Author's Posts

Less of a Profession, More a Way of Being

Amanda Erickson — Sun, 04 May 2008 20:29:26 -0500

Leaders Grapple With Barnard-Columbia Relationship

Amanda Erickson — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:11:56 -0500

MSA Celebrates 50th Anniversary

Amanda Erickson — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 06:46:19 -0500

SENIOR PROFILE: Saleem Ahmed

Amanda Erickson — Tue, 15 May 2007 23:00:00 -0500

Saleem Ahmed, CC '07, doesn't listen to Kanye West just because he likes his music. Ahmed, who is rarely seen without his headphones, cares much more West's career as a music-maker. "I look a lot more to producers than to artists," Ahmed said. "Kanye was a millionaire before he began to perform." Making music has been a passion of Ahmed's since he came to Columbia. He turned his hobby into a position as the former vice president of CU Records, where he transformed the organization known only to those in the loop into a campus-wide phenomenon. The economics major and amateur beat-maker heard about the club at the end of his sophomore year. He asked a friend of a friend to help him join, and he was hooked. Last year, as vice president, he brought the club to campus prominence, turning the organization into a training ground for those interested in going into the music industry by emphasizing marketing, events, and artist exposure. "When we took over, we hyped it up because we could," he said. "We had a different philosophy [then the former president]. We built CU Records from the ground up." His passion, Ahmed said, is for "cool ideas turned ... into a really cool event." He pointed to Chicken and Rifles-where students went to JJ's Place for free chicken, and Halo-playing and a Mixology lesson from Scratch Records-as examples. Ahmed has Ghanian roots but grew up in Connecticut with his family. It was his older brother, a graduate of the class of 2006, who first introduced him to the University. "Where he goes, I go," Saleem said, explaining why he choose to apply here. He's made the most of his time at Columbia. Besides helping to run CU Records, Ahmed played lacrosse and junior varsity basketball and participated in the Muslim Students Association and the Black Students Organization. After graduation, he will work at an investment banking firm in Connecticut. While he said he enjoys investment banking, he hopes to one day return to making music. "I would love to make a lot of money, then use it to build a record label," Ahmed said. "I want to just create music." -Amanda Erickson

Minutemen Founder's Speech Ignites Yearlong Free Speech Debate

Amanda Erickson — Sun, 06 May 2007 23:00:00 -0500

It was over almost as soon as it began. Seconds after a small group of students rushed the stage where Minuteman Project founder Jim Gilchrist was speaking and unfurled a banner stating that "no one is illegal," a fight broke out on the stage. Video footage showed Minutemen supporters kicking and hitting Columbians. Only a few minutes later, Columbia's security had regained control of the room, and a relative quiet had returned to Roone Arledge Auditorium. But those few minutes have affected the University more than any others this year. They caused University President Lee Bollinger, Barnard President Judith Shapiro, and other top administrators to reconsider security procedures, the role of free speech on a private campus, and whether discipline procedures that were written 40 years ago in the months after the riots of 1968 are still fair and practical. Student leaders also grappled with how to create a campus that welcomes controversial ideas, while at the same time building a community in which members feel safe. In the days after the debacle, student groups struggled to craft statements that expressed both the importance of free speech and the right to student protest. In the immediate aftermath of the protest, many student groups struggled to distance themselves from the protesters. "The Student Body of Columbia University has a right to invite speakers with varied points of view to campus, and it is unacceptable within our community to take away someone else's right to express their opinions and viewpoints," the University Senate's Student Affairs Caucus, composed of elected representatives from every school at Columbia, wrote in a resolution passed on October 8. Over the next few months, the University began to make policy changes: new security measures put into place immediately after the event decreased the number of people from outside the University who could attend certain events and established physical barriers between the stage and audience. Oversight of the Student Governing Board changed hands, causing many students to complain that the governing board was losing its student control. Meanwhile, the process by which disciplinary decisions against the student protesters were decided yielded results that many called unfair, causing some to begin lobbying the University to consider revamping its disciplinary process. The Right to Speak? Immediately after the Minutemen protest, the University created a new set of rules that gave the it more oversight in terms of planning and developing a security plan for bringing speakers to campus. In the week that followed, the University tightened security significantly-when speaker Walid Shoebat came to the University to speak with the College Republicans a week later, he spoke behind two plastic fences. Additionally, while the Republicans initially invited 115 outside guests to the event, only 20 were allowed to attend. "This is a police state," Bari Weiss, CC '07 and a former Spectator columnist, said at the time. Bollinger defended the rights of students to bring anyone to campus. "Students have the right as organizations to invite whomever they want to campus," he told Spectator in October. But in December, Bollinger announced in a formal statement that the University would review all invitations to speakers or groups who were invited to speak on campus and would require an agreement between the University and the student groups about how the events would be staged. The Big Move In early November, the Student Governing Board, which funds political and activist groups, including the College Republicans, was moved from the Office of the University Chaplain's jurisdiction into the Student Affairs office. At the time, the University said the move had nothing to do with the Minutemen incident-rather, they said the shift would offer the students in the SGB more access to resources and advisers. But in a December statement, Bollinger said that the reorganization of SGB under the Student Affairs umbrella would allow more oversight by the University to ensure that all groups had the opportunity to bring controversial speakers to campus. Top SGB leaders have criticized the University's lack of transparency, though they have said that the additional resources will be useful. Sakib Khan, SEAS '07 and chair of SGB, said that administrators have gone "beyond border-line dishonesty." The Charges The release of disciplinary decisions for the students who stormed the stage has prompted many students to push for a review of the University's disciplinary system regarding protests, which hasn't been changed since the 1960s. The University announced in December that students involved in rushing the stage would be tried under the Rules of University Conduct, University-wide rules that apply strictly to students who participate in protests on University property. All of the students who were charged faced simple rules violations, the lighter of two levels of punishment under current rules. Simple violations are dealt with through Dean's Discipline, a process by which a small group of deans hear a student's case and make a decision without public input. When results of the trials were released, eight students had been charged with simple violations. At the end of the disciplinary process, three students, all of whom are Latino, received censures, which is a harsher punishment than the disciplinary warnings received by the other five. As a result, some students have accused the University of unfairness and racism. "We need to have pretty drastic changes if we're going to have anything like justice," David Judd, SEAS '08 and one of those who was given a disciplinary warning, said. In April, the Student Governing Board called on the University to review its current procedures to evaluate if there is a better and more transparent process by which students can be tried. "The system wasn't transparent," said incoming SGB president Jonathan Seigel, CC '08. "You can't have a secret justice system. What's the point of having a disciplinary process at all if no one believes in it?"

NY Papers Win Most Pulitzers

Amanda Erickson — Mon, 16 Apr 2007 23:00:00 -0500

Stories about an imam in America and a missing family in Oregon topped the list of notable works of journalism this year. Winners of the Pulitzer Prize, the highest award in American journalism, were announced yesterday at 3 p.m. at the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism. The winners are decided by a board of distinguished figures in journalism and at the University. New York City-based newspapers were the big winners this year: Andrea Elliott of the New York Times won Best Feature Story for a story on an imam's struggles to remain devout and serve his faithful in a secular country. The New York Daily News was awarded the Editorial Writing prize for a series of editorials calling on the city and country to address the health issues of Ground Zero workers. The Wall Street Journal was the only paper to receive multiple awards. It garnered the Public Service prize for its investigation on back-dated stock options, and the International Reporting prize for reporting on the negative affects of China's booming economy. Kenneth R. Weiss, Usha Lee McFarling and Rick Loomis of the Los Angeles Times won Best Explanatory Reporting for a series on the world's oceans, and the Oregonian was honored with the Breaking News Reporting prize for its stories on a family lost in the wilderness. In the prizes for letters and drama, The Road by Cormac McCarthy won best fiction work and the The Looming Tower by Lawrence Wright was awarded best work of nonfiction.

Students Mourn Va. Shooting

Amanda Erickson — Mon, 16 Apr 2007 23:00:00 -0500

Columbians across campus expressed shock and outrage over the violent rampage on Virginia Tech's campus that left at least 32 students dead yesterday, the deadliest shooting attack in the country's history. Students took a break from their daily routines to watch gruesome coverage, mourn, and show support as details were released. "It's something that really has touched every single student at this campus," said Dan Okin, SEAS '07 and Engineering Student Council president. The shooter, described as an young man of Asian descent, opened fire in a Virginia Tech dorm at around 7:15 in the morning, killing one student and a resident adviser. Two and a half hours later, the man entered an academic building and moved ruthlessly from classroom to classroom, firing at students and faculty with two handguns, the Washington Post reported. "I'm really at a loss for words to explain or to understand the carnage that has visited our campus," Charles W. Steger, president of Virginia Tech, told the Post. Several Columbia students and all four of the undergraduate councils scrambled to pull together prayer services and candlelight vigils to express their grief and show their sympathy. "It's a tragedy and I feel like any show of my support is important," said Justin Leung, CC '09. Leung and several other students will attend a prayer service in Lerner Hall today at 7 a.m. The impromptu service, which was advertised via Facebook invitation, aims to bring together students "whatever your religion, faith, belief, or background ... [to] show our support together to those who really need it right now." The undergraduate student councils are working together to organizing a candlelight vigil for Wednesday night after sundown. Seth Flaxman, CC '07 and Columbia College Student Council president, said that the councils wanted to put together an event that would enable the University to come together. "I've had so many conversations with students who are upset by this," Flaxman said. "I feel like this is the least we can do."

Pulitzer Prize Winners Revealed

Amanda Erickson — Sun, 15 Apr 2007 23:00:00 -0500

Stories about an Imam in America and a missing family in Oregon topped the list of notable works of journalism this year. The Pulitzer Prize, the highest award in journalism, was announced today at 3 PM at the Columbia Journalism School. The winners are decided by a board of distinguished figures in journalism and at the University. New York City-based newspapers were the big winners this year: the New York Times won the Best Feature Story for a story on an Imam's struggles to remain and raise the faithful in the United States. The New York Daily News was awarded the top prize in editorial writing for a series of editorials calling on the city to properly compensate Sept. 11, 2001 workers. The Wall Street Journal was the only paper to receive two awards. They garnered the Public Service prize for their investigation on back-dated stock options, and the International Reporting prize for their reporting on the negative affects of China's booming economy. The Los Angeles Times won best explanatory reporting for a series on the world's oceans, and the Oregonian was honored with the best breaking news coverage for its stories on a family lost in the wilderness. In the prizes for letters and drama, The Road , by Cormac McCarthy won best fiction work and the The Looming Tower by Lawrence Wright was awarded best work of non-fiction.

Discipline Procedures at CU Prove Complex

Amanda Erickson — Sun, 04 Feb 2007 23:00:00 -0600

In the days after the protestors stormed the stage of Jim Gilchrist's Oct. 4 speech, one question loomed large: how, if at all, would the students be punished? The answer was about more than just whether or not a handful of students would be suspended or asked to leave the University-the disciplinary procedures spoke to the way Columbia administrators understood the events that unfolded in early October. Some felt that a harsh penalty would suggest the University wanted to make a statement that students who interrupted speakers would not be tolerated at Columbia, while a more lenient treatment would mean the University was sympathetic towards the students' actions. As students began to receive letters notifying them that they were under investigation, it became clear that the University would use the Rules of University Conduct to assess disciplinary options. The rules, which are the highest level of disciplinary proceedings at Columbia, govern the conduct of all University members at protests, pickets, and other types of rallies on Columbia property. However, questions still remained-would storming the stage and unfurling a banner be considered a serious violation or a simple one? The distinction was key: students who commit simple violations are assessed under Dean's Discipline, while students who commit violations that are considered serious have the option to choose between Dean's Discipline and a formal proceeding before a hearing officer. These differences between the two paths of disciplinary procedures have come up as students and administrators grapple with the past and future of a complicated system. ORIGINS According to Barnard history professor and Columbia University historian Robert McCaughey, the University did not have a discipline system that dealt specifically with protests until the 1960s. Instead, the University used Dean's Discipline for all proceedings. In these hearings, deans of the various undergraduate colleges were responsible for handling students accused of infractions. "The administration wasn't focused on the undergraduates," he said. "They thought this system was simpler and more controllable." But while he said few students complained about the system, the disciplinary framework had its problems. "It wasn't that the system was harsh," McCaughey said. "It was undependable and more easily manipulated." That changed in the late 1960s, when deans began seeing more politically-motivated infractions, which were, by their nature, more difficult for the deans to handle. The issue came to a head in 1968 when student protests over the construction of a gym in Morningside Park with separate entrances for community members and students rocked the University. The sheer size of the demonstrations and the number of students protesting overwhelmed the administration. In the following months, Columbia's administration worked to develop a system that would both involve students and administrators and create a concrete method for dealing with offenders. The structure they eventually created-the Rules of University Conduct-allowed students who were prosecuted for certain infractions the opportunity to go before a board. Francis Da Cruz, a former Columbia student who now works for the University as a director for Communications Software, was one of the students who protested in the 1968 riots. He said that while the University may have moved to try and clean up the disciplinary system after the protests, he and other students were not interested in their efforts. "At some point, the dean and some other officials came down and told us to stop or we'd be in trouble," he said. "We didn't stop." Da Cruz, who was later suspended for a semester, said even after he was punished through Dean's Discipline, he didn't much care about the system. For him, no matter what the punishment, his actions were worth it. He said he couldn't even remember a change in policy. "All this bureaucratic stuff," he said, "I didn't pay much attention to it." Working With the System Despite the effort that went into writing the Rules, they are very rarely used at Columbia. They were last employed after the student hunger strike in 1996, when several students refused to eat for several days to convince the administration to create the Center for the Study of Ethnicity and Race. Much more common is Dean's Discipline, which addresses violations of both academic and behavioral policies and is implemented regardless of whether the student's conduct occurred on or off campus. During Dean's Discipline, at least two administrators hear the accused student's testimony and determine whether or not the student is guilty. If he or she is deemed so, the deans choose a punishment, which can range from censure to expulsion. Students have an opportunity to appeal the ruling. "The ultimate goal of the Dean's Discipline process is to help students understand how their actions have impacted their own life," Morgan Levy, assistant dean of judicial affairs, wrote in an e-mail. "When students appear at a hearing demonstrating that they understand what they did wrong and are willing to make amends to the community for their actions, their perspective is taken into consideration when considering sanctions." A hearing under the Rules of University Conduct is only offered to students when they are accused of a "serious" infraction. Then, they may choose to be tried under Dean's Discipline or the Rules of University Conduct. Some administrators said they think the option is useful for students. "They give accused students the option of two sets of procedures," said Roger Lehecka, a retired Columbia dean who now works for the Office of University Development and Alumni Relations. "They [the rules] are helpful in that students feel they have a chance to choose a path." Marsha Wagner, a Columbia Ombuds officer said that some students have come to her with concerns about the disciplinary procedures at the University. However, she said that it is difficult to tell whether those concerns are legitimate. "It's hard to say," Wagner said. "When someone gets a [traffic] ticket, they're dissatisfied for various reasons. Does that mean it's a bad traffic regulation, or that the process wasn't fair?" John Davisson contributed to this article.

Ditching the Norm For Clothes and Camp

Amanda Erickson — Mon, 20 Nov 2006 23:00:00 -0600

Columbia may not be known for its keg stands and weekend-long bashes, but it has given birth to its share of party planners. It was here, after all, that the likes of immaculate hostess-extraordinaire Martha Stewart and Toshi-king of the New York City party scene, where twenty-somethings decked in little but house paint serve drinks, dance, and drink the night away-got their start. Lately though, Columbia students may be giving hosts of yore a run for their money. Theme parties have become more and more popular in suites and dorm rooms-students say the more intricate the theme, the better. "People have definitely been getting creative this year with the ideas," said Cliff Horton, CC '07. Horton, who has hosted such parties as a hat party and a Martipalooza, in honor of his friend Marti, said the trick is to get people talking. "The best themes get people talking about each other," he said. "But it has to be easy to execute." Casey Acierno, CC '08, doesn't apply to that rule. Her first party, she said, was based on an F. Scott Fitzgerald novel. Last year, she said she and her suitemates decided to throw a Great Gatsby party. Her suite invited people to dress like characters in the book. "My friends were like, 'why don't we do this more often?'" she said. And they have. Since then, they've thrown a West End party (it involved rap music, white tank tops, and popped collars), a disco party (all things sparkly), and a robots and ho-bots party (few dressed up for this one). Occasionally, she said, people suggest that theme parties may get in the way of certain other priorities. "Don't spend money on decorating, spend money on alcohol," a suitemate of Acierno's said. But, Acierno said theme parties are more fun. "Everyone likes an excuse to wear something silly," she said. Jordan Keenan, CC '08, a member of Bacchanal, said Columbia's official party-planning organization is a big proponent of all things themed. "You can't make them too complicated," he said. "Otherwise people won't get involved." He said the most successful parties are simple-toga parties and beach parties work well. And, when in doubt, he said, throw an '80s party. Tamara Lee, CC '07, has been throwing parties since her freshman year, when she and her roommate hosted a Christmas party. Since then, she has held a '20s party, an ocean party (everyone wore blue), and an EC pub crawl, where she and six other suites joined together to throw a multi-suite bash with a different drink theme for each suite. "I think especially when we're in college, the typical going to a dorm or a frat and drinking beer or any standard alcoholic drink gets boring," she said. "It's a fun way to add something extra to a party."