To the Oberlin Community-
This letter is in response to past Review articles about dean of Student Life and Services Charlene Cole-Newkirk and her opinions concerning the Senate's reinstatement of the clauses removed from the college's Fussers.
Cole-Newkirk stated that the clause's reinstatement "creates a cycle of distrust" among Oberlin College governing boards. This appears hypocritical in light of the clause's removal without consultation of the General Faculty. Inferring that a staff member will know when they see something "outside the values of the community" is an even more antagonistic statement towards the students of this institution.
How can one Area Coordinator say what is within the values of the community unless the behavior of an individual affects the community as a marijuana users seeking protection from state laws, the issue has higher ramifications. By allowing the College to use found evidence in room searches, there is an infringement upon the private space of the student. Some argue that through paying the College tuition, students give up privacy rights to the College as landlords. However, in the sake of the ideals that we understand of Oberlin as a liberal intellectual institution, we would hope that the College would have an interest in protecting the privacy rights concerning its students.
The issue of marijuana within a public space may be an infringement upon those who are bothered by the smoke, or the open use of drugs. But in privacy, what the public doesn't know, the College won't know, and what the College doesn't know won't hurt them.
Where can the line be drawn concerning communal values extending into private space? This is a question which should be addressed by the community of students affected rather than through administrative decisions. If the college wishes to create a divide between its student policies and its students' behavior, then perhaps they are seeking to attract a different type of student than those which are currently enrolled. Though many students may disagree with the free use of illegal drugs which some partake of, we feel that as an ideal they should understand the privileges of privacy we strive for against the machine of bureaucracy that dorm life entails.
The attitude of the dean that this issue revolves around drug use, and "if it was a Monet painting, students wouldn't be angry" show the dean's lack of understanding and miscommunication between her and the students she represents. "When does Oberlin begin to trust that a dean can make some decisions on its own" Cole-Newkirk asks? Maybe when the dean can be up front with us, and prove that she's worth trusting.
Copyright © 1997, The Oberlin Review.
Volume 125, Number 16; February 28, 1997
Contact Review webmaster with suggestions or comments at ocreview@www.oberlin.edu.
Contact Review editorial staff at oreview@oberlin.edu.