2008 Woodie Awards
Dr. Phil talks budget - I still have questions
Tuition Forum
Duncan McGregor
Issue date: 3/14/08 Section: Opinion
The obvious argument is that the university's reputation will be better and our diploma's will be more valuable. However, I am still unclear what effect improvement ten years down the road has on my education rather than my resume'.
Another important tidbit of information: B-street will probably never become a public access facility. Despite its proclaimed goal of educating the public and promises of being reopened to the public, the university cannot afford the liability of a public access facility. It will of course continue to be used as a student laboratory and the administration is hoping to host tours for local schools, but no more.
It is interesting that after the commotion dies down and student apathy rises, B-street stops being an important issue. The university's delaying tactics when producing a definite statement have effectively trumped student support.
Tom McCall has come under the eye of the administration as well. They are considering restructuring it due to its recent $70,000 loss. Creighton gave the impression that it may be restructured into something almost completely unrelated to politics, since political speakers are too expensive. Perhaps Pacific will end up hosting an annual big name academic lecture.
This strikes me as countering the purpose of the Forum. Having a serious political debate sets Pacific apart from other institutions, hosting a lecture series does not. Further lectures instead of political debates do not necessarily have the same public draw or increase local interest in national politics.
Perhaps the most light hearted topic of conversation is that Creighton has promised to participate in Rainbow Coalition's Drag Dance. The idea of Creighton in drag amuses me to no end.
I do not hate Creighton, and I have no personal vendetta against the administration at Pacific University. I feel I am receiving an excellent education here. I understand the administration is necessary in facilitating this.
However, the deeper into Pacific's politics I dig, the more I realize the administration's best interests are not necessarily the student's. They desire to grow the university into a prestigious center for higher learning. This does current students very little good.
The difference in interests creates tension between students and administration. I believe its presence can be healthy, indicating that students are neither dominated by an uncaring administration or dictating policy to cowed academics.
Through tuition, students pay a huge chunk of the bills. We may not be driving the university into the future, but we are the life blood that sustains it now. If there were not students, there would not be a university.
We need to start acting like the university works for us. If we do not, the administration may completely lose sight of what our best interests are.
Another important tidbit of information: B-street will probably never become a public access facility. Despite its proclaimed goal of educating the public and promises of being reopened to the public, the university cannot afford the liability of a public access facility. It will of course continue to be used as a student laboratory and the administration is hoping to host tours for local schools, but no more.
It is interesting that after the commotion dies down and student apathy rises, B-street stops being an important issue. The university's delaying tactics when producing a definite statement have effectively trumped student support.
Tom McCall has come under the eye of the administration as well. They are considering restructuring it due to its recent $70,000 loss. Creighton gave the impression that it may be restructured into something almost completely unrelated to politics, since political speakers are too expensive. Perhaps Pacific will end up hosting an annual big name academic lecture.
This strikes me as countering the purpose of the Forum. Having a serious political debate sets Pacific apart from other institutions, hosting a lecture series does not. Further lectures instead of political debates do not necessarily have the same public draw or increase local interest in national politics.
Perhaps the most light hearted topic of conversation is that Creighton has promised to participate in Rainbow Coalition's Drag Dance. The idea of Creighton in drag amuses me to no end.
I do not hate Creighton, and I have no personal vendetta against the administration at Pacific University. I feel I am receiving an excellent education here. I understand the administration is necessary in facilitating this.
However, the deeper into Pacific's politics I dig, the more I realize the administration's best interests are not necessarily the student's. They desire to grow the university into a prestigious center for higher learning. This does current students very little good.
The difference in interests creates tension between students and administration. I believe its presence can be healthy, indicating that students are neither dominated by an uncaring administration or dictating policy to cowed academics.
Through tuition, students pay a huge chunk of the bills. We may not be driving the university into the future, but we are the life blood that sustains it now. If there were not students, there would not be a university.
We need to start acting like the university works for us. If we do not, the administration may completely lose sight of what our best interests are.
Be the first to comment on this story