<p>According to the Washington Post, some students at the Santa Fe campus got together to criticize certain administrative actions at both campuses of the college. They started stjohnsforum.com, and multiple points of view are expressed on the forum. While all colleges have problems, this may give an insight into the particular problems present at this college.</p>
<p>I am uncomfortable with the forums use of St. Johns web site appearance for the forums web site "look". A bit childish. Take compaints with a big grain of salt.</p>
<p>I don't think that it's fair to dismiss the content of a website because of its look. It's more relevant that the website gives people an opportunity to refute specific claims, an opportunity that the administration has not taken advantage of. It is certainly not a secret that many Annapolis students have problems with security and that the school administration shows an eagerness to kick people out. Most of the information on the site can be verified simply by talking to students involved in these incidents.</p>
<p>I'd be pretty mad if I spent that kind of money and was expelled my junior or senior year. I mean, where would those credits transfer to if you're not in a program like that? It's good that things are being addressed, but if the school gets bad press, it gets a bad reputation and then there is less money given from alumni or others I would think. I agree on all parts except when this site asked people to tell every news source possible.</p>
<p>I dont know; I'm being vague. I just got off work.</p>
<p>I dont know how many of the college donors will stop giving money to the college as a result of student criticism, but I doubt that financial aid will be seriously affected. There will always be big foundations who give away large sums of money without paying too close attention to whats going on at the place their money is being sent to. If a donor simply stopped giving money, then the administration would not know for certain that this is a response to their policies. It would be much more helpful to promote change if donors said that they wouldnt give money because of the way the administration conducts itself. The college has an endowment of nearly a hundred million dollars, and a few donors withholding money would probably not directly impact the school so much. If a donor decided not to give the school a hundred dollars this year, the financial impact on the school would be minor. A far more significant impact is that it would subject the administration to criticism, for the St. Johns College administration cannot stand criticism.
The relationship of stjohnsforum.com to St. Johns College seems similar to the relationship between newspapers and government. Not only does it inform people about problems at the college but it also acts as a mirror to the administration. The more people are aware of school problems and the more people publicly discuss those problems, whether they agree or disagree with the school policies, the more the administration is forced to confront its own decisions. Socrates said that the unexamined life is not worth living, and the St. Johns administration is not very introspective. St. Johns College has existed for a long time, and many administrators have been charged with managing the college over the years. While there are many amazing things about a St. Johns education, the current stewards of the school are damaging many students experience at the college. What kind of people would put in the student handbook that a student can be dismissed merely for being undesirable? What kind of people finds it acceptable neither to give these students a reason for their dismissal nor to refund any of their money? What kind of people would conduct a harsh drug investigation followed by mass expulsions? What kind of people would tell one employee to spy on another? What kind of people would keep security guards who beat up students? What kind of people would bar a former student from campus for criticizing the administration on the internet and speaking to the Washington Post? All students at St. Johns College are required to read and discuss the Bill of Rights during the junior year, yet the administration does not feel inspired to model their behavior on this document.</p>
<p>"gulliver" has started a parallel thread on the St. John's College (New Mexico) forum. I've added a post to that thread which I would direct folks who are interested in more information on "gulliver"'s disinformation program.</p>
<p>Like "sbc", I find the attempt to give the stjohnsforum.com website the look and feel of the official college website disturbing. It represents another attempt on the part of the individual who is behind that website to fool people. As I note on the other post, the website is almost entirely the work of one individual and does not have the same relation to the college as a genuine newspaper has to a governmental entity. It has, rather, the same relation as an obsessed blogger has to the object of his or her obsession.</p>
<p>Finally, prospective students should be aware that although course work at more main-stream colleges don't transfer to St. John's, the reverse is the case. St. John's provides a transcript to other colleges together with a key which shows how the courses at St. john's can be allocated to traditional majors. Since St. John's is fully accredited, all course work completed at St. John's can be transferred to other colleges, and usually the allocation of credits to traditional majors allows students to transfer into other colleges at approximately the same level as they left St. John's.</p>
<p>Ptolemy has attacked me on both the Annapolis and Santa Fe threads, so I felt that it was appropriate to respond in both. I havent started a disinformation program. Ive stated my opinions on the college administration, and Ive repeated facts that are included on the forum. I know a fair amount about most of what is asserted on the forum; far from being exaggerations, if people knew many of the details, they would be even more shocked. All but two of the items mentioned on the forum refer to people involved who can be contacted easily to verify the claims. The former athletic director cannot be contacted on this matter, as he signed a non-disclosure agreement as part of the settlement of his lawsuit; the site does not mention where the information about him comes from. The site also does not mention who claims to have overheard the conversation between the psychiatrist and the assistant dean. Without such information, it is impossible for these claims to be verified; people have to decide for themselves whether to trust an anonymous source. Ptolemy says that the disregard for confidentiality proves that the charges are baseless. While the decision to publish names of people associated with alleged administration misconduct may or may not be misguided, it adds more weight to the charges truthfulness; it does not prove them untrue as ptolemy suggests. The decision not to publish the sources for these two stories suggests either that the forum does not recklessly publish every name available or that these stories are fictional. Based on my knowledge of some of the people involved, I believe the former, but I understand why others may not.</p>
<p>I did not design the website, so I cant comment on why the site has a look similar to the colleges website except to say that it is different enough and includes a disclaimer stating that it is not the official college website that I would think that people would be unlikely to be confused, although appollodorus did make the mistake of falsely believing the site to be the official forum of the college. It doesnt seem to me to be a valid argument that the style of the site proves its content false. People who disagree with its content use this as a way of attacking the site when they would really attack the site regardless of its style.</p>
<p>The Washington Post article says that several students put the site together; the one person known to be involved has been punished, so it is reasonable to assume that the others have good reason to keep their role secret, especially if they are current students at St. Johns. Fifty people have registered for the site; as registration is necessary only to post to the site, not to view the site, it is reasonable to assume that most of those who registered without leaving comments did so to express support for the site. There are a number of people who oppose administration policies but feel that the website is an inappropriate means of expressing discontent. Some have written letters to the administration; others publicly gripe about it; many others do nothing.</p>
<p>It is true, as ptolemy says, that the founders of St. Johns Forum have a major ax to grind. The actions of the St. Johns administration have nurtured resentment for such a long time in a sufficiently large number of students that it is inevitable that such resentment would ultimately spill out in public. It is worth noting that St. Johns Forum is not the first website to be critical of St. Johns, only the most prominent.</p>
<p>I have read the Washington Post article, and it is impossible to see how one can honestly say that it does not put the college in a bad light. Ptolemy implies that all American colleges have no choice in how they apply their drug policy. This is patently false. Some colleges aggressively enforce their anti-drug policy; in other colleges, illegal drug use is tolerated to a much higher extent. Three things make the St. Johns College drug probe so sinister: first, the college harshly interrogated students, many of whom never did drugs. The administration denies this in the Washington Post article, but there are many students in Annapolis who confirm that this is true. Second, the college delayed by a year the issuance of three seniors degrees. After working very hard for four years and paying the college an enormous amount of money, the college decided to hurt them for no apparent reason save for pure maliciousness. If the students have loans, they may spend years paying off their debt to the college. The college admits denying the seniors their hard-earned degrees, but gives no reason for this action save for an obligation to enforce their anti-drug policy. The college did not seem to feel that they owed these students anything. Third, the college seemingly haphazardly chose whom to punish and whom not to. When seniors complained in mass to alumni at Annapolis Homecoming about the cocaine investigation, Jeff Bishop, the Annapolis vice president, in clear violation of the students privacy rights that the administration claims to value, explained to alumni that the college only kicked out immature students. Jeff Bishop gave as an example students who talked during lecture. Many alumni were present when Jeff Bishop talked about this. While the administrations actions are shocking, I am not exaggerating, and I resent claims that I am doing so.</p>
<p>Ptolemy is correct that the forums contributors, especially the major contributor, are obsessed bloggers, and St. Johns is the object of their obsession. I was not denying this; I was only making an analogy between the forum and news media. When Woodward and Bernstein started out reporting on the Watergate scandal, many felt that they were obsessed with a story that wasnt there. The media considers the affairs of a small college to be largely beneath their attention. The internet is useful because no story is so small that someone is not interested in pursuing it. Many of the stories are presented on the forum in short bullet-like paragraphs, in which the facts are concisely presented.</p>
<p>While credits from St. Johns are transferable, private colleges generally have a two-year residency requirement. Even if a student has completed three years at St. Johns, he will still have to spend at least two years at the college he is transferring to. Most St. Johns classes have no parallel at other colleges, so they transfer as elective classes. A student will likely have to complete all the course work of a major (unless, perhaps, he chooses to study philosophy) as well as fulfilling the general education requirements (although another college may be willing to waive some or all of them). As many majors require basic classes to be completed as prerequisites before more advanced classes can be taken and sometimes at small colleges a necessary class is only offered once a year or (rarely) once every other year, a student may find it difficult, but not impossible, to complete a degree in many fields in two years.</p>
<p>I clearly have a great deal of affinity for the St. Johns Forum, which is why I thought it important to mention it here. While I believe there are some legitimate criticisms of the forum, I do not agree with those who claim that the college has no problems. I also believe that a wonderful educational opportunity exists at St. Johns College, and prospective students should carefully weigh the pros of the education against the cons of the current administration.</p>
<p>For some reason, when I try to enter the site <a href="http://www.stjohnsforum.com%5B/url%5D">http://www.stjohnsforum.com</a>, I get a pop-up demanding for my screename and password. How do I view the site, or at least how do I register?</p>
<p>The forum was down for a few weeks. It's back up now, so you should be able to access the site without that pop-up window appearing.</p>