Regarding ‘Has the USG lost it?' (Friday, April 25, 2008)
The editorial board and many members of the USG seem fundamentally to misunderstand the intentions of my referendum and set unnecessarily high standards for the goals of referenda.
The primary criticisms of the referendum seem to be that it is the wrong way to institute change and that it lacks efficacy. The only change I expect from this referendum is a better public knowledge of what students on the whole think of the way Princeton has been run. This practical result of an approval rating is important as background information for the ongoing debate on campus policies and how the administration makes decisions. As the referendum's questions have been ones the USG is unwilling to ask of its own volition, a petition and referendum are the necessary vehicles to put them on the agenda.
In general, a referendum may be non-binding, as the first three questions of mine are, and need not submit to some standard of "efficacy." Indeed, as could be the case in this instance, the most important outcome of a referendum may be symbolic.
What really worries me is what the reactions in print seem to indicate about our campus institutions. Are many members of the USG too afraid of raising uncomfortable but necessary questions and engaging in real advocacy on behalf of students? Is the administration so afraid of the results of a simple survey that it has to have its most popular member give an impolitic and unfounded attack on the document? Is the editorial board too stuck in an organization kid ethos to distinguish between an inflammatory question and an expected inflammatory answer?
Given the enormous level of support I have received from students for this referendum, regardless of their views on the administration, it appears many parties here are out of touch with some of the University's most important stakeholders.
Kyle Smith '09
Whatever happened to student input?
Regarding ‘Has the USG lost it?' (Friday, April 25, 2008)
This year's ballot referendum is simple - three questions regarding the policies, record and responsiveness of top University administrators with a space for specific, constructive suggestions. This will provide unique insight into the Princeton community. Students tend to grumble about everything from toilet paper to grade inflation, but what does the student body as a whole really think? Is anti-administration discontent limited to just a few cynics or do most student feel the same way? We'll soon hear a clear answer on this vital issue.
The referendum was generated by students who feel that the top university leadership is leading us down the wrong track and has not listened to us. Though most students are happy with the eating club system, the University has aggressively pushed the four-year college system and seen fit to annex popular independent and upperclass housing to the benefit of the colleges. Furious student criticism of grade deflation and the invasive RCA policy only led to minor concessions. And last year the administration abruptly axed early decision, a sensible policy supported by most students.
While it is true that the top administrators are theoretically beholden to Trustees, the reality is that the Trustees are extremely busy professionals. Unless the Trustees receive a strong signal, we can hardly expect them to push back against their activist employees. The supporters of the referendum believe that its results might produce such a signal. Clearly, the frivolity amendment was not aimed at referendums with this goal but at ones such as Jeremy Johnson '07's referendum on whether then USG President Alex Lenahan '07 should be forced to run naked through a fountain.
Nearly everyone elected to the USG campaigned on a promise to "listen to every student voice." When more than 200 student voices demanded an important referendum on a fundamental issue, the USG ought never to have considered abandoning its commitments to the student body.
Kent Kuran '08, Former U-Councilor
Keep priorities straight
Regarding ‘Borough Police: Assailants were gang members' (Thursday, April 24, 2008)
WOW! Gang violence in Princeton! I guess that's why the Borough Police spend so much time looking for petty alcohol violations on Prospect Avenue and even concocts charges against the innocent. Keep up the good work and protect us all from open beer cans.
Michael Scharf '64
Read More
Why can’t lecturers win the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching?
Jerry ZhuLet’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Let’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Princeton’s administration of justice is Trumpian
Frances BroganThe disparity between the University’s approach to Giberson and its approach to pro-Palestinian protestors reflects a concerning trend of appeasing an increasingly emboldened right rather than resisting the threat it poses to academic freedom and the wellbeing of Princeton students.
Secular Opening Exercises? Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water
Frank StrasburgerThe secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
The secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
