The University's decision to allocate Spelman 8 to Whitman has resulted in some independent students - at least six and as many as 32, by our calculations - being turned away from Spelman in favor of Whitman students. It is disheartening that even after many expressed overwhelming and well-reasoned opposition to the plan, the administration did not take greater steps to ensure that as many independent students as possible were given the chance to live in Spelman.
That any draw groups containing independents were denied suites in Spelman to make room for residential college draw groups is unacceptable. Since Spelman rooms are best suited for independent student use, the University should allocate as many of these rooms as possible to independents. Instead, 24 Whitman students will live in administration-gifted luxury.
A closer look at how the entire Spelman affair unfolded suggests that the administration has not been totally honest about its intentions.
When the plan to annex both Spelman 7 and 8 to Whitman College was first announced, one of the University's stated aims was to increase flexibility for students by adding a housing option that would combine independent and residential college life. Administrators told The Daily Princetonian the changes had grown out of student input on the issue. Several weeks later, Assistant Director for Student Housing Lisa DePaul and Undergraduate Housing Manager Angela Hodgeman reasserted the claim that the move would increase options in a guest column. As opposition to the idea surged and independent applications to Spelman shot up, however, the plan was altered to its current form: the reallocation of Spelman 8 to Whitman and an entryway of Little to Mathey College.
But this modified plan was not at all consistent with the original stated intent of giving students more options, as rooms in Little Hall are not equipped with kitchens. Did that motivation vanish? Was it ever a motivation in the first place?
Indeed, given the administration's subsequent decisions, the primary goal appears to have been adding more beds to the four-year college system at any cost. Indeed, after the announcement of the revised annexation plans, Hodgeman told the ‘Prince' that the proposal was intended to accommodate rising numbers of underclassmen while maintaining the number of juniors and seniors in four-year colleges.
The administration's conduct has fed student concerns about what motivates decisions in West College. If the administration wants the trust of students, it must explain its plans in a straightforward way while seriously listening to everyone, including those who do not support the University's agenda. In a previous editorial ("All Aboard," Friday, March 14, 2008), we suggested guidelines for how the University can effectively solicit student input. Whatever form a sincere dialogue takes, students will remain deeply troubled by West College's current decision-making paradigm unless changes are made.
Click here to see how the Editorial Board arrived at the numbers in this editorial.
Read More
A ‘climate apocalypse’ is all but inevitable. Why aren’t we planning for it?
Alexander MargulisNot only must every Princeton student think about what sort of life they can — or should — build in the context of an ever-warming world, but also that the climate activists on campus who intend to spur this sort of thinking often end up discouraging it.
Not only must every Princeton student think about what sort of life they can — or should — build in the context of an ever-warming world, but also that the climate activists on campus who intend to spur this sort of thinking often end up discouraging it.
Princeton, don’t budge on Title IX
Charlie YaleTrump’s changes to Title IX signal more dire attacks on education are to come in the future. Princeton has a responsibility to do everything it can to prevent them.
Trump’s changes to Title IX signal more dire attacks on education are to come in the future. Princeton has a responsibility to do everything it can to prevent them.
In case you haven’t noticed, the target is already on our back
Isaac BarsoumIf I could say anything to the University about this, here is what it would be: when there is a target on your back, you do not stand still and wait for the arrow to strike. You put on a bulletproof vest, hunker down into a foxhole, and fire back.
If I could say anything to the University about this, here is what it would be: when there is a target on your back, you do not stand still and wait for the arrow to strike. You put on a bulletproof vest, hunker down into a foxhole, and fire back.
