This is a regular feature to examine the information in the weekly Trinitonian editorial. I love the Trinitonian and the students who run it. Sometimes, however there are more nuances to the issue than they have space for. Besides, electronic media allows for there to be "watchdog" watchdogs. Editorials are rated by "hits," as in blog hits, with one being worst and 5 being best. If they are published on-line I will provide links.
Welcome to my world.
5 blog hits
Friday, March 26, 2010
Thursday, March 18, 2010
Cessation and Taking Sides
I have written here about smoking policies before. As a former smoker I am ambivalent. When someone near me lights up I breathe in what I can just to remember how things used to be. On the other hand, when the mrs. comes home at 3 a.m. after a night of carousing and crawls into bed smelling of cheap bourbon, chicken wings, those orange spongy circus peanut candies, and an ash tray, my thoughts are different. (Editors note: any resemblance to real persons is done simply for dramatic effect.)I have a proposal for our students, which my friends at the Trinitonian will love, because they want more student involvement in decision-making. I say we leave decisions about smoking in the dorms up to the residents. ASR passed a resolution this year that would ban smoking from within 50* feet of building entrances. The Safety and Health committee and Faculty Senate are considering the recommendations related to non-residential facilities. The Residential Life Office has the authority to set smoking policies for the dorms and will respect the 50 foot rule (from main entrances) as proposed. Of course, there would continue to be no smoking in designated substance-free and LEEDS-certified buildings.
ASR stopped short of banning smoking from student balconies, which our current policy permits. (Smoking is not allowed inside any campus building). ASR learned that sometimes you have to choose between two noble values: In this case health/rights of one group versus the freedoms of another. This is the learning environment the liberal arts should promote. ASR chose freedom. That is not surprising for college students. This all stemmed from growing complaints from students about those who smoke on nearby balconies. In the recent diploma debate, ASR chose the rights of the minority (by number) over another important value.
Through this post (take the poll at right) Residential Life is soliciting opinions about a new policy that would prohibit student smoking on balconies unless voted otherwise by the residents of the specific dorms. By allowing smoking on balconies now, the Res Life Office is taking sides in a way, not unlike ASR. We have apparently sided with the freedom to smoke, which again, I generally support based on my own college experience. But really, our choice should be, in this situation, about the right of the majority - the group who wants to be heard related to their rights to live smoke-free - to live in the freedom that they choose. (A survey showed recently that non-smokers would support a balcony smoking ban.) By placing the onus on the smokers to appeal to the entire in their building it gives them responsibility for making their case to smoke. That case would have to be made to their peers who live in the same building. This takes the administration/staff out of it and leaves the entire issue to the students.
The only downside to this is the perception of the Pontius Pilate approach - simply washing our hands of the issue. But the choices are to leave the policy the same (which means we have taken sides), to ban smoking on balconies (which means we are taking sides), or to let the students in each dorm decide. This will allow all students to learn what ASR did. Taking sides isn't always as easy as it looks.
*The ASR standard was 15 feet, but LEEDS policies and most ordinances target the 50 foot distance.
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Counter in TUitive 3.6.10
This is a regular feature to examine the information in the weekly Trinitonian editorial. I love the Trinitonian and the students who run it. Sometimes, however there are more nuances to the issue than they have space for. Besides, electronic media allows for there to be "watchdog" watchdogs. Editorials are rated by "hits," as in blog hits, with one being worst and 5 being best. If they are published on-line I will provide links.
The Trinitonian editorial staff came out swinging this week, citing recent decisions as mounting evidence of unilateral University decision-making that is insensitive to student needs. That allegation always stings.
First up is the Student Affairs decision to take authority away from the Greek Judicial Board because it was struggling to manage cases effectively. Greeks were the only ones on campus getting the chance to judge its own members on hazing cases, and the outcome has been questionable at best. It has proven too big a challenge to hear cases regarding other organizations knowing the same groups could be in the judgment role the following week. The University extended this privilege to allow the Greek Council to self-govern, but it hasn't really worked. So now all student organizations and individuals will face the same judicial process in the future. The Trinitonian staff wanted the students to have another chance. They may not realize that this experiment has been tried - and failed - before.
Second, Residential Life implemented a group housing community initiative program several years ago in response to a campus-wide Quality of Student Life Task Force that recommended more self-governing options for upper-class students. That program was delayed a year because of student objections (this was in 2001-2002). The program then met with initial success, but over the last three years has grown stale, with no credible new communities seeking to be added. The ones who continued were marginal in fulfilling the goals of the program. (Self governance is work and is different than no governance.) This was all due to the implementation of the Sophomore College - an outcome of another task force with broad student representation.
Last year Residential Life wanted to terminate the Community Initiative program. ASR was consulted and suggested letting it die a slow death. (Trinitonian staffers would know that if they attended student government meetings.) It has died that death, and in consultation with the groups themselves, has been discontinued. In its place is a block housing program allowing groups of students to reserve larger blocks of space together in the lightly staffed upper-class area. There are many advantages to this for students.
The Trinitonian staff feels that the administration is making too many one-sided decisions. Interestingly, they were invited to observe the entire recent campus conduct review committee (and failed to show until the last meeting). They fail to communicate clearly that the changes to spring room reservation have been made with full student consultation. Those changes include a better system for juniors to request to move off campus.
What they have done instead is drag out tired old situations that they were unhappy about before, in an effort to demonstrate a pattern that, in my opinion, isn't there and ignores other popular student-led initiatives. That's what college papers do, and at least ours does it respectfully. Despite evidence otherwise, the Trinitonian continues to contend that students weren't consulted when the last student-heavy task force recommended Sophomore College - with full ASR support. The truth is, students objected when the first year area was created. They objected to the Community Initiative program. And they resisted the recommendations by the Upper-class Task Force. Naturally the Trinitonian editorial staff has a memory as long as their experience here. They contend we don't reverse decisions when students protest them. They fail to acknowledge that student opinion is often in opposition when programs either begin or end. That is the nature of administrator-student relationships. I invite the Trinitonian to consider the perspective of the the administration: The long view.
1 blog hit
The Trinitonian editorial staff came out swinging this week, citing recent decisions as mounting evidence of unilateral University decision-making that is insensitive to student needs. That allegation always stings.
First up is the Student Affairs decision to take authority away from the Greek Judicial Board because it was struggling to manage cases effectively. Greeks were the only ones on campus getting the chance to judge its own members on hazing cases, and the outcome has been questionable at best. It has proven too big a challenge to hear cases regarding other organizations knowing the same groups could be in the judgment role the following week. The University extended this privilege to allow the Greek Council to self-govern, but it hasn't really worked. So now all student organizations and individuals will face the same judicial process in the future. The Trinitonian staff wanted the students to have another chance. They may not realize that this experiment has been tried - and failed - before.
Second, Residential Life implemented a group housing community initiative program several years ago in response to a campus-wide Quality of Student Life Task Force that recommended more self-governing options for upper-class students. That program was delayed a year because of student objections (this was in 2001-2002). The program then met with initial success, but over the last three years has grown stale, with no credible new communities seeking to be added. The ones who continued were marginal in fulfilling the goals of the program. (Self governance is work and is different than no governance.) This was all due to the implementation of the Sophomore College - an outcome of another task force with broad student representation.
Last year Residential Life wanted to terminate the Community Initiative program. ASR was consulted and suggested letting it die a slow death. (Trinitonian staffers would know that if they attended student government meetings.) It has died that death, and in consultation with the groups themselves, has been discontinued. In its place is a block housing program allowing groups of students to reserve larger blocks of space together in the lightly staffed upper-class area. There are many advantages to this for students.
The Trinitonian staff feels that the administration is making too many one-sided decisions. Interestingly, they were invited to observe the entire recent campus conduct review committee (and failed to show until the last meeting). They fail to communicate clearly that the changes to spring room reservation have been made with full student consultation. Those changes include a better system for juniors to request to move off campus.
What they have done instead is drag out tired old situations that they were unhappy about before, in an effort to demonstrate a pattern that, in my opinion, isn't there and ignores other popular student-led initiatives. That's what college papers do, and at least ours does it respectfully. Despite evidence otherwise, the Trinitonian continues to contend that students weren't consulted when the last student-heavy task force recommended Sophomore College - with full ASR support. The truth is, students objected when the first year area was created. They objected to the Community Initiative program. And they resisted the recommendations by the Upper-class Task Force. Naturally the Trinitonian editorial staff has a memory as long as their experience here. They contend we don't reverse decisions when students protest them. They fail to acknowledge that student opinion is often in opposition when programs either begin or end. That is the nature of administrator-student relationships. I invite the Trinitonian to consider the perspective of the the administration: The long view.
1 blog hit
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)