For much of my time here, I felt like I wasn’t doing a very good job of making new friends, but in hindsight, I see that all along I’ve picked up people to laugh with, pray with and talk to. It’s cliche to say, but the end of this year really is bittersweet.
It means little to the men and women who risk their lives in service to their country to be supported only as individuals. Their missions in the armed forces are a crucial part of their roles and identities.
The “something extra” that my referendum proposes is not just “intent to cheat,” as the Editorial Board implied. That change would obligate the Honor Committee to acquit students for even the most irresponsible failures to learn the policy for an exam — failures that usually create an unfair advantage. My referendum would require that the accused either intends to cheat or that he or she is negligent in learning and interpreting his or her exam policy.
Talking with freshmen and explaining to them their new home really reminds me of why I decided to come to Princeton in the first place. Everything from the details of course selection to the earth-shattering wonder of late meal is brought back in the retelling.
We believe that, while perhaps professors should penalize students who unintentionally cheat by lowering their exam grades, students should not suffer broad punitive measures as mandated by the current system.
According to the head of the Democratic Party, we’re not at a crossroads between social democracy and limited government. No, our choice is between Democrats and segregationists.
Fall in Princeton is nice, but spring is the best. The weather is getting warmer, the world is young again and everyone can look forward to the end of classes and exams.
Dining Services should consider a number of potential changes. It ought to introduce a greater range of healthier options at more affordable prices at late meal. Furthermore, the Frist Gallery ought to offer more orange plate combos for their healthier sections.
Angela Cai criticizes the Woodrow Wilson School's decision to end selective admission.
Here is the Wimsey reply: The late professor is sadly no longer with us and his “privacy” has already been breached in the most public way. He was suddenly dismissed from his teaching position at one of the most prestigious universities in the world.
We posited that “it” begins at the top, with the administration’s focus on college rankings and the “value of a Princeton degree” and trickles down to student culture. Maybe it’s the nature of the students who the admission office accepts or the nature of the students who choose to enroll. We could not agree on the origin nor could we agree exactly on what “it” is.
While sources for funding are plenty, information about them is decentralized and non-standardized. Often, details and requirements for various grants, awards and opportunities are only spread by word of mouth. Other times they are unclear, not completely transparent or vary greatly across departments.
It has been a great honor to experiment with the art of critique on these pages. I will miss it dearly.
There is absolutely no need for class participation points, and forcing unwilling students to attend precept hurts everyone.
The University ought to have taken a more straightforward and honest approach in reporting Calvo’s death.
The Committee makes distinctions among acts of plagiarism based on the seriousness of the violation and on what a student ought reasonably to have understood.
