Recently in LAUS Dialogues Category

LAUSDeanLong: Kasey, one of the things we talk about as a core value of the liberal arts is being open to diversity. This is different from tolerance, which is merely to put up with something that might otherwise be unpleasant. The liberal arts ideal involves more than that, it means to embrace diversity as an enriching part of our lives, as what gives human life texture and depth.

That is why the images we have seen of the Penn State students playing on the most insensitive and demeaning caricature of Mexicans is so disheartening. It reflects poorly on all of us and demonstrates that we are doing a poor job cultivating one of the central ideals of a liberal arts education. How are you and your fellow students thinking about and responding to this incident?

KaseyOK: I think that students are generally disappointed by this situation. While a divide seems to exist as to exactly how out of line the students' actions were, I think we have all acknowledged that the stereotypes that were highlighted were extremely offensive to us and to Mexicans. We simply wish the students had thought about the consequences of representing people of this culture in a degrading manner.

As you mentioned, in Liberal Arts we strongly value diversity and encourage all students to be open to and embrace people of other cultures. Personally, I do not believe this incident stemmed from hate; however I believe it did come out of a lack of these values which we have distinguished as being central to a liberal arts education. Looking ahead, I think we as individuals need to re-examine the way we incorporate diversity into our lives, and learn to do more than tolerate others, but to seek actively opportunities for growth through exposure to diversity.

LAUSDeanLong: You are probably right that the incident did not stem from overt hatred, but it did emerge from a culture of ignorance and xenophobia. It is probably easier to address overt hatred than it is to address more subtle and therefore perhaps more pernicious forms of racism and cultural ignorance. It is our responsibility as an institution of education to respond in ways that enable us to honestly examine and redress our own prejudices, even and especially when they are embedded in the institutional and cultural structures in which we live.

Another important dimension of this episode is the role social media played in exposing the incident. One aspect of social media that I find compelling is the way it can reveal something about ourselves to us as a community; often it reveals aspects of ourselves it is difficult to face. The public nature of social media is critical in this regard. Do you have the sense that students appreciate the extent to which their social media presence is, at heart, a way of appearing in public, with all the power and implications that involves?

KaseyOK: At this point in our lives (being in college, applying for jobs and other opportunities), I believe students are developing an awareness of this public face that social media provides. Students take steps such as altering Facebook names, creating multiple Twitter accounts, and blocking certain people from their social media platforms in order to maintain "privacy." 

The following speech was delivered by Debra Hawhee, Professor of English, to the Class of 2016 during the President's New Student Convocation on August 25, 2012.

Debra Hawhee, "The Unending Conversation," 2012 New Student Convocation, Penn State

Imagine that you enter a parlor. You come late. When you arrive, others have long preceded you, and they are engaged in a heated discussion, a discussion too heated for them to pause and tell you exactly what it is about. In fact, the discussion had already begun long before any of them got there, so that no one present is qualified to retrace for you all the steps that had gone before. You listen for a while, until you decide that you have caught the tenor of the argument; then you put in your oar. Someone answers; you answer her; another comes to your defense; another supports what you have to say; another disagrees. The discussion, however, is interminable. The hour grows late, you must depart. And you do depart, with the discussion still vigorously in progress.

This scenario was offered in 1939 by a thinker and writer named Kenneth Burke to illustrate the unfolding drama of language. Burke, as it happens, has connections to Penn State. He did a little teaching here, and when he died in 1992 the library acquired his papers. If you go into the special collections room at the library, you'll see a very large bust of him.

Burke refers to this imagined scene in the parlor as the "unending conversation."  
This unending conversation can be read as a metaphor for life, in the sense that everything is ongoing, then we arrive, and after we depart, everything will still go on.

But the unending conversation is mainly about the give-and-take of discussion, of deliberation. Conversations like the one Burke describes go on everywhere in your lives, and in the next four years, they will continue to play out in your classrooms, on your Facebook pages, and  in your civic spaces. As you well know, and as Burke knew too, these conversations can get heated; they can get gritty. They also involve everyone around us, including those with whom we disagree and those who might agree with us.

A heated--very heated--set of discussions is going on, not just at Penn State, but about Penn State. Like it or not, each one of you has been drawn into that conversation. And while that conversation may be the loudest right now, it is not the only one.

Over the next four years, you will participate in all kinds of conversations, and one of the most important things your college education will help you do is to prepare you to respond, to equip you to figure out what's being said, what values are being defended or cast aside, and what you might want to say about it all.

You'll recall Burke's scenario marks out a period of listening. Learning to listen to people who think differently from you might be one of the most important lessons of higher education. Too many people flee from disagreement, thinking it's rude or scary. But disagreement is crucial for a smart, thriving citizenry.  Taking the time to listen is crucial; listening will improve the conversation; listening will help you reflect on what is really at issue in the conversation, and it will lead to more thoughtful responses when you decide to put in your oar.   When disagreement is cast in terms of good and evil and the discussion becomes so polarized that it devolves into shouting or name calling, that's when we are in trouble.

Your education will also help you become better participants in conversations, because the courses you take here and the disciplines you study will give you ways to find out what you think and help you know when to put in your oar:  in a philosophy course you might inquire into belief itself; a history course will help you examine conversations from the past; a literature course will introduce you to some of "the best that has been thought and said";  a chemistry course will show you how to test knowledge through rigorous experimentation;  a sociology course will give you tools to learn about how people interact, and so on. All, I contend, will help you be a better participant in these ongoing conversations. You will leave here knowing more stuff, sure, but the important thing is that you leave here not necessarily knowing what to think, but how to think, how to really ruminate over hard questions, and how to do this for yourself and in relation to others who are different from you. This, to me, is the lasting value of the education you are about to begin: all the knowledge you will acquire, make, and deliberate about will help you become more thoughtful, active, respectful, and emphatic citizens in your communities, your countries, and in your world. On behalf of the Penn State faculty, I welcome you to the university and encourage you to embrace the intellectual challenges of this lively, unending conversation.

LAUSDeanLong: It is a real honor, Kasey, to continue our tradition of dialogues between the LAUS Dean and the President of the LAUC with you today. The dialogues are intended to open a space of mature and honest communication with students in which we can address issues of central concern to the College and the University. There is, of course, no more pressing issue of concern today than the recent release of the Freeh Report. 

LAUSDeanLong: Over the past two years, I have been engaged in an ongoing dialogue about the culture of drinking at Penn State with the presidents of the Liberal Arts Undergraduate Council. 

LAUSDeanLong: Returning home is always fraught with complex emotions and feelings, for you return to a familiar place a changed person.

I wonder how students are feeling about their return home for Thanksgiving this week in the wake of the complex emotional, intellectual and psychological experiences of the past two weeks.

LaurenPerrotti: Some students have already made up their minds by posting facebook statuses warning friends not to bring up the Sanudsky case. Others plan to tell family and friends that it is their week off and they are taking a break from addressing the issue. Thursday evening at the LAUC meeting, our very own Doug Dooling (@DailyDiplomat) posed the question to the council. I am fortunate that my family has been patient and understanding of both the situation and my reaction toward it. However, I know that this is not the case for every student.

LAUSDeanLong: Last week in my letter to students I appealed to Rilke who spoke about the need to "live the questions." This week, as you return home, I thought perhaps this quotation from D.H. Lawrence might speak to you as it has to me over the past two weeks:

"The cataclysm has happened, we are among the ruins, we start to build up new little habitats, to have new little hopes. It is rather hard work: there is now no smooth road into the future: but we go round, or scramble over the obstacles. We've got to live, no matter how many skies have fallen."

Our attempts to live the questions among the ruins really is difficult work. But it is work for which you all are prepared; it is the work of a liberal arts education, the work of growth and maturity. And you have resources to help you with it: your family, your professors, your friends, and our Liberal Arts academic advisers.

My hope for us this week away is that we find ways to renew our energy and refocus our attention. For when you return, we will need our collective talents, our best selves, to move forward with integrity.

LaurenPerrotti: Yes, and we thought that we might provide a space below in the comment section for students who are at home for the break who want to continue to talk through their experiences with other students on our blog. Over the course of the next week, we invite you to do just that.

In Episode 34 of the bi-weekly Liberal Arts Voices podcast, Associate Dean Long; Lecturers in Sociology Laurie Mulvey and Sam Richards; and Liberal Arts Undergraduate President Lauren Perrotti discuss the Penn State crisis.

Approximately two weeks after the release of the grand jury report on the Sandusky case, Dean Long, Laurie, Sam, and Lauren reflect on the recent events, how the campus has been impacted, and where the Penn State community can go from here. 

Laurie and Sam talk about student responses to these issues in their Sociology 119 class and their World in Conversation Project.  Lauren discusses her experiences talking about this crisis in her classes and addressing these issues as a student leader on campus.

The group reflects on the complex set of issues at hand and the variety of ways in which the Penn State community is experiencing them on individual and institutional levels. They discuss the importance of attentive listening, critical thinking, and respectful responses as the Penn State community processes and responds to this crisis.

Liberal Arts voices: Episode 34 "Talking Through the Penn State Crisis"

To subscribe to Liberal Arts Voices through iTunes, click here.

We encourage all of our listeners to write to us with comments, questions, or suggestions at laus@la.psu.edu. We may even respond to these comments on the next episode of Liberal Arts Voices.

LAUSDeanLong: Lauren, we have been talking in person over the last week or so about how to respond to the crisis at Penn State in the wake of the grand jury indictments in the Sandusky case. I have admired your leadership with students in trying to keep the focus on the more important elements of this experience: first, the abused children, then the question of an institutional culture and character that seems to have allowed abuse to continue. How are students processing all of this?

Lauren Perrotti (Liberal Arts Undergraduate Council President): Thank you for your compliment. After the news broke (and continued to break daily) about the Sandusky case, students have been facing a multitude of emotions. It is difficult to process all the major issues surrounding the case. First and foremost, it is the case itself, the horrific allegations, and the sadness we feel for the victims. Then there is the firing of a beloved figure, the responses of the administration, the swift acts of the Board of Trustees, the incessant media presence, and the lack of communication from the University to the students. As students, we are trying to comprehend everything, but it is difficult.

The recent email from you reached out to students, yet treated us as adults. Do you foresee more communication between administration and students as this long process continues?

LAUSDeanLong: When I wrote that email, I tried to think about what I would want to hear as a student ... then I checked with you. Thank you for looking it over.

Students have a lot of resources to bring to bear on this situation, and administrators and faculty have much to learn from how you are processing the diversity of emotions on the multiple levels you mention. Perhaps the sort of public, honest, mature and open exchange we are having here, and have had in the past, can be a model for ongoing student/administrative communication.

We have both tried to think about what a just and ethical response to all of this might look like. Certainly, it will require us not to lose sight of the crimes at the root of it, nor to forget the victims of those crimes who continue to suffer. But it will also require that we take up the question of institutional ethics in earnest, and not in name only.

What sorts of responses to this would you consider just and ethical?

LaurenPerrotti: I think that the best way to frame a just and ethical response is by promoting truth and respect. Over the course of the past week, we've felt in the dark and unclear about what is going on. I think that as you mentioned, these types of transparent dialogues are necessary. It is not us and them, but rather We Are all part of a community coming together as one.

It is important to treat this situation with the complexity it deserves. Thoughtful responses to the current situation include the Friday's vigil on Old Main lawn, the response of everyone at Beaver Stadium on Saturday, and the choice of the THON 2012 logo. Even the Liberal Arts Undergraduate Council (LAUC) called a meeting on Thursday to openly discuss the events surrounding Penn State and to reflect on how we are feeling.

The more we communicate and deliberate together, the more we can reach just and ethical conclusions. How are other students, faculty and staff within the Liberal Arts and Penn State community responding to this crisis? What just and ethical responses would promote truth and respect?

By now you have deduced that this series of posts tackles the welfare of the liberal arts from many different perspectives. Rob Turchick introduced the conversation discussing the worthiness of the liberal arts - indeed, all of higher education - in today's society. Sam Loewner followed by broaching the subject of value associated with education. Today, I continue down our tendentious path of discussion, focusing on the great benefit the liberal arts adds to every sector of the professional marketplace. I hope to provoke some thought on how liberal arts advocates can enhance their promotion of the skills graduates acquire in the liberal arts. Ambitious, I know.

Liberal arts graduates are certainly not feckless. Admittedly biased, I genuinely believe the skills liberal arts students acquire in earning their degrees make them some of the sharpest, efficacious employees. As Sam so correctly pointed out, people do understand the value of a liberal arts student - great writer; strong ability to think critically; broad depth of knowledge; all-in-all a very well rounded package - but, they fail to understand how seamlessly said skills (and numerous others) fit into almost every area of the professional marketplace. From geology to banking and engineering to teaching, the skills acquired through liberal arts courses, majors, degrees, etc, are not just pertinent - they are unmistakably necessary.

For example, a banker in Pennsylvania serving on the Pennsylvania Bankers Association needs to have the ability to articulate the pros and cons of potential financial legislation winding its way through the PA Senate to colleagues and shareholders alike. Humanitarian engineers working in Northern Africa need to be able to understand the geo-political ramifications of current freedom movements and how those movements may impact the viability of building a medical clinic, while teaming with entrepreneurs to introduce mobile diagnostic applications on cellular phones. In short, the skills that students master in a liberal arts education are as salient today as they were when farmer and inventor Thomas Jefferson sat down and penned the Declaration of Independence.

I'm unabashedly proud of what the liberal arts can give students; however, I am not naive. The liberal arts as a wide ranging curriculum faces unprecedented challenge in today's world. Obstinately plugging away and sharing the message with folks who already believe in the liberal arts does little to solve our current problem. What mechanisms exist for liberal arts faculty, students, graduates, and believers to promote the utility of the liberal arts? Is there an efficacious way to concertedly promote the skills mastered in the liberal arts? I invite your thoughts on my thoughts and the questions I have posed.

Rob Turchick wrote recently about how some Americans are beginning to question the worthiness of a college experience. When he originally pointed out a TIME article on the topic to me, I tried to think of a way to put a value on an education. I sought a way to prove that college is worth it and that those people are just thinking about it in the wrong sense.

I attempted to characterize an education as a tool. In a vacuum, it doesn't mean much (a hammer just sitting on the table doesn't do anyone much good). In the hands of someone who wants to use it, though, it can be very powerful. When I proposed this idea to Rob, he responded (rightly, I think) that education has an intrinsic value. Being contemplative, being able (even if you do not do so all the time) to think critically, being exposed to a community of scholarship - these are valuable things, regardless of how a person uses them.

After considering those points, I have reached the conclusion that it's very difficult - perhaps impossible - to place a value on "an education." Colleges and Universities make an effort to, but they only measure their costs: a student pays enough money to make sure the sidewalks stay paved, the dorms stay heated, and the faculty are paid for their teaching and research. Schools charge students in that manner because it's impossible - in my opinion - to gauge the value of what a student will end up doing with the knowledge and understanding of the world that she accumulates while sitting in Economics or English classes.

Some people attempt to compare the starting salaries that graduates of a certain degree make. For example, we have information that will tell us what the average sociology major spends to receive a degree. We can also guess what his starting salary will be. Although this information may be useful, it does nothing to tell us how a student changed because he took a Sociology class and now understands more about the intrinsic divisions within his home city. And that understanding - broadly termed as "the liberal arts" - is what will allow him to infer and comprehend more things about different cities and populations throughout the world.

I anticipate that you will soon see a subsequent post from a colleague and friend of mine, fellow former LAUC President Geoff Halberstadt. Until then, though, I know that there are a wide variety of views on the value of an education (or how we can value it, if we must), so I will stop here and invite debate in the comments: do you feel that we can state a value for an education? How would you value your education? Would you consider tuition and fees an appropriate numerical representation of the knowledge you acquire while pursuing your degree?

My name is Rob Turchick, a rising senior studying English and Vice President of the Liberal Arts Undergraduate Council. I write today what will be the first blog in a series of posts focused on the importance of higher education; more specifically, a liberal arts education. Recent budget cuts and (what seemed like a flurry of) disbanded majors, such as Religious Studies, have many questioning the value of the liberal arts, as well as the direction that higher education is taking. Through this series of posts, we will hear what members of Penn State's liberal arts community have to say.

At the close of the 2011 spring semester, Penn State's College of the Liberal Arts hosted a conference that served to highlight a crisis in the liberal arts, and to identify potential solutions. Personally, I think our outgoing LAUC President Geoff Halberstadt summed up the problem in question best in a blog post titled "Crisis in the Liberal Arts: Cynical Faculty":

"The problem I see lies in the turning away from a liberal arts education, and, to me at the very least, a repudiation of the values that education offers its students."

A liberal arts education instills in all of its students leadership, understanding, and ethics, and has been the foundation of higher education since its inception. It is becoming more apparent, especially now with constricting monetary limitations, that these qualities are being devalued by politicians and the public alike. A recent PEW study, "Is College Worth It?", reported that 57% of Americans believe that the higher education system in the U.S. fails to give students good value for the money that they dish out for college. Furthermore, the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices will have you believe that "preparing a state's work force for 21st-century jobs" will require the governors to wean colleges and universities from their "emphasis on broad liberal-arts education" (see Carol Schneider's article "Degrees for What Jobs?' Wrong Question, Wrong Answers" for more information). It seems to me that higher education as a whole is being criticized, and the liberal arts are sure to receive the heaviest critical blow.

This should be alarming to the entire nation, not just liberal arts students, teachers, or administrators. Liberal arts students consistently perform astronomically better than students in other areas of study in reading, writing, and analytical thinking. For some reason, these skills are being kicked to the curb in exchange for extremely narrow fields of study which have short term pay offs, but give students no real room to grow. The liberal arts provide the best avenue for personal growth and a better understanding of the world we live in, giving its students a foundation for success in any field of work. When did we begin thinking of education in terms of dollar signs and pay offs? A few other questions must be addressed, as well. How do the liberal arts contribute to society? Why does higher education have a bad name with the majority of the American public? How can we reverse these beliefs?

We are very fortunate to also be hearing from former LAUC President Sam Loewner in the very near future, who will offer his own insight into how we might measure the value of education. I implore everyone to follow along in a series of posts that will hopefully validate my belief that a liberal arts education is something to be celebrated and encourage.

I now invite everyone in the Penn State community to take part in this discussion. Please feel free to support or refute any ideas that I have put forth in the comments.

LAUSDeanLong: Since our last online Dialogue on Drinking post, I attended a Dialogue on Drinking event facilitated by the World In Conversation Project, which brought students, faculty and administrators together to have a candid discussion about drinking. The details of the discussion are confidential, but I learned a lot during the 90-minute session. It has prompted me to think a lot about questions of freedom and responsibility.

My sense is that students often frame their decisions in terms of personal freedom rather than communal responsibility. This statement, which I admit is already a massive generalization, probably applies to Americans in general, and not just students. But I am thinking right now about students as they make decisions regarding drinking. I have heard many students say something like: if I want to drink to excess, that is my business and the University or the Borough or the police should not involve themselves in what is an issue of personal freedom. Is this a fair characterization of how many, not all, students frame the issue of drinking?

Geoff Halberstadt: I think the background for your question is pretty indicative of how many students feel; however, we both know that students' reasons for drinking vary greatly: work hard...party hard, trying something new, personal stresses, and personal freedom to name just a few. But let's focus on your question: yes - this is a fair characterization of how some students frame this issue. The majority of students understand that there is a balance between personal freedom and communal responsibility. I can see this because the vast majority of students never cause problems or put an undue burden on the community because of their behavior. When that line gets blurred, we see the massive problems that dangerous drinking can cause. If we assume that students see this problem through the lens of personal freedom, how do we address this conflict between personal freedom and the personal responsibility one should feel toward one's community?

LAUSDeanLong: Perhaps we should ask: what responsibilities do you--student, staff, faculty, Borough resident--feel toward the community in which you live? Notice, of course, that in asking this, I have identified different groups of people each of which will likely have commitments to different kinds of communities. So, in asking this, let's limit it to the Penn State University Park community as situated in the Borough of State College. What does it mean to be a member of this Penn State community and what do we owe one another as members of it?

Geoff Halberstadt: I believe we, as students, owe other members (specifically, non-students) of the community two basic things. First we owe them respect as residents, members, and contributors to the same community to which we belong. Secondly, we owe them understanding. What do I mean by that? I believe we owe the other members of the community an understanding of where they come from. This includes understanding why a young family is appalled when students throw beer cans through their windows. Or why a mother is furious when a drunk student breaks into a home in which her children are asleep. Or why a property owner doesn't want garbage tossed in their garden. A basic understanding of other people's positions or situations can lead to mutual respect. A certain amount of respect goes a long way in combating problems that would otherwise arise when students aren't thoughtful of the community in which we live.

Visit the "Dialogue on Drinking" category of our blog to follow the conversation between Dean Long and Geoff Halberstadt from the beginning.

Geoff Halberstadt: The comments for our previous blog post were definitely heartening to see. I'm glad that this conversation has some traction, hopefully that focus can continue as we go forward.

LAUSDeanLong: Yes, I was very impressed by the responses to our first post and hope it provides a good starting point. One concern I have, though, is the degree to which the framework and the comments remain focused largely on the experience of students. This is understandable given that students made up the majority of respondents.

But I know that you attended the Presidential Leadership Academy's presentation to the Borough Council last month. It seems to me that some discussion of that presentation might turn our attention toward the impact of the drinking culture on the wider community. What were your impressions of the event?

Geoff Halberstadt: On Wednesday, November 10, I went to the Presidential Leadership Academy's presentation to the Borough Council. The panelists listening represented the Borough, Penn State, and students - T.J. Bard and Christian Ragland were representing UPUA.

LAUSDeanLong: Can you give us some context about how that meeting came about?

Geoff Halberstadt: Last semester, Spring '10, the PLA researched dangerous drinking in our community and presented their findings in the HUB. The presentation last Wednesday was summary of some elements of their research. The presentation focused on the the phenomenon of pre-gaming, Alumni behavior, Town and Gown relations, and alternative activities to drinking.

I'll be honest, I was disappointed in the conversation I heard. The point that was continuously made was that we must change the culture of drinking here. At one point the assertion was made that, "culture can change in 4 years." This theme of changing the culture of drinking is exactly why Penn State and the Borough will fail with whatever policies and initiatives they implement.

LAUSDeanLong: OK, that is a bold claim. Tell me more about what leads you to this position.

Geoff Halberstadt: Lets take a step back and really look at this position - it is untenable. Policy can not bring about real change when it is facing an entrenched culture like this. Any plan that begins with the premise that the University or the Borough can change the culture is doomed to failure and subsequent head scratching. We must work from the premise that we can alleviate the drinking problem, rather than eradicating it. Once the University and Borough agree to that premise then they can identify policies and initiatives tailored towards achieving that goal.

LAUSDeanLong: I agree that cultural changes are best effected from within the culture itself rather than as imposed from outside. I wonder, though, what it would mean to "alleviate the drinking problem"? If we agree that drinking will not be eradicated, then what does responsible drinking look like? What would it mean to have a community of mature student, parent, faculty, staff and resident drinkers? Perhaps we can shift the discussion by changing the vocabulary from one that emphasizes the "problem to be alleviated or solved" to one that asked "what does it mean to live a healthy, fulfilling life?"

Geoff Halberstadt: You raise an excellent question in pondering what alleviating the excessive drinking problem looks like. To me, alleviating the drinking problem requires an emphasis on reducing excessive drinking, providing relevant, appealing alternatives to high risk drinking (increased intramural sports, concerts, performances), and sound policies that educate students of the dangers in excessive drinking. Those are just a few of many plausible solutions that should be simultaneously enacted. I believe that alleviating the excessive drinking problem is a step towards achieving a "healthy, fulfilling life." I don't feel qualified to determine what a healthy fulfilling life is for everyone. How is that determined? What are the factors included in the determination? 

In the wake of a series of issues that have arisen over the past few years regarding the culture of student drinking here at Penn State, LAUC President, Geoff Halberstadt, and I began a conversation about how we as a community could best respond. We both recognize that there are productive roles for students and administrators to play in addressing the issue. But we also felt that these roles can only emerge from a genuine and open dialogue between students and administrators.

So, what began as a face to face conversation, grew through social media as we tweeted ideas and links to one another. We hope the conversation will begin to blossom here on the LAUS blog as we invite others to participate.  So please join us in a Dialogue on Drinking over the next few months.

LAUS Dean Long: I really appreciate the manner in which you responded to my tweet in September about alcohol education on campus. It reminded me of the conversation your predecessor as LAUC President, Sam Loewner and I had last spring in the wake of the State Patty's Day controversy. That discussion and your responses to my questions about alcohol awareness remind me of how insightful students are about the drinking culture on campus.

Geoff Halberstadt: Thanks for giving me the opportunity to become part of the conversation. It certainly was an interesting way for you and I to fall into this topic, but I'm grateful that we have. I recall the conversation that you and Sam generated last spring and I enjoyed following it. All too often, I feel like the conversation is dominated by the extremes, and student insight is overlooked.

Dean Long: I agree. My experience with students both in as a Philosophy professor and as Associate Dean tells me that there are many thoughtful, responsible and creative students at Penn State who have a lot to contribute about how to address the drinking culture here. Haven't leaders from the UPUA and other organizations been included in thinking through solutions?

Geoff: Yes, student leaders from University Park Undergraduate Association, Interfraternity Council, and others are brought into the conversation, but I am left feeling like many students do not enter into the conversation. For this reason, I'm thankful for the conversation you and I had, and the idea that we developed from that meeting. I believe that starting an online discussion is an excellent way for us to broach this topic with a large audience, especially students. I hope that the conversation we cultivate focuses on the issues and the community impacts. I don't want it to become banal. Hopefully, the discussion we had via Twitter can grow and be entered into by other people.

Dean Long: Me too. So, what are the issues, exactly? Maybe we can identify a number here and address them individually in posts to come. I really hope others will join this dialogue on drinking here on the blog and on twitter under the hashtag: #psuDD. What are the main issues concerning the drinking culture at Penn State that we should discuss?

Here are some possibilities Geoff and I thought of:

• How should we, as a community, respond to dangerous drinking habits? Examples: Four Loko or a student who was found sleeping on State College resident's couch.
• The new Penn State initiative to address the Drinking Culture - what is working, what are its limitations? 
• What are the responsibilities of students, faculty, administrators?