COLUMN: Student apathy for agendas

From Andrea Ahles, "Hawaiian Style," Fall '97 From Andrea Ahles, "Hawaiian Style," Fall '97 Picture a campus with townhouses for dormitories, laundry machines that take a card, not quarters, academic programs within residences and students taking interdisciplinary classes that combine the Law School and the School of Arts and Sciences. This is the Penn of the future. But once the newness of a plan fades away and officials begin to flush out more details of a project, trying to include students in its development, there is generally a lack of enthusiasm for it. Administrators are often baffled why many students are not as excited about University plans and projects as they are. While the grandeur of Sansom Commons is very appealing, many undergraduates at Penn won't be here to experience walking through a corridor of retail stores similar to M Street near Georgetown's campus. Why should we tell administrators what kind of retail we want to see near Penn if we know we won't see it in our lifetime as a student? That kind of attitude pervades a large part of the student body. It's evident in the lack of participation in Undergraduate Assembly elections -- only 25.7 percent last year -- and the small number of students who come to University Council meetings to be updated on what's going on at Penn. Some of the plans Rodin's administration has put forth leave a taste of bitterness in the mouths of undergraduates. If the University did decide to knock down the high rises, those who live there would be happy to see them go -- but resentful administrators didn't decide to demolish them sooner. The new academic programs between the Law School and the Wharton School of Business and other dual-degree programs will also come into existence too late for any of the current student body to take advantage of them. And although the academics here are top-rate, they're obviously not as excellent as they could be, since administrators have identified academic areas of weakness. There is also the matter of money. These plans will cost the University lots of money -- money the University does not currently have. Undergraduates will not be happy to see a significant increase in tuition to defray costs of projects they wont experience. With the announcement of the strategic goals, however, Rodin made it clear tuition money will not be used to upgrade academics. In short, for undergraduates the future plans are abstract and blurry and too far down the road. But students should care about these plan, regardless of the effects it has on them personally. Whether Penn was your first choice or not, we are attending this institution, and when we graduate our diplomas will have the University of Pennsylvania stamped on it. Alumni tend to have a certain amount of pride in their alma mater. While we are not alumni yet, we soon will be. If the Agenda for Excellence, 21st Century Project and Sansom Commons retail plans are successful, the University will turn into the type of college atmosphere many desire. We want to see a headline saying U.S. News and World Report rankings rate Penn in the top 10. When we return for our 25th class reunion, the campus will look very different from what we remember. Also, even if many plans don't directly affect us, they may affect our children should they choose to go here. Many alumni children attending Penn benefit from plans developed when their parents were here. There is a strong sense of allegiance among Penn alumni, especially in sending their kids here. Wouldn't you want Penn to be a better place for the next generation? But the fact of the matter remains, many students are apathetic to strategic goals and plans for the University. Administrators cannot expect students to be as excited as they are even with all of these factors taken into account. In the end, they are the ones who will see the plans come to fruition and be able to benefit from the long range plans. Undergraduates will not.