Commission releases report

U. urged to drop speech code, randomize freshman housing In the most sweeping set of recommendations to hit the University in more than two decades, the Commission on Strengthening Community advocates the immediate elimination of the University's speech code. In its preliminary report released in today's Almanac, the Commission also suggests severe limitations on choice in freshman housing, which to many is the equivalent of advocating randomized housing. Among the Commission's more than 50 suggestions, it recommends that: ·fraternity and sorority rush be moved to first-semester sophomore year, · the University judicial system be reformed, ·a coffee house be opened on Locust Walk. ·faculty promotion and salaries be based on commitment to community-building activities on campus, as well as scholarship and teaching, and ·University police consistently enforce University alcohol policies. The 47-page report was drafted by the 22-member Commission after months of information gathering. The Commission was appointed by former University President Sheldon Hackney and Interim President Claire Fagin in the wake of last spring's 'water buffalo' incident and confiscation of The Daily Pennsylvanian. Made up of members of the University Board of Trustees, faculty, staff, students and high-profile officials connected with the University, the Commission was charged with promoting "an academic community in which all members may learn from and be enriched by their similarities and their differences and in which the free exchange of ideas may flourish." The report's recommendations are divided into seven categories and address every aspect of University life, ranging from undergraduate education to faculty responsibility to inter-staff relations. "We were thorough in the areas we covered, although some areas we did not cover at all," said Commission Chairperson Gloria Chisum, who is also vice chairperson of the University Trustees. "This report can have a positive impact." Chisum said yesterday that the Commission found in its interviews with dozens of campus groups that people want to work to change the University community for the better. The report is open to public comment until March 16. The Commission has scheduled two open forums to get community feedback, one in February and one in March. Chisum said the Commission is willing to sit down and talk with any campus group that would like to meet with it to discuss the preliminary report. The report's first recommendation, and perhaps most controversial, is Section A.1a. It states that "student speech, as such, should not be the basis for disciplinary action." "In a university there should be no orthodoxy, no idea that is immune to skeptical inquiry," the report states. "In sum, recent and painful experiences at this University suggest that the entire enterprise of attempting to discipline student-to-student speech deflects attention from underlying problems. "The message is wrong for the offender and offended alike, and the process is likely to open more wounds than it heals," the report continues. The recommendation applies only to inter-student speech taking place outside "an employment or supervisory context." The report does state, though, that "student speech may be the subject of discipline under general rules of conduct." This suggestion was designed to prevent threats of physical harm, bomb threats and disruptive noise from being exempt from punishment. In another recommendation which is expected to cause campus-wide debate, the report recommends that the provost assign all first year students to designated houses for a trial period beginning in the fall of 1995 and continuing through the spring of 2001. Stating that the University "must teach its students to live in a community that is not homogeneous," it recommends that a committee of faculty and students consider a variety of models, including a college house system, for assigning students to first-year houses and suggests that the provost work to implement it. Subject of a report released last year by former Vice Provost for University Life Kim Morrisson, a college house system is similar to residential systems now in place at other Ivy League schools and several European universities. "Over time, some first year [University residences] have come to be associated with specific groups of people," the Commission report states. "While the comfort provided by a familiar group is an important support when dealing with the stresses of the first year, we believe it is vital that students' lives and experiences remain as open as possible." In this same recommendation, Section D.1., the Commission advocates the delay of fraternity and sorority rush until first-semester sophomore year on the belief that freshman rush "inhibits new students from exploring the variety of living and social options on campus." "We recognize that this will cause a shift in the housing arrangements for sophomores, and we urge that special attention should be paid to their housing," the report states. The Commission also acknowledges a need to equalize the "price and attractiveness" of all first-year residences in order for the residential assignment process to be fair. Freshman housing is the subject of the report's only minority opinion, written by Commission member and Sociology Professor Samuel Klausner. Klausner argues in his statement that the Commission's recommendations are assimilationist, tantamount to randomized housing and will be destructive to the community. "There is a hidden assumption that group tensions can or should be reduced by the reducing differences between groups," Klausner states. "Assigned housing is a reversal of the traditional civil right to live where one chooses." Commission Director Rebecca Bushnell said yesterday that the Commission did not intend to advocate randomized housing. "There would always be some flexibility in any housing system," Bushnell said. But Klausner said yesterday he is convinced that the recommendation on first-year housing will lead to a reduction of choice and arbitrary assignment. "I'm quite persuaded it is the wrong direction to go," he said. Klausner also wrote in his minority opinion that "the policy will present the Office of Residential Living with a first-class headache in trying to deal with exceptions [to assignments]." In the section on policies and procedures regarding conduct, the Commission recommends that the University remain true to its "duty to educate for community." In explaining this recommendation, the Commission report indicts current diversity training sessions, such as those currently offered during New Student Orientation, as failures. "Crash courses on tolerance are, by nearly all accounts, a failure and we have concluded that judicial policies regarding student speech as such are counterproductive," the report states. In reform of the judicial system, the report advocates that a less-formal, residential judicial system be developed and that "a dispute resolution service" be available to parties who wish to have their conflicts resolved through mediation. But while many students have been calling for a student-run judicial system, the Commission report says faculty should continue to be involved in the process. "We applaud the interest and initiative students have shown in addressing the perceived weakness in current disciplinary arrangements," the report states. "We believe that, for the future, continued faculty involvement is essential?." The Commission advocates the creation of a crisis team made up of the president, senior administrators, campus security, faculty and students to "assess incidents and mobilize the campus to respond to crisis incidents of intolerant behavior." A hotline should be used for the reporting of such incidents, the report states. In dealing with faculty issues, the Commission report suggests that the provost form an ad-hoc faculty committee on faculty roles and responsibilities. This committee should attempt to define University values, faculty conduct standards and the way in which teaching and research can be related to the life of the University community and surrounding areas. This committee is to offer recommendations within one year's time. The report also calls on the provost and faculty members to expand the number of courses taught in residence, increase the number of multi-ethnic oriented courses available to fulfill distribution requirements and serve as role models in promoting community service. The quality of off-campus housing should be examined, with "no substandard" housing being listed by the University, the report states. It charges Executive Vice President Janet Hale with the responsibility of working with the Philadelphia Licenses and Inspections Bureau to ensure that all off-campus housing near campus "meets at least minimal housing regulations." In addition to the creation of a coffee house and gathering place on Locust Walk, the report calls for further diversification of the Walk and the creation of a student center to serve during and after completion of the Revlon Center. Chisum described the coffee house idea as promoting an atmosphere similar to "a street cafe," conducive to intellectual and social interaction. The University's Book Store is urged to add a coffee shop to its current facility and an area to sit and reflect, like that which is offered by many other commercial bookstores. And the report supports better relations between the community and the police through interaction on a non-emergency basis. In addressing communication on campus, the report suggests that The Daily Pennsylvanian periodically print, free of charge, a listing of campus resources available to students and that the newspaper use an ombudsman to help resolve any disputes with the community. At the end of the report is a list of implementation goals, which divide the recommendations into those that will be put in place immediately, those to be put in place one year from now and those that will take more than one year to implement.