Allison Newman's letter ("RPI's Jackson is an asset to region," July 19) does not accurately reflect the view of the RPI community. In fact, it highlights the disconnect between the school's administration and the students/faculty.
The policy of the administration's response to well-founded and constructive criticism has long been one of dictatorial condemnation or, in this case, inflated arrogance.
This latest account of Dr. Shirley Ann Jackson's monetary value is unrelated to the great things accomplished by RPI students and faculty. In no way is it a slight against woman in STEM, nor is it an attack on the RPI community. To think that something so inconsequential would merit this type of response is truly upsetting.
Given this reaction, imagine the administration's response to actual criticism, and the fate of anyone at RPI that might want to change things in a positive way.
The global perception of RPI is changing, and not necessarily for the better. Your article is one of many that alert us to this fact. While this truth may not matter to the administration or trustees as the cash flow continues, as a young engineer who graduated from RPI in 2011 and is just beginning his career, it matters to me. I can only hope that my degree from RPI will continue to represent my outstanding training as an engineer, and not an acceptance of an intolerant and paranoid school administration.
Robert M. Chase
Troy
