I think you're first sentence -- about the administrators -- may be right. But the second -- about "change" -- is not so obvious. Torts can not explain why a small minority of students behaved so badly toward Erika and Nicholas Christakis. And it can't explain why Handa felt his "precious few years at college," and his "job hunts and lon…
I think you're first sentence -- about the administrators -- may be right. But the second -- about "change" -- is not so obvious. Torts can not explain why a small minority of students behaved so badly toward Erika and Nicholas Christakis. And it can't explain why Handa felt his "precious few years at college," and his "job hunts and long after" were in danger of being "ruined" if he spoke his mind.
But perhaps it is the behavior of the students, egged on by faculty, which makes the administrators fear legal action. Does that sound possible?
It absolutely doesn't have to do with the bad actions of the students. I meant to suggest it informs the decision making by the administrators in response to those bad actions.
I think you're first sentence -- about the administrators -- may be right. But the second -- about "change" -- is not so obvious. Torts can not explain why a small minority of students behaved so badly toward Erika and Nicholas Christakis. And it can't explain why Handa felt his "precious few years at college," and his "job hunts and long after" were in danger of being "ruined" if he spoke his mind.
But perhaps it is the behavior of the students, egged on by faculty, which makes the administrators fear legal action. Does that sound possible?
It absolutely doesn't have to do with the bad actions of the students. I meant to suggest it informs the decision making by the administrators in response to those bad actions.
OK, Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.
Thanks for helping me express it more clearly.