Slice the White Bread

The official rhetoric of the Columbia administration lacks flavor and is unnecessarily bad. If it were edible, it would be white bread.It is hard to say that nothing is getting done or that things are going wrong when we are told that we both know nothing and can't learn anything about the University's internal world. The white bread needs to stop, and an all-out push for transparency must begin.The use of white bread means that debate is rigged so that students are always idealistic adolescents and administrators are pragmatic adults. All official responses are soaked with the condescension of a knowing mother: grad students are well-paid, students concerned about Manhattanville must look at the big picture, the endowment isn't big enough for financial aid, and so on.Ever been to a fireside chat with President Bollinger? Students ask questions, and he responds to a question that no one actually asked with a series of empty platitudes. We are good at playing smart, but he is better at playing stupid.Once the platitudes start the argument ends. The administrators know the truth because they spend their time working on this or that issue, and we are busy, misinformed students. And we will stay misinformed because we don't-and won't-have access to the information. Anyone who objects to either of these claims is left saying "yes, but..." against the consuming simplicity of white bread.The only way to undo this dynamic is to fight for transparency without using it as a code word for a political agenda. We can handle the truth, and the administration can handle working harder to make it available. Specifics aren't that scary-they just require work.The administration is probably concerned about releasing too much information. Doing so will kick off intra-departmental fights, invite more scrutiny, and prove to be a pain in the ass. But it will also lead to clearer, fairer policies. Plus, if we have to footnote our papers so our work is transparent, shouldn't the administration do the same?Students do care-we just don't see the point of debates that seem settled and distant from reality. Thanks to white bread, Columbia can make any discussion seem besides the point.Take financial aid, for instance. Everyone agrees it needs improvement, but convoluted accounting hides specific numbers in a haystack of paperwork. Instead of benchmarks based on fundraisers, we are vaguely promised that grants will replace all loans. Instead of specifics, we get white bread.Or look at the John Jay Scholars Program, which honors the most desirable high school seniors who have been admitted. For some scholars, it is not purely ceremonial; their loans can be converted into grants, even if other similar-income students receive packages with greater loans. Though Columbia claims to give only need-based aid, it is essentially merit aid. There is probably nothing wrong with it. But instead of details, we get white bread.Dealings with the community follow the same track. The Manhattanville dispute is framed as if everything important is decided and only niceties are at stake. Everyone knows expansion is probably necessary and Columbia should help the neighborhood. Yet, when asked something like, "What's the deal with eminent domain?" useful information is replaced with empty statements: trust us, don't worry, we're the good guys. Instead of answers, we get white bread.There's no evidence that the administration actually wants transparency. For example, on Feb. 24 the University Senate will meet to finalize changes to Columbia's policy on sexual misconduct. A Senate task force reported last year that the current definition of sexual misconduct and the current procedures are confusing. While the important policy minutiae belong to the Senate, the administration has the ability to come out in favor of a simpler, more consistent process. Or it could encourage mandatory sexual assault awareness training. Or it could say nothing. Or it could serve white bread.Administrators aren't James Bond villains. Expansion could benefit the community, financial aid policies must compete with Harvard, and President Bollinger probably doesn't want to further overwhelm sexual assault victims. Yet, on issue after issue, Columbia acts as if it's hiding a doomsday device."Holding the University accountable" is not a euphemism. A multibillion-dollar university can spend the extra money and time needed to remove the barrier between the public and its affirmative action procedures, real estate ambitions, and everything else under the dome.

Before changing the world, we-student governments, conservatives, activist groups, the apathetic majority that is too confused to spend mental energy caring-need to figure out what the hell is going on. A little effort, and every improvement after that will be the best thing since sliced white bread.

Avi Zvi Zenilman is a Columbia College junior concentrating in history. Head in a Box runs alternate Mondays.