Improve flunch

As undergraduates, many of us are encouraged to get to know our professors on a more personal level. Unfortunately, this is nearly impossible to do in a large lecture course, and even seminar settings aren’t always up to the task as a result of the nature of the subject material or any other numbers of factors. The obvious solution is then to spend time with a professor outside of class. Of course, some professors are not easily accommodated on their own time, and those who are can typically be found pressed behind a long line outside of their offices. It often seems that forging personal relationships between student and faculty requires an inordinate amount of work, or at least that it lacks the proper vehicle.

Presumably, this is why the Flunch program was created years ago. For those unaware, the Flunch program, a DSG and OSAF joint initiative, allows a student to take a professor of choice out to a meal on campus, free of charge to either party. The goal of the program, as described on the OSAF website, is to provide students with an opportunity to “establish lasting relationships with faculty members they might not have developed in the classroom”. And the program may in fact be the best vehicle by which to finally achieve this end, considering its unique intersection between informality and face-to-face interaction.

However, there are some restrictions on a student’s capability to Flunch his professors. The first of these is that he is allowed only two Flunches per semester. In light of the fact that most students fail to use even one, this stipulation does not seem so limiting. The second is that his total combined expenditure during his two Flunch meetings cannot exceed $100. That comes out to $25 per diner per Flunch, which is also more than reasonable.

The final restriction on the Flunch program is the most aggressively apparent, and does more than any other single factor to undermine the program’s appeal and success: during a Flunch event, the student and professor may only choose from the Great Hall, the Marketplace and the new Central Campus eatery. Because the Marketplace and Central Campus are relatively out of the way for the majority of faculty and students, the issue of Flunch at the Great Hall is the most pressing.

It is difficult, in assessing the effect of the establishment on the program, to tell where to begin. Probably the simplest starting point is the fact that the Great Hall is a relatively unpopular campus eatery, at least according to last year’s dining survey. If students are already disinclined to dine there and, if in order to engage in the Flunch program they must dine there, then the desirability of the program is necessarily lowered by that association.

It is not, however, just the immediate reaction to the Great Hall that negatively impacts the event. The atmosphere of the Great Hall environment also detracts from the Flunch experience. Consider the stated goal of OSAF in sponsoring the program: the establishment of student-faculty relationships outside the classroom. The Great Hall mandate directly undermines that initiative by providing an interaction that is markedly similar to one that might take place in a large classroom, replete with high decibel levels, abrasive crowding and a multitude of distractions. Furthermore, the procedure of dining at the Great Hall lends itself more toward a 15 minute conversation over something to-go than the sort of in depth interaction that takes place in even a slightly more intimate setting.

Of course, students with a burning aversion to the Great Hall and an equally enflamed desire to break bread with a particular professor can find ways around this. Many opt to take their extracurricular interaction off-campus and overcome the inconvenience that way. Others might still travel to East or Central. In the end, a large number likely suck it up and Flunch at the Great Hall anyway, since it is only a small price to pay for the benefits both parties receive from the program.

Still, though, it is best to avoid these reductive measures when dealing with a program with so much potential for personal enrichment. It may be easy to dismiss undesirable aspects of the Flunch program as nothing more than a minor inconvenience to a select few.