Northern Caribbean University's high-handedness

By Devon Dick

Recently, Northern Caribbean University (NCU), a Seventh-day Adventist institution, explained that 21-year-old Sha-Shana James was given the greater punishment of suspension because she was responsible for the performance of the unapproved routine on March 4. The president, Trevor Gardner, quoted two regulations which James was guilty of breaching, although what I heard and read did not suggest that a case was proved against James. In addition, one of the vice-presidents, Beverley Cameron, claimed that the punishment was justified and lenient. NCU maintains that students have to comply with the church's values as a prerequisite for remaining a student in that institution.

Cheerleading routine is not a core subject but an extra-curricular activity and should be treated as such. The group was disqualified for doing a routine that was not approved and that is adequate as punishment.

Since the group participated in the routine and the members were aware of the change in the routine, then the group should accept culpability based on collective responsibility. There is a story in the gospel of John in which Jesus declared a no-case submission against a woman caught in adultery. It seems that Jesus was saying that a woman cannot commit adultery by herself so it would be unjust to punish her alone and the man gets away. This illustration is not a call for the other members of the cheerleading team to be suspended for two weeks but rather a call that James should get the same punishment as the other members, that is, having the routine disqualified.

INAPPROPRIATE QUESTION

That James appeared before the citizenship committee without her identification card and also had a pierced tongue are minor distractions. An identification card is to ensure that the correct person is being tried, so once they are sure it was James then it is no big deal. Furthermore, if a pierced tongue, and I assume the wearing of a tongue ring, is against the university's rule, then all they need to do is ask her to take out the tongue ring. Naturally, the question about whether she has a boyfriend was inappropriate and invasive and is deserving of an apology from the NCU. One can quibble about banning her from all student activities for her remaining two years. However, it is high-handed to have suspended her for two weeks over a cheerleading routine, which means that she missed classes.

The NCU should refund her tuition fees for those two weeks during which she missed classes. One reason being the university should not benefit financially from her suspension; and the other is in recognition that the university went overboard to cause her to miss classes for a misdemeanour.

If a student does not follow the routine taught in class then he or she is in danger of failing the exam. If the student does that for a number of subjects then he or she is liable to be suspended, but nobody is suspended because of one bad exam, so how can an optional activity such as cheerleading cause suspension after an incorrect routine? Deliberate mistakes made in cheerleading are not serious violations, such as cheating or stabbing a student or stealing property or abusing a lecturer, and should not lead to suspensions. Are we to understand that NCU does not follow the Education Code?

Inconsistently, the other female student who was involved in the mock proposal routine was called to a meeting but did not turn up and no action had been taken against that student up to April 10. Why, and what is the latest on her student status?

The university should change its high-handed approach and make amends to this young lady.

Rev Devon Dick is pastor of the Boulevard Baptist Church in St Andrew. He is author of 'The Cross and the Machete', and 'Rebellion to Riot'. Send feedback to columns@ gleanerjm.com.