Monday May 12, 2014

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Monday may 12, 2014 vol. cxxxviii no. 64

HIGH

LOW

86˚ 64˚

Yield for Classes of 2013 through 2018

chance of rain:

80

20 percent

66.7

Follow us on Twitter

60

In Opinion

Today on Campus 4:30 P.M.: Cornell professor Christine Shoemaker will discuss geological carbon sequestration in a Highlight Seminar. Computer Science Building 104.

The Archives

May 12, 1975 Over a thousand University community members attended a “Poe-Pourri” that included beer, fried chicken and performances by jazz, rock and country bands on Poe Field.

got a tip?

Email it to: tips@dailyprincetonian.com

News & Notes Lansky to retire after 45 years at Princeton

music professor Paul Lansky will retire this month. Lansky was one of the first composers to choose a machine as his main instrument, having specialized in computer music since 1973, NJ.com reported.

Initially a French horn player and guitarist, he began digitally composing on an IBM mainframe with one megabyte of memory in the 1960s. Much of his work involved reprocessing everyday sounds such as speech.

“It was a way to experiment with sounds and a way to try things that instruments couldn’t do,” he said.

Lansky joined the faculty 45 years ago. He explained that he thought he should stop teaching at the end of this year to make way for younger people. In retirement, he plans to continue composing, travel and relax.

The University will host a concert in honor of Lansky at Taplin Auditorium on Saturday at 8 p.m. The event will include a performance of his piece “Book of Memory.”

2013

2014

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

Class of 2018 yield revised, now higher

By Corinne Lowe staff writer

55 50

Azza Cohen explains the importance of using our education to help others, and Bennett McIntosh talks about recent protests at Rutgers University. PAGES 5-6

57.2

This is the last issue of The Daily Princetonian for the 2013-2014 academic year. A Reunions issue will be published on May 29. Regular publicatin will resume in September.

65

56.9

Announcement

70 58.3

@princetonian

PERCENTAGE YIELD

75

69.2

Periods of clouds and periods of sunshine.

68.7

WEATHER

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

2015

2016

2017 2018

CLASS YEAR SHIRLEY ZHU :: DESIGN EDITOR

The University’s yield for the freshman class has been increasing after a jump with the Class of 2016.

The yield has increased since the University reinstated an early admission round.

Following an announcement Thursday, the University has revised its official yield rate for the Class of 2018, increasing it to 69.2 percent, which actually marks a slight increase from last year’s yield of 68.7 percent.

Dean of Admission Janet Rapelye explained in an interview Friday that the number

provided to The Daily Princetonian on Thursday — a yield of 67.4 percent — did not include Bridge Year students. The Thursday number was provided by University Spokesperson Martin Mbugua and was also reported by the University Press Club.

Each year, around 35 students defer their enrollment for one year to participate in the Bridge Year Program, a University-sponsored gap year program. The Class of 2018 will include 35 students who See YIELD page 4

ACADEMICS

Class of 2017 BSEs declare concentrations

By Do-Hyeong Myeong staff writer

While B.S.E. departments did not have significant changes in the numbers of freshmen who declared this year, computer science and Operations Research and Financial Engineering were the two most popular major choices for Class of 2017 B.S.E. students.

Official numbers will be released on Monday morning. The numbers reported for this article were obtained using College Facebook.

Computer science, with 84 concentrators, had six more concentrators than last year and was the engineering department with the largest enrollment this year.

Department chair Andrew Appel noted that the computer science department has grown consistently over the past 10 years, attributing its increase to the growing importance of computer science in modern society.

“Whether they go out find a job in business world … or whether they go into some scientific or scholarly field, computer science has great applications in many of those fields,” Appel said. “Another reason, I think, is that our introductory courses are taught very well, there are interesting and challenging materials, we have a lot of support for the students.”

Evelyn Ding ’17 said that she chose to concentrate in computer science because of the department’s strong support system and the fact that the skills can be applied to many fields.

The department with the second-highest See ENGINEERING page 4

HANNAH MILLER :: SENIOR GRAPHICS DESIGNER

The most popular BSE department in the Class of 2017 was computer science. The second most popular department was ORFE.

{ Feature }

Who can use the ‘Princeton’ name?

By Sharon Deng staff writer

Colleen McCullough ’12 was contacted this March by University officials who told her that Princeton in the Middle East, the post-graduate fellowship program she had founded along with other University alumni, would have to remove the “Princeton in” construction from its name because it suggested that the independently established organization had an affiliation to the University and thus created confusion.

PriME is one of many outside organizations that have fallen into the gray area as to whether or not they should be allowed to use the word Princeton in their name. University General Counsel Peter McDonough said the University decides whether an organization can use the Princeton name on a case-by-case basis.

Sometimes the University

evaluates an organization and finds its use of the Princeton name to be legitimate, while other times, as with PriME, it has chosen to step in to ensure that no confusion regarding an association with the University arises.

For example, the Princeton Club of New York is a private club founded in 1899 that offers social events, rooms for overnight stay and fitness facilities for its members. Although it is independent of the University, its membership is restricted to University alumni, faculty and students, as well as alumni of select universities such as Columbia University and Williams College.

“We are fine with there being an association in the public’s mind between Princeton Club of New York and the University, so we don’t think there is any likelihood of confusion because we are fine with that,” McDonough said.

See NAME page 3

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

STUDENT LIFE

CPS denies existence of USG discusses ‘watch list’ of students Honor Code

By Jacob Donnelly staff writer

Counseling and Psychological Services does not maintain a “watch list” of students of concern that it shares with the Office of the Dean of Undergraduate Students, CPS director Calvin Chin and Associate Dean of Undergraduate Students Michael Olin said at a dialogue about mental health evaluations between students and administrators Friday afternoon.

The dialogue followed an initial dialogue that took place on Tuesday. The Tuesday discussion emphasized that CPS does not share information about its conversations with students with ODUS and that students are not required to follow treatment recommendations to gain readmittance.

U-Councilor Zhan OkudaLim ’15 had asked about the existence of a “watch list” at the meeting on Friday because of a 2007 Princeton Alumni

Weekly article in which former Director of University Health Services Daniel Silverman said that CPS regularly shared information about students with ODUS. John Kolligian, the current Director of UHS, explained that Silverman may have been “trumping up” more limited lists after the Virginia Tech massacre that CPS maintains to allay fears about a mass shooting, saying that there has not been such a “watch list” during his 10 years as CPS director and UHS director at the University.

Silverman may have been referring to two sorts of scenarios, Kolligian added.

The first is a list of students of concern in support groups for internal CPS use only and the other is the formal evaluation process in which ODUS, based on information brought to its attention by students, residential college advisors or residential college See CPS page 2

protocols

By Sheila Sisimit staff writer

While approving members of the Honor Committee and Committee on Discipline, the Senate debated some of these groups’ practices in its final meeting of the year on Sunday night.

Under current protocol, members of the Honor Committee contact students to meet with the committee but do not inform students of whether they are being called in because they are suspects or witnesses.

U-Council chair Elan Kugelmass ’14 raised the idea that students should be informed of their position as soon as possible in order to ensure their rights are protected.

“When we’re trying to build a system on trust … it doesn’t make sense that we would treat all students with some kind of See MEETING page 3

The Daily Princetonian

page 2

Monday may 12, 2014

2 students denied readmission in 10 years CPS

Continued from page 1

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

administrators, can request that a student undergo CPS evaluation.

In response to a recent anonymous guest op-ed in The Daily Princetonian, Olin said he recognized that the treatment provider forms being sent by the student’s Director of Student Life created the mistaken impression that ODUS administrators or the residential colleges are involved in evaluating the opinions of students’ outside therapists. The treatment provider form is part of the readmission application.

Only CPS sees the treatment provider forms, he said, and the University is considering re-working the process of sending out the letter.

According to a copy of the letter included in the guest op-ed, students seeking readmission need to fill out a “Questions for Treatment Providers Form” and then sign two copies of an authorization form to release medical records. The first copy authorizes CPS to have access to the medical information and the second form authorizes CPS to discuss the information with ODUS. The “Questions for Treatment Providers Form,” which is four pages long, asks for detailed information about the treatment given to students.

Among the questions asked are a list of medicines prescribed, the “focus and type of treatment” provided, the extent to which the student complied with treatment and an evaluation of the student’s

readiness to return to school.

Also included is a check box of mental health problems.

The treatment provider must check all that apply and then “elaborate with particular reference to any progress that the student has made in treatment in addressing these issues.”

Chin noted that the University will also consider cutting out questions on the treatment provider form that may be unnecessarily invasive and superfluous to the readmission process.

The majority of students brought to the attention of ODUS by students or staff do not leave the University community, and the primary role of ODUS is getting students to take CPS treatment recommendations seriously, Olin said. He noted that only two students in the past 10 years were denied readmission to the University for safety reasons.

Students are free to not visit CPS after ODUS has requested they do so, Olin explained, and added ODUS has no way of verifying whether a given student has visited CPS. Most students who express suicidal thoughts to CPS or are hospitalized for a suicide attempt or other mental health reason do not withdraw and are instead treated

by CPS or another provider, Chin said.

A safety threat to oneself has to be imminent to pursue involuntary withdrawal, Olin added.

Students should not feel as if the readmission meeting with a CPS clinician is an interview in which they have to impress someone to regain

admittance, Chin said. Rather, the process serves only to ensure the safety of the community and help to formulate treatment recommendations going forward, he said.

In his experience, however, students who fail to follow CPS treatment recommendations are more likely to withdraw again, Olin said.

He added that CPS was going to restart the Princeton Depression Awareness Program next year to provide a support group for friends of people struggling with mental illness, that he was going to hold office hours to discuss mental health issues and policies with students and that CPS will be posting frequently asked questions on its website over the summer.

Chin added he was receptive to suggestions that CPS include students who have dealt with mental illness in a CPS presentation during freshman orientation next year and that CPS better consider the experience of students with psychotic disorders by excluding them from the voluntary mental health “check-ups” it conducts in the residential colleges and in other ways.

Olin said his biggest fear is that a student not seek help for a mental health issue because they believe they will be forcibly withdrawn from the University.

“That’s really scary,” Olin said.

Okuda-Lim said the dialogues would continue in the fall.

The event was organized by the ODUS, UHS, CPS, the Princeton Mental Health Initiative and the USG Senate.

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

Page two of the “Questions for Treatment Providers” that students on leave for mental health reasons have to fill out. Questions include asking for a list of medications and the “focus and type” of treatment.

END-OF-YEAR STUDYING

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.

BEN KOGER :: PHOTOGRAPHY EDITOR

Students study in Wilcox Commons (top) and relax in the shadows in front of Blair Arch [bottom]. Dean’s Date, the University’s deadline for written work, is Tuesday at 5 p.m.

The Daily Princetonian

Monday may 12, 2014

page 3

U. and other organizations face challenges with gray areas in using name NAME

Continued from page 1

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

According to PCNY Director of Catering/Human Resources Tracy Kaufman, the club hosts over 250 events with the University each year.

“We are an extension of the family. We are Princetonians in New York City. We host parents. We are down for parents’ weekend, alumni day, senior check out, reunion weekend.

We are part of the make up of what Princetonians need when they come to Manhattan,” Kaufman said.

McDonough said the similarity between an outside organization’s services and those of the University is a key factor the University considers.

For example, Princeton Adult School is a non-profit educational organization founded in 1931 that is located in Princeton. Executive director Anne Brener noted that the adult school has close ties with the University.

“Although we are not affiliated at all, our lectures series is not only usually given on campus at University facilities, but the other part of it is that most of our lectures are from the University,” Brener said.

McDonough noted that the University’s shared name with the town complicates the issue of determining whether organizations can use the Princeton name. He said that the University tries to be fair and reasonable when deciding whether or not to intervene.

“We are not like Yale. Yale is in New Haven. At Yale, if somebody proposed to start the Yale

Adult School, they really could not argue that they are calling it that because of geography,” McDonough explained.

Brener recalled numerous cases when people have confused Princeton Adult School with Princeton University.

“People would call here, thinking they are calling some office of Princeton Admissions. I don’t know how they get to that from the name of Princeton Adult School,”

“In the end it is the quality of our courses that gives us the reputation and makes us successful.”

Anne Brenner princeton adult school executive director Brener said.

McDonough said that the University must also determine if an organization is intentionally trying to suggest to its customers that there is a University affiliation.

“There is no suggestion,” McDonough said regarding the Princeton Adult School.

“There isn’t a wrapping up the adult school name in orange and black, and there isn’t a lot of name dropping about the University that looks like it’s intended to confuse.”

Brener added that the real confusion comes when organizations bearing the Princeton name are located outside of the

town of Princeton.

“When people outside of Princeton use the name so freely all the way out to Hightstown, which is, you know, ten miles up the road and all the way past Princeton’s borders, past our zip codes, that’s where it gets confusing, but not here in town,” Brener said.

However, the University had called into question the use of Princeton’s name in the case of the Princeton Review, an independent business focused on standardized test preparation that at one point had its biggest offices in Princeton, according to its founder John Katzman ’81.

“They dropped the opposition, but I agreed that we would not use the brand Princeton Review in ways that create confusion with the University.

For instance, there will never be a Princeton Review University, or anything like it. And we don’t use fonts that are similar to University’s fonts,” Katzman said.

Katzman explained that he chose the name not because of the University but because Education Techonology Service — an educational services company that makes the SAT, among other tests — used to be commonly referred to by guidance counselors as “Princeton” due to its Princeton mailing address.

Princeton Architectural Press, founded by Kevin Lippert ’80 while he was an Architecture School graduate student, has dealt with confusion over its name since it moved its headquarters from Witherspoon Street to New York City.

Lippert said the name now

causes some unintended confusion but that the company has no immediate plan to change the name.

“The name is now confusing because we are not in Princeton. We are not part of the University. We don’t want people to think that we are the architectural arm of the Princeton University Press, and we publish a lot more than just architecture these days,” Lippert said.

According to Lippert, the University’s adoption of the town’s name makes it easier for outside business to have Princeton in its name. However, Lippert pointed out that trademarking a place name brings with it many complications.

“You can trademark a place name,” Lippert said, “but how many millions of businesses have the word New York in them here in New York City? So would you then try and whatever, shut them down or tax them or collect some sort of fee for the use of the name New York?”

McDonough pointed out that there is no clear legal boundary that the University applies to determine if a likelihood of confusion exists.

“We are talking about an area of the law that doesn’t have real, solid lines. As lawyers we talk about black and white issues and gray issues: this is a gray issue because it is almost always going to be decided based on the unique particular facts of any situation,” he added.

Not all outside organizations carrying the Princeton name report cases of confusion, however.

The Historical Society of

Princeton’s Executive Director Erin Dougherty said she does not think any confusion exists with the society. It was founded in 1938, and its founding president graduated from the University in 1899.

“I think our visitors come in knowing we are talking about the history of the town. We do sometimes discuss the University in our exhibitions, but we try to make it clear that we are

“This is a gray issue because it is almost always going to be decided based on the unique particular facts of any situation.”

Peter McDonough university general counsel a separate institution,” Dougherty said.

When the product being offered is very different than that of the University, there is also little confusion over the Princeton name. Princeton Power Systems was founded in Princeton but has since spread all over the country. According to co-founder Darren Hammell ’01, the name derives partly from his University affiliation and partly from the geographic area.

“We were based in Princeton when we started, so the location, and then we were all Princeton students in fact when we started the company,

so that has something to do with it,” Hammell said.

Hammell said having the Princeton name has been a benefit because it gives potential customers background information about the company and its origins just by the name.

McDonough noted that the quality of the product that an outside organization provides is another factor.

“If we are really, really, really good at something, and they are really, really, really bad at something, we would have a stronger case with the court for arguing that they can hurt us by us permitting them to continue to [use the Princeton name],” he said.

Brener said that ultimately whether or not an organization uses the Princeton name is not the most important factor for its success.

“I do think they look for it and I do think they think it might be a very special program because it is called Princeton,” Brener said. “However, in the end it is the quality of our courses that gives us the reputation and makes us successful.”

Dougherty expressed similar sentiment and said she doesn’t see a problem if confusion arises.

“Having Princeton in our name is just an complete plus for our organization, so if people happen to associate us with other organizations in town who also has Princeton in their name, like the University, you know it’s fine because it really shows Princeton as a really strong place that has a lot of organizations that celebrate the town,” she said.

Halal Nights announced, to start next school year

END-OF-YEAR STUDYING

MEETING Continued from page 1

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

impression that they’re not going to tell us the truth if we don’t give them the time to think of what to say,” he said.

Honor Committee chair Luchi Mmegwa ’14 responded to Kugelmass’ claim saying when a student is called in, the student is able to call in a representative at any point during the meeting and, in some situations, the committee members themselves do not know if the student called forth is a suspect or a witness.

U-Councilor Zhan OkudaLim ’15 noted that when this is the case, it creates a gray area for students who neither fit the description of a witness or a suspect.

Although some members of the senate described this “gray area” as troubling with regard to ensuring the student’s right to representation, Mmegwa said, “With regards to gray area, what I was meaning to say was that we never have a situation where we are calling someone who may be a suspect, but not treating them with their rights.”

He added that when students are called into the office, the student is able to decide which course of action to take before proceeding with the investigation and case.

“Students who come before the Honor Committee, even in investigatory phase, should be informed of status and rights and should not be left wondering if there were charges brought against them,” Kugelmass said.

According to Kugelmass, Associate Dean of Undergraduate Students Victoria Jueds, who serves as secretary of the Committee on Discipline, said that she didn’t think it was necessary for students to have repre-

sentation during the first meeting.

Kugelmass asked the six nominees for the Honor Committee whether they “support all efforts to quickly inform all students whether they are suspects or witnesses.”

He proceeded to ask the same question to the five nominees for the Committee on Discipline.

All nominees agreed and were approved for their positions.

The Senate also elected two new Council of the Princeton University Community executive committee representatives — U-Councilors Danny Johnson ’15 and Okuda-Lim. One of the two will later be given the title of U-Council chair.

Class of 2015 senator Nihar Madhavan announced during the meeting that there will now be Halal Nights in dining halls, in which main dinner entrees will be served with a halal meat option.

According to Madhavan, Dining Services was “surprised” at how simple and inexpensive providing halal options to the community would be.

Ella Cheng ’16, chair of the Undergraduate Student Life Committee, updated the Senate on possible changes to University ID card use and access in the future.

One idea brought up was giving residential college advisers, residential graduate students and dorm assistants PUID access to every room that they supervise, making it easier to help students who get locked out.

Cheng also brought up the issue of padlocks, which are only used on women’s bathrooms.

In the future, students may be surveyed to see how they feel about this, so the University can decide whether it will be best to proceed with no padlocks for any bathrooms or padlocks for both.

Did you know... that the ‘Prince’ has a Facebook page?

BEN KOGER :: PHOTOGRAPHY EDITOR

Students study in outdoor spaces around Wilcox Hall. The University’s official final examination period is May 14 to May 24.

Like our page!

The Daily Princetonian

page 4

Monday may 12, 2014

Previously reported yield statistics did not account for Bridge Year students YIELD

Continued from page 1

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

were originally accepted into the Class of 2017 and deferred enrollment.

On Thursday, Rapelye said, those 35 Bridge Year students were subtracted from the statistic she provided, resulting in a reported class size of 1,306 when there are really 1,341 students currently enrolled in the Class of 2018.

“Here’s our challenge: we have a Bridge Year program and there are 35 students who are away who are already in this class,” Rapelye said.

However, these 35 students were accepted to the Class of 2017 and were counted in last year’s yield as well. This practice — of counting Bridge Year students in the yield for both

their original class as well as the class they actually chose to enroll in — has been consistent with previous years.

Rapelye said that she predicted that approximately 30 students will be taken off the waitlist this year sometime between now and the end of June.

The yield of 69.2 percent, is comparable to last year’s 68.7 percent. Meanwhile, the

yield rate for the Class of 2017 without taking Bridge Year students into account was 65.8 percent.

Rapelye emphasized that even though the enrollment target was 1,308, the University has not overenrolled this year with its 1,341 students.

In addition, Rapelye said that she predicted that approximately 30 students will be taken off the waitlist this year sometime between now and the end of June. She added that the Office of Admission does not know the specific date they will make these decisions.

The University took 33 students off of the waitlist last year, but any number of students from zero to 124 have been taken off in the past five years.

This yield comes on the

heels of a year marked by the meningitis outbreak and an abridged Princeton Preview weekend.

“It was a concern. We didn’t know what to expect,” Rapelye said. “I actually felt like there were more variables this year than any other year because we’re still dealing with an outbreak on this campus and we had to make decisions about Preview we’ve never had to make before.”

Rapelye attributed the high yield rate to the work of current University students to make Preview a success and the University’s effort to reassure parents about the dangers of meningitis and the guarantee of vaccinations.

“I certainly want to thank our students on campus for their efforts for both Princeton Preview programs. Our stu-

dents were so helpful,” Rapelye said.

However, Rapelye remains uncertain as to how menin-

“I actually felt like there were more variables this year than any other year.”

Dean of Admission Janet Rapelye gitis and changes to Preview contributed to the yield numbers this year.

“Would our yield have been

even higher without it? Maybe it’s had no effect,” Rapelye said.

The enrolled Class of 2018 is 52.4 percent male and 47.6 percent female. Of those students, 11.2 percent are non-American citizens and 41.8 percent identify as students of color.

Rapelye noted that there was an incredibly high yield from students residing in New Jersey, and added that almost every admitted student between Princeton and New Jersey’s southern border who was admitted to the University chose to attend.

Harvard College reported a yield of 82 percent, the same as last year. Dartmouth College’s yield is 54.5 percent, increasing from 48.5 percent last year.

The University of Pennsylvania reported its highest yield since 2011 with a 66 percent yield rate.

Computer science receives most new concentrators ENGINEERING Continued from page 1

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

enrollment, ORFE, saw a slight decrease in enrollment.

The department had 79 concentrators this year compared to last year’s 88.

Department chair Jianqing Fan cited a few possible reasons why concentration in his department went down, noting that the Class of 2016 is larger than the Class of 2017 and that the increase in COS enrollment may have translated to a decrease in ORFE concentrators. However, he noted that although the enrollment for this year had slightly decreased, the department has grown consistently over the last 4 years, doubling in number of concentrators. The Class of 2013 had 41 students who declared ORFE. “I think this must have something to do with nowadays so-called data-rich environment,” he said. “We have really become consumers of data, and I think that’s probably the main reason that the department increased [in its enrollment].”

Fan added that he thinks the department has reached a very stable stage with around 80 concentrators this year and last year, and this is probably the largest that the department can get, given that more than 60 percent of University students choose to major in humanities or social science departments.

The number of concentrators in the electrical engineering department decreased from 41 last year to 33 this year.

Undergraduate departmental representative Andrew Houck noted that last year’s number of electrical engineering concentrators was abnormally large and that the department normally has between 30 and 40 concentrators. Like Fan, he said the number of concentrators in his department has increased significantly in recent years, noting that the graduating senior class only has nine electrical engineering majors.

Houck attributed the growth of the department to its effort to make electrical engineering courses more hands-on.

“We are trying very hard to

make students get in labs to do real design and learn fundamentals from design context from their sophomore years.

We revamped all of our required courses,” Houck said.

“There’s project-based learning in every class.”

Hope Lorah ’17, an electrical engineering major, said the department’s focus on projectbased learning is definitely one of the main factors that attracted her to the concentration.

“When I went to the engineering open houses, the electrical engineering open house was, ‘Here’s the car you get to make in this lab, here’s the solar cell you get to make, and here’s the switchboard you get to make in this class,’” she said.

“And it was very exciting.”

The mechanical and aerospace engineering department increased to 46 concentrators, down from 47 last year. Acting departmental chair N. Jeremy Kasdin declined to comment.

Nikita Turley ’17 said that he liked the close ties between the mechanical and aerospace engineering department and the astrophysics department.

“I am actually the most interested in exploratory space vehicle design, and there are close ties between the MAE department and the astrophysics department, which is the best in the country,” he said.

“So that will provide me with the opportunity to apply my knowledge in projects that I will be very interested in.”

The Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering saw a slight decrease in enrollment as 40 students declared compared to 49 last year. Chemical and biological engineering department chair Richard Register declined to comment.

“Pretty cool major, very relevant to life. Difficult? Yes, but doable, especially with good group of study friends,” said CBE major Steven Tsai ’17.

The civil and environmental engineering department had 28 students declare compared to 24 last year. Civil and environmental engineering department chair James Smith did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Staff writer Sarah Kim contributed reporting.

CORRECTION An earlier version of the May 7 article “At CPUC meeting, Princeton revises sexual violence definitions” misstated the nature of one of the revisions to the language used in Rights, Rules, Responsibilities. The University has revised the language for sexual assault deemed “especially egregious” and has removed “suspension” as a possibility, leaving only “expulsion” and “termination of employment” as options. However, this change does not mean that suspension will no longer be a possible punishment. Rather, the University seeks “to make it clear that students who commit these infractions are likely to receive ver y significant penalties.”

Editor’s note: The May 9 article “Yield for Class of 2018 decreases slightly to 67.4 percent” article has been retracted due to incorrect information provided to The Daily Princetonian by the University. The yield for the Class of 2018 was not 67.4 percent; it was 69.2 percent.

A new article has been published with the correct information.

The ‘Prince’ regrets the errors.

Bennett McIntosh columnist

Controversy over Condoleezza Rice at Rutgers

L

ast week, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice decided against speaking at Rutgers University’s commencement ceremony. Though the Rutgers administration declared that it continues to stand by her invitation to speak, Rice declined so as to avoid “a distraction for the community at this very special time.”

Why should such a distinguished political scientist and diplomat be concerned that her speech should be a distraction? Since the Rutgers Board of Governors had approved Rice as the speaker three months prior, students and faculty had protested the invitation and accompanying speaker’s fees and honorary degree vehemently.

Claiming that her false statements on the presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and her support of the resulting invasion made her a war criminal, the protesters demanded that the board withdraw her invitation. The student protesters’ tactics — occupation of a University senate meeting, forcing entry into the president’s office and picketing — were direct and disruptive to an extent to which this semester’s protests at Princeton opposing Richard Falk and by Praxis Axis, haven’t come close.

The protesters were concerned that Rice would be speaking to a captive audience with no chance for dialogue, but I am unconvinced that Rutgers deciding against a commencement-stage political debate would result in its students being captivated by her war-criminal ways. Though the protestors may disagree with her political views, as I do, it is disingenuous to call her a war criminal absent conviction. The controversy is, in any event, quite beside the point of commencement. Rice, having given up her dream of being a concert pianist to become a successful black woman in a field still dominated by white men, presumably has much of interest to say on topics of greater relevance to graduating seniors, like how to keep achieving upon entering the real world and how to overcome obstacles on the road to success. Because a number of passionate students threatened to disrupt commencement, Rutgers students missed the opportunity to listen and to learn from Rice’s considerable experience.

Speaking of opportunities to listen, the Rutgers administration’s response to the protesters fell flat. Mainly, by refusing to acknowledge the protesters’ legitimate concerns about Rice’s record, the administration encouraged continued escalation by protesters who felt their voices were not being heeded. It is not (and should not be) problematic to choose a controversial figure to speak at commencement proceedings — look no further than Ben Bernanke’s speech at last year’s Baccalaureate, or Al Gore’s speaking at Class Day next month — but student concerns should at least be acknowledged, and it is worth reconsidering the decision to endorse the entirety of Condoleezza Rice’s persona by awarding her an honorary degree. Indeed, the restructuring and lack of transparency in Rutgers’ Honorary Degree Committee — detailed by the Rutgers Daily Targum — is concerning to say the least.

Commencement is, as Rice noted in her decision to step down, “a time of joyous celebration for the graduates and their families.” It is also, however, a culmination of four years of intellectual inquiry and broadening horizons. A peaceful protest of the politics of an otherwise remarkable speaker at commencement would be a fitting capstone to all of this. The protesting students, however, were not planning a peaceful protest. Provoked by the administration and their own adamant judgment on Rice, they threatened that commencement would be significantly interrupted, provoking Rice to step back.

The protesters strongest concerns — that Rutgers was giving Condoleezza Rice a captive audience by giving her a platform to speak with no opportunity for response and that it was endorsing the entirety of her life’s work by granting her an honorary degree — could have been allayed without the university or the former secretary of state backing down from the invitation to speak.

In the spirit of engaging debate, a panel discussion between Rice and others interested in American policy of the time — perhaps including Toby Jones, an associate professor of modern Middle Eastern history at Rutgers, who is writing a book titled “America’s Oil Wars” — before or after the ceremony, would allow dialogue without bringing undue confrontation into the ceremony itself.

Arguments on both sides of the controversy have called it an issue of free speech — whether Rice’s free speech or that of the students was being suppressed. Note that since Rice withdrew of her own volition and the student protesters faced no legal consequences for their speech, even in regards to trespassing, neither party came close to having their First Amendment rights violated. This is instead a matter of academic freedom. All involved students, faculty and staff should be concerned in the utmost that student passion and administrative obstinacy resulted in the suppression of a number of valuable discussions within the Rutgers community.

Bennett McIntosh is a chemistry major from Littleton, Colo. He can be reached at bam2@princeton.edu.

Monday may 12, 2014

Opinion

page 5

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Is Princeton a selfish endeavor?

Azza Cohen

contributing columnist

W

e often speak about the importance of thinking outside the Orange Bubble — what about popping it?

Our four years at Princeton produce many memories: lunches with friends, late nights in Firestone Library, learning and growing from different extracurricular activities and sports.

Our time here sometimes seems too long, but it’s simultaneously escaping us quickly. With finals quickly running away from us and summer quickly running toward, I find it important to reflect on why we are here running along the racetrack of undergraduate studies. I ask myself: Is Princeton a selfish endeavor?

I am my own devil’s advocate because I am indeed an undergraduate here. However, it’s important to question why we are here and what we will do with

the gift of a Princeton education.

Four years is a long time to study; four years is a short time to make a difference. If we believe that a Princeton education is “in the nation’s service and in the service of all nations,” what do others expect of us, and what do we expect of ourselves after graduation?

The financial crisis has certainly shifted what an undergraduate degree can mean. According to Career Services, in 2006, 50 percent of employed Princeton graduates were in the financial and insurance sector. In 2009, the number cut sharply in half to 25 percent. This is not to argue that those who pursue a career in finance are not contributing to the nation’s service in other ways. Of course, those who make money can (and do!) certainly give it away to charities — but what if our Princeton minds, rather than our checkbooks, were used to solve problems of unfair systems?

The Scholars in the Nation’s Service Initiative program is an interesting Princeton-centric

solution. According to the program website, “There is a critical need within the U.S. government for the most talented, dedicated young people to step forward to help tackle the increasingly complex challenges, domestic and international, that will face our nation.”

The Thiel Fellowship is another solution. Eden Full ’15 took time away from Princeton to pursue and perfect her SunSaluter organization that “helps solar panels follow the sun, while providing clean water.” While The New York Times implied that Full was not returning to Princeton (although she did), her two years away allowed her the time and space to create something with potential for incredible good.

Education is privilege. College is privilege.

Princeton is privilege.

I therefore contend that a Princeton education is selfish, at an undergraduate or graduate level, if we take this education and do not use it for others.

ON squirrels

vol. cxxxviii

Lizzie Buehler ’17

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

Marcelo Rochabrun ’15 editor-in-chief

Nicholas Hu ’15

business manager

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 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 5.11.14 news Ruby Shao ’17 senior copy editor Jacob Donnelly ’17 staff copy editors Keith Gladstone ’17 Kathleen Mulligan ’17 Anna Kalfaian ’17 Jay Park ’16 Robin Spiess ’17 design Patrick Ding ’15 Christin Kyauk ’16 Julia Johnstone ’16 Hannah Miller ’16

LETTER TO THE EDITOR ...........................................................

W

riting this letter took a lot of courage, especially after seeing all of the ad hominem attacks and ridicule directed at Tal Fortgang ‘17 in response to his article in the Princeton Tory. However, the discussion on privilege and how we approach it is crucial, so here’s hoping that I won’t be attacked when I say I have a problem with the indiscriminate use of the phrase “check your privilege.”

The phrase discourages discussions, leads to ad hominem attacks and dismisses arguments based on who the speaker is rather than what the speaker is saying.

I have noticed a strange phenomenon throughout my time at Princeton. Whenever I discuss political issues, I am silenced with the phrase “check your privilege” when I disagree with aspects of activist views on redistribution of wealth, LGBTQ rights or feminism, solely because I am a straight male from an uppermiddle class family. On the other hand, I am somehow entitled to contradict the same activists without nearly as much hostility — or scrutiny — on matters about immigration, racism or mental illness, presumably due to my firsthand experience and disadvantage in those areas as a

I am not my privilege neuroatypical, first generation Korean immigrant who didn’t speak a word of English at 10.

In most of my discussions, the phrase “check your privilege” did more harm than good — I understand that it’s meant to ask people to evaluate their privilege and the effect it has on their views, but why is it said with so much hostility toward the person, and often paired with another commonly used phrase: “Shut up?” Is the anger at the presumed hypocrisy of the speakers, since they clearly don’t know what they’re talking about since they are white/neurotypical/straight? I know the point isn’t to attack me personally, but it is hard not to feel attacked when the implication is that I am uneducated about the topic because I am not marginalized.

I am not denying the value of asking someone to evaluate their privilege. However, “check your privilege” is used too often to dismiss arguments and to start conversations directed at privileged groups, instead of facilitating conversations with privileged groups. It uses stereotyping, ignorance and shaming against one group as a weapon in a fight against stereotyping, ignorance and shaming against another.

The end result is hostility, resentment and denial of privilege, with

headlines like “ ‘I’ll never apologize for my white privilege’ guy is basically most of white America.”

Yes, sadly, bigots exist. Yes, sadly, there are people who have no idea what privilege is, even when they benefit from it the most. And look, I get it. It’s annoying and obnoxious to have to explain the myriad ways in which privilege affords protection from harassment and prejudice to someone who has no idea what being black/ depressed/trans feels like, especially when it’s for the umpteenth time. But even if this is the case, we should assess opinions on their soundness and merit, not on the speaker’s sex, gender, wealth, education, race or neurotypicity. No argument should be declared illegitimate by virtue of the speaker’s privilege, and no one should have to defend themselves from ad hominem attacks in the meta-debate about whether their views are offensive that follows the accusation of privilege.

As Jon Lovett wrote in “The Culture of Shut Up,” we should “win the argument; [not] declare the argument too offensive to be won.” If you are still unconvinced, think about all the layers of “privilege” lost when multiple oppressed groups disagree and throw the phrase at each other: Earlier this year, the University

of Michigan and the University of Illinois decided not to show a documentary criticizing female genital mutilation and honor killings since it was deemed offensive to Muslims, whose accusations amounted to “check your non-Muslim privilege.” The phrase “check your privilege” creates a false dichotomy between the unprivileged-right and the privileged-wrong, when, in fact, discussions of privilege should provide us with better context for understanding each other.

Does my privilege influence my views? Absolutely. Should I recognize that, understand them in context, try to educate myself and put myself in another’s shoes? Most certainly. Does being part of an oppressed group make your opinions more relevant in conversations about that oppression? Of course. But none of that gives you the right to shut someone up, label them a bigot and dismiss their opinions with a convenient three-word phrase.

I, like everyone else, have a multitude of personas and identities.

I am checking my privilege, but I am not my privilege. So please, look past my privilege, and try to listen to what I have to say.

Dodam Ih ’15

Seoul, South Korea

The Daily Princetonian

page 6

Monday may 11, 2014

Be Brave Michael D. Phillips ’90

Morgan Jerkins

Guest Contributor

columnist

In response to Tal Fortgang

D

ear Tal Fortgang and the Princeton University Community: Welcome to the fun house world of American mainstream media’s obsession with caricatured versions of campus identity politics. In this world, the small groups of genuinely left-wing or minority students who are outspoken in their criticism of society on campus are seen as some sort of thought police who stif le open debate in that critical agora of the mind, the academy. You are the latest in a sequence of young white males (and one Asian of Indian descent, among the stars of this long-running drama) selected as the hero-martyr of a discourse that began in the 1960s. If you don’t relish the idea of being a kind of Ivy League political and moral Pepto-Bismol for the middling, middle-brow and comfortable for the remainder of your life — well, then, I have a suggestion: study history, not politics. American history, ideally.

The reason for this is simple. You wrote in your essay about your grandparents: “It was their privilege to come to a country that grants equal protection under the law to its citizens, that cares not about religion or race, but the content of your character .”

I find this quotation fascinating. You seem to genuinely believe that the United States in the 1940s was a country that granted equal protection to its citizens. And cared neither about religion nor race.

It may come as a shock to you to learn that far from “caring not about religion nor race,” the United States in the 1940s was a country in which it was assumed that not just a white male, but only a white male Protestant could become President (the catastrophe of Al Smith’s 1928 campaign was still a fresh memory then). It was a country in which it was perfectly legal to write into the deed for one’s home, or an entire new subdivision of homes, an enforceable legal covenant that said “No Jews.” Or Blacks, or “Orientals,” perhaps here and there even “no Catholics.”

The United States was a country in which Catskills resorts like Grossinger’s f lourished in part because older, more prestigious resorts like Mohonk Mountain House simply didn’t allow Jews, much less people of color, to come stay. A country in which most stores on 125th Street in Harlem didn’t allow “coloreds” to patronize those stores, adjacent to the largest and most prestigious African-American neighborhood in the country.

Your grandparents gratefully came to a country that wanted to believe itself a shining beacon to the world and the fulfillment of the prophecy built into our founding documents of a near-utopian society without injustice.

There is nothing wrong indeed in being inspired by these 18th-century ideals and their application today. But the reason your grandparents were able to come here at all is the then-tremendous guilt about America’s indifference to the persecution of Jews in Europe before and during the Holocaust. It was the vindication of New Deal liberal interventionists after 1945 that made possible new laws on refugees, laws that were written to conform American law to codes developed by the newly founded United Nations and its promise of morality over national self-interest. That made an exception to highly racist, quite extreme limits on U.S. immigration legislated in the 1920s that were designed to keep Jewish (and Catholic, and southern European) immigrants from coming here.

Perhaps it is now time for you to open your eyes to all the history that explains the argument you find yourself naively inserted into now, ingenuously pure in your belief in an America that might exist one day, but that exists now (and I write this more admiringly than critically) almost wholly in your imagination. Bring that imagination into contact with reality, and perhaps you can make that dream a bit more real. But please don’t help along those who would lie to us and themselves and say this has been the American reality all along, telling us to shut up and accept that we already live in a “best of all possible worlds.” We don’t.

I

wanted to remain in denial a little while longer, even though I knew this moment had been coming for quite some time. It is cliché to say that time has gone by really quickly, but it truly has.

I’m about to embark on another chapter of my life and enter in a new stage of adulthood, but there is something that I have to do first before I leave. I’d like to give some advice to all opinion writers who are thinking about putting their work out there for the first time or are in the process of doing so.

Publicizing your thoughts isn’t easy. But by doing so, you get to see just how thick-skinned and brave you really are or are destined to be. Although my journey as a writer has been through a lot of ups and downs, the process has made me a stronger person, and I wouldn’t change it for anything in the world. Growing pains are necessary when honing your craft, and there’s no other way to improve than enduring the

Your objective is never to please the readers, but to make your voice known.

Any opinion is problematic. process. I thank campus publications like The Daily Princetonian, The Stripes and The Nassau Literary Review for giving me the opportunity to share my voice with all of you. So without further ado, I will impart some knowledge that I’ve learned throughout the years.

First: You’re going to offend

someone. There is no way to get around it, especially if you talk about controversial issues like rape or hookup culture. The sooner you absorb this truth, the better your writing will become. If you focus too much on what other people think rather than pay attention to your voice, your words will suffer. Now, that’s not to say you should be careless and not take into consideration the many different angles in which your words may be interpreted, but acknowledge the fact that you cannot please everyone. Then again, your objective is never to please the readers, but to make your voice known. Any opinion is problematic. Our views are shaped by our background and experiences, and sometimes there are those out there who believe that your opinion is a personal attack on their lives.

And at times, a single word or phrase can turn an otherwise harmless idea into a polemical one. Intent does not always match result. The best thing you can do is read each word carefully, consider the opposing side and use your best judgment to decide how to construct your argument accordingly. You’ll be damned if you do and damned if you don’t, so you might as well write what you think.

Second: Have your arsenal ready. Your weaponry is your evidence. Whenever you make a claim, you have to be ready and able to substantiate it with facts, statistics and anecdotes.

This point may sound like a no-brainer, but it is very easy to create an argument based on passion alone, when reason and logic need to support it.

You cannot craft an argument using only your emotions. Anything that would not hold up in regular discourse will not hold up in a column. A strong argument necessitates critical thinking. Do your research.

Third: Most importantly — be brave. Be very brave even when you are afraid — and this goes especially for my minority writers. You will be subjected to vitriol and ad hominem attacks for your race, gender or sexual-

vol. cxxxviii

ity. But don’t let these things stop you. Do not pay attention to those who attack you rather than your argument. Most times they should be ignored anyway. The things you’re most afraid of speaking up about are the things that deserve to be released out into the world.

Have confidence in the fact that whatever you have to say is important. Take the sign of “cold feet” as proof that what you feel matters. Vulnerability

Marcelo Rochabrun ’15 editor-in-chief

Nicholas Hu ’15

business manager

138th managing board news editor Anna Mazarakis ’16 opinion editor Sarah Schwartz ’15 sports editor Andrew Steele ’16 street editor Catherine Bauman ’15

You will be subjected to vitriol and ad hominem attacks for your race, gender, or sexuality.

photography editor Benjamin Koger ’16 video editors Carla Javier ’15 Rishi Kaneriya ’16 web editor Channing Huang ’15 projects editor Victoria Majchrzak ’15

is not synonymous with weakness. Open yourself to the questions that bother you most and explore them to their depths.

Honesty is the best characteristic of an op-ed. Remember: there will always be someone out there who agrees with you.

And you never know, you may have been the voice to all the sentiments they have felt but never had the courage to say out loud. You never know how much impact you will have on another person’s life. Besides, it feels much better to get things out of your system rather than to hold them in. Trust that your passions are there for a reason.

Don’t stifle them. You know yourself better than you think.

Seek the help from other writers or friends who can guide your thoughts. Never be afraid to admit that you’ll mess up.

Mistakes will happen. Accept them as part of your trajectory and necessary for your evolution as an artist. Good luck out there.

You will be fine — trust me.

Morgan Jerkins is a comparative literature major from Williamstown, N.J. She can be reached at mjerkins@princeton.edu.

chief copy editors Jean-Carlos Arenas ’16 Chamsi Hssaine ’16 design editors Helen Yao ’15 Shirley Zhu ’16 prox editor Urvija Banerji ’15 intersections editor Jarron McAllister ’16 associate news editors Paul Phillips ’16 Angela Wang ’16 associate opinion editors Richard Daker ’15 Prianka Misra ’16 associate opinion editor for cartoons Caresse Yan ’15 associate sports editors Jonathan Rogers ’16 Edward Owens ’15 associate street editors Lin King ’16 Seth Merkin Morokoff ’16 associate photography editors Conor Dube ’15 Karen Ku ’16 Shannon McGue ’15 associate chief copy editors Dana Bernstein ’15 Alexander Schindele-Murayama ’16 associate design editors Austin Lee’16 Jessie Liu ’16 editorial board chair Jillian Wilkowski ’15

Princeton is so much more than schooling Aaron Applbaum columnist

I

sat to write this column, my final in this paper, and drew blank after blank. There is simultaneously so much to say about my time at the University and no good way of saying it. We run out of time; we all must leave. This thought, not a purely sad one, created in me a sense of nostalgia. I was tempted to convey these melancholy sentiments here and then felt gross. My final column was not going to resemble a fifth grader’s farewell address to elementary school as his first traces of pubescent emotion settle in.

So desperate for inspiration, I asked my friends advice as to what I should write about.

The first piece of advice I got was to compose for twenty uninterrupted minutes a list of my most memorable experiences. Most of them had to do with some form of mischief, drugs or sex.

Although I do believe rules are meant to be broken, tastefully, I figured my parting words should not advocate breaking the rules. Limits are meant to be pushed, and the sanctity of doors that say “don’t enter” ought to be breached from time to time.

My list did shed light on the fact that my time at Princeton has been about so much more than schooling. Princeton is very much about experiences outside the classroom, adventures that we have to create for ourselves. This thought is not new, and in turn I did not

want this to be the subject of my final piece. So I thought about providing other pieces of advice to future Princetonians. I would let them know classes are important, our professors are amazing and our peers are our most important resources. Again, gross. These thoughts are not unique, and so the advice is not helpful. Maybe I ought to write not about my time at Princeton, but what it means

Princeton is very much about experiences outside the classroom, adventures that we have to create for ourselves. for that time to be ending.

After all, only a senior has insight into the road’s end.

So if Princeton is not just about schooling, what does it mean for it to end? It is clearly not about fulfilling credits and being handed a paper recognizing that completion. When Princeton ends, what begins?

What is graduation? To walk out FitzRandolph Gate 24 hours before commencement would not deprive me of my distinction as a Bachelor of the Arts. There has to be significance to the robes, the scepters, the marching and the Latin. Graduation, I suppose is a ritualized transition ceremony that makes something mundane

quite profound. We are not just done with credits; we are entering a new phase.

At this point in my musings I discovered I didn’t have much to say about Princeton ending. So, I thought, perhaps this article should be about that which lies beyond the Orange Bubble.

I took a job a couple of days ago; would folks like to know how that feels, to be an employed adult?

What do I know about adulthood? I thought about the substance of my newfound maturity; it seems to be about shifting from consumer to a producer.

All my life I have consumed people’s time, money and efforts. Graduation seems to usher in a time where I am responsible for myself and for contributing to the productivity of the world. This is a nice idea, but I could have done this all while I was at Princeton. I could have worked, produced and have taken more responsibility.

So what changed? I am now forced to do normal things I had simply not done because I didn’t have to? So perhaps my insight into adulthood isn’t that profound either.

This article then captures the fact that there is so much to talk about, but so too there is not much left unsaid. It feels as though something momentous and life-changing is happening during graduation, but perhaps it’s really a supremely common experience.

Perhaps it is appropriate then, instead of waxing philosophical to spend my time thanking those who have stuck with me these four years. I don’t know who

all of my readers are, but I am grateful to them, and in some perverse way even love them. And if you haven’t stuck with me these four years I still thank you for

The substance of my newfound maturity seems to be about shifting from consumer to a producer. bearing with me for these 800 words. Random musings can be hard to get through.

Thank you to my various editors who gave great insight and put up with my often last-minute submissions.

Thank you to the friends and family who constantly and consistently helped me come up with column ideas.

I could not have done this without their support.

I will miss this place and the people in it. I guess it is tough to articulate that, but not everything needs to be said out loud. Goodbye readers. Goodbye Princeton (Ha! As if that were possible with yearly reunions). Goodbye 17 years of schooling.

With an eye toward the future: I wish The Daily Princetonian’s opinion section nothing but the best!

Aaron Applbaum is a Wilson School major from Oakland, Calif. He can be reached at applbaum@princeton. edu.

The Daily Princetonian

Monday May 12, 2014

page 7

Tigers look optimistically toward 2015 Juniors McMunn, Slifer shine in Va. W. LAX

Continued from page 8

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

CARLY JACKSON :: FILE PHOTO

The program’s first NCAA tournament win came for women’s tennis, following an Ivy League title.

W. TENNIS Continued from page 8

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

it was not to be, as the Sun Devil duo took the match in a tiebreak. Graff and freshman Alanna Wolff rallied back in their match, but ultimately forfeited the doubles point to Arizona State.

“It was tough to lose doubles point,” Graff said. “But it also made them realize they couldn’t take us lightly. It got us motivated for singles.”

Unfortunately for the Tigers, the momentum carried over for the Sun Devils.

They took quick 6-1 first sets at positions five and six, and eked out wins at two and four.

The last time Princeton had been in a situation similar to this was five full weeks ago at Yale. The Tigers didn’t roll over then and they certainly didn’t lay down on Friday.

They took five of six second sets, each of which was won by no closer than two games.

Muliawan was the first to finish, completing a straight-set victory to even the match.

Freshman Sivan Krems kept both sets close, but fell 7-6, 7-5 to Leighann Sahagun.

Tang finished her third set before Graff finished her second, falling 7-5 to bring Arizona State to the brink of clinching.

Graff soon finished up an impressive 7-5, 6-4 win over No. 69 Stephanie Vlad to keep the match alive. Junior Katie Goepel, who won just two of the first eleven games in her match, fought back brilliantly to keep the team alive.

She managed to win the second set tiebreak and then closed it out with a 6-2 final set. The match was now in the hands of the freshman Wolff, the only player on the team who was guaranteed further matches this season as the Ivy League’s representative in the NCAA singles tournament.

Coincidentally, her opponent was No. 37 Desirae Krawczyk, Arizona State’s only representative in the NCAA singles

tournament.

It was Wolff, however, who played like the experienced favorite in the third set. She grabbed an early break as Krawczyk made unforced error upon unforced error. She maintained the advantage throughout, even forcing a match point up 5-3. She didn’t finish it then, but didn’t let the lost opportunity get to her. A few points later she had wrapped up a 5-7, 6-4, 6-4 victory, giving Princeton its first

“We really believe we are one of the top teams in NCAA tennis.”

Junior Lindsay Graff

ever NCAA tournament win.

“Everyone was lined up on either side of the net,” Graff said. “We were so much louder cheering than [Arizona State was]. We never doubted it, we were never nervous. We genuinely believed in her. They looked like they were lacking in team energy.”

“It was honestly so nervewracking,” Wolff said of having the match on her shoulders. “I tried not to look over at the team and just stay focused on the match.”

The Tigers went into their Round of 32 match fearless and unintimidated. But much like the previous day, they got a slow start in doubles. Facing one of the best doubles lineups in the country, Princeton fell very quickly at the one and two positions. The doubles point was Alabama’s, as was the momentum.

“We’re used to losing the doubles point, especially early in the season,” Graff said. “We all got together after doubles and said, ‘They’re not any more talented than us. This is a winnable match, this is a beatable

team.’ We weren’t intimated by them.”

The first signs of disruption were evident with two opening set wins by Graff and Wolff, but the Crimson Tide still appeared poised for a quick victory having taken the other sets by an average score of 6-2. Continuing yesterday’s storyline, the second sets were a huge turning point for Princeton.

Graff and Wolff finished off straight set victories against No. 65 Mary Ann Daines and No. 93 Danielle Speilmann, respectively.

“I felt pretty good,” Graff said. “I noticed in the first couple games what her weaknesses are. Planned out my strategy. I told myself if I was going to lose this match, she was gonna have to beat me.

Have to make them beat you with your strengths, not give it to them. I was aggressive and I think she didn’t expect that.

Muliawan and Tang both rebounded from 6-1 first-set losses to take their second sets. Alabama won at positions four and six with ranked players and stood on the brink of victory. Tang and the Crimson Tide’s Emily Zabor traded games until it was 4-4. Zabor buckled down one last time and broke Tang. She then held serve to give Alabama the victory.

Graff admitted that her team felt disappointment after the season ending loss, but she expressed pride in her team’s campaign, saying, “We could all feel it: lot of disappointment, but it was pretty short-lived. Once we were able to take a step back and reflect on the season, we felt pride about what we’ve done.”

By the junior’s account, Princeton women’s tennis has high aspirations for next year.

“We’ll be kicking it into gear from day one. We want to repeat as Ivy Champs and make the Sweet 16 if not the quarterfinals. We really believe we are one of the top teams in NCAA tennis. And it’s definitely feasible given our performance the last couple weeks.”

games within a 48-hour period.

Princeton had spent a great deal of mental and physical energy in upsetting Penn State. Taking down an athletic Virginia side proved just too great a challenge after a quick turnaround both on the road and in sweltering heat.

The two goalkeeping staffs were shaken up by Friday’s contest. Princeton pulled sophomore Anne Whoeling after 10 minutes of play saw four goals against and zero saves by the starter. The change proved effective, as senior Caroline Franke would get credit for the win.

The fourth-year keeper tallied 12 saves while allowing nine goals.

Penn State rotated through all three of their keepers. After the halftime break, Cat Raione replaced Emi Smith in the goal.

Once Princeton had taken its first two-goal lead of the afternoon, Natalia Angelo relieved Smith for the final 3 minutes, 37 seconds of play. The three Nittany Lion keepers managed one, two and zero saves respectively.

While Friday would not be the hour of the goalie, skilled shooting was mostly to blame for the struggles in the net.

Princeton would score on six of seven attempts in the first half and convert 10 of 15 in the second. Penn State came in with a less efficient 13-28 shooting mark. However, the two teams only saw six shots miss the cage.

Junior attacker Erin McMunn showed once again why she should be ranked among the nation’s elite offensive players.

Her five points, scored on four goals and an assist, tied for a game high. One of her markers served as a sort of tide-turner, coming at the 27:37 mark in the second half. Before McMunn’s goal, assisted by freshman linemate Olivia Hompe, Penn State held a three-goal advantage which would chipped away by a 3-0 Princeton scoring run.

The Lions’ Maggie McCormick was surgical through

thirty minutes, tallying four of her five points in the first frame. Her dissecting of the Tiger defense caused no small measure of anxiety for coach Sailer and her staff. On the whole, the first half defense from Princeton was not up to its usual standards. It’s fair to say that they missed the presence of their stalwart leader: senior Colleen Smith. Slides were late and Penn State players found open looks at the cage.

The first period saw four failed clears and 11 turnovers

by Princeton. The second half would be a different story, with the Tigers turning the ball over

The Cavaliers jumped out to an imposing 4-0 lead thanks to an early hat trick

by All-ACC attacker Courtney Swan. five times — that’s about average — and successfully advancing the ball into the offensive zone seven times on seven attempts.

A first round victory set the stage for the Tigers’ meeting with another long-time rival. Virginia and Princeton have collided fairly regularly.

Among non-Ivy foes, the Cavaliers have been the third-most common opponent for the Orange and Black, behind Maryland and Penn State. The series record was an even 16-16 coming into Sunday’s game. What’s more, both Princeton and Virginia held 1-3 records against opponents common between the sides during the 2014 season.

As of this year, the Princeton women have featured 22 times in the NCAA Tournament. In nine of those instances, the

competition’s bracket has pitted Orange and Black against Orange and Blue. With the win on Sunday, the Cavaliers took the edge over their rivals with a 5-4 advantage.

The home field advantage would prove crucial for the Virginia side. Additionally, the home team was inspired to avenge the 14-8 loss their men had suffered against Johns Hopkins on the same field just one hour prior.

The Cavaliers jumped out to an imposing 4-0 lead thanks to an early hat trick by All-ACC attacker Courtney Swan. The junior Tewaaraton Trophy candidate was sensational throughout, tallying four goals and two assists to lead the game in points.

Freshman midfielder Anna Doherty scored Princeton’s first and her 24th of the season. At the 10:21 mark, junior midfielder Erin Slifer tallied the third goal in a 3-0 Tiger run to narrow the Virginia lead to 5-4. However, this would be the contest’s closest margin, save for 0-0.

As is customary of women’s lacrosse, the two teams scored in bunches. Two Princeton goals came at the beginning of the second half, but four more unanswered Virginia scores made it 12-6 to the home team.

Cavaliers Maddy Keeshan and Liza Blue tallied a hat trick each.

In her final game as a Tiger, senior attacker Mary-Kate Sivilli scored a hat trick on just three shots, including goals nine and 10 within a minute of each other. Slifer was prolific on the day, tallying four goals on 11 shots. However, their efforts would be too little too late.

Princeton was playing catchup throughout, and they could not catch up to the substantial Virginia advantage.

Goalkeeper Caroline Franke, also playing in her final Princeton contest, would be credited with the loss. She tallied seven saves on the day.

The Cavaliers will advance to the quarterfinals, facing conference rival the University of North Carolina.

Hill wins 100m, first Tiger since 1989 TRACK

Continued from page 8

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

in the decathlon, less than 100 points behind Brown’s Evan Weinstock.

Women’s squad finishes fifth at Heps The women’s track and field team held the lead after the first day of competition, but could not score enough on Sunday as Harvard stormed to victory. The Tigers won three events on Saturday, which included a Heps record from sophomore Julia Ratcliffe in the hammer throw. All of Ratcliffe’s countable throws would have won her the event, but it was her toss of 67.75 on her fifth attempt that gave her the record. She would go on to be named the Most Valuable Female Performer in field competition.

Seniors Imani Oliver and Samantha Anderson also won on Saturday, as Oliver’s jump of 6.02 gave her gold in the long jump, and Anderson’s clearance of 3.80 meters was enough for her

Ratcliffe would go on to be named the Most Valuable Female Performer in field competition. second straight Heps title.

Freshman Megan Curham continued to dazzle in her rookie campaign, as she ran a PR and school record of 33:24.79 in the 10k, good for

second place.

Five wins for Harvard on the final day of competition were more than enough to push the Crimson ahead of the field to take the title, with Dartmouth close in tow. The final scoring ended with Harvard taking Dartmouth down 162-149, with Cornell in third with 94 points, Columbia in fourth with 88 points and the Tigers in fifth with 86 points.

Coming off her second place finish on Saturday, Curham finished third in the 5k. Senior Beth McKenna finished tied with Madison Hansen of Harvard for second in the heptatholon, with sophomore Kerry Krause placing fourth. Freshman Elizabeth Bird placed fourth in the 3000 meter steeplechase, and the Tigers’ 4×800 relay would round out topthree placing with a mark of 8:44.98.

Sports

Monday May 12, 2014

page 8

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } NFL DRAFT

DT Reid drafted by Lions with 158th pick

By John Wolfe senior writer

CONOR DUBE :: FILE PHOTO

Opposing coaching staffs struggled to game plan around the imposing presence of defensive tackle Caraun Reid.

Senior defensive lineman Caraun Reid was the fifth round’s 18th pick in the National Football League draft on Saturday. Reid will join the Detroit Lions as the 158th overall pick. He recorded 20 sacks and 36.5 total tackles for loss in his last three years at Princeton, making him the program’s first two-time All-America honoree in 20 years. Reid became the second Princeton player in two years whose decision to play an extra medical redshirt season was rewarded with an NFL Draft spot, after former teammate Mike Catapano ’13 was dealt to the Kansas City Chiefs last spring.

Some had predicted he would get drafted as early as the third round of the NFL draft; The defensive stalwart became the 14th player in Princeton history to earn an NFL Draft selection and was just the second of those players to be drafted within the first five rounds.

In the NFL’s modern era — since the league’s 1970 merger with the AFL – he is the only Tiger to be drafted this high.

In the Motor City, Reid will join arguably the best defensive lineman in professional football: three-time Pro Bowler and 2010 NFL Alumni Defensive Lineman of the Year Ndamukong Suh. The aggressive style of play that Suh and the rest of Detroit’s D-Line execute offers a perfect fit for Reid, according to his agent Mike McCartney.

“It’s a great spot for him,’’ he said.

“I’m thrilled. I wanted him to go to a team where the defensive line gets upfield. That’s his game. And that’s exactly what the Lions do. This will play right to his strengths.’’

After the draft, Reid echoed his agent’s sentiments. “[I’m] so grateful to join a great or-

ganization, learn from a great coach and great player and compete to be the best player I can be,” he said.

In a video circulating on Facebook, Reid can be seen answering a phone call from the Lions’ management in which he calmly extends his gratitude for the offer.

Reid maintains his usual reserved, collected demeanor until his living room fills with relatives’ screams, applause and chants of “Detroit, Detroit!” Reid cracks a smile and slowly exits the room, explaining over the line, “Sorry. My family’s buggin’ out right now.”

While Reid told The Daily Princetonian he was not surprised to receive the call, the experience was unforgettable nonetheless.

“I knew I was gonna get drafted, but the moment was everything,” he said. “Possibly the greatest feeling in my life.”

ESPN commentators commended the “speed” and “slipperiness” of Reid’s interior pass rushing moves as they played clips of him racking up sacks against Dartmouth and Columbia. The analysts also applauded Reid’s well-roundedness as a student, explicitly citing his involvement with Princeton Faith and Action as well as Old Nassoul.

ESPN analyst Bill Polian, who served as the president and general manager of the Indianapolis Colts and was responsible for drafting Peyton Manning, graduated from the same all-boys Catholic high school as Reid. Polian was covering the draft live on ESPN when Reid’s name was announced, at which point he donned a hat from their alma mater and offered his personal congratulations with a round of applause.

“Caraun Reid is from Mount Saint Michael Academy in the Bronx, New York. I’m a proud alumnus. Way to go Caraun!”

TRACK AND FIELD

WOMEN’S TENNIS

Cornell edges out Princeton men at Heps

Second-round loss comes at Alabama

By Jack Rogers associate sports editor

Men’s edged by Cornell; streak of outdoor Heps title ends at three The men’s track and field team came up just short of a fourth consecutive outdoor Heptagonals title this weekend in New Haven, as the Tigers fell to Cornell by less than seven points.

The Tigers climbed to third place during the first day of competition at Cuyler Field and Dwyer Track, as 15 of their 24.33 points came in the long

jump. A 2-3-6 finish by senior Tom Hopkins, senior Damon McLean and sophomore Jake Scinto gave the Tigers three of the six point-earners in the event. Hopkins fouled on his first four attempts, but saved a PR of 7.71 meters for his final jump, which was just one inch shy of the win. McLean’s third place effort of 7.61 demolished his previous best of 7.23 from his freshman year at Heps. Senior Jake Taylor scored for the Tigers with a sixth place finish in the hammer throw, senior David Coneway finished tied for

fourth with a mark of 4.80 in the pole vault and senior Brad Pelisek placed sixth in the javelin. Further scoring came in the final event of Saturday, when seniors Chris Bendtsen and Tyler Udland finished fourth and sixth in the 10k.

Trailing the Crimson by almost 30 points going into Sunday, the Tigers made a noticeable resurgence to pass Harvard and Dartmouth.

McLean performed as expected in the triple jump, as he took gold with a mark of 15.77 meters.

Junior Scott Rushton marked at

17.50 meters to take second in the shot put. In a heated battle that would come back to haunt the Tigers, Princeton fell to the men of Cornell in the 4×100 relay by under two-tenths of a second.

Hopkins came back firing on Sunday as well, as he managed a 47.66 in the 400 finals to edge Cornell’s Larry Gibson for gold.

The final victory for the Tigers came from sophomore John Hill, who edged Harvard’s Damani Wilson by four-hundredths of a second to win the 100. Junior Stephen Soerens placed second See TRACK page 7

WOMEN’S LACROSSE

Tigers top Penn State, fall to Virginia in round 2

By Andrew Steele sports editor

No. 18/17 women’s lacrosse (12-7 overall, 6-1 Ivy League) finished its NCAA Tournament run where PENN STATE 13 it began: at PRINCETON 16 Virgin ia’s VIRIGINIA 13 K l o c k n e r PRINCETON 11 St a d i u m .

The Tigers faced a tough test this past weekend, drawing against No. 11/8 Penn State (10-7, 3-3 Big 10) on Friday and then against No. 15/11 Virginia (10-8, 3-4 ACC) on Sunday. After emerging from an 8-6 halftime deficit to top the Nittany Lions by a score of

16-13, head coach Chris Sailer’s side could not get past the Cavaliers. The final score of the second round matchup was 13-11 in favor of Virginia, with the home side having taken an early 4-0 advantage and holding a lead throughout.

With a comeback win over Penn State, Princeton ensured that they would advance as far in the NCAA tournament as they have since 2011. In that year, the Tigers got past James Madison before falling in a rout to top-ranked Maryland.

As in 2011, the 2014 campaign provided the immense postseason challenge of playing two See W. LAX page 7

CONOR DUBE :: FILE PHOTO

The 2014 campaign saw the Tigers finish with a 12-7 overall record. Ivy League cochampions, they earned their program’s 22nd NCAA Tournament appearance.

Quotable

‘Yea so I just saw a commercial for the new Lebron app.......

I’m out’ Nolan Bieck (@babybird174), sophomore kicker on the football team

Did you know?

By Eddie Owens associate sports editor

The Tigers made history this weekend, earning the program’s first ever NCAA tournament win. It came in dramatic fashion in a comefrom-behind 4-3 win over No. 25 Arizona State.

Despite the momentous accomplishment, the weekend was, in the eyes of the team, bittersweet. No. 47 Princeton very nearly followed up its moderate upset with a once-in-a-lifetime upset a la Princeton over Georgetown in ’89.

On Saturday the team faced No. 2 Alabama in Tuscaloosa. The match ARIZONA 3 was expected to be nothPRINCETON 4 ing more than a formality, enabling the Crimson Tide ALABAMA 4 to pass into the Sweet 16 in PRINCETON 2 Georgia. Instead, the Tigers dug in and held their ground. They had a chance to pull off the shocker if they could win a couple of three setters. But alas, the natural order of things prevailed and Princeton lost 4-2.

The Arizona State match started with controversy, as the two teams could not agree upon the location. Despite the high chance of rain in the forecast, the Sun Devils wanted to start the match outside. Princeton wanted to play indoors, since it knew its opponent rarely played indoors with the desert climate they were accustomed to in the Southwest. The Tigers ultimately relented, but barely a game into the doubles matches, the skies opened up and the match was delayed.

“We knew it would go inside,” junior Lindsay Graff said. “It wasn’t really a problem, since we expected to be playing inside.”

Arizona State played the favorite’s role well early on, jumping out to leads in each doubles match. Sophomores Amanda Muliawan and Emily Hahn were the first Tigers to wake up, going on a ferocious run to take the match 8-5.

Their spurt catalyzed junior Joan Cannon and freshman Dorothy Tang to go on one of their own. They took four straight games to go up 6-5 and twice achieved match point up 7-6. But

Senior distance runner Chris Bendtsen, with a 5k win in this past weekend’s Heptagonals Championship, extended Princeton’s winning streak in the event to seven. A Tiger has won nine of the last 10.

See W. TENNIS page 7

Follow us ‘Prince’ Sports is on Twitter!

Follow us at www.twitter.com/princesports

for live news and reports!