Respondent Comments

Note: This document contains all of the written comments provided by IPS respondents, as transcribed by NCHEMS. They have not been edited and are not presented in any particular order.

The institution is still getting reorganized, as it needed to be. The biggest single problem remains too many decisions made without first discussing them with the people affected by them. It's getting better, but not fast enough.

We are a unique institution-our goal is change. Our administration is relatively new and although highly qualified, motivated and capable, they are dealing with a faculty and student body that are often rugged individualists and who feel only loosely bound by policies, procedures, etc. They are challenged to establish a new construct for management that does not feel like management to those they manage. If artists feel constricted, restrained, "politicized," or are made defensive in any way, they cannot perform their art. Each student, faculty adjunct, etc., therefore needs freedom to create, converse and subsist. Our administration is working hard to find the balance between a fixed or "hard" institution and a change-based "soft" one. I feel that when they discover how to accomplish this they will provide a new model that will govern all arts institutions.

The institution seems to promote the fine art side of Columbia over strategic design and visual communications programs.

First off, thanks for asking. My previous college employer wouldn't have asked and wouldn't have cared about the answers! Like any school, I think Columbia has a few "impossible" students who will be satisfied. On the whole, however, our students are as creative and dynamic as they come. I really love working in Admissions, despite the hours. I just hope our scholarships and endowment grow as they need to.

I have experienced a distinct lack of coordination and feedback between departments. There is a lot of knowledge going to waste because of it. More contact and cooperation could improve morale and collegiality and greatly improve the content offered to our students.

It is very hard to give numerical answers that do justice to the complexity of some of the questions asked. For example, the college-wide, school-wide and department experiences can be very much at odds on items such as equity, rewards for good work, communication, resource allocation and so on. It would have been helpful to have been able to distinguish. I tried to answer on the college level, but of course my experience is mostly at the department level.

The school's mission is what I think most faculty believe in and support-however, the practice of supporting an institution requires another set of principles, for some administrators that gap leaves many faculty in the dark as their authority is measured by administrations' goals and finances. Communication and secrecy are at odds in this process-and faculty and students feel an implicit disrespect and disregard at best and at worst disdain and invisibility. Faculty is seldom involved in making financial allocations or decisions for the institution as a whole-coalition building is not a strategy at Columbia.

Columbia College is a very unique and special place! It provides students the opportunity to learn and grow academically and artistically. It is a great place to work and learn. But with the increase in enrollment, new administrative leaders, and the changes on campus (new buildings, residences...), the college is in a state of transition. Communication and collaboration across the departments is more crucial to the health of the institution than ever. In many ways, Columbia is sitting on a winning lottery ticket, but not quite sure how to cash it in.

Despite its many flaws, Columbia is an excellent institution that accomplishes its mission with many of its students much of the time.

In my perception the greatest problem for Columbia is that not enough is being done to build lasting financial resources through large donor contributions for endowments. The layer of bureaucratic positions-deans were intended to address this, but so far isn't being adequately utilized. Dissatisfaction among some full-time faculty has been related to me. It seems rather serious. The level of expectations of them has increased. Quality of students has increased steadily in my 15 years here. The College is doing a lot to promote that.

In light of the large number of part-time teachers at Columbia, would be desirable to consider features that are especially impacted by this significant facet-e.g., turnover (teacher), relations between full and part-time teachers, etc.

The administration is too top-down. Decisions are not allowed to come from the bottom up. The administrators are changing the mission and nature of the college by "stealth", e.g., by recruiting select populations. There is no national leadership on important issues like getting more student aid from the federal government. Lots of effort goes into "show" but classrooms are left in squalor. Assessment of efforts with students out of class is anecdotal and not systematic. Mid-level administrators are not up to date in training or skills. I love this place, but I fear we are losing our edge and selling out. Some areas get attention, others are ignored.

My position is rather unique-with no interaction with college students, so perhaps I'm not the ideal candidate to poll. The college is definitely doing a better job with its image and branding (finally updating its logo and literature to actually look like an arts institution). There are definitely problems-I feel departments isolate themselves, view their equipment and space as "theirs" instead of viewing it as "ours." Seems to be a lot of confusion in institutional advancement-but they are trying to work it out. Overall, Columbia has a lot of potential that I believe in and I do enjoy my job and the environment. We are moving in the right direction, I think.

I feel that the current administration is commercializing the college, and while it is good to broaden the school's reputation, I fear changes that threaten to diminish the unique culture of the college-the very thing which has attracted students and kept them. I am greatly concerned that the school is becoming too concerned with appearance over substance. Are we an arts and communication college or a McSchool? Are we artists or star______ (bleep)? Teachers or bureaucrats?

I don't believe the administration is allocating funds in a manner that is sensitive to the needs of all departments. The budgeting process seems to be in an immovable rut. Too much funding is going to making paper flyers, posters, postcards-unevenly. Too much funding is going to manifest. The institution at times confuses quantity with quality. Sometimes there is too much change too fast. I feel overwhelmed with product, the ovation and performance and miss depth and wisdom and stability overall in the institution. The unique needs and characteristics of the graduate programs are often overlooked.

Health benefits on a pace with those of full-time faculty should be immediately activated for adjunct faculty.

Over the time I have been here many ideas and innovations have come and gone. This is the first time I have been asked to give feedback. My biggest fear is that it is all for nothing. I really don't think there will be a serious evaluation of the data. It seems as though as the wind blows so do the college's whims go. I am jaded but perhaps I have been kicked in the head so many times that I can't be optimistic any longer.

I have seen morale plummet under the current administration while we have amazing, overworked, underappreciated deans, the top level administration and Board have failed to support them, their chairs, and the faculty on so many fronts that it is sometimes difficult to continue with work that so many of us have believed in.

There are two academic communities within Columbia: those within the communications arts and those within the liberal arts. Members of the former tend to be highly engaged professionally; members of the latter, less so. It is therefore difficult to answer questions 22-24 on page 6 because those questions lump both academic communities together. Without differentiation, estimates are less than useful.

It is also difficult to answer questions about administration and administrators because those questions, too, lump all administrators together. My judgment of senior administrators is negative; that of chairs, positive.

The previous president received a salary commensurate with presidents of institutions with endowments over 1 billion dollars; at that time, Columbia's was approximately 50 million. I see little in the expenditures and actions by some of our senior administrators to allow me to trust that this unfortunate pattern has ceased. Students come to Columbia for the teachers; no student comes because of administrators. Senior administrators are, of course, accountable to the Board--small consolation in that the Board blessed the previous president's salary and actions.

The movement to unionize the staff is testimony to a lack of trust in the administration. This movement, whether successful or not, could have been easily avoided by genuine concern and genuine truth-telling. What a waste.

We are experiencing increasing bureaucratization. It is bleeding the institution financially while producing little of worth.

It should be a high priority that our governance and bureaucracy be overhauled and made lean and productive.

As a general characterization, deans and associate deans have become meddlesome pencil-pushers, drowning their schools in bureaucratic procedure while making timely, street-smart decisions difficult. Historically, this institution survived because administrators looked beyond the four walls of the institution to the real world, and then made flexible, inexpensive and timely adjustments.

Internships need to be handled by the portfolio center as they had been in the past. There is not enough faculty time and energy to actively seek and investigate meaningful internship opportunities for our students. Our students will suffer professionally without a full-time staff person devoted to this job exclusively.

The College must become more inclusive toward adjunct faculty members. Adjuncts should be allowed to attend the annual faculty retreat, have business cards, and allowed to participate in all development grants programs offered by the College. There is something akin to a "segregationist" mindset toward adjunct faculty and they account for or represent the overwhelming majority among overall faculty.

In regard to the 2010 planning conversations are being held in secular groups but there has not been a lot of cross-departmental collaboration-not encouraged and not engaged as a faculty to consider this possibility as an asset to both departments. There need to be an education of faculty and a mandate to change! Department chairs are like the kings of their domain and are not very open to change-assistant chairs seem to have fresher ideas and potential fertile ground for innovation.

I think the school is too tuition driven-becomes corporate model of "grow or die."

I think there are too few academic department support staff. The faculty is swamped with professional and "clerical" work.

School doesn't look to what other schools are doing. "Reinvents the wheel" with every decision.

Large reliance on part-time faculty, many of whom aren't truly invested or kept abreast of campus life.

When I started to work at Columbia almost ten years ago, the school was very divided and non-cooperative between departments. There were a lot of good traits like loyalty and pride in accomplishments, but the school was remarkably behind in a lot of areas, especially technology. The changes that have happened lately seem to me to be noteworthy and very encouraging. There is a lot more communication and cooperation between departments, and the leadership brings us all together toward a common goal. I didn't feel this during the first years I was here. Although we are on the right track, the communication should still be improved further. There are still a few departments that have a bunker mentality, seeing other departments as the enemy. Some of the legacy remains. But I am glad that I stayed here because I see such wonderful changes and potential for even more.

Columbia College Chicago has been a wonderful place for our students, teachers, and staff, vibrant and rich in its mission to afford arts education to a broad and diverse community of students on an open-admissions basis. This has recently become less true and more problematic given the effort by top administrators to make Columbia a corporate entity plastered all over with flashy branding and crass color schemes rather than ideas and creativity. Bring back the real Columbia.
This is a good college.

Some questions are difficult to answer because inequity is not uncommon; therefore, a question as Section 10, #14 is true in some areas and not others, depending upon VP.

The highest leadership at Columbia are very disappointing. The Provost has no idea how to support faculty development. He has weakened the College by eliminating the Graduate School Dean position and is not connected to Chicago as the context for Columbia. I am embarrassed by our President. He has brought in very little financial resources, although he promised to do so during his job interviews on campus. Columbia desperately needs better leadership at the Provost and President level.

I have seen the morale of this institution decline. Fear has been instilled with the firings of individuals. Not enough money is brought in and students feel the crunch. We seem to forget at times that we are here for the students. The family atmosphere has changed to corporate. I don't feel the love I once did. I do my job for the students and their future, but I fear for them as well. There are a lot of good people here, but I think sometimes the bad outweigh them. This is a wonderful place that needs a positive facelift to bring it back (am I fired yet?).

There is poor communication between the management and staff. Projects are not always thought out before implementation. In a lot of administrative offices the staff is only allowed to speak to their supervisor and not the head of the department. Due to this it is hard to sell ideas, get needed resources and set goals. It turns out that the supervisors are speaking for us and not always to our advantage. Staff should not be closed off from the top level of management.

I felt the questions to be too detailed regarding demographics. If you were to look at the numbers of people employed in the various categories you would notice at least one area the number is extremely small...some departments are also extremely small. So I do not feel my identity would be safe. Those pages and questions (race, etc.) should be optional. The fact that I am an employee and however I was selected already proves this would never be totally anonymous.

Academic leadership at the Provost level seems absent. Monies are being wasted.

I think Columbia is experiencing a great deal of change, but we still don't have everyone on board which causes conflict. There are some who still want to run this like a 1500 student school, who resist the change and development.

As a part-time faculty member in the film department, I am not privy to income/resource information. My responses were film/video centered. I think the department does well with what they have over all the school could benefit by higher standards both on the faculty hiring and especially with incoming students. The open enrollment policy, I feel, prevents us from ever going beyond a certain place.

I came to Columbia College Chicago from outside the U.S. at the time restructuring into academic schools was implemented. I believe the college has undergone huge change in that time, most for the better. I think there is still a way to go with self-belief. There is a residue of uncertainty about the college's right to lead the world in its field of focus. There are a number of employees (faculty and staff) who have been at Columbia so long they have lost confidence in their place in the world beyond Columbia. Many react by being defensive about change because change might bring that few closer to home. Do they ever have a place at Columbia any more? I understand the few but from my perspective the interests of present and future students are paramount. They come before faculty and staff, me (and all administrators) included.

The current administration of the college seems to put a great deal of emphasis on the college's image and none on the quality or relevance of instruction. Dr. Carter and his administration are far more interested in the 'flash' than the substance of education. Since becoming president, his administration has spent a fortune on several costly 'image-enhancing' programs (new logos and letterhead, repainting campus buildings, etc.) purchased and rehabbed a mansion for him to live in, brought celebrities to campus (Ben Vereen, Lauren Bacall, etc.), and generally run the college as if we were the Disney Corporation rather than an institution of higher learning. Through all of this, tuition has increased steadily while funds for scholarships have decreased. His much-touted 'Columbia 2010' plan wants to make the college more 'student-centered', without defining what that means or why that is necessary. I am not aware of any initiative put forth by Dr. Carter or his administration that has been focused on improving retention, the curriculum, or the relevance of what is taught in the classroom; or of any effort on his part to make the college a more affordable or accessible place for our students. Dr. Carter and his administration have adopted the stance that the staff and faculty are expendable. Besides opposing attempts by the staff to unionize (going so far as to make people 'supervisors' in order to disqualify as many eligible voters as possible), Carter has established a pattern of 'restructuring' departments that result in long-time employees being pushed out of jobs in favor of his hand-picked hires - i.e. the restructuring of the Development Office into 'Institutional Advancement', with more employees earning higher salaries and garnering fewer results in the way of fundraising. The administration has also recently implemented a new vacation and sick day tracking system that treats staff like hourly employees without paying them for overtime, and denied a faculty initiative to decrease teaching loads. Based on the Institution-Specific questions, the point of this survey seems to be to garner support for a costly new Student Center. While I agree that such a facility is needed; the bigger question that no one is asking is 'Why should students continue to come to Columbia?' when we offer a high-priced, low quality education that focuses only on what's current, not what is meaningful in the long-run. New skills, new technology and new techniques can be acquired throughout one's career, regardless of your discipline. The fundamental skills, i.e. critical thinking, theory, aesthetics, and history, need to be mastered before the latest trend can be applied in a meaningful way. The college's focus on celebrity, marketing, and image is detrimental to the learning environment; the students get the message that it is who you know, not what you know, that is important. I think the need for a new college president far outweighs the need for a new student center.

I feel out of the administrative information loop. The occasional email concerning college news is just not enough. As a part-time instructor, I don't feel my input is very welcome or valued. I appreciate the steps they have taken, especially the unionization of the part-time staff. That makes policies seem much more equitable.

I think the college should address the following ASAP:

Lack of scholarships/grants for low income students who rely on loans too much

Lack of respect for staff and the contribution they make to the college

Disconnect between the school's "mission" and current admission/financial and policies and sensitivity of faculty to diverse student population

Columbia is still tuition driven after 25 years of attempting to address this issue.

The questions concerning the institution are too broad. Most faculty have more awareness of just their department.

Columbia's great strength is that the faculty and administrators in each department are working professionals in their field. The students get the benefit of true artists and their real-life real world experience. This is also Columbia's greatest weakness in that such artists are often less organized, easily distracted and bound to tangents and caprice. It would seem the trade-off is worthwhile (if occasionally frustrating).

Columbia College is an amazing place that I feel proud to be a part of. Nonetheless, the college needs to face up to several fundamental failures of its identity and mission within the current financial, educational, and professional context of the global 21 st century. I (and many other junior full-time faculty) feel very strongly that we would only benefit our students by reducing enrollment and enforcing admissions guidelines. We graduate far too many students into fields that cannot support them and far too many of these students were underprepared for college and therefore took poor advantage of the Columbia learning environment, graduating with insufficient skills and an enormous debt burden. We are taking advantage of an increasingly large segment of our student populace by taking too much of their money (financial aid sucks here).

The administration needs to reach out to include more staff and faculty feedback in their thinking.

I feel that there is a giant disconnect between top administration and the rank and file faculty and staff. While I feel very positive and invested in my job and my department, and think that many others do too, I don't feel that top administration has any interest in, responsiveness to, or accountability to the people who form the backbone of the college and who strive to preserve and execute our mission everyday. We kick ass despite the administration, not because of it.

More standardization in the job descriptions and actual work loads of middle managers including department chairs and program directors would help the entire college community significantly.

Columbia College Chicago is a wonderful place to teach because of the creativity, intensity, and variety of its students, and the expertise and involvement of its faculty.

I have brought the survey, and subsequently you all reading this, out to dinner. A cute joint on the North Side. I had the tuna melt on corn bread. Great eats. But I digress. I am a supporter of the college but since you asked about my concerns: space on a vertical campus in a major metro area is tight but we're busting at the seams on the department's floor. The super dorm-while pretty-should have included "all" student spaces and faculty resources, gym, garage, etc. Love the library more a few years back, and they are doing a good job. Alas, the check has arrived-no, I'll get it-you all will do the right thing. Just keep the dialogue open with the kids. They work hard, raise familiar, keep your ears open to them-heck, just get the top brass out in the buildings more often-god forbid surprise us with a visit-we and they don't always need an invitation, a soda and a microphone to dialogue. Ride the elevator with six undergrads one day-you'll hear all you need to know. Good luck.

I have seen Columbia make major strides over the past seven years I have been with the college. The students have improved in terms of their commitment to learning and their professional goals. It has been a pleasure to see the growth. As a student of organizational structure and leadership this is a major accomplishment. It appears now to be time to focus more on establishing better communication internally among administration and faculty. We are growing so much into an interdisciplinary world and there needs to be better communication among administration-faculty and departments to continue the effects toward needing our goals. Personally, it is a pleasure teaching at Columbia because of the students. I learn a great deal from being with them. I also appreciate being given the opportunity to evaluate Columbia.

We need to work on space shortage-classrooms, equipment, performance space, student lockers, storage space.

I'm concerned about the level of disconnect between the top administrators and those "on the ground," especially the part-time faculty who are doing most of the teaching but often completely disengaged from setting policy. I'm also concerned and confused by the redundancy among areas-departments duplication functions in "silos," rather than consolidating and collaborating. The benefits of more collaboration (interdepartmentally) would be both financial and academic, allowing areas to grow from the influx of ideas from others.

Since I am part-time, I have a couple other jobs to support the family-I would like to stay more well-informed but one can only be stretched to take in all the info so far. I don't much of the school as a whole but I do know the success of our graduate students vs. students, artists and alumni in the Book and Paper Program.

The marketing of education has become more important than the quality of education more often than not at many institutions. If we only chase enrollment, how do we achieve academic excellence? It is better to focus on the learning environment than style. Students want to learn more than simply book work.

Bottom line, communication is key across the board. Some info does trickle down but not enough details. Every place of business has its problems, but overall I believe Columbia is doing its best to address the challenge at hand and move forward to achieve its goals and mission.

In my opinion, Columbia College has turned away from its original mission as an "alternative" college where the faculty and students were dedicated to creating an open, honest enrollment for learning and an exchange of ideas. It now feels more like any other college, where the bureaucracy and leadership are more concerned with raising money for physical structures and appearances rather than keeping abreast of the latest trends in the arts and the businesses which we are supposed to be preparing our students to enter into after graduation. The shrinking number of African American students and difficulty in attracting Hispanic faculty are symptoms of the problem.

I am concerned that Columbia is being "corporatized." It is our personal and individual experiences as artists and students that motivate us and inform the goals and decisions we make as faculty, staff, and students. It is very difficult to place our trust in top administrators who are not fundamentally "one of us." In the conflict that flows from this difference, it is not the executives that will become better artists, teachers, or students, but it is the artists, teachers and students that will be forced to become better executives.

Many students commute to this institution. Therefore, the opportunity to network is very limited, which poses a problem upon graduation.

I feel that as a part-time faculty member, my contributions are not valued and are underrepresented by the program director and tenure track faculty that have the opportunities to represent them to decisionmakers.

Columbia is a unique institution because what people are learning here is not like other degrees. Students have to be real self-starters, there is no set "career path" for most jobs in the film/video world. I wish the film/video department was more embracing of the new technologies that are transforming the business.

I have been teaching at Columbia College for 20 years. I started with a B.A. They held my position for 3 years while I earned a MFA degree. The college has grown and grown up in a healthy way. There is diversity within diversity and today the students are better prepared for college. The weakest element of all students is that their ability to write a good paper, much less a good paragraph, is weak-very weak. The school has a "million" computers, the technical devices are first rate, but most students' ability to write is weak. Columbia College is unionized but part-time faculty has yet to receive health care services. It is a happy place to work. But interdepartmental communication could be better.

Changes in administration are not making the school better. Administrators that are attracted to this school are not very good and have made decisions that weaken the school. I agree that the size of the school necessitates more standardization and some more bureaucracy, but new people coming in seem to ignore the staff and faculty that have been here for years in both decisionmaking and execution. The branding exercise was good in thought but hideous and overly costly in execution and ignored the departments that worked in those buildings and disrupted (and still disrupt) their function. We seem to get people here that were let go from previous jobs for good reason.

Considering the previous administration to Dr. Carter had been overly creative concerning real estate "purchases" and pension obligations, I feel he and his peers have done a fine job in positioning CCC for financial stability. There are trends in American Letters that CCC is part of. These trends do not in my opinion bode well for the future. I would like to highlight that adjunct or part-time faculty perform the lion's share of teaching and receive wages for this toil. This toil enjoys such basics as healthcare, pension, sabbatical and professional development stipends. If these benefits are not forthcoming to the employees whose efforts created this wealth, why should they stay in the profession? Think about it. Each semester the part-timers teach classes, the revenue of which is in the millions of dollars. How much of that is returned to them as wages and quality of life?

One of the institution's concepts of expanding its academic offerings is to allow 4 separate departments to offer the same or similar classes-course duplications. The Science Institute and the Science/Math Department and the English Department and the Fiction Department each are victims of course duplication. In the case of the Fiction Department, their "literature" offerings would not be accepted by an out of the way institution in this country. The administration needs to address this concern. Too much bad blood and poor teaching has gone on for too long.

I feel Columbia should have more programs for adults. Many people change careers, and Columbia should be a school that they can consider. I also feel that it's very difficult to be promoted to higher positions and would like very much to see the administration work on that with regard to support staff especially. Columbia should also make space for staff. They purchase many buildings; however, we only have 1 lounge that must be shared with faculty.

I don't have enough information to accurately answer many of these questions. I know very little about the administrative side of the college. If you want a real idea of what happens at the college, ask the students. I was a student and now faculty and I feel very isolated and that there isn't a lot of communication, especially between departments. I'm sorry I couldn't give a better amount of information, but maybe the lack of my information is a clue too.

This is a perfect time for the Leadership of CCC to take a more aggressive approach in sharing with everyone what the college direction will be, starting with Columbia 2010. We spend too much time apologizing for Columbia 2010.

More staff and faculty across the board should be involved with the task and strategy of Columbia 2010, not decisionmaking, just task and strategy.

The college should have more role clarity from the board, to the President's Cabinet to the President's Council. Each of the roles should be clear and defined and then communicated to everyone. Also, the college should define the decisionmaking process and communicate the decisionmaking process to everyone.

Columbia is outgrowing its current space. Students and staff are feeling the crush.

We have a great institution.

One good aspect about Columbia is that it costs half the amount of other four-year institutions. The college also has something unique, a good writing center.

Because I am a part-time faculty member and because of the way our college is structured, all of the questions asked here, I have responded to vis a vis the theater department and not the college as a whole. Each department operates uniquely and specifically within the college. The chairperson of my department communicates with all of us regularly and does a good job of reporting the concerns of the college to us at semester meetings. On the other hand, part-time faculty members are very much out of the loop when it comes to the administrative and budgetary concerns of the college.

Please note that some earlier questions in this survey I am unable to answer as my position does not include these insights into the plans of the college.

It's a shame for any college/university to hire so many part-time instructors. It's a deplorable practice. Shame on you, Columbia.

Columbia was a more caring place previously, or maybe I just thought so. I also felt that the administration previously was more sensitive to the faculty. However, I actually have knowledge of many incidents recently where I actually know that the administration has no idea of the expertise of the faculty and what they are capable of. Perfect examples are the changes that have been made for the color and carpet choices in all of the buildings. Working with someone who actually knows and has experience in mixing color could have averted the terrible color decisions that were made last summer. Also, what student who cares about the quality of their work would allow the horrible prints of their work to hang on the side of the building? Choosing yellow carpet blocks for the Art and Design Department floors was another unbelievable decision. The college has become way too corporate lately. Another smart decision is to sponsor marching bands in a parade when never in a lifetime would Columbia College ever have had a marching band of their own! The expensive house and salary for the president is absurd. Many faculty are so underpaid for what they have contributed to this school that it is laughable. The mission of this college was never about spending huge sums of money for advertising and decorating that do nothing to improve the college. A college should try to behave in a somewhat intelligent manner.

Columbia College is a creative arts institution where a student can accomplish practical goals in field of the arts. It does a great job in fulfilling its mission and this is reflected in the growing student body.

Many questions ask about faculty members without specifying part-time or full-time. The part-time experience is quite unique at this and many other colleges. There were many queries I had to answer as 3 because part-time was a 1 and full-time was a 5. We are fragmented by departments and by buildings and by scheduling complications (those of PT cannot be controlled/dictated by the college). Security, even of locked faculty offices after hours, is almost non-existent. Now the issue of college liability for personal items of PT faculty that were stolen from locked rooms is being explored. Commonly there is a warning or artist rendering of a rapist taped up by the elevators.

For further information, please contact: hwexler@colum.edu