On April 19, philly.com published an opinion articlet from Drexel University President John A. Fry about the death of Tim Piazza and the need for a crackdown on hazing. In the article, he expressed his support for a bill introduced by Pennsylvania Senate Majority Leader Jake Corman, which called for required anti-hazing policies in Pennsylvania among other things.

I think few would disagree with President Fry’s point, that hazing ­­— especially when it involves excessive quantities of alcohol, as in Piazza’s case — is dangerous, and can have very serious consequences. Requiring policies against hazing seems prudent. In that sense, President Fry’s words are admirable.

We are disappointed, therefore, only in what he chose not to say.

In September of 2015, Drexel student and member of Pi Kappa Phi Ian McGibbon attended an all-you-can-drink event at Cavanaugh’s River Deck. Afterwards, he suffered a punch to the face from a member of another Drexel fraternity. A few months later, he was declared incapacitated by a court due to his brain damage from that injury.

When McGibbon’s parents filed suit against Drexel’s Pi Kappa Phi chapter and several other parties in July 2017, their attorney’s press release stated that 911 was not contacted for more than 10 hours following McGibbon’s injury. This is eerily reminiscent of the neglect of Tim Piazza, who was drunk, and then injured, and then left without medical attention for a significant amount of time.

Of course, we do not know that hazing was involved in McGibbon’s injury. However, it did involve problematic action of lack of action by fraternity members, which is very relevant to President Fry’s article. Part of the bill that he expresses support for includes legal protection for people who contact the police when such an event occurs. Is that not directly related to the case of McGibbon, for whom authorities were not called until hours after he was injured?

“To be sure, Drexel is not immune and has had its sharing of fraternity drinking incidents,” is the only vague allusion to McGibbon and any students like him. It hardly seems like enough.

We applaud President Fry for taking a stand against hazing. We share his sympathy for Tim Piazza and his family. However, his complete failure to even mention McGibbon feels both negligent and ignorant. He had a chance to maturely recognize the way the tragedy of excessive drinking, injury, and neglect in a Greek life setting has impacted our own campus, and has forever damaged the life of a Drexel student. Ian McGibbon is more than a “fraternity drinking incident.” He deserves to be named — especially by the president of his own university.

As the Spring Term begins, many Drexel students are switching gears between classes and co-op. However, our graduating seniors are switching their mindsets to something much larger than a new quarter or a new workplace: many are looking to get the hell out of here and start their careers. It’s a transition that’s filled with excitement and anxiety, and it signals the end of an era. Especially for Drexel students, who in a large part attend for five years, and who almost universally lose their precious summer vacation time so praised by peers at other universities, finally leaving is a startling and euphoric experience.

Graduation marks a time to look back on all of the experiences, triumphs, low points, failures, and lessons from students’ time in school. For some, it means it’s time to go to graduate school. For others, it’s time to start being a part of the workforce. Some students choose to take a much deserved break and travel before settling on their next steps. Still others stay behind to finish a few classes and receive their degree. Whatever comes after graduation, one thing is for sure: it’s bound to hold new beginnings and maybe just a touch of nostalgia.

Drexel students are especially sensitive to our lack of school spirit, and the well-known experience of the Drexel shaft is one all Dragons can relate to, so it doesn’t necessarily come as a surprise that most Drexel students are disenchanted with the idea of attending their commencement ceremony. To add insult to injury, many student vocalize their ire at being forced to pay nearly $90 for the necessary graduation cap and gown that they’ve waited so long to proudly don. The ceremony will be long, the speeches may end up being terrible, and the horror of scheduling family arrivals and visits for the big day is enough to drive any graduating student crazy.

However, it’s important to consider what may be gained by attending commencement.

For what is very likely the last time, graduating students are able to stand together as a unified class, a group of determined and damn well-prepared young professionals and academics who are chomping at the bit to get into the world and start making a difference. Commencement concentrates every graduating student into one alarmingly claustrophobic space for a few hours physically – mentally, and emotionally, the concentration of nostalgia, pride, and just a touch of disbelief is a lot to take it. The atmosphere at graduation ceremonies never fails to be a little bit awe-inspiring, and for many graduating seniors, it is the last chance to experience this incredible feeling for yourself.

So yes, you’ve just gotten through five years of way too many “midterms,” not nearly enough summer fun, being shafted pretty regularly, and who knows how much debt and student loans. But you’ve also gotten through what many consider an extremely rigorous course load, an insane amount of responsibility at various co-ops, and several hours spent proving that you have what it takes. You might as well take your opportunity to bask in it while you can.

It’s a bit early to say congratulations to our class of 2018, so instead we’ll say hang in there, and we’ll see you at graduation.

The following is the opinion of the Emerald’s editorial board and not Emerald Media Group as a whole.

The ASUO election is an opportunity for UO students to directly participate in their school’s democracy, but election turnouts the past couple of years have been horrendous. A total of 2,799 students voted in the 2016 ASUO election and 1,439 voted in 2017 — roughly 11 percent and 6 percent of the student body, respectively. ASUO handles roughly $16 million accumulated from students’ tuition, which is one of the many reasons why students should be voting in the election.

Unlike last year, two ASUO slates are competing this year to represent the student body: Ducks Together and United UO. The Emerald will not endorse a slate this election as they have in previous elections, but we endorse the idea that students should be informed so that they vote according to what they believe is best for the university.

Ducks Together

According to its Facebook page, Ducks Together is “all about taking back student power.” Maria Gallegos and Imani Dorsey, the presidential and vice presidential candidates, stressed in last Thursday’s town hall debate that student voices will be protected and heard on issues like tuition increases. One of the slate’s main focuses is to make the student Food Pantry more available to food insecure students. Increasing Food Pantry availability was part of Amy Schenk’s campaign last year for her slate, UO For You.

It’s important to know that Ducks Together is primarily made up of current ASUO representatives. Although it’s not a defining factor, having experience on how ASUO works may translate well into the slate’s performance next year if elected. But sticking to the status quo may not sit well with students depending on their view of the current ASUO slate. In that case, United UO is the slate to consider.

United UO

United UO is campaigning on its five pillars: student safety, student housing, student health, transportation and community town halls. Among many things, the slate is more focused on infrastructure changes than Ducks Together, emphasizing the increase of lighting around campus in response to the recent robberies and increasing parking availability.

United UO’s slate members are made up of students who are not already in ASUO. Jacob Faatz and Karishma Shah are the running president and vice presidential candidate, respectively. Faatz has interned with U.S. Senator Ron Wyden and has also interned for Oregon Senator Lee Beyer. United UO believes that the slate’s experience in local government and its fresh approach to the ASUO establishment will prove that it’s the right choice to represent UO students.

UO students need to know that ASUO will decide where their tuition dollars go next year and debate how much your tuition is increased the next year. Students who care about their money allocation have a say in where the money is allocated to. Students can call their representatives, or participate in town hall debates, but the first point of democracy starts with voting in who you believe represents you best.

The post Editorial: Your vote matters this ASUO election appeared first on Emerald Media.

The following is the opinion of the Emerald’s editorial board and not Emerald Media Group as a whole.

The small student protest that cancelled University of Oregon President Michael Schill’s speech on Friday was disrespectful, ineffective, and reflects poorly on the whole student body.

Approximately 45 students, calling themselves the “UO Student Collective,” swarmed the stage right before Schill was scheduled to give his State of the University speech Friday morning, and after several minutes of chanting, an administrator announced that the speech was cancelled. The following day, the students posted a list of demands on Facebook.

Friday’s protest painted the UO student body as unwilling to listen to the viewpoints of others. College students around the country have been criticized recently for shutting down the speeches of controversial right-wing figures such as Milo Yiannopoulos and Ben Shapiro.

What happened Friday was worse. Schill wasn’t there to spew hate-filled rhetoric – he was a university president doing his job.

The organizers, whose gripes include Schill’s “acceptance of fascism and neo-Nazis,” “insurmountable increases to student tuition,” and “ignorantly happy-go-lucky attitude” wrote in their Facebook group for the event that “radical change requires radical action.”

We got the radical action. Still waiting on the radical change.

The organizers failed to suppress anything, as UO released a pre-recorded version of the speech minutes after its cancellation. Instead, the event made headlines for its spectacle and painted the student body as rude, unfocused and angry about … just about everything.

Students who are unhappy with school administration should absolutely protest and make their concerns heard.  The repeated tuition increases are a legitimate gripe, and Schill comes across as tone deaf when he tells students to ask their parents for money or take on more debt. But shouting him off the stage isn’t the way to address those concerns.

The Black Student Task Force has shown that respectful protest can effect change on this campus. Not all of their demands have been met, but they got things done by showing a willingness to work with administration rather than drown it out.

For change to happen, there must be dialogue with those in charge of making the changes. Suppressing the speech of others is not how to move forward.

The post Editorial: Let Schill speak appeared first on Emerald Media.

Three simple words, uttered under the disgraceful guise of being fair and equitable, debased the Donald Trump presidency and the country to a lower point than the already low bar set during the last eight months. Those three words? “On many sides.”

“We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides.”

Speaking about the white supremacist rally where 32-year-old Heather Heyer was murdered by a man driving his car through counter-protesters against the white supremacist movement, Donald Trump somehow managed to implicitly side with neo-Nazis.

Donald Trump once again stepped to the podium 48 hours later, this time to finally, explicitly denounce the white supremacist movement. The delay before this response, as well as the hollow “they’re making me do this” tone he adapted, served to make the statement toothless.

Lest someone somewhere be convinced by his insipid statement, the president once again took to the podium Aug. 15, this time filled with fury and bitterness, as has become the trademark of this presidency.

He, among other things, defended the delay in his response, his association with White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon, and even took the time to peddle his winery. The most telling quote came when he was pressed by a reporter about the protests and the death and injuries caused to one side.

“I watched those much more closely than you people watched it, and you had a group on one side that was bad and you had a group on the other side that was also very violent. And nobody wants to say that, but I’ll say that right now. You had a group on one side that came charging in, without a permit, and they were very, very violent.”

This is an unqualified victory for white supremacists and their movement.

David Duke, former Ku Klux Klan leader, took to Twitter to thank the president for his statement: “Thank you President Trump for your honesty & courage to tell the truth about #Charlottesville & condemn the leftist terrorists in BLM/Antifa.”

Many other prominent white supremacists and neo-Nazi leaders rejoiced in the wake of the press conference, congratulating and thanking President Trump for standing up for them.

The statement is not only revolting on its surface but may be the most dangerous moment of this presidency.

Hate groups in this country have been emboldened since the election, where Donald Trump publicly ran on a campaign of similar hate to their ideals. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, the total number of hate groups in the country have grown 17 percent from 2014 to 914 total groups today, a troubling trend, especially given that the president appears unwilling to do anything to stand up to hate in the country.

White supremacists and similar groups have already come out with a declaration of their intention to keep fighting and pushing their way of life. Already, white nationalist groups have requested permission to protest in other locations throughout the country. A white supremacist leader named Matthew Heimbach said, “[White nationalist groups] are going to be more active than ever before.”

White supremacists are invigorated by Donald Trump, and that’s a scary idea for the oppressed in this country. This state of affairs further marginalizes and endangers the most compromised members of society and it has become clear that this administration will not stand up for what is right and is perfectly fine emboldening hate groups.

Many watched as the protesters, described by President Trump as “protesting very quietly,” chanted “You will not replace us! Jews will not replace us!” Many watched as armed militants showed out with automatic weapons to defend the white supremacists. Many watched videos of a terrorist Nazi sympathizer driving his car into people protesting against white supremacy. And then many watched as Donald Trump stood in the lobby of Trump Tower in New York City to defend the side of hate and bigotry.

There is no “both sides” to a fight where one side stands up for the oppressed and their liberty to control their bodies and actions and the other is diametrically opposed to basic human rights. One side believes that people of every creed and color deserve the right to live, the other doesn’t. It’s as simple as that.

At every opportunity, we must make a stand against hate in our communities and in the country as a whole. It’s time to make our stand and show white supremacists and sympathizers that their hate has no place in this country. It needs to be a frightening proposition for people to reveal that they don’t believe in the rights for certain people to exist in this country and they need to be publically shamed until they go back into hiding.

There may never be a total elimination of these hateful groups from the world, but we have a responsibility to eliminate them from the public eye as much as humanly possible.

There are some students who enrolled at Drexel with an exact idea of what they wanted to do and who they wanted to be when they received their diplomas. There are many students who entered with only a vague inkling of their calling, one that they hoped to solidify in their four (or five) years of education.

And this time of year, with grad school applications going live and commencement three quarters away for rising seniors, students from both groups — “mind made up since day one” and “reluctantly ambivalent” — are starting to a feel a little nauseous.

For those nearing the metaphorical finish line, August is more than just the end of summer. It’s the transitional period where their post-college future starts to change from a shapeless mass into an inevitable reality. Whether it’s from submitting med school essays, sending GRE scores, applying for graduation or just scouting for jobs, now is the time where it starts to feel real. And that’s an incredibly exciting feeling — but it’s also terrifying. Like, cold-sweats-in-summer terrifying.

Say you’re in the first set of kids, the ones who had their futures planned out since forever. Now that those futures are coming into view, you’re forced to consider the possibility that your one perfect plan might not come to fruition. Not because you’re not good enough, but because sometimes things happen that you can’t anticipate.

And then there’s the kids on the other side of the aisle, the ones pulled in seven different directions, who have to make a decision about their career. They’ll do it because they have to, but there’s a part of them that will continue to question their choice. Nails get bitten to nubs. Pro/con lists get scrawled onto whiteboards. People get scared.

So much so that they forget how much they have to be proud of.

Maybe you don’t know what the hell you want to do with your life, or you know exactly what you want but you’re only 37 percent sure you can get there. We can’t say it doesn’t matter, because it does, but there’s something that matters more — the fact that you’re here to begin with.

You went to college, you studied, you dodged speeding cars on Lancaster Walk, and you survived. Maybe you tore out half your hair in the process (minor details) — but you kept going, even when everything felt stupid and hard. And when you get your diploma, you’ll be holding something in your hand that not everybody has — and you’ll be holding it because you deserve to.

Come June, all our seniors will step off the graduation stage and into the world, like everyone before them, to try to make at least a little mark on a very big world. If that sentence had you reaching for the Pepto Bismol on your nightstand, that’s okay.

New stuff is scary.

In the next ten months, go ahead and brace yourself for it. And every time you feel yourself overcome with the pressure of having to prove yourself, just try to remember that you already have.

During his presidential campaign, President Donald Trump once said, “I will do everything in my power to protect our LGBTQ citizens.”

Trump announced through a series of tweets July 26 that the U.S. will not “accept or allow” transgender people to join the military, contradicting his preliminary promise.

He tweeted: “After consultation with my Generals and military experts, please be advised that the United States Government will not accept or allow transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military.”

This reverses the former decision made by the Obama administration, which allowed transgender people to serve and receive coverage for any treatment deemed medically necessary by their doctors, including reproductive surgery and hormone therapy. President Obama’s defense secretary Ashton Carter also opened combat roles to women, and Obama appointed the first openly gay Secretary of the Army.

And according to a RAND Corporation study, as many as 11,000 transgender people currently serve in the reserves and on active duty.

But in familiar Trump fashion, we are taking a step back from progress and discarding these sensible developments our nation long awaited.

“Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail,” he said on Twitter.

Burdened.

These people have selflessly volunteered to protect the safety and security of our nation, and yet, our nation will not protect the safety and security of them merely based upon the gender with which they identify  — something that certainly should not factor into their desire to heroically defend the people of their country. All that matters is if they meet the predetermined military qualifications.

Besides, the associated costs are very minimal when considering the hefty U.S. military expenditure. The military budget continues to sharply rise, with the proposed budget for fiscal year 2018 at a whopping $824.7 billion. The military budget is one budget that is consistently never downsized, so saying that the decision is based on costs does not reflect the true motives behind the act of hate.

Trump’s defense secretary James Mattis said last month, “Put another way, how will the decision affect the ability of America’s military to defend the nation? It is against this standard that I provide the following guidance on the way forward in accessing transgender individuals into the military services.”

Saying that someone’s gender dictates their ability to defend the nation — or anything in that matter — is incredibly ill-informed.

Since the ban was announced, many public figures have spoken against it. “[The ban] has no place in our military,” Carter said.

He’s right.

Landing a paid co-op can be quintessential for Drexel students, but sometimes it happens that the opportunities students are most interested in
are unpaid.

Currently, a group of co-op coordinators at Drexel’s Steinbright Career Development Center (SCDC) are working with employers to turn unpaid co-ops into paid ones via fundraising efforts.

The team also actively helps companies that can’t afford to pay co-ops to think of other benefits that appeal to students.

At this point, more than 152 individual jobs have gone from unpaid to offering
some compensation.

This is great news, especially for those who run into unpaid co-ops more frequently in the application process.

Less than 50 percent of the co-op positions offered are unpaid in the following majors: hospitality management, sports management, anthropology, criminology & justice studies, environmental studies & sustainability, environmental studies & sustainability, Psychology, English, international area studies, photography, music industry, game art & production, film and video, fashion design, entertainment & arts management, design
and merchandising.

While the number of
unpaid co-ops within the system is currently at 20 percent (and this percentage is expected to continue to decline with new fundraising effort) it becomes very clear when searching through the SCDC system that most students who end up applying for these unpaid co-ops are not in STEM fields.

While it is understandable that not all companies have the resources to provide paid co-ops, including many non-profits, it is concerning that some majors at Drexel are more unlikely to procure a paying co-op than others, and it is exciting that SCDC is working
to rectify this.

“Come check out the newest edition to Drexel’s campus- @thestudyatuniversitycity is a beautiful new place to stay while you visit! Does this intersection look familiar? Thats because it used to be the home of our Intercultural Center, which was not providing quite as much to our community as this luxury hotel now does!”

On June 23, Drexel University’s Instagram account, drexeluniversity, posted the above caption below a picture of The Study’s spectacles statue.

Users in the comments section wondered if it was a joke. judy0509 called the post out as insensitive. karlymoon999 commented “Wtf kinda kool aid does John fry have you drinking?”

We wouldn’t phrase it exactly like karlymoon999, but these commenters have a point.

The James E. Marks Intercultural Center was a meeting place for several student organizations. It was significant enough to students that when plans were announced for its replacement with a hotel, a petition was started to save it. That petition had more than 200 signatures.

We understand that Drexel is a growing university in a rapidly changing city. The people in charge of the decision to replace the intercultural center with a hotel probably considered their options carefully, and they could probably make a logical argument as to why they think the decision made was the most ideal.

But they already won that battle. The hotel is up and running, and the intercultural center is a distant memory. Still, why are they saying this shiny new building contributes more to the Drexel community?

Is it even true?

“How would a hotel that students don’t use provide more to the community than a center that was used for student activities,” Instagrammer okemmmaa commented.

This user, too, brings about a valid point. Sure, the hotel is an attractive space for visitors. But in a university that struggles to find enough space to accommodate all its thriving student organizations, can you really argue that this space for visitors is providing more for the community than space for students?

We understand that the university is proud of the way it has made progress over the years. And in many aspects of that progress, we’re proud too. But Drexel University’s Instagram has more than 3,000 followers — more thought needs to be put into how to express their pride without being condescending to the students who make Drexel what it is.

The post can be found at: http://bit.ly/2u3Coic.

As you read this, there are around 3,500 living, breathing students who are chomping at the bit to get to Drexel — all members of next year’s prospective freshman class.

Our University’s new admissions strategy is working. They’re ambitious. They can’t wait!

While 3,500 students have submitted enrollment deposits, the number of kids on campus in the fall may be a little lower at 3,100. Even so, the unexpectedly large number (the University’s target was 2,400 students) has thrown a wrench into previous freshman housing plans.

The University had announced March 17 would be vacant the 2017-2018 year in preparation for its demolition in the summer of 2018, after which it would become student green space. However, on June 7, Drexel University’s Department of Campus Services announced that Myers Hall would remain open to house select College Learning Communities.

In previous years, when Drexel has had incoming classes of 3,000 or more, it’s also had to make some tricky housing calls, occasionally tripling dorms like Towers Hall and turning common spaces in Kelly Hall into makeshift dorm rooms.

With Calhoun Hall under renovation (as it has been since 2014), the University is down about 140 freshman living spaces. It’s since pushed freshman housing into certain floors of North Hall, formerly not open to them.

The University is currently putting together a plan to house the incoming freshmen, expected to be finalized in late June, and we’re sure it’ll get neatly resolved — but the question of space for freshmen has brought another to our minds.

In recent years, the University’s jumped on every opportunity it could to lease space out to third parties, rather than use it for academic purposes. We’ve seen this with the construction of Chestnut Square and the respective shops along Chestnut Street, the replacement of Hess Labs with the Summit, the replacement of the Intercultural Center with the Study, and most recently, the erection of Vue32, being built to house Drexel faculty and graduate students.

It’s important to note that all of these buildings have been paid for by outside entities; it’s not like the University is choosing to use its money to build hotels, residences, and shops instead of academic spaces.

But it is making the choice to lease its land to these third parties rather than reinvesting in its academic spaces.

If you’re even remotely involved in Drexel’s academic community here, you’d have a hard time denying that, of all the things we fall short on, space is number one.

For starters, our lone library, the beloved W.W. Hag, can only hold one-third of our student body’s population. Adjunct professors have trouble procuring space to meet with their students because there is no designated office space for them. When quarters are in full swing, classrooms are almost always in use and filled to capacity. Student organizations and clubs struggle to find spaces they can rent for events.

When we’ve had high numbers of freshmen in the past, we could always count on a high number of dropouts, too. But if numbers continue to increase and more students are going to be staying their full term on campus, from enrollment to graduation, we will almost certainly need more space.

For housing. For classes. For professors. For administrators. For students.

In the last few years, Drexel has been evaluating its on-campus space more like a business than a university. So we feel the need to ask — when will it resume investing our academic community?