Path to Victory

February 8, 2010 • By The Breeze Editorial Board,
Print This Post
Email This Post

Congratulations all around on the most recent developments surrounding the late-night bus service to Student Services Committee of the SGA and the JMU student body.

Thanks to the SGA for putting together a useful survey that allowed the voice of the entire student body to be heard. We also extend our praise to all students who took the time to sift through the multitude of e-mails requesting survey responses and actually filled this one out. The survey clearly showed that taking away the late-night bus service has not served the stated purpose of curbing student drinking.

With the survey results in hand, JMU can make an informed decision about what to do with the late-night bus and attempt to balance the campus’ image as a “party school” with student safety — two issues which so often seem opposed.

The Breeze cannot help but think that the more students are treated as adults, the more likely they will respond as adults to the issues confronting our community. As noted previously, by retaining our current “three-strike” policy, the university is clearly on the right track, allowing students to handle a first strike without parental notification. However, the administration’s conduct concerning the late-night bus is a departure from this line of thought. We look forward to the next logical steps in finding solutions based on student input.

We’re not convinced JMU is any more of a “party school” than any other resident, four-year undergraduate institution, and we firmly support the continuing effort of all university branches to treat students as adults.

Filed Under Opinion

Share |

Comments

One Response to “Path to Victory”

cut in the middle on February 12th, 2010 12:31 am

The true problem is the desire of the JMU students that want the school to be a party school and thus push to the limits of all extremes. If this school is no more of a “party school” than any other resident, four-year undergraduate institution as stated in the editorial, then there should not be a push within the student body to go beyond that.

The other cause of the problem is the tendancy of high school and non JMU students (townies) to frequent JMU parties and create unsafe environments. It appears that this issue should also be looked at in addition to the actions of the student body. JMU may be having its reputation pushed by non students and a connection is worth being examined.

Got something to say?