2008 Woodie Awards
Residence Life curriculum needs change
Former program created uncomfortable environment
Issue date: 11/6/07 Section: Editorial
Oct. 30, 2007 - a date that will forever change the university and its Office of Residence Life. This is when the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education posted a letter on its Web site calling for the immediate cessation of Residence Life activities in light of breaches of students' freedom of speech and other civil injustices.
After highlighting the cases of some university residents who felt wronged by actions taken by resident assistants in floor meetings and individual sessions, FIRE officials deemed Residence Life's curriculum manipulating and indoctrinating.
While the program may have had good intentions, its execution was inappropriate and culpability falls on Residence Life and on the resident assistants who allowed themselves to be used as unquestioning instruments of the program and its ideology.
Additionally, the type of language used by Residence Life staff and printed in its own educational materials promotes a position that is unacceptable at a public institution.
FIRE's statement claims multiple residents felt forced to attend the sessions and if they did not attend, they would have to meet with RAs individually to review what was addressed at the meeting. While vice president of student life Michael Gilbert repeatedly stated there were no mandatory attendance requirements, if residents feel they are being pressured into an activity that they do not agree or feel comfortable with, such pressure is unacceptable.
The Residence Life Web site states that the program strives to create a "living-learning environment characterized by a variety of programs and services that foster the integration of students' personal and academic development." This is a noble goal; however, freshmen are required to live on campus their first year, and are thus forced to become a part of this living-learning environment. If the university mandates that every freshman live on-campus, and these residences become part of a grander educational scheme, then freshmen have no escape from the ideologies put forth in the Residence Life programs. This approach is invasive and encroaches on the privacy of all residents.
After highlighting the cases of some university residents who felt wronged by actions taken by resident assistants in floor meetings and individual sessions, FIRE officials deemed Residence Life's curriculum manipulating and indoctrinating.
While the program may have had good intentions, its execution was inappropriate and culpability falls on Residence Life and on the resident assistants who allowed themselves to be used as unquestioning instruments of the program and its ideology.
Additionally, the type of language used by Residence Life staff and printed in its own educational materials promotes a position that is unacceptable at a public institution.
FIRE's statement claims multiple residents felt forced to attend the sessions and if they did not attend, they would have to meet with RAs individually to review what was addressed at the meeting. While vice president of student life Michael Gilbert repeatedly stated there were no mandatory attendance requirements, if residents feel they are being pressured into an activity that they do not agree or feel comfortable with, such pressure is unacceptable.
The Residence Life Web site states that the program strives to create a "living-learning environment characterized by a variety of programs and services that foster the integration of students' personal and academic development." This is a noble goal; however, freshmen are required to live on campus their first year, and are thus forced to become a part of this living-learning environment. If the university mandates that every freshman live on-campus, and these residences become part of a grander educational scheme, then freshmen have no escape from the ideologies put forth in the Residence Life programs. This approach is invasive and encroaches on the privacy of all residents.
Viewing Comments 1 - 3 of 3
San Singh
posted 11/07/07 @ 5:24 AM EST
We have been watching these developments from China. We often have trouble with workers getting ideas independently. We didn't know the US had developed a reeducation program, but we would like to find copies of the training materials. (Continued…)
Becky
posted 11/08/07 @ 8:59 PM EST
How about all schools, including universities and colleges, move from indoctrination back to education. You know, things that are actually useful in real life instead of just making some people feeeeeeeel so touchy-feely, warm and fuzzy. (Continued…)
The Stevie-D (yeah, its me!)
posted 11/08/07 @ 9:05 PM EST
Wow!
So the "...university did not make a mistake..." in assuming "Residence Life's ramped-up diversity and tolerance education programs served as a hopeful quick-fix solution for the university's public relations woes. (Continued…)
Post a Comment