DISCOURSE
- Proposal to ban biking, skating unrealistic Editorial
- College newspaper's use of profanity unwarranted Editorial
- Homework is a helpful supplement to education Lucy Rodriguez
- Fla. among worst perps in compensation denial policy Sarah Paulk
- Letters to the Editor
Proposal to ban biking, skating unrealistic
Editorial
People have noticed the plethora of bicycles and skateboards on campus this year and some have expressed opposition to these alternate means of transportation. But those who question why so many students feel the need for transportation other than their own two feet need to take a break from their premium parking privileges and spend a day or two parked in Lot 18.
The walk from Lot 18 to the green takes nearly 20 minutes, depending on the amount of sidewalk closures due to construction, and that's at a steady pace. The shuttle that was supposed to solve the distance problem can add another 10 minutes to the average walking time, making it a good half-hour excursion from the car to
the classroom.
A bike or a skateboard reduces students' commute time considerably and cuts down an unreasonably
long walk.
The limited number of housing permits has restricted many students who live on campus from parking anywhere near their dorms. The students who weren't lucky enough to obtain a nearby pass don't even have a chance to purchase a premium parking pass. They are forced to park either in Lot 18 or Lot 53 and take a 30-minute walk home if they live on campus. These students need access to their cars in a reasonable amount of time, and the ability to skateboard and bicycle through campus should be available to them.
Parking a mile from home is hard enough but being forced to walk there is ridiculous. These unfortunate housing students deserve the right to pedal or skate across campus. In fact, the university should consider
buying them bike trailers to cart
their groceries.
Some are concerned with the safety risks posed by riders speeding by on campus sidewalks. But UNF's rules that prohibit skateboards and
bicycles from covered walkways greatly reduce this risk, as most pedestrian congestion is under the walkways. Skateboarders and bicyclists need to heed the university's regulations, be aware of the dangers associated with their speed and be conscious of pedestrians, but a potential accident is no reason to ban riders.
Accidents can happen almost anywhere on campus, and not just with skateboards and bicycles. Just check out the "Safety council votes unanimously to close road on campus" on the front page. Car accidents are becoming more and more frequent on campus.
Aside from that, if the administration really wants to prohibit accidents on campus, it might as well ban geese, chemistry labs, stairs, the use of silverware in the cafeteria and other hazardous objects. Banning such things is illogical and irrational - much like banning wheels on campus property.
Skateboarding and bicycling are common among UNF students for a good reason - distance. They are not trying to harm the university; riders are just trying to get to class.
As the university grows, these alternate means of transportation will undoubtedly increase among
students, and the administration needs to be aware of these students' needs. Maybe instead of banning wheels around campus, administrators could fix cracks on pavements or divide sidewalks to give both riders and pedestrians a safer route to class.
College newspaper's use of profanity unwarranted
Editorial
Late nights in a newspaper office can lead to some strange decisions. For confirmation, just ask a Spinnaker staffer about some of the more experimental eating habits witnessed during our weekly production.
The Rocky Mountain Collegian's decision to publish an editorial consisting of four words - "Taser this... F--- Bush" - can't be blamed on a snap decision during the course of a long evening. The statement was a gross misuse of power and a disservice to collegiate journalism.
It's hard to objectively consider the Collegian's explicit editorial a failure or a success, as its purpose is not clear. If it was meant to be a bold political statement articulating the paper's opposition on the current executive branch, it failed miserably. If it was designed as a heavy-handed grab at media infamy, it served its purpose admirably.
The Collegian's employees, particularly Editor in Chief J. David McSwane, might be witnessing life on the other side of the tape recorder, but the incident has harmed the welfare of the newspaper and its staff. Advertisers pulled a total of $30,000 worth of content after the editorial ran, and the Collegian's paid staff has had their pay docked 10 percent to stymie the financial hemorrhaging. McSwane's job
security has now been called
into question.
The CSU editorial board might have rationalized the headline's existence in any number of ways, but the racy declaration carries with it more than just baggage for the staff of the Collegian. It attacks the very heart of the paper's existence. The editorial brings into question the paper's credibility.
Writing "F--- Bush" in dominant font does not facilitate discussion. Some readers will pass it off as the work of a college staff going through a rebellious phase. Others will rise up to decry the headline as a piece of yellow journalism.
Unless a publication regularly publishes articles about Bat Boy, credibility should be of particular importance. This statement does little to further the conversation
about the merits of the current
administration.
No country can truly thrive until the media has the ability to rapidly disseminate information to the public without imposition. This thought keeps many newspapers going through the late nights and relentless deadlines. Whether they represent a major metropolis or an up-and-coming college campus, the ability to freely practice journalism is vital to promoting a virile democracy and an informed public.
The facts remains that every newspaper would be within its rights to publish such an inflammatory headline, but the pursuit of credibility should dissuade editors from making such a rash decision. For the Collegian, the issue is not about overstepping the constructs of the First Amendment. It's a matter of good taste.
Homework is a helpful supplement to education
Student Opinion
Parents and students have long debated whether schools give too much or too little homework. Some private and so-called independent schools have banned homework altogether.
Eliminating homework prevents children from learning the basics of mathematics that enable them to conquer algebra and calculus. The no homework rule deprives them of studying the complexities of biology and chemistry.
The schools' reasons for banning homework range from parents claiming that students need more time to spend with their families to students needing more time to just be kids. Parents also feel homework is a burden because educators are too focused on getting students prepared for standardized tests. The needless ranting goes on and on.
Parents are making these excuses because they are over-scheduling their children or not creating a homework schedule that works for them and their kids.
Anti-homework parents in Florida also don't realize the importance of the Florida Assessment Comprehensive Test.
The FCAT is part of the state's plan to increase children's education by setting benchmarks for students to reach and exceed. School districts' test results from 2006 show some students in Duval County could not read at their grade level.
If parents feel their children are better off with no homework, they should send them to one of the strange private and independent schools that have a no homework policy. At least then parents will be able to say they did something about it.
Never mind that private schools are not licensed or accredited by the U.S. Department of Education. Try to forget diplomas from private schools don't require approval from the state. Ignore the fact private school teachers and administrators don't need to be certified in Florida. Maybe it's not important that Harris Cooper, a Duke University psychology professor who has studied this issue for 20 years, found homework seems to increase student success.
Parents that agree with the no homework policies need to think again.
Six hours of class time does not allow for children to practice and master necessary skills for a successful future.
Parents can cry all they want,
but this is for the benefit of their children.
Contact Lucy Rodriguez at discourse@unfspinnaker.com -- PERMALINK -- TOP OF PAGE
Fla. among worst perps in compensation denial policy
Student Opinion
Alan Crotzer spent 24 years in a Florida prison for a crime he never committed, and he didn't even get a bus ticket home.
In January 2006, he was released when DNA evidence proved him innocent of 1981 rape and kidnapping convictions. But at 45, Crotzer has spent most of his life behind bars and isn't even entitled to the "re-entry" programs that parolees benefit from, said Michael Olenick, his attorney.
Although Gov. Jeb Bush and the Florida House of Representatives unanimously approved a bill that would have given Crotzer a cool $1.25 million for his trouble, the Florida Senate essentially said, "Don't take it personally, but we just can't spare
the cash."
It is unfortunate that Crotzer hails from the Sunshine State. If this were Connecticut, maybe he'd get $5 million like James Tillman, who spent 18 years in prison for a rape he didn't commit.
Or if this were Missouri, he'd at least get $50 for every day he was wrongfully incarcerated - roughly $438,000, in his case. Even
the federal government doles out $50,000 per year erroneously spent in their big house - $100,000 if you're
on death row.
But this is Florida, and here we have no laws on what to do if the criminal justice system fails and sends an innocent man to prison for more than two decades.
For years now bills that would provide compensation for exonerated prisoners have been rejected.
Lawmakers can't seem to agree on the "clean hands proviso." Republican House Whip Ellyn Bogdanoff said the state shouldn't compensate prisoners wrongfully convicted of one crime who have an otherwise lengthy rap sheet.
In Alan Crotzer's case, since he stole some beer when he was 18, he'd be ineligible for any compensation for the years he spent in jail for a completely unrelated crime he didn't even commit. If Bogandoff and others have their way, Crotzer won't see a dime.
The ironic thing is that prior convictions usually play a huge role in spawning wrongful convictions. Jenny Greenberg, director of the Innocence Project in Florida, said most exonerated prisoners have prior convictions, and those pictures often lead to incorrect identification.
Twenty-four years, six months and 13 days later, Alan Crotzer is trying
to start his life over. Florida needs
to pass this legislation in an effort to compensate Crotzer and other
exonerated prisoners of the money and dignity they were deprived of.
Contact Sarah Paulk at discourse@unfspinnaker.com -- PERMALINK -- TOP OF PAGE
Letters to the Editor
Teachers who don't teach shouldn't accept paychecks
Dear Editor,
As a new full-time student, I can't help but notice a downfall in the organizational skills of some of the professors at the University of North Florida.
At first glance, it might appear I have had a bad experience with my professors this semester; however, after bringing this concern to the attention of friends and classmates, it seems I am not the only one who shares this opinion.
As I scanned the pages of RateMyProfessor.com - which I understand is not the most reliable source of information prior to registration - I started to notice a trend of students pointing out this flaw in professors.
In only my first month of class, many classes have been canceled without notice, test dates and paper due dates have been changed without clear direction on the new dates, and instructors forget what they have told students regarding objectives or requirements for homework.
This causes confusion and makes it more difficult to properly manage time for other classes and assignments. I understand there are times when circumstances force changes in a syllabus, but teachers should at least try to stay organized and on schedule.
These miscommunications directly affect grades and the learning atmosphere of the classroom. With nothing but respect for professors, I still must remind administrators students pay to receive an education and professors get paid to educate.
Professors: If we are required to fulfill your requirements for class, I think the least you can do is cover your end of the bargain.
Justin Melquist
Sophomore, Finance
Most dietary restrictions are an unbearable thought
Dear Editor,
I want to let you know how appalling I thought Brandon Jesters' viewpoint was concerning overweight citizens in the Sept. 12 column "It's about time trans fat intake became regulated."
It seems Jester feels the government has every right to decide what citizens are putting into their bodies. So as long as the government feels you are in a certain weight range, all is well. That's like a scenario in which the government decides which citizens are acceptable and which aren't. Sounds familiar.
I'm sorry - people work hard. They deserve to do with their bodies as they please, and they certainly do not need to worry whether the government or Jester is happy with it.
The republic we reside in decides which policy to take by listening to the majority of the population, and if the majority wants to indulge in a Happy Meal from time to time, then so be it.
I like soda. I like pizza. I also like working out and being active. If the government or Jester tries to take away my God-given right to snack on whatever I want, they sure as hell better bring the big guns. This junk food junkie will not relinquish a single donut, hamburger, or basket of cheese fries without a fight.
I also want to let you know how idiotic I thought Courtney Lambert's viewpoint on the same topic was in the Sept. 12 column "Life, liberty, fatty food: Don't legislate my lunch." This nation is embarrassed by the decline of its citizens. It is time to stop letting fat be acceptable.
Is it fair that health insurance rates skyrocket with the alarming rate of cardiovascular disease caused by unhealthy lifestyles? No. Is it fair citizens who travel by air pay for the extra seat used by someone who cannot fit their body into one? No.
America has let the flab fly for too long. It sounds mean, and I feel sympathy for the small sliver of the population that does have glandular problems. But the fact is that the majority of the population does not have these genetic issues, and the rest are just letting it go.
Food is expensive. It is also what gives you the energy to live. So go nuts: Spend a little more on the things that are going to able you to function. No one has ever been put on the streets for eating right. It won't break the bank - trust me, I live well below
the poverty line.
It seems Lambert is in total accordance with letting adults choose what they want to do with their bodies. Great idea - let's legalize heroin and cocaine. I think plenty of adults would not mind putting that into their bodies on a daily basis.
The fact is that most citizens have no idea what is good or bad for them. That is where leading experts come in. They help policy makers choose the best path so the population does not expire. They say being fat is unhealthy. They also say the majority is not taking heed and preventing themselves from becoming fat; therefore, restrictions must be put on the population as a whole.
I think Lambert should pull her head out of the sand and realize that putting small restrictions on the items that are killing and harming American citizens in the long run might be a good idea.
Brian Wehle,
Lifeguard, Ponte Vedra Beach