Noticias relacionadas con la Innovación Educativa
La Autoridad Fiscal examina las becas universitarias: concluye que se pagan tarde y son escasas para quien vive fuera
Two bills introduced within the last month seek to address foreign espionage targeting academic research as Congress continues to pay more attention to this issue and collaborations involving China and Chinese nationals in particular have come under increased scrutiny.
The Protect Our Universities Act, introduced Tuesday by Senator Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican, would require students from China, Iran and Russia to undergo background screening before participating in designated “sensitive research projects.” An interagency task force led by the Department of Homeland Security would be charged with maintaining a list of sensitive research projects funded by the member government agencies.
Hawley plans to introduce the bill as an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act, which is currently being marked up in the House and Senate. He said in a statement that American universities are “key targets of espionage and intellectual property theft by not only China, but Russia and Iran.”
“For too long, these countries have sent students to our universities to collect sensitive research that they can later use to develop capabilities that threaten our national security,” Hawley said. “This bill takes much-needed steps to ensure our research stays out of the hands of foreign adversaries who are proactively rooting for our failure.”
Members of Congress, the White House, national security agencies and federal science agencies have all significantly stepped up scrutiny of foreign research links over the past two years, with much of the scrutiny focused on China.
Speaking to the Council on Foreign Relations in April, Federal Bureau of Investigation director Christopher Wray described China as posing a bigger threat than any other country. “China has pioneered a societal approach to stealing innovation in any way it can from a wide array of businesses, universities and organizations,” Wray said. “They’re doing it through Chinese intelligence services, through state-owned enterprises, through ostensibly private companies, through graduate students and researchers, through a variety of actors, all working on behalf of China.”
The increased scrutiny has raised concerns about racial profiling of Chinese students and scholars and about a chilling effect on collaborations with Chinese institutions. One Chinese American scientist fired by Emory University for allegedly failing to disclose Chinese funding and ties is publicly disputing the charges against him. Bloomberg Businessweek published an article last week about the resignation of a top cancer epidemiologist from the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and the targeting of ethnic Chinese scientists for extra scrutiny.
Higher education groups say they share the government's concerns about safeguarding U.S. research, but they warn that taking an overly restrictive approach will harm U.S. science, which is highly international.
Tobin Smith, vice president for policy at the American Association of Universities, said he thinks the Protect Our Universities Act proposed by Hawley takes the wrong approach to addressing these issues.
“It ignores that we have mechanisms already in place to safeguard research,” Smith said. “Those mechanisms are classification, export controls and what we call controlled unclassified information. It seems to us that this would create a new category of sensitive research projects, which is very vague and hard to understand. Historically, National Security Decision Directive 189, issued by President Reagan in the '80s, said the primary mechanism for control of information should be classification system, and to the maximum extent possible fundamental research should be kept open.”
“This bill would require background checks of individuals who would be working on fundamental research that is intended to be published and made accessible to the public,” Peter McPherson, the president of the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, said via email. “International students already go through a visa process. Creating another process would unnecessarily complicate research projects that will ultimately be published online and viewable across the world.”
Both AAU and APLU support a different bill, the Securing American Science and Technology Act, or SASTA, which was introduced in late May by Representative Mikie Sherrill, a Democrat from New Jersey and chair of the House Science Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight.
A number of major higher education and scientific associations have endorsed SASTA, as have dozens of research universities, who wrote in a joint letter that the bill takes “a proactive and sensible approach to safeguarding federally funded research and development from growing threats of foreign interference, cyberattacks, theft and espionage.”
The bill would direct the director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy to establish an interagency working group “to coordinate activities to protect federally funded research and development from foreign interference, cyberattacks, theft or espionage and to develop common definitions and best practices for federal science agencies and grantees, while accounting for the importance of the open exchange of ideas and international talent required for scientific progress and American leadership in science and technology.” It also would establish a new National Science, Technology and Security Roundtable to encourage information exchange between academia and federal security and science agencies on these topics.
“There are serious and legitimate concerns about academic espionage at our universities,” Sherrill said in a statement. “That’s why we’re proposing a unified approach to protect research without creating overlapping or contradictory federal requirements. We have to get this right. We must protect our innovation and research while maintaining the international engagement and demonstrated value foreign students bring to our institutions of higher learning.”
AAU’s Smith said that SASTA has been included in the current House version of the NDAA, which appears poised to be the vehicle through which legislation affecting science and security issues will be advanced.GlobalEditorial Tags: Science policyInternational higher educationForeign Students in U.S.Is this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: Display Promo Box:
Roosevelt U students take to social media to complain about a professor of theater they say has long been "abusive"
This article contains explicit and potentially offensive terms that are essential to reporting on this situation.
The floodgates opened at Roosevelt University’s Chicago College of Performing Arts this month, with numerous students and alumni complaining on social media that a professor and longtime associate dean there had harassed them or their peers and had otherwise been "toxic."
Additional concerns have been raised about the climate within the college for underrepresented students.
Questions remain as to how the alleged behavior went unchecked, if it did, and when the university became aware of the allegations. Multiple students have said that more formal complaints against the professor, Sean Kelley, went nowhere or were dropped by the university.
Kelley did not respond to requests for comment. The university says it’s investigating the allegations.
Complaints about Kelley began to appear on social media after one former performing arts student, Netta Walker, wrote a lengthy public Facebook statement upon receiving a local Jeff Award for her work in Chicago-area theater. Walker, who is black, wrote that the fine arts program at Roosevelt is “abusive.”
“This university taught me that I was less than my peers in the following ways: they did not cast me, they chose white male-dominated seasons, they deliberately did not try to utilize me, they refused to cast outside both the racial and gender binaries, and taught exclusively white theatrical history,” Walker wrote. “This program is still heavily run by white men, and has not changed any of these practices.”
Walker said she didn’t care if her post upset her former professors or broke her ties with the college.
“I’m already comfortable not claiming the institution, and it seems they feel the same in regards to me,” she said. “I refuse to stay silent about the brainwashing that students are faced with daily.”
Tatyana Sampson, a college alumna, then started an online petition targeting Kelley, in particular. Kelley has “for years” been “known for his inappropriate sexual harassment and behavior towards many of the young men” at the college, she wrote, sharing a photo of an allegedly underage person that Kelley had liked on Instagram. “It is not our job as students to have to fight this, our primary job is learning; but when other higher ups neglect to do anything I find it my duty, as an alum, to say something.”
Next, student Laney Yancey shared her own Facebook post about her experiences studying under Kelley.
“Going to acting school for me, was, and continues to be, a dream. I am from a small town in Kentucky, and have always longed for my college days when I could learn more and more about this art form that has given me a deeper purpose in this life,” she wrote. While her first year delivered on part of that dream, it also “opened my eyes to deep systematic issues that exist [within the college]. These issues had me often feeling enraged, deeply saddened, and confused.” Kelley, in particular, “has created and perpetuated a toxic culture and has been a figurehead in abusing his power in an environment that should be founded on trust, safety, and vulnerability.”
Roosevelt’s performing arts school is a conservatory-style program. And conservatories are known for their intense, demanding and sometimes unconventional teaching methods. But the behaviors that Yancey and others have described go beyond unconventional or demanding.
In Yancey’s acting class alone, she wrote, Kelley allegedly said that she and a classmate “looked like we would have great sex.” While preparing Yancey for a scene, Kelley also allegedly “screamed until he was red in the face, while repetitively calling me bitch. Both of these instances were in front of an entire classroom of my peers.” He allegedly told Yancey that she was a “walking counseling center” when she asked for help with a scene and, in another instance, “threw a chair, slammed several cabinet doors, and then used the exact words of, ‘Slap that cunt,’ while ‘coaching’ a male student in his scene with a female student.”
To other students who also shared their experiences in posts or comments on social media, Yancey said, “I am so proud of all the voices that have been vigilant in posting their own experiences. We do not live in a world where men in power get excused anymore.”
Kelley has not commented publicly on the allegations against him and did not respond to requests for comment over several days.
The college on its Facebook page said, “Please know that the university is now aware of the allegations and is in the process of investigating them." It added, “Please know that the university takes complaints very seriously and also that the university strictly prohibits retaliation.”
Roosevelt “values every member of its community, including current and former students, faculty, and other staff,” the college also said. “It is important to us that these matters be investigated promptly and thoroughly, and that members of our community feel comfortable voicing any and all concerns. We will provide updates on these matters when/as we are able.”
The post provided contacts to make formal complaints. Some students have complained that the contacts don’t yield responses. Others have asked if the university is also investigating the climate concerns raised, beyond Kelley specifically. Some also say that the university was previously notified about Kelley, directly, but did nothing.
Nicole Barron, university spokesperson, also said that the university recently became aware of the allegations on social media and takes them “very seriously.” She confirmed that Roosevelt is investigating but declined additional comment, including as to whether Kelley is on leave.FacultyStudentsEditorial Tags: FacultyMisconductImage Caption: Sean KelleyIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: College: Roosevelt UniversityDisplay Promo Box:
Last fall, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos released a proposed Title IX rule that many observers said would lead to fewer reports of sexual misconduct on college campuses.
The state Legislature in Texas, however, has taken a starkly different approach. In the legislative session that wrapped up last month, lawmakers passed a flurry of bills that will put new pressure on colleges to address campus-based sexual harassment and assault.
One demands that colleges provide more resources to students and survivors of sexual assault. Another requires institutions to annotate a student’s transcript if they are asked to leave campus for a nonacademic reason.
The third, and perhaps most consequential, would add new criminal penalties for campus officials who fail to report sexual harassment or misconduct to their institution’s Title IX coordinator -- to the consternation of civil libertarians and some survivor advocate groups. They would face a misdemeanor and termination by their institution. Colleges would also have to compile and publicly disclose those reports. Institutions that fail to do so could also face fines of up to $2 million from the state’s higher ed coordinating board.
Texas governor Greg Abbott, a Republican, signed all three bills into law over the past week after each of them passed both statehouse chambers by wide margins. The mandatory reporting legislation passed without a single no vote.
The approach of that law in particular is being criticized by civil libertarians, who said it defines harassment in an overly broad manner and threatens due process. Advocates for sexual assault survivors, however, said the punitive approach to accountability is misguided and doesn't address the substance of the problem on campuses.
No state has gone so far as to demand reporting of sexual misconduct on campuses. And lawmakers in other Republican-dominated states have advanced bills over the past year to restrict colleges' response to sexual assaults or to reflect the proposed Trump administration rule.
The new campus reporting law also tees up a potential conflict with requirements outlined in regulations crafted by DeVos, who is expected to issue a final rule later this year.
“There isn’t any question that this is a distinct path from the approach taken under Obama and DeVos,” said Peter Lake, director of the Center for Excellence in Higher Education Law and Policy at Stetson University.
Under guidance issued by the Obama administration, colleges were expected to investigate complaints where they “reasonably should” have known about misconduct. In practice, that meant instructors were expected to report incidents they became aware of. But the proposed Trump administration rule says colleges only are liable for looking into incidents when they have an “actual knowledge” of misconduct. Students would have to report to an official like a Title IX coordinator with clear formal responsibilities. But a disclosure to a professor wouldn’t put a college on the hook for an investigation.
The new law in Texas goes the other direction.
The Baylor Effect
Campus sexual assault became a hot-button issue under the Obama administration, which pushed colleges to seriously address misconduct for the first time. And DeVos’s decision to roll back federal guidance issued in 2011 and 2014 and to craft new federal regulations on campus-based sexual misconduct has helped elevate the issue for many state legislators.
In Texas, however, the Baylor University sexual assault scandal that eventually led to the ouster of Baylor’s head football coach and president provided a special impetus for lawmakers to take tough action on campus sexual misconduct.
A 2016 report produced by the law firm Pepper Hamilton assigned much of the blame for mishandling of sexual assaults by Baylor football players to former president Ken Starr. Starr, the report said, failed “to provide consistent and meaningful engagement with Title IX.” A series of stories by ESPN found that the university had sought to keep quiet a number of physical and sexual assaults committed primarily by football players.
The transcript notation law was crafted in response to another Baylor case, in which a former fraternity president withdrew from the university after he was accused of sexually assaulting another student at a party in 2016 and later transferred to the University of Texas at Dallas. The student, Jacob Anderson, faced sexual assault charges but pleaded to a lesser charge of unlawful restraint.
After a public uproar over Anderson's case last year, UT Dallas president Richard Benson complained that the university had no knowledge of the accusations against Anderson at Baylor.
A version of the campus reporting legislation introduced in the previous legislative session would have added criminal penalties not only for campus officials, but also for student employees who fail to report sexual misconduct. College groups did not actively oppose the legislation and higher education leaders are examining their institutions’ policies to ensure they comply.
“It is critical that the public, including students and parents, are aware of any potential safety threats occurring on campuses,” State Senator Joan Huffman, the law’s author and a Republican from southeast Texas, told her colleagues during the session.
But advocates on campus misconduct issues fault the legislation for potential negative consequences and failures in its broad approach.
Joe Cohn, legislative and policy director at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, called the Texas campus reporting law “egregiously problematic.”
“This is a perfect recipe to create an environment that is devastating to both campus free speech and due process,” he said.
FIRE had urged Abbott to veto the legislation.
Cohn said the law uses an overly broad definition of sexual harassment that's at odds with the more narrow definition adopted in the Trump administration's proposed Title IX rule. And he warned that attaching criminal penalties would lead campus officials to report minor incidents to protect themselves from individual liability.
The law directs colleges to designate officials with whom students could speak confidentially about sexual misconduct. But Cohn and other critics said that doesn’t mitigate broader concerns about the language.
Laura Dunn, who founded the nonprofit SurvJustice and was instrumental in the crafting of federal guidance under the Obama administration, said she wasn’t opposed to accountability measures for campus officials who fail to report misconduct.
“It’s really going to come down to how schools implement it,” said Dunn of the mandatory reporting requirements. “It definitely provides an incentive for schools to have very significant training.”
But other survivor advocates rejected the approach of the legislation.
Jess Davidson, executive director of End Rape on Campus, said the campus reporting and transcript notation laws are solutions produced by well-meaning individuals who don’t understand potential unintended consequences of the policy changes. Adding more accountability for individual officials and institutions won't seriously address sexual misconduct without broader changes to policies and resources for survivors. Those policies could include more training for first-year students, due process for alleged victims and accused students, and accommodations on campus for survivors.
“We can’t just assume that if we add more accountability things will change,” she said. "We know reporting rates are extremely low. That's because so many pieces of the system are broken.”
Ashka Dighe, a University of Texas sophomore and vice president of the campus chapter of It’s On Us, a national organization that seeks to end sexual assault, said she was impressed with the bipartisan focus on tackling campus sexual assault during the legislative session.
“The overall goal of the bill was to protect survivors and prevent instances of sexual assault from happening,” she said. “I just think the way they approached this should have been different.”
Rather than adding criminal penalties to hold employees responsible for reporting misconduct, Dighe said the Legislature should push colleges to provide more resources to students who experience assault or harassment.
The American Association of University Professors has opposed mandatory reporting requirements, including in comments submitted to the Education Department on the proposed Title IX rule last year.
“These kinds of policies have a strong negative impact on faculty members in particular because of the negative effects on the teaching and advising relationship they have with students,” said Risa Lieberwitz, general counsel at AAUP.
Adding a criminal penalty for campus officials only exacerbates existing problems with the policy, Lieberwitz said.
Survivor advocates found more to like in the approach of another new law authored by State Senator Donna Howard, a Democrat from Austin, would mandate that colleges craft policies dealing with sexual harassment and assault, as well as dating violence and stalking. They would also have to lay out a process for reporting allegations and accommodations for victims. Davidson said by making small tweaks to various parts of the college system, the law could increase reporting without including tough penalties for individual campus officials.
Cohn of FIRE said that legislation also used overly broad definitions of harassment and said the procedural protections in the legislation were too sparse.
But Davidson said the law would have a positive impact by focusing on student experiences on campus rather than just an institution’s response to misconduct.
“Criminalizing school employees is not the kind of accountability we’re seeking when everything else in the system is set up to make it harder for survivors to report,” she said.Students and ViolenceEditorial Tags: Federal policySexual assaultState policyTitle IXImage Source: Getty ImagesAd Keyword: Title IXIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: Display Promo Box:
Politicians (mostly conservative) have perpetuated a narrative of college students, even before the election of President Trump. They have depicted campus activists as "snowflakes," overly sensitive, irrational and unbending in their beliefs. It is a depiction that has caused lawmakers to zero in on college campuses in a new way. Trump himself signed an executive order barring federal funds to colleges that do not meet free speech obligations.
Panic Attack: Young Radicals in the Age of Trump (St. Martin’s Press), the first book from Robby Soave, a rising young libertarian author and editor for Reason -- a libertarian publication -- does little to dispel these myths. The book is out this week.
In Soave's view, many of the causes for which these students fight are being marred by unnecessary infighting and political correctness, or with sexual assault issues and overreach by the federal government in telling institutions how to adjudicate such cases.
Soave delivers blazing critiques of progressive student activists -- their fondness for "trigger warnings," for instance, which he writes can be invoked regarding virtually anything uncomfortable. He said in a recent interview with Inside Higher Ed, though, that his intent is not to portray the situation on college campuses as a “crisis.” Rather, Soave said, he is trying to help moderate-to-center Democrats identify warning signs. Soave said he hopes these liberals will see the scenarios unfolding and will step in before free speech rights are further “trampled,” to ensure due process in college sexual assault proceedings is restored and no longer disregarded in “kangaroo courts.”
Soave said he was inspired to write about these issues following a series of incidents in 2015. The first were the racial protests at the University of Missouri at Columbia that exploded into the national forefront, and the second involved two Yale University professors. Nicholas A. Christakis, and his wife, Erika, resigned from their positions as head and associate head of Silliman College following an email Erika sent to students questioning whether Yale should be policing offensive Halloween costumes.
After he started writing about higher education more, Soave said with his libertarian background he was concerned by the language students were using in some cases -- particularly those attending elite colleges -- that seemed to suppress the views of those with which they did not agree. He said he was worried by the fact that some students consider free speech "harmful."
This manifested in a number of ways, in Soave’s opinion. He continually refers to the faults with intersectionality in his book, not as a concept generally but how it is applied to activism, he said.
For instance, if feminists do not consider a black woman’s view or a transgender woman’s view, then they are not “being intersectional” and can be excluded from the movement, Soave said. He identifies the Women’s March as an example of this conflict among feminists, in which certain advocates were angry more women of color and trans women were not involved in organizing it.
This unwillingness to hear out certain opinions is much more evident in Soave’s free speech chapter, though. Here, he discusses how the Free Speech Movement, which originated at the University of California, Berkeley, originally benefited liberal activists. He questions why students do not seem to support the concept of free expression.
He said that students seem to believe that free speech -- and in students’ views, offensive speech -- can actually inflict harm and jeopardize safety. Soave runs through some of the more significant shout downs of controversial speakers, namely Charles Murray, a social scientist many view as racist, who was drowned out at Middlebury College in 2017.
Soave also discusses how the anti-fascist movement, commonly referred to as antifa, has encroached on campuses in violent ways. This was most notably the case at Berkeley, where outsiders who subscribed to antifa caused widespread destruction, literally setting part of the campus ablaze when Milo Yiannopoulos, the former Breitbart editor, attempted to speak there in 2017.
Though Soave does note that many of these perpetrators were unaffiliated with the campus, the image he creates of Berkeley is particularly unflattering and consistent with conservatives who feel that free speech is being suppressed. Soave links the students to this behavior, saying they did not want Yiannopoulos on the campus.
In the interview, Soave acknowledged that the Berkeley students were the ones who were not violent -- but that didn't matter -- "they still didn't want him there," he said. Soave does not note that the administration publicly stated that Yiannopoulos had a right to speak on campus and devoted resources to trying to make that possible
Soave said he does not want to promote “absolute alarmism." He does not feel free speech has reached a crisis point (Soave disagrees with the Trump free speech order) but he also believes what is happening on college campuses might “trickle into” workplaces, such as media companies and elsewhere. Soave pointed out that The Atlantic swiftly cut ties with Kevin Williamson, a longtime National Review staffer and arch-conservative, following 2018 backlash against his public statements. Most notably, Williamson posted on Twitter that abortion should be treated like homicide and those who seek abortions should be subject to the death penalty, preferably, in Williamson's view, by hanging.
Soave is unclear where this crisis attitude comes from -- he said he does not believe, as some other pundits do, that liberal professors are brainwashing students. On the contrary, Soave said in his research he found that professors are terrified to broach certain subjects in the classroom for fear of running afoul of the more outspoken progressive students who might take exception to their lessons, even in an academic sense. But he does maintain that some disciplines are more “activist oriented,” such as gender studies and those that study other races.
“I have tried to convince conservatives that I think the liberal professor theory is wrong,” he said.
Soave is more harsh and absolute in his criticism of the Obama administration's rules around Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which were largely credited with providing more protections for sexual assault survivors. While Title IX practitioners have continued to defend Obama’s guidance around the federal sex antidiscrimination law, saying that the guidelines were strong but institutions may have misinterpreted them, Soave wholeheartedly does not support them. In the book, Soave writes that he does believe sexual assault "is all too common, on campus and off."
"The debate is over the size, scope and shape of the problem," Soave wrote. "With activists often taking the most extreme position that patriarchal forces systematically oppress and violate women, particularly women who are, for identity-based intersectional reasons, extra susceptible to marginalization."
He said that the guidance, which came in the form of a Dear Colleague letter in 2011, caused institutions and administrators to overstep and has resulted in some truly farcical Title IX cases. Obama’s guidance was rescinded by Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, who offered new draft regulations that have yet to be approved by the department. They largely undo the Obama rules and give more latitude to colleges and universities in investigating and adjudicating such matters. Soave said that he’s not particularly optimistic that administrators will change much of anything around Title IX -- in fact, they are likely to double down on their practices given the public’s sensitivity to sexual assault.
Soave said (without data to back this up) that the adjudicators who sit on Title IX panels have a natural bias and tend to side with those accusing others of sexual assault.
“Automatically believing the victim and the application of that mind-set to these cases is disastrous,” Soave said.New Books About Higher EducationEditorial Tags: BooksFree speechTitle IXIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: Display Promo Box:
Living on campus and away from home for the first time, many college freshmen are susceptible to crimes like burglary and theft. But on some campuses, security personnel are trying to help students learn crime-prevention tactics early on.
In recent years, many campuses have started or expanded programs to prevent sexual assault of students. But the crimes many will experience relate to theft, which is why some colleges are stepping up programming on the issue.
According to data from the National Center for Education Statistics, there were 6,716 reported burglaries in campus residence halls and 5,299 reported in other areas of campus throughout the U.S. in 2016. There were also 1,106 total on-campus robberies. (Robbery is when an assailant induces someone to hand over their property, while burglary is when someone steals property while the owner is away.)
With all these in mind, some universities are working to ensure students have all the tools necessary to avoid theft when they arrive on campus.
At Winston-Salem State University, a historically black college, crime-prevention learning is incorporated specifically into a required freshman classes, taught by a campus police officer.
“Like many college campuses, larceny is the most reported offense on campus,” Winston-Salem spokesperson Jay Davis said in an email. “This includes students leaving or misplacing student ID cards. To address this issue, WSSU’s Police and Public Safety are taking a layered approach.”
The issue of stealing wallets -- not just in the hopes of finding cash but credit cards as well as student and government IDs for the purpose of identity theft -- has become an increasing trend at universities, according to John Ojeisekhoba, campus security chief at Biola University in California. Ojeisekhoba said along with increasing issues of identity theft, stealing wallets with student IDs can allow criminals swipe-in access to areas of campus where they can find more valuable items to steal. Consumer Reports found there was a 20 percent increase in reported identity theft among college students in 2017.
“The trend coming up is mostly wallets, because you can go easily to any store and use someone’s card,” Ojeisekhoba said. “From a student’s single wallet, there are financial gains -- if there’s money or a card in the wallet, if there’s someone’s ID, that’s icing on the cake for identity theft. Bad guys also know students keep their student ID card in their wallets. They can come back to the campus, access more areas and steal more stuff.”
In 2017 Ojeisekhoba was the recipient of the National Clery Compliance Award for his efforts at Biola. As at Winston-Salem State, Ojeisekhoba said informing students early is key to crime prevention, as freshmen are often targets.
“We do things in different phases,” Ojeisekhoba said. “The orientation information is generic but also has in-depth details. For the orientation, we cover the current crime trends on college campuses.”
At Winston-Salem State, the freshman experience is littered with moments of learning about crime prevention. In addition to the mandatory class, Davis said students periodically break into smaller sessions about crime prevention during the weeklong freshman orientation prior to the start of classes.
As Ojeisekhoba prepares for the arrival of a new freshman class, he plans to keep them up-to-date on the growing issue of bike theft, which he said is on the rise due to the ease with which bikes can be resold. Ojeisekhoba even tested as many available bike locks he could find on the market in order to determine which would be best for students to use and determined that a metal U-lock is preferable. Biola will now hand out 200 free U-locks to students who agree to register their bikes with campus security.
Ojeisekhoba said in his experience, informing students early on about crime trends at their university poises them to be more successful at crime prevention.
“Sometimes we’ll have events in dormitories to make sure we’re reaching freshmen beyond the orientation,” Ojeisekhoba said. “It’s helpful for us and for them to use this medium to educate freshmen.”Image Caption: John Ojeisekhoba of Biola UniversityIs this diversity newsletter?: Newsletter Order: 0Disable left side advertisement?: Is this Career Advice newsletter?: Magazine treatment: Trending: College: Winston-Salem State UniversityDisplay Promo Box: