All posts by Rowan Rockwell, Campus Life Editor

Campus Life, Home Page News Bytes

Friends and foes: Connecting on a commuter campus post-pandemic

 

To write stories about Campus Life at Northern Essex is like writing about what’s going on in your neighbors’ houses from the perspective of the street.

You’ve got to peek into windows and behind closed doors where quiet conversations connect through cups on invisible strings.

There’s an elephant on campus with an Achilles Heel, crouching on the school’s left shoulder, whispering through empty hallways, student lounges and faculty boardrooms, bouncing off the concrete crevices of unoccupied enclaves of the campus’s perimeter saying, “Dooo weee actuallyyy have a Campus Lifeeeee?”

“When I came here, I was like, ‘Theres not a lot happening,” said Rhea Clarke a 21-year-old Electrical Engineering major at Northern Essex Community College. Rhea, who came to NECC from Worcester Polytechnique Institute the year before, emphasized the contrast in social bustle between the two campuses.

Although the connections you can find at a four-year school with dorms simply doesn’t compare with the social landscape of NECC Rhea claims it’s not completely barren. Rhea explained she’s found friendships in unlikely places, one of them being the tutoring center.

“I didn’t know it even existed!” she said of the tutoring center. “It’s not really a social location, but I’ve hung out there some. I met some people and that’s been cool, which I was really surprised by.”

Jordan Marcelin a 19-year-old Business major at NECC echoed much of what Clarke had to say about the change in pace he experienced coming to NECC from a larger, more active school — in his case UMass Boston.

“It’s kind of weird over here, not in a bad way but I’m just used to UMass Boston being so much bigger. Over here it just feels distant.”

Location is one thing, but I wanted to know more about how Jordan felt about socializing on campus and in turn how it relates to his own social life.

Although I often see Jordan hanging out in the hallways of Building C, often chatting with other students, when I asked him about his friends he said “I’m kind of the person who doesn’t talk much, I just do school and head home.”

A common thread between Rhea and Jordan’s thoughts about social life both on and off campus had to do with the ripple many people their age still feel about the COVID-19 Pandemic along with the level of exposure to social media and digital entertainment that accompanied it.

“To me ever since COVID [it] was kind of hard to make friends. There’s still a little mix of that ‘pandemic syndrome’ in there. Some people are still kind of quiet cuz they’re used to having their mask on and being behind a screen. When you’re outdoors you’re still a little nervous,” said Jordan. “It still lingers around.”

He continued, expressing unease with how often his time was consumed by being on his phone.

“I think about how life used to be ‘back then’[when people were on their phones less]. I remember I saw a couple videos of a high school class from 2010 or 2015, everybody was fun, having fun, fun without phones. It was different. Now everybody’s on their phone, you walk everywhere people are just looking down at their phone. You kind of feel like you’re trapped in a system.”

People who have lived half their lives before the pandemic occurred may not even consider the social/emotional impact waged on late members of Gen Z and incoming Gen Alpha. They are forming their connections, building their hopes and dreams in a much lonelier world.

I asked Rhea if she thought things felt lonelier after the pandemic, to which she replied, “Oh yeah.”

“I don’t do well online,” she continued. Not just doing school online but maintaining friendships online. “When I see people and meet people in person it’s a lot easier to connect.”

Rhea touches on a prominent and paradoxical effect that social media can have. Although it was supposedly created with the intention of connecting more people than ever before, in many ways has done the opposite.

A hopeful note arose when Rhea looked up at someone passing by in the hall.

“Hey,” she said to the student in passing.

“Friend?” I asked.

“Friend.”

Opinion

Too close to step back: Coming of age in a crumbling technoscape

 

To have a more meaningful understanding about the world since the advent of the internet I believe it is helpful to create a demarcation in understanding between the initial possibilities of philanthropic utopias new tech could offer and on the other hand understanding the vice grip that government money and commercial control have over the direction of technology’s expansion over the past 60 years. We must look at the internet’s birth and life first as a timeline to refamiliarize ourselves with the schism between the futuristic idealization that tech once offered and the current state of tech development that seems unsympathetic to philanthropy and functionality, instead seemingly focused on forging a trajectory of useless and hypnotic gadgets that create more problems than solutions.

The beginning of the internet promised a cornucopia of utopian solutions, that offered possibilities of radical expansion in human capability and individual freedom. Like so many great inventions of the past 100 years the internet was conceived and funded under the controls of the United States government’s funding and oversight. The U.S. poured over $100,000,000 into realizing the foundations of the internet beginning with ARPANET (1969), an internet prototype created by the U.S. gov’ts Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA). Like many things that the government researches, the kind of technology invented under their funding and supervision only became commercially available after years of dedicated study out of reach to the public.

Some internet idealists reference this level of government involvement in the internet’s development as obstructing the larger utopian possibilities it could offer. In essence suggesting that an internet made BY the people could be an internet truly FOR the people, a place where individuals could be the masters of their own worlds free of authority and censorship.

If the government had not had such a large role in creating the internet the possibilities of its impact beyond today’s manifestations are unimaginable for better and for worse.

Now in 2025 in the wake of the most drastic expansion of technology available to the average person, foremost being internet access, our societies are wrestling with the ethics of internet moderation and the degree to which these things should be overseen by the gov’t.

Government regulation in both the public and the private sector is becoming increasingly unpopular. The more information we have access to the more we realize our government may not be trustworthy. One of the most revelatory incidents in recent years contributing to the public’s lack of trust in government came in the form of classified documents leaked by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden unveiling government programs conducting illegal global surveillance operations. For providing the American public proof that our government was not only abusing its power illegally but undermining the trust of its citizens while doing so Edward Snowden was indicted on charges of espionage and is living in Russia as a naturalized citizen.

Why has humanity’s greatest leap in technology and science resulted in such an underwhelming improvement to our societies? There are arguments to be made that we have benefitted greatly, and I do not want to shrug off these accomplishments. The point I’m really trying to make is that people seem to have forgotten the extent to which our impressive leap in technology could be bettering the world and instead have become comfortable with the idea that the ripest fruits these advancements in tech have yielded are luxury products for the consumer that predominantly exist to entertain and soothe the consumer instead of focusing on truly improving human potential and minimizing global suffering.

For the last couple of decades, the public’s interest in the ethics of technology’s impact on our lives has been alarmingly unserious. Even prior to the life of Alan Touring, the father of modern computer science, tech thinkers discussed the insidious possibility of a “technological singularity”, a point in time where due to the exponential acceleration inherent in the development of computer science, computers could surpass human intelligence permanently leaving human beings with no recourse or option but to bend to their will or biologically incorporate themselves with technology to survive.

Many modern-day thinkers and scientists on the cutting edge of technology have openly discussed the singularity and people like Bill Gates and Elon Musk have been talking about it for at least 10 years.

Confusingly, one of the most radically transformative events in all of Earth’s history seems to go unappreciated in the spheres of public discourse where there is a concerning lack of fear, skepticism and opposition meaningfully voiced by average citizens.

More perturbing still is this lack of opposition seems scant and obscure in comparison to the status quos willingness to participate in the continuation of this trajectory by assuming the role of a mindless consumer, inevitably funding the people and places that continue to develop technology totally detached from the intention to actually offer the consumer access to technology that could improve our lives and work on eliminating global suffering.

Further-more, people continue to buy these products not even considering that they never asked for these products to be made. Although this technology is being sold on the grounds of progress and innovation the majority of the consumer base has no input into how research and development are employed to offer realistic solutions to problems that already exist. Now we are subjected to new problems created by technology that once promised egalitarian revolution and a new plain of personal autonomy but have only entrapped us in a system that is so novel and complex that the only people who seem to have a real ability to untangle us are the ones continuing to let the genie out of the bottle.

No one asked for Sam Altman to open Pandora’s Box.

If you have been alive since at least before the turn of the century you have been part of a brave new world, bombarded with a level of unwanted stimuli and consumer incentives. Although it doesn’t seem as though this recent acceleration has reached a plateau, I think people who have been alive long enough to see it wind up and let loose have lived long enough to become better acquainted with the realities of this brave new world and where Transhumanism is Trojan Horsed into our societies on the guise of progress and innovation.

I believe that those of us who have seen this acceleration play out for as long as it has can finally step back from the screen of this science fiction movie we’re living in. Finally stepping back to appreciate the complexity of the issues no longer blinded by the seduction of consumerism.

We don’t have to joke about being the guinea pigs anymore, the first experiment is over and time has given us perspective.

There is a proven cognitive trait in all of us called the negativity bias. “The negativity bias is our tendency not only to register negative stimuli more readily but also to dwell on these events. Also known as positive-negative asymmetry, this negativity bias means that we feel the sting of a rebuke more powerfully than we feel the joy of praise.”(What Is The Negativity Bias, Kendra Cherry MSEd, verywellmind.com)

Although you could use the negativity bias to invalidate my subjective analysis of modern tech, I think inherent in the definition of the negativity bias lies validation of my argument. The crushing, existential weight accompanying discussions about the ethics of modern tech, the unsustainable model of energy consumption used by things like blockchain servers and the overall lack of tangible, fantasy level improvements promised by the tech of the future (just to name a few) have had legitimate and objectively harmful consequence, enough that the weight of those negative outcomes has a logical case for swaying our stance away from the seduction of technology’s comforts and conveniences and back to a rational scrutiny of the pros and cons. A good faith effort is also necessary to create coalitions that give a voice to the public who have no control or desire to continue with the philosophical intentions of modern day developers who may not realize the true unpopularity of their creations due to their own ego and a misinterpretation that their innovations aren’t continuing to sell because they are improving people’s lives but because they have created a black market of an unsatisfiable dopamine addiction.

This leads me to my last point. We have not only moved into a new age that is immune to the conventions and philosophies of the old word. Part of the transition into this brave new one is learning to understand the restructuring of value in today’s information economy. In 2017 The Economist published an article that asserted that data had surpassed oil in value. We are in a new age of capture by socio-economic systems that function separately from the ones we’ve become familiar with.

Just think about it. If you had to pay to start a Facebook account would you have done it? Social media offered a way to interact with a platform or product without paying for it and we took the bait hook line and sinker. Now data is more valuable than oil and social media companies get paid in clicks not dollars. Clicks mined by our thumbs. We are only now realizing that we are keeping systems alive with what we thought was our own free will. The status quo has now begun its slow descent into the serfdom of techno-feudalism.

It’s important going forward that we keep in mind how quickly this world is changing. The events that are reshaping our world are not just affecting our perception, they are also changing the rules to the game. It’s like we’re in a game of Quidditch when all we know is soccer and we can’t imagine the game is played in the air on flying broomsticks because we’ve accepted the rules of gravity and refuse to break from them.

We must challenge Transhumanism and band together to meaningfully critique the world that we are being enticed into by the rich and powerful.

We must be mindful consumers.

We mustn’t forget that a whole is only the sum of its parts and without the dollars or the clicks a system or corporation will cease to exist.

Last of all we can’t forget what makes us human and the hopes and dreams we truly strive for. Going to Mars isn’t going to save Earth it’s going to let us continue to repeat the same mistake.

There is a thought experiment in philosophy known as The Ship of Theseus. The experiment is a way to examine how identity exists in relation to time. In Greek mythology there was a hero named Theseus who went on many adventures many of which were undertaken on a sailing vessel. The compounding wear of so many trips on this vessel required it to be repaired many times resulting in a slow but eventual replacement in every part of the ship. The experiment has us examine if the identity of Theseus’s ship we attach to the vessel can retain its identity even when it has been completely physically transformed or renewed.

Evolution, like The Ship of Theseus, is strange. We are constantly updating our software and often question how much of a human tie we still hold with our ancestors who lived oh such different lives. I say it’s okay to lose some nails and some color and maybe even the sails, but the motherboard must be salvaged and restored constantly with the utmost reverence and ritual. It is our duty to our own salvation, and it is our path to steering this ship of ambiguous wonder back onto the right course.

Campus Life, Slider

What is the college experience?

 
People sitting on grass
Photo courtesy NECC Archives

We are living in a time of unprecedented growth and change. The college campus is the ultimate forum of debate, discussion and establishment of an individual’s intellectual identity. It is in these spaces where students are not only tasked with understanding the past but reckoning with the present and molding the philosophical hopes and intentions of our collective future. As this generation’s batch of philosophical trailblazers and world movers existing in a strange, new world of rapid exponentiality how much do we want things to continue to change and what is worth staying the same?

The old adage “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” comes to mind here yet it seems that things have now reached a plane of disrepair. It is in these formidable intermediaries that the paradigm of history must be reshaped. Out with the old, in with the new, but if it isn’t broke, maybe it can stay.

As Campus Life editor I have undertaken the task of an investigation into the legitimacy of the purpose of a Campus Life section here in NECC’s Observer. In my recent interviews with staff and students it has become apparent to me that there is a schism between the fundamental realities of our commuter community and an ambiguous desire to transcend those realities in an effort to substantiate the so called “college experience.”

In fact this term “college experience” is a bit of a fallacy. The idea of “getting an education” has become so warped and twisted that it has seemingly fallen second in importance to simply obtaining a degree as proof of an accomplishment that will admit you into the next gateway of life. This or you have the money and need to extend your childhood (because who really wants to grow up).

I personally know many people whose quest for academic rigor and intellectual enlightenment has been diluted in the romanticized mire of the “college experience.” The idea of a four year school for many recent high school grads has become an implied vortex of hedonistic purging as part of the reward for reaching a new milestone in adulthood and personal liberty. This would be a benign biproduct of post juvenile jubilee for many if it wasn’t so societally catastrophic. 

What’s different about NECC is people more often than not come here for the purpose of a larger goal. They have the time to figure things out, maybe even make a few mistakes, many trying their hand at a four year school and realizing the money wasn’t worth it for what they were getting out of the experience at that time in their lives. 

According to a study by the PEW Research Center almost half of all American young men and women not in school stated their reasons were due to the cost of education. On top of that between 12% and 20% of Americans have student loan debt averaging around 1.7 trillion dollars, only around 1 million dollars less than the United States federal deficit. Because most esteemed colleges are private institutions they are regularly not eligible for the same kinds of subsidies granted to public institutions.

The risk and pressure of pursuing your dreams, your education and your career have become increasingly dicey. How much of this cost is associated with a dedication to the betterment of a students mind and how much is it related to creating the “college experience.”

On top of that we are seeing a veritable social inversion in our culture writ large. The dichotomy of technology that is supposed to connect us and in fact is separating us more than ever puts us at a grave psychological crossroads. The shifting discernment between the benefits of online learning and working from home post pandemic have also reshaped our social environments. 

To top it all off the vicious culture war divides in our country have given way to an overall restructuring of American morals and value systems that have left us shattered and disparate. This is a national and in some cases global situation that is continuing to unfold. There are many forces at play when it comes to the unraveling of our contemporary social fabric not just a problem with whether or not people should dorm at community college to make more friends and drink more alcohol.

At NECC our lack of campus community may actually be a strength in honing our pupils focus on their studies and the purpose and meaning of this step in the project of their lives, all theoretically while being able to hold down a job and manage the rest of life’s responsibilities, something that would be very difficult while dorming and going to school full time.

In my research and interviews with students so far I have found many students are not actually yearning for a more robust campus life and the students that are may already just be seeking out connection and community in general. 

I don’t think we should give up on the premise of creating that kind of community for students but I think being realistic about our strengths and our weaknesses when we look at the reality of the situation means devoting our efforts into specialized support towards getting students on the path for whatever they want to achieve and to be able to do it affordably. 

Resources should also be devoted to offering students state of the art technology and access to the cutting edge of new information that pushes the envelope of mandated curricula.

It’s still hard to fathom in the swirling turbidity of our modern lives what “ain’t broke” and what “needs fixin’”. If anything we should be adapting our learning environments to be more suitable to the everchanging playing field of educational needs and aspirations of all types of students with an emphasis on growth and integration as a human being so they can in turn create a fulfilling life and fill that life with connection.

At the end of the day NECC is a space we all share and the dire realities of our existential plight going forward should not obstruct us from acknowledging one another. 

We have to remember to see each other, make each other feel seen and to find ourselves in other people. 

Otherwise we are going to be making babies in test tubes and gazing back out of a small glass porthole in space at the seething, fiery corpse of an exhausted organism we once called Mother Earth, running away from a place we once called home.

Campus Life, Slider

Campus Life flatline?

 
A student looks at his computer in an empty second floor hallway in the Spurk building on March 3. Photo by Rowan Rockwell

Examining the college experience on a commuter campus

Anyone who spends a significant amount of time on Northern Essex Community College’s Haverhill campus is likely to acknowledge it is a place where people are made to feel welcome.

Where does this sense of welcoming acceptance come from? Does it stem from a legitimately established sense of community?

Being a commuter school makes it difficult for an academic establishment to foster any sort of long-lasting personal identity let alone a policy on social connectivity.

Maybe this favorable reception felt in the hallways stems not from an established sense of community but rather an ecosystem defined by the campus as a physical place, where a shifting mass of unconnected commuters all inhabit the same space with myriad academic agendas and thus do not share enough in common to create a familiar social network.

What this sort of system can result in is a place where the regularities of polite exchange are limited to such kinds found in any random public venue where large groups of people inhabit space.

When the long-awaited day of high school graduation comes to fruition some people may experience a Stockholm syndrome adjacent biproduct. You’ve been forced to collaborate with people not of your choosing for such an extended amount of time that your raw proximity to them over time creates a kind of empathy for people you may have even had disdain for in the past.

At a commuter school like our own we are not placed under the same kind of stipulations.

We are each showing up at often very different times to pursue goals that are fundamentally unique to each individual in attendance.

The time for socializing in this place is confined to small sets of circumstance.

There are no gaps to yap in unless you go out of your way to advance a conversation with a peer in the hurried moments between classes or from class to parking lot and that kind of initiation is only present in a percentile of spontaneous pupils.

That being said; friends can be made, and socializing can be had, but in this academic ecosystem of our humble commutersphere how do we go about fostering meaningful social connections in accordance with the limitations of our environment and do we even want to?

This is not a phenomenon unique to Northern Essex. Commuter schools at large plot ways to create a sense of community for the academic diaspora in their charge by means of clubs and student centers.

Some of these spaces are ghost towns while others provide a space for peers to bond while catching up on assignments and the like.

Under The Observer’s Campus Life section this semester we will put a magnifying lens to these questions through meaningful feedback from individual students and staff and maybe get to know each other a little better in the process.

We will aim to uncover what lays in the unconscious consensus of our campus, dig deeper into the social shockwave of the COVID-19 pandemic that is still rippling throughout every community and the arresting modern-day landscape of social media in relation to social connection all while keeping our finger on the pulse of “campus life” to see if it’s still beating.

Get in touch with me, I would love to hear your thoughts about campus life or your individual experience here Let’s explore the current state of things and discuss its evolving future. Email me at observer@necc.mass.edu.