214 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
The Department of Public Safety recently announced that it will allow sworn officers to access rifles in case of an active shooter on campus. Under the University’s new policy, Public Safety officers would not carry firearms on them at all times. Instead, rifles would be kept in an armory and public safety cars and, only if there is an active shooter, be accessible by sworn Public Safety officers who have completed New Jersey State Police School. The Board applauds Public Safety’s decision as one that will make campus safer in the future.While Princeton historically has had a low crime rate, the Board believes this policy change prudent in light of recent trends in school violence. The announcement comes in the wake of school shootings this month at Umpqua Community College in Oregon, Northern Arizona University, and Texas Southern University. These incidents took place amid an alarming rise in school shootings over the past decade and a half. Last year, the FBI reported that there were an average of 16.4 school shootings per year between 2007 and 2013, compared to 6.4 shootings per year between 2000 and 2006. While the new policy is not a panacea, it will keep the Princeton community safer by improving emergency response time and effectiveness.School shootings are unpredictable, and the results are tragic and devastating. It is the University’s responsibility to be prepared in these situations. Public Safety officers do not need weapons on a day to day basis, but they should be in a position to protect both themselves and the campus community in case of an emergency. Some students worry that students’ interactions with Public Safety officers will be significantly altered by the presence of firearms, but the policy change only affects active shooter situations. The rifles would not be visible or used at any other time.The Board supports this policy because it will allow for a more rapid response to active shooter situations. Unlike off-campus police officers, Public Safety officers have an intimate knowledge of campus layout and buildings. This means that they may be able to respond to emergencies more quickly and safely than police officers who have never been on campus before. While off-campus police departments would also respond in the case of an active shooter, increased preparedness by Public Safety officers can only be an advantage in an emergency situation.The Board has confidence in the Public Safety’s ability to respond properly in these situations. Sworn Public Safety officers go through a 26-week training program at the New Jersey State Police Academy, and they have the same qualifications as New Jersey police officers. Generally, active shooter training is completed by police departments once officers have been through the Police Department. The Board calls on the University to ensure that all sworn Public Safety officers regularly complete active shooter trainings so that they are able to respond in the best way possible.Still, we should remember that allowing Public Safety to access rifles is only one step in a series of positive emergency response reforms. The Board believes that the University should also increase emergency preparedness by publicizing active shooter protocols for all students to follow, in line with proposals that we have advocated for in the past. Princeton students should be briefed on how to react depending on where they are.It is unlikely that a school shooting will take place, but if that happens, it is imperative that Public Safety officers be able to take whichever steps next necessary to protect themselves and the campus community. The policy change regarding firearms is narrowly tailored, but could provide Public Safety officers with a life-saving resource in the event of a shooting.Cydney Kim ‘17, Jeffrey Leibenhaut ‘16, Carolyn Liziewski ‘18, Ashley Reed ‘18, and Aditya Trivedi ‘16 abstained from the writing of this editorial
TheEditorial Boardis an independent body and decides its opinions separately from the regular staff and editors of The Daily Princetonian. The Board answers only to its Chair, the Opinion Editor and the Editor-in-Chief.
Earlier this month, students circulated a petition to bring a new co-op to campus. This echoed the efforts of a similar petition distributed in 2014 that called for a new vegetarian co-op. Co-ops, seen as an economical alternative to dining options such as eating clubs, have become increasingly popular in recent years. In light of this petition, the Editorial Board calls for the University to provide the space and resources for the creation of a new co-op.
In the midst of the semester, balancing multiple heavy workloads is difficult for students; however, the challenges of maintaining this balance begin earlier than the first day of class. Specifically, choosing the correct combination of classes is often an unduly difficult task due to class scheduling conflicts. Undergraduate courses are not scheduled evenly throughout the day; rather, a majority of classes begin during the 11 a.m. or 1:30 p.m. scheduling blocks. To increase the range of classes students can accommodate in their schedules, the Editorial Board recommends redistributing a portion of the undergraduate courses to other, less-trafficked scheduling blocks throughout the day.
University students are fortunate to have Career Services as a resource when searching for jobs and internships. The office does a praiseworthy job of matching academic interests to career interests, preparing students for interviews, attracting top employers and much more. Nonetheless, the student body’s poor understanding of Career Services’ policies undermine Career Services’ mission to educate, engage and empower students. The Board believes that Career Services should do more to address job offers that violate its on-campus recruiting policies, better communicate policies and events to students and increase the number of in-person appointments.
Last week, the University released the results of the WeSpeak survey. In the survey, 34 percent of undergraduate women reported being victims of sexual misconduct broadly defined, while 27 percent of undergraduate women reported unwanted sexual contact or assault. To address the unacceptable pervasiveness of this disturbing problem, we must both double down on our commitment to swift and proportionate punishment for offenders and look for new ways to combat misconduct. In light of the survey results, the Editorial Board recommends implementing mandatory bystander intervention training for leaders of student organizations. Additionally, the Board calls upon all Princeton students to take action on an individual basis to discuss and address these problems.
Princeton is well-known as a dynamic research university that focuses on undergraduate education. The University’s faculty members are not only experts in their respective fields but also educators who share their knowledge and expertise with students. In order to facilitate the learning experience, several departments throughout the University have begun to implement alternatives to the traditional in-class lecture, including innovative learning methods such as video lectures, online discussion boards and beginner’s precepts. Princeton prides itself on the diversity of its student body, not just in the geographic sense, but also in terms of intellectual interests. In this same spirit of academic diversity, the Board encourages departments to expand the use of these innovative learning methods.
Last semester, the unsigned editorials featured on this page have discussed issues such as electing Honor Committee representatives, encouraging students to take the WeSpeak survey and altering the academic calendar. The Daily Princetonian Editorial Board, a group of 16 undergraduates, was collectively responsible for writing these pieces. The members of the Board are not the editors of the various sections of the ‘Prince.’ Instead, they constitute an independent group of undergraduate students charged with determining the position of the newspaper as a whole. Today, instead of taking a stance on an issue, we would like to explain the editorial process and invite interested freshmen, sophomores and juniors to apply to join the Board.
In a Letter to the Editor on September 7, 2015, Luke Koppisch, Deputy Director of the Alliance Center for Independence noted that while Princeton seeks robust academic freedom, it also requires that all of its members show each other mutual respect and understanding. Koppisch went on to criticize Peter Singer, the Ira W. Decamp Professor of Bioethics, for publishing views Koppisch likened to hate speech. He isolated Singer’s publications as endorsing non-voluntary euthanasia of severely disabled infants and the elderly.
The start of classes is an exciting time, offering students a chance to meet new people, reconnect with old friends and explore varied interests. But for some students, this is overshadowed by schedules not yet finalized due to University policies related to add/drop period for non-freshman, precept selection and access to course syllabi. The Board proposes three reforms to the start of the fall semester: allow upperclassmen to add or drop courses when Academic Year Sign-In begins, improve the process of precept selection and require that professors post course syllabi on Blackboard two weeks prior to the start of classes. We believe these changes will ease students’ transition to the fall semester and create more choice and flexibility.
This academic year, Princeton’s undergraduate student body voted in a series of contentious referenda. While Undergraduate Student Government elections are governed by campaign finance regulations outlined in the USG Elections Handbook, students involved in referendum campaigns are only bound by Princeton’s “Rights, Rules, Responsibilities,” as well as New Jersey law. As a result, referenda become an electoral free-for-all during which student advocacy organizations have the ability to spend unlimited funds in support of their causes without listing their donors.
Commencement marks the end of of the undergraduate careers of Princeton seniors and includes four days of events for the members of the graduating class and their families. This is a time for great celebration that is meant to be shared with friends and relatives; however, given the differing capacities of the events’ various venues, seniors are given limited numbers of tickets for invitees. The number of allotted tickets is the same for all seniors, and those who want more are not allowed to buy them. The Board believes that the University should create a formal system for commencement ticket redistribution.
Princeton Preview has come and gone, and the University is preparing to welcome the Class of 2019 in September. For incoming freshmen, orientation week is a turbulent transition into a new social scene, and residential college advisers serve as guides to University policy and culture, including sexuality on campus. Next fall, RCAs will distribute a copy of “You’re So Sexy When You Aren’t Transmitting STDs,” a comic book meant to provide freshmen with information about consent and safe sex. Additionally, all freshmen will watch the play “The Way You Move,” which addresses campus sexual climate. While presenting this material engagingly is commendable, the University fails to treat the subject matter with the gravity it deserves and to include those who choose abstinence.
Princeton Preview is the University’s premier outreach event for admitted students. Prior to the meningitis B outbreak that occurred a year and a half ago, Preview was a three-day event that included extensive exposure to student life and overnight stays in the University’s residential colleges. Last April, we agreed with the University’s decision to shorten Preview to a daylong program in response to the meningitis outbreak. However, given that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention now consider the University’s meningitis B risk equivalent to that of other colleges, the Editorial Board advocates that the University return to its overnight model for Preview.
Last week, The Daily Princetonian reported on an initiative by Princeton Hindu Satsangam and a number of both Hindu and non-Hindu students to advocate for the creation of a Hindu prayer space on campus. Though the University Chapel hosts Hindu events and Murray-Dodge Hall, which houses the University’s Religious Life offices, contains an interfaith prayer room, supporters of the proposal have pointed out that the establishment of a space geared specifically towards Hindu worship would offer a meaningful recognition of Princeton’s large Hindu community. Additionally, a new Hindu prayer space would contribute to the mission of fostering diversity and cultural awareness which lies at the core of the University’s educational goals. The Editorial Board endorses this initiative and commends the students who have expressed interest in a prayer space for their efforts to enhance Hindu life at Princeton.
Club sports are an integral part of university life for many students. At the University, the more visible varsity sports teams, which accommodate only a small fraction of the student body, are complemented by the large number of club sports. According to the Campus Recreation website, the University has 37 different club sports, rangin from fencing to ultimate frisbee. Open to all University students, regardless of skill level, club sports contribute to the physical health and well-being of the students who participate, as they emphasize peer leadership and student development outside the classroom. Thus, the Editorial Board recommends that Campus Rec better support clubs with start-up funding and fundraising assistance.
From noon today through noon on Wednesday, voting will take place in the Spring USG Elections. The ballot includes a referendum to determine if Princeton students will call on the Trustees “to divest [the University’s endowment] from multinational corporations that maintain the infrastructure of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank.” The Board urges students to vote no on the divestment referendum. We believe that the University should not directly insert itself in heavily politicized issues like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, especially when such issues have been the source of widespread disagreement on campus. Further, we consider the specific condemnation of Israel’s actions without similar condemnation of worse conduct exhibited by other nations to be a philosophically inconsistent show of ‘selective outrage.’
Princeton is not perfect. We have persistent problems with race, gender and class that affect members of our student body every day. Far too often, it falls upon the most affected groups to work alone to combat these problems. The fact that the University shares this dynamic with the rest of society does not make the situation excusable. We can do better, and we should do better. Being in the service of a righteous cause, however, does not exempt activists from criticism. We, the Editorial Board, disapprove of the misconstrual of the words of University President Eisgruber ’83 during the protest at the Chapel on Sunday and commend Eisgruber for his thoughtful response to the discussion surrounding Urban Congo and Big Sean.
A university is a stage for the clash of ideas through reasoned discourse between those of diverse points of view. Princetonians are diverse in many ways. We differ academically, politically and culturally. Diversity of thought inevitably yields disagreement. But despite our differences and deep personal investment in various debates, we pride ourselves on the ability to engage with one another and develop ideas and values through healthy participation in the University’s intellectual community. We therefore commend the University faculty and President Eisgruber’s administration for passing a motion to include a more comprehensive statement protecting freedom of expression in the University “Rights, Rules, Responsibilities,” and we strongly encourage our peer institutions to follow suit.
Since it went live on Sunday, the petition to have Big Sean dropped as the Lawnparties main act has fueled an intense debate within the student body. The Editorial Board supports the discussion about misogyny in music and the role the campus community has in perpetuating it; however, the Board thinks that the petition’s focus on the Undergraduate Student Government should be expanded to a more holistic critique of campus culture in general. Instead of looking to blame USG president Ella Cheng ’16 and social chair Simon Wu ’17, the Board thinks that those who have signed the petition should look at the campus community and the choices that have led to his invitation, as well as the role that music with derogatory lyrics plays in our social lives.
Last week, an opinion column was published in The Daily Princetonian by members of the Faculty-Student Committee on Sexual Misconduct urging the student body of the University to participate in the "WeSpeak: Attitudes on Sexual Misconduct at Princeton" survey. According to an email distributed to students by the committee, the objective of the survey is simple: to learn about the prevalence of sexual assault at Princeton and to more effectively address issues related to sexual violence and sexual assault. The Editorial Board recognizes the critical importance of accurate data related to instances of sexual assault and sexual violence at the University, and the Board is concerned that an initially low response rate may have caused the University to extend the survey deadline. Consequently, we urge every student to participate in the survey before its April 7 deadline.