2008 Woodie Awards
Letters to the Editor
Issue date: 3/26/08 Section: Opinion
Hazing is not so rare
Because I seem to have my head more in the real world here on the campus than the vice president for student affairs and her office, I am disturbed by the comments made by vice president for Student Affairs Linda Clement when she called the recent hazing violations on the campus "isolated incidents" and said the policy governing hazing "needs no changes." I quote from Monday's article: "I don't really believe that this is a widely recognized practice ... I really just don't believe any of that sort of thing is going on here." Wow. I mean really, wow. And I assume the racism that helped place the noose outside the Nyumburu Cultural Center surprised her too? But, of course, that was an "isolated incident" as well.
A study in the American Journal of Health Behavior shows that these are not isolated incidents. In fact over a third of students reported being involved in an event defined by the university's code as hazing. Further, more than one in 10 students admitted to have been hazed in some way. The study notes the discrepancy between identification and action. And the hazing occurs on sport teams as well - to about half of those participating.
The point in fact here is that even if these things were isolated incidents - which study data shows they are not - when the university's vice president for student affairs stands before the public and makes such ill-founded statements and suggests that nothing be done, it smacks of politicking for the good of the public profile of the university. Instead of addressing, educating and intervening for the welfare of students. It's too bad the university's penchant for prioritizing a good public face over the reality of the need for protection of its students against discrimination, physical abuse and stereotyping isn't an "isolated incident" itself.
Andrew Timleck
MPH, PhD candidate
Sociology Department
A disturbing sense of entitlement
"I earned my minor," pithily remarked Colleen Esper about the courses she has successfully completed in U.S. Latina/o Studies. Her complaint notwithstanding, she has not actually earned it. Such an unwarranted feeling of entitlement quite disturbs me.
I am not wholly unpossessed of sympathy for Esper: Having endured hardships such as taking the courses that she wanted must be quite frustrating! At least being able to claim that she has a minor in the field could, perhaps, ease some of the pain. However, the article makes quite clear that this minor does not exist; rather, it is merely the subject of a discussed proposal, one that has not yet been approved, let alone turned into policy. The minor not existing, her having earned it is impossible.
As distressing as this pervasive sense of entitlement - one hardly limited to Esper or academia at large - is, the circumstances discussed in the article are symptomatic of something far more pernicious: the diluted, almost meaningless nature of undergraduate education today. "[T]hey're ready to protest if the minor isn't approved." Faculty members, always on hand for the leftist cause du jour, have, following bravely in the footsteps of Chavez, et alia, joined the ranks of would-be protesters. Oh how the Academy has declined!
Where are the professors protesting that the letters and sciences program, rather than an intensive interdisciplinary program that actually educates students, mind and soul, is where undergrads "prepare to declare" through courses of studies that will train them to become drones in the work-a-day world? Why have I read nothing of disgruntled faculty members threatening to barricade the doors to the Main Administration Building until university officials relent and more aggressively fund and advertise the program in the classics, which was for centuries "the major for university students preparing for law, ministry, medicine and politics"?
I worry much more about Latin studies than Latina/o. I may be in the minority, but I should not be.
Nathan P. Origer
Master's candidate
Community Planning
Air Your Views
The Diamondback welcomes your comments. Address your letters or guest columns to the Opinion Desk at opinion@dbk.umd.edu. All letters and guest columns must be signed. Include your full name, year, major and day- and night-time phone numbers. Please limit letters to 300 words. Please limit guest columns to between 550 and 700 words.
Submission of a letter or guest column constitutes an exclusive, worldwide, transferable license to The Diamondback of the copyright in the material in any media. The Diamondback retains the right to edit submissions for content and length.
Letters can also be submitted online here.
Because I seem to have my head more in the real world here on the campus than the vice president for student affairs and her office, I am disturbed by the comments made by vice president for Student Affairs Linda Clement when she called the recent hazing violations on the campus "isolated incidents" and said the policy governing hazing "needs no changes." I quote from Monday's article: "I don't really believe that this is a widely recognized practice ... I really just don't believe any of that sort of thing is going on here." Wow. I mean really, wow. And I assume the racism that helped place the noose outside the Nyumburu Cultural Center surprised her too? But, of course, that was an "isolated incident" as well.
A study in the American Journal of Health Behavior shows that these are not isolated incidents. In fact over a third of students reported being involved in an event defined by the university's code as hazing. Further, more than one in 10 students admitted to have been hazed in some way. The study notes the discrepancy between identification and action. And the hazing occurs on sport teams as well - to about half of those participating.
The point in fact here is that even if these things were isolated incidents - which study data shows they are not - when the university's vice president for student affairs stands before the public and makes such ill-founded statements and suggests that nothing be done, it smacks of politicking for the good of the public profile of the university. Instead of addressing, educating and intervening for the welfare of students. It's too bad the university's penchant for prioritizing a good public face over the reality of the need for protection of its students against discrimination, physical abuse and stereotyping isn't an "isolated incident" itself.
Andrew Timleck
MPH, PhD candidate
Sociology Department
A disturbing sense of entitlement
"I earned my minor," pithily remarked Colleen Esper about the courses she has successfully completed in U.S. Latina/o Studies. Her complaint notwithstanding, she has not actually earned it. Such an unwarranted feeling of entitlement quite disturbs me.
I am not wholly unpossessed of sympathy for Esper: Having endured hardships such as taking the courses that she wanted must be quite frustrating! At least being able to claim that she has a minor in the field could, perhaps, ease some of the pain. However, the article makes quite clear that this minor does not exist; rather, it is merely the subject of a discussed proposal, one that has not yet been approved, let alone turned into policy. The minor not existing, her having earned it is impossible.
As distressing as this pervasive sense of entitlement - one hardly limited to Esper or academia at large - is, the circumstances discussed in the article are symptomatic of something far more pernicious: the diluted, almost meaningless nature of undergraduate education today. "[T]hey're ready to protest if the minor isn't approved." Faculty members, always on hand for the leftist cause du jour, have, following bravely in the footsteps of Chavez, et alia, joined the ranks of would-be protesters. Oh how the Academy has declined!
Where are the professors protesting that the letters and sciences program, rather than an intensive interdisciplinary program that actually educates students, mind and soul, is where undergrads "prepare to declare" through courses of studies that will train them to become drones in the work-a-day world? Why have I read nothing of disgruntled faculty members threatening to barricade the doors to the Main Administration Building until university officials relent and more aggressively fund and advertise the program in the classics, which was for centuries "the major for university students preparing for law, ministry, medicine and politics"?
I worry much more about Latin studies than Latina/o. I may be in the minority, but I should not be.
Nathan P. Origer
Master's candidate
Community Planning
Air Your Views
The Diamondback welcomes your comments. Address your letters or guest columns to the Opinion Desk at opinion@dbk.umd.edu. All letters and guest columns must be signed. Include your full name, year, major and day- and night-time phone numbers. Please limit letters to 300 words. Please limit guest columns to between 550 and 700 words.
Submission of a letter or guest column constitutes an exclusive, worldwide, transferable license to The Diamondback of the copyright in the material in any media. The Diamondback retains the right to edit submissions for content and length.
Letters can also be submitted online here.
Submit a letter to the editor or post a comment below.
Be the first to comment on this story