1000 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
For the past two Mondays, gaggles of elated high school seniors have been wandering around campus with their bright-orange folders for Princeton Preview. Despite the myriad activities — ranging from a cappella shows to public lectures — Preview is missing a significant aspect of Princeton which no prospective student should leave without knowing about.
The Princeton University Board Plan Review Committee has been reviewing dining hall options for the past two years, and this week released a memo detailing possible changes for both under and upperclassmen. Although well-intentioned, this proposal seems to place more limitations on students rather than facilitating student’s growth towards making healthy decisions for themselves.
Native English speaker or not, you have an accent. So does the girl sitting next you, and so do I. We all vocalize our thoughts with different rhythms, intonations, percussiveness, and inflections. Even within the United States, people speak English differently. Despite this natural tendency, we are keen to point out the “accents” of those who speak differently from how we do.
As we enter room draw and draw times are released, many will find that their draw time(s) are at inconvenient hours, specifically from 9 a.m. through 7 p.m. on weekdays. During these hours, most students will either be in lecture, lab, precept, or another prior commitment, creating a high likelihood of conflict. Many students feel forced to get proxies to cover for them during their draw time, which can be inconvenient and stressful. This nuisance can be prevented through simple policy changes.
I believe that the mere potential for this process to take place will encourage the Committee leadership to think more critically about its behavior and professionalism. This referendum would help remedy an Honor Committee in desperate need of transparency and accountability, so I strongly encourage you to vote YES.
My phone-typed response soon had the length of an essay, and I’m sharing part of that here. As an engineering major focused on sustainable design, and a health-focused individual who treasures the interpersonal warmth of a great meal, I’ve long taken issue with the required meal plans at this university. The forced predetermination of one’s food and eating place is incomprehensible to my friends and family, in Germany and across the globe.
If the Board Plan Review Committee is truly concerned about flexibility, they should not make any meal plan mandatory. Affordability can be addressed by simply increasing the annual stipend or granting more free meal swipes. Quality of life should not be sacrificed for supposed efficiency, which keeps costs down for the University while the most vulnerable student populations.
We’re all told to maximize our time here, and no one will argue that the classes you choose are going impact that time. Part of what you choose is the options you’re presented with, and course times are a big part of how we schedule our lives. Who knows how many people have left Princeton without experiencing that one life-changing class, that one class that made it all worth it, because Introduction to Spanish is at 1:30 p.m., and so is everything else.
This week, the USG election ballot includes yet another referendum to amend the Honor Constitution. Unlike the referenda from the fall, however, this proposal does not touch on the committee’s penalties or procedures. Instead, it focuses on the leadership of the committee itself. The referendum, if adopted, would create a procedure for a member of the Honor Committee to challenge the incumbent chair or clerk for their position. Regardless of your views on the Honor Committee and the fall referenda, this proposal should concern every student.
Feeling ridiculed and disrespected is a universally shared experience that all types of people have felt on different scales.
So, what we’re left with is simply more questions, and it’s incumbent on good journalists to dig further, and for the State Attorney Generals’ office to release more information on the exact circumstances of the shooting on March 20. For our community’s part, Princeton seems to want to sweep the memory of the shooting away. A window was shot out in the Panera on the day of the shooting; it was replaced by evening the next day, as I walked by. And then a week later, Panera reopened, as if nothing had ever happened. “We remodeled,” read a cheery sign outside the storefront.
The University should have more consistent institutional guidance for underclassmen, who are still confused as to where they see themselves in the near future.
It is imperative, in today’s environment, to seriously view campus carry as a burden in an intellectual sense, as Makalani writes, and in a physical safety sense.
We join our peers on campuses across the country in imploring you to revoke your endorsement of Kenneth Marcus and ensure our safety and the safety of all students.
When course selection comes out right after the grind and frustration of midterms, it's tempting to seek out the classes whose course evaluations promise an “easy A.” Another semester of all-nighters in Sherrerd Hall sounds less appealing than two hours of lecture a week, one hour of reading, and an in-class midterm plus final. But, as we plan for our limited semesters here, we should keep in mind that it is this academic rigor — the constantly challenging material and ambitious curriculum — that drove us to Princeton in the first place.
On April 12, 2011 — seven years ago today — a much-loved senior Spanish lecturer at the University killed himself. The University had suspended him without due process, and in seeming violation of its own procedures. In the time since, there has never been an independent investigation of what the University did. Whenever I think of my Princeton experience, the University’s actions around the death of a beloved community member is what I remember most of all.
But more than anything, my professor’s ability to find beauty on that seemingly forsaken day left me speechless. I was prepared to let the afternoon go to waste, just as I was ready to declare my day earlier this week a total failure. But my beloved professor wasn’t. Instead of seeing the obvious ugliness that sometimes surrounds us, she chose, instead, to see something beautiful. She saw blossoms in the midst of a snowstorm.
I disagree. While these people do hold severely and deeply incorrect views, I don’t think they are, for the most part, stupid, deranged, or vicious people. If the Republican thinks, for instance, that the U.S. government has a primary obligation to its citizens and that immigrants are bad for the country, then his conclusion about DACA would follow from his beliefs.
I hope to show that many of the qualities that some deride in fact possess tremendous value. When we critique other modernist buildings on campus like it, we should be careful not to overlook their perhaps subtle beauty.
The unfortunate truth is, for most undergraduates, the majority of their time spent “learning” at Princeton is occupied by lectures. Last spring, I argued that professors should stop lecturing us; in other words, Princeton should get rid of lectures completely. Sadly, though unsurprisingly, the University has not ended lectures since the publication of my article.