Previous   Next

Do you think universities should have committees to monitor students for disturbing behavior?

Asked at Massachusetts Street on March 29, 2008

Browse the archives

Photo of Annette Becker

“That sounds a little too Big Brotheresque to me.”

Photo of Tom Potts

“Yeah. I don’t think that would probably do much harm as long as it was maintained and supervised professionally.”

Photo of Justin Banks

“I don’t agree with that. It’s not the majority that’s the problem. I think kids go to college to get away from the structure a little bit, and I don’t think they should have someone looking over their shoulder.”

Photo of Cherae Clark

“I think it’s a good idea to a certain extent, but I think they should hold off on monitoring students’ online activities unless they have reasonable suspicion.”


Marion Lynn 6 years ago

I would gladly take the position of Minister of Hallway Monitoring at the University.

Vee haff vays uv makink zem cooperate!


Pogo 6 years ago

hmmmm.....that outfit "The Mustard Seed" started in much the same way.....

Isn't this stuff Waco cult material?


sunflower_sue 6 years ago

H_L, hahahaha!



Richard Heckler 6 years ago

I say screw the whole concept and get back to academics.

Just because Bush screwed up on 9/11/01 is no indication that the USA needs to watch everyone in the dressing rooms.


dajudge 6 years ago

Where do I sign up to become one of the monitors? That would be fun. Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign?


prospector 6 years ago

It sounds like disturbing behavior on the universities' part.


hitme 6 years ago

We should do it. The program has been proven quite effective in other countries like Iran, North Korea, and China (and now Tibet).


ChristmasCarol 6 years ago

I did not mean to be abrasive to Tom Potts comment but I just want people to think about "monitoring". Who is monitoring the monitors? I don't know they sure need to be put in check by something that was exactly my point.



Who is monitoring the monitors?


geekin_topekan 6 years ago

No,the notion is rediculous and irresponsible. There is a movement of people in this country who live in fear and promote a very narrow classification that would be regarded as "normal".Which in turn would create an extremely broad area of "not-so-normal".Giving this movement any foothold of power would be distracting to the targeted student at the very least. Who would represent said "disturbed" student?I see civil law suits and an ever expanding division of people which the small but desperate movement is working very hard to promote. I would have to say that this comittee shall have some sort of consequences for any wrong accusations or discomfort created for the "disturbed" student. Perhaps a cash refund for every day they appear undisturbed to be paid by the commitee?You can not create a situation such as this without some sort of accountability attached.That would be too...Berlin-ish.


BABBOY 6 years ago

I saw this happen in that in the movie Animal House. Here is what will happen; A frat house will be isolated and picked upon by a bunch of a right wing nazi types. The fun loving frat boys will get booted over a misunderstanding with a horse. Then, complete and utter disaster in home coming parade.

Just ugly.... Would not want to be the Mayor....

Seriously: this is America. Stupid idea.


le 6 years ago

i dont agree that the "man" should have his nose shoved up kids butts ! however...even though 18 is suppose to be the magic age that says your an adult ....majority of todays kids dont officially get their brains until they reach 30 something ! gee ...i know the truth hurts youngins but...think back to when you were 14 and i bet you thought you knew it all then ! fact is you will still be learning when you are 50,60,70 and so will make mistakes your whole life! but if you learn from those mistakes without dying from them ,then good for you ! you get a gold star! "screw the man" !!!!!!!!!!!!! live life to the fullest..(without harming others)...and after you make those dumb mistakes...clean up the mess ! if wierd hair was a crime...amyx should be doing life in prison!!!!!!!!


Kat Christian 6 years ago

I don't think it is necessary for these reasons: If a person shows a violant nature by the time they get to college most likely they've had these feelings in the past (high school). Perhaps the stress of a less structure environment and the stress of college in itself is what lights the fuse for these individuals to set off and do what they do. I think the monitoring should begin in high school. A lot of these type of things should be looked at in high school, i.e. parenting classes, budgeting classes, and psychological testing. Now the issue is what do you do with a child who shows a tendency of being off balance? I think that needs to be focused on first - have a game plan of how to help these individuals before they go out into the world. Some may never be helped it is what it is or they are what they are. Evil is evil and if it has consumed a human nothing here on earth is going to combat and change what has already been laid down to unfold. Perhaps a spiritual intervention but if that were to happen the whole family has to be involved including all mentors who will come in contact with that individual. But I like what the other person stated about what deems as popular is not always right or the answer for that matter. True. Our society needs to be careful not to fall into this trap. That's all I have to say about this.


H_Lecter 6 years ago

Absolutely! We'll start with bathroom monitors. If anyone uses the bathroom without washing their hands (disturbing behavior) they're immediately arrested and disinfected. A first-time offender will have their germs washed/chemically removed. Repeat offender could have their germs surgically removed and their hands placed in a display case outside the restroom as a subtle reminder. This could be a really fun committee; I do hope I get an opportunity to


ChristmasCarol 6 years ago

All too often being "supervised professionally" entails people that look for a standard of certain results.

If motivated by a factor that creates the need to self-substantiate then individuals in the "professional" field for observation need to come up with results to have findings to justify their existence.

This can be done at the expense of the commoner that just has tastes other than the majority.

Does this include safeguards for people inside the system of governing that will use the ability to harm individuals through the system of "monitoring"?

For instance, I went to school with someone that had a mohawk. He was not seen as someone of quality character back then because of the staunch opinions of "dress codes" at the time. His taste in haircuts got him in a lot of trouble. It was seen as something by peers and staff at the school to be absolutely frowned upon and harassed by both.

He got the gym class he belonged to more calestinics than anyone in the class could handle for "being out of line" and it in turn also got him beat up because the others in the class turned around and blamed him and not the discretion of the teacher. ( I sided with neither not having liked him much myself and liking the teacher up to that point.) I do not think this resolved the problem.

I think that sometimes individuals in power have a tendency to abuse it, many attain the status of being in power just to tell others what to think and do. It only really being a matter of taste in the end.

Today his mohawk would be looked at as a slight hairstyle whereas back then it was an atrocity not to be overlooked by anyone and punished for heavy handedly.

This is not something I take lightly though.

Had we only to be able to trust the commoner to do the right thing ever or always.

What we had here was merely an opinion that was regulated harshly and with no checks or balances on the part of the governing "professionals". It was merely the opinion of the people in charge.

Basically the "good ol' boy system" or "professionalism" because to get the job of professional you had to be a good ol' boy.


Mariann 6 years ago

Just what is disturbing?

"preachin evolution"....pornography? "forcing abortions"??????????? I say we shut down the university- in the name of the american redneck god and take the money for more nascar.


ChristmasCarol 6 years ago

"Superivised Professionally"?

That raises some questions as far as I would be concerned. I am not sure I trust McDonald's cooks as professionals mostly.

As far as supervision goes I had experiences on campus that raised some questions in my mind as to the motivation of individuals "running the show" such as Resident Assistants, assistant professors, and other dorm staff. I was not sure why the doors were not monitored or left unlocked at all hours of the night and other such regulations overlooked and not kept into check as they were supposed to. In favor they chose harassing individuals about individual perspective and tastes in music and television and spare time activities.

In my experience it became more a monitoring of taste than of anything "disturbing".

I found some of the people monitoring the "show" and their actions quite disturbing in fact.


tonythetiger 6 years ago

That would depend on how you would define "disturbing".

Would they do it in accordance with behavior that fit in the normalcy and popular motives of action or would they speculate into the deeper causes of human capacity?

Just because a person and the actions it executes are not like all the others around them does not mean the person is someone that should be under suspicion. Sometimes the people around the person in the situation are the ones that should be supervised as well.

Conforming to the majority may be the most popular at the time but sometimes the one that does his own thing is the one that follows a conviction of his own instead of just following a charsimatic leader or "ring leader".

Fanaticism is exemplified in a popular movement like the "Salem Witch Trials" where the populare movement of the day is founded on what will come to be known later as a fallacy.

1) the flat earth 2) non-existence of "new world" 3) "ghost spirits" controlling rain 4) all celestial bodies revolve around earth...

Popular conceptions and notions are not always true. They are just a sign o' the times.


Commenting has been disabled for this item.