“RPI Sucks.” I cannot say how many times I have heard this during my stay here. Phrases like “the ‘tute screw” come to mind for many people every time the administration makes a change, and this is partially justified. I have recently been asked to clear up some issues for both students and administration as to why the alumni do not donate as much as at other schools, and I received many complaints about the administration. But the administration is not out to, as we have so quaintly put it, screw us. Rather, we are witnessing a major neglect to use of the lines of communication that are available to both parties. Students, on the other hand, lack active involvement in student government and often do not voice their opinions in the appropriate venues (if they even voice them at all) furthering the issue.
After talking with David Haviland, vice president for institute advancement, the breakdown has become all too clear for myself. Haviland pointed out many complaints students have made about the Institute and the motives to why the administration has taken these actions. From referring to the Institute by a different name, to the current EMPAC-tuition increase-commencement change “triple whammy,” the administration’s motives were discussed and they seem to make complete sense to them [the administration] and, at least partial sense to myself.
First, why “Rensselaer” and not “RPI?” Because we’re living in a global marketplace. “RPI” works fine locally, however once you leave the area this name begins to be a source of confusion. “RPI” can mean the “Railway Progress Institute” (http://www.rpi.org) – or worse yet – the word “Polytechnic” strikes up the connotation of a two-year vocational school in those British-influenced countries and colonies around the world. I have been assured the name of the school will not change, however it will be referred to as “Rensselaer” to downplay the connotation our full name has in the global marketplace. “So why does MIT refer to itself as MIT still?” others have asked. Simple. They’re doing the same thing we are – downplaying “Massachusetts” in their name so they too can look better in the global marketplace.
What about living conditions on campus? These maintenance costs will be part of running the Institute and repairs are being made. New roofs have already been installed on the Troy, Carnegie, and Amos Eaton buildings, with Sage Laboratories coming up next. Since the tops of these buildings are clad in copper sheets, these repairs are nowhere near inexpensive. Fire sprinklers, fire alarms, and a new retractable roof for the Robison Pool are all improvements pending (or already completed), in addition to the heat problems, which will be fixed with the addition of the new boiler plant. Some of these projects need to be placed ahead of others. Enter EMPAC and the tuition increases.
Is this the right way to achieve these goals? I’m not sure. It sure makes at least partial sense to me, however I encourage all readers to make their own opinions. As for Institute myth and reality, I look forward to hopefully seeing Vice President Haviland write a column for The Poly to augment this article and communicate the many reasons why the administration makes the decisions that they do.
