Tuesday October 14 2014

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Tuesday october 14, 2014 vol. cxxxviii no. 91

WEATHER

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } HIGH

LOW

79˚ 64˚

Partly cloudy with 1015 mph winds. chance of rain:

20 percent

Follow us on Twitter @princetonian

In Opinion

Rabbi Julie Roth responds to a recent letter to the editor, and Mizzi Gomes critiques Cornell’s new learning initiative.

PAGE 5

Today on Campus 5 p.m.: James A. Baker III ‘52, 61st U.S. Secretary of State, will give a public lecture titled, “Iran: 35 Years after the Revolution.”

McCormick 101.

The Archives

Oct. 14, 1992 Gary Becker ’51 was awarded a Nobel Prize in Economics for his work in applying microeconomic analysis to a wide range of non-market human behavior. Gary is the first University alumnus to receive this honor.

got a tip?

Email it to:

U N I V E R S I T Y A F FA I R S

Letters shed light on mental health policies

By Chitra Marti

logical Services and which, she said, had been released to her with the student’s permission.

Her conclusion, in consultation with Dr. John Kolligian, the director of University Health Services, was that the student posed an “unacceptably high risk of intentional self-harm and the demands of a rigorous academic program in an intense university context would only increase that risk.”

The letter is part of a set of four previously confidential pieces of correspondence released by the University last week as part of a federal court lawsuit challenging its mental health practices and policies.

One of the letters is a match almost word for word to a letter published in The Daily Princetonian last spring that detailed the conditions for readmission following a leave of absence for mental health reasons. The letters were sent almost a year

staff writer

In March of 2012, Vice President for Campus Life Cynthia Cherrey wrote to a student a month after he had attempted to commit suicide and gave him an ultimatum: Take a voluntary withdrawal sometime in the next four days or be forced to do so.

“I do hope … that you will reconsider and take a voluntary withdrawal by no later than March 30, 2012,” she wrote in the final paragraph of a twopage letter. “If you do not choose to do so, I will require you to withdraw, which would then be reflected on your transcript.”

Earlier in the letter, Cherrey had cited seven distinct sources of medical information she had personally reviewed, including a summary of treatment written by Counseling and Psycho-

apart, one in 2012 and the other in 2013.

The documents, as well as interviews with the plaintiff and one other student who is currently taking a leave of absence for mental health issues, shed light on the controversial and often ambiguous process the University uses when considering cases of mental illness.

Most notably, they show just how insistent the University can be in requiring withdrawal when it has determined it is in the best interest of the student and how blurry the line between voluntary and mandatory withdrawal can be.

The University does not comment on matters of pending See LAWSUIT page 2

INSIDE: page 3

A timeline of how Princeton handled this mental health case

U N I V E R S I T Y A F FA I R S

U. to hire additional sexual assault investigator

By Sharon Deng staff writer

The University is scheduled to hire an external investigator to handle sexual misconduct disciplinary proceedings, according to a job posting on the University’s website.

This is at least the second staff addition since the University’s policies for dealing with sexual assault cases were overhauled this summer in response to pressures from the federal Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights. As part of the changes, students and faculty will no longer adjudicate cases of sexual assault. Instead, a panel of three administrators will investigate the cases and recommend a penalty. The external investigator will serve as one of the three investigators in certain cases.

The external investigator’s job will be aimed at facilitating the handling of cases that arise during academic vacations, Michele Minter, vice provost for

institutional equity and diversity and Title IX coordinator, said. She explained that the position is advertised on the University’s website as “casual,” a distinction that means parttime since the investigator will only be called upon if a case arises.

Prior to recent changes to the University’s sexual assault policy, the external investigator would be charged with developing an investigation plan, interviewing involved parties, reviewing case details and preparing a case file.

The University’s current external investigator is Joyce Chen Shueh ’95, who runs a private law practice in town.

Candidates are required to have a minimum of four to six years of experience in a related field, demonstrate experience conducting investigations alleging discrimination and demonstrate experience handling issues related to genderbased violence, according to the See HIRE page 4

STUDENT LIFE

Posters seek to highlight USG’s gender disparities

Gender in USG Males

Females

TOTAL

44% female

Major leadership positions in the Undergraduate Student government are held by 28 males and 22 females, with females holding over half of the Class Council positions, while males make up the majority of the USG Senate.

tips@dailyprincetonian.com

News & Notes Following email threat, Harvard dean says communication could have been better

after r acially charged death threats were emailed to several hundred Harvard affiliates in early October, the Dean of the College at Harvard Rakesh Khurana was critical of administrators for failing to communicate quickly and efficiently with faculty and students during the incident, according to the Harvard Crimson.

An hour after accepting responsibility for the lack of communication during an interview with the Crimson, Khurana sent out an email to undergraduates that said administrators could do a better job of communicating with students in such situations.

The email death threat that was sent out included a racial slur and disproportionately targeted women of Asian-American descent, the Crimson reported.

In his email to students, Khurana called the threat “despicable” and said the emails, which directly targeted Asian and AsianAmerican students, created a campus environment of fear and anxiety.

The Harvard University Police Department’s investigation into the source of the threat is still ongoing, although the Crimson reported that a spokesperson issued an advisory message saying the emails originated overseas and do not pose a credible threat to the campus.

In the aftermath of the incident, students have gathered several times for community conversations to discuss the threat and associated communications.

Senate

Class Council

Executive

2015

Class Senators

2016

Appointed

2017

U-Council

2018

37%

55%

female

female

HANNAH MILLER :: SENIOR GRAPHICS DESIGNER

The Undergraduate Student Government is composed of 28 male and 22 female members. 37 percent of the senate is female while 55 percent of the class council is female.

By Corinne Lowe staff writer

“USG: where men are presidents and women are secretaries” is one of a series of posters that have spawned conversations about equal

gender representation around campus, most notably in regards to the Undergraduate Student Government and campus leadership in general.

Sponsored by the Women’s Center, the aforementioned

USG poster is one of many that points out certain gender practices at the University. Others depict a man who calls himself a feminist and a woman who calls herself a future CEO. Amada Sandoval, direc-

LECTURE

tor of the Women’s Center, declined to comment on the posters.

“We’ve talked a little about the poster that mentions USG, and we appreciate that the Women’s Center is promoting dialogue about how

to get more women in these positions on USG, specifically in the role of president,” USG president Shawon Jackson ’15 said.

USG vice president Molly Stoneman ’16 said that senate See USG page 4

U N I V E R S I T Y A F FA I R S

Frank ’80 talks eating clubs, activism MENAR, formerly PriME, sends first fellow abroad

By Sarah Kim staff writer

Sally Frank ’80, who successfully sued Ivy Club and Tiger Inn to admit women, discussed her 11-year legal battle at a lecture this Monday.

Currently a professor at Drake Law School and an Iowa representative to the national board of the American Civil Liberties Union, Frank opened up the lecture with the history of the University’s eating club and coeducation because she said that she believes the history best helps to explain the context of the lawsuit.

The University’s secret societies, she said, were precursors to fraternities. In 1872, the University expelled a few students for forming and joining these secret societies, which eventually led to the introduction of University-approved, all-male eating clubs in 1879.

In 1969, the University began See LECTURE page 2

By Sharon Deng staff writer

TIFFANY CHEN :: CONTRIBUTING PHOTOGRAPHER

Sally Frank ‘80 discussed her famous lawsuit at campus on Monday.

The Middle East and North Africa Regional Fellowship Program, originally operating under the name Princeton in the Middle East, has sent its first fellow abroad since disputes arose with the University about its name.

The program sent Rachel Webb ’14 to Dubai, in the United Arab Emirates in August to intern for Endeavor, a nonprofit organization that helps new entrepreneurs launch their careers around the world.

MENAR, founded by a steering committee of four University alumni in 2011, is a fellowship program modeled after similar programs such as Princeton in Africa and Princeton in Asia. The program was contacted last

spring by University officials to change its name because it is not affiliated with the University.

The fellowship program had at the time already sent its first fellow to Rabat, Morocco, under the administrative oversight of Princeton in Africa.

Stanley Katz, a Wilson School professor and a member of MENAR’s advisory board, said the University’s approach came as a surprise.

“Now, the surprise for us is that the University had come to feel attaching a University name to a private program is unacceptable,” Katz said. “It hadn’t occurred to us that a program that was in other ways like Princeton in Africa, say, couldn’t call itself Princeton in another part of the world.”

See FELLOWSHIP page 4

The Daily Princetonian

page 2

Tuesday october 14, 2014

U. releases four confidential letters in mental health lawsuit filed by student LAWSUIT Continued from page 1

.............

litigation.

The Letters and the Meetings In late February, the student, who uses the pseudonym W.P., swallowed 20 Trazodone tablets and then immediately began to try to vomit them out. He let less than a minute pass, he said, before he sought help at McCosh Health Center and was transferred to the University Medical Center of Princeton at Plainsboro.

W.P.’s first meeting took place while he was still at the hospital, with then-Wilson College Director of Student Life Michael Olin. In an interview, the student said that he was then told he was now banned from campus. Soon afterward, another meeting was held during which, W.P. alleges, confidential medical details were disclosed by then-CPS Director Anita McLean, and he was informed that the “universal outcome” in such cases was voluntary withdrawal, even after presenting letters from his offcampus psychologist that recommended he stay enrolled.

“I was informed that it was the universal result in all cases like this, that there were no exceptions, that I must take a year off,” he explained.

In a letter sent to W.P. about a week after the suicide attempt

that summarized the first few meetings that had taken place, Dean of Undergraduate Students Kathleen Deignan informed him of the results of his “formal post-hospital eval-

“I did not expect them to boot me for a year, kick me off campus, to really screw me quite so hard.”

W.P. student suing u.

uation” performed by McLean and a University psychiatrist.

In it, Deignan wrote of the “substantial behavioral instability” W.P. exhibited during his first meeting with Olin in the hospital, the University’s “profound concerns for his safety” and the improbability of another evaluation yielding different results.

In addition, the letter said W.P. seemed to be at “extremely high risk of having another dangerous episode” and noted that this was the student’s third suicide attempt in the past 14

months. Furthermore, it stated W.P. had cut short his treatment at UMCPP against medical advice and had not engaged in psychological or psychiatric treatment following the incident.

If the student were to request a new evaluation to determine his mental health, Deignan wrote, they would perform it under the condition that the student release his medical records within and outside the University for the past 12 months.

Overall, four letters addressed to W.P. were released by the University. Two of them detail the back and forth leading up to his decision to accept the voluntary withdrawal condition, while the other two letters explain the readmission process.

Requests for alternative accommodations outside campus were denied, and in appeal meetings he was told that offcampus accommodations or a reduced courseload would “fundamentally alter the nature of a Princeton education,” according to one letter. The University’s defense has used the exact same wording in court papers in response to a claim alleging housing discrimination.

W.P. said administrators never tried to define what they meant, and he compared the experience to Franz Kafka’s “The Trial.”

“Everywhere you go you’d try to say something logical, and you’d be met with this wall, this firm ‘that doesn’t fit with the Princeton experience,’ ” he said.

“What they eventually used to get me out of school was pretty clever.”

W.P. said he was informed that he had missed too many classes to pass his Writing Seminar and his Spanish class, and that he would be better off withdrawing from the University. Finally, three weeks after he was first asked to withdraw, Cherrey’s letter asked him to voluntarily withdraw or be forced to do so within the next four days.

“I understand that you sincerely feel that you are able to return to your academic studies,” Cherrey wrote in the letter.

“I disagree.”

“I almost have respect for how clever it was,” W.P. said in response.

A different student, who last academic year wrote an anonymous op-ed in The Daily Princetonian describing her experience with the University’s mental health process, described the series of events lead-

ing up to voluntary withdrawal as a “cookie-cutter … [one] that seems to be very rigid and inflexible,” one that made her feel violated and ostracized.

Unlike W.P., she said, she had never attempted suicide and yet was treated in the almost exact same way.

“It seems like they ignored those details, and that’s what makes them so scary,” she said.

Both students received nearly identical, word-for-word letters during their year off with instructions about the readmission process, a letter the female student included in her op-ed in the ‘Prince’ last year.

“Prior to your readmission, you must undergo a readmission evaluation at the University’s Counseling and Psychological Services,” both letters read. “It will also be necessary for you to sign two copies of the ‘Authorization for Release of Information’ form: one authorizing your treatment providers to discuss your progress with our clinical staff at CPS, and one authorizing CPS to discuss your readmission evaluation with us.”

However, W.P.’s letter included an additional section describing the extent to which he would be allowed to visit campus during his time off. Although he would be allowed to visit public events such as athletic events and theatrical performances, the University did not “expect” him to visit dormitories, dining halls or other locations meant for the campus’ residential community.

“If you wish for us to make an exception so that you, for example, might visit a friend, we are willing to entertain an occasional request to that effect,” read the letter signed by Olin and then-Associate Dean of Undergraduate Students Cole Crittenden In hindsight, both students said the process was unpleasant.

“It was a process that made me feel alienated, like they don’t want me there, like all of a sudden I’m gone,” the author of last year’s op-ed said. “It’s like they’re saying, ‘You need to prove to us that you deserve to be back.’ ” “I felt bulldozed – they played hardball,” W.P. said. “I did not expect them to boot me for a year, kick me off campus, to really screw me quite so hard.”

Off-Campus vs. CPS The female student said she was already planning to take a year off in fall of 2013 but had heard so many negative stories

about her peers’ experiences with CPS that she refrained from mentioning it was for anything more than “medical reasons.”

Both the author and W.P. say they had been regularly visiting off-campus treatment providers for their mental health issues. Both highly recommend that students choose this route whenever possible. When asked if students should ever visit CPS, both said it should be a last resort.

“It’s easier for students to be completely open if they don’t have to check their words,” the author said. “My only fear is that students won’t want to be completely open because they’re scared of the process – it’s hurting their ability to get better.”

W.P. said that if he ever donates to Princeton, he would like to set up a branch of CPS that is unaffiliated with the administration.

“I’d donate like $3 billion for that shit,” he said.

However, both did visit CPS a few times, and both say their records were not kept confidential – in fact, they say they were forced to waive their right to the records during the withdrawal process.

“They didn’t even know the severity of what I was going through, they just knew that I was depressed,” she said, adding that, at that point, “everything changed.”

Moving Forward Managing a lawsuit against the University while also a student here, W.P. said, is like “an extra class that I have a very, very intense personal interest in.”

Though he is representing himself pro se, both W.P.’s parents are law professors and have helped him navigate the process.

He said his hope for the lawsuit is that it changes the standards for how the University handles cases like his own.

“We can’t have unprofessional people who are just flagrantly violating their professional oaths around an institution of higher learning like this,” W.P. said. “Princeton is obviously in a business of intimidation here.”

As the suit moves forward, W.P. said he plans to amend the complaint in response to a motion presented by the University last week seeking to dismiss a number of claims and to remove former University President Shirley Tilghman as a defendant altogether.

A hearing for this motion will be held in early November.

The female student said her main issues with the process were in its rigidity and inflexibility – that the University became a foe rather than a friend.

“If you do not choose to [voluntarily withdraw], I will require you to withdraw, which would then be reflected on your transcript.” cynthia cherrey vp for campus life She said it is this aspect of the process that often keeps students from coming forward with their illness – a “matter of life and death,” as she said in her article.

Both W.P. and the female student said that, despite everything the administration put them through, they do still love the University – in particular, the students and the professors – and want to be here.

The author emphasized that she does believe the University has the students’ best interests at heart and is merely unequipped to properly handle cases of mental illness.

“They way they’re doing things now, it sends the message, ‘If you come to us, we’ll kick you off campus. This applies to everyone no matter the severity level.’ ” Her suggestions include weighing input from outside psychologists more and working with students after they have left to make them feel like a continuing member of the community.

“I love Princeton. I believe that their motives behind this are pure – I believe that they do look out for the students, but I’m not a fan of how they’re doing what they’re doing,” she said. “I just have this perfect, idealistic scenario in my head of how they could be doing things to become more of a friend, instead of a foe.”

“I’m not fond of the administration, but my professors and my friends showed me an outpouring of respect that I didn’t expect, maybe didn’t deserve,” W.P. said. “Not everyone here is out to crush me.”

Frank ’80: Sexism has not disappeared on campus LECTURE Continued from page 1

.............

accepting women for the first time, and Frank herself started her time at the University in 1976.

She said that in light of the change to coeducation, most eating clubs also turned co-ed — with the exception of Ivy Club, Tiger Inn and Cottage Club.

The University itself, however, made efforts to accommo-

date women on campus.

“They added more women’s bathrooms, added locks,” she said. “They put all of the women in one dorm, surrounded by proctors. They also promised the alumni that the admittance of women would not decrease the admittance of men, expanding class size.”

Frank noted that the male alumni were not pleased with the changes, but the women kept actively pursuing basic issues, such as establishing a women’s studies program.

“What many of us saw is that by being all-male, the eating clubs by definition had sexism to it, and that radiated onto the campus,” Frank further said.

She said that she agreed that the eating clubs were not antiwomen, especially for clubrelated activities. However, she also said she remembered that the social chair of Cottage Club at the time compared women to pizza — “when we want them, we send out for them.”

“The fact that he wouldn’t think twice when saying something like that was a symbol of how bad the problem was,” she said.

Frank bickered three times during her time at the University. The first time, she marked herself as male in the registration form. The second time, she marked neither male nor female.

The first time, she was denied permission to bicker the thenall-male eating clubs, and the executive director of American Civil Liberties Union in New Jersey offered that she bring a lawsuit against them.

When she first brought the case against the three eating clubs in 1979, it was a public accommodations case, based on discrimination on sex.

She was not successful in her first attempt and had to refile multiple times.

Frank said she was harassed and threatened on campus through phone calls and even during lectures.

“But you can’t get me not to act just because I’m intimidated,” she said.

Hoping to decrease the level of anger, Frank said that she gave the eating club presidents a warning every time she took a step further in the legal process.

The final time she filed the lawsuit, after having been denied before, she paid more attention to her oral arguments and practiced them. Her arguments revolved around the distinction between eating clubs and fraternities and the fact that eating clubs, despite being private institutions, were intrinsically tied to and could not exist without the University.

At this point, she had already graduated from the University and was attending law school.

On July 3, 1990, the state’s highest court ordered that all eating clubs be co-ed. Before the court decision, Cottage had already opened its membership to women.

According to Frank, one of the remaining two eating clubs appealed, but the Supreme Court decided not to hear the case. The club’s reasoning behind the appeal was that the decision was a violation on its civil rights.

On social activism, Frank encouraged the audience to react to the issues.

“It’s nice to see people interested in the story of the case and history of the University and what it can mean to your struggle to change the school,” Frank told her audience.

She also explained that sexism has not disappeared on campus and that she cannot imagine that it would anywhere in society.

“What I’m asking you to do is keep your eyes open,” she said.

“The only way to get better is if you take a stand — either by organizing a group or as an individual. Each of you can make a change, even though it may be a long struggle.”

She noted that the fact that Ivy’s president could be a woman is evidence of the change she brought.

“Don’t sit back and let someone else do it, or think it’s not worth it,” she said.

She emphasized that inaction is not the correct way to fight inequality, not only because there are opponents, but also because nobody will realize an issue is an issue until someone brings it to light and demands action.

The lecture, titled “A Frank Talk About the Eating Clubs,” was co-sponsored by the American Whig-Cliosophic Society and the Women’s Center and took place at 8 p.m. in the Whig Senate Chamber.

Frank is also scheduled to participate in a panel on “Effective Activism” with Princeton Student Activists this Tuesday at 8 p.m. in Terrace Club.

The Daily Princetonian

Tuesday october 14, 2014

page 3

Timeline of a mental health case Documents released by the University last week in the context of a federal lawsuit challenging its mental health policies and practices shed light on how these cases are handled when they are brought to the attention of administrators. In this case, a student who tried to commit suicide — for the third time in 14 months — was first asked to withdraw voluntarily, before a second letter told him to withdraw voluntarily or be forced to do so.

February 2012 February 25, 2012

February 29, 2012

W.P. attempts suicide by ingesting 20 tablets of Trazodone.

While still in the hospital, W.P. has a meeting with doctors from UHS, Dean Cole Crittenden and Dean Michael Olin about “[his] status at Princeton.”

March 7, 2012 Kathleen Deignan sends W.P. a letter following up on the last meeting. She recommends that W.P. voluntarily withdraw. In case he wants to be reassesed, W.P. would have to release all his medical records from the University Medical Center at Princeton “in the wake of the incident,” as well as all his medical records from the past 12 months.

March 16, 2012 W.P. and Vice President of campus life Cynthia Cherrey have a meeting.

March 22-23, 2012 W.P. provides documentation to Cherrey about his suicide attempt.

March 26, 2012 Cherrey writes to W.P. saying he has until March 30 to withdraw voluntarily.

Otherwise, he will be forced to withdraw.

March 29, 2012 W.P. voluntarily withdraws “for medical reasons, effective [Feb. 29].”

April 9, 2012 W.P.’s residential college deans send him a letter “confirming” his voluntary withdrawal, adding that “serious conditions” have been attached to his readmission.

April 24, 2012 W.P. receives a letter detailing the conditions for his readmission. These require him to release his treatment information to CPS, who will then share their evaluation with ODUS. In addition, he is told to have a “limited” presence on campus during his leave.

April 2012 2014 In March 2014, the student, using the pseudonym W.P., filed suit against the University in federal court alleging a number of discrimination issues in the handling of his mental health case. The suit helped spark discussion on campus about the state of mental health policies at the University. Last week, the University filed its first formal response to the complaint and has released the documents above.

The Daily Princetonian

page 4

Tuesday october 14, 2014

Jackson ’15: Genders equally represented in USG, contribute same amount USG

Continued from page 1

.............

positions along with U-Councilor and class representative positions have demonstrated increasingly equal gender representation. While she said that overall the USG reflects a diverse group of students in every respect, she added that the role of president has been historically dominated by men.

Nina Langsam ’03 was the last female student to serve as USG president, serving more than a decade ago, from spring 2002 to spring 2003.

Jackson, who is in his second term as USG president, noted that his opponents were exclusively male each year he ran for president.

Overall, 22 individuals of the 50 current USG members are female, making USG 44 percent female.

Within the class councils, there are 11 female class officers and nine male class officers, resulting in a 55 percent female class council on average. Meanwhile, the senate has 11 women and 19 men, making the senate 36.7 percent female.

However, gender distribution varies greatly by class year and position — four of the five 2015 class council members are female, whereas only one out of the six current class senators is female.

Both Jackson and Stoneman indicated that on the whole they think the genders are equally represented

in the USG senate and among U-councilors and class officers. They also agreed that students of both genders contribute to discussion equally in USG meetings.

However, the USG is looking to increase outreach to women in future elections.

“We’re thinking about specific outreach to women for upcoming elections to make sure they consider running for all of our executive posi-

“We appreciate that the Women’s Center is promoting dialogue about how to get more women in these positions on USG.” shawon jackson ’15, usg president tions,” Jackson said. “In addition, we’ll also be talking to members on the USG senate about how they can do individual outreach to people who are committee members, for example, but may not consider a role on the executive committee.”

Individual outreach might also consist of USG members personally reaching out to women on campus and using social media and emails to encourage female students to

run for president and other USG positions, Stoneman said.

Stoneman said the USG has also worked with the Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Students, which has directed them to work with the Women’s Center and the Women’s Mentorship Program, to promote female leadership both in the USG and across campus in general.

USG coordinated with the Women’s Center for a Women in Elections event earlier this year, which Stoneman said was meant to encourage females to seek out leadership positions.

“We find in collaboration with the Women’s Center that a lot of the highest positions, including USG president but also including The Daily ‘Prince’ Editor in Chief and the Whig-Clio president and the eating club presidents tend to be very heavily male,” Stoneman said.

However, not all students thought that the posters were the best way to address the issue.

“Essentially, I think that some of them do have accurate dimensions to them, but they don’t really allow for critical conversation is the problem,” Lara Norgaard ’17 said of the posters. “For example, I do think we have a serious issue with women in leadership in eating clubs and USG. At the same time, a poster that almost blames isn’t a good way to approach that.”

In discussing the probable

causes of women’s lack of representation in executive positions, Stoneman mentioned a 2011 report of the Steering Committee on Undergraduate Student Leadership. This 100-page report found that women were less likely to selfnominate; rather they choose to run for elections after being approached and encouraged by mentors or friends. It also found that while women and men tended to enter college at similar confidence levels, women had lower confidence than men by the time of graduation.

The report also mentioned the different group dynamics for men and women, saying that women are more likely to work in teams whereas men are more likely to express their leadership in what Stoneman referred to as a “singular way” when summarizing the study.

The report also conveyed that women were more hesitant to speak their minds immediately in conversation and took more time to compose their thoughts beforehand.

Stoneman added that it may be easier for women to fall through the cracks in elections because men may be viewed as stronger presences because their voices are naturally deeper and louder, making it easier for men to command attention.

Stoneman said she hadn’t considered running for president herself last year because she was only a sophomore but would potentially consider it in the future.

DAILY PRINCETONIAN STAFF

The Women’s Center poster that pointed out the gender disparity in USG.

“As far as running for vice president, I thought I would do a good job with it,” Stoneman said. “I also saw myself as a compatible leader alongside Shawon.”

Despite both Jackson’s and Stoneman’s endorsement of the conversation the Women’s Center is starting with these posters, Stoneman disagreed

with the poster’s portrayal of the secretary position, a position she held last year.

“We find the statement to be rather misleading because actually in the USG senate the position of secretary is amongst the most high ranking and visible positions in the organization,” Stoneman said.

Expert will train staff on sexual assault MENAR helps students travel abroad HIRE

Continued from page 1

.............

University’s website.

A law school degree, credentials in higher education and demonstrated knowledge of current regulations related to the Violence Against Women Act and Title IX are preferred.

Title IX is a law that prohibits sex-based discrimination in educational institutions that receive federal funds.

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights made explicit legal demands of the University to comply with the Clery Act, VAWA and Title IX over the summer, leading to the noted changes in the investigator’s role.

“It is my hope that this process will be very consistent with the old process in terms of fairness and outcome,” Minter said of the changes, adding that the adjudication panel always aims to provide a fair and unbiased assessment of every case.

Minter also said the new system allows complainants and

respondents to narrate their stories only once instead of twice, saving time and perhaps alleviating stress and anxiety.

Although parties involved in the handling of sexual assault cases have always required training, she explained that the training will become even more extensive.

David Lisak, a national expert on sexual misconduct cases on college campuses, will train a group of staff members this week, Minter said. Over the course of the training, participants will learn about investigation techniques; relevant research, such as the prevalence of serial offenders; and gain a strong general knowledge of sexual assault cases, such as possible victim reactions and possible miscommunications.

“We also do a lot of work to help train investigators how to ask questions and how to organize their questions,” Minter said. “[Investigators] have to be very well briefed in our definitions of sexual misconduct,” she added, explaining that these definitions would include

terms such as “incapacitation” and “consent.”

During the most recent Council of the Princeton University Community meeting, a student raised concerns that an investigator’s legal background may put students at a disadvantage.

Minter responded that the disciplinary proceeding does not resemble a criminal proceeding and that the investigator’s role is not prosecutorial.

In addition, Minter said the investigator’s legal background could be especially helpful if an involved party chooses a professional lawyer as their adviser.

“I don’t view it as a disadvantage to the student,” Minter said, adding that most experienced investigators in this context already have extensive legal backgrounds.

Although the position is only part-time, Minter noted that in no way does she see it as a casual role.

The University will conduct interviews as soon as it has a reasonable pool of applicants and hopes to fill the position as early as Thanksgiving.

FELLOWSHIP Continued from page 1

.............

Colleen McCullough ’12, one of the founding members and the program’s spokesperson, said she understood the University’s stance on the issue.

“They are worried about protecting that brand,” she said. “From our end, of course, it would be useful to us to be able to identify with that — not the Princeton University brand but with the other Princeton brand as an international program.”

Webb, a Wilson School graduate with a certificate in Near Eastern Studies, said she learned about the opportunity first through Princeton in Africa and later through an interest email from the Near Eastern Studies department.

“As soon as I saw Princeton in the Middle East, I knew that it was something

I would be interested in,” Webb said.

Katz said he speculates that the dispute is a result of the University’s uncertainty

“[W]e now don’t have to go through the explanation that we aren’t just oriented toward [the U.]” Colleen McCullough ’12, MENAR Co-founder toward its international programs.

“I think one of the problems here is that the University hasn’t been able to decide what it’s going to be when it grows up as a player in international programs, and I

think probably that [MENAR] is a roadkill for that process, a very minor kind of problem for the University,” he said.

MENAR is currently talking to attorneys to register itself as an independent nonprofit.

“We can do everything we want to do with [MENAR] as well,” McCullough said. “For example, we are going to be recruiting non-Princeton applicants, and we now don’t have to go through the explanation that we aren’t just oriented toward Princeton University.”

Webb said she feels wellsupported by MENAR, and the founding alumni were very responsive to her questions.

“I think that regardless of the name it is an amazing program, and it’s exactly what we need to be having in the Middle East right now in terms of, you know, allowing Princeton students to gain that exposure,” she said.

CORRECTION Due to a reporting error, an earlier version of the Oct. 13 article “USG senate addresses Mental Health Initiative Board, Firefighters and Yik Yak” misstated the role that Paul Riley ‘17 will have in organizing a benefit cocktail for the local fire department. He will help organize it.

Due to a reporting error, an earlier version of the Oct. 13 article “Number of disciplinary violations remains relatively constant” incorrectly described the sequence that leads up to disciplinary action in case of an alcohol violation report. The report is made by the Department of Public Safety and adjudicated by the Residential College Disciplinary Board and/or the Faculty-Student Committee on Discipline. Clarification: The article was also updated to clarify that discipline reports are publicly available starting in 2009 but earlier data is internally available to administrators.

The ‘Prince’ regrets the errors.

MORNING ECLIPSE

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

The Daily Princetonian is published daily except Saturday and Sunday from September through May and three times a week during January and May by The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc., 48 University Place, Princeton, N.J. 08540. Mailing address: P.O. Box 469, Princeton, N.J. 08542. Subscription rates: Mailed in the United States $175.00 per year, $90.00 per semester. Office hours: Sunday through Friday, 1:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. Telephones: Business: 609-375-8553; News and Editorial: 609-258-3632.

For tips, email news@dailyprincetonian.com. Reproduction of any material in this newspaper without expressed permission of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc., is strictly prohibited. Copyright 2014, The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Daily Princetonian, P.O. Box 469, Princeton, N.J. 08542.

THE PAPER CAMPUS WAKES UP TO YICHENG SUN :: CONTRIBUTING PHOTOGRAPHER

Early last Wednesday morning there was a full lunar eclipse. It reached totality at 6:24 a.m.

Enjoy the honeymoon

Opinion

Tuesday october 14, 2014

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Ryan Dukeman

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

columnist

A

few weeks ago, I went to a law school admission presentation hosted by four of the top programs in the country. As a sophomore who still hasn’t fully decided what I want to major in, let alone what exactly I want to do after Princeton, I felt a bit awkward going. This was, of course, exacerbated by the fact that I assumed I’d be the youngest person there and that I really didn’t need to be thinking that far ahead yet anyway. But, nevertheless, I found myself a seat in the back of Frist Campus Center 302 less than two years after opening my acceptance letter from Princeton to hear about the law school equivalent of the Common Application and application process I feel like I just finished getting through.

As it turned out, I was not the only sophomore at the event (which was held on Oct. 1 or less than a month into the school year), and I was doubly surprised to see one attendee raise their hand when one of the deans asked if there were any freshmen in the audience. While I admittedly had felt in myself some of the same qualities that undoubtedly motivated that individual to attend a meeting for a law school they won’t begin attending until 2018 at the absolute earliest (uncertainty about the future, curiosity, ambition), my first thought was, “Wow, that was a short honeymoon.”

We spend an inordinate amount of our lives concerned with the ‘next step.’ Personally, I began preparing for the entrance exams for my grades 7-12 high school in the fall of sixth grade, started seriously thinking about college in the late spring of junior year and spent much of senior year applying for, stressing about and then planning for the start of college. The real ‘honeymoon period’ for me purely being able to enjoy the high point of my high school experience started only in January and then only because I was fortunate enough to get accepted early. So it could be said that of the past eight years of my educational life, I’ve spent nearly half worrying about ‘the next thing.’ I wouldn’t think it ridiculous to posit that this applies to many people on this campus as well. Many Princeton seniors will tell you that freshman year is spent learning the ropes, and junior and senior years are consumed with job hunting, interviews and grad school applications (not to mention independent work).

It is sad — but makes sense — to acknowl-

Ryan Dukeman is a sophomore from Westwood, Mass. He can be reached at rdukeman@princeton. edu.

vol. cxxxviii

Response from the Center for Jewish Life

T

his is a response to Professor Max Weiss’s October 12 article entitled “Is the Center for Jewish Life stifling free speech on campus?”

Every member of the Princeton community is always welcome at the Center for Jewish Life. However, participation in a panel that we sponsor is a privilege and not a right. Our decision to sponsor or co-sponsor an event is an opportunity we evaluate in each case, not an entitlement on the one hand, nor an infringement of free speech on the other.

The CJL is a community that promotes dialogue and open conversation. Last week, the CJL sponsored a program together with the Princeton Committee on Palestine, the Muslim Student Association, Near Eastern Studies, Tigers for Israel, and J-Street U featuring a Palestinian peace activist, Ali Abu Awwad. We were happy to sponsor a compelling program promoting a constructive, prosolution perspective on ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Like any other organization, we have policies that inform our

programming decisions. A few years ago the CJL Board of Directors carefully crafted guidelines that embody our values. Under these guidelines, the CJL sponsors programs that provide opportunities for open discussion and the expression of differing views in the spirit of University life and in commitment to a pluralistic Jewish community. The CJL will not, however, sponsor groups or speakers that intend to harm Israel or promote racism or hatred of any kind.

When Professor Max Weiss was suggested as one of many possible faculty speakers for a program that two CJL-affiliated student groups were hoping to co-sponsor with the Princeton Committee on Palestine in response to this summer’s conflict in Gaza, some of the student organizers ultimately decided not to invite him. They did so in consultation with CJL staff member Slav Leibin, and on the basis of the fact that Professor Weiss has supported the cultural and academic boycott of Israeli professors and institutions of higher learning, a position that infringes

Marcelo Rochabrun ’15 editor-in-chief

Nicholas Hu ’15

business manager

academic freedom and is incompatible with CJL event sponsorship on the basis of our guidelines outlined above. Professor Weiss’s personal attack on Slav Leibin, and the Jewish Agency with whom we partner, was unwarranted, and we believe Professor Weiss owes Slav and the CJL an apology.

The CJL is committed to ongoing learning and exchange of ideas through panel discussions, travel experiences, ongoing dialogues such as the Muslim-Jewish and Black-Jewish dialogues and hundreds of one-on-one conversations. We believe these efforts are more likely to bring about positive change than boycotts or newspaper articles that attack those working to find common ground.

Rabbi Julie Roth, Executive Director of the Center for Jewish Life Pierre Gentin ’89, Chair, Center for Jewish Life Board of Directors Melissa Lane, Class of 1943 Professor of Politics, Princeton University, and ViceChair, Center for Jewish Life Board of Directors

weekend studying elizabeth buehler ’17 ..................................................

BOARD OF TRUSTEES president Richard W. Thaler, Jr. ’73 vice presidents John G. Horan ’74 Thomas E. Weber ’89 secretary Kathleen Kiely ’77 treasurer Michael E. Seger ’71 Craig Bloom ’88 Gregory L. Diskant ’70 Richard P. Dzina, Jr. ’85 William R. Elfers ’71 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 John G. Horan ’74 Joshua Katz Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Betsy J. Minkin ’77 Alexia Quadrani Jerry Raymond ’73 Annalyn Swan ’73 Douglas Widmann ’90

138TH BUSINESS BOARD business manager Nicholas Hu ’15 head of advertising Zoe Zhang ’16 director of national advertising Kevin Tang ’16 director of recruitment advertising Justine Mauro ’17 director of local advertising Mark Zhang ’17 director of online advertising Matteo Kruijssen ’16 head of operations Daniel Kim ’17 comptroller Eugene Cho ’17

NIGHT STAFF 10.13.14 news Durva Trivedi ’17 Jessica Li ’18

At some point, it’s both OK and necessary to recognize that we are currently in the future we planned for ourselves and worked incredibly hard to reach. edge that only one of your four years here can truly be spent being here, exclusively, fully engaging in your Princeton experience without regard for the next possible steps of the future. If we’re only going to have one full year to enjoy Princeton completely, knowing this place well and not having to worry about what’s coming next, we should hold on to every moment of that year and try to extend the honeymoon period beyond it if circumstances allow.

Let me be clear; I in no way wish to single out the freshman at the law school event I went to and attack their personal decision about when to start planning for the future. Rather, I simply wish to decry the way the current system requires us to spend so much of our present thinking about that future. At some point, it’s both OK and necessary to recognize that we are currently in the future we planned for ourselves and worked incredibly hard to reach. I’m not arguing that 12 months into our Princeton careers, we begin spending every waking moment filling out grad school apps; but I am saying that we are forced into worrying about our next steps — at least privately — too early in our Princeton years. A better world would be one in which society gives us a longer honeymoon period to enjoy the present we worked hard for in the past and one that delays just a little longer the inevitable planning for the next step. It’s wrong and a waste of time and talent to spend so much of our high school and college lives standing on an incredible pedestal, only to be distracted by concerns for the future and trying to use that pedestal as a springboard to the next one. Yes, the clock will one day run out on X phase of life, but the inevitability of changing life phases doesn’t have to mean we spend all our time planning for a future that always stays one step ahead of where we currently are.

page 5

senior copy editors Julie Aromi ’15 Elizabeth Dolan ’17 Jennifer Shyue ’17 staff copy editors Divya Krishnan ’16 Marlyse Viera ’17 contributing copy editors Maya Wesby ’18 design Carrie Chen ’16 Christine Kyauk ’16

Community engagement is not an experiment Isabella Gomes

senior columnist

I

nstitutions of higher education are no strangers to high-profile gifts from their successful alumni. In particular, Cornell University is the recent recipient of a $50 million gift from alumnus and billionaire hedge fund manager David Einhorn. This $50 million donation, which will be supplemented by another $100 million from outside donors, will fund the university’s new 10-year initiative called Engaged Cornell, which will encourage students to go beyond the classroom and have hands-on experiences through community-university partnerships. The goal of expanding the percentage of student engagement in communities to 100 percent is certainly noble and inspiring. However, the initiative’s goal to enable departments to offer these communityintegrated courses at all levels of expertise, including introductorylevel classes, can be troubling.

In her Oct. 6 article in The New York Times, Ariel Kaminer covered the Einhorn Family Charitable Trust’s gift to Cornell through the lens of the recent interest in integrating student education with community service experience. She states that “interest in educational styles tends to run in cycles, and community engagement is a trendy topic these days.”

Besides the problematic notion of community engagement as being

“trendy,” Kaminer’s article also references Engaged Cornell and other university initiatives that integrate community participation and learning as “experiments.” While these two word choices may not be part of the point of Kaminer’s article, they do highlight the possible consequences of squeezing students from introductory-level courses (and not just advanced courses) into potentially high-impact programs.

If we take a look at Princeton’s Program in Global Health and Health Policy, we can see the emphasis on developing students’ understanding and research of the subject before application. The program requires field- or lab-based research specifically during the summer between junior and senior years — the purpose of which is to make sure that students will already have taken the required core courses — GHP 350: Critical Perspectives in Global Health and GHP 351: Epidemiology — in their junior years before they go abroad. This is so that students will make their best efforts to be prepared for their field experiences ahead of time through courses like GHP 350 and 351. These courses provide students with an introduction to the world of development and policy and to the importance of acknowledging that their future actions in this world will have socioeconomic implications that will directly affect the lives of people around the world. Courses like GHP 350 and 351 inform and remind students that there really is a way to do service wrong. After all, if a community is willing to receive a student’s help and input, shouldn’t that student be knowledgeable about that

community’s culture, history and economy as well as effective ways to establish a program that is both integrated and sustainable. There is a way to do volunteering, community engagement and policy-making incorrectly so that while they might have a “high-impact” effect on the targeted community, that impact may be undesired and perhaps even harmful to that community.

While the lofty goals for Engaged Cornell have fantastic intentions, allowing students to engage in communities before they have received a certain amount of foundation in the classroom and from existing literature on a topic means that they’re going into these communities with a very small toolbox. Even though the students can learn on the job, there’s really not enough room for “trial-and-error” as learning usually involves because these are real people whom students work with. And these people may have already been struggling before that student came to “learn on the job.”

Furthermore, within the goals of Engaged Cornell listed in the Cornell Chronicle on Oct. 6, the program plans to “launch a new engaged-learning leadership development program, available to all students across colleges, Leadership for the Greater Good, where student exemplars who successfully complete the program will receive special recognition upon graduation” by 2025.

The possibility of special recognition for exemplary completion of the program upon graduation could mean that many students will try to participate in the program without the purity of intention and sensitivity that should drive community

engagement. Sure, a major factor of participating in community service for students may already be that added resume boost, but the official honors that the initiative offers and promotes in its goals may accentuate this misguided way of thinking, and if anything, conflict with the intentions of the initiative itself.

Besides the lack of formal learning in the classroom and the potentially counterproductive effect of offering special recognition, the program’s inclusion of students in introductory levels is inherently problematic in that it may include college sophomores and even freshmen. It is true that our freshman and sophomore years are characterized by large 200-person-plus lectures without much individualized attention or practical application of material, so a program like this can be a dream come true. However, encouraging students — who might not have had as much training, guidance or culture-specific classes as would an upperclassman — to get out there in the “real world” and make “high-impact” changes in the communities they’ve barely studied cannot be a wise allocation of such valuable resources.

In spite of their emphasis on outof-the-classroom teaching, community-engaged initiatives often fail to recognize that the classroom may be the place where students learn respect for the communities they wish to serve before they make the mistake of learning it the hard way.

Isabella Gomes is an ecology and evolutionary biology major from Irvine, Calif.

She can be reached at igomes@princeton. edu.

Sports

Tuesday october 14, 2014

page 6

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

PRINCETON 0, YALE 3

BINK SITAWARIN :: CONTRIBUTING PHOTOGRAPHER

Top row: Sophomore hitter Cara Mattaliano sets up for a serve against Yale.

While the Tigers served at a very high 98.1 percent, the visitors’ service game yielded seven aces to Princeton’s one; junior hitter Kendall Peterkin attempts to find space in the Bulldog defensive setup. She was held to a game-low -3.1 attack percent; as of last weekend, Mattaliano ranked 10th in the Ivy League in kills per set with 2.83; junior libero Sarah Daschbach prepares to serve against the Bulldogs. Princeton’s defensive specialist has been one of the conference’s best. Her 16 digs on Saturday led all players.

Middle row: Reigning Ivy League Player of the Week Kendall Peterkin goes for a kill against the Bulldog blockers. The junior hitter holds a substantial lead in the Ivy League kills tally. This past matchup with Yale marks the first Ivy League contest during which Peterkin has been held to single-digit kills.

Bottom row: The strength of Yale’s blocking held Princeton to a meager attack percentage of 12.4. During the course of the three-set shutout win, the Bulldogs accrued an attack percentage of 32.7. Set scores for the match were 25-17, 25-22 and 25-12.

tweet of the day

Wednesday

Follow us

“Now that it’s getting chilly outside you won’t catch me outside without my Chapstick”

Field hockey has a chance to break a fourgame losing streak.

Look for a preview of their midweek game.

‘Prince’ Sports is on Twitter!

Follow us at

Conan O’Brien, late nite television funnyman

www.twitter.com/princesports

for live news and reports!