VOL. 2, ISSUE 3 TUESDAY, 21 OCTOBER 2014 YALE-NUS, SINGAPORE

NEWS

21 Oct, 2014 | 1

story Spandana Bhattacharya | photo Christopher Khew

YALE-NUS UPHOLDS FREE SPEECH ON CAMPUS

Early morning on Oct. 10, David Chia ’17 saw an official from the NUS Office of Housing Services (OHS) remove a

poster reading, “In Solidarity with Hong Kong students” from a Yale-NUS elevator. The incident refused to leave his mind.

“I felt like I should write something,” recounted Chia who posted about the incident on the Yale-NUS College Students Facebook group at 11.11 a.m.

Within seconds, Chia was “overwhelmed” by the response of his classmates who started actively debating possible political reasons for the removal on Facebook. Nur Qistina Binte Abdul Wahid ’17 revealed, “I felt quite surprised and genuinely upset because it took away our rights to free speech, to share our views.”

Assistant Professor Dr. Jessica Hanser too felt “surprised” when she heard about the incident from a student at lunch. Earlier that week, she had given a lecture on markets to the freshmen for their Comparative Social Institutions class, where she referred to the situation in Hong Kong focusing on the economic aspects.

Within minutes, the news of the incident spread like wildfire. Dean’s Fellows with access to the Facebook group immediately reported the incident to Kyle Farley, Dean of Students. As the administration gained

further information, they decided that the best step would be to approach the OHS officials directly. Farley, Rector Brian McAdoo and Dean’s Fellow Sara Pervaiz Amjad promptly made a trip to the OHS.

What students had feared to be a case of censorship, instead turned out to be a matter of miscommunication. Farley explained, “The miscommunication was that the person who worked [at OHS] thought the policy was that they should take it [the posters] down.” The community breathed a collective sigh of relief when Amjad clarified via a post on the Facebook group, liked by a third of the student body, at 2.25 pm that the removal had not been sanctioned by Yale-NUS administration and the posters should be put back up. The incident seemed resolved when the posters were back up on the elevator walls by late Friday night.

However for many, the conversation had just begun.

The poster was a social experiment by a freshman. Matthew Ware ’18, the creator of the posters, said a talk on campus by provocative Singaporean writer Alfian Sa’at on Oct. 7 inspired him to put up the posters that very night. “Alfian Sa’at was asking us what is the extent of academic freedom [at Yale-NUS] … most of us there said … that we feel that there is a very high degree of it … he challenged us [to test] what exactly are the limits of the

bubble. So, I did wonder, could someone put up a poster like that?”

When interviewed, President Pericles Lewis reiterated Yale-NUS’s policy, “We encourage all free speech on campus and the removal of poster was a mistake due to miscommunication with OHS so we immediately approved putting the posters back up and we never had any intention for the posters to be taken down.”

However, many students are still concerned. “Even if it was just a mistake, which I am inclined to believe … it still happened and I think that raises the underlying questions that have been there from the start … not about freedom of speech which is protected ... but those questions about how Yale-NUS fits into … the broader NUS policy,” said Michael Moore-Jones ’17.

Responding to student concerns about whether the removal of the posters points to a greater debate about Yale-NUS’s place within NUS and a clash of ideologies, Lewis said that, “I don’t think it’s so much difference between Yale-NUS and NUS because from what I understand the colleges here in Utown like Tembusu...have basically the same policy that we do … OHS has explained it was a mistake and not part of NUS policy. I don’t think it had any ramifications for broader free speech [in Yale-NUS] ... it is we who determine that policy and what happens in our elevators and in our classrooms and outside our classrooms”.

When asked about NUS’s official policy, Farley elaborated, “My understanding … is that NUS’s policy is to not remove posters without communicating it to the leadership of that building.”

OHS corroborated this stance in an email statement which stated, “This is all a misunderstanding as we had the impression that the poster could have been put up by an unauthorized external party. The moment Yale-NUS clarified with us, it was put back up immediately. Going forward, OHS will work closely with Yale-NUS College first before taking down any posters.”

All 13 students interviewed agreed that there is absolute freedom of speech on campus while six of the 13, said that any inhibitions to free speech only arise due to social student pressure. Timothy Lim ’17 articulated this sentiment, “I think there is an atmosphere in the campus which makes us want to self-censor ... look to confessions; it seems the idea that someone could not be feminist is foreign to some, or that some people don’t actually want

The posters supporting Hong Kong’s Umbrella Revolution were reinstated in elevators within 12 hours.

NEWS

2 | 21 Oct, 2014

On Tuesday Oct. 14, the Elected Student Council (ESC) held its first General Assembly of the year. The event was

attended by approximately 60 students, coming up to about a fifth of the student body across the Classes of 2017 and 2018.

The ESC was created to help facilitate the creation of a student government. The current committee, comprising seven students from the Class of 2017, was elected in May 2014 through a nomination and online voting process facilitated by the Dean of Students Advisory Council (DOSAC). The DOSAC has since been replaced by the ESC.

During the assembly, members of the ESC updated the audience on how they would moderate the constitution writing process. Google Moderator will be used to help track suggested articles for the constitution, and facilitate discussion on various posts submitted by users. The web-based program also has

a function that ranks posts based on a ratio of votes received so popular submissions are placed higher in the forum.

Breakout sessions then took place for focused discussions on topics ranging from Sophomore-Freshman dynamics to Residential Life and RC Identity to Dining.

Dean’s Fellow Caroline Manela, who took notes for the constitution writing session, felt the assembly was generally successful. “I thought the general assembly meeting went really well … the ESC chose very relevant topics to focus the feedback discussions on.”

Lishani Ramanayake ’17 agreed, “I thought the assembly was more productive than expected because of the very hands-on approach that the members of the ESC and the DFs took … seeing our concerns addressed so comprehensively was very satisfying.”

Meredith Jett ’18 found the discussion on freshmen-sophomore dynamics particularly interesting. “[This] dynamic will continue to change as new students join every year, and for that reason we cannot just talk about the two classes’ interactions, but rather we need to be building a precedent that allows anyone, no matter the class, to interact comfortably with their peers as they want and see fit,” she said.

However, the turnout rate appeared to be a cause for concern. “Many students complain about things like the choice of options in the dining hall, or etiquette in the laundry rooms, but when the time comes for us to actually do something constructive with that criticism, few people ... turned up,” shared Ramanayake.

“I wish more people could have found the time to attend because it turned out to be a productive outlet for a lot of our common grievances,” added Jett.

According to Evannia Handoyo ’17, one of the members of the ESC, the notes from the session will be consolidated and passed on to the Dean of Students’ office and Rectors’ office. “Our primary focus is still to write the Constitution,” she emphasized.

The ESC will be replaced by the elected student government in the next semester.

TOWARDS SELF-RULE

story May Tay photo Pareen Chaudhari

I confess I fall in love with words, the sound and color and flavor of words every day, or at least the days I get to spend reading and

researching. How can you come across words like okapi, kakamora, dousing, and wentletrap and not fall madly, hopelessly in love? How can you not ache to write them, let your speech be infused with them like herbs in a delicate oil?”

This quote, from guest speaker and renowned poet Aimee Nezhukumatathil, spoken by Daniel Soo ’17, marked the return of the President’s speaker series in style, on Wednesday, Oct. 15. While Soo may have had to clarify the meaning of “okapi,” “kakamora” and “wentletrap,” the quote successfully set the stage for Nezhukumatathil’s evening of poetry; in which, she would be reading from her three award-winning collections, Lucky Fish (2011), Miracle Fruit (2003) and At the Drive-In Volcano (2007).

Over the course of the event, Nezhukumatathil’s exploration of words

TO FALL IN LOVE WITH WORDS

story David Chappell | photo Christopher Khew | chart source Office of the President

to tolerate homosexuals. The attacks on these anonymous views are just another form of inhibiting the open airing of all views.”

Ware too agreed that there is full freedom of speech on campus, “That’s one of the things that articles in The Yale Daily News get wrong, the people who write them have not been here, they don’t know what the actual climate is like.”

When asked to respond to critics of Yale-NUS who might use this incident to argue that Yale-NUS should not be in Singapore, Farley stressed that the incident was a case of miscommunication, not a clash of policies and said, “I think it would be unfortunate if someone took one employee who works for Housing services removing one piece of paper thinking that it was the policy of an entire institution and read into that Yale-NUS should not be in Singapore... I know that some of our external critics who are looking for anything, would make that jump, I just hope that people inside Yale-NUS don’t.”

Moving forward, students demand a more detailed and explicit written policy outlining all mediums of free speech on campus to ensure that such mistakes are not repeated.

Moore-Jones highlighted, “I think...this is the most important issue that Yale-NUS actually has over the next two years because the way that is dealt with now, in a joint conversation with students and faculty and college leadership, sets the tone for how the college is seen in Singapore … and around the world for a long time to come.”

Students in a focus group discussion on Residential Life and RC Identity.

Above: Nezhukumatathil took questions on inspiration, free-verse and sassiness.

NEWS/FEATURE

21 Oct, 2014 | 3

Saga, Elm, Cendana. To most, these trees mean nothing beyond landscaping. At Yale-NUS College however, their

significance relates to one of the fundamental principles on which this college was built — the Residential College system. With this as an integral part of the school’s culture, many students have conflicting views on its value.

The RC system defines certain characteristics of life at Yale-NUS, including the Dean’s Fellow group students are assigned to. Especially in the initial stages of settling in, these DF groups are important in establishing relationships. Bing Lin ’18 said, “I think it’s a good way of getting to know people in a more structured manner.”

Similarly, RCs are divided into floors. Saga occupies floors 9 to 11 (with a few students on 12), Elm occupies 12 to 14, and Cendana 15 to 17. “The initial fear is that it creates a segregation and almost unnecessary distinction.” Roshan Singh ’18 said. “The people one floor above me are in the same RC so everyone knows everyone, but the people in the floor below me, we hardly know each other.”

Lin suggested that a possible factor leading to this segregation could be freshman orientation during which the three RCs split up to go to different countries respectively. Saga, Elm and Cendana went to Laos, Borneo and Vietnam respectively. Because of these trips, Lin said, “I feel like I know people within my RC more than people from other RCs.”

The experiences of the sophomore batch on the other hand were very different. Having the summer immersion at Yale facilitated interaction between the class without the RC identity being imposed strictly.

What should be done about the RC split, especially if it seems to be a mostly freshmen dilemma? A member of RC^3, Marcus Koe

VALUE OF THE RC SYSTEMstory Kavya Gopal | photo Pareen Chaudhari

’17 answered, “I can understand that [the freshmen] want to be together as a batch, but I definitely see the eventual need for an RC system and I think it’s good to start now and get the building blocks up for when we move to the new campus.”

If RC mobility is an issue between floors in RC4, the new campus threatens to pose an even bigger physical separation as each RC will occupy their own independent building. However, Koe pointed out, “I think that within each RC, there will be much closer community.”

RC^3 is one such student organisation on campus that is dedicated to promoting RC identity and providing platforms for the different RCs to interact. Their latest initiative is responsible living, where consumption of electricity and food wastage during lunch are being monitored and recorded as RCs. The goal is to foster healthy-RC competition by being mindful of the spaces we live in. “We’re not trying to split up the RCs in an antagonistic way,” Koe commented. “What we’re trying to do is recognize that people have to eventually settle into their RCs, and we’re trying to allow that to happen sooner.”

The RC system is also not always as restraining as it seems. There are plenty of means through which meeting members of other RCs is possible, including clubs, sports and classes.

Singh emphasised the importance of mingling to meeting people from other RCs, “We end up shooting ourselves in the foot because we miss an integral part of this school—the people. ”

Singh concluded, “It’s nice to have that identity, but we just have to know how to sidestep it to get to know people … it might be healthier to neither fully reject [our RC], nor live too strictly by it.”

Promoting RC spirit through the responsible

living initiative.

saw her examining the origin of the the fruit mango, a fear of long words (sadistically called “hippopotomonstrosesquipedaliophobia”), her last name, which the more astute readers may already have noticed is rather unique, as well as fielding questions from intrigued audience members. In addition, earlier that day, five lucky students were given the chance to work with her on their poetry, learning to experiment with personas and empathy through the exploration of unusual phobias.

While President Pericles Lewis did say that, “it isn’t really symbolic who goes first in a given year,” Nezhukumatathil marked the start of an exciting line up of the coming year’s President’s speakers. This is thanks, in part, to Yale-NUS College co-sponsoring the Bridges series of lectures, a scheme that will see Nobel laureates coming to South-east Asia to “encourage peace” and for “cultural communication,” as Lewis noted.

The next President’s speaker will be Geoff Dyer, a novelist and essayist, who will be coming to Yale-NUS on Nov. 5.

DATE SPEAKER/TOPIC

Nov. 5-6Geoff Dyer: An Evening with Geoff Dyer

Nov. 7

President David Oxtoby (Pomona): Dialogue

Between Presidents—The Future of Liberal Arts in Asia and North America

Jan. 21-22Brian P. Schmidt

(BRIDGES): Astrophysics/Science: Humanity’s

Universal Bridge

Feb. 2-6 Jane Hirshfield: TBC

Feb. 11-12Mohamed El Baradei (BRIDGES): Global Equity and Security

March 9 Paul Sabin: TBC

March 11 Emily Bazelon: TBC

April 15

Dr. Noeleen Heyzer: We The Peoples: A

Leadership Journey in the United Nations

Sept. 16 Olivia lum: TBC

TBC Chan Heng Chee: TBC

PRESIDENT’S SPEAKERS:

OPINION

4 | 21 Oct, 2014

LETTER TO THE EDITORSSend your letter to the editors (maximum word count 200) to yncpanopt@gmail.com by 5 P.M. on Friday for the chance to have it published here next week.

Wow, your college is doing so much. You are really fortunate to be in Yale-NUS,” my mother said as

she flipped through the Yale-NUS College Year-in-Review. I sat next to her, and felt a sense of pride—I was part of something that I can say I played a part in creating. At the same time, I started reflecting: Is Yale-NUS really what is portrayed to our parents and the rest of the world? Is our college really the greatest, awesome-est thing that we keep telling ourselves it is?

Some events over the past few weeks have compelled me to reconsider those questions. Don’t get me wrong. I love this college and I am a huge advocate for it. Yet, the more I think about it, the more it seemed that the college that my mother reads about in the promotional materials and the college that I am actually experiencing, are two separate colleges.

When many of us were considering Yale-NUS as our college of choice, we bought into the promises and the ideas that were proposed to us. We were wowed by the innovative programming and curriculum, and during the first EYW, we were even asked to think about how to use $10,000 in the creation of student groups and organizations. Rightly or wrongly, the ideas and promises that we were offered created exceedingly high expectations of the college, which we held onto when we entered the hallowed doors of Yale-NUS College.

But the ideas and promises offered were at the end of the day, merely ideas and promises. We never really considered the minute details—what are the policies for student organization funding? How would the common curriculum work out? How are we going to deal with limited space before having our own campus?

And therein lies the problem. We were offered a dream of a college, but the reality seems a bit too different. From the way the Common Curriculum was executed to the various limitations we have in student life affairs, there is a huge disconnect between the expectations that we were sold and the reality we are seeing. This deficit in expectations is the reason why many students, mostly sophomores, feel rather exhausted and disappointed. (Just look at the Obama Administration, and it is clear how exceedingly high expectations would lead to exceedingly high disappointment.)

Don’t get me wrong. As Yale-NUS students, we are fortunate to have a lot of resources invested in us, and we are aware about the limitations that we have to navigate and the obstacles that we have to cross. We chose Yale-NUS because we can adapt to numerous changing circumstances of a start-up university—and we have proven this time and again. But what compounds the problem of the deficit in expectations is how problems are addressed in this college, which then creates an impression amongst students that our own college administration is the limitation or obstacle to that dream.

One example is the lack of clarity in policies and systems (in every aspect of this college). It is understandable that policies and systems are not necessarily in place in a start-up. Honestly, I see that as a great opportunity for the administration and students to work together to create such policies. However, policies and processes are often made on the fly and constantly amended. Additionally, certain policies are made as knee-jerk reactions to events that occur, often without discussion with the community-at-large, affecting students in ways that the administrators might not see or understand. What is discomforting too is that at times, the impression given is that non-student stakeholders are given more weight than student opinion.

Justified or not, this creates resentment, dissatisfaction, and in the long term, disillusionment. We start to question if the promises of institutional support exist, and try to balance the “go aim for the stars”

encouragement with the reality of unclear policies. This complicates the way in which we view the school and our place in the larger picture of the college.

Disgruntled students are common in higher education. But what is worrying at Yale-NUS is the sense that students are starting to not care and give up. What makes it worse is when students start to leave (of course there’s a myriad of reasons, but this disillusionment is one). Many more are thinking of doing so. A close friend of mine confided that a major reason why people are staying on is because at this late stage of our college careers, there’s a huge sunk cost in leaving.

I wrote this column to flag out this issue, one that many students have been talking about, though mostly to each other. It is not my intention to play the blame-game, nor to deny the hard work of the staff and faculty at Yale-NUS. Instead, I hope students and the administration start talking more candidly and honestly about where we all stand, so we can find a way forward to deal with the ‘slump’ the student body is facing, instead of giving excuses for it.

We were all sold on an overpromised dream and many of us are disappointed. But should we continue to be tired, jaded and angry at unfulfilled promises? I believe that we should try our hardest to come together as a community to build that dream college with whatever tools we have, no matter the limitations or obstacles. If we succeed, that would be our legacy. If not, at least we tried to live up to that dream. That’s the least we can do for ourselves.

OVERPROMISING A DREAMcolumn Jared Yeo | photo used with permission from Yale-NUS Admissions

The Promised Dream

A dream oversold?