Category: Editorial

The School of Management recently announced details of its four new majors that will be available to students beginning with the class of 2015: Accounting and Financial Management, Global Management, Managing for Sustainability, and Markets, Innovation and Design. These new majors aim to better prepare students for the challenges that the business world will be facing in future decades.

We are happy to see an academic program making such extensive and effort-intensive changes to better address the needs of its students, and we foresee these changes having many positive results. They should make the School of Management stronger and more attractive to potential students, boosting the University’s competitiveness and perhaps making the University more likely to be a first choice among particularly business-oriented students. They will also make management students better able to take programs of study that specifically interest them, rather than having to fulfill the broader requirements of a general major. The new majors and new courses will certainly help students prepare for issues they are likely to face in their future careers. Students will also benefit from having smaller majors, hopefully receiving more direct faculty attention than when grouped together into the broad major of “management.”

At the same time, seeing these changes take place at a liberal arts institution makes us reflect on the directions higher education has recently been taking. The School of Management appears to be moving in the direction of a more explicitly career-oriented education, and we wonder what long-terms effects these changes will have. Will they attract a different type of person to the University? Is it unequivocally a good thing to be clearly focused and specialized? Will the changes allow indecisive students sufficient time to explore their options before having to make a commitment? Or do we need to change the dynamic of a “liberal arts” education in today’s society to give students a better chance to be successful after their college years have concluded?

We believe that the School of Management has done a good job in preserving as much of a liberal arts element as possible in its new curriculum. Students will still have to meet all of the requirements of the Core College Curriculum, taking such diverse courses as a foundation seminar, a foreign language course, two arts and humanities courses, two natural science or math courses, and a course about diversity, among other requirements. Plenty of space will also exist for electives, and many of the new major requirements will actually encourage students to take related classes from outside of the School of Management, so students should not be forced into too narrow of a track by the new majors.

The changes to the School of Management represent an admirable effort to prepare students for the professional world while still retaining a liberal arts core. Balancing these two types of education is clearly no easy task, so we applaud the School of Management for its efforts and hope that they turn out for the best.

The seven sorority presidents on campus have all agreed that women in their organizations will not attend functions at fraternities that have themes that are derogatory or demeaning towards women. The situation can be clarified with a simple example:  the “Office Lives and Trophy Wives” mixer, where fraternity men in suits and sorority women in cocktail dresses drink together, may have finally met its end. Fraternities will have to start getting more creative with their party themes in a respectful manner if they wish to continue partying with sororities on a weekly basis.

Is this a superficial name change or the first step towards a much broader cultural shift in which misogyny is eliminated from our campus? If nothing else, this declaration from the sorority presidents has sparked a discussion. Apparently the days where “mixers” between fraternities and sororities were a taboo topic with administrators and student leaders have passed.

For our readers who are not living on campus, it may be hard to understand just how big of a deal even suggesting a change in party names is. Greek life is incredibly pervasive in the University’s social scene, and this will affect a significant portion of students on campus.

It is common for students at the University to find themselves in a situation where past precedents are used to justify current behaviors without evaluating them first. Underage drinking is an easy example. In different situations, this mindset has been used to justify traditions that could qualify as hazing.

This is the mindset that must be overcome in order to reduce or eliminate misogyny on campus, and it will be much more difficult to do than simply changing the name of a party.

The theme of a mixer could be something as innocuous as “St. Patrick’s Day” and the atmosphere of the party will still be problematic, with men demeaning women and women objectifying themselves through the way they dress and dance. Although many themes are clearly offensive and should obviously be eliminated, the themes are not the root of the problem; the way we party needs to change in order for campus climate to improve. We need to create a culture where people do not feel the need to behave in such degrading ways to gain approval from peers or the opposite sex. Changing the party names is an important first step, but it will be merely superficial unless we find a way to change the underlying culture. Both men and women are a part of the problem, and both groups, rather than blaming each other, need to work together in search of a solution.

We applaud sorority women for speaking up and challenging the norms on campus, which is a difficult thing for anyone to do. We sincerely hope that they are successful and that derogatory mixer themes, and more importantly, disrespectful behaviors towards women at these events, are eliminated. At the same time, we remain skeptical that the further steps necessary for a broader cultural change will be taken. This is not a time for celebration just yet.

As a final and related thought, we would like to encourage all students and guests to be safe and respectful of one another during House Party Weekend. The time to start making changes to campus culture is today–-literally.

Two years ago, the men’s basketball team stumbled to a disappointing record of 7-23; the team’s biggest stars had graduated, and no one new had yet stepped up to replace them. Now, the Bison are back in the Patriot League Championship, and the future looks bright for a team loaded with standout underclassmen.

Last year, The Bucknellian shrank to 12 pages as staff members disappeared and writers grew apathetic. The remaining editors were worried that the paper might be dying. But since then, a group of motivated first-years has has re-invigorated the paper, erasing doubts and raising hope for years to come.

Now Addison O’Donnell ’14, in creating Campus Productions, is attempting to enact a similar turnaround for the University’s musicals scene. A musical theatre club has actually already existed at the University for some time now, but its activity has been inconsistent and has left a void in the University’s theater offerings, which include many other productions but few musicals. O’Donnell hopes to be the one to fill that void.

We recognize the immense difficulties that must be involved in such an ambitious project, and we applaud O’Donnell for his initiative and effort. We also congratulate all of the students working to create common-interest communities for the Small Houses Program. The amount of planning and organization that must go into creating such communities is substantial, but students have worked tirelessly to put together programs that will genuinely serve the University community—for example, the University’s first gender-neutral housing.

All of these examples demonstrate that dedicated students really can make a big difference in their campus community—a fact especially important considering the short life-cycle of many student organizations. All student organizations must deal with the issue of member turnover. Students are usually only at the University for four years; groups are forced to give up their more experienced members upon graduation, and may or may not be able to find fresh members to replace them. Talent and interest fluctuate from year to year, but a few consecutive bad years can easily plunge a previously successful organization into a cycle of futility.

Still, students should take heart from the success stories around them and realize that even if disaster has struck their favorite organizations, they can still do something about it. As long as students retain hope, they can potentially turn things around. We hope that O’Donnell will be successful in his endeavors; we hope that The Counterweight, just now publishing its first issue of the semester with a depleted staff, can succeed in returning to its former glory; and we wish the best for anyone else attempting to revitalize an organization or start a new one.

It only takes a few dedicated students to inspire others and turn things around; the results of engaging in action rather than remaining apathetic can be momentous.

The University recently announced that its comprehensive fee will increase to an estimated $54,240 for the 2011-12 school year. While we obviously would prefer for the fee to remain as low as possible, we can understand that a modest increase is inevitable. The University must keep pace with the continually rising costs of providing a quality education.

We recognize the value of the University’s remarkably small classes, we enjoy having speakers such as Paul Rusesabagina and Brian Greene brought to campus, we appreciate the alumni networking events that the Career Development Center puts together, we are grateful to the President’s Office for buying Bison Backers basketball playoff tickets, and we love free printing—but we realize that all of these things cost money. For these reasons, we are willing to put up with rising tuition. If all that we wanted out of our college experiences was the chance to attend class for a bargain, we would not have chosen to enroll at the University.

Still, we hope that the University will continue doing everything it can to make a University education affordable to as many people as possible. The University is already unaffordable to most families without significant financial aid. According to 2009 census data, less than 15% of American households make over $100,000 in income; for most families, $54,240 is a vast sum of money, and for families that must send more than one child to college, it is even more unfathomable.

However, sticker price is not a big deal if the University makes sufficient financial aid available to those who need it, and our experiences have indicated that this is the case. If the University can top its peers in its financial aid efforts, then needy students might actually pay less than at peer institutions, and the difference in sticker price will only be felt by students whose families can afford to contribute more to the University. The University must make sure not to increase tuition so much that it leaves even more families out of reach.

The rising costs of tuition also emphasize just how important it is for students to participate in everything that the University has to offer. Even those receiving financial support must still pay a substantial amount of money to be here; for this reason, students must sure to get their money’s worth out of their college experience.

Most people who attended the University’s annual First Night ceremony, held last Friday, agree that the event went well and that most first-year students who attended enjoyed it. However, although a majority of first-years went and enjoyed themselves, a significant proportion did not bother to go. Rooke Chapel was crowded, but not nearly as jam-packed as during Orientation, and many halls had at least a small group of students skip out on the ceremonies. Some of these absentees had legitimate excuses such as athletics commitments, but many students bypassed the tradition by choice because they were not interested in participating.

Students party every week, and it is upsetting that even a minority of first-years would rather spend an extra few hours doing so than participate in an important University tradition.

First Night is a ceremony that initiates first-years into the University’s alumni community; it also features the unveiling of the first-year class’s motto, colors and crest. Still, it was apparently unclear to many first-years going into the event why they should care about it. There was a noticeable lack of enthusiasm in the time leading up to the event, and expectations were low. Many students evidently decided that attending would not be worth their time.

These low expectations were at least partially a result of a failure to hype up the event sufficiently. The RAs and OAs of first-year halls and class representatives could have done more to get students excited, promoting the event further in advance and more clearly emphasizing why it would be enjoyable and worthwhile. If First Night had been portrayed as a bigger deal in the time leading up to the event, the students who declined to attend might have been more interested.

Still, it is sad that a major University tradition should need so much marketing and promotion just to sustain student interest. Even if First Night may not have been the most thrilling few hours of everyone’s college careers, it was certainly more memorable and meaningful than anything else that first-years were likely to have been doing on a Friday evening. Few students do homework or anything useful on Friday evenings, preferring to spend the time relaxing, socializing and preparing for parties. Although we could understand why students would want to have time to wind down after a busy week, First Night only happens once in a student’s time at the University, so students should have embraced it and looked forward to it, even if it cut into their normal routine.

In any case, First Night was over well before the night’s major parties began at 10 p.m., so it certainly did not prevent anyone from otherwise enjoying their Friday night. Even if the event was not as hyped up as it could have been, the blame for students’ reluctance to participate ultimately lies on them.

On Monday night, Dr. Jackson Katz gave a lecture about the need for men to take an active role in preventing gender violence. The speech was sponsored by the Interfraternity Council and the Women’s Resource Center and is the latest in a series of efforts to improve campus climate at the University. The majority of the Greek community, both fraternities and sororities, were present at the event. In the wake of Katz’s speech, much of campus is involved in discussing ways to reduce sexual assault and other abuse and violence.

Bringing speakers such as Katz to campus is an important first step. Many faculty members are also striving to continue the conversation begun by Katz’s lecture. Groups of professors have organized reading groups to discuss books dealing with gender violence issues (including Katz’s book), some of which are specifically targeted at female students and some of which are targeted at males. Other professors and department secretaries have brought up these issues in class (even in classes about completely irrelevant subject matter) and forwarded information about these reading groups to get the word out to students. On their own, students who attended the lecture have discussed their reactions to it, and even if reactions have not always been positive, some conversation and awareness about gender violence is better than none.

The faculty, administration and a selection of students clearly care very deeply about these issues. They are acknowledging the need to emphasize these issues and doing everything they can conceivably do to address them, and they should be commended for their efforts to create a safer environment on campus. But how effective their efforts will be remains to be seen.

We suspect that the people who most need to think more about these gender violence issues will be among the people least likely to attend a reading group discussion or take a lecture such as Katz’s seriously. Indeed, many students seemed to blow off Katz’s lecture. Some were seen doing homework during the speech, while others apparently got nothing out of it except irritation that it had run long. Katz was correct in his observation that many people distance themselves from these issues, thinking that they only apply to “monsters” rather than themselves, but this distancing also makes people less responsive to his message.

This is why it is so important that those who did listen and do care take action. These people must refuse to let themselves be “bystanders” and must step up to stop abuse as it happens. They must also realize that “gender violence” is not merely rape; unwanted touching and groping and verbal harassment are also harmful. Perhaps most difficult, they must be willing to stand up for what’s right, even if it means going against their friends.

The administration and faculty have done everything they can do; whether or not their efforts succeed is up to the student body.

Last week it was announced to the senior class that 100 Nights, an event that had previously brought seniors together to celebrate their time at the University, would be canceled due to problems stemming from excessive drinking and vandalism in previous years. The Office of Alumni Relations and the Career Development Center, which had hosted the event along with a student planning committee, are planning to replace it with a new event that will “provide [seniors] with a setting to enjoy each other’s company and reconnect with … first year hallmates as well as reinforce the mission of why we are all here: to educate and prepare you for a lifetime of discovery, fulfillment, critical thinking and imagination,” according to an e-mail sent to seniors.

Despite the plans for the creation of a new tradition, many students are disappointed about the discontinuation of 100 Nights. This was an event that students had looked forward to for a long time, and excitement was building as it approached. It is understandable that students are upset about its abrupt cancellation.

The problems that led to the cancellation of the event are not surprising. Widespread alcohol consumption, often to levels that can be described as “excessive,” takes place every weekend at the University. Removing or re-shaping a popular event will not eliminate irresponsible behavior from unruly seniors that night. If anything, events such as 100 Nights protect students by encouraging them to consume alcohol in a controlled environment. Even in the case of vandalism, the fairness of punishing current students for the failures of past classes is questionable. There should certainly be repercussions for students who act inappropriately, but the actions of a few should not be allowed to ruin the experiences of future students. Compared to other large-scale spring semester events like House Party Weekend, 100 Nights seems tame.

It is clear that 100 Nights was intended to be much more than just a giant party with a nostalgia theme, but many students did not seem to realize this. Few students knew that the event was organized by Alumni Relations and the CDC; many assumed that it was an official University tradition such as First Night and Orientation, except with alcohol. There seems to have been a widespread misunderstanding among students about what the event was intended to accomplish. Many students envisioned it as a drunken celebration, while the planning committee evidently wanted it to be a reflective and thoughtful experience.

The change to a new event is certainly the product of good intentions, and the planning committee has expressed every desire to create a new tradition that will be even better than 100 Nights. Still, in order to be successful, the new tradition cannot merely encourage seniors to “reflect,” “think” and “prepare.” It must also allow them to celebrate and have fun. The organizers of the event should not scale back the celebration aspect just because they fear a few participants might become too rowdy.

Students should give the new event a fair chance and realize that they can still have fun and bond together without the presence of alcohol. They need to take the the event’s thought-provoking intentions seriously or it will simply meet the same fate as 100 Nights in a few years.

This could be the start of a memorable new tradition at the University. An event created in a framework that integrates both thoughtful reflection and celebration potentially will have a much more powerful impact upon the graduating senior class than 100 Nights did in the past.

Over the 2009-2010 school year, a total of 77 cases of academic irresponsibility were brought before the University’s Board of Review on Academic Responsibility. While we could hardly argue that 77 cases represents a rampant outbreak of cheating on campus, we do believe students and faculty should more seriously consider the issue. 

Of the 77 cases adjudicated, 22 were found not guilty. The remaining cases received sentences ranging in severity from taking a zero on the assignment or a drop in the final course grade to a one-semester suspension. More troubling, however, is that many more instances of cheating go unreported, potentially skewing our interpretation of the statistics provided by the Board of Review.

The increased availability of information on the Internet and the growth in the use of electronic telecommunications devices have made cheating and plagiarism easier, though many students still resort to traditional techniques. Some students sneak a peak at their classmates’ quizzes while the teacher’s back is turned. Others stash notes in the bathroom and take breaks during exams to review the stowed materials. Some students have even made a business of trading old exams and homework assignments with other students who are taking the same classes the next semester.

Using technology to cheat on homework has also become prominent, according to the March 28, 2010 issue of the Chronicle of Higher Education. Some students download online solutions manuals and hand in answers copied directly from the manual. Others may store answers in graphing calculators during exams. The problem lies in the “technological detachment phenomenon,” according to the article on “High-Tech Cheating.” In other words, students feel that cheating is acceptable because technology removes them from any notion of responsibility. 

Plagiarism, whether intentional or not, is another growing issue. Twenty-eight of the reported cases related to plagiarism, and only six were found not guilty. The rise of plagiarism reflects a growing trend in students not understanding the importance of giving credit where credit is due. For example, a New York Times article dated Aug. 1, 2010 reported that many college students simply did not understand the extent of their crime, faulting digital technology for the blurring lines of authorship.

But no matter how much technology facilitates academic irresponsibility, students should resist the urge. Although the competitive college culture seems to encourage it, cheating is still no more than the easy way out. It fosters neither lifelong learning nor original scholarship. While it may produce short-term results in the form of higher grades, its long-term effects promise only a lifetime of dependence on others.

Students should realize cheating and plagiarism are severe crimes and should not be taken lightly. Furthermore, faculty and teaching assistants should assume a more no-nonsense approach to these problems when they see them. Letting the matter slide only encourages serial cheaters to continue their unethical methods.

Cheating and plagiarism are never acceptable in any learning environment. Students and faculty should report instances of cheating to the Board of Review on Academic Responsibility, and the sentences issued need to reflect the severity of the crimes.