In fact, Greek life, since it has institutional checks and balances in place — as well as an entire University office devoted to regulating it — can be more easily held accountable for reported acts of hazing compared with CIOs or other student groups.
The board’s decision to divest — and to refrain from investing in private prison companies in the future — serves as a reminder of the varied impacts universities can have. While this past year we became consumed with issues over which our University has more direct control, the impacts of a given school can extend far beyond its physical campus or student body.
While there is merit to the debate over religious exemptions to this mandate, Wheaton officials were not yet being forced to act against their religious beliefs. Moreover, they did not even attempt to grandfather students into their new policy, halting coverage immediately for students who probably expected to remain covered through their school as long as they remained enrolled.
We are devastated by a tragedy that is both proximate and exceptionally lurid. But this tragedy does not stand alone: a 2014 FBI study of 160 active-shooter events since 2000 showed an increase in shootings over time.
McDonnell’s entire case, even though he is the first Virginia governor to be tried and convicted of corruption, has demonstrated the special privileges his title offers.
Though some of us may have felt blindsided by this change in our system, its benefits far outweigh any small annoyances we may have with filling out another form.
As the academic year comes to an end, the Managing Board recounts some notable numbers.
Issues facing LGBTQ students can be complex, but one issue that almost uniquely plagues transgender and gender non-conforming students is the issue of invisibility. When spaces demarcate between just two genders — male and female — and force all students into one of these two categories, transgender and gender non-conforming students are rendered invisible to existing structures.
If it is not conscious decisions, but rather subconscious biases as a result of existing structures, that push administrators toward unethical tendencies, addressing ethical issues in higher education is that much more complicated. But this case-study provides some clear solutions: one could be that administrators be required to review their decisions in one consistent platform; another could be that outsiders come into college campuses over certain periods of time to discuss current ethical dilemmas.
We cannot overstate the harm these generalizations have created. People who are survivors may not see themselves as such, or if they do, they may not report their stories. And those who work tirelessly on behalf of survivors and take all the right steps — such as informing survivors of all their options and allowing them the room to make a choice to give them back their agency, something Erdely condemned in her article — must fear that doing the right thing will be manipulated and distorted by an ill-informed public.
Slavery was ubiquitous, and therefore markers of its existence and impact should be ubiquitous, too. As we strive to confront this history and best navigate the waters of simultaneously appreciating and condemning the contributions of major historical figures, making our physical spaces reflect that contradiction can only help.
As these colleges strive to raise revenue, they are attempting to do so without it being, literally, at the neediest students’ expense. It is unrealistic to expect a school to be completely or close to free, as wonderful as that would be.
By turning the viewing into an opportunity for dialogue about the state of Muslims in America and globally and how the film contributes to perceptions of Muslims, the MSA made it possible for the film to be contextualized. Students who may not otherwise question the presentation of Muslims and Middle Eastern individuals in the film had the opportunity to do so this weekend. In fact, it was probably better for students to watch “American Sniper” in this setting — a setting that ultimately forced them to think critically — than to see it at a movie theater where they may not view the movie the same way.
It is extremely disappointing that the General Assembly has yet to produce a new, fairer map. What the General Assembly has done so far has actually been contrary to the goal of undermining gerrymandering: this past session, the General Assembly passed numerous bills tweaking existing districts to make them less competitive instead of properly responding to the U.S. District Court’s initial ruling.
The Board has included a non-voting student member for a long time prior to this recent inclusion of a non-voting faculty member; this speaks to the disconnect at our school between the various populations in need of representation. With our commitment to student self-governance, students have the privilege of independence, and therefore fewer interactions with faculty members outside their academics. Compared to other schools, there is likely increased interaction between students and administrators, without interim faculty involvement.
There is a difference here between what public and private schools may regulate, but there is no difference between our University and Columbia in terms of what is right and wrong when it comes to the voicing of student concerns. In this case, Columbia students should not see their protests restricted.
Keeping information in the hands of only a few Board members is problematic for obvious reasons. But if it was so egregious as to lead to the resignation of a prominent Board member, transparency within the Board must be an even worse problem than we anticipated previously.
The intense scrutiny of Sullivan — who has only been at the University since 2010 — begs an important question: where is that same scrutiny of other administrators who have been here much longer and whose impact is, in many ways, much more significant to the lives of students?
This year, the University further shifted toward hiring non-tenure track professors (“non-tenure track” is the University’s term for “adjunct”). Information released under the Freedom of Information Act shows that in the 2012-13 academic year, there were 151 non-tenure track teaching faculty, whereas in the 2014-15 year there have been 270. This compares to the roughly 860 tenure-track professors for both academic years.
The University’s contract with Aramark is a business, and not ethical, contract. And in the world of business transactions, there will often be trade-offs between low-cost solutions and efficiency and the moral character of a company. In Aramark’s case, however, the trade-offs are simply not worth it.
