Letter to the Editor

Letter to the Editor: Setting the table

At Princeton, another year has come and gone, and with it the cycle of all our peculiar rituals. This week, a significant portion of the junior and senior classes gather in big mansions behind locked doors (they’re locked: I’ve checked) to cast judgment on a significant portion of the sophomore class. They will display the sophomore’s names and photos, hear the case for and against the social merits of each, and then, one by one, vote on whether or not to admit the sophomore in question into their mansion. 

Mental Health Peers: A needed support system

I propose the establishment of Mental Health Peers. Mental Health Peers will provide a concrete service in the University community by training students how to be friends in mental crisis. We will train our friends, classmates, and peers how to talk about mental health.

The Republican tax bill is a disaster for millennials

On the Honor Code Referenda: Why aren’t we mobilizing?

Princeton undergraduate students and alumni: You should be absolutely furious right now. We just had our (honor-) constitutionally-endowed rights obliterated by a short email sent by several administrators. These rights were guaranteed to us 125 years ago with the establishment of the Honor Constitution and yet, one well-timed email was enough to dismantle them.

Letter to the Editor: Honor Code Reform remanding was provoked outright

The administrators who wrote the email did not do anything untoward. The erroneous, careless, and irresponsible actions of the USG and the USG subcommittee unnecessarily constructed this ignominious debacle. 

Letter to the Editor: Response to the EIC’s response

I write in response to Sarah Sakha’s response to my opinion piece demonstrating that Title IX proceedings are far less fair than those of the Honor Code. I have nothing to add to my original argument, which was based on an undisputed, factual comparison of the two sets of procedures. As Sakha herself wrote: “Ultimately, I agree with Berger’s overarching argument. Yes, the Honor Code Constitution presents stipulations far stricter than those presented by Title IX regulations.” In response to Sakha’s piece, I have three additional points. 

Letter to the Editor: Concerning amendments to the constitution of the Honor System

As I understand it, the undergraduate student body correctly followed this procedure as prescribed by the Constitution, and therefore successfully amended the Constitution. The deans and vice president outlined their thinking to the contrary, stating, “these proposals represent a significant departure from prior practice and exceed the scope of the responsibility delegated to the student body by the faculty concerning the Honor System. The proposals would also place the penalties for violating the Honor Code for in-class examinations out of alignment with academic integrity violations adjudicated by the faculty-student Committee on Discipline in cases of plagiarism and other out-of-class academic infractions.”

Title IX proceedings: Far less fair than the Honor Code

“Fairness.” It was the word at the heart of the arguments made in favor of Honor Code reform during December’s campaign. In announcing the referenda, the campaign sponsors wrote, “Most importantly, we need a fair system … we’re proposing four, common-sense reforms that will lead to greater fairness and academic integrity.” The importance of fairness was repeated throughout a photo campaign featuring calls from student leaders to vote for Honor Code reform in order to, for example, “strengthen our commitment to academic integrity, due process, and fairness for all students,” “ensure fairness for future classes,” and “make sure the system is fair for everyone.”

Letter to the Editor: Addressing the H1-B shortage

I have seen many of Princeton’s brightest minds be forced to leave the United States because, despite finding good employment after graduation, they are unable to get a work visa under the H-1B program. To put it simply: There are not enough visas available for high-skilled workers. As a result, great Princeton-educated scientists, engineers, and businesspeople, who would love to stay and contribute to this country, are forced to leave.

Letter to the Editor: An alum's perspective on Honor Code reform

It is in our nature to hire people who agree with us. I therefore recommend that after the current measure passes, students consider lessening the control of hiring new committee members by current committee members.

Letter to the Editor: Princeton needs a union — it doesn’t need PGSU

By refusing to affiliate with PGSU and revoking any affiliation you may have given them, you can take a step in the right direction. PGSU dissolving can provide the space to start over, to build from the ground up an organization founded on principles of fairness and transparency. 

Responsible Reform: Comments from Honor Committee Leadership Part II

Under this reform, the student who copies code on the in-class programming exam would be on disciplinary probation until graduation, and the student who copies code on the assignment would be suspended for a year. So, if this reform passes, we must then ask if we can encourage the faculty and the Committee On Discipline to accept a modified standard penalty across the board.

Letter to the Editor: Some thoughts on Honor Code Reform

Our job really starts then, once the Honor Committee Chair and two investigators determine a hearing is warranted after reviewing evidence and speaking with the student in question, also known as the SIQ. From that moment, Peer Representatives are defense attorneys, peer counselors, advisers, and ombuds, all at once.

Letter to the Editor: Clarifying the historical record on the Honor Committee

I write to share clarification and historical context in response to the letter by former Honor Committee chairs that was published on Monday, Dec. 11​.​ ​The authors declare​ that for violations of the honor system​, “in 1893, Princeton students settled on a consequence — one-year suspension​...”​​​ In fact, for the majority of the Honor System's existence, the standard penalty for Honor Code violations was expulsion.

Letter to the Editor: Release Patrice Nganang

Last Thursday evening, the prominent Francophone novelist Patrice Nganang was arrested as he was about to board a flight leaving Cameroon. Initially charged with “insulting” the president, Nganang has been a vocal and visible critic of the oppressive and brutal tactics that Paul Biya’s regime is using against Cameroonian citizens in the English-speaking western part of the country.

Letter to the Editor: Response to WWS graduate students

Since becoming dean in 2012, I have worked to improve how the school approaches issues of inclusion and representation. I am committed to continuing this work with our students to identify areas where the school can improve and implement needed reforms.

Letter to the Editor: My rape isn't a joke

Increased access to mental health care – which would help assault survivors and many more – is apparently just an “idea,” not an “ideal,” according to USG presidential candidate Ryan Ozminkowski.

A call for increased diversity and inclusion at WWS

We write as a group of Woodrow Wilson School graduate students to call attention to the urgent need for further progress in creating a safe, supportive, and fair environment for marginalized students.

Honor Committee Reform No. 1: Making cheating easier for Princetonians everywhere

Anybody smart enough to be admitted to Princeton should have realized what really ought to have been an obvious fact about cheating at the University: people don’t refrain from cheating because of their impeccable moral compasses, they do so because they’re scared of the consequences that will follow if they do cheat. 

Why we need to reform the Honor Constitution: a former Honor Committee member explains

As a referendum sponsor who served on the Honor Committee for two years, I write with the hope that my fellow Princetonians will exercise their right to amend the Honor Constitution and seize the opportunity to create a fairer system by voting “yes” on the four referenda up for voting between Tuesday, Dec. 12, and Thursday, Dec. 14.  These referenda reflect many frequent student concerns in addition to issues stemming from dynamics that I bore witness to while a member of the Honor Committee.