I mention this to show why the recent referendum results' suggestion that undergraduates sour on the administration over their four years here is a big deal and to propose how the University might fix its credibility gap. The main problem is that the administration often engages in doublespeak when tackling legitimate student concerns. This problem was rarely directly addressed in the referendum's free responses but nevertheless infected those statements and makes students more likely to dismiss proposed changes. Take these examples.
On grade deflation - a policy that I have no problem with - the administration simultaneously trumpets its ability to bring down average grades while saying that no individual grades can be lowered because of the policy. But what are average grades if not an amalgam of individual marks? This isn't logically consistent, and students know it isn't, and they know that the University must know, too. This breeds resentment.
Last year's proposed changes to the alcohol policy radically changed RCAs' role while the administration argued that the close relationship between RCAs and students wouldn't change. But you can't change how people interact and expect the resultant relationship to remain static. This point was so obvious and so completely unaddressed that students assumed that the University was lying.
The stated goal of this change was reducing dangerous drinking, but the new policy was widely believed by students to actually discourage relatively safe drinking in large groups in favor of small, hidden gatherings less likely to be busted - like the one that killed Westminster Choir College freshman Justin Warfield. Because the policy seemed unlikely to achieve its stated goal, students were left wondering what its actual goals were.
When students protested the annexation of Spelman Halls 7 and 8, we were at first offered the same old reassurances that the University was just creating a "new option." That this option came at the expense of old ones, that those exercising it were receiving preferential treatment and that this option was more equal than the rest was ignored.
On Wednesday, Michael Medeiros '10 wrote an excellent column discussing how the administration's declaration of "mission accomplished" on Whitman rang hollow to him, a sentiment that I think is the majority opinion. Medeiros' conclusion that the "declaration of success bothers [him] more than the lack of community itself" makes clear that the problem isn't as much the policies as what is said about them.
Now, I'm not suggesting that the University wants someone to die from alcohol poisoning, doesn't care about our futures or is engaged in a conspiracy to shut down the Street tomorrow. But when administrators don't appear forthcoming, it makes students wonder what's really going on, and it makes many of us "strongly disapprove" of administrators' actions. It has gotten to the point where, in my experience, even good changes are met with suspicion among a large group of students simply because of who the messenger is.
To move forward positively, uncomfortable and inconvenient candor is necessary. A forthright admission that said, in as many words, "we were wrong. Sorry, we screwed up," about anything (say, that other schools would also deflate their grades) would go a long way toward regaining lost trust. While the temptation to spin is strong and the short-term benefits clear, the long term consequence is a continual erosion of trust.
In that spirit of candor, let me congratulate the University for belatedly responding to student anger and fixing the biggest problems with the proposed alcohol enforcement policy. Straight talk about mistakes would have been preferable to wishy-washy statements that some students may have misread the policy, but at least it's a start.
As I watched the election returns come in Tuesday night, I started to believe that near-certain Democratic nominee Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is confronting a similar problem. Just as Princeton administrators face a student body divided over judgments about their honesty, Obama faces an electoral base shattered by issues of patriotism, race and extremism. Two-thirds of Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.)'s supporters, for instance, said that the controversy over Jeremiah Wright played an important role in their vote, and race, a singularly divisive issue, was the most decisive factor on Tuesday. Parties generally heal their wounds, but Obama's are of a particularly destructive variety and so may fester.
Obama supporters at Princeton need to understand that both the results Tuesday and the antagonism on campus are warnings. Such anger takes time to form, but once embedded it's hard to get rid of. Obama needs to immediately make a concerted effort to regain control over his reputation before questions about unrepentant domestic terrorists, anti-American mentors and religious radicalism become inseparable from his image and potentially fatal to his candidacy. As we've seen on campus and in this campaign, waiting until image problems are unavoidable does not make them easier to manage.
Barry Caro is a history major from White Plains, N.Y. He can be reached at bcaro@princeton.edu.
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.
