Antisemitism at LSE

An attempt to brand Israel as an "apartheid" state by students at one of Britain's leading universities fell by just seven votes last week. But members of the Jewish and Israel societies at the London School of Economics may have to return to the students' union debating chamber after a challenge to the conduct of the ballot. The union's constitutional committee is understood to have called into question the 292-285 vote against the motion, although a decision was not due to be announced until yesterday.

The resolution - whose proposers included the head of the students' Palestine Society - called for a campaign to lobby the LSE and the National Union of Students to "divest from apartheid Israel". More than 600 students - six times the usual attendance for union meetings - cast their vote, which was held by secret ballot rather than a show of hands to prevent intimidation. But the union's returning officer received complaints that some students had been unable to get into the crowded hall to hear the debate, and that ballot papers lying around may have been used by people not entitled to vote.

The result of the debate, however, buoyed Jewish students, who had only 48 hours to mobilise opinion after learning that it was to take place. Marilyn Carsley, president of LSE's Israel Society, said that there had been "a lot of anti-Israel rhetoric" on campus recently and that the outcome of the debate had been "uncertain. We were all on edge." Sam Cohen, an MA student, who led the campaign against the resolution, said: "The response has been phenomenal. Jewish and non-Jewish students proudly opposed extremist language at LSE and have shown that we want a moderate, sensible and constructive debate around the issues of the Middle East. "I really hope this is the last time people try to polarise the student body in this way."

An editorial in this week's LSE student newspaper, The Beaver, commented: "The LSE has been in real danger of alienating Jewish and Israeli students, and this motion was another example."

When new students arrived at the London School of Economics last autumn, they received a welcome pack from the students' union that would have been distinctly unwelcome to many Jewish freshers. Its contents included a letter from two union officials, one the head of the Palestine Society, telling them of the union's twinning with the West Bank university, An Najah, and accusing Israel of having killed 800 Palestinian children. It was a taste of what was to come. Pro-Palestinian campaigners have turned up the heat on Israel over the past year, sporting "Make Apartheid History" T-shirts while handing out leaflets denouncing the Jewish state. "It is time for us to call Israeli apartheid by its name and press our universities to divest and stop funding it," Palestine Society head Ziyaad Lunat told the JC this week.

But the intense lobbying "has made a lot of Jewish students feel intimidated by the atmosphere this year", said Sam Cohen, an activist in the Jewish and Israel societies. "They feel particularly targeted because the anti-Israel voice is so loud, extreme and polarising." There are 36 Israeli postgraduates and three undergraduates at LSE, according to an official website aimed at encouraging applicants from the country. But one third-year Israeli postgrad, Lior Herman, said he would now think twice about advising compatriots to join him. "I would definitely recommend LSE for academic reasons, but the atmosphere among students is not so pleasant."

If last week's resolution labelling Israel as apartheid had passed, Mr Herman believed that many Jewish and Israeli students "would have found it hard to be members of a student body that says if you don't agree Israel is an apartheid state, or side with the boycott, you're not one of us." Ms Cohen said that Jewish students had come to her in tears, for example after the term "apartheid" had been "tossed around in class". An MA student in human rights, she said that in one of her own classes, "I have heard students accuse Israel of genocide, ethnic cleansing and of being an apartheid, racist state."

Source





Low grades cost 87 SUNY students their dorms

Rather a good idea

SUNY Old Westbury has removed 87 residential students from their dormitories for having grade point averages below 2.0, enforcing a policy that appears to be the only one of its kind on Long Island. The policy has been blasted by faculty and students, but an administrator said Friday that the rule -- which he described as an effort to raise academic standards -- would continue. "Our goal is to have students with us who are serious about their studies," said Michael Kinane, assistant to the president.

The students were removed from their dorm rooms last month. The Faculty Senate then unanimously passed three resolutions seeking to have the policy suspended, largely because that group feels it is inconsistent with best practices and disproportionately impacts freshmen, said Faculty Senate chair Maureen Dolan, a mathematics and computer science professor. "I have not heard yet a single faculty member support this policy," she said. Twenty-three of the evicted students did not register for the spring term, Kinane said.

Sandy Pierre, 20, of Brooklyn, who said she is a junior, said she received a letter during winter break that she would have to leave her dorm because her grade point average was 1.9. "It came as a shock to me," said Pierre, who wants to go into public relations and said she is on the school's dance team. "I was thinking of withdrawing from this semester, which I don't want to do." Pierre said her mother now drives her to and from campus each day, but the travel is taking a toll. "I am enrolled, but it's really hard for me to actually have to commute," Pierre said. About 1,000 of the school's 3,500 students live in dorms.

The policy has been in effect since at least 1994, Kinane said, but had not previously been enforced. University president Calvin O. Butts III had sought to do so two years ago, Kinane said, but didn't feel the school had communicated it well enough to students. As the fall semester began, students received letters and each dorm had a meeting about the policy, Kinane said.

The overall grade point average for Old Westbury students is 2.83, down from 2.84 in fall 2006, Kinane said, while the freshman class score from fall 2007 was 2.87, up from 2.80 for the previous year's class. It is too soon to tell how the policy impacts grades, he said.

Professor Runi Mukherji, chair of the school's psychology department, said the policy is "draconian" and punishes vulnerable students. "I support the idea that we should have high standards and high expectations for our students," she said. "This is not the way we should achieve it." Freshmen, who have taken few classes and may have trouble adjusting to college life, are the most at risk, she said. Mukherji said some students removed from the dorms were unable to commute and did not have anywhere to go. Kinane said the college did not offer assistance for affected students to find alternative housing.

Esther Goodcuff, an associate vice president at Adelphi University in Garden City, which has no policy linking grades to residential life, said in a statement: "Isolating students from campus may exacerbate the student's poor academic performance, rather than help them."

On Old Westbury's campus, students voiced mixed feelings about the policy Friday. "There's some people that got affected by it. They were partying," said Faith Rivera, 26, a senior from the Catskills. "But then there were people who were trying their hardest." But other students, including Joseph Walker, 19, a sophomore from Flushing, said the policy is fair. "A 2.0 is not really that hard," he said.

Source