Does the University have a set of community standards?
This question is important to explore, as the city of Eugene recently accused the University of complicity in the recent rioting and asked it to pay some of the costs incurred as a result. As we see it, the University is negligent in expressing its community standards, and it should, indeed, pony up some money to the larger community of which it is a part.
The University does have standards, and these are expressed in myriad ways on campus, from class syllabi to the ASUO Constitution. Perhaps the most important of these is the Student Conduct Code.
The code mentions inappropriate behaviors, such as academic fraud, destruction of University property and disorderly conduct, and provides consequences, but only if these activities hurt members of the University community or University property.
It seems odd to us that our community standards extend only so far as the edge of campus property. If it occurred off-campus, then, could we fail to turn in our homework and still get credit? Of course not — our community’s standards do not end when a student leaves the property.
This extension exists for a reason. One is not a happenstance member of this community. To join costs money and time, and expectations must be met in order to receive the prize of membership: a higher education. In turn, then, the standards of the community are higher, and students carry those standards no matter where they go.
To say otherwise would be foolishness; is it acceptable for a murderer or rapist to continue to be a student here? No — that would cheapen the membership and the prize for the rest of us who are not murderers or rapists.
The problem, then, in the current situation, is that University standards either are not stated explicitly enough or that consequences are not provided for. We think both are true.
Here is a quote from Boston College’s conduct code: “Violation of the laws in the communities surrounding the campus injures the University, just as it does the other citizens who reside there, and the University offers no tolerance of any such conduct. … Therefore, the University reserves the right to refer any student(s) identified as being involved in this type of behavior to the Boston College Student Judicial System for disciplinary action … including loss of University Housing privileges or suspension or dismissal from the University.”
How difficult is it to say that? By not doing so, the University has shown a disregard for the surrounding community. “Education” and “outreach” only go so far. Riots have occurred near campus five times in the past six years, and nothing has been done to further specify community standards and provide consequences.
We’re tempted to update an old saying: Riot once, screw you. Riot twice, screw the University. Riot three times, deny the screw. But riot five times, and something is screwy at the University.
In the absence of clear standards and consequences, the University’s refusal to help pay for the damage feels like the actions of bad party guests — as long as their house doesn’t get trashed, who cares?
Related Stories:
Partiers turn violent in West University neighborhood
ASUO opens dialogue on riot
Editorial: Throw rioters out with the burning trash
Riot Restitution
UO students named in weekend’s riots
Letters to the editor (10/02/02)
Offensive imagery, blurry photographs and a simple error
Editorial: The community should not be screwed anymore
Eugene riots not so cool
Police are making Eugene a ‘military-city’
Police Arrest 35 in Riot Near UO
Eugene Police Beefing Up Patrols Near U of O
Crowd riots in Eugene
University, city fight over riot bill
Riot prompts UO to review off-campus conduct policy
Riot May Result In Code Of Conduct Changes At UO
Police Hope Their Video Tape Will Lead to More Arrests.
View photographs from the riot here.
Editorial: The community should not be screwed anymore
Daily Emerald
October 6, 2002
More to Discover