VOL. 2, ISSUE 4 TUESDAY, 28 OCTOBER 2014 YALE-NUS, SINGAPORE

NEWS

28 Oct, 2014 | 1

SOPHOMORES TRAVEL TO LANGKAWI

story and photos Joyan Tan

On Friday, Oct. 24, 61 sophomores flew into Langkawi, Malaysia for a Foundations of Science (FoS) field

trip. Students were divided into six groups, each group participating in four activities over the course of the trip.

Accompanied by FoS faculty, students visited an observatory, went on a mangrove walk, sailed around the island to investigate sea levels, visited night markets to explore Fibonacci in pineapples, investigated the 2004 tsunami that hit Langkawi and went on night hiking trips.

The trip was a repeat event from Sept. 12-14 when the other half of the FOS class travelled to Langkawi. The trips were conceptualized in December 2013 by the FoS faculty.

FoS Course Coordinator Brian McAdoo explained the rationale, “We decided that this trip would be a good thing because so many of us actually don’t work in laboratories. We work in fields. So it’s important for students to see how field science works instead of lab science.”

This objective was not always met for many students, especially for those on the

first trip as many had deadlines to meet after the weekend. For Brian Huang ’17, most of the trip was spent working on assignments. “I brought my Japanese homework with me to the waterfall/ mangroves and Marx with me to the observatory.” Huang summarized his experience saying, “I wish I were doing my work at RC4 instead of here.”

On the other hand, others appreciated the chance to get out of RC4 and Singapore. Karen Ho ’17 especially enjoyed the night hike. “My most memorable part of the trip was when I got to hold the toad [during the night hike]… It was sitting there in the middle of my palm and I could feel how much weight it was putting on each leg… I felt like I could connect with that toad.”

“When you stay in Singapore, you don’t see a lot of nature,” Ho added.

Following feedback from the first trip, the FoS faculty made changes to the trip, such as changing the hotel and including some free time into the schedule. During the five-hour period on the second day, students engaged in various activities such as exploring different

islands, going for massages, or staying in the hotel to rest.

“People have different requirements when they come on a trip like that and that four, five-hour block really gives you the chance to do whatever you want to do.” Manas Punhani ’17 commented, “The administration was very considerate.”

Next semester, students in the FoS course can expect to be doing more work around Singapore. “[It won’t be] so big next semester”, McAdoo commented. “Each unit may do some individual outings and we’re going to try to do a couple of class outings.”

It is unclear whether the Langkawi field trip will be a constant for all future FoS classes. “I actually hope so, but it’s going to be an additional challenge because with each year there will be more students,” McAdoo said. “[It becomes] expensive, logistically challenging.” A larger class size may also make it more difficult for learning to occur, according to McAdoo.

After three days in Langkawi, the sophomores flew back into Singapore at late afternoon on Oct. 26.

Andrea Lee ’17 learns how to use an Abney Level to

reconstruct the inundation of the 2004 tsunami.

On Dec. 26, 2004, the Indian Ocean tsunami hit

the island of Langkawi.

Students learn about rising sea levels by examining rocks with professor Chris Gouramanis.

Students examine a hermit crab on

the beach.

NEWS/FEATURE

2 | 28 Oct, 2014

Knives, baking trays, an entire bottle of extra-virgin olive oil — Adlin Zainal ’17 lost all these items when she left them in

the kitchen, and she is not alone. A recent spate of high-profile thefts has

brought the stealing problem in Yale-NUS College into the spotlight. Students have

had $370 worth of stationery stolen from an unlocked room, $70 worth of pre-workout supplements disappearing from the kitchen, and even a painting going missing from a locked room.

These thefts have a chilling effect on the community. Many students have expressed a heightened consciousness to safeguard their belongings, while some who have had things stolen feel a loss of trust in the community. Dean of Students Kyle Farley explained that with such a small community, theft has an echoing effect. He said, “When someone has broken that trust [by stealing], it’s not what one individual does to another. It quickly becomes collective.”

Ritika Biswas ’18, who lost a bag containing her student pass, matriculation card and cash admitted, “I am not really a trusting person, but Yale-NUS seemed like a safe place to me compared to other places I’ve been. Losing my bag made Yale-NUS a lot more realistic in a negative sense to me.”

Lee Seung Hee ’18, had a more cynical view after losing pre-workout supplements worth $70. “People steal everywhere, I acknowledge that. I learnt my lesson and I’m going to put my things in my room now.”

Yet, how much responsibility do we want to place on the individual when theft happens? Many felt that collective action as a community is needed in response as well. The issue of additional security measures, like cameras in kitchens and locking doors to RC4 at all hours, was raised. Lee said, “We have cameras in the laundry room, but not in the kitchen. What’s the logic in that?”

Without CCTV cameras, there is little avenue to investigate a theft. Biswas added, “I was told that the DOS doesn’t want to violate students’ privacy, but with a camera, even in the doorway of the kitchen, I could find out who took my bag. I will feel safer with a camera system in place.”

Some are frustrated with the DOS’ lack of

MISPLACED

TRUSTstory Regina Marie Lee | photo illustration Pareen Chaudhari

story May Tayphoto Pareen Chaudhari

BY STUDENTS, FOR STUDENTS

When Hillary Loh ’18 returned from a lecture, she found a slip of paper at her door. “Good morning

sunshine! Thank you for making this school an even better place by participating in the Angels game,” it read, before announcing the name of her Mortal.

The past month or so has seen the mushrooming of a number of student-initiated community building efforts. Conceptualised, facilitated and executed entirely by students, these organic initiatives have further enriched the community at Yale-NUS College and added to the flurry of activity on campus.

“I felt that perhaps the community spirit was a bit lacking this semester, [which is why] I thought to revive [the Angels game],” said Anna Evtushenko ’17, who facilitates the game with Amanda Lee ’17. In the game, a ‘Mortal’ is randomly assigned an ‘Angel’, and the ‘Angel’ is to send the ‘Mortal’ letters or gifts over the course of the semester. Both classes participate in the game on an opt out basis.

On student initiatives, Loh thinks they fill niches that larger and more generic schoolwide events may not fully satisfy. What’s Going On is another student initiative started by four students on Sept. 15. According to Willie Khoo ’17, one of the organisers, the four of them saw a need for a regular safe space where students could be vulnerable with each other and gather to discuss community issues. “In our intro session ... [some participants said that until then] we’ve not had a space like this… [and they thought] having a space like this is very important,” shared Khoo. Their dialogue sessions so far have discussed topics like the use of spaces on campus and expectations in college. One of these sessions inspired Kavya Gopal ’18 and Hannah Yeo ’18 with the idea for Lunch Lottery, a social dining project and adaptation of Lunch Tag.

The students interviewed for this article all agreed on the importance of student-led

initiatives. “One of the special things about Yale-NUS is the close knit community we have … [and initiatives like these] reflect school spirit,” said Andrew Lai ’18, who is organising a college-wide music mixtape exchange with fellow classmate Yonatan Gazit ’18. “Also if you know the person organising [the event], it seems more likely that people will participate,” said Lai.

Others think student ownership of ideas is important. “The gulf between idea and action is really huge. People don’t usually realise this until they take ownership of an idea themselves. It’s easy to throw an idea out there and expect the DoS, ESC or someone else to take it up ... [Bridging the gulf through seeing an idea through] is a very satisfying [process] and very important,” said Khoo.

At the end of the day, while not every student may participate in, or be as involved as others in activities on campus, student-initiated or otherwise, it is comforting to know that Yale-NUS is a growing, self-aware community.

On a final note, Evtushenko added, “I really hope all the Angels reach out to their mortals soon, because Angels is all about giving.”

Above: Poster for the Angels & Mortals game in the lift.

Personal foodstuff like milk, eggs and yogurt are regularly siphoned off when stored in the communal kitchens.

FEATURE/SPORTS

28 Oct, 2014 | 3

a concrete response on the problem. “Right now, there seems to be no explicit stand against stealing and punishments for theft,” said Lee.

When asked how aware the DOS was of the scale of the problem, Farley said, “Here’s what I know, there’s too much stealing.” Still, he was hesitant to increase security measures before consulting the larger school community. “There are no decisions made at this time, although I know students who want to lock the doors ... I would never make a decision to lock the doors without talking to students. Nothing is being done unilaterally; considerations are being made thinking about the larger community.”

Indeed, dialogue is necessary, since opinion on how to respond as a community is divided. Roughly an equal percentage of students polled were for or against having cameras in the kitchen. Jay Lusk ’18 is strongly against having more cameras. He explained, “For me, I would not feel comfortable going into the kitchens if there were cameras there. It is a privacy issue. We should figure out other ways to stop stealing before we have cameras to regulate that area.”

For Farley, “the number one [preventive measure against stealing] that is in place is community expectations”. Some hope that an honour code system can reduce thefts in the school. This would be a code of behaviour agreed upon by the student body that all students upheld.

Still, some polled were cynical that this would work. Sau Tsoi ’17 said, “I don’t see how an honour code would help...looking at the rate of theft right now. People who want to steal will steal regardless of codes set in place, as long as they can get away with it.”

The divide lies in how much one values collective action over individual responsibility, and whether to rely on community expectations or deterrence measures. Should we persist in hoping that a system of honour will deter theft, even at the risk of valuable items being stolen? Should we leave it to individual responsibility and respect privacy concerns, even if it means no one dares to leave anything in common spaces anymore?

These thefts have challenged our expectations of our community—it is up to us to redefine and uphold what we want our community to be like.

SKI, BOARD AND SURF:DEVELOPING YALE-NUS’ SPORTS

story David Chappell | photos used with permission from Kalya Kee and Luke Ong

Kalya Kee ’18 water skiing. The Ski, Board and Surf club is currently awaiting a decision from the DOS.

On Sunday Sept. 21, Luke Ong ’18 began gathering interest on a potential Ski, Board and Surf Team for Yale-NUS

College. Four weeks later, the proposal, along with 25 signatures expressing interest in the club, has been sent to the Office of the Dean of Students. Yet unlike traditional sporting societies at Yale-NUS, if approved, the Ski, Board and Surf Team will be functioning both as a recreational sports club and a competitive sports team— a distinction which raised many challenges in its application.

Traditionally, when proposing a new athletic society at Yale-NUS, applicants are required to define it as either a club or a team, with submission for teams requiring a list of participants equal to the number needed for a competition as well as a greater commitment level. Ong and fellow co-founder Kalya Kee ’18, however, have a very different vision for the Ski, Board and Surf Team. They intend for the society to cater to both recreational and competitive interest, with interested parties taking part less frequently, around once a month, compared with 10 participants who train more regularly, as well as competing in local and overseas tournaments. Indeed, to avoid these problems in the future, Ong expressed interest in a third, combined, category in the application process, one which allowed for their intended model.

Despite the issues caused by the club/team distinction, the remaining application process has otherwise been smooth for the pair. “The

school provided a detailed plan…it’s pretty straight forward,” Ong noted, despite pointing out that “a lot of the guidelines weren’t in place until recently.” Similarly, he praised Associate Director of Athletics & Fitness Wain Khoo for his help in the application process, as well as Dean Kristin Greene’s enthusiasm for the project as a whole.

Although, as Kee pointed out, “if you’re not familiar with other proposals then it can be a bit tricky, creating the proposal itself.”

This sentiment was echoed by Ong, saying that “some people may have the idea but they may not be able to come up with the proposal, timing, location and stuff like that.”

The club/team model that the society hopes to adopt was borne out of a desire for inclusivity. This was something of a concern for Ong, stating that “we don’t want it to be like a team where none else joins because they can’t commit that much time, or they don’t have enough money.” It was discussed that the team itself will require a higher level of commitment and money, compared with other activities. The idea of inclusivity is central to the pitch, with both Ong and Kee expressing an interest in “wanting to build up the school’s athletics culture.”

It is Ong’s hope that the team, if approved can bring water sports, such as water skiing, surfing and wakeboarding to Yale-NUS, before potentially branching out into snow sports, such as skiing and snow boarding in the near future. Above: Luke Ong ’18 wake boarding at

Bedok Reservoir.

OPINION

4 | 28 Oct, 2014

guest column Nicholas Carverhill | illustration Christopher Khew

I have always been equally optimistic as I have been wary of our College’s first publication, particularly in relation to its chosen name.

Digging back through the archives, one can find the etymology of Panopt being described as, “that which sees everything” (Issue 02, Volume 01, 2013). Funnily enough, the student who submitted this interpretation was awarded a Starbucks gift card. In two issues before last, we are provided with a stunning reversal from this initial interpretation; we are told it is “not the Panopticon, and […] never will be” (Issue 01, Volume 02, 2014), despite the fact that this original definition is, in effect, a description of the Panopticon.

I find the newest justification for this publication’s name troubling. It is of some reassurance that the editors were actively aware of the negative associations with Jeremy Bentham’s Panopticon (even though they invoke a much later thinker’s, Foucault’s, view on the concept). Where the logic falls apart is in the description of Panopt’s role in our College community. We are told that this publication is meant to “bridge the gap between the seeing and being seen,” and is therefore antithetical to that which the Panopticon embodies. This is problematic primarily because the Panopticon is by definition a construct in which the observer is never observed. I find it ominous that we are willing to align ourselves, even metaphorically, so closely to something

that was originally designed as the ultimate prison. Bentham imagined that the Panopticon would be effective as an institution because inmates would never be able to tell when they were being watched. The ‘watchman’ in the Panopticon is, in fact, structurally immune to any form of “transparency or accountability.” Later, when Foucault invoked the concept, he refers to the modern state structure wherein population control is achieved without the need for physical domination – an idea familiar to all students of Comparative Social Institutions. Panopticism is desirable precisely because it dissociates the ruler from the ruled and veils the structures of power in the shadows.

While it would be hyperbolic and intellectually irresponsible to assert that this publication’s goals are anywhere close to those described above, there is a frightening turn in its own etymological justification: “there is no fear of being seen if one is not in the wrong.” This claim implicitly abandons the previous stance that, as an institution, Panopt is somehow structurally different from the Panopticon. Recognize that invoking this reasoning is in tension with the accountability claims because it tells the reader, ‘if you have nothing to hide, then why bother caring that we are all-seeing in the first place?’ It dismisses the fact that there may be value to privacy in and of itself, and is an argument in preparation for the failure of the initial claim that it does not see everything to

THE NAME GAME

begin with.On a side note, this publication’s new logo—

with its ominous eye-shaped ‘O’—does not help its cause in dissociating itself from the all-seeing. I can only imagine the field day that Jim Sleeper would have if he ever stumbled across our name, logo, etymological justification, or any combination thereof.

As the self-proclaimed platform for free discourse and critical discussion at Yale-NUS, Panopt is not exempt from navigating our College’s complex political territory and its associated responsibilities. I will make the bold recommendation that this publication scrap its name and conduct a College-wide referendum to rename and rebrand itself as something more befitting of the relationship we wish to have, as students, with structures of power. The fourth estate is meant to be a conduit for the oppressed and a voice for the marginalized; even if Panopt is only associated with the Panopticon by root-word it is enough to question whether it indeed exists amongst us, or above us.

LETTER TO THE EDITORSI would like to thank Jared for bringing the

important issue of disillusionment into public discourse. Although I disagree with him—I feel the college has lived up to and exceeded almost all of my expectations—I do not wish to discount the subjective experience of others. Rather, I wish to ask those that resonate with Jared’s words a question: Does the future campus seem to you like an oversold promise?

Most of you probably answer no—rather,

it is a work in progress, a promise not broken but yet unfulfilled. I think this is analogous to some aspects of student organizational life. In the same way that RC4 is temporary and imperfect, so are our policies, and the amount of student input into them. But come next semester, students will be on the committee deciding funding and policies—students from the student government, should we choose such a constitution.

We are under construction, so please do not give up. Build with us. To me, it seems clear that a well-functioning and representative student government is the keystone to our development: so come for the conventions. Disillusionment might not be a choice. But participation is. —Adrian Stymne ’17

Send your letter to the editors to yncpanopt@gmail.com by 5 P.M. on Friday for the chance to have it published here next week.

As the creator of the Hong Kong posters, I was heartened to see the Yale-NUS administration stand up for free expression on campus, and I was impressed that some members of the staff immediately went to talk to the Office of Housing Services, and inform OHS that they are not allowed to remove student posters. However, it is concerning that later, many Yale-NUS administrators dismissed the

situation as a “misunderstanding.” Censorship is serious, and words like ‘misunderstanding’ don’t convey the gravity of what it is—a stifling of discussion and debate. Yes, Yale-NUS didn’t, and doesn’t endorse censorship. But even if it is true that only one NUS employee acted alone, or misunderstood a directive, the act of censorship is still censorship. The fact is simple, an OHS employee practised censorship

when the posters were removed. Until NUS Campus Security and the Office of Housing Services stop removing student posters, there will still be censorship, no matter what the departments’ official positions on the matter are. If Yale-NUS is to have strong leadership on free expression, it has to start with recognising censorship for what it is.

—Matthew Ware ’18

panopt.org | facebook.com/panoptync | @yncpanoptCHECK OUT MORE AT: