Running head: ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

Its All in the Neighborhood

Nolan Theodore
University at Buffalo

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

Its All in the Neighborhood

University at Buffalo describes itself as a premier, research-intensive public university
dedicated to academic excellence (UB at a Glance, n.d.). Indeed, University at Buffalo (UB) has
much to boast about. Located in Western New York (WNY), University at Buffalo is a flagship
institution of the State University of New York with nearly 20,000 undergraduate students and
over 10,000 graduate and professional students. With an endowment estimated at more than
$600 million, its no wonder than the institution estimates its economic impact at $1.7 billion per
year. However, what of its social impact on, for instance, the WNY area? University at Buffalo
addresses their intent to positively impact their local community by bringing the benefits of its
research, scholarshipcreative activity, and educational excellence. Furthermore, the
University emphasizes this commitment within its many institutional goals, stating its mission to
deepen its impact and outreach in the regional community, strengthening programs and

partnerships that contribute to the social, cultural and economic vitality of Western New York
(Our Universitys, n.d.). Though the Universitys message is noble, recent events may call into
question its promise to positively contribute to local communities.
University at Buffalo has been subjected to considerable media coverage concerning its
relationship with a local neighborhood, known as University Heights, several times in recent
years (B. Ricotta, personal communication, March 20). Located in northeast Buffalo, this district
has been described as a neighborhood that is ready to explode from its powder keg of booze
and bad behavior (Specht, 2013). The University Heights community has been plagued with
multitudes of crimes, including assault (Tarhan, 2012), public urination (Michel, 2013),
burglaries (The Spectrum, 2014), and murder (Buckley, 2009), but is also reportedly subjected to
loud and belligerent partying of college students (Khoury, 2013; Specht, 2013). University at

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

Buffalo has been declared the facilitator of a great majority of its crimes, as its students are often
perceived as the perpetrators by University Heights residents (Khoury, 2013; Nostro, 2010;
Raguse, 2014).
In 2013, University at Buffalos Vice President for Government and Community
Relations, Michael Pietkiewicz, attended a community meeting between the city of Buffalo,
University Heights residents, and the University Heights Collaborative, an organization
dedicated to maintaining and enhancing the quality of life for University Heights residents
(University Heights, n.d.), to discuss the issue of students creating disturbances within the
University Heights community (Khoury, 2013). In light of residents observing intoxicated
students publically urinating and littering (When students coming in, crime goes up stated one
resident), the University Heights residents demanded two courses of action for the University to
take. First, the residents demanded that the University shut down its twenty-four hour bus service
that transports University at Buffalo students to the University Heights community, as residents
claimed it funneled students intent on partying to the University Heights area. Second, residents
demanded that the University have its police jurisdiction extended to the University Heights area
and assist the city of Buffalo Police with their patrolling duties. Overall, residents viewed the
University as accountable for the actions of its students and demanded that the University devise
solutions to remedy the conflict their students had created within the University Heights
community.
One might ask why University at Buffalo would consider investing time and energy into
remedying this problem, as it would not seem to directly impact the day-to-day operations of the
University. However, re-visiting the Universitys goals and mission statement would reveal that
not attending to this issue would construe the institution as not fulfilling its mission. Claiming a

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

falsehood like working to positively impact local communities and failing to do so may have
many potential consequences. For instance, local community members may choose not to enroll
or allow their children to enroll in the University, the University may be labeled as an infamous
party school and harm its reputation, and/or partnerships the University has with local
constituents for service-learning or research may be severed if a sincere effort to remedy the
situation is not made. Therefore, it is sensible for the University to invest in endeavors to remove
itself from this harsh limelight and work towards a peaceful relationship with the University
Heights community.
Therefore, I posit that the University would be wise in consulting organizational theory as
a means to devising solutions to this issue. The University has certainly employed solutions in
the past that I will discuss in greater length, but interviews with current members of the
University at Buffalo community reveal that this issue has yet to find a finite solution. In this
paper, I will first discuss the methodology in which I conducted interviews, made observations,
and add further context to the issue at hand. Next, I will describe two organizational
theories/frames, general and social systems theory and organizational learning theory, which will
then aid in the analyzing of the strained relationship between the University and the University
Heights community. By comparing and contrasting these two theories/frames, a more nuanced
conceptualization of this conflict will allow for further considerations of solutions. Ultimately, by
consulting general and social systems theory and theories of organizational learning theory, it
will become possible to gain greater insights into the conflict between University at Buffalo and
the University Heights community, thereby producing alternative solutions with an
understandably greater probability of creating an effective impact.
Methodology and Context

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

Consulting the archives of University at Buffalos student newspaper, The Spectrum, was
useful in gathering large amounts of information regarding this issue on a longitudinal scale.
Other news sources, such as The Buffalo News, were consulted as well. These sources were used
to draw multiple inferences regarding the issue, gain insight into specific events that occurred in
the past, analyze the Universitys and the University Heights communitys behavior, actions, and
responses to specific events in Buffalo history.
Interviews were conducted in order to gain additional information. Two undergraduate
University at Buffalo students were interviewed, along with Barbara Ricotta, the Vice President
of Student Affairs. Interviews with the University at Buffalo students were approximately 20-30
minutes and involved questions regarding the Universitys relationship with the University
Heights community, safety within the University Heights district, and the Universitys twentyfour hour bus system. The interview with Ricotta lasted approximately one-hour and included
questions regarding interactions between the University and the University Heights community,
previous solutions employed by the University to address withstanding conflict in the University
Heights district, and how certain organizational decisions were made.
In order to gain further context of the situation, it may prove useful to list previous
solutions employed by the University. In an attempt to resolve conflict with the University
Heights community, University at Buffalo has: financed the purchasing and installation of
surveillance cameras within the University Heights district (Church, 2008), created partnerships
with the University Heights community to provide students for community service opportunities
(Andalzone, 2015), extended the patrolling of University Police to include the University
Heights area (B. Ricotta, personal communication, March 20), installed Porta-Potties to address
reports of students publically urinating on University Heights residents property (Michel, 2013;

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

B. Ricotta, personal communication, March 20), and re-arranged bus routes of the twenty-four
hour bus system to include attractive locations to visit beyond the University Heights community
(B. Ricotta, personal communication, March 20). Of these known solutions, the University has
also contemplated a solution in which the University purchased housing in the University
Heights community to house undergraduate students and students within the Student Affairs
graduate program (B. Ricotta, personal communication, March 20). These students would then,
theoretically, place their studies of student development into practice by fulfilling hall director
positions within said housing and spearheading community service initiatives within the district.
Referring back to the previous stated demands of the University made by University Heights
residents, it would seem that the University agreed to extend police presence into the University
Heights area but refused to discontinue the twenty-four hour bus service. With that said, an
exploration of organizational-decision making theory and general and social systems theory is
warranted in order to frame the conflict.
General and Social Systems Theory and Organizational Learning Theory
Bess and Dee (2012a) discuss general systems theory as the conceptualization of units
into virtual hierarchies based in complexity, and provide the main principles that comprise
general systems theory. For instance, a human being is, in and of itself, its own system that
pursues actions and behaviors to ensure its own survival. Within a human being, various organs
are working within their own systems to keep the human being alive: the circulatory system
comprising of the heart, veins, and arteries to carry blood throughout the body, the digestive
system that includes the stomach and intestines to digest food and absorb nutrients, etc. General
systems theory is designed such that this theory may also be applied to organizations as well.

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

Therefore, organizations are systems that, much like human beings, must interact with the
environment and other systems in order to coordinate its own survival. Organizations are
separated by boundaries which allows the system to separate itself from other systems,
facilitating the construction of its own external identity. Inputs and outputs exerted by and
between an organization and its environment must pass through what is known as the interface,
or the area of separation between an organizations boundaries and others. General systems
theory also includes the concept of feedback, or the process by which organizations receive
information on their outputs in terms of the attainment of goals, how well a particular output was
received, and so on. To further understand systems theory, it is important to discuss at greater
lengths the interactions between environments and systems. Thus, analyzing models of
organization-environment relations becomes invaluable in discussing the conflict between
University at Buffalo and the University Heights community.
Organization-environment relations models. Bess and Dee (2012b) discuss
organization-environment relations models based on two variables. Environmental determinism
is the first variable, best defined as the degree of control the environment exercises over the
organization (p. 135). The second variable, perceived choice, can be understood as the extent to
which an organizations leader believe they are able to make decisions and take action. Each
variable is discussed as either being high or low (e.g. high determinism, perceived low
choice), therefore resulting in four quadrants that delineate the type of relationship the
organization has with the environment and models for further extrapolation. Understanding
organization-environment relationships can be analyzed even further with the aid of contingency
theory.

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

Contingency theory. Bess and Dee (2012b) describe contingency theory as the idea that
organizational effectiveness is contingent on a judicious, rational matching of organizational
variables to environmental decisions. Duncan (1972, as cited in Bess & Dee, 2012b)
conceptualized an organizations effectiveness as relying on two variables: the degree of
complexity in the external environment and the rate of change in said environment. These
variables are characterized as either high or low, and result in four categories that describe
the best organizational model to respond to an environment given the previous variables. Thus,
organizational models will be described as either mechanistic (rigidly structured) or organic
(fluid structure) and with a degree of specialization that is low or high. By using models of
organization-environment relations with contingency theory, an opportunity to truly understand
the way in which an organization behaves within a specific environment presents itself.
Organizational learning theory. Organizational learning theory, on the other hand,
focuses more so on the organization itself as opposed to its interactions with the environment.
Bess and Dee (2012c) discuss organizational learning theory as an umbrella-term for many
different theories that frame organizations as entities capable of engaging in the process of
learning, much like individuals. For example, Huber (1991, as cited in Bess & Dee, 2012c)
discussed five organizational learning processes that an organization may utilize in their pursuit
of acquiring knowledge: congenital learning (learning from ancestors), experiential learning
(learning through experiments), vicarious learning (learning from other organizations
experiences), grafting (learning through adding new members or units), and searching and
scanning (producing solutions to identified problems).
Single- and double-loop learning. Argyris and Schns (1978, as cited in Bess & Dee,
2012c) theory of single- and double-loop learning is also considered an organizational theory.

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

This theory identifies organizational learning in one of two ways. Single-loop learning occurs
when feedback from organizational outputs (i.e. monthly budget reports, routine maintenance) is
utilized to inform and operationalize efforts to correct errors or improve performance. Thus,
single-loop learning attempts to correct mistakes but does not explore why the mistakes
occurred in the first place (Bess & Dee, 2012c, p. 675). Double-loop learning, on the other
hand, occurs when an organization examines the consequences of certain outputs and uses this
information to re-examine the organizations structure, goals, policies, and culture (Bess & Dee,
2012c). Therefore, double-loop learning tends to be a thorough, transformative process that may
re-frame an issue that organizations may try to solve with the potential to increase at determining
an effective solution whereas single-loop learning can be a largely ineffective process by which
to address a conflict or issue.
Systems Theory versus Organizational Learning Theory
Systems theory and organizational learning theory overlap in various ways. One example
of this crossover is each theories focus of organizational behavior. For example, consider the
systems theories of organization-environment relations models and contingency theory. While
each focus on an organizations interactions with the environment, they are each intimately
intertwined with the way in which organizations operate. Organization-environment relations
model, for example, focus on the way in which organizations take action within their
environment. Contingency theory builds upon these models by providing outlines of how
organizations should behave given the state of its environment. Similarly, organizational learning
theories also examine organizational behavior by placing emphasis on how organizational
behavior either facilitates or impedes organizational learning. Single- and double-loop learning,
for instance, discusses how an organization behaves after receiving output data: either engaging

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

10

in single-loop learning to address errors or in double-loop learning to re-examine the solution

being produced and the issue it is trying to remedy.
Along the same vein of thought, these theories also focus on environmental interaction as
well. For instance, organization-environment relation models describe how organizations will
likely interact with an environment based on organizational leaderships perceived choice,
whereas organizational learning theory posits learning as an active process, as evident from
Hubers organizational learning processes. Within Hubers processes, organizations are active
participants in learning by surveying other institutions, acquiring units or members with unique
knowledge to add to the organization, and experimenting in order to gather data. In this way, the
elements of systems theory and organizational learning theory find commonalities in examining
organizational behavior and interacting with their environment.
Systems theory and organizational learning theory, however, offer unique perspectives on
organizations. The value of systems theory lies within its conceptualization of organizations as
functioning within an environment. When an organization is framed as a system operating within
an increasingly complex environment comprised of other systems, it becomes apparent that its
actions and behaviors are often somehow related to the systems and environments it interacts
with. This becomes evident in both contingency theory and organization-environment relation
models, in which possibilities for organizational behavior and aptitude for addressing an issue
are deemed based on the characteristics of the organization and the environment. It is also
important to note that this claim is not possible without systems theory introducing organizations
as their own unique system comprised of tasks, strengths, and weaknesses. As a result, systems
theory posits organizations as their own unique entities whose actions and behaviors are often
related to, if not contingent of, the environment in which they are placed.

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

11

Organizational learning theory does indeed incorporate some elements of systems theory
by recognizing that organizations may gain or enhance their knowledge by interacting with the
environment (Bess & Dee, 2012c). As one can imagine, however, organizations tend to be the
main focus of organizational learning theory. In fact, organizational learning theory tends to
focus not on the organization itself, but the processes within it. Single- and double-loop learning,
for example, does not discuss the characteristics of an organization and its behavior, but rather
attempt to classify the learning that occurs from engaging in a very specific behavior: evaluating
output data in correct an error or solving a problem. A focus on organizational processes within
organizational learning theory becomes evident yet again when examining Hubers
organizational learning processes, which discusses the way in which organizations can acquire
new knowledge.
Combining systems theory and organizational learning theory are the optimal lenses from
which to analyze the conflict between University at Buffalo and the University Heights district.
To gain greater insights into this conflict, utilizing systems theory allows for the deconstructing
of the context in which the conflict is occurring. The kind of environment that the University at
Buffalo is located in and how the environment impacts the University is the type of information
that will prove useful in deconstructing the context of this conflict and providing clarity into the
Universitys behavior. In doing so, it may be possible to reveal alternative solutions to those
introduced in the past.
Organizational learning theory will also be instrumental in understanding this conflict as
well. To be specific, organizational learning theory can be used to analyze the way in which the
University has engaged in organizational learning in the process of finding remedies to its
conflict with the University Heights. Inferences into the type of organizational learning the

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

12

University engages in may also be made by previous solutions provided in the past as well.
When combined, systems theory will deconstruct the context in which this conflict occurs by
identifying the elements of the situation and its players. Furthermore, categorizing the
Universitys relationship with the environment in tandem with organizational learning theory will
facilitate the understanding of the University organizational learning processes in its attempt to
find a resolution to its conflict with the University Heights district.
From Theory to Practice
It will be imperative to first classify the relationship the University at Buffalo has with
the environment. As stated earlier, the University at Buffalo is a large research university with an
enormous impact on a local and global scale. One could then consider the environment in which
the University interacts with and its factors virtually endless, rendering a classification of the
relationship between the institution and its environment useless. For the purposes of this paper, I
will classify the environment in which the student disturbances are occurring in: the University
Heights district/community.
Using Bess and Dees (2012b) table of organization-environment relation models, it
becomes possible to categorize the relationship the University has with the University Heights
community. In terms of environmental determinism, or the degree of control the environment has
over the institution, it can be said that the University Heights community constitutes high
environmental determinism. The University Heights residents have demonstrated over the years
that it is holds no reservations over voicing their outrage over students disturbing their
neighborhood, causing alarm for University administrators who wish to maintain a pleasant
external identity when community concerns about University at Buffalo students regularly make
media headlines (Raguse, 2014; Michel, 2013; Specht, 2014). As discussed earlier, the

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

13

Universitys reputation becomes endangered by such media coverage, thereby constricting the
University to address the problem in some form. Therefore, it can be said that the multiple
attempts to smooth the relationship between University at Buffalo and the University Heights
area and the diverse nature of said attempts exemplifies the institutions being highly reactive to
that of its environment.
When considering perceived choice, the Universitys leadership can be said to understand
their degree of choice as high when making institutional decisions. This degree of perceived
choice is inferred from the Universitys methods in addressing the conflict. First, the myriad of
diverse solutions provided in addressing elements of this conflict suggest that the organizations
leadership have a considerable degree of choice in determining what solutions to experiment
with, such as the installation of Porta-Potties (Michel, 2013), the purchasing and installation of
security cameras (B. Ricotta, personal communication, March 20,; Church, 2008), and placement
of University Police into the University Heights area (B. Ricotta, personal communication,
March 20). Secondly, from a systems theory perspective, University at Buffalo jeopardized its
boundaries and external identity by addressing and investing in solutions to resolve the issue of
student crime/disturbances in the University Heights community and outside of their own
organization. Though the University had the option of investing in solutions that remained within
the organization, the institution decided upon investing in solutions outside of the organization,
again demonstrating an understanding of the Universitys leadership as holding high choice in
institutional decisions. High environmental determinism combined with high perceived
organizational leadership choice indicates Quadrant Four within Bess & Dees (2012b) table of
organization-environment relations models. This categorization indicates that the University and
University Heights are engaged in a symbiotic relationship, where the institutions actions have

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

14

an effect on the University Heights district and vice-versa (Bess & Dee, 2012b). This distinction
will prove useful in crafting pathways to a resolution to the conflict between the University and
the University Heights community.
Examining the Universitys learning processes will prove useful in deciphering how the
University should proceed with resolving the conflict. Of Hubers organizational learning
processes, it is clear that the University has engaged in, for the most part, one of the processes.
For instance, there is no doubt that the University engaged in experiential learning. An interview
with University at Buffalos Vice President of Student Affairs, Barbara Ricotta, confirms this.
Ricotta claims that the relationship the University has with University Heights residents
changes with the wind, contingent on which residents are current leaders within the
community (B. Ricotta, personal communication, March 20). So as to steady the status of its
relationship, it could be said that the University experimented with solutions to complaints of
student crime within the community, but also experimented with the way in which the solutions
were received by University Heights residents. Proof of this experimentation can be found within
select news articles of 2013. Khoury (2013) describes a meeting of University Heights residents,
city of Buffalo representatives, Buffalo Police, and a University representative in October 2013
that included many demands made by the University Heights residents to the University, but
made no mention of calls for the installation of Porta-Potties. One month later, Michel (2013)
covers the upheaval of University Heights residents in response to the Universitys installation of
two Porta-Potties in the neighborhood. This solution comes as a shock to the residents, with one
commentator stating Their answer to these drunken kids was not to better patrol the buses, not
to curtail the number of buses, but to put up Porta-Potties to protect their buildings. This is an
insult to the community (Michel, 2013). It can be inferred that the University took a risk in

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

15

solving this problem in a manner on their own terms as opposed to the ones suggested by the
community itself. It can, however, be said, that the University did also engage in Hubers
organizational learning process of searching by attending the meeting described by Khoury
(2013).
Evidence of single- and double-loop learning is less easily discerned as the distinction
between the two types of learning is defined by an organizations attempt to connect a current
issue or error back to the organizations purpose, structure, and culture. While Ricotta (one of the
chief leaders to addressing issues surrounding the University Heights community) did not
explicitly mention such reflection, it may be possible to draw inferences regarding single- and
double-loop learning from the actions of University at Buffalo. For instance, the purchasing of
security cameras for the University Heights neighborhood may represent single-loop learning.
Simply put, the University may have understood that student crime in the University Heights
community could potentially increase the arrest of students exhibiting criminal behavior,
decrease crime rates, which would therein reduce malicious media coverage of the University.
This would reflect single-learning as the University would understand the issue of student crime
in the University Heights area as a recurring issue that still needed solutions. However, recent
events may reflect ascension from single- to double-loop learning.
Recently, the University has entered a partnership with the University Heights
community to in an event called ReTree the District, an activity in which University at Buffalo
students will assist the University Heights community in planting new trees for their
neighborhood. This solution, one might say, is more artfully crafted. First, it can be considered
that a handful of the Universitys previous attempts to ease tensions in the University Heights
community were examples of single-loop learning. However, this initiative returns to the

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

16

Universitys goals of making a positive impact on its local community. This pro-environment
move demonstrates a sincere attempt on the part of the University to display its respect for the
University Heights community by assisting in its beautification. While this fix does not directly
solve conflict between the University Heights community and the University itself, perhaps its
strength lies within its indirectness. By including the same population the University Heights
community chastises in the ReTree the District initiative, the identity of the University and its
students may shift. This initiative proves beneficial not only for the district, but for UB students
themselves as they gain valuable community service experience. Indeed, this initiative reflects
double-loop learning: University at Buffalo, instead of applying Band-Aid fixes, seems to have
revisited the culture and mission of the University which, in return, resulted in the institutions
transformation of remedial efforts. Indeed, this initiative instills hope for the University, as it
may create a culture in which students behavior, when in the University Heights district, reflects
a sincere respect for the community as opposed to selfishness.
Advice & Solutions
The combination of general and social systems theories with organizational learning
theory reveals that relying on double-loop learning more often when considering solutions to the
issue of student conduct in the University Heights community will be important in finding a
permanent solution. Furthermore, these solutions would benefit from conceptualizing the
relationship between the University and the University Heights community as a symbiotic
relationship, as framed by contingency theory. For instance, when there is malevolent behavior in
the University Heights community on the part of University at Buffalo students, the community
suffers from the actual consequences of their behavior while the University also suffers, if only
from the bad publicity their students receive. However, when both the University and University

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

17

Heights partner to make a positive impact, each organization prospers which is an indicator of a
symbiotic relationship. Applying contingency theory to this relationship would reveal that the
University (mechanistic, due to its rigid structuring of positions and tasks) and the University
Heights community (an environment rich with complexities when considering the heterogeneity
of the residents and diversity of crimes and conflicts) are aptly matched: the University is highly
specialized departmentally to handle the complex situations and issues of student crime within
the University Heights community.
First, I would advise University at Buffalo to consider would be to evaluate the
University Heights community in terms of how they conceptualize the University. For instance,
with the demands of ending the twenty-four hour bus service and extending the University police
presence into the University Heights, it is understandable why the University would be
apprehensive in agreeing to these requests. Perhaps unbeknownst to those outside the University,
the twenty-four hour bus system is not utilized solely for the trafficking of UB students into the
University Heights community. In fact, during the normal daytime hours, this service is used to
transport students to their classes, home to their dorms, to food markets, and commercial shops.
By the same token, extending University Police presence from the campus to neighboring
communities blurs the boundaries between the University and its environment and consumes
resources. A degree of transparency between the University and its environment may, in this
case, pave the way for alternative solutions to be found.
The University may also benefit from engaging in Hubers other organizational learning
processes. One example of this in action could be engaging in the act of grafting, or searching for
new members or units to add to the institution in order to solve this issue. An outside public
relations firm or a student conduct professional/strategist could be potential additions to the

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

18

organization that could assist in finding a suitable solution. Gee (2014) illustrates the issue of
student crime and misbehavior in the University Heights as existing for several years. With this
information, congenital learning, or learning from older/previous members, may also be a
valuable path to resolution for the University as well. Furthermore, creating partnerships with
nearby higher education institutions that have also had students accused of committing crimes
within the University Heights area could provide the opportunity for a coalition dedicated to
solving these issues within the community as well. However, these learning processes must
demonstrate evidence of double-loop learning taking place. The expenditure of resources that can
only be considered as short-term Band-Aid fixes is unwise, to say the least. Double-loop
learning combined with organizational learning processes would, theoretically, be more likely to
provide worthwhile solutions.
Conclusion
Combining organizational learning theory with general and social systems theory is a
venture abound with possibilities. General and social systems theory frames the relationship
between the University at Buffalo and the University Heights community as symbiotic.
Therefore, if poor, overly ambitious solutions are applied, such as that of the Porta-Potty
installations, than poor results will follow. However, if a thoughtful solution is applied, it is much
more likely that a positive result will follow. The ReTree the District event is the best example
of this symbiotic relationship. University Heights is supplied with University at Buffalo students
who assist in the beautification of the neighborhood as opposed to disturbing and destroying it.
As a result, University at Buffalo students gain a worthwhile experience in community service
while maintaining an excellent public image. This is most likely because this event is most likely
evidence of double-loop learning. In essence, if students are the main issue causing a disturbance

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

19

within the University at Buffalo, then they may also be the solution. Revisiting the Universitys
mission to positively impact the University Heights community could therefore provide the
opportunity for the institution to instill this message in its students, therein creating a culture in
which respecting the University Heights community and district becomes commonplace.

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

20
References

Andalzone, C. (2015, April 17). UB students pitch in and dig in for Saturdays ReTree the
District. University at Buffalo. Retrieved from www.buffalo.edu
Bess, J.L. & Dee, J.R. (2012a). General and social systems theory. In J.L. Bee & J.R. Dee (Eds.),
Understanding college and university organization. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Bess, J.L. & Dee, J.R. (2012b). Organizational environments. In J.L. Bee & J.R. Dee (Eds.),
Understanding college and university organization. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Bess, J.L. & Dee, J.R. (2012c). Organizational learning. In J.L. Bee & J.R. Dee (Eds.),
Understanding college and university organization. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
Buckley, E. (2009, May 10). A UB student murdered hours after graduating. WBFO News.
Retrieved from news.wbfo.org
Church, L. (2008, October 17). New cameras installed in University Heights. The Spectrum.
Retrieved from www.ubspectrum.com
Gee, D.J. (2014, May 25). Concerns about University Heights have been around for years.
Buffalo News. Retrieved from www.buffalonews.com
Michel, L. (2013, November 16). Porta-Potties not much of a solution to drunk students on South
Campus, neighbors say.
Our Universitys Missions, Vision, and Goals (n.d.). University at Buffalo. Retrieved from
www.buffalo.edu
Nostro, L. (2010, November 1). University Heights meeting becomes heated over police
presence. The Spectrum. Retrieved from www.ubspectrum.com

ITS ALL IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD

Raguse, L. (2014, September 1). New semester means loud parties return at UB. WIVB.
Retrieved from www.wivb.com
Specht, C. (2013, September 30). University Heights residents share party concerns with UB
officials. The Buffalo News. Retrieved from www.buffalonews.com
The Spectrum (2014, September 2). Two burglaries occurred in the University Heights over
Labor Day weekend. The Spectrum. Retrieved from www.ubspectrum.com
Tarhan, B. (2012, November 13). Witness recounts one of weekend assaults in University
Heights. The Spectrum. Retrieved from www.ubspectrum.com
UB at a Glance (n.d.). University at Buffalo. Retrieved from www.buffalo.edu

21