The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 76, No. 27, Ed. 1 Friday, May 19, 1989 Page: 2 of 8
This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: Texas Digital Newspaper Program and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the Rice University Woodson Research Center.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
FRIDAY, MAY 19, 1989 THE RICE THRESHER
Opinion
College unity does not
depend on family-style
lliis year's Commencement was not very different from others
before it. Undergraduate degree recipients marched in with their col-
leges. Many other undergraduates came only for their own college's
commencement. And when awards and prizes were presented to
professors that were also college associates, the members of that
college gave a rowdy standing ovation.
What all of these images represent is that college unity is neither
dead nor dying, despite what some university officials would lead us
to believe.
In the past few months, these officials, as well as some college
masters and students, have attempted to restrict an individual col-
lege's right to choose cafeteria-style meals over family-style meals,
claiming that cafeteria-style causes or reinforces a tremendous loss of
college unity.
1 find this to be a far-fetched assumption. In the first place, how can
those opposed to cafeteria-style measure "college unity?" I would like
to propose some viable factors.
One is the social networks students create at Rice. I believe most
students would agree that, while they may have many acquaintances
from other colleges, most of their closest friends are from their own.
The college system also breaks down social barriers between classes
and majors. It is not unusual to find engineers, humanities majors, pre-
med students and architecture students living together, even in their
junior and senior years.
College unity also manifests itself in all-college activites, such as
annual parties, games days, Beer-Bike, and other inter-college com-
petitions.
Family-style dinners can be a valuable way to preserve college
unity. But it is certainly not the only or the most vital way. For instance,
why has the entire meal debate centered on the evening meal?
It is true Ui at in a "family" setting, dinner is the meal when everyone
gathers to share each other's company. But at school, lunch can be a
much more convenient meal for which to get back to one's college. I
always see most on-campus college members, a lot of off-campus
members, several associates and my college master at lunch. Maybe
it is different at other colleges. But the point is that this indicates there
is as much college unity at Will Rice as at Lovett or Wiess. colleges that
enjoy family-style, but that each college shows its "unity" in different
ways, at different times.
'Hie university should definitely work to maintain college unity, but
not through blanket changes that will have no effect on some colleges
and an unwanted effect on others. It should work with each college
individually, to improve upon the unity that is already, most definitely,
alive and well. -Sarah Leedy
Hall should be replaced
Nine seasons after David Hall became Rice's head baseball coach,
the time has come to fire him. The reasons are simple: the continually
poor performance of Rice baseball in Southwest Conference play and
his insistence that scholarship players live off-campus.
Over the last five seasons (in reverse order), Rice has compiled
SWC records of 4-17 (star pitcher Rob Howard had 3 of the 4 wins),
6-15 (including a 4-16 overall stretch to end the year after being
ranked in top 25), 5-16,5-16, and 5-15. Rice finished last or next-to-last
each year..
Rice's performance hasn't always been this bad. Rice finished 13-
8,11-10,11-10, and 8-13 in conference play in Hall's first four seasons.
Some may argue that the SWC is an extremely tough baseball
conference, including perennial baseball powerhouses Texas A&M,
Arkansas, and Texas. But the league's second tier, Baylor, TCU, and
Texas Tech, is nowhere near as strong.
I don't mean to suggest that Rice should be able to compete with
the three powerhouses every year. Our strong academics hurts
recruiting not only by reducing the pool of players available but also
by decreasing the chance that superstar players will play here.
Rice's overall play was much better during those four years, too.
The team won 69 more games than it lost during Hall's first four years.
The last five years, it has won only 15 more than it lost (out of 283 total
games).However, ecause of the many weak teams Rice plays at the
beginning of the year, the overall record is not a true test.
But winning isn't everything. A big part of the Rice Experience is
being on campus and participating in activities in the colleges.
Scholarship athletes are treated as much like regular students as
possible.Yet Hall insists that players live off-campus.
One possible reason for this is that the baseball season sometimes
ends after graduation., but track athletes in the same situationare
allowed to live on campus.
There have been two other reasons proposed why Hall wants
players to live off-campus. First is that he wants them to have less
distractions to be able to concentrate on studies. The second is that
he does it to save money for the school. Off-campus athletes are paid
$325 a month for room and board, while a room on campus cost about
$460 a month this year. An informed source told me it's a standing
joke on the team that Hall would never be fired because he always
comes in under budget.
Even so, the point is that baseball players should be allowed to pick
whichever life-style they want. Many probably would stay O-C.That
should be their choice.
At this point, Rice should make an easier choice: fire David Hall.
—Kurt Moeller
SIGHED IT COIONEL- \NE MJL KNCW
THE GOVERNMENT WESNfT ISfiOt N
"LICENSETO UE WDSTEN.,' WIT WET
Grad students protest drug policy
An open letter to the Rice Com-
munity:
I have received the University
Policy Memoranda 323-89 and 324-
89 and understand the conse-
quences of violating the Research
Misconduct policy. I do not believe
that anyone understands the conse-
quences of violating the Drug-free
Workplace policy, since debate in
my department has demonstrated
that many interpretations of the
document are possible. In particular,
it is unclear whether the promulga-
tion of the Drug-free Workplace pol-
icy under coercion from the Federal
government is in violation of the U.S.
Constitution.
I understand that Federal Law
requires me to inform the Associate
Provost within five days of any crimi-
nal drug statute conviction for a vio-
lation occurring in the "workplace"
at Rice University. I presume that
this refers only to hypothetical viola-
tions committed by me, since I do not
feel obliged continually to comb
court records to keep aware of "any
drug statute conviction."
I further realize that failure to
comply with these Policies can lead
to a range of disciplinary actions up
to and including termination as an
employee/student-worker at Rice
University. Although the vague use
of certain auxiliary verbs in Policy
Memorandum 323-89 could be con-
strued to require "squealing" and to
authorize invasive searches without
probable cause, I do not support
such interpretations, and would pro-
test any University or Federal action
based on such interpretations as a
violation of constitutional rights.
By succumbing to the pressures
of drug hysteria and promulgating
such a policy, I feel that Rice Univer-
sity is sacrificing academic integrity
for financial security—a sacrifice we
may all someday regret
Jerry Fowler
Rick Bubenik
Gina Goff
Steve Carr
Graduate Students
Computer Science
Schools debate racist speech rules
By Kurt Moeller
Imagine this: you are arguing
with a fellow student and become
quite irritated. You make a remark or
gesture that obviously insults his
race, sex, or sexual preference. Af-
terwards, you receive a letter from
the university commanding you to
report to the Proctor's Office for
punishment
Such an incident could soon hap-
pen at Stanford University, Emory
University, the University of Michi-
gan at Ann Arbor, or the University
of Wisconsin at Madison. All are
considering restricting forms of
speech considered offensive. The
New York Times article also re-
ported that the Wisconsin state legis-
lature is debating a bill requiring
regents to prohibit such speech.
Supporters say the measures are
needed to curb increasing racial
tensions and promote tolerance.
Critics claim they not only violate
First Amendment rights and try to
sweep problems out of sight, but also
restrict the intellectual exchange
that is at the heart of universities'
missions.
Recently Emory's President is-
sued a statement broadening the
school's prohibition of sexual har-
assment to include all kinds of har-
assment: racial, ethnic, sexual, etc.
Last April the regents at University
of Michigan at Ann Arbor issued a
warning that discriminatory harass-
ment could lead to punishments
from reprimand to expulsion.
The Wisconsin House of Repre-
sentatives unanimously approved a
bill restricting "racist or discrimina-
taory comments or other expressive
behavior, uttered to an individual."
At hearings in the Senate, where
opposition is expected, the Wiscon-
sin Student Association testified in
favor of the bill.
Sponsor D. Spencer Coggs, a
Milwaukee Democrat, said "We
agree that divergent philosophies
should be allowed on a college cam-
pus." However, "You cannot yell fire
SEE SPEECH, PAGE 3
.v ;ns only on alternate Tuesdays -
HOMO-
-•Leaves on Monday, Thursday
and Friday except holidays ~
HO.VtfNT-
-Change cars at Torpor for
Farrago -
mm-
-Connects with No. 21 on even
third Wednesdav <
Easter!^.'
AMERKMOlll
L4CC01$4flll
I
nSmm
VolwM
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Kahn, Greg & Leedy, Sarah L. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 76, No. 27, Ed. 1 Friday, May 19, 1989, newspaper, May 19, 1989; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth245723/m1/2/: accessed June 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.