On Wednesday, February 23, three women, all now healthy sexagenarians, shared their experiences from years of working as Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) organizers in the Deep South to an audience in Filene Auditorium. The event, called “Hands on the Freedom Plow,” was one of a series of events celebrating Black History Month, and was co-sponsored by the History, Women & Gender Studies and African American Studies departments. One of the women, Judy Richardson, recalled a story of a former cohort’s altercation with the police. “Don’t touch the fur, don’t touch the fur,” the woman told police as they placed her under arrest for participating in a sit-in at the local diner in Mississippi. Sit-ins were one of many tactics that Judy Richardson, Penny Patch and Janet Moses learned to use to fight discrimination and racism during their time organizing with SNCC.

Their stories evoked humorous and sometimes somber responses from those in attendance. Audience members struggled to fight back tears as Patch, one of SNCC’s first white female organizers, told of the time an elderly black woman offered to get up from her seat and allow Patch to sit down simply because she was white.

Beyond the discussions of fighting racism and discrimination in the context of the women’s’ experiences, a conversation about generational expectations of political advocacy was embedded within their stories

The women, like most SNCC organizers, were in their late teens to early twenties when they worked as organizers. Patch and Richardson both left Swarthmore, the college they were currently attending, to go south. They believed that their presence in southern states could help change the racial hierarchy that had long existed in American society. Not unlike civil rights advocacy today, the movement they took part in was energized by college students, both black and white.

The women were initially unaware of what they would face because, as Richardson told a History class earlier in the day, “If we had known the kind of people and thinking we were up against, we might not have went.” Even if a ghostly figure had appeared to warn her about traveling to Mississippi and organizing demonstrations against inequality, I doubt Richardson would have passed up the chance. Listening to her statement, I could not help but wonder if Richardson’s present thoughts about her younger years demonstrated a certain amount of pessimism that comes along with growing older.

So, what happened to her “anything is possible” attitude? Has she suddenly become content with the status quo in her old age? Of course not. Richardson’s will to see change is still alive, but society’s view of her as someone who might have the desire or capacity to bring about that change is dead. When we think of people like Patch, Moses, and Richardson we have the tendency to imagine sweet ole’ ladies who spend their days visiting grandchildren and cooking holiday feasts for their families. We rarely look to them to spawn the next great American social movement.

College students fall victim to this polar assumption. It has become widely accepted that young, enthusiastic college students are overly eager to organize for any cause. Along with devaluing the causes college students organize by dismissing them as products of a youthful phase, we create a society in which aging men and women are encouraged to withdraw from public political discourse.

Even at Dartmouth, the large elderly community of Hanover is expected to support events at The Hop, but is not consulted when the administration proposes budget cuts and employee layoffs. Why have we created a community in which there is no space for aging, concerned women like these?

Through their very presence on our campus, the women of SNCC reminded me that as people grow old, nothing changes within them to make them less concerned about society. What changes are our expectations of them. We expect them to quiet down and give us a peek into an earlier time and place.

Along with valuing the history lessons that people like Patch, Moses and Richardson offer us, we might start making space in society and at Dartmouth for their voices, too. Their personal accounts can be read in a new anthology of narratives by women that organized for SNCC: Hands on the Freedom Plow: Personal Accounts by Women in SNCC (University of Illinois Press, 2010).

Several unrelated cases of food poisoning have gone unreported by students after they consumed some spoiled, uncooked vegetables at Dartmouth Dining Service’s Food Court and Home Plate facilities. The three cases, each involving a different type of vegetable, has called in to question DDS food-handling practices along with its methods for obtaining student feedback regarding its food and services.

Consumption of uncooked vegetables often leads to poisoning since improper rinsing and storage can lead to the development of foodborne illness-causing bacteria. The United States Department of Agriculture recommends that uncooked vegetables be kept below 42 degrees Fahrenheit and be monitored every 30 minutes to ensure that this internal temperature is maintained. It seems as though DDS is disregarding these recommendations. Former student DDS workers—who did not want to be indentified—have reported that DDS salad bars are not checked regularly and that the temperature is often higher than it ought to be.

Even more concerning are the admissions that the former student workers have made concerning the preparation and rinsing of uncooked vegetables. While the USDA recommends that vegetables be thoroughly washed and checked for signs of decay or damage, the students contend that during their tenure at DDS they often saw employees rush through the rinsing process. As a result, salad and other spoiled vegetables were placed onto the salad bar that would have otherwise been discarded if checked properly.

These admissions have bewildered the throngs of students who depend on DDS for their daily intake of fruits and vegetables. Upon finding out about the recent cases of food poisonings, Rochele Brown ‘13, a vegetarian, admitted that she “rarely eats from the salad bar or uncooked vegetable side items because they often taste spoiled and dirty.” When asked if she had reported this to the DDS staff, she replied “no, because I wasn’t sure if my opinion was representative of most students.”

While it is hard to confirm whether students agree with Brown, the recent cases of food poisoning reveal a real danger that could result from DDS’s failure to seek feedback from the student body about its food and service quality.

In comparison to other colleges, DDS takes few surveys of campus opinion. While DDS has attempted to start a quality survey group among a select group of students in the past, the findings of those surveys have not been made public. Other colleges, like Emory and Harvard, regularly survey the student body at large to get feedback on quality. They then update their menu offerings in response to student needs.

For example, in a 2009 survey of nearly 3,000 undergraduates, Harvard’s dining services found that students thought it was falling behind in its commitment to serve fresh food. Similarly, surveys of Dartmouth’s campus would more than likely find that students are increasingly dissatisfied with DDS’s improper handling of fresh produce.

The recent cases of food illness caused by uncooked vegetables have gone unnoticed because, like other areas of Dartmouth’s bureaucracy, those charged with running DDS consistently fail to seek input. If we continue to depend on select groups of student to represent everyone’s views and experiences in any area of campus, we will never have a meaningful conversation that helps us to improve experiences on campus.

It is not enough to say “we’re here if you want to come talk.” Rather, DDS and the administration must actively seek to implement ways in which the campus at large can efficiently share their experiences. While not everyone will have time or feel comfortable with intruding on DDS supervisors to inform them of their spoiled veggies, most students will have 5 minutes over spring break to complete an online survey that both applauds DDS’s strengths and highlights its weaknesses. And if the survey should reveal that veggies are consistently spoiled and cause student sickness, DDS will have the input it needs to make the change. With this said, I only have one question for DDS—where’s the survey?

The announcement that Acting Dean of the College, Sylvia Spears, will not be applying for the position she assumed in August 2009 has sent waves through the Dartmouth Community.

Eleven days after Provost Carol Folt announced the beginning of a national search for a new dean, eight students announced their own search—a search for more diversity, transparency, and continuity within Dartmouth’s administrative leadership.

In an open letter to the community containing a link to an online petition, Dartmouth students Anise Vance ‘11, Katie Lindsay’11, Justin Varilek’11, Aryana Jacobs ‘11, Amrita Sankar ‘12, Angelo Carino ‘11, Sebastian DeLuca ‘14, and Antonio Brown ‘11 highlighted Dean Spears’ many accomplishments during her brief deanship. They referred to her as “an invaluable force for positive change… whose inconsideration for Dean has left many students with ‘a sense of confusion.’”

Some of the confusion has to do with the implications of the timing of Folt’s announcement.  Dartmouth typically begins organizing administrative search committees in October, but this time they waited until January to begin their search.  This leaves many to wonder whether the delay was caused by a sudden change of heart by President Jim Kim or other College administrators, or perhaps some unexpected event that occurred in the interval between October or November and last week. Although a national search was always expected, it was assumed by many close to the administration that Spears was a shoo-in for the position.

Jim Kim showed his support and positive expectations for Spears in a quote in the June 25, 2010 edition of The Dartmouth:

“I think Spears has done a fantastic job as [acting] Dean of the College,” Kim said. “We’re going to do a search but it’s hard for me to imagine there’s someone who will bring as much expertise and such a great track record to the job.”

Whether or not Kim has since strayed from the sentiments conveyed above is unclear since the official word from the administration is that Spears has opted out of consideration for the job.

Students who doubt Spears’ willingness to step aside are accusing Parkhurst of intentionally concealing the search process. Other students posit that perhaps there was some sort of internal conflict within the administration that they are hesitating to disclose to the public for confidentiality purposes. But the truth is that these are all just guesses. Perhaps Dean Spears simply did not like her job. But then why would she not make a simple statement explaining herself? Who is trying to keep her silent?

Whatever the case, petitioners believe that the administration needs to develop long-term plans for more transparent search processes in the future, and shed immediate light on the reasons Spears chose not to apply to keep her job.

Also at issue is the search committee’s lack of diversity. Two out of ten female members and one person of color is not exactly a representative cross section of Dartmouth.  The problem is that the person to whom we usually defer for diversity issues at Dartmouth is Dean Spears herself. As a result, petitioners are concerned that the new dean will be less sensitive to issues of diversity than Spears, who joined Dartmouth in 2007 as director of OPAL and is noted in her official college bio as having worked in “university settings in affirmative action/equal opportunity and multicultural student services.”

Members of the college community have also expressed concern over the news that yet another Dean will be appointed. The College, which has seen three Deans of Students over the past four years, is still recovering from the 2009 departure of Dean Tom Crady after less than two years in the post.

In response to the news that students should expect a new Dean by July 2011, a member of the class of 2013, Jake Epstein, said he thinks, “inconsistent leadership does not make for a cohesive community. Honestly, I am not sure what the Dean of Students does because I am just getting settled in the college and now she is leaving. I do not think the college has been straightforward about the process and in my opinion, if she has not done anything unprofessional then it is odd that the administration is not considering her for the job she already holds.”

Sylvia Spears was unavailable for comment at the time of print.

Thus I will conclude with the following question addressed directly to President Kim: Why exactly did Dean Spears choose not to apply for Deanship next term?