October 24, 2000

Page 1

lUP

[1

Illy m

'

i

■ %

>

LTD I II I Y< IAxirr*! I

M

II \ M I

I

I

\

mil

I

Yy

§

p LJ I

J| J

«^-*.3 —BsMiW ,orts

Jets wide receiver Wayne Chrebet hauled

in

two touchdowns as his team came back from ' ' Lflp/V a 23-point deficit to win in OT. See page 15

Housing figures show disparities � For the third year in a row, West Campus and fraternities are disproportionately white, while Central and North campuses have a disproportionate percentage of minorities. By DAVE INGRAM The Chronicle Despite student and administrative promises to increase residential diversity, racial and ethnic segregation still plagues Duke dorms and campuses, according

to this fall’s housing statistics, recently released by the Office of Student Development. Compiled annually by Assistant Dean of Student Development Bill Burig, the numbers illustrate a continued lack of diversity among certain selective housing groups, as well as a disproportionately high percentage of minorities on North and Central campuses. This validates a pattern that has emerged over multiple years and reflects similar trends across the University,” said Barbara Baker, dean of student development. “Every person who looks at this can draw different types ofconclusions.” While 62.1 percent of all residential students are white, 80.4 percent of fraternity residents and 57.8 percent of non-fraternal selective house members are white. Two years ago, when such statistics were first calculated, 61.8 percent of all residents were white. Just over 80 percent of fraternity members and 62.4 percent of non-fraternal selective house members were white. “Clearly some living groups, particularly non-fraternities, are becoming more diverse,” Burig said. “But the vast majority of fraternities haven’t changed at all.” This year, Asians comprise 15.4 percent of the residential student body, but only 4.9 percent of residential fraternity members; 4.9 percent of all residents are See HOUSING on page 9 �

CHRIS RITTER/THE CHRONICLE

PROSPECTIVE STUDENT HECTOR MANCEBO of Lawrence, Mass., consulted with Senior Associate Director of Undergraduate Admissions Leonard Satterwhite about his prospects yesterday. Mancebo will miss the new criteria, which could affect the class of 2006.

Admissions considers new criteria By

WBIGHT e

romcle

hor future Blue Devils, admisto Duke may have become a little more difficult. As part of Trinity College’s long-range academic plan a committee of administrators has proposed adding an intellectual engagement composion

nent to the six-pronged selection

process currently employed by the Office of Undergraduate Admissions. The committee also hopes to diversify the campus

economically, reaching out to students from financially disadvantaged backgrounds. “We would like to see a student body that grows,” said William Chafe, vice provost for under-

graduate education and dean of the faculty of arts and sciences, “It is our hope, certainly, to see more of an integration between social and academic The University currently evaluates students on a five-point scale in six areas—an applicant’s high school curriculum, grades, ”

See

ADMISSIONS on page 7 �

Price, Ward weigh in on litany of Fourth District issues Candidates towed the party line through the debate By ANDREW ROTHMAN The Chronicle

MANOJ RAJAPAKSA/THE CHRONICLE

AT THE SANFORD INSTITUTE OF PUBLIC POLICY last night, Republican candidate Jess Ward (left) debated Democratic Rep. David Price, who now holds the Fourth District seat thatis upfor grabs next month.

Foundation

gives

Last night, the candidates for the Fourth District seat in the U.S. House of Representatives went head to head on campus in a debate that covered a wide variety of issues, including tax cuts, education, social security, foreign relations and prescription drugs. Congressman David Price, the Democratic incumbent, and Republican candidate Jess Ward answered four questions prepared by moderator and political science professor Paula McClain, followed by 15 questions posed by the 50-member audience of Duke students and residents of the Fourth District. In addition to describing their leadership experience and character, the candidates strove to emphasize the differences between their positions on a wide array of subjects. The candidates differed sharply on Social Security, essentially siding with

their respective parties’ candidate for president. In support of Texas Gov. George W. Bush’s partial privatization plan, Ward said, “I believe that with the

looming crisis, we have to do something different and allow young people to invest [part of their Social Security benefits] in personal accounts.” Price, on the other hand, echoed Vice President A1 Gore’s view of the looming Social Security insolvency, saying, “I believe the best way to prevent [failure of the system] is to get rid of the national debt.” He contended that reducing the debt would save billions on interest payments, which could then be used to keep Social Security afloat. The rest of the debate followed this general trend. In response to a question regarding education, the candidates voiced opinions consistent with the platforms of the presidential candidates. Price, the Democratic candidate, favored See

DEBATE on page 6

S2M to Duke, page 5 � Mathematician contrasts computers, mind, page 6


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.
October 24, 2000 by Duke Chronicle Print Archives - Issuu