TAGS
ON CAMPUS
STUDENT LIFE
OFF CAMPUS
EDUCATION

GOVERNMENT
MONEY
COOL
VARSITY BLUES
UTSU
ADMINISTRATION
BIOLOGY
ART
MUSIC
FOOD & DRINK
ELECTIONS
IN THE LAB
FACULTY
TECHNOLOGY
HEALTH
FILM
PROFILE
NUMBERS
INTERVIEW
LITERATURE
PSYCH
BRIEFS
THEATRE
LOVE & SEX
DESIGN
GENDER
ENVIRONMENT
LONG FORM
POP CULTURE
THE VARSITY
SPACE
LAW
PRO SPORTS
SIMCOE HALL
TORONTO
HUMAN RIGHTS
MISSISSAUGA
UTSU DEFEDERATION
FROSH
SCARBOROUGH
PHOTOGRAPHY
INFOGRAPHICS
FAITH
BEST OF 2012
GUIDES
LGBTQ
FASHION
RACE
DRUGS
ALUMNI
EUREKA
EDITORIAL
DANCE
SGRT
RELIGION
JOURNALISM
INTRAMURALS
JOB MARKET
COMMUTE
INVESTIGATIVE
PODCAST
University of Toronto's Student Newspaper Since 1880

Munk School hits its stride

Two years on, The Varsity checks in to see how the university’s $35 million investment in a new school for international affairs has fared

By Irina Vukosavic
Published: 3:47 am, 22 October 2012
Vol CXXXIII, No. 07 under
BERNARDA GOSPIC/THE VARSITY

With an initial $35 million investment from Barrick Gold chairman Peter Munk in 2010, a new building on Bloor for the flagship Masters of Global Affairs program, and the promise of giving students a unique window on the world, the legacy of the Munk School of Global Affairs has so far engendered both prestige and controversy.

Launched in 2010, the Munk School of Global Affairs has re- cently seen its first cohort convocate and make their way into the workforce. The school’s academic initatives and ground- breaking research regularly make international headlines.

Since its inception, the Munk School has been dogged by allegations of undue corporate influence among a handful of outspoken groups on campus, many of whom object to the fact that a mining mogul like namesake donor Munk is so heavily invested at U of T.

“Perhaps the main problem with the Munk contract, which President Naylor signed to establish the Munk School, is that it effectively cedes decision-making power to the corporate sector,” says Jacob Nerenberg, a graduate anthropology student at U of T, in a previous exchange over email.

Sakura Saunders, co-editor of anti-Munk website ProtestBarrick.net, claims that Peter Munk’s mining company Barrick Gold is “leveraging the reputation of the university to avoid government regulation on mining abuses.”

Students at the Munk School tell a different story.

“Never once in my time here have I seen, in light of Peter Munk’s donation, even the slightest indication of impeded academic freedom in any way,” says Graham Smith, currently half-way through the school’s flagship Masters of Global Af- fairs (MGA) program.

Janice Stein, director at the Munk School, says that academic freedom is “in our DNA,” and that students are “free to express their opinions and develop arguments that are supported by the best evidence that they can find.”

In spite of the initial furor over Munk’s influence, it’s hard to ignore how far the Munk School has come in just two short years. The new building on Bloor Street provides a home for the MGA program, doubling the amount of space for students, faculty, and staff. An official ribbon-cutting ceremony hosted in late September was attended by senior administrators from Simcoe Hall as well as provincial cabinet ministers.

Some younger programs like the Global Journalism Fellow- ships, which were launched in September, seem to be getting a strong reception already, turning heads in places like Harvard’s Nieman Journalism Lab or the headlines of The Globe and Mail.

“Now all of our Fellows are reporting stories for major me- dia; all have pitched stories successfully; some have already been published. Others are in the queue. That’s a lot of prog- ress for a month!” says Robert Steiner, director of the journal- ism fellowship program.

The secret to this rapid and high-profile success, according to students and administrators, is the Munk School’s primary goal of combining real-world experience and lecture material.

“The MGA program is very focused on linking theoretical knowledge and practice of international affairs,” said Smith. “It’s endowing in us professional skills and networks to tap into so that when we get out of here, we can hit the ground running in global affairs careers.”

Fariya Mohiuddin, part of the first cohort of students to graduate from the MGA program, says that it’s the perfect way to pursue higher learning without giving up network- ing and practical skills. She explains that instead of going the traditional route of doing a masters degree and an entry-level position afterwards, MGA graduates can go straight into the professional world.

One of the ways the Munk School provides practical expe- rience, said Mohiuddin, is through the first-year internship program. Although other students suggested that the initial round of internship assignments was bumpy as the school was still brand new and coming into its own, Mohiuddin’s experience — helping the government prep for the annual budget in Bangladesh — was an “incredibly positive experi- ence.” Other students within the program say much the same about their placements.

“I interned at the World Bank in Washington this past sum- mer and it was an amazing opportunity,” says Smith. “Being at a major multi-lateral institution like that, I had so many con- tacts and experiences unparalleled to anything I may have got- ten at another graduate program.”

Another reason for the Munk School’s success, say students, is the receptivity of the faculty. The new “2.0 MGA program,” as Mohiuddin calls it, has been adjusted and tinkered with over the past two years.

“We have received a lot of valuable feedback from the first graduating class of MGA students and have extensively re- vamped our Capstone course to enhance the professional edu- cation that students get,” says Ron Levi, program director for the MGA program.

The Capstone course, Levi says, now offers students re- search opportunities in experimental labs and research proj- ects across campus. For example, professor Joseph Wong’s new interdisciplinary “Global Challenges” course is taught in col- laboration with colleagues from the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering, the Rotman School of Management, and the Dalla Lana School of Public Health. Those kinds of innovative, cross-faculty courses, says Mohiuddin, weren’t offered in her first year at Munk.

“We knew what we were getting ourselves into, but at the end we all knew we were doing something monumental,” says Mohiuddin.

Stein says this is just the beginning. Her hope is that the MGA program “will be among the best programs internation- ally, a program that students around the world look to as an ex- ample of professional education that is infused with Canadian knowledge and expertise.”

  • janice stein is a hypocrite!

    I remember there was a Munk OUT of UofT meeting that Janice Stein attended unexpectedly. She was given the first 5 minutes to present her case and answer questions. One of the people at the meeting was then UTSU Executive Director, Angela Regnier. She asked Janice Stein about academic freedom and what Stein thought of the SLAPP suit that Barrick had against 3 academics in Quebec. Stein admitted that she knew nothing of this case, and took down Angela’s contact info so that she could get back to her. The next day, Angela received a threatening letter from Barrick’s lawyers, explaining that they were concerned with libelous information spread by the Munk OUT of UofT campaign. They followed this with a threatening phone call. Luckily, one of Angela’s passions in life is academic freedom… so, undetered… she spoke out against this blatant attempt at intimidation. Janice Stein is a hypocrite and a shame to the school. Munk OUT of UofT!

    • Ron Thom

      My initial reaction to Munk OUT was to say stop making trouble out of nothing. Pipe down and spend your time doing more productive things. But I encourage anyone else who has this same reaction to look up Munk OUT and read a bit before they decide that this group is whacked. Sure, I believe Janice Stein that academic freedom is not impinged by the source of funding. But Barrick Gold and Peter Munk have some pretty serious potentially criminal accusations to answer. Read up before you judge. Barrick Gold has a lot of answering to do.

  • MGA Student

    As a student of the MGA program, I can wholeheartedly agree with the analysis made by Graham Smith regarding the lack of political tilt in the classroom. I have never felt like my academic experience has been in any way impeded by the corporate donation by Peter Munk. As much as I’d like to be sympathetic to those who are so whole-heartedly opposed to the Munk school, I simply cannot without feeling like in some way I’ve given up my integrity and admitted to being a fool.

    Please, those who are outside of the program, actually talk to those of us going through the program before spreading your own form of slander. The quality of my graduate education is no less than the quality of graduate education available through any of the other faculties at the school, and I’d like to think of us as one big happy U of T community rather than an isolated subgroup subject to a zealous group of opponents.

    I may not personally agree with everything Peter Munk does, and I most certainly don’t believe in everything Barrick Gold does, but I find it extremely difficult to have any sympathy for those militant groups so opposed to the school. I have learned more, both about myself and about the world at large, in my brief time at Munk than I did throughout my entire undergraduate career.

    Further, I find the story illustrated in the comments below somewhat unbelievable. It seems quite unlikely that Barrick gold would care about what a student said at a meeting against a school that their company’s owner had helped fund. And if they did, I am absolutely certain that their issue with Angela Regnier was due to more than a simple comment about a lawsuit, which is public domain in any case. The threat, if it is real, was surely do to a culmination of activity, and to imply that Janice Stein is to blame is slanderous.

    One thing I hope to take from my time at the MGA is an ability to increase universal access to education, seems odd to me that in a country like Canada there would still be those who seek to restrict the education of some based on personal values and beliefs.

    • Anon

      Do you feel bad at all that your funding is coming from the profits of genocide?

      • Ron Thom

        Billy Sunday’s philosophy on unrestricted gifts from nefarious sources: “The Devil’s had it long enough– quickly cash the check.”

        • Anon

          Billy Sunday should think harder. There’s no such thing as a free lunch.

      • MGA Student

        Yes. I also feel bad when I buy Nike products, or that the earrings I inherited from a grandparent have small stones I do not know the source of. I feel bad when I drive my car, or fly in a plane because it means that I am contributing to the global environmental crisis. I generally feel guilty for the fact that I live in a safe country when so much of the world lives in constant fear, I feel guilty that I can afford the roof over my head and the food in my belly when so many others cannot.

        A key element of the program is opening dialogue and creating a space in which we can debate ways to improve these injustices, improve the international spaces so that they are legitimate enough to actually provide social and transitive justice and hold a real impact on the victims of the world.

        I can’t avoid doing all these things because I feel bad. I can’t avoid all conflict money (look at the items around your house, the clothes you wear, your jewelry, the car you drive – look at the things you do everyday – can you truly say that you know the sustainable and proper source of all these items and activities? are you truly blameless as well? or do you just know a lot about one man, one issue?) because to do so would be utterly impossible. Maybe he is guilty of genocide, and maybe your hyperbole is right and that all the funding for the school was directly resultant from genocide. To be honest, I’m skeptical. And in the meantime, taking away my opportunity to education most certainly isn’t contributing to justice for the victims who have suffered. All it does is shut down another centre of open discussion and debate, thus closing another potential avenue towards global solutions.

        • Anon

          I don’t wear clothes made in sweat shops. You can always be moral.

        • really

          Well yes, but if you really do feel bad, you can always be more proactive in the smallest of ways. Every dollar is your vote. When you’re spending money for any organization, you are essentially supporting everything that organization does, whether you are conscious of it or not. You can voice your rejection simply by NOT buying Nike products, using a hybrid car, carpool or public transit, etc., especially when there are so many other options out there.

          I, for one, try to buy local whenever I can (instead of the going to a large chain, I can easily find something from a lesser-known store, or buy a product that was made in Canada), buy clothes that I know are not made from sweat shops, make sure the eggs that I buy are free range, buy products that are certified organic, and buy fair trade items whenever I can. I’m a poor student as well, but these causes are far greater than my own needs, so I don’t feel bad shelling out a bit of extra money when I can afford to.

        • missing the point

          this is not a question of consumer politics (boring and useless anyway) or ‘feeling bad’ – this is a question of munk school running off resources that are being taken away by other units that Naylor and Munk etc. have decided are not worthy, not fundable, not amenable to global governance and the interests of transnational capital, the global security counter-terror apparatus, etc. Governing council never even had the opportunity to examine the Munk Contract; at the same time as Naylor passed it in secret, he and his posse were slashing social science budgets and trying to shut down a dozen or so units. The happy debates you all are having are coming at the expense of a wider community of debaters and thinkers and students and teachers, who see where the cash is and have the choice to collaborate with Munk or find a new job. And no, I don’t think your debates are all that interesting – I see what kind of people teach your courses on how to track down terrorists and how to stabilize world capitalism.

          • ReallyMissingthePoint

            What kind of people teach my classes? You’ve met them have you? and you’ve sat in on the classes where we learn how to “track down terrorists and stabilize world capitalism”? Gosh. You seem to be getting a far more direct form of education from my school than I am, I have yet to learn how to track down a terrorist OR how to stabilize global capitalism.

            Above posters seem to be making pretty broad spectrum assumptions about my own personal political leanings and moralities based solely on my defense of my school and education. My being a student does not make me complicit in any perceived inequalities in the distribution of university funds and resources. Nor does my attendance at an institution, in particular one the size of the University of Toronto, impose upon anyone else the inability to attend classes and programs of their own. I am sorry that the university is shutting down other programs, my undergraduate program at the university where I attained my degree was also recently closed, and that’s too bad, but it is also the way that universities function.

            As to the students and teachers and thinkers and debaters who have opted not to participate due to the association with Munk: How is this any different from any other institution in any other area of the world? Academia has historically always been promoted, funded, and supported by all-too-human characters. And programs and universities have always been boycotted/protested/bemoaned as a result. I do not view this as being any different. If Munk was shut down, it doesn’t hurt Peter Munk or Barrick Gold, but rather those of us who are attending, and who plan to attend.

            What would you have a student, who disagrees with the action of Barrick gold, but who has a driven, simplistic desire to learn more about the world and our interactions as global citizens within it, do? Should I forgo my own education, continue working a job that leaves me unfulfilled, unsatisfied, unstimulated and underappreciated? Should I disregard my impulses and urges to know more and to have a broader conversation with peers who are just as passionate about helping to improve the world for everyone in it because of the (all due respect, but do your research) ill-informed opinions of someone reading an online news article? Should I abandon the opportunities I have worked so hard to access? I don’t see how this would help anyone at all. I’m stunned how when in doubt, people’s instincts are “shut down that ‘school/teacher/thinker/organization’”. When have burning the books and closing the classrooms ever led to a more open and conversant society?

    • now be reasonable

      I think that the tilt that you claim does not exist might just be invisible to you. Please read the Munk Primer on the MunkOUTofUofT website to find out more of what I’m talking about. This IS something that literacy around can counteract. And please don’t characterize those that oppose the Munk’s donation as militants… it is a very reasonable thing to oppose his influence at the school. Militancy is a tactical decision, opposing Munk’s influence at the University is common sense. I feel like you are biased in the way that you are approaching this situation and it is evident in the language that you use.

  • Hardy Weinberg

    Why are people so much against Alvin and the Chipmunk? They are soo adorable.
    Oh wait this is about Peter Munk, who is also adorable, if you ignore human rights abuses by barrick Gold. But remember Adorable Rights ALWAYS TRUMPS Human Rights! ALVIN, SIMON & PETER MUNK!

  • MGA Student, Class 2014

    There’s nothing bad to say on the MGA program. We are making history by being part of the best Global Affairs school in the world. It is still early, but in a few years the MGA program and the Munk School will be one of the leading voices in the field of Global Affairs, equal to Harvard’s Kennedy School, Georgetown school of Foreign Service and others.

  • missing the point

    Framing the issue as a narrow question of whether or not Munk has ‘undue influence in the classroom’ (easily disputed by passionate proclamations about freedom being ‘in our dna’ (!)) or as a question of ‘blood money’ from mining operations kinda misses the point of how the Munk School was established not so much (or rather not only) through Barrick Gold funding but through UofT funding and government funding to UofT – funding that UofT was cutting from other programs, funding that the government was saying it could no longer afford to invest in things like social sciences or facilities for all students. The author provides as evidence of the Munk School’s ‘success’ the fact that it has new buildings and gets cited in the media. Exactly: the Munk School, and Barrick Gold/Peter Munk, have successfully hijacked UofT and manipulated the process of academic and infrastructural planning such that UofT and government resources now go massively and first to Munk, second and in reduced amounts to other programs. Had there been any remotely democratic oversight (such as the minimal possiblity of approval by governing council, which was overstepped by Naylor even though it is effectively a rubber stamp body, but Naylor didn’t want to risk the few critical voices getting an opportunity to raise a public fuss), then we might be having a different conversation. Happy Munk students can gush all they want about how great their lives are – this happiness is coming at the expense of the wider university community, who sees one ‘flagship’ corporate-backed security studies & global governance unit, get all the cash, buildings and attention, while other programs are quite literally starved to death. Happy Munk students, would-be journalists, and activists alike need to get this story straight, and get this issue straight: this is first and foremost a question of how we decide where our University resources go. The Munk school enshrines a new process where Naylor decides in secret to funnel resources towards priorities that are determined (in secret) by Toronto’s corporate elite working in collaboration with Ottawa’s foreign affairs, international trade and military elite. That is not cool, no matter how much you love your course about counter-terrorism or world bank history or whatever.

  • missing the point

    also, do you all know that non-MGA students are NOT ALLOWED to take MGA courses no matter what? how exactly is the Munk School benefiting the wider UofT community? it isn’t.