Report card

Just as every SMU student gets a grade in the classes they’ve taken at the end of the semester, the Daily Campus Editorial Board takes delight in grading university facilities and organizations. This year, we have given grades to the athletic department, the greeks, parking, Residence Life and Student Housing, the Student Senate and ourselves. Remember – it’s not whether you go to class that counts; it’s whether you contribute to the discussion.

The Daily Campus – B+

While we at The Daily Campus would like to think we produce a perfect paper, reality forces us to realize we do little to push us over the average mark. While the paper has featured more news stories and less fluff, the diversity of events, programs and organizations covered is pretty narrow in scope. Sports coverage rarely drifted from varsity sports, and Meadows (both the museum and the school) had little face time on the Arts & Entertainment pages. News pages also needed more investigative stories and better coverage of police reports and crimes on campus.

On the positive side, The Daily Campus has made it through the last four months without printing any major snafus or faux pas. We haven’t alienated any organizations, but we have mended some of the broken fences between greek life and the The Daily Campus. But the shining jewel in our crown? The Editorial Board’s persistent evaluation of the Student Senate. Without a strong system of checks and balances, no government by representation would succeed. It’s this tenacious evaluation of student government that pushes The Daily Campus up to a “B+.”

The athletic department – D

School spirit or the lack thereof has time and time again been blamed on students. Their attendance at games and their all around SMU spirit is pitiful. But the view of the Editorial Board is that the athletic department is partially to blame in this semester’s spirit catastrophe. The athletic department urged students to come to the early fall football games but when the students came they were kicked out of their seats. At an attempt to intice more people to come, the athletic department introduced the “Mustang Maniac” and halftime giveaways. The attempt is well noted but it’s hard to ignore that the “Mustang Maniac” looks like the cartoon character “The Tick” and the prizes are nothing but a cheap round of golf.

The basketball games have similar shortcomings. The cheerleaders have been moved from their typical college courtside position to a platform in the corner of the room to allow for more floor seating. When wanting to raise spirit the best thing is definitely to move the cheerleaders far from the crowd. It should also be noted that these cheerleaders are also athletes who deserve to showcase their skills the same as the basketball team. Maybe the athletic department should realize that displacing students and members of the spirit team for profit doesn’t increase school spirit.

The Greek system – P

The greeks. Well, they showed up, but like the back row in stat class, they didn’t contribute much to the conversation this semester. Each chapter went through the usual motions – the welcome back / beginning-of-semester and theme parties, late-night frat house drunk-fests and philanthropy activities. But aside from the usual, we didn’t see much action on sorority or fraternity row.

Ed Board recognizes the sororities’ attempt to energize the football team by sponsoring players (or was that just to get their numbers for date dash?), but the athletic department promptly wrecked their endeavors. And as always, we enjoyed drinking the fraternities’ beer on the Boulevard pre-game. Thanks, guys.

But what have the philanthropists been doing? IFC sponsored Special Olympics, and everyone else chipped in their bit. Everything looks the same, though.

The greeks need to spice things up. Suggestions: keep the theme parties, change the themes (Pimps and Prostitutes is no longer classic, just low-class). Emphasize your chapter’s philanthropies, and urge new members to organize different activities.

With about 50 percent of the campus wearing letters, the greeks could use their considerable influence and power to make positive changes in policy and campus life.

The parking system – F

The last time Editorial Board graded the SMU facilities, parking received an “F”, due to raised parking rates, unavailability of parking spaces, lack of senior parking and an overabundance of construction machinery. Guess what? Nothing has improved. $200 a semester is still too much to pay for unavailable parking spaces, parking garages where cars get stolen and parking lots where spaces are blocked by construction equipment. In addition, SMU seems to be doing very little to address the problem.

The results of an evaluation done by an independent consulting firm earlier this year (and only released in November) were less than satisfying; students are advised to park in the Dedman 3 Lot – the same one where several of this year’s car thefts occurred, and where cars are vandalized daily – if they have nowhere else to park, despite the distance of this lot from the Main Quad and the fact that half the lot will disappear when the Dedman Center expands. Like a student who stops showing up in class (and stupidly forgets they’re still enrolled), SMU parking receives another “F.”

RLSH – A-

As hundreds of first-years and returning upperclassmen headed toward Dallas, their belongings shoved in boxes and strapped onto the roofs of their overweighted cars, many arrived to find that there was no room at the residence halls. Despite beginning the year with overbooked accommodations, RLSH reorganized on-campus housing in creative ways. By temporarily placing residents in old apartments and some with their resident assistants, everyone had a place to sleep on the night of their arrival. Within a few weeks everyone was placed in a permanent home of their own.

The office’s staff deserves to be commended for finding homes for all the residence hall refugees in an expedient and efficient manner while remaining calm in a potentially stressful situation.

It’s a shame that we had to say goodbye to the man at RLSH’s helm this October as Eddie Hull moves to take over a similar organization at Duke.

During his time here, Hull molded the residence halls from the typical university dorms to community centers with frequent in-hall activities, well organized RA staffs, and hall councils. With SMU aiming to mold itself after benchmark schools like Duke, it’s a comforting sign that our campus is producing quality leaders such as Hull that will do just as well at any benchmark as they did during their tenure on the Hilltop.

The Student Senate – B-

As the semester draws to a close, it falls upon the Editorial Board to weigh the performance of the Student Senate over the past several months. This semester saw the Senate struggle with issues regarding minority retention, the proposed expansion of the non-discrimination policy to include transgendered persons and an election scandal whose effects still linger. A flurry of activity in recent weeks improved the Senate’s meaningless memorial bills vs. real legislation ratio – which is a step in the right direction. However, the pace of Senate so far this year is still best described as sedentary.

But overshadowing the activity of the last month is the election scandal, and the Senate’s reaction to it, and to criticism of its procedures.

A more representative example of the Senate’s posture towards the rest of the campus could not have been designed. The election scandal exposed a Senate that is arrogant, disdainful of criticism and anti-democratic. The Senate’s own actions have shown that major changes are needed in the very structure of the organization. The Senate needs to be reminded that its role is to lead, not to rule.

The Senate needs to come down off its pedestal, to become more responsive and more transparent. It needs to commit itself to acting in a democratic manner from here on out – and a good start would be the passage of a rule that requires the Senate to make public the vote results of all future Senate elections.

While the Senate did little wrong this semester, aside from their handling of the election controversy, they did little right, either – in fact, the Senate did little at all. For that reason it is impossible to grade them too harshly, but at the same time unthinkable to grade them leniently.

The Editorial Board will, therefore, simply split the difference, and give the Student Senate a “B-” for the semester, with the hope that next spring will see an improvement in momentum, focus and openness, so that come May we might be able to revise this mark to an “A.”