The USG got one step closer to approving a student-written letter voicing opinions and concerns with the University's recent grade inflation proposals at its senate meeting Sunday night.
Though a final vote on the letter had been expected to occur Sunday, USG members decided to postpone the vote in order to get more student feedback on the draft, USG President Matt Margolin '05 said. The letter will face final approval by USG members Tuesday night.
"The extra time will give us a chance to talk with students and further assess which issues are important to them and to see how they react to our approach," Margolin said.
The letter is the result of a student forum held last Thursday by the USG precisely for the purpose of composing an official response from the student body to the proposals.
In its current form, the letter states that grade inflation is an issue that should be addressed but also expresses concern that the proposals do not adequately protect student interests, Margolin said.
If approved, the letter will be sent to President Tilghman, Dean of the College Nancy Weiss Malkiel and the student body Wednesday. The USG is also considering the logistics of distributing the letter to each faculty member.
"Over the last two weeks the level of debate and discussion has increased dramatically, and we hope that this letter will help to do the same thing within the faculty," Margolin said.
Malkiel also attended the meeting to observe the discussion and answer questions from USG members.
Since the release of the proposals, many students have expressed opposition to them, claiming that if passed they would make the University more competitive and hurt students' chances to be accepted to competitive graduate schools and jobs.
A number of students turned out to voice their concerns to Malkiel at a Whig-Clio panel last Thursday, and they will have additional chances to do so again this week as Malkiel holds question-and-answer sessions in the residential colleges.
The issue will be taken up at the April 26 faculty meeting, the earliest date at which a vote on the proposals could occur.
Read More
As endowment tax looms, Princeton asks departments to make plans for ‘permanent’ budget cuts, warns of potential layoffs
Christopher Bao and Annie RupertusPrinceton asked all departments and University units to prepare “separate plans for 5 percent and 10 percent permanent budget cuts to be phased in over the next three years in a memo sent Monday. Administrators warned of layoffs as the University prepares for a potential federal endowment tax, set to be debated in Congress later this week.
Princeton asked all departments and University units to prepare “separate plans for 5 percent and 10 percent permanent budget cuts to be phased in over the next three years in a memo sent Monday. Administrators warned of layoffs as the University prepares for a potential federal endowment tax, set to be debated in Congress later this week.
Newark airport disruptions snarl student travel plans
Cynthia TorresNewark has been facing disruptions for around two weeks amid a national air traffic controller shortage, leading to delays of up to five hours for some flights. As a result, some students flying home for the summer have changed their flights.
Newark has been facing disruptions for around two weeks amid a national air traffic controller shortage, leading to delays of up to five hours for some flights. Some students flying home for the summer and may be effected by delays and some students changed their flights.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth ’03 ‘plagiarized’ small portions of his senior thesis, experts say. But how serious is it?
Sena ChangA review of the senior thesis of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ’03 by The Daily Princetonian, in consultation with three plagiarism experts, found eight instances of uncredited material, sham paraphrasing, and verbatim copying. According to the experts, each passage violated Princeton’s academic integrity policies but varied in severity.
A review of the senior thesis of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ’03 by The Daily Princetonian, in consultation with three plagiarism experts, found eight instances of uncredited material, sham paraphrasing, and verbatim copying. According to the experts, each passage violated Princeton’s academic integrity policies but varied in severity.