August 28, 2008

Editorial Board

Laura Misjak
Kate Polesnak
Lindsey Poisson
James Harrison
Keiara Tenant
Whitney Gronski

Shorter Welcome Week won't prevent parties

MSU administrators are discussing a proposal that would cut Welcome Week by changing the move-in dates for incoming freshmen and transfer students.

The proposed plan would bring new students into the dorms starting Sunday with the first day of class on the following Wednesday.

Administrators cite “the health and safety of students” as the motivating factor behind their decision.

But let’s be honest. The proposal is aiming to eliminate the partying that goes on during the week before classes begin.

By eliminating the number of days to party before classes begin, administrators would be cutting the time students need to adjust to university life, forge friendships and get to know their way around campus and the rest of the city.

That’s also an important part of student health and safety administrators probably haven’t considered.

For some students, this period of adjustment can make or break their outlook on life at MSU. The events that characterize Welcome Week serve as a time to bond with peers and learn about MSU and all it has to offer in terms of clubs, sports and other social groups.

The student that might be unsure about his or her decision to come to MSU could stay or leave depending on the Welcome Week experience.

Academically speaking, cutting two days out of the first week would put all students at a disadvantage. Missed labs and recitations mean lost information that cold be vital to passing the class.

Professors who feel they’ve lost time with the late start might pile on more work the first week of school, instead of gradually introducing their students to the course.

Not to mention the first week of school still would be before Labor Day weekend. That would mean three days of classes the first week and four days of classes the second week — talk about confusing freshmen even more. It would be the third week of class before anyone would attend a Monday recitation or lab.

If the university is adamant about changing the move-in date, it would make more sense to have classes start after Labor Day, as students would have more time to move in and many people trek out of town that weekend anyway. It also would align MSU with some other universities’ schedules.

Moving in early also cuts the amount of time a student’s family has to help them. For out-of-state students, this could be more of a challenge.

But adjusting the dorm schedules won’t eliminate the booze.

For upperclassmen living off campus, the dorm move-in dates wouldn’t affect those contractually bound by their leases. The university can’t control when off-campus students move into their apartments or houses. And because these students are older and have more access to alcohol, this wouldn’t solve the problem of partying.

Instead, the administration is granting upperclassmen an extra two days of debauchery, while eliminating two days for students who actually need the extra time on campus before classes commence.

When all is said and done, students who want to go out and party are going to do so, regardless of what day of the week it is.

Published on Thursday, April 3, 2008

Comments RSS 2.0 Comment Feed

The Grinch
04/04/08 @ 3:00am

Well, NOW it’s obvious. Not only did the news article http://tinyurl.com/2rqfqv introduce the shortened welcome week in a overall positive light, their entire editorial team adds more propaganda to the mix. “but it’s true!” they say..; yeah I know but parties aren’t our only concern; SPEAKING OF WHICH, if parties won’t be reduced, then why are we shortening the week, again?

Debbie
04/04/08 @ 1:35pm

“That would mean three days of classes the first week and four days of classes the second week — talk about confusing freshmen even more.”

Gee, I am surprised that freshmen are able to get up and function throughout the day with their peanut-sized brains. Seriously, I doubt any college-age freshman would have difficulty following a calendar.

af
04/04/08 @ 2:00pm

“That would mean three days of classes the first week and four days of classes the second week — talk about confusing freshmen even more.”

That does not say much about the classes the University is admitting. Maybe we should increase our admissions criteria

Mr. Pants
04/04/08 @ 6:55pm

I assume that those who party will adjust their schedules and still party the same way. And those who are more concerned with (re)adjusting to campus life will be slightly inconvenienced. I’m just surprised that the administration thinks the drinking situation is so bad that they actually plan to shorten the semester.

Bill
04/04/08 @ 6:56pm

Maybe I’m not understanding something.

“Missed labs and recitations mean lost information that could be vital to passing the class.”

Do we test on stuff that’s not covered? I’m against shortening Welcome Week, but that claim’s a bit much. Faculty and staff will adjust their syllabi—maybe they won’t cover as much, but odds are, if that happens, it’ll get shaved off of the end of the semester, not from the foundational stuff in the first weeks—and even if they did, it’s unlikely they’d hold students responsible for missing information.

Mrs. Pants
04/04/08 @ 6:58pm

I assume that those needing to (re)adjust to campus life will still get adjusted the same way. And those who are more concerned with partying will be slightly inconvenienced. I’m just surprised the administration isn’t banning drinking altogether.

Benjy Compson
04/04/08 @ 7:01pm

Bill, I agree. The editorial is almost entirely made of very very poor arguments. The only good statements are the last two sentences:

“Instead, the administration is granting upperclassmen an extra two days of debauchery, while eliminating two days for students who actually need the extra time on campus before classes commence.

“When all is said and done, students who want to go out and party are going to do so, regardless of what day of the week it is.”