Talk:Central College

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Iowa, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Iowa.
If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

Contents

[edit] Discrimination on Campus

This year, 25% of the minority students left campus due to the administration ignoring several dangerous incidents and racism. Should this be included in the article? It's a pretty significant statistic. --Morningstar2651 22:03, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

This needs a reference of some kind. Google turns up empty for web search, news, and even Usenet newsgroups. -- Curps 16:42, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've been trying to find a source online. I can ask a student to quote the email announcement sent out by Dr. Roe. I could also run around the campus tomorrow and take pictures of what's going on. --Morningstar2651 21:23, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)
The difficulty finding sources online is because of what appears to be corruption within some of the faculty. I attended a meeting the evening of April 13 in which several incidents were discussed and the dean of students hadn't recieved the reports that he was supposed to. I'll contact students later this evening and get them to work on the article. --Morningstar2651 21:43, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)

The folliwing is the e-mail from Dr. Roe - president of Central College. It was forwarded to me by a student. --Morningstar2651 16:15, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)

From: David Roe

Sent: Wed 4/13/2005 11:53 AM

To: Employees; Students

Subject: Continuing our journey to become a truly welcoming and ecumenical community

Background

  • Three of our minority students recently chose to absent themselves from our community because they felt unsafe here emotionally and physically.
  • One of our international students withdrew from Central at the beginning of this academic year, in part because she experienced undue pressure from some of her Christian friends regarding her religion.
  • Many of our students of color continue to feel that the Central campus is unwelcoming to them or even hostile as a result of the unresolved "N" word incident at the beginning of the 2003-04 academic year and the negative racial vibes they have experienced since that time, including this most recent incident.
  • The past two years has seen an increase in campus vandalism, belligerence toward staff confronting policy violations and students providing false information to college personnel. Moreover, we have also seen an increase in student unwillingness to hold peers accountable for such actions.
  • Student Life staff have been called upon to handle numerous incidents that entailed either or both a lack of civility and an absence of respect for human dignity.

Purpose of Memo

First, I want to outline the relevant details of the first incident and the follow-on steps that are in process. Many word-of-mouth rumors about the incident and what has happened do not appear to be based on the actual facts, so I believe we need to clear this up as much as possible.

Second, I offer a diagnosis of the health of our community from the viewpoint that a community wellness grade of "A" would mean we as a community are exemplifying the mission, goals, and values of the college and achieving the kind of welcoming environment envisioned in our official statement of welcome and the policies we have adopted.

Third, I offer a prescription for the actions we as individuals need to take along with steps the college needs to take to help us make real progress toward a community wellness grade of "A."

Definitions

For purposes of this memo only, I will use two words to mean certain specific things so that I can be both more concise and inclusive:

Majority - heterosexual, Euro-Caucasian Christians

"Under-reps" - individuals whose ethnic background, whose religious faith, whose sexual orientation puts them in a cohort of like individuals who are under-represented as a percentage of the Central community when compared to the broader American society.

Overview of incident cited first above

  • In late January, three majority males confronted a Latino male student for making disparaging remarks about Central's athletic teams. All admit to having consumed alcohol on that evening and to a verbal altercation. A scuffle ensued resulting in the Latino student hitting one of the other three students. A campus security guard arrived on the scene and attempted to bring the situation under control. The Latino student broke free, fled the situation and then, on his own initiative, reported to the Pella police station about the incident.
  • One of the students involved in the altercation (the one who was struck) felt action on the issue should be taken in accordance with the procedures outlined in the Student Handbook.
  • Student Life investigated the incident and convened the Campus Hearing and Appeals Board. The determinations of that Board have recently been communicated to Tim Phillips.
  • The emotions deriving from the incident itself, combined with the cumulative effect of many lesser elements over the time they have been here led the Latino student, and his Latino and African American friends who testified on his behalf, to choose to leave Central's campus. They are attempting to complete as many of their courses as possible from off campus and we anticipate they will withdraw from Central at the conclusion of this semester.
  • All three of these students are welcome to enroll for the fall semester assuming their academic performance meets the required criteria.
  • Recommendations from the Board included follow-up with other parties involved as well and we are in the process of doing just that.

Diagnosis

As a welcoming community Central's overall wellness is at best a "C-." While many in the majority experience an "A" environment, the best experience of our "under-reps" would be a "C" and the worst an "F." Students who choose to leave us because they feel threatened or perceive a hostile environment are giving our community an "F."

As a community Central is more complex than many realize. Therefore, any incident like the ones referred to in the opening of this memo cannot be assessed in isolation. Nor can narrowly focused prescriptions help solve the underlying causes of our unwellness.

Tim Phillips and I are encouraged that an overwhelming number of our students know intellectually what behaviors are expected of them. Unfortunately, when our students have been drinking or otherwise not thinking, prejudices they harbor come out. And the emergent words and/or actions can offend, distress, or even harass "under-reps." In some instances the reverse has occurred where "under-reps" words or actions harass members of the majority or other "under-reps." We are also convinced that the tough stance taken by college leaders in the aftermath of the "N" word incident caused those knowledgeable about the perpetrator(s) not to talk for fear the process, and ultimately the sanction, was a foregone conclusion.

We also acknowledge that the big event approach such as Martin Luther King celebrations, Hip Hop Summit and White Privilege Conference have not in and of themselves achieved the desired effectiveness. Many who have participated have grown from these opportunities. But many have chosen not to engage. And still others have felt an absence of an environment conducive to open discussion on these issues without judgment.

In the end we as a community will become mutually respectful and more welcoming only to the extent each of us grows in our understanding and appreciation of those in our community who are different from us. Also it requires recognition that we each are at different points in our personal journeys to understand and appreciate others in our community and in our broader society and world.

In a campus e-mail and open letter in The Ray during the fall semester of 2002, I wrote about my hopes to eliminate several forms of harassing behavior from our campus. Below I list the kinds of harassing behavior I believe are still restricting our abilities to foster the welcoming environment we seek:

  • Racial harassment
  • Religious harassment
  • Sexual orientation harassment
  • Gender harassment

Prescription for the Central College Community

  • Each of us should set a personal goal each day to reach out in respect and attempted understanding to a fellow human being whom we do not know well.
  • Each of us should make a more thoughtful and deliberate effort to say and do things that send signals to those different from us that we are glad they are part of our campus community.
  • Each of us should take more advantage of college and community sponsored events that educate us about others who are different or have different viewpoints.
  • Each of us needs to learn to push back and inform friends, colleagues and acquaintances who are part of the college community when we are offended or feel harassed by the words or actions of others. At the same time such conversations should be consistent with our adopted "Guidelines for Respectful Dialogue."
  • The college administration should continue to tap the wisdom of the Diversity Leadership Team and experts beyond the campus to refine and clarify our policies and procedures with regard to behaviors that harass or otherwise create a hostile environment.
  • Each community member must commit to examining his/her perspectives and viewpoints on those who may be different to themselves and how these manifest themselves in our daily actions.
  • Each of us should suspend judgment when first hearing comments on an emotional or particularly sensitive issue. Only through careful consideration can we begin to understand the experience and perspective of another and how that may be different than our own.
  • Each classroom, residential unit and common areas space on campus should seek to create opportunities for open dialogues that honor all information and viewpoints bearing on issues. Only through such dialogues, involving a deeper search for truth without the fear of judgment, will our community truly become great.

[edit] Not relevant

I would submit that none of this is relevant to the Wikipedia article. With so little other content, its presence makes the article unbalanced by sensationalizing the negative. An encyclopedic entry about an educational institution need not recount this type of information.

[edit] Sources and figures

Okay I guess I didn't know that Wikipedia was a news website.

I guess I'd better go to the Iowa State University article and add references to every single VEISHEA disturbance, the recent stabbings, people who've drowned in the lake, and so on. Maybe I should go to the University of Iowa article and talk about the vandalism in the science building.

But if we're going to have this stuff marring the Central College article I'd like to see some figures. One quarter of ethnic minority students--what does that mean? How many is that? How many are there total? Cite your sources.

Furthermore, if you're going to edit this stub, why skew it so heavily in favor of the negative? Maybe you can add some information about the athletics program or some history of the college? Right now we have an article that says "Central College is some thing in Pella, AND ALL THIS BAD STUFF HAPPENED OMG OMG!" It's silly and not-very-encyclopedic. Adm58 00:50, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

After looking more closely, it appears the article is simply copying the president's email. That's probably not such a good idea. Adm58 01:38, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
First, I would remove the bulk of the text because of what's at the bottom o the edit page:
By submitting your work you promise you wrote it yourself, or copied it from public domain resources — this does not include most web pages.
Most of it is blatant plagarism and the proof is right above. Secondly, WP is not a news source. Thirdly, it's way too much information for wikipedia on one niche event. Cburnett 01:47, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
After trying to retain some mention of the "recent developments", I was forced to go ahead and remove it entirely. While 64.12.116.195 called it "pretty relevant news", as such it has no place on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_general_knowledge_base to learn what is appropriate for WP. If there is any argument against my action it needs to be discussed here or the page may be protected. Adm58 03:58, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
Then you may as well go to the Harvard article and remove its recent developments section as well. Or does Harvard get preferred treatment? Things ARE negative at Central college and the facts should NOT be hidden to "make it look more positive". One thing that I know wikipedia isn't is a place to ADVERTIZE. If you have a problem with recent developments not looking good for Central College, then take your problem up with Central College. --Morningstar2651 16:13, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
I know this is a big deal in a town like Pella, Iowa, but it really isn't. I attend ISU and if I wrote on Wikipedia every time somebody wrote "fucking liberal hippie" on my door, or everytime I've seen/heard racial slurs (including a high profile incident directed at Arabs), then all WP would be is a catalog of college disturbances. I don't know why anybody is surprised by this, it's Central College in Pella, Iowa. (By the way, one quarter of minority students is about 15 people at best, I checked).
In no way is the Central College article an advertisement. It's a NPOV brief description of what it is and how it came to be. And you shouldn't quote me saying "make it look more positive" because I didn't say that. I said right now you have nothing but negative information. Which really has nothing to do with the college, just some idiot students which you'll find at every college. I could care less how good the college looks, the president's own letter explains the type of community we all know it to be (white and ignorant). All I'm concerned with is the integrity of the Wikipedia.
But anyways, I suggest you read my posts more closely because you have clearly gotten the wrong idea. There are rules on WP and I am trying to adhere to them. I also asked a neutral third party (Cburnett) to check it out as he has more experience here than either of us. Reread his opinions as well, I feel like you missed the entire point of why we think this is innappropriate for WP. Adm58 17:12, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Protection

I put this page up for protection (WP:RFPP). Cburnett 21:07, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] To do

To do list moved from the article namespace to Talk:Central College/to do. -- Joolz 15:16, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wannabe Investigative Reporters damage Wikipedia

I want to reiterate the point made above and stress that in a college with a 150 year history of educating many tens of thousands, some unidentified drunken frat boy allegedly scrawling "nigger" on a door and the resultant fallout - musn't be the only thing of note.

a) If this was noteworthy then every institution in the country would have thousands of words detailing similar incidents.

b) Even if one argues that it is noteworthy - it musn't be the only thing that is noteworthy. It's catch 22 you see: If the only thing noteworthy is a racist incident then it clearly isn't a sufficiently noteworthy institution to have tangential details in it's history in an encyclopedia.

As I see it, it is no more than an "exposé" by some wannabe hack.

jucifer 15:44, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. Adm58 17:13, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Articles shouldn't be numbers

Right now, the article has a list of stats and a list of presidents (like anyone really cares about who was president). But when someone adds actual information about a college, information that colors how the world currently sees the college (and current perception certainly is an important part of an encyclopedia), it gets dismissed as "an "exposé" by some wannabe hack". (Calling someone a wannabe hack violates WP:NPA, and at a volunteer encyclopedia, we could all be judged as wannabes.) It may not be the only thing noteworthy, but that doesn't mean that it should be deleted; add material to balance it.

Nevertheless, the post above has solid points on why that information doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. If information on these types of events were detailed throughout the Wikipedia, before long articles on sizable universities would have dozens of pages of information and new stuff would be added almost weekly. I know you feel it's important, but it's not appropriate for an encyclopedia. Current issues can be blinding... think of it like this: If the event in question happened 20 years ago, would you be interested in reading it in an encyclopedia? (The answer is no, by the way) Adm58 04:11, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
If this happened in any state university, it would be national news. It isn't that common.--Prosfilaes 14:47, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
I currently attend a state university, and I am telling you it is that common. Similar incidents happen all the time. In fact, much worse incidents. It's talked about for a week or two in the student paper, and then that's about it. Adm58 14:49, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Context is king; four kids die together all the time on universities, but Kent State shootings is clearly notable despite just being four kids getting killed. 25% of the minority students at the school going home does not happen everyday at state universities, and is notable.--Prosfilaes 01:01, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Context? 25% is a nice figure to throw around, sounds big, but really that's about 15 people according to enrollment data. Anyways, you seem to be missing the argument about the encyclopedia. Whether it's notable or not, it's out of place here. That's been the consensus on this issue since it came up. Adm58 15:54, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
25% is 25%. You're claiming a consensus that just isn't there; I count three against (you, jucifer and Cburnett) versus me and Morningstar2651. Would you like to post enrollment data on the Wikipedia article, or would that mar the picture of your perfect little school, I mean be non-notable.--Prosfilaes 03:38, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Not relevant

I would submit that none of this is relevant to the Wikipedia article. With so little other content, its presence makes the article unbalanced by sensationalizing the negative. An encyclopedic entry about an educational institution need not recount this type of information.

Posting e-mails without the author's permission is very questionable.

Wiping a talk page completely is very questionable; an email that was sent to a couple thousand people is not terribly private and probably counts as fair use. I'm tired of people whining about so little other content; balance it by adding content, not deleting the content. A encyclopedia article should not be written by the university's publicity department.--Prosfilaes 19:33, 5 October 2005 (UTC)