Something Positive, For a Change
In the three years since the announcement of the Student Life Initiative, administrative decisions involving alcohol and social life have often met with heated controversy. So it was surprising that the Binswanger working group's recommendations for a new alcohol policy were greeted with a quiet campus reception this week.
The mild and sensible nature of the changes to the existing policy -- mostly amounting to semantics -- was one reason for the lack of clamor.
A more important explanation, however, was the College's commendable new way of instituting change. Rather than imposing policies suddenly from on high as they did with the Safety and Security walk-throughs, administrators are working closely with students to create policies that satisfy both groups.
The proposed changes to the "Good Samaritan" policy, for example, stemmed from student admissions that they would be more likely to bring intoxicated friends to Dick's House if their own names would not be reported to class deans. The switch from a "registration" system in which parties must be organized in advance to a "reservation" system in which gatherings can be reported on the fly stemmed from student desires for greater flexibility.
Though the minimal changes -- if implemented -- would do little to meet the policy's highly touted goal of tearing down walls of mistrust that currently separate administrators and students, the process ensured that the goal at least has the potential to be realized.
Foreign Aid
In a poorly-conceived move, an interagency working group, operating under the auspices of the Office of Homeland Security, may prohibit international students from studying subjects such as computer science and engineering that could be directly applied to the development of weapons of mass destruction.
The very idea that any group within the government could propose such a plan is appalling. International students make up almost half of those pursuing advanced degrees in engineering. The proposed measure goes against the principles of higher education, demonizing foreign students and denying access to knowledge. Moreover, it recalls such embarrassing chapters of American history as the Asian Exclusion Act of 1924.
This extension of the Bush administration's directive issued last October on "Combating Terrorism Through Immigration Policies" threatens one of the basic tenets on which our country prides itself: the best populace is an informed populace. Opening our doors to students from other countries helps to foster international understanding. But, under this policy, foreign students may be driven away from the United States. It would stifle the interests of foreign students choosing to attend American universities, and could hinder the modernization of countries that rely upon Western-educated students to revamp their infrastructure.
This misguided thinking will not solve the problem of terrorism. In protecting our nation, we should not deny others the very freedoms that we ourselves have fought so long to preserve.
