Over the past few years, the Wilson School has undergone dramatic changes in its undergraduate program. These changes have included the discontinuation of selective admissions, the emphasis on specific policy tracks and the discontinuation of the certificate program. With this in mind, the Board, while recognizing that the previous certificate program posed numerous problems, recommends that the Wilson School create a new certificate program that would aid in the school’s aim to further collaboration between policymakers and those in other disciplines and departments. We believe that the School should offer certificates in specialized policy areas, such as security or health care policy, instead of offering a general certificate.
The Honor Committee recently announced that it would be holding focus groups to solicit student opinions regarding the punishment for writing after time has been called on exams. In an op-ed published in the ‘Prince,’ Honor Committee chair Antonia Hyman ’13 reported that there has been a significant increase in the number of students reported taking extra time on exams. The Editorial Board welcomes the Honor Committee’s initiative and calls for even greater transparency. Taking into account our judgment about the relative severity of working over time and the likely effects of a policy change, the Board believes that the default sentence for writing over time on an exam should be a zero on the exam and academic probation, rather than a one-year suspension.
While Princeton students are able to fulfill distribution requirements with numerous courses that can be taken pass/D/fail, students are required to take all introductory level language courses on a graded, no-P/D/F scale. The Editorial Board agrees that a letter grade should be required for fulfilling the University language requirement. However, the Board believes that students who have already completed the University foreign language requirement should be allowed to P/D/F introductory level classes for additional foreign languages.
While the Editorial Board supports many of the concerns raised in the report, we do not wholly agree with the final recommendation: We believe that banning rush events for only the first semester of freshman year would achieve most of the benefits of postponing rush while avoiding certain problems.
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.
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.
The Editorial Board would like to congratulate Eisgruber on being named Princeton’s 20th president. Back in September, the Board wrote an editorial complimenting President Tilghman on her confident leadership and detailing the issues we believed were imperative for the incoming President to address during his or her tenure. In light of Mr. Eisgruber’s appointment, the Board would like to reflect on his time as provost and express its hopes for his presidency.
The University ought to have taken a more straightforward and honest approach in reporting Calvo’s death.
Given that the Committee on Discipline hears only one or two cases of sexual assault every year, however, it seems that changing the standard of review would not be wholly effective in solving the problem. Attempts to improve the disciplinary process must also focus on reforming campus culture so that more victims of sexual assault feel comfortable reporting it to appropriate campus authorities.
Princeton is certainly exceptional in a number of ways, making it is easy to assume a problem like sexual assault “does not happen here.” Yet even in our ivory tower, sexual assault occurs. It is important to acknowledge that Princeton is part of and contributes to the national figures. We are no exception.
Allowing students to charge their U-Store purchases to their student accounts will help both the student body and the U-Store itself.
Finals are clearly a difficult time for everybody involved, and we credit the University for the job it has done in making this stressful period as painless as possible. Of the relevant policies, however, three stand out in need of change.
The Editorial Board urges students to vote for the proposed changes to the Honor Code but it does not support the ENDA referendum.