April 9, 2018

Founded 1876 daily since 1892 online since 1998

Monday April 9, 2018 vol. CXLII no. 38

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } Stay engaged! Twitter: @princetonian Facebook: The Daily Princetonian YouTube: The Daily Princetonian Instagram: @dailyprincetonian ON CAMPUS

STUDENT LIFE

SARAH HIRSCHFIELD :: PRINCETONIAN NEWS AND FILM EDITOR

COURTESY OF PELUMI ODIMAYO

Moses is an educator and activist who was involved in voter registration in Mississippi during the civil rights movement.

TigerLaunch team at the NYU Stern School of Business, where the New York regional was held.

SNCC activist Bob Moses U. students move to discusses US Constitution finals of TigerLaunch

By Sarah Warman Hirschfield Associate News and Video Editor

Bob Moses started his talk yesterday by asking the audience to say the words of the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution with him.

“I’m going to ask you to think about the Preamble, and whether you can own it,” Moses said.

Moses is an educator and activist who was involved in the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, voter registration in Mississippi during the Civil Rights Movement, and improving minority education. In 1982, he received a MacArthur Fellowship, which he used to create the Algebra Project, a mathematics literacy effort targeting low-income

students and students of color.

Yesterday, he joined KeeangaYamahtta Taylor, assistant professor in the Department of African American Studies, to discuss the evolution of U.S. racial justice political organizing.

Moses pointed out that the Preamble uses an active verb in the present tense: “Do ordain and establish.”

“It says in effect that there is a class of constitutional people who own the Constitution,” he said. “Nowhere in the text does it tell you who the ‘we’ is.”

To think the constitutional meaning is solely in the written text is ridiculous, according to Moses.

“What does it mean to be a constitutional person in this country?” he asked the audi-

ence. “What does it mean to be a constitutional person?”

Part of that answer can be found in Article Four, Section Two, Clause Three — the Fugitive Slave Clause, which required that slaves who fled to another state to be returned to the owner in the original state.

That clause, explained Moses, identified another class: constitutional property, Africans.

The clause outlined the obligation of the federal government to return “any constitutional property that decides to leave the constitutional person,” he said.

“Right there in the Constitution, in the very beginning, is the basic conundrum of the country. Where are we now?

What has happened in our conSee SNCC page 3

STUDENT LIFE

USG discusses Lawnparties, movie cosponsorship by clubs

By Jacob Gerrish Staff Writer

The Undergraduate Student Government discussed thesis pictures, “Yard Parties” funding, and student co-sponsorship of Garden Theater movies during its weekly meeting on Apr. 8.

U-Councilor Diego NegrónReichard ’18 introduced an initiative to hold a photoshoot for seniors on Apr. 16 to celebrating the passing of thesis deadlines.

Because the event would be backed by the 2018 Class Council, low-income students could acquire high-quality photos without incurring exorbitant costs from private photographers.

“Something I noticed that the Financial Reform Team can bring about in the future is the idea of identifying cultural problems that might make people feel alienated,” NegrónReichard stated.

University Student Life Committee Chair Tania Bore ’20 presented on the “Yard Parties” funding request of $2,500 by the leaders of campus co-ops. “Yard Parties” would serve as an alternative to House Parties for independent students and would introduce underclassmen to additional dining options.

“It would be cool to see some-

thing like this in the Fall potentially, or maybe more around bicker at the turn of the semester, to really put it on display as people are making food choices for the next year,” Campus and Community Affairs Chair Caleb Visser ’20 said.

The Senate passed the budget request.

Movies Committee Chair Jona Mojados ’20 discussed how the Movies Committee has begun to show advertisements for student groups onscreen and to allow student groups to co-sponsor movie screenings this semester. However, Visser raised concerns about the screening of The Passion of the Christ that Princeton Faith and Action sponsored this past weekend. “[Showing certain movies] really marginalizes and damages our relationships with community members here,” Visser said. “For example - The Passion of the Christ - if you Google anti-Semitic movies, it’s the third movie to come up.”

Other Senate members agreed about the necessity for clear and rigid guidelines in future student co-sponsorship movie applications.

Academics Committee Chair Olivia Ott ’20 presented on the progress of the new academic calendar proposal. The faculty

will vote on the proposal on Apr. 23, and the 2020-21 academic year will be the earliest that the proposal will go into effect.

“It is looking optimistic that it will be approved by the faculty,” Ott said.

Negrón-Reichard further proposed that the Social Committee and the Chief Elections Manager organize a “Get Out The Vote” event in Frist on Apr. 16. Entitled “Project 50,” the voter registration drive would attempt to raise student participation in Spring USG elections from 15% to 50%.

Social Committee Chair Liam Glass ’19 requested an additional $10,000 to cover production for the Lawnparties headliner. Total USG commitment to Lawnparties would then increase to $117,000.

The Senate approved the proposal.

The Senate also confirmed the following members: Jessica Lawlor ’21 and Anne Crowley ’21 to the University Student Life Committee; Lyubomir Hadjiyski ’21, Samantha Shapiro ’21, and Jocelyn Reckford ’20 to the Academics Committee; Marcus Jonas ’21 to the Communications Committee; Aditya Shah ’21 as U-Councilor; and Maris Fechter ’19 as Website Manager.

The next USG meeting will take place on Apr. 15, 2018.

By Nick Shashkini and Benjamin Ball Staff Writers

An elite team of computer science majors from the University are taking their project to the finals of TigerLaunch, the nation’s largest studentrun entrepreneurship competition.

“We all have our shared interests in the sense that we believe in the power and the use of technology to solve some of the problems in developing and developed countries,” said Felix Madutsa ’18.

The co-founders of the BlockX team are Madutsa, Avthar Sewrathan ’18, and Richard Adjei ’18. The students have known and worked with one another on various projects since their freshman year, so the idea to collaborate on a business came naturally.

“We’ve been partnering together since COS 126,” Computer Science — An Interdisciplinary Approach, said Sewrathan. “We’ve known each other

for such a long time that we knew we’d want to start a company together.”

Their company’s mission is to help people reclaim their privacy and data on the internet. To achieve this, their program uses blockchain, a digital ledger in which transactions made in bitcoin or another cryptocurrency are recorded. Their particular blockchain-based naming and storage system is called Blockstack.

“A lot of people talk about blockchain to take power from financial middlemen; we’re just trying to use blockchain to take power from information middlemen, the people who supply most information you consume,” Adjei said.

He added that this goal is especially important in the cases of developing countries, where it can be difficult to obtain information that isn’t influenced by the government or another higher power.

See LAUNCH page 2

STUDENT LIFE

U. students mobilize against proposal for nearby fracked gas compressor station

KATIE TAM :: PRINCETONIAN CONTRIBUTOR

Princeton was the last town to not have a grassroots movement mobilized against this station, according to Jack Aiello ’21.

By Katie Tam Contributor

A coalition of student groups headed by the Princeton Student Climate Initiative is mobilizing against the planned construction of a natural gas compressor station four and a half miles from the University.

Compressor Station 206 would be along the existing Transco pipeline as part of the Northeast Supply Enhancement Project, and would be

in the between of the South Brunswick and Franklin Park residential areas, according to the Williams-Transco website.

The compressor station will carry fracked gas from Pennsylvania through New Jersey for distribution to areas along the East Coast.

Students at the University and members of the local community have collaborated in advocating against the compressor station. A local environmental organization called See COMPRESSOR page 4

In Opinion

Senior columnist Ryan Born offers several pedagogical suggestions to reform the standard lecture, while assistant opinion editor Samuel Aftel calls for more merciful, rehabilitative honor code penalties for minor offenses.

SEE PAGE 7 FOR CROSSWORD PUZZLE

Today on Campus Noon: Infidelities and Regrets: Confessions of a Translator Louis A. Simpson International Building / 144

WEATHER

Looking for the Street? See events on campus in This Week with the Street, PAGE 5 HIGH

48˚

LOW

35˚

Cloudy chance of rain:

0 percent

page 2

The Daily Princetonian

Monday April 9, 2018

BlockX works to reclaim data, privacy on internet LAUNCH Continued from page 1

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

The company focuses on communication applications. BlockX uses blockchain to create two products: a decentralized encrypted messaging and payments platform (similar to WeChat, a communication and messaging platform popular in Asia) and a decentralized social network or microblogging platform, similar to Twitter.

“We’re trying to take away that power the government and that middleman has over the people’s thinking so they can actually make the thoughts that are necessary to push themselves and the human race as a whole forward,” said Adjei.

Sewrathan described the microblogging platform as a social media outlet in which users have control over their own data without having to rely on larger actors like Facebook and risk their data being shared.

Sewrathan referenced the recent Cambridge Analytica scandal as a “timely example.”

“Only now are people realizing that this is not just something that academics think about but [something] that actually affects people in the real world,” said Sewrathan.

The group had been thinking about the potential uses of Blockchain far before the competition ever began, and much of their respective independent work has looked into its possibilities. Using a similar idea, the team won a Princeton Pitch competition in December 2017, indicating that their idea had potential for market success.

The group placed in the top-five competitors at the TigerLaunch regional in New York City in February 2018.

The group emphasized that their idea was not solely for the competition in any sense. Rather, they saw the competition as a way to use one of the University’s many resources to receive feedback and continue to improve. The competition also provides them and other competitors with a network of experts and other students to collaborate with.

“TigerLaunch gives you access to

people who’ve had a lot of crazy ideas pitched to them,” Madutsa said. “If they say this idea is not that crazy, or they think it’s viable, it gives us … a feeling of validation.”

When asked what advice they would give to aspiring entrepreneurs, the team emphasized taking notice of the resources that are on campus and using them, forming connections with professors, immersing oneself in one’s interests, and developing and testing ideas in small ways.

“You think that one day you’re gonna wake up and magically get this idea, which is not the case,” Sewrathan said. “You need to work on an idea and go back and refine it.”

In the course of the TigerLaunch competition, teams from many different universities present in front of a diverse panel of judges to compete for $30,000 dollars in prize money and an opportunity to pitch to top venture capital firms.

The TigerLaunch competition is sponsored by the Princeton Entrepreneurship Club.

“We’re one of the only competitions that’s run by students, for students,” said Sophie Troyka ’19, the lead of the marketing team for the competition.

“Our key words are grit and vision.”

TigerLaunch became a national competition three years ago when it expanded to include teams from colleges other than the University.

Students enter the competition by submitting an application and video explanation of their company and, if accepted, go on to the regional competitions.

This is TigerLaunch’s first year as an international competition, accepting teams from Paris regionals in addition to the regionals in New York City and Chicago.

When asked what the goal of the competition was at the time of its founding, Pelumi Odimayo ’19, a member of the TigerLaunch marketing team, said that its goal was “building a community of student founders and entrepreneurs across the United States.”

The finals of the competition are being held on campus on April 13 and 14.

The Daily Princetonian

Monday April 9, 2018

page 3

Moses: You have to understand the constitutional eras of the country, when it has lurched forward and back SNCC

Continued from page 1

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

stitutional era?” Moses asked.

In the first constitutional era, Africans were struggling to become members of the Preamble, according to Moses.

After the Civil War, when the country entered Reconstruction, Moses says there was a lurch forward. The second lurch came a century later, with the Civil Rights movement.

In voting, housing, and public transportation, the question of the meaning of being a citizen of this country was being raised, said Moses.

“The only area is public accommodations,” he continued.

“The country agrees that we all have constitutional status in the public sphere of this country. We can’t belittle that. The struggle goes on.”

Asked about the legacy of the Civil Rights movement, Moses responded that first it was portrayed in terms of Martin Luther King Jr. Moses pointed out that using King as the face of the Civil Rights movement can be discouraging, because young

people do not think they can be like King. Moses prefers a description of the movement that gives people an easier entry point.

“When you portray the movement in terms of King, there’s no context for the movement. The better metaphor there is that King is a huge tidal wave coming out of an ocean.

What is that ocean, and how did it create that tidal wave?”

Moses asked.

“You have to understand the constitutional eras of the country, when it has lurched forward and back,” Moses said.

“The last presidential election alerted everyone that the country’s lurching. The question was, which way?” Moses said.

Moses discussed his time as a civil rights leader in Mississippi, where he worked with the SNCC and helped organize the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party, which challenged the all-white Democratic Party delegates at a 1964 convention.

Before going down to Mississippi, Moses saw pictures of the young people there in The New York Times.

“They looked like I felt,” he said. “One thing led to anoth-

er.”

He compared organizing to low-grade guerrilla warfare.

“You were exposed and possibly opened to some danger,” he said, adding that the danger came from different groups: the highway patrols, local sheriffs, and other citizens.

What is difficult, according to Moses, is understanding what an organizer’s work is: becoming part of the community to organize around a particular issue and getting the community to figure out that it has a voice and role to play.

He added that he needed to convince black citizens that voting is worth personal danger. Additionally, he needed to earn the respect of the Justice Department because they were the ones who held the keys to the vote.

“But they put in [the 1957 Civil Rights Act] that you couldn’t arrest people for trying to vote.

For them to decide that, we had to discipline ourselves and just do voter registration. So whenever we got locked up, the presumption was it was voter registration,” he said.

Discussing his work with MFDP, Moses said he learned that the key to unlocking Mis-

sissippi’s political and social caste system was the Democratic Party’s structure.

“White people have switched from Democrats to Republicans,” he said, adding that the question of being a Democrat or Republican hinged on white supremacy.

“Along comes Trump. What’s been happening all along, but hasn’t been a part of the national politics is out in the open. So here we are, and where are we going?”

Moses was critical of the mass incarceration of black people and police shootings. In particular, he noted the topical issue of gun rights.

“The issue of the Second Amendment has to do with black people,” he said.

Asked about the Black Lives Matter movement, Moses said that one problem is that it is coming into being at a time when people leapt overnight into national consciousness.

Moses said that education should be an organizing tool for young people today, citing a 1971 Supreme Court case that set the precedent for states to be the judge of educational quality.

“You can’t come to courts for

Like sports? Write for the sports section!

Email: join@dailyprincetonian.com

You could be this guy.

Write for the ‘Prince.’

Email join@dailyprincetonian.com

equity relief because there’s no constitutional right to education. Now the issue is fought state by state,” he said, adding that the states’ constitutions are failing to do the job.

Moses called the current educational system “sharecropper education.”

“The whole country is getting an education for the 20th century and factory work when what they need is education for 21st century and information technology work,” he said.

“Unless we figure it out, we’re going to lurch in the other direction.”

The talk, “SNCC to BLM: Robert Moses Discusses the Evolution of Racial Justice Organizing in the U.S.,” took place at 4 p.m. on April 8, 2018, in McCormick 101. The event was cosponsored by the Department of African American Studies and the Pace Center for Civic Engagement, as part of the Organizing Praxis Lab’s public speaker series. OPL, started after President Donald Trump was elected, seeks to educate activists on how to organize through a year-long training program, sponsored by the Pace Center and the University Center for Human Values.

The Daily Princetonian

page 4

Monday April 9, 2018

The best place to Write Edit Opine Design Produce Illustrate Photograph Create

on campus.

join@dailyprincetonian.com

Compressor’s location puts it at high risk of fires and explosions COMPRESSOR Continued from page 1

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

Franklin Township Task Force helped inform PSCI about the timeline and public comments process. PSCI developed more streamlined ways for submitting such comments. PSCI also plans to help with ongoing research on the impacts of the plant.

The project raises major concerns for University students and Princeton community members. According to the Residents Against Compressor Station 206 website, compressor stations release pounds of toxic chemicals and carcinogens into the water and air, including benzene, formaldehyde, and ammonia. This can result in cancer, leukemia, asthma, and birth defects, among other issues.

In addition, the compressor’s location near an active stone quarry puts the region at high risk of fires and explosions, the severity of which nearby townships do not have the capacity to handle. Noise pollution is also a potential problem, according to the RACS website.

PSCI first heard about the

compressor station project when Amanda Eisenhour ’21, the group’s political director, attended an environmental justice event at Rutgers University. PSCI was also approached by the Franklin Township Task Force at a local environmental event.

“Princeton is the last town to not have a grassroots movement mobilized against this station,” Jack Aiello ’21, a member of PSCI, said.

Franklin Township Task Force visited the University on March 30 to give a brief presentation. The presentation drove the students to make an action plan for the coming weeks. The main goal was to alert the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection of the dangers of the proposed project.

“FERC has only denied two projects in its entire history of regulating these types of projects,” Aiello said.

FERC was responsible for releasing a draft environmental impact statement to analyze the environmental effects of proposed Compressor Station 206. However, FERC did not conduct an independent health

impact assessment. Rather than gathering its own data, FERC made its estimates solely based on numbers provided by Williams-Transco itself.

“What we have heard about the environmental impact statement so far sounds very inadequate,” said Charles Copeland ’19, president of PSCI. The gray area surrounding the health consequences of the project makes the independent assessment crucial, Copeland said.

Because FERC has approved all but two project proposals, Copeland thinks of it as “essentially a rubber-stamp body.”

Thus, Copeland supports pressuring the NJDEP to deny final permits for the project. To further this goal, PSCI and other advocacy groups are encouraging students to submit public comments to FERC before the deadline on May 14.

“You have to register as an intervenor, which means that you are going to be affected somehow, and almost everyone at Princeton will be because the project is supposed to come online by 2019. After that, you can express why you are concerned, and then FERC has to consider those comments,”

Aiello said about the process.

Comments also slow the compressor project down and make it more difficult for the company to receive funding.

Another focus is on building a Princeton Alliance for Our Health in hopes of pressuring the University to take a public stance on the issue.

PSCI hopes this coalition can include everything from green groups to political groups to sports teams.

As of now, the Office of Environmental Health and Safety has not given an official statement.

Copeland noted that the time-sensitive nature of the project has occasionally been challenging. “It’s a fast-moving timeline. It’s a quickly developing project,” he said. “A few of our members, including myself, had to make some decisions about prioritizing this project over our schoolwork, our sleep.”

Copeland also cited the initial difficulty of engaging the student body.

“Princeton hasn’t always been a place conducive to this sort of local activism. We’re a very theoretical campus that generally doesn’t know what’s

happening in our own backyard,” Copeland said.

PSCI has been working hard to spread the word on campus, tabling in Frist Campus Center and hosting various events.

Many students ended up taking initiative and brainstorming creative ways to spread the word, including a profile picture-taking event set for this Tuesday. The outpouring of support and increase in comments encouraged Eisenhour, who has enjoyed speaking with students during tabling events.

“It has been empowering to educate others,” Eisenhour said.

“About 80 people signed up in four days of tabling.”

The role of civic engagement in fighting future projects like the construction of Compressor Station 206 is important to Copeland.

“I really do believe that citizen involvement can have an impact on these types of projects,” Copeland said. “If the station is going to pose a serious threat to people and if people contact and get the word out to the right kind of government agencies and put the right kind of public pressure, I think the government will respond.”

Monday April 9, 2018

The Daily Princetonian

(if(equal? web love) (join the ‘Prince’ now) (join anyway))

Join the ‘Prince’ web and multimedia team.

Email join@dailyprincetonian.com

page 5

Opinion

Monday April 9, 2018

page 6

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Mercy should be the guiding principle of Honor Code reform Sam Aftel

Assistant Opinion Editor

O

n March 26, the Honor System Review Committee discussed its preliminary findings regarding the three suspended referenda — which were passed with overwhelming support by the student body — at a Council of the Princeton University Community meeting. The Committee took great issue with the first and third referenda, which would reduce the Honor Code’s standard penalty of a one-year suspension to academic probation and exonerate suspected students if their professor claimed they did not violate the Honor Code, respectively. The Committee “revised the wording” of the second referendum, which “originally required two pieces of evidence in order for a case to move forward.”

The condemnation of the first referendum is particularly striking. The Committee claimed the referendum was problematic, as it “would create a disparity between punishments from the Honor Committee, which focuses on in-class violations, and from the Committee on Discipline, which focuses on a broader range of outof-class infractions.”

It is highly disappointing that the first referendum would create this inequitable disparity.

Likewise, the first referendum, if enacted, would retain a standard penalty (albeit a less punitive one) for all first-time offenses. A standard penalty is dangerously unfair, as it treats all Honor Code infractions as equally immoral and severe — without accounting for intent or motive. Some Honor Code violations are malicious and premeditated, but others are completely unintentional and simply careless errors; the latter violations should be treated with a reasonable level of mercy rather than with the more punitive responses the former violations warrant. All in all, I believe that Honor Code punishments should

be equalized between the Honor Committee and the Committee on Discipline and that the penalties for Honor Code infractions should be degraded in proportion to the severity of the offence.

Outside of the University’s Honor Code proceedings, the principle of proportional, degraded punishment is the framework for policing legal and ethical violations. A ten-year-old who steals Tic Tacs from a local candy shop is punished less harshly than an adult who robs $1,000,000 from a bank at gunpoint; although both people committed a form of theft, the ten-year-old’s offence is objectively less harmful than the bank robber’s. Thus, the ten-year-old is likely to be punished less severely, if convicted.

The same principle should exist within the Honor Code. All acts of cheating, of course, are wrong.

But some acts of cheating are significantly less malicious than others. A first-year student who accidentally violates the Honor Code on a problem set has committed a less severe ethical offence than a senior who intentionally plagiarizes an entire chapter of a senior thesis to gain a qualitative advantage. Although acts of carelessness are problematic, they are certainly not as ethically compromising as deliberate, premeditated acts of cheating.

At the March 26 meeting where the Committee’s preliminary findings were discussed, “[President Christopher L.] Eisgruber defended the process [of faculty examining the suspended referenda], distinguishing between referenda that simply have to do with ‘procedures’ – like the fourth referendum, which was approved — and the other three, which have to do with ‘principles.’” He also stated, “If you lessen across the board the likelihood or the punishments that exist for cheating, at that point you undermine what are principles that are critical for what this university does.”

I absolutely agree that reforms that change the basic procedures of the Honor Code are distinct from reforms that alter the fundamental moral and ethical principles of the Honor Code. But I believe that compassion, reason, and

mercy should be synthesized with a promotion of total academic integrity as core principles of the University’s Honor Code. In addition, faculty alone should not be the ones to establish the University’s principles — especially pertaining to the Honor Code, which has a direct and disproportionately substantial impact on student life. Faculty should take students’ frustration with the Honor Code and their referenda vote seriously and reform the Honor Code in a sensible and collaborative fashion. Establishing a degraded, nonstandardized, and more reasonably merciful Honor Code penalty system — which applies equally to in-class and out-of-class infractions — is one way to retain faculty supervision of the Honor Code and respect students’ desire for reform; if this type of reform were enacted, faculty would reinforce their ultimate authority over academic integrity (they would still be rejecting the student referenda), and students would get at least some of what they want: a less punitive Honor Code.

Likewise, Eisgruber’s assertion that fundamental changes to the Honor Code could mitigate the Honor Code’s deterrent effect is well-founded yet incomplete.

Deterrence must be paired with second chances and rehabilitative, rather than simply punitive, consequences, in accordance with the severity of the academic infraction at hand. Of course, thievish ten-year-olds would be much less likely to steal Tic Tacs from a candy shop if the punishment for their crime was a sentence of twenty years in prison. But the cost of having such a draconian punishment, that is, the punitive aspect of such a penalty, outweighs its positive deterrent effect.

Thus, the current, standard, non-degraded penalty for a firsttime Honor Code violation, a oneyear suspension, is unreasonably harsh for unmalicious, accidental Honor Code infractions. A oneyear suspension can significantly detract a student’s academic and pre-professional progress, as it removes students from the collegiate environment for an extended period of time and adds a

Straight Outta Asia

Dora Zhao

Assistant Opinion Editor

D

onning a pastel pink polo and a fanny pack, Brian Imanuel — who goes by the stage name Rich Brian — became a viral YouTube sensation with his song “Dat $tick”.

Much of his initial fame came from the spectacle. Imanuel is a baby-faced teenager from Jakarta, emulating trap music from Black communities in the United States. To many, Imanuel seemed to be a one-hit wonder; audiences were laughing as much at him as they were with him. The world did not take him all that seriously.

But Imanuel has proven his naysayers wrong. Two years after “Dat $tick” was released, his debut album Amen took the number one spot on iTunes for hip hop albums.

Imanuel’s success is not an outlier. He is part of a larger movement of Asian rappers — Higher Brothers, Awkwafina, Keith Ape — who are slowly making their way into the mainstream. As they carve a space for themselves in the hip-hop scene, they are simultaneously widening the breadth of spaces Asians can occupy in American society.

The increase in visibility for Asian rappers is about more than the music they make. It signifies much-needed progress for Asian Americans, not only in terms of representation in the media, but also in subverting pervasive stereotypes.

Ever since the end of World War II, Asian Americans have been lumped together under the moniker of “model minority” — a name that communicates the idea that they are an exemplary group that is the living embodiment of the American Dream. While ostensibly the model minority can be seen as a positive stereotype, the phrase creates a false sense of overarching success amongst the Asian American community. Feeling the need to be a model minority both marginalizes those who are not as economically affluent as the stereotype suggests and discourages many Asian Americans from making riskier choices, such as taking a job in the media industry, out of fear of failure.

Because of the overarching stereotype of the model minority, listeners are confused as to what place Asian Americans have in rap music. As Salima Koroma, the director of the documentary Bad Rap, stated, “To be honest, what hip hop is perceived to be is the antithesis of what Asian Americans are considered to be in this country.” Yet this crop of

Asian rappers are the ultimate juxtaposition: they challenge the expectations, proving that there is space in popular culture, specifically hip hop, for new voices.

Having this representation for Asian Americans is essential, not to fill a diversity quota or to appease changing consumer demand, but to reflect the different stories that different people have to tell.

Unfortunately, to date, Asian Americans have been grossly underrepresented in media.

A 2015 diversity report from the University of Southern California found that, of the 100 most popular films, 49 included no speaking or named Asian characters.

And, frankly, the problem is not only with underrepresentation but also misrepresentation. It is not enough to have Asian bodies fill supporting roles or serve as props for white stories. Asian Americans have a wide range of unique stories — stemming from their background, family, identity — that have been largely ignored by mass media. Instead, they are portrayed as one-dimensional tropes, creating the illusion that the Asian American experience is monolithic.

Rap can become a means for sharing these stories. Even though she is primarily a comedic rapper, Nora Lum, commonly known as Awkwafina, touches on serious issues of the racial and gender stereo-

moral stain to students’ academic background. Additionally, oneyear suspensions are disastrous for low-income, disadvantaged students, who may not have the financial and social resources to take a year off from school.

Consequently, one-year suspensions and more severe penalties should be reserved for only those students who commit unequivocally intentional acts of cheating that give them a substantial qualitative advantage or for students who violate the Honor Code two or more times.

Other less malicious acts of cheating — such as accidentally citing a source incorrectly or acts of cheating that occur due to mental illness — should be given more rehabilitative punishments that allow students to learn from their mistakes and continue their academic progress on schedule. Such penalties could include a failing grade in the course in which the violation occurred, a temporary restriction on extracurricular or athletic participation, mandatory academic and psychological counseling, or academic probation.

I wholeheartedly embrace the University’s ethos of absolute academic integrity. Without integrity, our intellectual achievements are fundamentally meaningless, as honesty — an expression of total truth — and scholarship are inseparable. Therefore, a strong Honor Code that deters acts of academic wrongdoing is an undeniably necessary element of academic life at the University.

Nevertheless, I believe our Honor Code would be strengthened and further legitimized if students found guilty of cheating were punished in accordance with the severity of their violation. Deterrence and mercy need not be mutually exclusive. A reasonable and compassionate Honor Code that punishes violators proportionally and recognizes the moral necessity of second chances and rehabilitation, as well as deterrence, is an Honor Code of strength, justice, and integrity.

Samuel Aftel is a sophomore from East Northport, N.Y. He can be reached at saftel@princeton.edu.

types that Asian women face in her songs. For her song “Green Tea,” Lum paired with comedian and activist Margaret Cho with the intention of teaching young women of color. In an interview with the blogger Angry Asian Man, Lum stated that she wanted her listeners “to embrace their quirkiness, their sexuality, their inner-child and their creativity with passion.” While popular media has traditionally depicted Asian women either as the asexual nerd or an oversexualized erotic trope, voices like Lum’s are needed to dispel these stereotypes.

In many ways, rap is the perfect medium for this revolution. It has long been the breeding ground for expressions of individuality and unique perspectives. Rap is lyrically free — a spoken word, almost poetry, recorded to an instrumental track. This form affords artists greater freedoms, allowing rap to convey some social consciousness.

Rappers paint a gritty version of their reality and use their songs to bring light to issues within their community.

Using this model, rap music goes beyond being a form of representation. It is a vehicle that can help change mainstream perceptions of Asian Americans.

So, we can appreciate “WeChat” or “Gospel” for their catchy beat. We can even laugh at the bizarreness of “My Vag.”

vol. cxlii

editor-in-chief

Marcia Brown ’19 business manager

Ryan Gizzie ’19

BOARD OF TRUSTEES president Thomas E. Weber ’89 vice president Craig Bloom ’88 secretary Betsy L. Minkin ’77 treasurer Douglas J. Widmann ’90 Kathleen Crown William R. Elfers ’71 Stephen Fuzesi ’00 Zachary A. Goldfarb ’05 John Horan ’74 Joshua Katz Kathleen Kiely ’77 Rick Klein ’98 James T. MacGregor ’66 Alexia Quadrani Marcelo Rochabrun ’15 Richard W. Thaler, Jr. ’73 Lisa Belkin ‘82 Francesca Barber trustees emeriti Gregory L. Diskant ’70 Jerry Raymond ’73 Michael E. Seger ’71 Annalyn Swan ’73

142ND MANAGING BOARD managing editors Isabel Hsu ’19 Claire Lee ’19 head news editors Claire Thornton ’19 Jeff Zymeri ’20 associate news editors Allie Spensley ’20 Audrey Spensley ’20 Ariel Chen ’20 associate news and film editor Sarah Warman Hirschfield ’20 head opinion editor Emily Erdos ’19 associate opinion editors Samuel Parsons ’19 Jon Ort ’21 head sports editors David Xin ’19 Chris Murphy ’20 associate sports editors Miranda Hasty ’19 Jack Graham ’20 head street editor Jianing Zhao ’20 associate street editors Danielle Hoffman ’20 Lyric Perot ’20 digital operations manager Sarah Bowen ’20 associate chief copy editors Marina Latif ’19 Arthur Mateos ’19 head design editor Rachel Brill ’19 cartoons editor Tashi Treadway ’19 head photo editor Risa Gelles-Watnick ’21

NIGHT STAFF copy Hannah Freid ’20 Armani Aguiar ’21 Douglas Corzine ’20 assistant chief copy editor Alexandra Wilson ’20 design Charlotte Adamo ’21

But what we cannot do is ignore the fact that Asian American identity is changing, in part because of hip hop’s influence. These rappers are bravely complicating what it means to be “Asian” in America. They are demonstrating that it is not the monolithic experience that many wrongly assume.

Dora Zhao is a first-year student from Newtown, Pa. She can be reached at dorothyzhao@ princeton.edu.

Editor’s note: This month, the University observes Asian Pacific American Heritage Month. If you would like contribute to this month-long conversation about Asian-American and PacificAmerican culture, please email opinion@ dailyprincetonian.

Monday April 9, 2018

Opinion

page 7

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com }

Born, again

T

he unfortunate truth is, for most undergraduates, the majority of their time spent “learning” at Princeton is occupied by lectures. Last spring, I argued that professors should stop lecturing us; in other words, Princeton should get rid of lectures completely.

Sadly, though unsurprisingly, the University has not ended lectures since the publication of my article. While I wait for the administration to follow my “moderate” and sensible reform for the sake of its students, I will offer a series of moderate and sensible reforms in an (ultimately vain) attempt to make lectures better.

My position has not changed in the past year. I still argue that lectures are the most inefficient possible way to teach.

Research supports this. The Peak Performance Center shows that lecture allows for 5 percent retention of presented material. Another paper notes that, “Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics,” and it found that students in classes with traditional learning were 50 percent more likely to fail than peers in classes with active learning. There are more intuitive reasons why lectures are inefficient besides pure research. It is hard to focus on someone talking for 50 minutes straight. It’s easy to nod as if you understand without actually understanding.

Despite all of this, lectures have one saving grace: They

Friends, professors, students: How do we make lectures better?

give condensed versions of otherwise difficult material, prepared and summarized by experts in the relevant field.

I argue that if we are to have lectures at all, this single positive aspect of lectures must be accentuated. Professors should acknowledge that lectures are generally going to be inefficient and do everything in their power to alleviate the inefficient educational model foisted on them by the University. As I argued in my previous piece, the University should at the very least put as many lectures into video as possible and limit the time of lectures to 50 minutes (80-minute lectures are too long).

A good place to start is that professors should, in every case, provide comprehensive lecture outlines for two reasons: firstly, in order to allow students to make up for the deficiencies of the lecture format later one, and secondly, in order to allow students to afford to miss lectures so that they do not waste their time attending. Because lectures are such a poor way of learning, it is generally inadvisable to force students to go to lectures; while Princeton cannot remove lectures formally, we can informally limit their influence.

As part of this, professors should never make attendance in lectures mandatory. Because lecture notes should be provided and lectures are not efficient, professors should not consider our actual presence in lectures to be necessary.

Instead, students should go to lectures if they think they will benefit from attending.

It should be up to professors to ensure that their lecturing style is compelling or necessary enough to actually provoke attendance.

Moreover, professors ought to insist on the most interesting presentation formats possible. I do not expect a song or dance. I do not expect a TED Talk. But is it really unfair to expect professors to be good lecturers? I don’t think so. The University is prestigious and is supposed to be the best at its job: research and undergraduate education. The University can afford to reject people whose scholarship is merely “very good” if their teaching is not to a high standard.

I do think professors should attempt a certain standard of lecturing: not reading off their slides, utilizing diagrams and pictures whenever relevant, and varying their tone. These are just the basic standards of presentation that we are taught as students. Moreover, I expect professors and the University to consistently refine their pedagogies to maximize the benefit we get from our education here. It is insufficient to expect that just because we are taught by experts, we receive the best education possible.

University students are some of the best students available; we would succeed in any circumstances. I want teachers that take advantage of our abilities and raise us to a higher level.

Major Decisions Isabel hsu ’19

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

Given that students will be at some lectures, professors should maximize the benefit of being physically present in lectures. Foremost in this category is the removal of laptops and phones from the classroom. Some students genuinely do take notes on their laptops. Electronic notes are convenient and transferable. As many professors argue, however, writing is far superior in notetaking than typing. In addition, laptops and phones have negative externalities for other students.

Typing is annoying; screens are distracting. Perhaps this will result in diligent students attending lecture and less diligent students staying in their dorm rooms. At the same time, remember that lectures are not remarkably effective even if we do diligently show up and take notes, so the difference between going to lecture and missing lecture is not as large as it may at first appear.

Professors should be more discerning in what they ask us to read, and they should provide the appropriate priming for lectures in the form of a couple of questions for us to keep in mind while reading.

Such questions should be directly relevant to lecture. It is totally unreasonable to suggest to students that they should read 250 pages and somehow be able to recall that material on top of anything else they must read. What is further insulting is when we are asked to do a large amount of reading and the professor spends 90 per-

cent of their lecture on a handful of sentences. If professors do insist on large quantities of reading, they should at least provide prompting reading questions. Not a barrage of them, but a few to guide reading in preparation for the lecture.

Finally, most importantly — but admittedly most controversially — professors should, as much as possible, remove questions from their lectures. That is to say that professors should not invite questions nor address any that may come up in lecture. This is an extreme position, but I make it on principled grounds.

Consider that I am at a lecture to learn from an expert, not to listen to questions fielded by other undergraduates. When a single person asks a question in a crowded lecture, that person is essentially holding everyone else hostage by focusing on what they want to know the answer to. Many undergraduates ask questions that are going to be addressed later, have already been addressed, or are off-topic. It is a rare question indeed that is actually “good,” by which I mean interesting and relevant for the rest of the class.

Is the rare appearance of these questions worth it? No. Office hours, precepts, and emails exist for a reason; people are capable of writing down their questions and asking them later. If the professor thinks that a question is legitimately important, they are free to address it in an email to the class or in their lecture. But lecture itself should be a pure distillation of whatever the professor wants us to learn about. Lecture is not the time for anyone to entertain the attempts of their classmates to look smart.

One might argue that, in arguing against professors interacting verbally with students via questions, I am underselling the very active learning that I argue is better than lectures. There’s even an article that suggests one bad sign of a professor is an unwillingness to interact with students.

My intention is merely to point out that there are other spaces for active learning that are not lectures, and that if lectures are to have any benefit at all, they must be focused on the one good thing about them.

Is there anyway to add a more active learning approach to lectures? I have found one.

It’s called peer-to-peer instruction. An American Public Media article on a class at the University of Maryland has put in the spotlight a suggestion that lectures should focus, not on the professor lecturing, and not the professor asking students if they understand, but asking the students to instruct each other on the topic.

I think the most effective way to deal with lectures is simply to remove them. I am not sure Princeton will ever do that. In the meantime, I appeal to professors to attempt to alleviate the deficiencies of the format they are saddled with.

While I would never presume to tell professors how they ought to teach, I hope some of them will find my arguments persuasive.

Ryan Born is a philosophy concentrator from Washington Township, Mich. He can be reached at rcborn@princeton. edu.

This is part of a recurring weekly column on politics and pedagogy at Princeton and abroad.

Sports

Monday April 9, 2018

page 8

{ www.dailyprincetonian.com } SOFTBALL

Softball drops Ivy League series to Dartmouth as tough season continues

By Chris Murphy

Head Sports Editor

After playing one of their best games of the season early Friday afternoon, the Princeton softball team seemed to gain some momentum. By Saturday night, all of that momentum was gone.

Despite winning the first game against Dartmouth 6–0 on Friday at the Class of 1895 Field, the Tigers lost the series to the Big Green two games to one. They fell 8–6 in the second game of Friday’s doubleheader and were thoroughly outmatched in Saturday’s rubber match, which resulted in a 12–1 loss. The Tigers (5–20 overall, 3–6 Ivy), dropped their second straight Ivy League series and lost any remaining momentum they had from their series win over Brown two weeks ago.

Things looked good at the start of the weekend, as the Tigers came out firing on all cylinders in their 6–0 victory in game one. Freshman pitcher Allie Reynolds was the hero for the Orange and Black, pitching her second shutout of the season and only allowing four runners to reach as far as second, while striking out four batters on 118 pitches. The turning point came in the bottom of the fifth inning when the Tigers — then leading 2–0 over the Big Green — plated three more runs after junior catcher Kaylee Grant doubled

COURTESY OF GOPRINCETONTIGERS.COM

After playing one of their best games of the season early Friday afternoon, the U. softball team seemed to gain some momentum. By Saturday night, all of that momentum was gone.

to score two base runners, then came around to score herself after a Dartmouth throwing error. The five run lead allowed Reynolds to stay in the final two innings to earn another complete game shutout.

After the confidence-building game one win, the Tigers looked to close out the double header with a win and take the series. In one of the most exciting games of the season, the Tigers took an early lead when sophomore infielder Al-

Weekend review Men’s Lacrosse vs. Stony Brook: W 16–8 Sophomore attacker Michael Sowers led the Tigers with nine points, grabbing four goals and notching five assists. The Tigers executed well — winning faceoffs, ground balls, and limiting turnover. This translated into possession and goals as two other Tigers, senior midfielder Austin Sims and freshman midfielder Chris Brown, scored an impressive four goals each. Princeton will look to carry this momentum forward as they continue their break from Ivy League play with a match against Siena College this Tuesday.

Men’s Volleyball vs. Sacred Heart: W 3–1 Princeton’s win over Sacred Heart puts them in control of their own destiny as they look to clinch a playoff spot in the final weekend of the regular season. Another win for the Tigers or a loss by Charleston will send the Tigers through. Currently, Charleston is two games back, but they own the tie-breaker, meaning two losses for the Tigers and two wins by Charleston will see the Tigers fall out of the playoffs. The Tigers will play Penn State next Friday to potentially secure a playoff berth.

Women’s Lacrosse @ Harvard: W 20–15 The women’s lacrosse team had a strong 6–1 start against their Ivy League rival Harvard. Despite the lead, the Crimson found their way back into the game, tying it at 15 apiece. A late Princeton run would seal the game for the No. 20 Tigers, who are now 2-1 in conference play. The match saw four Tigers score four or more goals, including junior striker Elizabeth George, who led all scorers with five goals.

lison Harvey launched an RBI double into the gap in the bottom of the first.

Later trailing 3–1, freshman outfielder Mackenzie Meyer launched a home run over the fence to tie the game. Princeton would trail 8–4 head-

ing into the final inning, but would climb back to within two runs after RBIs by Harvey and Grant. With runners on first and second, the Tigers looked poised to mount a comeback, but couldn’t push the runners home as they grounded out to end the game.

Falling in a great back-andforth game, the Tigers hoped they could win the series with a Saturday victory over Dartmouth.

Unfortunately, the Tigers would not win on Saturday; in fact, they didn’t even come close as they were blown out 12–1 in five innings. Princeton gave up four home runs in the game, including two in the first three batters. Dartmouth would break the game open in the fourth with six runs, taking a 12–0 lead and forcing the game to end early. The Tigers would avoid being shut out with a run in the fourth, but left the field on Saturday with a bitter taste in their mouths as they failed to earn the series win against Dartmouth.

Up next for the Tigers is a non-conference home game against Monmouth on Tuesday night. Then, the Tigers travel to Connecticut to take on Yale in a three game series. The last place Tigers are hoping to leap ahead of the Bulldogs in the standings with a series win this upcoming weekend and maybe find some momentum heading into the final few weeks of the season.

Performances of the week Freshman lacrosse midfielder Kyla Sears: four goals, three assists Sears notched four goals and three assists, helping the Tigers beat back a rally from Harvard to secure their second Ivy League win.

Women’s Water Polo vs. Michigan: 8-7 (2OT) The women’s water polo team opened CWPA conference play with a four-game winning streak against ranked opponents. The No. 15 Tigers not only upset No. 13 Indiana to start the run, but they also managed to edge out No. 12 Hartwick and No. 9 Michigan in conference play. The Tigers have only won eight of their twenty-nine meetings against the Wolverines prior to the game this past weekend. The Tigers will now look to extend their winning streak with a four-game homestand.

Baseball @ Brown: W 2-1 series The baseball team opened their series against Brown with a 7–4 victory. Sophomore Chris Davis recorded his first career home run, while fellow classmate Conor Nolan added two hits to the Princeton effort. The team then carried this momentum as they held on to narrowly edge out Brown 4–3 in the second game.

However, the Orange and Black were unable to complete the series sweep as Brown earned a 12–0 decision over the Tigers. Princeton will face Seton Hall this Wednesday before resuming conference play against Penn.

Sophomore middle blocker George Huhmann: 26 kills, 9 blocks Huhmann posted a careerhigh 26 kills as the Tigers earned a crucial win against Sacred Heart. The win put the Tigers in control, with one victory securing a EIVA playoff berth.

Softball vs. Dartmouth: L 1–2 series The softball team started the series on the right foot, with freshman pitcher Allie Reynolds throwing to help secure a 6–0 shutout against Dartmouth. However, Dartmouth would rally in the second game, fighting off a Princeton push to secure the victory. The Big Green would then go on to dominate the third game with four home runs that would give Dartmouth the series over the Princeton squad.

Women’s Tennis vs. Columbia: W 6–1 The women’s tennis team beat Columbia 6–1 to continue their unbeaten streak in the Ivy League. The Tigers are now at 3–0 in conference play and the only team left in the Ancient Eight to remain unbeaten.

The Orange and Black will look to extend their winning streak with two crucial away matches against Yale and Brown.

Tweet of the Day “@princetonwlax is back in town Tuesday as they face Maryland! ” #tigerup Princeton Tigers (@ PUTIGERS),

Stat of the Day

26 kills

Sophomore George Huhmann of men’s volleyball led his team to a 3-1 victory on Saturday with a career-best 26 kills.

Follow us Check us out on Twitter @princesports for live news and reports, and on Instagram @princetoniansports for photos!