LSJUMB - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: LSJUMB (/thread-18819.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: LSJUMB (/thread-18819.html)
LSJUMB - 82lsju - 01-07-2020
Quote:"After considering the past, present, and future of the Stanford Band, we came to the realization that it is in all of our best interests to explore new opportunities for the structural housing of the Band within the University, and, beginning January 1, 2020, we will begin a new chapter of Band’s history as a Department-Sponsored Student Organization, formalizing our relationship with Stanford Athletics. The structure we are adopting is new to Stanford and was developed with careful consideration from students and alumni. We now have the support of both the Stanford Administration and Athletics Department to move forward with a two year pilot program."
see pages 7 and 8 here
https://lsjumb.stanford.edu/uploads/5/3/9/3/53939243/lsjumb_fall_2019_newsletter__1_.pdf
RE: LSJUMB - Phogge - 01-07-2020
Hopefully this means dumping the inane student band announcers who read copy just slightly superior than dialogue from a Lash Larue Western.
RE: LSJUMB - Spiny_Norman - 01-07-2020
What were they previously? An anarcho-syndicalist commune?
RE: LSJUMB - JJJ - 01-07-2020
(01-07-2020, 01:50 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote: What were they previously? An anarcho-syndicalist commune?
I know you know but for the benefit of others, they were a VSO (volunteer student organization).
I have no inside knowledge on whether this is a good thing but am willing to give it the benefit of the doubt.
RE: LSJUMB - 82lsju - 01-07-2020
from the link
Quote:1. The rules and regulations for Volunteer Student Organizations were meant for organizations like the Stanford Creative Writing Society, NOT for an organization like the LSJUMB with more than 100 members, that travels and performs for athletic events and hires a director. This ill-fitting designation continues to cause conflicts between the Band and University administrations.
2. The Office of Student Engagement (OSE) is undergoing reorganization. Last spring, without any discussion with the LSJUMB, the OSE announced that the LSJUMB would be grouped with fraternities and sororities for oversight, and they also removed the administrative support they previously provided. Change was happening
.....
a. Athletics will provide financial support of additional funding for lessons and support of the Band.
b. Athletics will assist with guidance on fundraising with SBAB.
c. The Band will remain student-run, and the students will have a committee that will work with the Athletic Department to smooth out issues during the two-year TRIAL of this experiment.
RE: LSJUMB - 2006alum - 01-07-2020
From my understanding, the university forced the Band's hand by forcing them to be overseen by the same branch of the Office of Student Affairs (the euphemistic doublespeak-sounding "Office of Student Engagement") that oversees the frats and sororities. In case you haven't kept up with recent campus goings-on, the university has been in a sustained multi-year war with a number of the housed frats and both of the housed dorms not formally owned by Stanford (Sigma Chi and Chi Theta Chi). My read is that Stanford wants to squash any sources of control that run outside formal administrative channels, so organizations like housed fraternities, non-university controlled dorms, and the Band all fall into that category.
RE: LSJUMB - teejers1 - 01-07-2020
(01-07-2020, 03:31 PM)2006alum Wrote: From my understanding, the university forced the Band's hand by forcing them to be overseen by the same branch of the Office of Student Affairs (the euphemistic doublespeak-sounding "Office of Student Engagement") that oversees the frats and sororities. In case you haven't kept up with recent campus goings-on, the university has been in a sustained multi-year war with a number of the housed frats and both of the housed dorms not formally owned by Stanford (Sigma Chi and Chi Theta Chi). My read is that Stanford wants to squash any sources of control that run outside formal administrative channels, so organizations like housed fraternities, non-university controlled dorms, and the Band all fall into that category.
Somewhere Dean Wormer is smirking . . .
(and yes, I know that John Vernon passed many years ago).
RE: LSJUMB - Phogge - 01-08-2020
“Wormer, he’s a dead man, Marmarlard..dead, Niedermeyer.. dead....................”
RE: LSJUMB - MVCard - 01-08-2020
If there is an instigator to be found here, the answer is much more in the history between Stanford and its martial arts team/club. With leadership changes in the office of student activities, there’s an increased focus on ensuring student organizations are “pure” in that they don’t have outside coaches, paid non-student staff, or alumni members. This was already affecting other groups.
Obviously if you’re the Band, with a paid director, and a reliance on alumni to cover some events and add to numbers, and you’re focused on being inclusive across the broader community, this trend is a problem. Also, if you compare the bureaucracy in student affairs with athletics, you’ll find it’s way easier to deal with specific behavior issues in a world where the norm is coach/captains make a call, vs a world where there’s a giant committee and paperwork and a tendency to hold an entire organization liable for one young adult’s bad decision. And if there’s one thing the Band likes, it’s being able to be more in control of what it does.
Suffice to say, I think this solution is a great idea. Now tell me that since the Band is in Athletics, my gifts to the Band can count towards seating priority!!! :)
RE: LSJUMB - M T - 01-08-2020
Not having gone to Stanford, I'm a bit fuzzy on some of the details that an alumnus would know...
The Dollies are part of the band, as I understand it, so I surmise they are now controlled by the athletic department.
Where do the cheerleaders fit in?
Do the band members now count toward Title IX numbers? If there were some band competition that they participated in, would they then count?
Might some wealthy alumnus/alumnae now make a scholarship for the band or Dollies?
RE: LSJUMB - 76lsjumb - 01-08-2020
(01-08-2020, 12:05 PM)M T Wrote: Not having gone to Stanford, I'm a bit fuzzy on some of the details that an alumnus would know...
The Dollies are part of the band, as I understand it, so I surmise they are now controlled by the athletic department.
Where do the cheerleaders fit in?
Do the band members now count toward Title IX numbers? If there were some band competition that they participated in, would they then count?
Might some wealthy alumnus/alumnae now make a scholarship for the band or Dollies?
Cheerleaders have always been under the Athletic Department and not related to the Band.
I doubt that the Band will have an impact on Title IX numbers.
A number of wealthy alumni have already made considerable donations to the Band over the years, but I don't believe anyone has ever endowed a specific scholarship for any particular Band position, and I would be very surprised if that ever happened.
RE: LSJUMB - ColoradoTree - 01-08-2020
Does anyone more knowledgeable than I have an opinion as to whether this is good/healthy or bad/unhealthy for the Band? What do people think this will mean for the future of the Band?
RE: LSJUMB - MVCard - 01-08-2020
(01-08-2020, 01:24 PM)76lsjumb Wrote:(01-08-2020, 12:05 PM)M T Wrote: Not having gone to Stanford, I'm a bit fuzzy on some of the details that an alumnus would know...
The Dollies are part of the band, as I understand it, so I surmise they are now controlled by the athletic department.
Where do the cheerleaders fit in?
Do the band members now count toward Title IX numbers? If there were some band competition that they participated in, would they then count?
Might some wealthy alumnus/alumnae now make a scholarship for the band or Dollies?
Cheerleaders have always been under the Athletic Department and not related to the Band.
I doubt that the Band will have an impact on Title IX numbers.
A number of wealthy alumni have already made considerable donations to the Band over the years, but I don't believe anyone has ever endowed a specific scholarship for any particular Band position, and I would be very surprised if that ever happened.
Stanford has had a number of donors over the years who specify that their gift be used for need-based scholarships in certain areas. The Band is no exception - there's at least one need-based scholarship I'm aware of that someone funded a long time ago, which goes out to eligible undergraduates in the Band.
As for merit-based scholarships, I think that's more a question of overall University policy. Some people like to draw the connection to USC here because they have band scholarships, their head majorette gets a free ride, etc. Frankly if you told me I was only allowed to play three songs all game, you'd have to pay me a lot of money too, so maybe that makes sense for them and their particular... idiom.
RE: LSJUMB - cctop - 01-08-2020
(01-08-2020, 01:52 PM)ColoradoTree Wrote: Does anyone more knowledgeable than I have an opinion as to whether this is good/healthy or bad/unhealthy for the Band? What do people think this will mean for the future of the Band?
Reading the link posted at the top of the thread, it's an administrative change that was driven by Band itself and they think it's a good thing.
RE: LSJUMB - 76lsjumb - 01-08-2020
(01-08-2020, 01:58 PM)MVCard Wrote:(01-08-2020, 01:24 PM)76lsjumb Wrote:(01-08-2020, 12:05 PM)M T Wrote: Not having gone to Stanford, I'm a bit fuzzy on some of the details that an alumnus would know...
The Dollies are part of the band, as I understand it, so I surmise they are now controlled by the athletic department.
Where do the cheerleaders fit in?
Do the band members now count toward Title IX numbers? If there were some band competition that they participated in, would they then count?
Might some wealthy alumnus/alumnae now make a scholarship for the band or Dollies?
Cheerleaders have always been under the Athletic Department and not related to the Band.
I doubt that the Band will have an impact on Title IX numbers.
A number of wealthy alumni have already made considerable donations to the Band over the years, but I don't believe anyone has ever endowed a specific scholarship for any particular Band position, and I would be very surprised if that ever happened.
Stanford has had a number of donors over the years who specify that their gift be used for need-based scholarships in certain areas. The Band is no exception - there's at least one need-based scholarship I'm aware of that someone funded a long time ago, which goes out to eligible undergraduates in the Band.
As for merit-based scholarships, I think that's more a question of overall University policy. Some people like to draw the connection to USC here because they have band scholarships, their head majorette gets a free ride, etc. Frankly if you told me I was only allowed to play three songs all game, you'd have to pay me a lot of money too, so maybe that makes sense for them and their particular... idiom.
Good to know. I was thinking more along the lines of athletic scholarships, where , for example, individual players on the basketball teams have their own four-year, endowed scholarships identified by their donors [who, at least in the not-too-distant past, you could find out simply by looking at plaques on the wall in Arrillaga]. If that exists for the Band, that's news to me. Although it might make some sense for the solo trump who does the Banner, I guess...
(01-08-2020, 02:51 PM)cctop Wrote:(01-08-2020, 01:52 PM)ColoradoTree Wrote: Does anyone more knowledgeable than I have an opinion as to whether this is good/healthy or bad/unhealthy for the Band? What do people think this will mean for the future of the Band?
Reading the link posted at the top of the thread, it's an administrative change that was driven by Band itself and they think it's a good thing.
Anything that gets the Band out from under the jurisdiction of the Assistant Associate Vice-Dean for Undergraduate Administrative Oversight of Student-Related Organizational Activities -- or whoever it was that formerly had responsibility for the Band -- is a good thing...
I trust Russ Gavin [and SBAB] on this. He's doing a good job.
RE: LSJUMB - 81alum - 01-08-2020
(01-08-2020, 01:24 PM)76lsjumb Wrote:When I was a student in the late 1970s I don't believe there were any cheerleaders--just the Dollies. It was actually a point of pride to me that Stanford did not demean itself with cheerleaders but instead featured modern dancers with innovative choreography. When I returned years later (after grad school) and saw that we had cheerleaders, I was flabbergasted. On the other hand, I saw that the Dollies were using the same choreography that I first saw in 1977--seemingly unchanged.(01-08-2020, 12:05 PM)M T Wrote: Not having gone to Stanford, I'm a bit fuzzy on some of the details that an alumnus would know...
The Dollies are part of the band, as I understand it, so I surmise they are now controlled by the athletic department.
Where do the cheerleaders fit in?
Do the band members now count toward Title IX numbers? If there were some band competition that they participated in, would they then count?
Might some wealthy alumnus/alumnae now make a scholarship for the band or Dollies?
Cheerleaders have always been under the Athletic Department and not related to the Band.
I doubt that the Band will have an impact on Title IX numbers.
A number of wealthy alumni have already made considerable donations to the Band over the years, but I don't believe anyone has ever endowed a specific scholarship for any particular Band position, and I would be very surprised if that ever happened.
Isn't the Band Director endowed? The "Arthur P. Barnes Director of Band?"
RE: LSJUMB - CowboyIndian - 01-08-2020
(01-08-2020, 10:04 PM)81alum Wrote: Isn't the Band Director endowed?
He appreciates that you noticed.
RE: LSJUMB - martyup - 01-09-2020
(01-08-2020, 06:55 AM)Phogge Wrote: “Wormer, he’s a dead man, Marmarlard..dead, Niedermeyer.. dead....................”
![[Image: ?u=https%3A%2F%2Fthumbs.gfycat.com%2FIns...f=1&nofb=1]](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fthumbs.gfycat.com%2FInsidiousDigitalAmphiuma-size_restricted.gif&f=1&nofb=1)
RE: LSJUMB - 82lsju - 01-13-2020
some more info from the Daily
https://www.stanforddaily.com/2020/01/13/stanford-band-becomes-department-sponsored-student-organization/
RE: LSJUMB - CrazedZooChimp - 01-13-2020
(01-08-2020, 10:04 PM)81alum Wrote: When I was a student in the late 1970s I don't believe there were any cheerleaders--just the Dollies. It was actually a point of pride to me that Stanford did not demean itself with cheerleaders but instead featured modern dancers with innovative choreography. When I returned years later (after grad school) and saw that we had cheerleaders, I was flabbergasted. On the other hand, I saw that the Dollies were using the same choreography that I first saw in 1977--seemingly unchanged.
Isn't the Band Director endowed? The "Arthur P. Barnes Director of Band?"
Yeah, I think the director is an endowed position now, which was an effort to get an actual full time director instead of someone from the music dept that kind of sometimes showed up to things.
I also thought the cheerleaders were just a club (maybe a VSO)? When I was in school (2000s) I felt like the cheerleaders were new (they were called Cardinal Competitive Cheer), and they didn't really even start going to sporting events until the mid-2000s.
(My understanding of dollie routines is that there are a few "traditional" dances that are unchanged each year and a bunch of new ones they choreograph new. Although, I imagine depending on how lazy a given years dollies are they may make a different number of new dances vs using old ones).