Princeton Review

The Princeton Review released its college rankings list August 1 and CMC took top spots in flattering categories, including Happiest Students (#2), Best Quality of Life ( #4), Best Career Services (#7) and School Runs Like Butter (#7).  The full lists are available here.

The Princeton Review book, which profiles the best 300+ colleges in its yearly publication, is a trusted staple for helicopter parents, prospective students, and college administrators.   But the unscientific methods used to create the venerated lists suggest our adoration may be misplaced.

The rankings are calculated by current student surveys.  Here’s Princeton Review’s official word on methodology:

“Most questions offer an answer choice on a five-point scale: students fill in one of five boxes on a grid with headers varying by topic (e.g. a range from “Excellent” to “Awful”). All of our 62 ranking lists tallies are based on students’ answers to one or more of these questions with a five-point answer scale. Some questions on the survey are open-ended and offer students the opportunity to answer with narrative responses.

Once the surveys have been completed and the responses stored in our database, we tally the results. Our methodology and the math by which we calculate our ranking results are quite simple. Each college is given a score (similar to a GPA) for its students’ answers to each multiple-choice question. These scores enable us to compare student opinion from college to college. They are the sole factors that determine which schools make it onto our 62 ranking lists.”

Of course, a rank near the bottom or the top of the pack has some truth to it.  Yes, our professors are accessible, perhaps too accessible when they wander through North Quad on a Thursday night.  But we’re #5 in “Lots of Beer” and UC Santa Barbara is #20?  Is our standing meant to imply that there is more beer consumed per capita at CMC than Santa Barbara? Anyone who believes that, to speak proverbially, clearly has had too much to drink.  That’s up from #13 since last year, but our alcohol policy has only become more restrictive.

CMC, at #8, outranked Scripps in the “Dorms Like Palaces” category.  If the category was “A Dorm is Like a Palace,” then perhaps CMC’s Claremont Hall could give Scripps’ GJW a run for its money.  But no one would doubt CMC’s founding fathers had utility, not luxury, in mind when designing North and Mid Quads.  Save a few hinges, the dorms could have been tipped on their sides and hosed down after a keg tap gone wrong.  Compare this to Scripps, where the sheer number of clinging vines may be enough to qualify it for a feature piece in Martha Stewart Living. The dorms also boast stained glass windows, coincidentally the window material favored by those who live in… palaces.

Forbes

CMC ranks between Harvard and Yale in the Forbes ranking.

The new Forbes Magazine college rankings were released on August 11 and soon became linked and liked all over Facebook.   The Forbes rankings system is its infancy–it’s only three years old–and the magazine is admittedly still working out flaws in methodology, which may explain dramatic year-to-year changes.  CMC moved from #27 in the “Best Colleges” list to #9 in the span of one year, placing it between Harvard (#8) and Yale (#10).

The rankings here are compiled from a combination of student opinions, including 17.5% from RateMyProfessors.com, and objective data, including alumni salaries from Payscale.com.

But the factors included range in legitimacy. Under “Postgraduate Success” is the outright absurd measure of listing of alumni in Who’s Who in America, featured only ten years earlier in the same magazine as “The Hall of Lame” for containing “a lot of relatively unaccomplished people who simply nominated themselves.”  This makes up 10% of a college’s score.

Since last year, they’ve dropped faculty awards altogether from consideration.  Previously, faculty awards made up 8.33% of the rankings.  They’ve included new variables to measure alumni success and default rates on loans.

U.S. News & World Report

The only rankings to get a school-wide email shout-out from President Gann, the U.S. News Rankings released yesterday are the gold standard in college rankings.  They’re also the most methodologically rigorous, incorporating objective measurements as well as subjective evaluations by students, peer institutions, and high school counselors.

The much-anticipated rankings varied only slightly from last year, despite changes in methodology that diminished the influence of ratings by peer institutions’ college presidents that attempted to quantify the reputation of the school.  In 2010, Claremont McKenna was ranked #11 on the list of best liberal arts colleges, a position shared with Vassar College.  In 2011, CMC retained its spot at #11 but has edged ahead of Vassar.   Pomona College, #6 last year, also remains at #6, suggesting to consumers that the methodological changes were not as dramatic as expected.

In 2011 the magazine placed more weight on graduation rates, increasing the measure’s weight from 5 percent to 7.5 percent of the final score.  High school counselors are now given a say and college officials’ opinions will receive less weight to accommodate them.

High honors or cheap sales?

“Top” liberal arts colleges formalized their objections to college rankings by circulating a petition in September 2007 agreeing not to use rankings in promotional material. Notable signatories included the presidents of Amherst, Carleton, Haverford, Wellesley and Pomona Colleges.

In a wide-ranging interview conducted last year by Forum Editor-in-Chief Michael Wilner, Pomona President David Oxtoby discussed his position on college rankings. Although he does think rankings in general have helped all liberal colleges by placing them among larger, well known schools including Ivies and public universities, he wished colleges and prospective students would place less faith in them.

“They have absurd claims to being scientific, which is really frustrating,” Oxtoby said. “On the other hand, the idea of protesting is a waste of time.  So I did not agree to the boycott. I think the reputational rankings are probably more valid that the rest of the survey components.”

He added, “I think we’re under-ranked. We should be higher.  In different ways, the other [Claremont] colleges may be under-ranked as well.”

President Gann had a different approach to the boycott, which she articulated in an interview with Inside Higher Ed.  Gann claimed that CMC only makes “very limited use” of rankings in promotional material, and that her objection to the boycott was the fundamental fissure it would create with the college’s core philosophy.   “Claremont McKenna College is very committed to free markets and individual choice,” she was quoted, “For-profit publications and rankings are what they are in our free-market economy.”

Staff Writer Sara Birkenthal and Editor-in-Chief Michael Wilner contributed to this article.

The main windows of Collins Dining Hall were painted over last night.

Late last night, “Fuck CMC” was painted on the main windows of Collins Dining Hall.

Pomona students are alleged to have committed the act, based on a continued graffiti trail back to the Sagehen campus. But Dean of Students Mary Spellman said there is no evidence to support this claim, and said that Campus Safety was continuing an investigation into the matter.

“I just received a report this morning,” Spellman said, adding she knew nothing else of the event.

The incident comes in light of a long history of similar episodes. CMC students infamously broke into Frary Dining Hall and defaced Prometheus years ago, and Pomona has damaged the Flamson Plaza fountain outside the Athenaeum in recent past.

The graffiti, which included phallic imagery along with the slur, was promptly cleaned up this morning. Today is one of two major on-campus days for prospective students.

A year and a half ago, several of my cohorts and I decided to embark on a mission to discover the greatest burrito and taco within a fifteen minute drive of the Claremont Colleges.  Very quickly, we realized that this endeavor would be no small task.  Although we have visited upwards of 40 different eateries thus far—dining at at least one new restaurant a week—there does not appear to be an end in sight.  In fact, it seems that each time we cross a burrito joint off our list, a new one opens for business.  Nonetheless, we will not stop until we find a clear, definitive answer to our essential question.

We have developed an elaborate rating system to objectively measure the gustatory experiences of our hunt. This involves three categories—the tortilla, the inside (whatever happens to be inside the tortilla), and other (be it price, atmosphere, salsa bar, a TV playing a soccer game, etc).  In addition, our research team is divided into beef burrito evaluator (Taylor Berliant), vegetarian burrito evaluator (Kris Brown), and the Taco Man (Julian Martinez). Each category is given a score from each researcher, 1-10, and the results are complied on a spreadsheet.  Our findings have proven fascinating and invaluable to anyone who wishes to be exceptionally full yet phenomenally content in life.  Here are the standouts thus far:

1) Candelario’s Market, 580 East La Verne Avenue, Pomona:

Candelario’s has its own meat market, which may explain its scrumptious selection of chicken, carne asada, and carnitas.  They also have an outdoor grilling area, providing the entire neighborhood with a better aroma than any flower, perfume, or candle could ever provide.  Overall, heavenly.

2) Lily’s Tacos–2128 N Garey Ave, Pomona:

The little screen ordering window, the non-English-speaking cashiers, the outdoor-only seating, the military surplus store next door, and the authentic menu items all give this little burrito stand more character than any other restaurant in our search.  Plus the food is absolutely delicious.  It is hard to walk away from Lily’s after a meal and not be in a fantastic mood.

3) Rocco’s Taccos–669 Indian Hill Boulevard, Pomona:

We were fortunate enough to visit Rocco’s during its grand opening.  And it did not disappoint.  They scored especially high in the “inside” category, with some of the best meat and sauces we’ve had.  We recommend the Monster Burrito.

Last Place) Pupuseria Cuscatleca--900 East Holt Avenue, Pomona:

This is arguably the worst restaurant in the world.  A few lowlights of the meal: forty-five minute wait for our food; water and all other beverages had a very odd chemical taste; there was a 98% likelihood that the taco meat was originally packaged beef jerky and a 100% likelihood that the rice was from the Chinese restaurant next door (we witnessed the delivery woman bring our waitress a take-out bag, and minutes later we had fried rice on our plates and in our burritos); beans nicely in the shape of a can; and lastly an ensuing three hour stomach ache.  We have suspicions that this establishment has a covert purpose, as many people came in during our meal to inquire about “signing up,” yet did not order any “delicious” food.  Further investigation required.

There will certainly be more riveting discoveries to come.  But in the meantime, I encourage all to sample our findings.  Feel free to scrutinize our research, or provide any suggestions that you may find yourself.

Author Jonathan Lethem will begin teaching creative writing classes at Pomona in Spring 2011.

The position had remained unfilled since Professor David Foster Wallace’s death at age 46 in 2008. The previous chair was called “the best mind of his generation” by notable film-critic A.O. Scott of The New York Times. He was, by most accounts, a beloved teacher who left a long shadow over the position. His 1996 work, Infinite Jest, was named one of the 100 best English-language novels since 1923 by Time.

Lethem is a well-decorated author in his own right. He is the recipient of the National Book Critics Circle Award for Fiction, the Salon Book Award, and the MacArthur “Genius” grant. Newsweek included Lethem in its “Century Club,” a list of 100 people to watch in the twenty-first century. The New York Times called his most recent novel, Chronic City (2009), one the ten best books of the year. Lethem’s fiction is notable for skirting the edges of various genres, including mystery, sci-fi, and western, while maintaining a literary bent. He has contributed to The New Yorker, Harpers, and Rolling Stone, among others.

The hire comes at the end of an intensive search process that involved more than 75 applicants. The other finalists considered for the position were Chris Abani, a Nigerian poet and author who now teaches at UC Riverside, and Edie Meidav, a professor  at Bard College. An initial candidate, Junot Diaz, author of the Pulitzer Prize winning novel The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao, withdrew his application for personal reasons. Lethem has the highest name recognition of the finalists, but he has less teaching experience than either Meidav or Abani. He also lacks an Master of Fine Arts.

Pomona was able to pry Lethem away from Brooklyn, New York, his home for most of the past decade and the setting for much of his recent fiction. Lethem and his family will move to Claremont either over the summer or during the fall of this year, and will begin teaching for the Spring 2011 term.

“The Six”

“I would judge me too if I saw this list,” notes Kathryn.

1. Chasing Pavements, Adele
2. About God, Gor Mkhitarian (As my friends know, this is a great pump-up party jam.)
3. Street Lights, Kanye West
4. Nick of Time, Bonnie Raitt
5. Satellite, Dave Matthews Band

2. What is your quirkiest quality?

Oh man, is it sad when everything I do could be taken as really weird? Here are a few:

• I love to sing with people, but whenever I start a singing it usually it turns into me singing at people rather than with them.
• I’ll start skipping anywhere and everywhere even when it is inappropriate to do so.
• I’ll also try to rally my friends around my Armenian pop music whenever we go out…they still don’t think it’s cool.

3. What do you consider your greatest achievement?

Killing six people last year in Assassins. I had high hopes for this year, but I died within the first five minutes of the game.

4. What is something you learned from your family?

From Grandpa Harold: Always check the expiration date on the Arby’s coupons before going to dine. In my family, we don’t like to pay for the second roast beef sandwich.

5. If you could be a character from a book, movie, TV show who would you be?

Mrs. Frizzle from The Magic School Bus. No question.

6. What is your favorite unknown tidbit about CMC?

Apparently a famous serial killer, Randy Kraft, went to CMC and lived on the second floor in the eastern most suite of Green. Why do I know the specific suite, you may ask? Good question. We’ll leave it at that.

What was your experience in theater prior to Without a Box?

Kathryn up to her usual antics during a performance with Without a Box.

In high school, I was a drama kid. I went to an all-girls high school and one might think we would import guys from other schools to be in our plays, but oh no. Girls played the guy parts. There were girls in my high school who would usually be typecast as ‘the hot guy’ or ‘the funny guy’ or ‘the freaky weirdo guy.’ Yeah, I fell in that latter category. I played a guy in every high school play I was in.

Having never really done improv before, how did you get involved with Without a Box?

Flashback to a Saturday morning in October of my freshman year at CMC. I was out to brunch with my mom in the Village and I got a call from a family friend of mine, Byron Yang, who was a junior at CMC at the time. He started to explain that the 5C improvisation group, Without a Box, was holding try-outs at that moment at Pomona. He thought I would really enjoy it and told me that I should get my butt over there. So, after my mother and I scarf down our breakfast burritos she dropped me off at Pomona. Walking into the try-outs 45 minutes late, I was given the dirtiest look from all of the current members of the group, but I guess they liked me.

What inspires you to be so hilarious, charismatic and outgoing?

Haha, you’re too nice! For me, it is definitely the audience. One of my duties as director is to warm-up and to energize the audience for the performance. I need to have that bubbly stage persona ready to go for each show on stage. As performers, we find it amazing how intensely you can feed off of the energy of the audience while you are in a scene. To be honest, I can’t truly explain this enigmatic energy, but it is this odd liveliness that comes from the audience’s suggestions for scenes as well as their  responses to what we do on stage whether it is laughter, gasps, screams etc.

What do you love most about performing with Without a Box?

The group of people I do ‘prov with. I have always had this philosophy our improv can be considered a team sport. We practice three times a week, we watch ‘game tape’ (literally we watch our show from the previous Friday and break it down), and in order for us to be successful we have to trust each other. With that said, the members of Box are some of my best friends here and I love every silly, inappropriate (sometimes), or loony minute with them. By having a core group of individuals I have the utmost respect for, I find that my job as director becomes so easy. They’ll support me and challenge me in most everything that I do and I can’t ask for anything more.

What is the hardest thing about doing improv? Do you get nervous?

I think the hardest thing for me is to let go of things that I do wrong in a scene, or a ‘bit’ as we call it. Think about it this way: in a show, if you totally crash and burn in a bit, nobody thought what you did was funny, you didn’t make sense, or you offended about half the audience, you absolutely cannot let that bother you in the next bit that you are in. The show must go on, without you worrying about that scene you did 20 minutes earlier. Again, it goes back to my sports team comparison, you really have to get up, dust yourself off and keep trucking because when you give up, you let the rest of the team down. I don’t get as nervous as I did when I was a freshman. I get the little butterflies in my stomach before going on stage. My first show as a freshman, I was on Pomona’s campus and I saw my director, Jamie. He turned to me and said, “Shouldn’t you go be throwing up in a trash can right now?” Needless to say, I was very nervous for that first show, but at this point I now have probably have at least 40 shows under my belt, so the butterflies have dissipated.

How do you guys prepare for shows?

We have three rehearsals a week. The new kids to our group, or “Moops” as we call them are required to come to that third rehearsal with me, but the rest of the older members only need to come to two rehearsals. We hold auditions in the fall for new cast members and we usually take about two to three new members. The new Moops are then trained for the first semester and do not perform in shows, but instead have a show in the spring where they are knighted as full cast members. The Moop-hearsal is meant to really hone and perfect the improv skills of the new kids and get them up to speed with the rest of the group. Rehearsals in general are broken into two parts: we have a warm-up period for about 20 -30 minutes and that entails us doing word association games, singing games, clapping games etc. One of my personal favorites is ‘butt tag’ which is basically a large game of butt tag where one person is it and everyone walks in a jovial jumpy fashion with their butts sticking out. After we complete our warm-ups, we then jump into working on the bits we want to do for the show. We have singing bits, short bits, and long form bits.  One of our personal favorites is Armando in which we get a one-word suggestion from the audience and off of that particular suggestion one of the cast members tells a true story relating to that word. We then create a series of scenes based off of that story and continue that until another cast member thinks of another story to build scenes off of.

What is the most hilarious thing that happened during one of your shows?

Prior to my “Moop show” or my first show as a full cast member, I along with my two fellow Moops (Asa and Duncan) were required to memorize “The Walrus and the Carpenter” and we were told we had to perform the entire poem for the audience at our show. We nervously prepared the piece, constantly being told that we would look like fools if we didn’t have it memorized. At the start of the show, the three of us were blindfolded and the program went on. In the final moment of our introduction we were all dressed in 80s prom dresses and placed in front of the audience. Over the microphone our director said that we had something very special prepared for the audience, so we geared up for our poem. There was a silence. All of a sudden “Crank That” by none other than the famed Soulja Boy came over the sound system. The older members of the group knew that I knew the entire Crank That dance, so the three of us proceeded to ‘Crank That’ for the audience. It was silly.

Do you want to pursue improvisational acting or is it just for fun?

Definitely just for fun! I love improv and it has given me a lot of important skills, but I don’t think I can pursue it as a career.

What has been the most meaningful part of your experience doing improv acting and performing in shows with Without A Box?

Hands down, meeting the people that I work with in Box. They are such interesting, intelligent, caring, and funny people! I wouldn’t trade them for anything. On a different note, I now possess a skill to jump up in front of an audience and come up with something to say that makes sense and is entertaining and sometimes its neither of those things, but I just roll with it. I now love not knowing what is going to come out of my mouth. I may fail miserably, but it’s the risk I want to take.

To see some of the Box shenanigans, check out their YouTube channel here. Head over to Seaver Theater at Pomona on Friday, May 7th at 8pm to see Kathryn perform in Without a Box’s last performance this year!

This year's choice for Pomona commencement is Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, whose immigration policy has aggravated a group of graduating seniors. Above: preparations for commencement 2009.

The group consisted of two Pomona students, Nick Gerber PO’10, Andrew Halladay PO’10; Suzanne Foster, head of the Pomona Economic Opportunity Center; an organization offering organizational and advocacy skills for day laborers; Jose Calderon, Professor of Sociology and Chicano/Latino studies at Pitzer; and Jose Diaz, a day laborer and organizer. The response originates from community members who have been organizing against some of the polices enacted by Napolitano in her capacity at Homeland Security. In particular, they have focused on the 287(g) program and the Secure Communities program, which empower local police forces to carry out immigration duties, and automatically verify every arrested person’s criminal and immigration records, respectively. The ACLU has urged Immigration and Customs Enforcement to halt implementation of both programs, and claims on their website that, “quite contrary to the program’s name, Secure Communities has the potential to greatly reduce public safety.”

Due to these policies, the group requested that Napolitano’s invitation to speak be rescinded. Group members were encouraged by Oxtoby’s acknowledgement that there have been some changes in Napolitano’s role since the invitation was extended nine months ago, and his willingness to discuss the issue with senior faculty and trustees. But they admit it is unlikely the offer will be revoked. “It’s a bit late in the game, so we’re just trying to raise awareness. [Oxtoby] has a responsibility to his trustees and his people, but we feel we have a responsibility to the community,” said Gerber. Oxtoby, when asked for comment said, “I had a good meeting with some thoughtful students and community members and they shared their concerns with me.”

Though group members wish to announce their displeasure at Napolitano’s impending arrival, they assured the Forum they have no plans to disrupt the commencement ceremony. Said Gerber: “[we] don’t want to ruin anyone’s graduation. It’s not about targeting families, or students, it’s targeting her, and her policies.” The group will focus on raising campus awareness and informing students, with an emphasis on seniors, of their views on the issues raised by Napolitano’s policy initiatives.

Claremont McKenna ranked #1 in the Daily Beast survey on happiness.

No surprise. The Daily Beast released its ranking yesterday of the “100 Happiest Colleges in America,” and Claremont McKenna came out on the very top. CMC was followed by Harvard, Pomona and Rice.

The blog’s methodology measures the quality of student life using a mix of data from College Prowler, a popular college review series, and U.S. News & World Report College Rankings, the premiere college ranking source. Between the two, the Daily Beast rankings take into account campus housing, dining and nightlife, student indebtedness and retention rate, the number of clubs on campus, and the weather climate.

Take a look at the full rankings here, as well as the most stressed out colleges in the country here.

My advice as a departing senior is to make friends at other colleges, take advantage of the resources at all the colleges, and appreciate that you aren’t at a tiny liberal arts college stranded by itself in the middle of nowhere.

Yes, certain members of the colleges do stupid things from time to time. Two years ago, Debra Wood, the Scripps College Dean of Students, sent an e-mail to the Scripps College student body complaining about a “racist party theme” at CMC held by the class of 2010. This party, hosted by Class President Isayas Theodros, encouraged students to wear white clothing because there would be a blacklight. Earlier that year, (mostly) Pitzer students engaged in a ridiculous protest of Karl Rove.  During that same year, Harvey Mudd’s Dean of Students made the bizarre decision to report to Campus Safety writing on a whiteboard that said “Hillary is a foxy lesbian.” Just recently, Pomona’s The Student Life published the wrong commencement speaker for CMC’s graduation this year.  For its part, CMC’s administration recently decided to ban non-CMC students, except for a guest list, from Thursday Night Club.

As unfortunate as these incidents are, they are clearly the exception and not the rule.  The reality, however, is that most of the people who attend the Claremont Colleges are good people. Sure there are jerks everywhere, but stereotyping across campuses is way too common at all of the 5Cs. Furthermore, almost all the stereotypes reflect the different colleges of 5-10 years ago much better than they reflect those institutions today. All of the 5Cs have similar values and fairly similar students and we cooperate in tons of academic, extracurricular, and social activities. There are important reasons a good percentage of Claremont Colleges students applied to multiple colleges, transferred between colleges, or take a lot of classes with mixed student populations.

The Claremont Colleges are excellent institutions, but we would all be even better if we integrated more and were less hostile towards one another. In my experience, most people at the end of the day seem to understand this and treat the rivalries as a fun tradition that amuses us. There are some people, however, who take these pointless rivalries way too far. They vandalize property, harass peers, or get in petty disputes with people from other colleges for really dumb reasons. Don’t be these people and don’t let your friends be these people.

Pomona's Walker Wall, the College's only "free" space for graffiti work, has been subjected to two conflicting visions this past week.

And so it is with our story today, the case of the Walker Wall Vandalism. For those of you unfamiliar with the setting for our story, Walker Wall is the south-facing stone wall that surrounds a grassy courtyard near Frary Dining Hall. On the street-facing outside, it’s a shade of unassuming slate gray. But like so many things in life, it’s what’s inside that counts. Student organizations from all campuses use the interior of the wall as a canvas, advertising for events or sending messages to the student body. But it’s not just for student organizations. Walker Wall has become a symbol of free speech: any student in possession of some paint and a good idea is allowed to put something on the wall, presumably. Obviously there’s an unspoken code of conduct: don’t paint over someone else’s stuff, unless it’s really old. Students, for the most part, respect said code.

It was on a fine spring day not too long ago that one such student group, the Queer Resources Center, utilized Walker Wall to kick off a month’s worth of activities and seminars for Gaypril. The QRC spent a solid two days painting a bright rainbow down the length of the wall. The painting of the rainbow, which has been QRC Gaypril tradition for some time, required an extensive amount of effort and work on the part of the QRC staff and members. In 2009, the rainbow remained untouched for many months on the wall, brightening the courtyard and raising awareness on behalf of the QRC.

Yet the 2010 rainbow found its unadulterated tenure cut short. On the morning of April 4th, the wall, including the rainbow, was found ransacked by a host of crudely-scrawled phrases: many of them banal, many of them offensive.  Red plastic cups and painting paraphernalia littered the quad.

The QRC reacted quickly. It was then I was contacted by Caitlin Feeney of the QRC, asking that the CMC Forum become involved in the investigation. An email sent out by QRC made it clear that those who were responsible would pay for their vandalism:

It is not the responsibility of the queer community to repaint the wall and sweep this incident under the rug. If Claremont becomes unsafe for certain groups, hiding it will not help. If there is going to be any event in response to this, the QRC—busy with its own events this April—does not want to expend time and resources doing damage control. We demand that the perpetrators of this vandalism accept responsibility and respond with action. (Read the full text here.)

Who is to blame for such things? Were the perpetrators Pomona Students, CMCers, or perhaps those troublesome Westies from Harvey Mudd? The Claremont Colleges are all too familiar with graffiti-related controversy. Lest we forget the dire incident in the spring of 2009 when some unknown outlaw scrawled “Scissor Me Scrippsies” and “Dick-tation” on the asphalt near the Motley to the View coffee shop. Could those culprits have struck again?  It seemed as though the case had gone cold.

But then the Forum, utilizing its contacts in the 5C underworld, came across a magnificent discovery: the perps had apologized! Not only had they apologized, but they had actually sent an email intended to ameliorate the situation before the QRC issued its email condemnation of the night’s crimes. They wrote a lengthy email regarding the incident, still while remaining anonymous. Leaders of Bev Scavvy claim that instead of a maliciously-intended attack on the QRC and “other” groups on campus, the incident was simply a misunderstanding during the Bev Scavvy, a hilarious night of 5C debauchery organized by a shadowy, nameless group of students. They offered forth this explanation of events:

We understand that many of those associated with the QRC—and many supportive students from around the Claremont Colleges more generally—were both sad and angry to find that the Rainbow flag only recently painted on Walker Wall had apparently been defaced over night.  Although at this point the writing has already been done, we would like to make it clear that none of it was in any way directed at or related to the QRC, Gaypril or the queer community of the Claremont Colleges.  The writing occurred specifically because of one of the clues on the scavenger hunt list, which asked students to find, make, and do certain things throughout the Claremont Colleges and the surrounding area.  The clue in question read: “Your team’s name, written as large and indelibly as possible on Walker Wall.”  Teams chose team names prior to receiving the list of clues (prior to finding out that they would be writing these names on Walker Wall), as we required teams to choose names in order to register for the event. (Read the full text here.)

Mind you, this solitary paragraph was just one of the lengthy apology sent to the QRC earlier this week by the anonymous organizers. The homophobic, sexist, and racist slurs scrawled upon the wall? Those were the names the students had given their teams.

If this situation were as simple as it appears, it would seem logical that the organizers of the Bev Scavvy would come forward and reveal their true identities. Unfortunately, Pomona’s tyrannical drinking policy doesn’t permit such events. Their rule-enforcing body has taken a harsh stance on organizers in previous years even though alcohol consumption is only optional. (Several years ago, one of the clues was to find a receipt for $0.47. When Pomona learned of this, it searched through Coop store transactions in order to fine everyone who had rung up a $.47 transaction that night.)

The situation seems to be an unfortunate misunderstanding. Sure, everybody makes mistakes, but just because you issue forth a glowing, heartfelt apology doesn’t mean that those offended will have to accept it.  Questions remain to be answered: Did the QRC overreact to the innocent scribbles of college students? Will the anonymous perps be forced to come forward for this vandalism? Will the QRC accept this apology? Will the rainbow be fixed by well-intentioned students? Can you really vandalize a graffiti wall?

The roadblock to union-forming stems from a argument over which type of voting process will decide the issue. The staff-only group Workers For Justice has proposed a card check system, while Pomona’s administration favors the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) process. The NLRB is an independent agency tasked with organizing union elections.  At its best, this system is the most democratic for the cause. But it can also be vulnerable to employer intimidation and long delays. Card check neutrality is a voting process that bypasses the NLRB, instantly forming a union when over 50% of employees vote in favor. This system is faster and less likely to be dominated by employers, but it instead can lead to intimidation by union organizers. To date, neither side has been willing to compromise on the voting method.

Student anger has only grown at Pomona since the movement began to unionize dining hall workers.

Though the distinction has not always been clear, there are in fact two organizations working in consort. The first is Workers for Justice (WFJ), a dining hall staff group pushing for a union through the card check neutrality procedure and non-intimidation agreement. Their student counterpart is Students in Solidarity with Workers for Justice (SSWJ), a student organization led by student organizers.

I find myself sympathizing deeply with the goals of SSWJ. Yet even as a signer of the SSWJ petition, I am worried by their rhetoric and methods. The group advocates an all-or-nothing approach and refuses to compromise with the administration on any of their key issues. While their dedication is certainly admirable, not everyone who supports the workers takes such a hard line. By making the cause ‘with-us-or-against-us’, Students for Solidarity forces many students, myself included, to either side with their demands or to leave the issue behind.

As an organization, we should credit them for the effectiveness of their campaign. In their underlying goal to provide a voice for the staff workers, they have undeniably succeeded. The organization has been covered in local newspapers and on several prominent blogs including the Huffington Post.

Still, many students feel that the administration is being unfairly vilified. While the administration has been unwilling to compromise on the card check issue, they have been receptive to many of the concerns and demands of WFJ. President Oxtoby has written three major emails to the Pomona community responding to concerns, and clarifying his administration’s position regarding the unionization process. This week, he plans on sitting down with dining hall staff to discuss staff concerns. Because of this apparent openness by the administration, many students worry that if the rhetoric and tactics used by Students in Solidarity do not change, the same alienation of the college community may result. In particular, I refer to the SSWJ’s stance against compromise on card check neutrality.

I am not arguing that the workers themselves should necessarily compromise on the issue. Maria R. Garcia, a Pomona dining hall worker for ten years, was one of the first members of staff to unite behind the proposed union. She believes that card check is the only solution. She said, “With NLRB they get all the power. It could go on for years. With the card check, it’s our voices, it’s our decisions.” There have been many reported instances of poor treatment of staff workers, including injury neglect and unpaid overtime. Garcia worries that without a union and card check, workers will be forced out of the conversation in the future. “We can’t be doing this every year. They need to give us a chance to work things out.”

Many on campus are also concerned about the seeming lack of division between Workers for Justice, the staff group, and Student in Solidarity with Workers for Justice. The distinction has gone unnoticed by many, including the recent article “Working For Workers” in the Claremont Port Side. This confusion has many consequences, not the least of which is that were the two groups the same, it might appear as though the students were exerting too much influence upon the workers’ decisions. Sam Gordon PO’11, media spokesman for Students in Solidarity, admits issues like these weren’t discussed appropriately in first wave of publicity but remains optimistic that the organization’s message and role will be more clearly defined.

“We were a little frantic and didn’t know the nuances of what we needed to do,” said Gordon. ”Since spring break, we’ve had the opportunity to refocus and we’ve been a lot better about making the distinction between students’ roles and workers’ roles.”

So what needs to happen? Both Pomona’s administration and SSWJ have roles to play. The administration can gain a great deal of credibility by admitting that the NLRB method of union creation has flaws, and explaining why, in spite of these, they believe that it is still the best method in these circumstances. SSWJ should continue their move away from direct representation of workers and towards their newly clarified goal of supporting the workers in their actions without necessarily taking a stance on the unionization process. Privately, several members of SSWJ have said that they believe that the NLRB process, if initiated at Pomona would likely form a union in a reasonable time.

As one member who wished to remain anonymous stated: “The workers have every right to demand the card check process, and we ought to let them have the voice to do so, but we can stand behind the staff without necessarily standing behind everything they say.”