We applaud a shift away from the apathy that currently reigns on campus, and — regardless of our views on Occupy Princeton’s political goals — we are hopeful that its presence may help contribute to that shift.
Inside the interview room we were all self-assured and positive that “this” was our goal and our dream career, but outside we each expressed self-doubt and a lack of direction. It was reassuring to realize that I wasn’t alone and yet at the same time frightening. It was not the interview but the prospect of a looming decision that concerned my peers and me.
Though The Daily Princetonian’s website has seen a few redesigns and now sports has a Twitter account, the ‘Prince’ is still an entirely traditional and print focused organization. Improving web presence can’t be a side project — the ‘Prince’ needs to see itself as a news organization rather than a newspaper one.
We’ve all heard the criticisms of Greek life — they’re networks for wealthy, white students; they’re feeders into certain eating clubs; they’re havens for hazing and alcoholism. But in all the ways Greek life has been described on campus, the most limiting factor is rarely mentioned: Princeton Greek life is overwhelmingly heterosexual.
Passwords are out of control. They’re too numerous and too weak to be the all-purpose authentication mechanism. We need so many and the rules are so arbitrary that one is forced to write passwords down, re-use them, and probably create them with some kind of pattern anyway, all of which adds to the risk
I can say, without hesitation, that both were among the best intellectual experiences I’ve had in my three years as an undergraduate. And while I’m not at all qualified to comment on Professor West’s academic production or his political activities, I do want to explain, based on personal experience, how his departure will be an extraordinary loss to the academic and public life of Princeton.
The University prohibits tutoring during finals week because “tutors need to study, too.” We believe that this limitation is misguided and that tutoring services should be offered even during finals week.
When faculty members write articles, they are usually published in scholarly journals to which most people have limited access. In fact, subscriptions to some journals may cost thousands of dollars a year. If the faculty member does not reserve the right to republish the article elsewhere then only those with access to the journal can read it. This, of course, seems contradictory to the University’s goal of generating and disseminating knowledge. If our faculty’s insights are available only to the small group of people who can afford journal subscription, the value of those insights is surely limited. Knowledge in a vacuum is not valuable. Only when there is widespread access can an insight be said to have any significance to the community. For these reasons, we are glad that the University is taking steps to expand access to articles that were previously only available in journals.
Start a conversation comparing Princeton with other universities, particularly state schools, and quickly someone will mention general attractiveness and athleticism. It’s true: with exception to varsity athletes, we’re generally pretty unfit. For my freshman, sophomore and junior years, I would sporadically go to the gym, while steadily eating unhealthily and putting on the pounds. I thought I’d be healthier if only I was forced, if only Princeton had a physical education requirement like MIT. This summer, when I started regularly going to the gym with a friend, I realized that being surrounded by positive examples was more effective than any University regulation could be.
We need to expand our thinking about HIV-positive individuals beyond the context of resource-poor nations, beyond the context of an intervention case. Debates about sex education, access to testing, coping mechanisms and funding are just as relevant in our communities as they are globally.
There is more than one way to encourage creativity and innovation. Even if the administration does not consider changes to the grading policy, it is possible to change the way we approach education.
What we learn in a class isn’t just a function of how many problem sets and how much reading the professor assigns. It’s also a function of our devotion to that class relative to other commitments.
Do we learn languages to celebrate Mass with people from different cultures or to understand the theological implications of saying “consubstantial” instead of “one in being with?” If it’s the former, require spoken modern languages. If it’s the latter, require language instruction. If it’s both, which I suspect it might be, require both. No matter what, the language requirement must be restructured if it is to be consistent with its own goals.
When taken together, all these practices are geared toward the same goal — making residential colleges an appealing source of fun and camaraderie for undergraduates.
The more we interact with the information on the Internet, the more we change it and contribute to it and check it for accountability, the more robust and accurate it will inevitably become.
We appreciate Sarah Schwartz’ constructive feedback in her Nov. 17 opinion column, “Editing the Writing Center.” It’s rewarding to hear that the Center is receiving such positive buzz from so many different sources on campus, and that Ms. Schwartz herself has benefited from working with our Fellows. We regret, however, that Ms. Schwartz did not contact us to discuss her concerns before the article went to press. ‘Prince’ readers may benefit from our perspective on what Writing Center Fellows can do and from information regarding the broader range of options we offer.
