LETTERS: Discussing race thoughtfully

To the Editor: Rather than seizing the opportunity afforded by the undergraduate experience to engage peers in meaningful conversations with a view toward understanding and empathy, too many are inclined to resort to attack mode, especially around the issue of race. I hasten to add that this is not true of all students who utilize the editorial and opinion-editorial page of the DP to express their views. Nevertheless, those who advance their opinions with thuggish affect are often the ones remembered and responded to with visceral force. Goldstein and Pereira, however, call us to our best selves as individuals and to our best self as a great University. For that, I am grateful. What a wonderful way to begin a new semester and a new year! William Gipson University Chaplain Headline goes here To the Editor: Your article ("Administrators skeptical about UA's advising report," DP, 1/28/97) accurately illustrates that many administrators harbor doubts about the Undergraduate Assembly's report on academic advising and feel threatened by the report's findings. However, it should be made clear that the UA advising report is critical not of the abilities of administrators but rather of the structure of the advising systems in the four undergraduate schools. In fact, in many cases the report finds that advising is good but too small-scale, and thus it calls for an expansion of advisors and advising programs in these cases. It is encouraging that many administrators across the University have welcomed with open arms the UA advising report and the UA's assistance. Instead of feeling offended or affronted, they fortunately see the report for what it is: a well researched and compelling set of realistic recommendations for overhauling what we all know is a system in disrepair. The report's detailed findings (which include having more communication between advisors, making advisors more accessible, giving RAs the role of peer advisors, and making faculty advisors better matched to students) are an ideal starting point for opening up a dialogue on how to improve advising. Also, it should be noted that the report is available in its entirety at http://dolphin.upenn.edu/~ua/advising. Larry Kamin College '98 UA Vice Chairperson Headline goes here To the Editor: As a Greek sophomore, having just last year endured a pledging program and still making my way through Rush, I am absolutely furious about the remarks made in the Sarah Giulian's column ("No way to treat a sister," DP, 1/20/97.) Not only was this column written by someone outside the system but it also negated any of the positive aspects of Greek life. The IntraFraternity Council has made incredible headway this year, pointing the students and administration towards the good that we contribute to campus life, socially, academically, and in terms of community service. As far as hazing accusations are made, the national offices of Greek organizations are constantly monitoring the activities of their chapters, in effort to minimize hazing. Pledges are required to attend a hazing workshop prior to pledging and understand the consequences of their actions. Although Hollywood persists in showcasing the apparent degradation of Greeks, whence Giulian apparently got her information, I maintain that hazing is decreasing. And that applies especially to this year's pledge classes, who will know when they draw the line--not when a biased columnist from the DP criticizes their actions without fully understanding their nature. Good luck to all freshman and sophomore pledges. Enjoy the Greek system for its intense ideal of fraternity and loyalty, for that will be more valuable to you than many of the things by which we are surrounded. Marc Aneed College '99 Sigma Phi Epsilon