIPASA), SIPA’s student government. She sat down with the Morningside Post last week to discuss her vision for SIPASA, her plans for this year, and the fallout from SIPASA’s leadership crisis at the end of last semester.

The Morningside Post: For first-year students, or second years that haven’t been paying attention, what is SIPASA? What’s your role in SIPA life?

SIPASA is the main liaison between the students and the administration. We work with students and represent their concerns to the administration and vice versa, and try to integrate the two together.

TMP: How does SIPASA hear from students? How do they bring you their concerns.

We are students ourselves, who volunteer their time to hear students’ problems. We hear a lot from our friends. This semester we’re opening all of our board meetings to students, so anybody who’s interested can come and sit through the meeting and then we can address any questions they have. Students email us as well with concerns, or they just talk to us in the hallways.

TMP: What are the main complaints you’ve been hearing this year?

Every year registration is brought up. Anything small from ‘let’s do another party’ to ‘how about this event.’

TMP: What about the administration? How do you interact with them?

Formally, we have monthly meetings, the President and the Vice President. Each Chair has formal meetings with their respective counterparts in the administration. And then informally, we see each other all the time. I know I see our representative in the administration, Dean Bruce, and we interact almost on a daily basis.

TMP: Does the administration listen to you? Do they have to?

Yes! Yes of course! The administration is very open to our feedback. And they take constructive feedback very positively. They’re very open and honest about what we can undertake and what would have results in the short term, and honest about things that would take longer. And that’s where we come in as students bringing our very constructive ideas and feedback that they haven’t thought of, maybe, and that would help them.

TMP: What’s your role as President of SIPASA?

The President is the face of SIPASA in formal settings, and tries to harmonize the work of the team [the SIPASA board] and give them the means and everything they need to do their job.

TMP: What are your priorities right now as a board and as a President?

We have two overarching goals this year, and they complement each other. One is to better integrate the student body into what SIPASA does. And the second is to facilitate and coordinate more with the administration. I would like to see both worlds come together into a richer community at SIPA.

We’re working under limited capacity. So we’re trying to prioritize our activities. One thing that we’re thinking of doing is: to receive feedback from students on activities they would like to undertake, and to give students ownership over those certain activities.

TMP: Limited capacity?

During the summer we received news that four of our team members would not be able to continue on the board. But we’re going to undertake all the responsibilities within the team. We won’t be able to do as much. But hopefully because we know how things work, compared to last semester, we’ll be able to level those things out and still undertake the activities we want to undertake this semester.

TMP: SIPASA’s known for parties. What about the parties?

We have three big ones set for this semester. One of them is the Boat Party, which is very interesting and in high demand by students. But we also do brown-bag lunches… things that are not party-centric, things that would give students a better experience beyond just going out and having fun.

TMP: Your predecessor as President, Rachael Boehr, was dismissed by the board in a vote at the end of last semester. What happened? Where do things stand now?

Last semester we did have a lot of problems internally as a board. And yes, indeed, it affected the way we operated. I’m certain. And I know that it showed. Students were able to observe that. However, the way it turned out brought the rest of us closer together. I think that we’re now a second-semester board. We know how to do things more efficiently. And we really lean our shoulders to each other, and we work very well together. So hopefully that will spill over to the students.

Ariel Stulberg is a second-year Master of International Affairs student.

By Ryan Beck and Max Marder

Sitting on a cushioned chair and looking out over Amsterdam Avenue, Dean Merit Janow is settling into her new office on the 14th floor nicely.

Janow replaced Robert Lieberman who had been serving as interim dean since February 2012.

At her coffee table, complete with a bowl of Lindt chocolates to offer to guests, Dean Janow met with The Morningside Post to discuss her vision for SIPA.

After three months on the job, Janow identified three goals for her term as SIPA’s dean: increasing financial aid, improving facilities and enhancing the school’s brand awareness.

In hiring Janow, the search committee chose to promote from within, rather than recruiting from outside.Janow has now been a member of the Columbia faculty for over 18 years. This experience has instilled Janow with an essential knowledge of SIPA’s faculty and the Columbia bureaucracy. Her appointment indicates continuity is more likely than change, as evidenced by her choice to continue implementing SIPA’s 2010-2015 Strategic Plan.

“It is a good plan, broadly cast … the priorities are right,” said Janow, who spoke in a calm but assertive tone. The Strategic Plan aims to provide a “world-class education” for SIPA students, empowering them to “serve the global public interest.”

“First of all, I am Dean of the Faculty,” said Janow, identifying her primary responsibility in helping to actualize SIPA’s mission. The dean expressed that she does not “manage” faculty members. Instead, she “works with and supports” them.

Developing a long-term vision for SIPA requires this, since faculty remain at SIPA much longer than students.

Before becoming dean of SIPA, Merit Janow worked for the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the United States Department of Justice, focusing on international trade and East Asian economic policy.

Now, the former head of the International Finance and Economic Policy (IFEP) concentration at SIPA is ready for new challenges.

In pursuit of these goals, Janow can draw on a diverse career that embodies much of what defines the school itself. Upon receiving her JD from Columbia Law School, Janow embarked on an extensive career working in both the public and private sector. After working as a corporate lawyer specializing in cross-border mergers and acquisitions, she served in the executive branch of the U.S. government.

Her regional experience working on issues in Asia and Europe add to the global perspective she will need to lead a school of “global public policy.”

While her tenure began only three months ago, Janow has highlighted three specific issue areas she shares with the 2010-2015 Strategic Plan: financial aid, facilities and brand awareness.

Firstly, Janow believes financial aid is vital for the school’s success, allowing SIPA to attract outstanding students from around the world. She wants to augment the amount of aid available to SIPA students, setting an ambitious goal of growing SIPA’s financial aid portfolio, valued at $8 million currently, to $15 million by 2015.While 79 percent of respondents to a SIPASA-conducted SIPA Funding Survey indicated an overwhelmingly negative perception of the current assistantship allocation process, Janow expressed that she is more focused on raising funds than the process in which they are distributed.

In a memo to Dean Janow, the SIPASA Board said that a “justified and transparent funding process is crucial in maintaining SIPA’s high standards.”

On Oct. 11, Dean Janow met with select members of SIPASA in a closed meeting to discuss financial aid, among other issues. Following the meeting, SIPASA representatives reported that they felt that the Dean was responsive to their arguments.

In particular, SIPASA representatives were encouraged that a Fellowship Task Force has been meeting twice a month to address “the transparency of the assistantship allocation process.” Sarah Goldman, one of SIPASA’s communications officers, stated that a more formal report of SIPASA’s meeting with the Dean is forthcoming.

In addition to improving financial aid, Janow said she “would love to refresh the building and create more space,” since the International Affairs Building is overcrowded and becoming dilapidated .

However, Janow admitted that infrastructure improvement, or “physical plant,” is a gradual process. SIPA does have plans to move to a newer facility on the Manhattanville Campus, but the move will not take place for many years.

Finally, Janow seeks to address SIPA’s brand, which she identified as “a very heterogeneous student body with lots of different passions,” united by “an interest in the world and in global policy.”

Indeed, it is a vision that all SIPA students are familiar with. Janow’s challenge will be to project this image more broadly. The 2010-2015 Strategic Plan prioritized the increase of “awareness and community through communication, marketing and engagement.”

Yet, according to students and SIPASA, SIPA has not done enough in the last three years to improve its brand. SIPASA wrote in its memo to the dean that it sees the school’s branding deficiency as a detriment to SIPA’s goals for “funding, attraction of talent, employment opportunities and alumni relations.”

SIPASA made several recommendations to the dean, including the hiring of an external public relations firm to improve the school’s brand “so that future graduates may sport their SIPA affiliation with pride.”

To be sure, Dean Janow and the student body share many of the same concerns. It is an encouraging sign that the new dean is aware of students’ concerns and the challenges facing SIPA. Hopefully she is ready to address them through 2015 and beyond.

Ryan Beck is a second-year Master of Public Administration student.

Max Marder is a second-year Master of International Affairs student and Editor-in-Chief of The Morningside Post.

Photo by Rebeca Moreno via Twitter

By Xiaoshuang Ma and Ariel Stulberg

Alice’s Cafe was transformed last Tuesday evening into a buzzing Ancient-Greek-style political amphitheater as students packed in to watch their peers vie for positions in the next SIPA student government.

Confident candidates made well-dressed speeches and debated SIPA politics long into the night.

The event was a lively and enlightening prelude to this week’s 2014 SIPA Student Association (SIPASA) board elections, and was students’ only chance to see the candidates live and in action.

The debates between candidates for SIPASA President and University Senator — moderated by The Morningside Post co-Editor-in-Chief Max Marder — were the first of their kind and the event’s clear highlight.

Cristian Campos and Viola Kuzmova faced off in the headline presidential debate. Campos emphasized his impressive management experience as Chief of Staff for Mexico’s Undersecretary of Economy. He said SIPASA was a “weak institution,” so unserious as to eat dinner during their meetings. He had the background and the know-how, he said, to set things right.

Kuzmova stressed engagement with students and the administration. “I won’t be sitting in an office,” she said, “I’ll be out there talking to you.” She promised more transparency, both from SIPASA in form of a yearly run-down of accomplishments, and from the administration.

Earlier in the evening, Lauren Andersen and Melissa Martinez debated in hopes of becoming University Senator, SIPA’s representative in the wider Columbia University student government.

Both candidates repeatedly brought up the Quality of Life Survey initiated in 2012 by former SIPA University Senator Aly Jiwani and promised to implement the results. Andersen said she hoped to sit on the Budget Committee to address SIPA students’ concerns about funding issues. Martinez said she aspired to work on the Housing Committee, to address international students’ problems with finding apartments in New York.

Asked about the presence of undergrads in Lehman, both acknowledged their rights to study in the library. Martinez proposed extending library hours, while Andersen proposed that their schools also contribute to maintaining the International Affairs Building.

Before the debates began, the other candidates for SIPASA board offices spoke, in turns amusing and impressing the gradually more inebriated audience.

“Un-opposed doesn’t mean un-committed” said lone vice presidential candidate R.T. Winston Berkman, in a speech that also included a promise to set up a centralized online calendar for all SIPA events of all kinds, from Brown Bags, to happy hours, to LASA parties.

Yan Wang, the only candidate for General Secretary, went so far in demonstrating her accessibility as to announce her phone number and email address from the dais. Wang told the crowd: “Whatever problem you have, I can understand,” from school, to work, to love.

“We all have experiences to be rejected for jobs for lacking of experiences that we can only get from actually doing the job. It’s a vicious circle,” said Umair Javed, running for Treasurer, in an attempt to parry his opponent Sheikh Tanjeb Islam’s Public Accountant certification. The third candidate, Jenna Barzelay, promised she’d always be there for voters. “I’ll never give you the rejection hotline number… I’m available now,” she said.

SIPASA board elections will be held this Tuesday, November 19.

Overall, the night of speeches and debates was an unambiguous success. If students aren’t informed now, they may never be.

Xiaoshuang Ma is a first-year Master of Public Administration student. Ariel Stulberg is a second-year Master of International Affairs student.

Andrea Kramer provided additional reporting for this story.

By Harpreet Gill

If  a  SIPA  student  has  opinions  she’d  liked  voiced  and  acted upon,  the  SIPA  Student  Association (SIPASA) Board is supposed to be one  place  to  turn.  Yet, low  with  student engagement  in  the  past  few  years, students  have  questioned  the  abilities of the student leaders to respond to their needs.

Roshni  Bandesha  (MPA  ’15)  sums up  many  students’  understanding  of the SIPASA Board: “I think the Board does  a  lot  but  I’m  not  sure  exactly what they do.”  With just 45% of students voting in the recent Board elections, the newly elected 2014 SIPASA Board will need innovative ideas to get students to care.

The new Board has begun to craft a new strategy and is deciding  how best to allocate the spring semester’s $60,000-70,000 in revenues generated by student fees, which amount to, on average, $55 per student per month.

Although the Board has informally met multiple times since the election and has led several events, including the Welcome Back Party on January 31 and Student Group Fair on February 4, they’ve only just agreed to their term’s agenda.  At the first full meeting on February 11, the group identified three major focus areas: inclusion, engagement, and transparency.

According  to  Benjamin  Weiss  (MIA  15’),  SIPASA’s  Co-Chair  for  Communications and External Relations, the Board  hopes  to  make  its  activities more inclusive, in order to better cater to the diversity of students, programs, and  degrees  that  SIPA  offers.    Additionally, this year’s Board wants to increase student engagement by soliciting more student input and involvement with events.

Nusrat Jahan (MPA-DP ’14) is one of the students that hopes to be better engaged by the new Board.  “In my view, they organize too many social events and happy hours.  I would probably like something more constructive,” she said. “SIPASA can actually collaborate with other SIPA groups more often to organize theme-based events, which I don’t think they do much.”

In response to such criticism in the past, the Board is currently planning several upcoming events, including a ‘Free Speech, Free Eats’ speaker series on February 25 and office hours for meetings with the Student Academic Task Force.

The Board’s last big goal is to continue building on transparency measures taken by the previous Board.  There is some work to be done on that front, as the SIPASA website still contains last year’s information, and the prompt release meeting minutes has been lacking.

SIPASA’s management has some institutional inefficiencies to deal with as well, which have been carried over from previous boards.  Although midterms are just a few weeks away, student groups have yet to receive funding for spring semester activities.  According  to  Dean  Duane Bruce,  the  Board  could  have  moved the  deadline  earlier  than  February 7  so  that  student  groups  would  receive Spring semester money sooner.  Deepti Kakkar (MPA ’15), President of the South Asian Association (SSA), says the funding process is “frustrating” for additional reasons.

“It’s  difficult  to  bring  about  big changes  in  [our  student  group’s]  programming  because  much  of  the funding is contingent upon previous year’s activities,” she said. New student group leaders are often limited by past budgets that they were not responsible for spending.

The previous Board “talked about it but didn’t change it [and] the new Board seems more interested in changing the funding process,” Dean Bruce said.

So are big changes possible?

The  Board  has  financial  resources and administrative clout, particularly  when  empowered  by  the  student body.  As  evidence,  Weiss  points  out to the changes brought about in the restructured Politics of Policymaking (POP)  class  this  past  fall,  in  which SIPASA  set  up  an  Academic  Task Force  to  help  restructure  the  core MPA course curriculum.

But the Board’s future relationship with students and, more importantly, their understanding of student needs, may be limited due to a lack of student engagement.

The  Board  hopes  to  improve  on this  communication  in  the  coming weeks  with  Google  groups,  online surveys,  and  listening  sessions,  and are  encouraging  students  to  reach out  to  their  elected  representatives on issues that they care about.

During  the  SIPASA  election  debates  this  past    November,  Viola Kuzmova  (MIA  15’),  the  current Board President, stated, “The key is outreach–town halls and orientation is  not  enough—we  need  more.”  The Board meets again on February 25.

Let’s hope they figure out what else is needed to get the student body to care.

Harpreet Gill is a first-year Master of Public Administration student.

This story first ran on the print edition of The Morningside Post on February 19, 2014

By the TMP Editorial Board

Last Friday, September 5^th, the SIPASA Board hosted Welcome Back Bash 2014 at LAVO, one of NYC’s premier nightclubs. By the time classes had started in the IAB on Monday, students were already abuzz with the happenings of the night.

On Monday, the student-body received an email from the SIPASA Board apologizing for the entertainment’s “poor taste” and “for any offenses it caused to those in attendance.” That same day, the Gender Policy Working Group (GPWG), a student group that seeks to facilitate the integration and exposure of a gender perspective at SIPA, addressed an open letter to SIPASA. The GPWG letter presented the group’s views and concerns—not just of the party, but about what the party exposed regarding the treatment and the role of women within the SIPA community.

At The Morningside Post, we strive to provide the SIPA community with an open, shared forum for dialogue. Our role, as SIPA’s “student-run news and opinion site,” is to act as an impartial watchdog, allowing for a free flow of ideas and opinions. TMP features passionate and inquisitive voices from students and community members that reflect first-hand perspectives on issues that affect each of us.

The full SIPASA email is provided below, followed by the GPWG letter, which was edited by TMP.

Good afternoon, SIPA,

We have been pleased to hear from so many of you that Friday’s Welcome Back Bash was a success. However, we are outraged at the reports of violence and indecency that took place, and we want you to know that we are working tirelessly and urgently to resolve these troubling issues.

Let us be clear: The incidence of physical, verbal and sexual assault is intolerable and unacceptable. We have been in close contact with the nightclub management, with event sponsors and with those affected to try to determine exactly what happened on Friday night; due to the gravity of these matters, we are also exploring whether further action involving law enforcement will be necessary to ensure all issues are adequately, effectively, sensitively and legally addressed. We will keep you abreast of this process.

We are aware, as well, that some of the entertainment at Friday’s event was in poor taste. We sincerely apologize for this unfortunate occurrence and for any offense it caused to those in attendance. Our arrangements with the venue were simple: a space for graduate students to enjoy a night out, with an hour of open bar, good music and a distinctive atmosphere. We were unaware that dancers would be present, we certainly did not request them to be there, and had we been made aware of the nature of their performance we would have, without any hesitation, taken our business elsewhere. It must be said that SIPASA did not pay for such entertainment–indeed, all costs of the event were covered by ticket sales; not a cent was borne by SIPASA or stemmed from your student fees. Still, we take responsibility for what occurred at a SIPASA event, we will not return to this venue under any circumstances, and we are now aware of matters that must be carefully and clearly fleshed out in advance of any future events to ensure nothing like this happens again.

Again, we know that the vast majority of those who came to the party had a great time, and we are thrilled about that. Still, the unfortunate events mentioned above cast a pall over the entire evening and over our efforts to make your time at SIPA—as we said last week—as rewarding, fulfilling and fun as possible. We remain deeply committed to that mission, we have certainly learned a few lessons from this event, and we will do our best to rectify matters moving forward.

If you have any further concerns or are looking for appropriate resources—on or off campus—please do not hesitate to let us know.

- Your SIPASA Board

———————————————————————————————————

Dear SIPASA,

On Friday night, many SIPA students attended the SIPA Welcome Back Bash 2014 hosted by SIPASA at LAVO nightclub.  Throughout much of the party, two young women were on display on podiums above the dance floor, wearing nothing but underwear and masks. Their sole purpose, it seemed, was to be sexy.

Though SIPASA has stated that they were not aware of this feature at the nightclub, the Gender Policy Working Group (GPWG) Board wants to state our concern that this type of “decor” at a party is not representative of our choices and preferences as a student body and urge SIPASA to be more cautious of issues such as these at future SIPA events.

We were not offended in principle by these scantily clad women and their sensual performance. This situation did, however, make us uncomfortable and extremely worried about the beliefs and attitudes towards women that are being cultivated in our school community. What we found disturbing was that women were used in this venue for ornamental purposes, and SIPASA did not seem to be doing anything to change this. These women were nothing more than furniture at the club. There were leather couches, giant chandeliers and sexy girls. They were no more human than any other part of the interior – and wearing masks over their faces made it impossible to detect their facial expressions.

Many probably found this scenario tasteless and may have scoffed it off as something unimportant. We at GPWG, however, are hesitant to dismiss this matter as mere frivolity. Women today continue to struggle with being sexualized;  many are adored and applauded for their youth, beauty and sex appeal – and less for their intellect. This is one of the reasons SIPA still has student groups and programs like Women in Leadership, Women in Security, Women in Energy, and the Gender Policy Working Group.  Women often don’t get the same opportunities as men, despite having similar brain power, Ivy League educations and impressive resumes. 

Using women as props at a school-sponsored party intended to be inclusive does not foster an environment of tolerance nor equality. Women were objectified on Friday night. And when women are objectified, their bodies and sexuality go on the market to be bought and sold in just the same manner as objects. By buying tickets to the SIPASA party, we all as students became complacent in paying these women for their sexuality. SIPA students bought tickets to this function, and we, as the GPWG, are  upset that this money was being used to pay for sexualized female bodies.

 Last Thursday,  SIPA’s Dean Merit Janow sent out an e-mail about Columbia University’s new policy on gender based misconduct. Given the recent news about sexual assault on Columbia’s campus. Everyone should be aware that sexual violence is a real problem at Columbia. We as students are responsible for creating an environment that fosters gender equality, respect and dignity. Paying women to be decorations impedes those values and  may further reinforce acts of sexual violence.

 We at GPWG find it important to point out that it would not have changed our concerns if there had been half-naked men standing on those podiums instead of women. Objectifying men equally to women is not the way towards gender equality. While we believe that both women and men should feel free to do whatever they want  with their bodies—as long as it doesn’t harm others— we are concerned with the assumption that sexy body decor at a school function is representative of our preferences as a student body.

More thought and consultation should be put into the choice of venues SIPA-affiliated groups secure for school parties and in the way student funds are spent. We urge SIPASA to form a policy on gender equality to help the school take steps towards an inclusive, safe and pleasant environment for all. We at GPWG would welcome the chance to be part of this process.

Sincerely,

The Board of the Gender Policy Working Group at SIPA [with edits by The Morningside Post Editorial Board]

Source: SIPA website

SIPA’s Town Hall Meeting is a serious version of the school’s annual Follies production, said Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, Dan McIntyre. Attendees at the meeting chuckled.

Many of the issues discussed that evening had already been expressed at Follies, McIntyre acceded. “Parody is a good way to communicate what you’re thinking about,” he said.

At the town hall On April 22, administration, faculty, students and SIPASA gathered over dinner to discuss ongoing concerns and goals for SIPA. The line to speak on the microphone grew so long that administration eventually stopped offering responses, and just listened.

Raúl Soto (MPA-DP ‘15), SIPASA Academic Co-Chair, said that while the comments were not new, they were certainly valid.

“Most of their concerns have been discussed by administration, by us, in different venues,” he said. “What I still find positive is that the administration is open to have a dialogue”, he said.

The night’s presentations reviewed the Student Satisfaction and Learning Outcomes Survey results, which have yet to be released publicly. At 52 percent, the survey response rate has improved, with 850 written comments. Among the results, ISP students rated the knowledge gained in their classes the highest. Respondents also noted an improvement in IT staff services, and many students requested more alumni mentors. Overall satisfaction at SIPA remains the same as last year.

But administrators acknowledged serious issues raised by students, such as the often-muddled second-year funding process, quality of core classes, lack of study space in Lehman Library, SIPA’s decline in the U.S. News and World Report ranking, and a general consensus that student voices were not being heard.

Town hall meetings in the past have had some success in immediately addressing student concerns. At the fall semester town hall, students expressed a desire to develop practical IT skills, and by spring, coding and excel classes were available.

“There are some things that may not be a quick fix, but we are committed to working on them,” said Anne Waters, Senior Associate Dean.

At the meeting, Madeline Vellturo (MPA ‘15), a J-term student who started SIPA this past January, pointed out the unique challenges of registration and lost funding opportunities her small cohort faces. Dual-degree students, who expressed the most challenges with the administration in their survey results, have similar concerns.

“Large class sizes for core classes and [non-core] classes are a huge issue. Offering them both fall and spring semester will decrease class sizes and increase flexibility,” Vellturo said.

The controversial concern of English proficiency among SIPA’s international students came up twice during the meeting. Students cited consequences like poor teamwork efficiency, and less communication among peers.

Not all students agreed, however, including SIPA University Senator, Melissa Martinez. “We all have our specialties and also things that we are not good at,” Martinez said. “Some students learned English as their third or fourth language. As students we need to foster an environment in which those that find it harder to communicate in English can feel confident in the classroom and in group projects.”

The administration responded that although class size increased this year due to more students accepting their offers, they have not lowered any admissions standards.

Some MPA students expressed disapproval over the number of academic research assignments, preferring more practicality in their coursework. Not all students agreed.

“On one [assignment] I was even admonished for trying to sneak too much of the academic theory in there where it was not appropriate in a practical memo,” Vellturo said.

The central question running through the night’s discussion rose again: does SIPA live up to what a policy school should be, a balance of critical analysis and real-world engagement?

While engagement means the opportunity to produce actionable work, it also means stepping up at SIPA, making voices and concerns heard and paying attention to what administrators are doing to improve the student experience. SIPASA and University Senate representatives presented their ongoing efforts, such as budgeting and sexual assault protocol.

“Students expect us to organize the social events,” Soto explained. “And the balance with that and voicing the interests of students in other aspects… I think we’re still juggling a little with that.”

Soto said SIPASA plans to organize next semester’s priorities around the survey results from the town hall. Meanwhile, student government representatives openly call for more student interaction with the system, not just within it.

“Town hall is an opportunity that students should take.” Soto said. “It’s one of the better ways to at least get the administration to actually hear you.”

Sarayu Adeni is a first-year Master of Public Administration in Development Practice Student.

Xiaoshuang Ma is a first-year Master of Public Administration student.

This story first ran in the print edition of The Morningside Post on May 6, 2014.

2014 SIPASA Board members. Photo credit: Divya Mansukhani.

By Harpreet Gill

Despite a mixed start to their tenure, the SIPASA board feels confident in their programming lined up for their final semester in office. The board, which was elected in late Fall of 2013, is responsible for managing over $120,000 in student activity fees, in addition to providing oversight and funding for student groups for Spring 2014 and Fall 2014 semesters. Benjamin Weiss (MIA ‘15), SIPASA’s Co-Chair for Communications and External Relations, says the board is “very proud of what we’ve been able to accomplish thus far.”

The SIPASA board identified three areas of focus last year: inclusiveness, engagement and transparency. According to Weiss, the board has made “tremendous strides in each of those areas.”

Weiss identified a host of successful programs that increased student engagement and participation, such as the “Free Speech, Free Eats” brownbag lunch initiative that connected students with prominent SIPA professors and the “Lunch and Learn Career Series” where students had the chance to connect with alumni in an intimate, casual setting. SIPASA also put on a series of digital skills workshops throughout April as well as the SIPA Gala and Graduation weekend celebrations, which “were well-attended and got overwhelmingly positive reviews”

However, despite these notable accomplishments, the board fell short in many of their objectives. While SIPASA board meetings are now open to the public, student turnout to these meetings continues to be low. Furthermore, SIPASA still does not publish the minutes from these general board meetings, which makes it difficult for students to stay updated on relevant information.

The board has also fallen short of creating a truly inclusive culture. They received a host of criticism earlier this academic year from The Gender Policy Working Group (GPWG). In an open letter, the GPWG recently criticized the SIPASA board for holding the Welcome Back Party at Club LAVO, where “scantily clad women …were used for ornamental purposes, and SIPASA did not seem to be doing anything to change this.” GPWG and the SIPASA board are now working together to ensure that future events are inclusive, safe and pleasant.

Challenges for the board have not been limited to programming and outreach; SIPASA has also struggled to retain its own board members. In an email statement on Sept 5th, SIPASA says they were disappointed to learn that three members—the vice president, the general secretary and a social co-chair—are no longer attending SIPA, and the fourth member, SIPASA Board President Viola Kuzmova (MIA 15’), had quit to focus on her academic goals. These departures follow the ousting of SIPASA’s 2013 President by a secret board ballot.

Weiss remains optimistic about the future. “We’ve got a somewhat shuffled board this semester, everyone’s really stepped up and taken on their new roles with a sense of purpose and determination to carry things forward.”

The board is already facing challenges from students as they move forward with this semester’s programming. Students are upset with SIPASA’s decision to combine the Halloween party and the boat cruise, which were separate events last year. Others are upset about having to pay to go to SIPASA events like the Welcome Back Party and now the Halloween boat party. Weiss says the board is “hyper-sensitive” about its pricing strategy and tries their best to have a balance of free and ticketed events.

“We’ve had a happy hour coming this week—the Spooky Scary Boat Party Ticket Launch Happy Hour,” Weiss mentioned via email, and “anyone is welcome to stop by and hang with their classmates over as many drinks as they’d like. And it’s all completely free.”

Karan Arjun (MPA ’15) sympathizes with the challenges SIPASA faces with student criticism. “Even if SIPASA has a free Jay-Z concert, someone will find a reason to be upset,” he says.

One group that is not upset with SIPASA are the student group leaders. Weiss points out that “student group funding has gone up some 10 percent” and the allocation process is more organized, transparent, and efficient than ever before. Anthony Guerbidjian (MIA ’15), Vice President of Arab Students’ Association, says “SIPASA is doing a good job, but there is so much more that needs to be done.”

One of the concerns many people share is SIPA branding. Weiss says SIPASA board has many conversations with administration about the SIPA brand. “The fact of the matter is, this is a massive, multifaceted undertaking—major shifts in opinion don’t happen overnight—and it’s something that will continue for many, many years,” he said.

To make those changes, another board will be elected by SIPA students in late November. Weiss is excited about the energy and enthusiasm from first year students and encourages anyone looking to make SIPA an even better place to run for a SIPASA Board position next month.

Harpreet Gill is a second-year Master of Public Administration student.

This story first ran in the print edition of The Morningside Post on October 16, 2014.

By The Morningside Post Staff

The SIPASA election debates are one of the few instances where SIPA students get to show off their policy-savvy skills, and despite the shortage of pizza slices, the 2014 SIPASA election debate night was a successful display of student engagement on campus. Run and organized by the current SIPASA Board and moderated by The Morningside Post’s Andrea Kramar, the event gave SIPA students the opportunity to understand the goals and values of the candidates beyond mere campaign ads and fliers, as well as an unusual chance to see their peers sweat it off in the hot seat.

Following brief introductions for both contended and uncontended positions, the three-way debate for University Senator was off. Manuel Ludwig Dehm (MPA, ‘16), Hariharan Sriram (MIA, ‘16), and Bartek Walentynski (MPA, ‘16) took the stage for the Senatorial Debate. Adorned in business suits and glasses, the candidates covered a wide range of topics, but focused their attention on the new Gender-Based Misconduct Policy.

Sriram emphasized the need for better housing options and availability for SIPA students, more food choices in the SIPA Cafe, and greater student participation in University-wide initiatives. Walentynski, a proud Polish first-year student, opened with the most clever campaign slogan (“Let’s Polish SIPA!”), yet he struggled to convey concrete policy objectives. He often advocated for typical ideas one would expect from a candidate–more, cross registration opportunities, and email communication. In response to Walentynski’s proposal to email minutes of University-wide Senate meetings directly to all SIPA students, Ludwig-Dehm quickly rebuked this suggestion and instead proposed having meeting summaries displayed prominently around SIPA.

Overall, Ludwig-Dehm came off as more polished than Walentynski, providing ideas that were more innovative and in tune with the local community, (including more educational involvement with the Harlem community, using data from surveys to assess the longitudinal progress of students and of SIPA policies, and promoting ways for SIPA students to work on New York City policies).

Sriram matched the sharp responses provided by Ludwig-Dehm, but also showcased a more congenial side, often beginning his responses with quick-witted jokes that endeared the audience. He exhibited an understanding of the Gender-Based Misconduct Policy and the potential conflict of interest it presents by requiring students to send complaints directly to the Dean of their respective schools. Sriram identified this as a flaw and pledged to appeal for a more effective Policy.

The two presidential candidates, John Olderman (MPA, ‘16) and Ajith Menon (MPA, ‘16) made for entertaining debate opponents with their starkly contrasting, yet oddly complementary personalities. Olderman, composed and collected, made his background and experience in state politics evident throughout the evening. Menon, on the other hand, was passionate in his opening remarks but came across as less inspired when fielding direct questions.

The Morningside Post has chosen to refrain from endorsing a specific candidate, particularly given the fact that our ideal candidate would be an Olderman-Menon smoothie. Instead,we’ll contend with listing out what we loved and critiqued about both SIPASA presidential candidates.

SIPASA Presidential Candidate John Olderman (MPA, ‘16):

With interesting SIPA-related facts in his back pocket, it was clear that Olderman had done his research. He displayed confidence and strength, particularly in his response to a question regarding a potential stalemate between SIPA students and the administration, “there should be no stalemate. If the students have a grievance, it’s the duty of the administration to address it.”

When one audience member asked if the candidates were really up to the job, given the nebulous trajectory of most of the previous presidents, Olderman took the opportunity to disclose his consistent attendance at every single SIPASA meeting of the semester to date.

As a former Chief-of-Staff to Maryland Senator Madaleno, Olderman is experienced enough to realize his biggest disadvantage in running against an international student–his low score on the diversity scale. He admirably offset his would-be clichéd white, american, male persona by actively acknowledging gender issues and issues faced by the international student body. He even spoke of the lack of racial diversity among the professors at SIPA.

Despite these strengths, it’s unclear if Olderman would be the kind of SIPASA President to spend time interacting with the student body directly. His polished air may detract from anyone perceiving him as a people’s person, able to easily mingle at a social event on or off of campus. As Menon was quick to admit,Olderman would be good at the marketing aspects required of the position, including selling SIPA to other schools, the administration and to potential employers.

SIPASA Presidential Candide: Ajith Menon (MPA, ‘16)

Menon displayed great passion and enthusiasm during the SIPASA election debate. He spoke about his beliefs, values, and the changes that he would like to see at SIPA, yet his ideas seemed less concrete compared to Olderman. He had some great ideas but most of these seemed to be still on the drawing board. When asked what student complaint he felt he would be unable to address as SIPASA President, Menon said the most frequent complaint he had heard from students was that nobody had enough time. Instead of seeing this as a grievance, Menon feels that staying busy is a good thing that he wouldn’t want to change.

In response to a question regarding the longstanding issues that may not be resolved during his short term as President, Menon identified the quality of courses and the quality of food at Alice café as potentially long-term obstacles. Menon’s responses showed a lack of knowledge pertaining to the inner-workings of the SIPA Administration.

Yet, overall, Menon conveyed an air of genuine honesty that was refreshing. He was frank about what he didn’t think would change and he seemed approachable–a useful quality for a student-body President.

While the debates may not have garnered as much laughter and play as the trending “SIPA for America” Facebook page (which The Morningside Post highly recommends), the debate provided a rare opportunity for the School of International and Public Affairs to really practice what it preaches–meaningful engagement in public affairs. With that, may the best candidate win.

Ideas that TMP loved:

Olderman: Visually record classes so that students can preview a course instead of wasting a week of “shopping,” enhance career advising and services for international students.

Menon: Make the class syllabi available before registration to help students better manage their time and schedules, focus on a career fair event directed specifically at SIPA students.

From Wikipedia Commons

By Samir Memon

SIPASA’s March Academic and Social Life Survey showed dramatic changes from the previous academic year, with all evidence pointing towards mobile-dating application Tinder being the favored activity of students.

Students seemed more than happy to discuss their newfound mobile-application hobby. “Tinder is fantastic,” said Pablo Garza (MIA ’15).“I can literally spend hours swiping at the library. Who needs to distract themselves with YouTube when I can…sorry, I just got a match. I have to send a message.”

Christiane Justino (MPA ’16) appeared just as excited about the app. “Last year, I didn’t know what Tinder was. Since discovering it last month, I’ve met more SIPA students through it than in all my classes put together! It’s my favorite way of finding study partners.”

In other changing trends, students have been dedicating significantly more hours inside the International Affairs Building than ever before. Building maintenance officials have noticed a five-fold increase in student usage of previously unpopular study locations. Facilities manager, Chico Camus, said that usage of unlocked classrooms after 10 PM skyrocketed since September, with the majority of students found in them to be in groups of two or three. They also noted most students had been conducting work with the lights off.

Additionally, previously unknown parts of Lehman Library have also been utilized more heavily recently, particularly during late night hours. “Last week I had to kick out several students from the second sub-basement study booths at closing time,” said head librarian, Holly Holm. “I have been at Lehman for 14 years and until this semester; I didn’t even know we had a second sub-basement!” she said.

As a result of the recent increases in facility usage, tension has erupted amongst Columbia University custodial staff. Spending more hours cleaning carpets than initially budgeted for, the custodial union has formally requested a renegotiation for over-time extension. However, a union representative conceded that a change in the collective bargaining agreement wouldn’t be necessary if the carpets were either detailed or removed altogether.

When asked to comment on the students’ new behavioral trends, Dean Janow remarked that the increase in facility usage was proof that “the building inspires not only academic excellence but also unprecedented networking opportunities.”