As eveyone directly affiliated with LETU knows, Student Senate and various levels of administration are currently considering adding extra hours for open dorms. The current addition being discussed would allow visitation of opposite-sex dorms on Sunday from 5 p.m to 9 p.m.
The Apartments, the living area I represent in Senate, seem not to care that much because any additional hours between noon and 11 p.m. on any day would not affect us. Therefore, I want it to be clear that the following is simply my opinion on the matter and does not reflect the view of the Apartments.
As the rule currently stands, one is allowed to visit the dorm rooms of those of the opposite sex during three six-hour windows at the close of each week. That's eighteen hours spread over three days. I think this is ridiculous.
With a few exceptions, the students at LETU are legally adults. We can drive. We can vote. We could buy cigarettes, and some of us can even buy alcohol. We are old enough to be considered responsible for paying LETU, and many of us do bear the bulk of that financial burden. We can select our own majors, choose our classes (in almost any order), and decide to drop classes or college altogether.
We are given tremendous responsibility to plan our future through our educational and financial choices. Yet, we apparently can not be trusted around the opposite sex unless we are almost continually supervised. I can only assume the reason for this is that those who make the rules believe college age men and women are so full of hormones that they will literally tear off their clothes the moment they aren't being watched.
Oh, wait, that isn't the reason. It's because they are trying to help us students make wise decisions. They are protecting us from ourselves. They don't want us to become distracted if we are trying to do homework, prepare for class, or try to sleep. Apparently, students at LETU aren't capable of asking someone to leave. They don't want us to succumb to temptation. Apparently, students at LETU aren't capable of making moral decisions regarding sexuality unless a multi-layered system of checks are in place.
I am against having "closed dorms" at all. We, as adults, are capable of making responsible decisions. Those who don't make responsible decisions face consequences for their choices. Just like with the internet filter, anyone who wants to get around the "open dorms" rules will do so.
I guess I am just opposed to rules which punish everyone because a few are irresponsible.
Posted by Randy at February 7, 2006 05:55 PM | TrackBackI think it's a liability issue, less chance of a lawsuit against the university with fewer open dorm hours.
Posted by: Melchizedek at February 7, 2006 06:45 PMOh, come on, it's the conservative Christian back-lash to the sexual revolution represented by the Board of Trustees. What's this lawsuit business about?
Posted by: Hookah at February 7, 2006 09:13 PMI'm with Hookah on this one. If there is one thing I've learned during my tour here at LeTourneau, it is that the administration is very good at what it does, from a purely Machiavellian standpoint at least. Those in charge of the majority of decisions make those decisions which will provide their paycheck for another year. Now granted any University is a massive financial operation, and as a result certain sacrifices have to be made.
The Board of Trustees functions much like the high-profile stock holders of a large corporation. As the prime investors in the services this institution provides, everyone on the payroll is ultimately responsible to the trustees. Being a non-profit organization, this relationship is compounded since the investors are not in it for shrewd financial gain. They are taking a loss already; therefore, the admin has to work hard to show that the investor’s money is being put to good use.
I don’t know any of the board members personally, but it would be my guess that the university policy greatly reflects their personal beliefs. The majority is likely conservative and the rules of this institution, when compared to the institutions they may have attended in their days, is most likely considerably liberal. My main point is that there are many forces at work here.
I have watched the administration of this school destroy the lives of several students through the flexing of their authoritative muscles, yet when I speak to those in administration as equals, not superiors, I find that they are not the corrupt tyrants many make them out to be. They are merely people doing a job. It is my belief that the biggest concern for the authority at LeTourneau is two-fold: maintenance of their display of power over the students (in order to maintain control) and keeping up appearances to the outside world (in order to maintain their positions).
It may be nice to think of what things would be like if the administration were a lot more buddy-buddy with the students and less interested in maintenance of the system. From what I’ve deciphered in speaking with elder alumnus, R.G. and his wife had tremendous personal relationships with their students. Unfortunately, this attitude towards the operation of the institution drove it into massive debt and near bankruptcy. The truth is that many in the current administration have led the University out of debt and allowed it to continue operation. We may like the former style of running a school better, but the current method seems to be the one that lasts.
All in all my experience here has been quite interesting and I’m sure it would make quite an interesting book if I ever get around to it.
Posted by: Codepainter at February 8, 2006 01:26 AMI think closed dorms are a good thing. I didn't go to LeTU, but my hubby did (2A for 2 years) and I was there for 3 years in married student housing. I went to the University of Colorado, where there are open dorms 24/7. There's a huge difference in floor unity when it's all girls or all guys most of the time. And you don't have to worry about walking back to your room in a towel and running into some guy. Some people that want to go do immoral things will get around it, but it WILL help some avoid temptation. It should be worth the sacrifice of the strong to keep a stumbling block from weaker brothers and sisters. Paul talks about not eating meat for their sake - why not having closed dorms? Seems like much less of a big deal than not eating meat. =)
Posted by: kate at February 8, 2006 10:17 AM