It is important to me to seen as reasonable, logical and
effective.
As an Area Coordinator in the Department of Housing and
Residence Life, I am responsible for the First Year Program – that is, I am
consistently viewing the experience of newly-initiated adults into what they
understand to be “the real world”. I have quickly recognized that the
perceptions of young adults about what college is and the goals of a collegiate
community do not align with the standards and procedures the real world
follows. In many ways, it is my job to show them the inconsistencies between
college and the real world – college policies are indeed more restrictive than
laws – and I find it necessary to elaborate on why there is such a stark difference.
For example, students are not allowed to smoke on campus. Federal
law states those over the age of 18 can smoke legally. Why would a university
restrict the rights they have as Americans?
I can relate to such reasoning. In my past (and still) I have
been (infamously) deemed an activist, a rebel rouser, and a muckraker. I
strongly believe in the individual rights of people and the right to live one’s
life freely without interference from others. I often rely on appeals to
emotion, namely in the form of this statement: “If _____ doesn’t affect your
life, why should you care if I do it?”
As I reflect upon my personal thought of individualism, a
response calls within the back of my mind. Is my general statement valid? Perhaps
I want to believe that anyone should be allowed to do what they want to do
because I want to do whatever I want to do. For example, I want to speed for I
can get to my destination. I do not think my speeding affects anyone else. Does
anything we do only affect us? I fail to consider how others may feel unsafe on
the road because of my speeding. There may be new drivers who are nervous and
fearful of my careening around them. Even on a macro level, I refuse to notice
how speeding increases exhaust, which adds contaminants to the air that my
community breathes in. Speeding decreases my miles per gallon, increasing (ever
so slightly) our nation’s dependence on oil Slippery slope? Perhaps. There are
also solutions. I should leave earlier. I should shower at night. Perhaps there
are legitimate purposes for why I should stop driving fast, and they are why
there are driving laws. Someone is trying to protect me from myself, and
protect society from people like me. The same goes for our university ruling on
smoking. But what is the purpose of
our policy?
We care because it does affect us as a university and our
reputation could go up in smoke if we are not preparing our students for their
reality. I was thoroughly educated on reasoning for this policy; it is clear
that the University has analyzed the benefits to enforcing this rule. Our
school is unique in such pointed specialization of studies. In the aerospace,
engineering and aviation industry, many top companies are smoke free. Union
Pacific, DuPont, Dow, Boeing, Texas Instruments and Sharper Image and others
have tobacco-free policies. Why would we allow our students to blindly enter
fields carrying blunt detrimental habits [pun intended]? I defend our stance
with facts, devoid of my personal opinion. It would make sense for STEM-focused
careers to take such a stance: smoking has been proven hazardous to both active
smokers and non-smokers through secondhand smoke. On both college campuses and
in the workplace, smoke is a common allergen and just particle of ash on
clothing and nearby material can irritate others. Cigarettes smell foul and can
be offensive to others who may need to share facilities with smokers.
Thinking about the specifics of how my explanation will resonate with the students in important to gaining understanding. As Nosich states in his appeal to being precise, I flex from general to specific reasoning for an institutions actions for making policy. College and work environments save money as smoke-free
facilities. Maintenance costs go down when companies do not have to worry about
cigarette butts, matches and ash on their premises. When a long-term smoking
employee or housing resident leaves, their office may smell of tobacco, and
companies need to spend more time and money cleaning (and possibly replacing)
this furniture. They also do not have to provide separate receptacles for smokers
to dispose of their butts. Where the likelihood of an accidental fire and spread
is high, a policy prohibiting smoking avoids costly damage to the community as
a whole. Life and health insurance usually ask if employees are smokers.
Smokers have higher policy rates than non-smokers. In both the classroom,
residence hall, meeting room and bathroom, those who smoke may be stereotyped
as unhealthy, unclean or unsympathetic to those who they expose their irritants.
We protect our students and staff from health problems,
protect the facilities from unnecessary wear and damage, and lower operation
costs, which directly benefits students. No one wants tuition to rise.This conjecture of thought appeals to the average student's (an consumer's) non-critical thinking standards - appealing to personal benefit. I also appeal to the circumstances that are attention getting. Imagine
the millions of dollars in planes alone that could go up in smoke by someone
failing to put out a smoldering tobacco product! This example is particularly
relevant to the Prescott campus, as only a little more than a year ago, a
forest fire occurred across the street from campus, killing 19 firefighters.
My job is to teach outside of the classroom, the decorum
needed to function as a member of society, as a leader and as an employee.
Being reasonable to complaints about why policy is as it stands allows me to
see where the complaints the students make originate from while also seeing the
usefulness of such policies. Being logical allows me to convince them that they
policies that may land them in my office today may allow them to keep their
dream job (and good health) in the future. Exercising effectiveness notes that
I will be clear in my purpose; I will not waste a student’s time with telling
them information that is not relevant to them and their future. Though students
may not always want to hear what I have to say, my job is to successfully
represent the purpose and mission of the university, which is to retain our
students until they complete a degree program, and disperse competent STEM
leaders out into their chosen career field.
References
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2010). Implementing a Tobacco-Free Campus Initiative in Your Workplace. Reviewed at www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpao/hwi/toolkits/tobacco/index.htm
Suskie, L. (2004). Assessing student learning: A common
sense guide. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc.
Nosich, G. (2012). Learning to Think Things Through. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (2005). CDC Tobacco-free Campus Policy. Reviewed at
www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpao/hwi/downloads/CDC_tobacco_polic y.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment