649 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(04/15/14 7:00pm)
In 1994, the Alabama Council of Higher Education passed a statewide articulation agreement, which built partnerships between community colleges and universities, requiring all core credits transferred from a two-year college to fulfill requirements at four-year colleges.
This agreement allows students to easily transfer between colleges without losing credit hours.
In 2010, Auburn University rolled around to changing its core curriculum model to meet this standard.
Before the revised model, students were required to take two literature courses and two history courses. Afterward, students were required to take either two literatures or a single history or vice versa.
Presented with this option, students have overwhelmingly decided to opt out of taking two literature courses and instead take two history courses. This change resulted in a decline in the number of students enrolled in English courses and hampered the department's ability to fill classes.
Now, those educators fear for their jobs, according to various English instructors.
Less classes mean less instructors. With their year-long employee contracts expiring soon, instructors are left in a state of suspense on whether or not they will be asked to return. This situation, coupled with a tenure track inaccessible to most instructors, recently caused many to seek employment elsewhere or simply put their collegiate careers on hold.
However, Jeremy Downes, chair for the department of English, stated these instructors' jobs are relatively safe, thanks to those who have already found jobs elsewhere.
Yet, the English department still faces an issue: how to fill their classes? The solution: cut back on classes.
We disagree.
The process behind reading comprehension can be found in the fundamentals of our education. It makes students worldlier and establishes intangible connections among the past, the present and the distant.
Core history courses seat approximately 200 students. As a result, students easily get away with not paying attention in class by texting, snoozing or daydreaming. History instructors are keen on this trend and enforce harsh penalties on students caught not paying attention, resulting in students viewing the professor as a ruthless despot rather than someone who is approachable.
Additionally, these professors generally give multiple-choice exams, encouraging students to adopt "stuff and flush" study habits. We think this exam format is not conducive to learning or to a collegiate environment.
Now, that's not to say we don't appreciate the history department. We probably wouldn't even know what despot means if not for them. History serves as a vital part of creating a well-rounded curriculum. We cannot plan for the future without understanding the pitfalls of the past.
But we would like to make a case for literature courses.
We understand translating thoughts onto a page does not come naturally for everyone. However, this skill can be learned though practice and is applicable in the professional world, regardless of job or major. The last thing you want is for an employer to think you read and write on a 7th grade level because you sent out a poor email.
Literature classes also promote discussion during class, aiding in comprehension and promoting of analytical skills. You just don't get that in a history lecture, where information is crammed in bulk into your ear.
We believe by reducing the history core classes' maximum capacity, students will inevitably be rerouted into literature. This change will reduce burdens on both department and instructors. It's mutually beneficial. It allows for potential of better rapport with students and history instructors while also reducing the workload on their graduate teaching assistants. To top it off, English department instructors will no longer face the impending doom of potentially losing their jobs at the esteemed Auburn University.
We understand this might be an oversimplification of a complex issue, but as a journalistic body, you can't fault us for our commitment to the written word.
(04/03/14 4:51pm)
There we sat in Suite 1111 of the Student Center six months ago.
We, the Fall 2014 Plainsman staff, were mainly confused.
Our normal office routine of teaching ourselves to read by watching FOX News was interrupted by two questions, "Who are Eric Hutchinson and Gloriana?" and "Why are they playing at Auburn University?"
We realized it didn't matter who they were. If we had to ask, they weren't big enough. The University Program Council had to do a better job at getting headliners.
As a result, we wrote an editorial, "'Are you not entertained?' No, we aren't."
But, was it pretentious of us to demand better bands to perform at Auburn? Well, we are going to throw some names at you. See if they sound familiar.
The Rolling Stones, Tina Turner, The Allman Brothers Band, Issac Hayes, Santana, Elton John, Elvis Presley, The Beach Boys, The Doobie Brothers, Bruce Springsteen, The Eagles, Charlie Daniels Band and R.E.M.
Do you know what they all have in common? They all performed at Auburn University.
We wanted bands we actually care to see; bands that get us excited. Excitement that can only be felt from seeing your favorite artists in the flesh. From feeling the first wave of sound from the amps crash into you. The bliss of hearing the first few notes of your favorite song. The sadness of it ending. These are all things we expect from a concert.
And nothing against Train, soul sister, but we would have been more excited to see them a decade ago.
All past travesties aside, UPC has turned it around by communicating via social media. Or maybe they just turned on a radio.
The Avett Brothers and B.o.B are as prominent in today's music scene as The Allman Brothers Band was in the 70s. We do not doubt the Auburn Arena will be filled with real fans, not just a bunch of students procrastinating their coursework on a Thursday night.
Seeing these big headlining bands will give students' minds the break they need near the end of the semester. It's clear UPC is trying to do this with every event they throw.
So what if the events are generally less than lackluster?
These are fellow students putting on events to help entertain their fellow students. If that isn't admirable enough for you, you can stop reading.
That said, we are still encouraging UPC to continue to make progress. We want to continue to see amazing artists like those who preformed here in the 70s.
If we could get Elton John to perform back in 1973, we see no reason we can't get headliners like The Black Keys or Drake to perform here now.
Keep the greats such as The Rolling Stones and Elvis Presley in your heads, UPC, and aim high.
(04/03/14 5:00am)
It has come to my attention how obsessed college girls are with being tan. Through this seemingly never-ending cold weather Auburn has endured, I have embraced my paleness.
In my hometown, there were three or four people in my high school that went to the tanning bed, but, other than that, it was fairly unheard of. The few tanning salons we did have were not in the best area of town, and it was considered not very classy for girls to go to the tanning bed.
People who went would be embarrassed if someone saw their car parked outside a tanning bed, and it was a joke that sometimes people would park next door and walk over.
Freshman year of college, I remember being very confused as to how half of the girls at Auburn were still extremely tan in the middle of December. The amount of people that use the tanning bed is much higher than I ever would have anticipated.
Before coming to college, I got one spray tan before prom and immediately regretted it because instead of the "glowing" tan I was promised, I ended up looking slightly orange, a look that clashed terribly with my green dress.
I also despised having to wait six hours after the spray tan before I could shower. I had never gone to the tanning bed because for years my mother had told me it was the worst thing for my skin and I would look like I was 50 when I was actually only 30 if I started going.
I never felt the need to go to the tanning bed because everyone else was pale like me in the winter.
This is not the case for college students. With the warmer weather, pools are starting to open and girls are panicking over their paleness. I have overheard multiple conversations in the Student Center and walking around campus where girls are stressed over their paleness.
This year, I caved in and went to the tanning bed twice before formal because I think I was actually glowing from how pale I was. The experience was a disaster.
I went to one of the tanning beds you can stand up in, because the idea of laying down in a small confined space sounds terrifying to me.
I went for ten minutes the first time, and ended up getting sunburned instead of tan, and then went for 8 minutes the second time.
It made very little difference. I had some color in my face for about a day but by formal day, which was only a day later, I was back to my normal color. And I was now $20 poorer.
The whole time I was in the tanning bed, I was picturing my skin turning to leather and half expected to have aged 15 years after I stepped out.
Other friends of mine took the spray tan route, but many of them went to the tanning bed or attempted to lay out the week before even though it was windy and fairly cold to be wearing only a bathing suit.
Finally, as a junior, I have learned that if there is one thing college girls are more obsessed with than over-sized T-shirts or Starbucks, it is being tan.
(03/27/14 9:00pm)
Newspapers strive to be objective, but we have a bias. We want to see Auburn succeed.
We printed two editorials about Jay Jacobs last year, "We need a leader, not a loser" and "The high cost of losing," calling for Jacobs to be fired.
We felt justified in our opinion, and we still feel it was the right call at the time. His decisions were an embarrassment to the University.
Jacobs seemed to be going by a system of trial and error; hiring and firing coaches here and there on a whim.
There almost seemed to be no logic or reason to his new hires. We saw this happen with Gene Chizik and Tony Barbee.
Jacobs hired Chizik after the former defensive coordinator had only won five games in two years at Iowa State. His reasoning? Chizik was an Auburn guy, and he was cheap.
Sure, he led us to a victory at the 2011 National Championship, but let's be honest, Cam Newton, Nick Fairley and several of Tommy Tuberville's recruits did all of the legwork.
As for Barbee, Auburn built a new arena for the men's basketball team in 2010, expecting Barbee to come through and form a team fans would want see play. What Auburn got was a joke -- the worst four-year stretch in program history -- and the Auburn Arena quickly became a $92.5 million tombstone for our men's basketball team.
Auburn Athletics was dead by 2012. Jacobs was burning the program to the ground with his incompetence. Auburn was in the Dark Age of athletics.
But two years later, despite his past failures, Jacobs has potentially turned the Auburn Athletics program around. He has sifted through the ashes and found a few pearls--literally.
Jacobs hired Gus Malzahn, who is one of the brightest offensive minds in football and brought the University to the BCS National Championship game in his first year.
He brought in Clint Myers for softball, who had two national championships in the Pac-12 and who left a Top-5 program to coach here.
Jacobs also got Sunny Golloway, who was the head coach of a consistent postseason contender at Oklahoma.
And now, he has gotten Bruce Pearl, who took Tennessee from 14-17 to 25-7 in one year and made them the No. 2 seed in the NCAA tournament with the same roster.
It will take a while for the basketball team to build themselves up to any sort of glory. Who knows, maybe Pearl will be able to pull off what Malzahn did in 2011.
We now have some of the most incredible coaching minds in college sports. Auburn University is in a veritable athletic Renaissance, and Jay Jacobs is the Medici.
Was it luck? Possibly. A miracle? Perhaps. All we really know is Jacobs gave us results, which is all we really care about.
Jacobs might actually go down in Auburn history if all goes well these next few years.
Now, this doesn't make us wrong for saying Jacobs should have been fired. He should have been.
However, he didn't buckle under the tremendous pressure the fans placed on him. It is fair to say Jacobs has redeemed himself. Hopefully, he can keep it up.
(03/28/14 2:45pm)
Let me preface this by saying I have nothing against supermodels or celebrities. I watch the Victoria's Secret fashion show and applaud their beauty and superbly toned bodies like any other 21-year-old college girl.
I don't even have a problem with models. They work to have those bodacious bods and more power to them. I congratulate their genes and the blessings nature gave them.
I used to go on Pinterest every single day beginning my freshman year at Auburn. I'm in a sorority, and it was something I was introduced to.
I didn't see anything wrong with the girls wearing the clothes that fit just perfectly, and I didn't even notice that they didn't have a single line, wrinkle or dimple on their impeccably tanned skin.
The cute clothes and fabulous eyeshadow tutorials blinded me.
Now, whenever I log into Pinterest, or shop online, something tugs at me.
I don't get as excited as I used to because all I see are "thinspirations," tiny meal recipes and women who are skinnier than the average middle schooler.
It's sad that my generation's perception of beauty has now come to desire a thigh-gap, and the definition of 'eating healthy' is barely eating at all.
I personally want to throttle the woman who thought to herself, "Hey, let me make myself so skinny that when I stand up I look like a prepubescent 12 year old."
That's not beautiful, and it's not hot. It's sad and unhealthy.
It's unnatural to see your bones, but it's now become a sense of pride in young women to see how long they can go without eating. I can't count how many times I go around campus and hear a girl complaining about her weight only to see that she's already tiny.
Girls are starting to try and mold themselves into who they see modeling online or in magazines. Some girls don't even have the body to be stick-and-bones, and they feel like a failure when they can't achieve it. It's all about looking like a tan Skeletor.
Even online brands are adding fuel to an already raging fire.
Recently, websites such as Target and Old Navy have gone under attack for photo shopping thigh gaps onto online models.
The worst was Target and the bathing suit. It was so noticeable and shows how big of an impact this bad fashion trend has.
I'm a huge supporter of campaigns that tell girls that "zero is not a size," or refuse to Photoshop and airbrush their models.
That's huge, and it makes a statement.
Maybe if girls saw actual models or celebrities without the Photoshop and airbrushing, then they wouldn't be so hard on themselves.
When I go on Pinterest now, it's hard for me not to feel the hit to my ego.
Then, I remember that I'm in college. I can't go run at the Recreation Center every single day for hours. I will eat my occasional McDonald's meal because I don't have time to cook for myself every day, and I have a rigorous class schedule.
So, Auburn women, don't be so hard on yourselves.
Step away from the Pinterest-palooza, put a bikini on and drink a margarita by the pool.
Don't let thinspirations and thigh gaps get you down, and if you make it to the Rec Center this week, maybe I'll see you there.
Maybe.
(03/27/14 3:45pm)
Personally, I just want to have a childlike wonderment about the world I live in, but maybe I need to love more things for that to happen.
Who knows? I'm young, I don't know everything, but I don't mind giving things a try.
I ate seeweed for the first time the other day.
It was OK, but I don't love it, so I probably won't go out of my way to eat it again. But at least now I can say that.
And, thankfully, I came to that realization immediately and won't have to go around for years wondering whether or not I love it.
Having goals and doing what you love should go hand-in-hand. Not too long ago, I was doing something that I didn't love.
I was a freshman working to major in something that I thought I could do based on what other people said I was good at, which sent me into a cave of doubt, then self reflection.
It was comforting to look back at my childhood because I felt so carelessly happy with everything leading me to become lackadaisical as a young adult.
But, from that realization, I found what I love and cherish to this very day, which wasn't much, but at least I know that I need to focus on that so much more from now on.
For me, it's peace, creativity and progress.
I know that seems broad, but at least I started the journey to find out who I really am because I did something that was hard. I realized that I wasn't who I wanted to be.
When I was a kid, it seemed like everything would just work out in the end thanks to my mom and dad, but these days, I'm just not sure.
I've seen people work hoping to make enough money to chase their dreams only to get a stupid driving ticket that sets them back a few months.
I have a friend who wants a camera, but his bills outweigh his paycheck, leaving him with just enough to get by. It kills me to see that because I look up to him.
The discussion I always bring up with him is to do what he loves instead of working a job that doesn't pay well, or even make him happy.
He is at an age where he still needs to have hope and assurance that he can change the world, which I think he can if he puts his effort into it.
Truthfully, I think everyone is changing the world one-way or another, whether they know it or not.
My friend is changing the world doing something that makes his goals and self-esteem worse, and you could say that is a selfless way of life, but he can do so much better.
For some reason, I feel like a lot of people can relate to stories like this on a personal level, and I think the reason is because the world has taken a sharp turn for the worst, or maybe it's because we're all getting older.
The older I get the more reality sets in, and right now, reality for me is minimum wage work, unpaid internships, and school work. To sum it up, Ramen noodles every night.
There seems to be no time for relaxing, and when there is, anxiety quietly tickles me out of my enjoyment.
Luckily for me, I am working toward doing the things that I love and hoping everything comes together soon.
So, to my friend, I hope that you are true to yourself and start doing what you love, because I know that it will help you to reach your goals.
(03/20/14 8:30pm)
I can't afford to pay my rent anymore.
It was a shocking discovery. It has been humbling and humiliating. And the hardest part of it all is that this is the best roommate situation I've ever been in. I had to call a roommate meeting like a diplomat and break the news to two of the nicest, coolest people I have ever met.
"Break the news" is a solid phrase. "Breaking news!" It's like someone took a sledgehammer and smashed the words into bits.
Deepening the lines around my mouth that fossilize the frowns and the sighs I had been wrestling. Breaking like the breaking of a home. Like a home-wrecker. Broken-up, like a spoiled love.
And then I felt selfish. Like I should be able to handle it. Magically pull time and energy and money out of the air, as if no one had thought to do that before. Conjure the groceries I need and the medicine to keep me going. My heart castigated itself for making my friends worry and for tearing apart our perfect balance of dishes-garbage-dishes, because girls do dishes and boys haul trash.
Hauling the trash from my brain, I wanted to scream, "This is not my choice!" I wanted to yell, "Never mind!"
I wanted to shout and break the numb silence that swirled around our living room, freezing the spiraling paisleys of my busy rug, wilting the stiff roses in her vases on the counter.
I don't want to go. I don't want to fill my gallery room with an anonymous sub-leaser and risk vacuuming months of Himalayan cat fur blotting out all evidence of my being there.
I don't want a more intrepid or wealthier tenant to sequel my presence and win my friends with late night confessions in front of a muted television and baked goods--because I can't cook at all, it's embarrassing. I don't want them to like her more. I don't want her to light Anthropologie candles or quote The Lord of the Rings or beat everyone at Cranium. Because that's my job.
And I know I'll still be in the same town, within the same circle of acquaintances, but when you live together, you are a clan. You are united and any sociology book could tell you that you form a special bond. Any psychology book could tell you that breaking up the family core cause stress and trauma and vast amounts of uncomfortable adjustments.
And now, what is there to do except to swallow my pride? Swallow my 4.0-gpa-with-two-part-time-jobs-and-a-killer-apartment arrogance and move on and move out? Because to live here, I have to work more. To work more, I have to study less. To study less, is to scrape by. To scrape by is to lose momentum. To lose momentum is to miss out. To miss out is to fall behind. To fall behind is to fail, and failing is swallowing my pride anyway.
Maybe it's okay to be selfish? Maybe I shouldn't call it selfish at all. What do you call it? Self-preservation?
(03/21/14 7:30pm)
The NFL draft is quickly approaching, and teams everywhere are constantly scrutinizing on which player they think can either turn their franchise around or help continue their success.
Without a doubt, the most talked about player in the upcoming class is former Texas A&M quarterback, 2012 Heisman winner Johnny Manziel.
That, for the most part, is due to his style of play, but also has a lot to do with his near celebrity status.
Let me start by saying that I love mobile quarterbacks. They are an absolute blast to watch and a real treat for football fans who love offense.
Quarterbacks who can run like a wide receiver are the biggest of defensive headaches on a college football field, but that doesn't mean Nick Marshall is the next Peyton Manning.
I don't think Manziel is either.
To back this up, take a look at some of the recent running QBs who took a shot at the bigs.
When you think about running quarterbacks, you most likely immediately think of Michael Vick.
Vick was a trailblazer for mobile quarterbacks everywhere, and he certainly saw substantial success in Atlanta running around making defenses look incredibly confused before he went to jail.
Where is Vick now? He's riding the bench behind Nick Foles, who looks like he's the got the starting job in Philly locked up for a while.
Next, there's Vince Young.
In college, Young was the engineer of what was the greatest pre-2013 Iron Bowl college football game of all time, a 41-38 win over Reggie Bush and USC in the 2006 Rose Bowl for the BCS National Championship.
During his time at Texas, Young ran through defenses as if they weren't even there. NFL scouts salivated as they thought they had discovered the next Vick.
Like Vick, after he was drafted third overall by the Tennessee Titans in the 2006 draft, Young saw some success, but it was limited.
Sure, he won some games and was even named to the Pro Bowl following his rookie season, but two years later, he suffered a season ending injury and watched from the sidelines as career-backup Kerry Collins led the Titans to a 13-3 record.
Young remained on the bench the following season and he was gone by 2010. He's out of the league now and probably won't be coming back anytime soon.
There's plenty of other examples, such as Tim Tebow of Florida and Matt Jones of Arkansas.
Of course there are success stories like Auburn's own Cam Newton, but Newton is a once-in-a-generation athlete.
I'm not saying for certain that Manziel won't pan out in the NFL. I'm just saying it's not likely.
One of my biggest reasons for my hesitance to be sold on Manziel is his tendency to throw a ball up for grabs.
There have been plenty of times where Manziel, in a scrambling situation, will just launch the ball into the air, hoping some Aggie will come down with it. You can't do that in the NFL; just ask Brett Favre, the league's career leader in interceptions.
As far as the character issue everyone loves to harp on so much, I don't see it as an issue.
If you really think about it, Manziel is doing the same sort of things any college student would do. He's just doing it on an exponentially larger budget.
I think Manziel can be a decent NFL player, but I don't see him as a top 10, or even first round pick.
If I'm an NFL general manager, I'd take Manziel in the third or fourth round. Put him on the Aaron Rogers system. Let him learn from your starter for a few years, and then when it's his time, he'll be ready.
(03/21/14 2:30pm)
It's one thing to compliment a woman, and it's another to yell vulgar and sexually offensive phrases at a woman across the street who is waiting for the pedestrian light.
Compliments are polite and positive. Catcalling isn't meant to be flattering. It's negative and meant to show dominance and power. If you think catcalling is appropriate behavior toward women, then it's appropriate for you to get punched in the face. It's disgusting, it's inappropriate and it shows what little respect the caller has for women and how it affects them.
Like many women, I've experienced my fair share of catcalling.
This time last year, a man sitting in a lawn chair yelled "How much?" as I waked on the opposite side of the empty street on my way to campus.
I didn't understand why. I wasn't dressed provocatively. I was wearing jeans, a crew neck tee shirt and sneakers. The two words he yelled across the street made me feel disgusting and humiliated, as if I needed to shield my body from the public eye.
Several weeks ago, I was in downtown Opelika taking pictures for a class assignment. A guy in his early twenties, and a boy, maybe eight years old, turned down the street I was on, and walked past me on the sidewalk.
I stopped to take pictures of the landscape. Moments later, I heard the guy say loudly, "Hey girl, you want my number?" I ignored him as I focused my lens and adjusted the aperture. I glanced over at him for a brief second. He continued to repeat himself while watching me as he and the kid walked down the street, away from me.
I ignored him again while I worked to compose my picture in the viewfinder. He yelled, "Bitch!" I heard him mumble several other things, but they weren't as loud.
Let's be real for a moment. Calling me a "bitch" by yelling it down the street isn't what he did wrong.
What he did wrong was expecting that I was going to stop what I was doing and "want his number."
He felt sorry for himself because I ignored him, refusing his attempt to be dominant. If he had stopped and talked to me like a decent person instead of passively catcalling with the hopes of getting some attention from the opposite sex, then perhaps he would have gotten a response as opposed to being ignored.
This instance didn't humiliate me, it frightened me. It didn't take long for him to become verbally aggressive. What if the next time I, or any woman, ignore someone's catcalls someone becomes aggressive, not just verbally but physically?
Catcalling is a gateway behavior. I myself have been followed on two separate occasions. Both instances had evolved from catcalling.
No woman should be treated like meat or objectified as some sexual object. Catcalling is intimidating, irritating and unnecessary. Any man who tries catcalling as a means of "getting some," in my opinion, isn't worth the time of day.
(03/06/14 10:15am)
Awareness is everything. It keeps us on track, ensures we know when our exams are, gets us to class on time and prevents us from getting hit by cars when we cross the street. Most everyone would say that they are aware of their surroundings, but global awareness is a concept many take for granted.
Global awareness is important now more than ever. The recent events in Ukraine have left many global actors in a state of uncertainty about the future of international politics. The conflict has placed the United States and Russia back into their usual corners of the ring. The situation is so tense, many other global actors have remained silent.
But do not stay deaf to the situation. We do not know where this conflict will lead, but do not wait to inform yourself until the climax.
It's easy to stay ignorant in today's day and age. Technology and mass media have made it easier than ever to remain in our own bubbles of information. Technology has placed all the information of the world at our fingertips, but we use it to take selfies instead. Does this show that our generation is taking everything for granted? The world could burn tomorrow, and there would be some jackass out there who uploads a selfie next to the flames #endoftheworldasweknowit.
And we're not feeling fine about this. Our generation needs to utilize technology and social media to communicate about current events in a way that is meaningful. The kind of activism we see on social media today can accurately be labeled as "slacktivism." Posting political memes, links, articles and blogs is not activism. Organizing in-person events is the only way to make change happen.
The Egyptian protesters in 2011 successfully utilized Facebook as a means of organizing protests in person. Had the Egyptians posted videos of themselves flipping through cue cards about how sad they were about being oppressed, the revolution would have gone nowhere.
Our abuse of technology is leading us nowhere. It is not inherently bad to want to keep in touch with your friends with social media, but there are small things we can all do to stay informed.
Try having two Twitter accounts, one for friends and one for news. Then upload your news Twitter account to your phone to get live updates of the news throughout the day instead of updates of where your friends are eating.
Part of being a college student is being exposed to new ideas and concepts. Staying informed will prevent you from falling for the people who seek to abuse you. It helps to develop healthy skepticism, which is important today, in a time when any person can share with you. Arming yourself with knowledge is one of the best ways to protect yourself, be it from scam artists, foreign aggressors or our government.
We stand for news. We advocate for staying involved with what's going on in the world around you. It's the difference between being able to make informed decisions and living in darkness. Being civically engaged is the only way to make sense of the world.
(02/27/14 8:15pm)
It's easy to see when someone isn't being transparent.
Auburn President Jay Gogue gave his second annual State of the University address Thursday, Feb. 20. According to Gogue, the Auburn University Board of Trustees moved to adopt the new five-year Strategic Plan to improve Auburn University last June.
Gogue highlighted in his speech the plan's goal to increase the graduation rate of Auburn students who obtain their degree in six years from 68 percent to 78 percent by 2018.
This statistic doesn't look terrible. However, most students aim to graduate in four years. When Gogue nonchalantly pointed out the six-year graduation rate and not the four-year graduation rate, our ears perked up.
The four-year graduation rate stands at 42 percent, according to the University's Strategic Plan Metrics, which can be found on the University's website. This statistic shatters the perception obtaining a degree in four years as normal, at least at Auburn University.
It's no surprise Gogue decided to cite the six-year graduation rate rather than the four-year graduation rate at the State of the University address. The four-year rate is embarrassingly low.
We cannot call Gogue a liar for not citing the four-year rate, but we can say he was misleading.
Gogue cited better looking statistic, trying to sweep more relevant information under the rug.
Additionally, Gouge referred to the federal government's "six-year method," which is used "when we look at schools." This vague reference is hardly justification to focus on a six-year graduation statistic rather than a four-year statistic.
Students are intent on graduating in four years, so Gogue's references to a six year graduation track lacks relevancy to the student body.
Spending six years at college is not financially realistic for students. With the high cost of tuition, many students lack the income necessary to do this. Tight budgets, loans or strict four-year deadlines from parents' result in students failing to graduate or taking on massive debt.
The current system at times inhibits students from graduating on a four-year track. Changing majors often results in a loss of hours.
As a result, changing majors as early as sophomore year can be enough to set them behind a year in studies, a year students might not be able to afford.
We're not saying Gogue or the University is completely to blame for this cringe-worthy statistic. We commend Gogue and the Board of Trustees for trying to rework the system to help students graduate on time by enacting this five-year plan.
It outlines the obstacles the University faces and the ideas they intend to implement to fix these issues.
However, the plan uses vague language and lacks direct solutions. We want answers, not bureaucratic lingo intended to appease alumni.
For example, point C of the Strategic Plan reads:
Review existing academic policies and develop new ones that will encourage students to complete their degree requirements within a reasonable period of time.
This does not sound like a plan. Much of the Strategic Plan reads similar to a series of observation. A plan requires a solution, and we see none here.
The information made available is not sufficient in convincing us the University can increase the four-year graduation rate. We would like to see more concrete ideas outlined in the University's Strategic Plan on how to reach these goals.
The University knows what to do; we would like to know how they intend to do it.
(02/27/14 5:15pm)
On Feb. 9, 1964, The Beatles exploded into American homes with a two-and-a-half-minute performance of "I Want to Hold Your Hand" on The Ed Sullivan Show. That night changed the way we would listen to music forever.
The Beatles transcend time. My parents listened to them, I listen to them and I'm willing to bet my children will listen to them too.
Growing up in a generation of Beliebers and Directioners, it can be hard to imagine another band having such a profound effect on a culture. It has been 50 years since that performance, and the world hasn't seen anything like it since. This anniversary begs the question: Is music past its prime?
One look at the current Top 40 would be enough to dishearten even the most optimistic rock 'n' roll fan. Grown-up Disney stars adorn the covers of every magazine, and choruses consist of only one word, repeated endlessly.
The amount of auto-tune on the radio at any given time would be enough to make Janis Joplin roll over in her grave. On the surface, the future of popular music looks bleak.
However, perspective is key. What makes music "good" is relative. A song that impacted a teenager in the sixties could have a completely different effect on a listener today.
Times have changed, whether we like it or not. Record producers know their audience, and people just aren't buying meaningful music anymore.
However, fans of antiquated music shouldn't lose hope just yet.
In recent years, there has been a massive resurgence of classic rock that does not seem to be going anywhere anytime soon. It has become trendy to embrace the culture of past generations. Vinyl record sales are through the roof. Instant cameras are back. And, you would be more likely to find affluent teenagers in a thrift store than in a shopping mall. Ten years ago it would've been considered strange to wear your parent's ratty Grateful Dead t-shirt. Now, it's become a popular trend.
This vintage revival has led to a slew of new artists who are developing styles of their own while paying homage to the greats at the same time.
Bands such as Mumford and Sons and The Avett Brothers evoke folk artists from the 60s and 70s such as Bob Dylan or Neil Young. Florence Welch of Florence and the Machine lists Grace Slick as one of her influences. And those are just the ones you hear about. Great bands like Shovels and Rope, Hurray for the Riff Raff and Neutral Milk Hotel fly under the radar all the time, just a Pandora click away.
Of course, it is doubtful any artist will change music the way The Beatles have. The impact they had on our culture is almost unthinkable, and they set an impossibly high standard for any artist that dared to come after them.
Nevertheless, music with substance is still happening. You just have to know where to look.
(02/20/14 5:30pm)
Stereotypical images of overweight, Cheeto-stained agoraphobes living in their mother's basement are a thing of the past. Cyberbullies are beginning to evolve into a more mobile, sunlit lifestyle thanks to smartphone apps.
Apps such as Hot or Not and Lulu allow for individuals to objectify complete strangers. A great confidence boost if you're pretty; however, anyone less than a perfect 10 is likely to feel the lash of cyber mobs.
Yik Yak is an app that allows users to anonymously send and view posts to everyone within a 10-mile radius. However, Yik Yak became a problem in many school systems due to the ability to post hateful messages anonymously.
This anonymity gives cyberbullies power.
Apps such as these seem like harmless fun for many, but the implications of the actions taken on these apps, and apps like them, are real. It is not necessary to know who is declaring insults for feelings to get hurt.
Empathy is lost when faced with the cold glow of a computer screen. Subtle facial expressions we pick up on in order to communicate effectively, such as a sudden twitch of the corner of the mouth or an upturned eyebrow, can't be seen on social media.
These subtle cues serve as a filter and prevent us from intentionally hurting one another. Looking at a glass screen and becoming detached is far too easy.
Detachment opens a doorway to a cold, objective analysis that feels less than human. People become works of art presented to be critiqued and objectified in ways that would never be done in-person.
That's not to say cyberbullies are not prominent on popular social media sites like Facebook or Twitter.
While incidents of cyberbullying that reach national attention generally involve middle and high school students, the scope with which cyberbullies can reach victims is ever increasing.
Threats against Auburn High School linebacker Rashaad Evans over signing with the University of Alabama is only the latest in a long list of cyberbully victims.
Though we were shocked, the decision was ultimately Evans', and we respect him for it. Social media posts hoping for permanent injury displays fanaticism at its worst.
Those who take part in intentional cyberbullying are cowards and are not worth the time it takes to explain to what they likely already know.
We fear devolution of interpersonal communication resulting from lack of experience. The immediacy of the Internet allows for people to respond with immediate, knee-jerk reactions without thinking critically.
Take our advice: If you wouldn't say it to someone's face, don't say it at all.
Cyberbullying turns a channel for communication into a wall for target practice. Those who stop to take aim need to go out and get a life.
(02/13/14 4:45pm)
Many people actively believe they know everything about love. Luckily for you, we actually do know everything about love. Couples, struggling when it comes to coming up with romantic ideas on Valentine's Day? Hold up, ladies and gentlemen! Before raiding the neighboring village for... uh, ideas; take some of our advice. Take The Plainsman's advice with our do's and don'ts during this year's holiday of love.
Don't pull your phone out on a date.
We know the familiar itch in your pocket, but don't forget you're on a date with the person in front of you, not the people on your phone. Our generation gets typecasted as narcissistic agorophobes; don't let that be you. Interacting with a person who is, at a minimum, mildly interesting far exceeds the social currency obtained from texting.
Don't spend too much.
This should be fairly obvious. Naturally, we all want to do something special. Take a look at your tuition and that should fix this problem. You don't need to go over the top and pop out of any food. Which leads us to our next point...
Don't pop out of any food.
This advice might not be so obvious. Popping out of food seems like a great idea. It's spontaneous, exciting and delicious. However, wheeling out a giant cake anywhere other than a bachelor party leaves much to be desired.
Do get chocolate flowers.
Two birds, one stone.
Don't propose on Valentine's Day.
It's cliche. If you must propose, do not place the ring inside any of her food. The last thing you want is for her to swallow it, which would make putting the ring on her finger... difficult.
Do test all of your chocolate for poison.
Check the packaging for breaks and tears. If you want to be sure, you need to taste test each, individual piece of chocolate. Your date might get a bit upset at you when you hand him or her a half-eaten box of chocolates, but just grin and say "I love you." Which might be a bad idea because...
Don't say, "I love you," just to say "I love you."
"I love you" is reserved for those who actually mean it. Couples in the budding stages of a relationship are likely to feel a warm, fuzzy sensation. This feeling is more likely indigestion than actual love. We recommend Pepto-Bismol.
Do show you care.
How, you might ask? Figure that out for yourself. This step requires you to do something personal enough only your significant other would appreciate. If she wants to stay in and watch that movie you hate, do it. If he has a collection of tacky camouflage hats, get him one. If this means doing research, you're already behind. The trick is doing something that shows you pay attention.
Don't see any made-for-Valentine's-Day movies.
No man in his right-mind wants to see one of these movies. Ladies, if you care about your man, do not subject him to this sadistically gushy torture. Furthermore, going to the movies on Valentine's Day is too easy.
Do something special and creative.
Just don't pop out of any cakes.
(02/12/14 5:00pm)
I've been cute-couple kicking for at least a decade now. I don't remember when my aversion to cute couples began, but something about the blissful titters, amorously glazed eyes and surreptitiously flexed biceps has always driven me bonkers.
Luckily, I discovered a few flinty kicks on the back of a flirty couple's seat was usually enough to snap a couple out of their amorous trance.
Those were the simple days before we all had smartphones in our hand and the latest Twitter update only a finger tap away. It's increasingly difficult to find cute couples so entranced with one another that they've forgotten the world and, consequently, how impossibly annoying they are. Instead, they've been replaced by couples whose eyes swivel constantly from the face of their partner to the siren glow of their phones. Their laughter sounds absentminded despite the agility of their busily tapping fingers on smartphones.
It's sad to watch these preoccupied couples who are too distracted to become properly enraptured with one another. There's nothing cute about them, nothing kickable.
There were a few moments this semester that made my feet tingle with hope. For instance, last Friday a couple in the Student Center loudly discussed what love meant to them while I was trying to study. They seemed like a perfect candidate and I could practically feel my foot twitching. Peering over my classwork, I peeked at them and could see the girl glancing at her phone as she spoke. Disgusted, I left to study elsewhere.
Feeling a little nostalgic, I remembered the loud giggles and nauseating smooches of the "adorable" couples of yesteryears. It was annoying, but their excessively starry-eyed delight with one another also happened to be the very thing that made them cute. They were so joyfully mesmerized with each other they forgot to take those around them into consideration. Unfortunately there is nothing adorable about individuals so self-absorbed that they're discourteous to both their partner and their peers.
Similarly, a few weeks earlier the upcoming reunion of an acquaintance and her long-distance boyfriend gave me concern. She planned to introduce us, but I worried I would feel uncomfortable witnessing the two exchange gooey regards when they reunited. But, after the initial greetings, sufficiently sappy embraces and my introduction had finished, each partner began to thumb-fiddle their phone.
I was dismayed. The guy had traveled three hours to visit his Auburn sweetie. With that kind of time commitment, I assumed he would have wanted to make the most of their fleeting moments together.
The incident reminded me of my own frustrating experiences visiting friends who live far from Auburn. Though we only see each other a few times a year, some of my friends only half-listen to what I'm saying. Peeking at their phones, I can see them looking at Instagram, Twitter and texts from other friends. These meetings are always uncomfortable and irritating. It's hard to believe someone values my friendship when they only dedicate a fraction of their attention to me when I'm in the flesh. When this first happened while visiting a schoolmate after my move, I was deeply hurt. I had thought they cared a lot; after all, they texted me all the time.
Love, both romantic and friendly, seems to be suffering from our culture's endless technology obsession. An incoming text merits more devotion than a loved one or a moment of genuine intimacy. As Valentine's Day approaches, maybe it's time to reassess our values and how much uninterrupted attention our loved ones deserve from us.
As for my twitchy feet, I'd gladly return to the days of careless cute-couple kicking but, frankly, I'd be so relieved to see them return, I'd probably give the sport up for good. Until then, I'm considering kicking habitual phone users. You never know, maybe it will cure their technology addiction and give them the time to truly love and appreciate someone special.
(02/06/14 10:03pm)
It's that wonderful time of year when students can be seen panhandling for their SGA candidate of choice. Forced away from their natural habitat, these groups must form homogenous blobs of baggy, pastel-colored shirts and block off sections of the Concourse in order to survive. While in this defensive formation, flock leaders can be seen socializing, eating food and grooming one another; leaving the socially informidable fledglings on the outskirts to forage for interaction with their SGA election fliers. It's fascinating, but Animal Planet won't cover it.
Let's not take them for granted though. These SGA flocks are advocating for a privilege many citizens take for granted. The importance of the right to give out free candy is one we cannot stress enough. But despite our dependency on sweet, life-giving sugar here at The Plainsman, we are obligated to say the right to vote is a privilege many students pass up.
Jokes aside, the work of these patriots and SGA members are deserving of more than our scorn and cynicism. In advocating the right to vote, these students display a wisdom that exceeds the misguided criticisms of any jaded, post-modern nihilists.
Being elected SGA President isn't just some honorary title. Winners get more than a gold sticker on their transcript and a pat on the head. The SGA President serves on the Board of Trustees and acts as the voice of the student body.
And they get work done, but not in a timeframe you might expect. Demanding instantaneous change from a newly elected official is unrealistic. SGA presidents are only elected for a one year term, which is not enough time to see their platforms to fruition. These presidents are forced to plan out a legacy they will only see finished long after they've graduated and their memory has faded from the public eye. It's hard work.
Former 2012 SGA President Owen Parrish, for example, is responsible for many of the new food options we now see on campus. This includes Go Greek and Pinkberry in the Village Dining Hall.
Remember that shiny new building you said you'd go work out at for your New Year's resolution but just haven't found the time or energy to visit? Well, the Recreation and Wellness Center is the direct result of former 2005 SGA President Lauren Hayes' work.
The SGA is, in fact, productive. To not take advantage of the potential each candidate is offering is to deny yourself free candy.
Do not dismiss the SGA election as a popularity contest either. If it has become that at all, it is because the student body has forced it due to their unwillingness to participate.
The right to remain silent is inalienable, but don't misinterpret complacency for silence. If you are feeling underrepresented, then run for president. Anyone can do it.
We encourage all students to do research on the candidates running for SGA and to make their voice heard by voting. Each candidate's information and platform can be found on the SGA's website. There is no other excuse to not inform yourself other than willful ignorance.
(01/31/14 10:50pm)
We cover many, many University events. Speakers who spread messages of inequality and peace, stand-up comedy, celebrations, concerts, racial integration. But do you know what many of these events have in common? No one goes to them.
Perhaps saying no one goes to these events is a bit of an overstatement. However, we have noticed a trend of embarrassing low attendance from students.
We at The Plainsman cover these events, but that doesn't mean people go to them. That also doesn't mean people will read our paper. Despite our coverage of these events, we probably wouldn't be going ourselves, outside of assignments.
The University and professors do advertise for events; albeit, not the best they could be. Nevertheless, students have plenty of opportunities to hear about these events, be it a flier or word of mouth.
With the availability of the Internet, there is no real excuse to miss these events other than willful ignorance or an AU_WiFi meltdown, which is entirely plausible.
There is a general apathy about these events, unless it's a headliner as famous as Ludacris. But not every speaker can be famous for a long string of low-budget racing movies.
We too share this general apathy, not only toward the "Fast and Furious" franchise, but toward attending events as a whole.
Many students have busy schedules and genuinely have better things to be doing with their time. This, coupled with a generation growing more introverted with the availability of social media means more couch surfing and less event attending.
Students who choose not to attend these events are perfectly justified in doing so. However, we would encourage everyone to attend as many events as possible.
College is meant to expose students to new things and expand their minds. Students who simply attend class and study are not taking full advantage of the opportunities the University is providing.
How many places can someone take in a lecture on social issues and attend a jazz concert in the same week?
Auburn University offers the potential for students to become cultured.
Searching the Internet and watching TED Talks is great, but nothing compares to taking an active role in the dialogue by showing up in person. Doing so allows for audience members to ask questions and engage in conversation that pales in comparison to an Internet comment section.
Are we as a generation willing to settle and simply polish our Grammy trivia knowledge instead of attending a lecture on inequality?
It's insulting to the University as well as those who are taking time out of their busy schedules to be here and speak, only to stand and talk awkwardly to the handful of professors who invited them.
It is tragic to see someone's work, which in many cases has been for the benefit of humanity, advertised and then disrespected with an audience's absence.
(01/23/14 1:45pm)
This just in! College kids like marijuana!
This shouldn't be news to anyone. Marijuana and substance abuse have become synonymous with the college experience. This topic has been in the public eye for some time now. We didn't intend to rehash this issue, but President Obama's remark in a recent interview has reignited debate.
We do not condone the use of any illegal substance. However, there is growing support for the legalization of marijuana, and we tend to agree. According to a recent Gallup poll, 58 percent of Americans are in favor of legalizing marijuana. This is in contrast to 1969, when 12 percent of Americans favored legalization. Another Gallup poll revealed 38 percent of Americans have tried marijuana and this percentage has stayed roughly the same since the mid-1980s.
Don't get the wrong idea. We are not for the full legalization of marijuana. Rather, we are for the decriminalization of it. Putting it lightly, Alabama's laws against marijuana are preposterous.
According to Alabama Code, it is illegal to own any drug paraphernalia. Paraphernalia is defined as anything that is used in the growth, sale or use of marijuana. All you cannabis consumers better start putting flowers in your bongs and calling them vases.
Where does the government even begin to draw the line? Could citizens be arrested for possessing a carved out apple? To arrest someone for owning drug paraphernalia, and not actual drugs, is analogous to arresting a drunken person for owning a driver's license.
Being caught with drug paraphernalia is punishable for up to one year in jail and a fine as much as $6,000. But don't get caught again or else you will face one to 10 years in jail and a $15,000 penalty.
But the ridiculousness doesn't end there. According to Alabama Code, those who possess marijuana have to pay a stamp tax on the marijuana they are not legally allowed to possess.
So, let's say you get pulled over by the police, and they find marijuana on your person. Not only do they have you on driving under the influence of marijuana and possession of marijuana, they also have you on not paying the taxes on the drugs you're not allowed to have. Not having this stamp tax paid can result in up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $15,000 dollars. Before you know it, you've been sentenced to jail for more than 20 years.
Laws like these are draconian at best. They are designed by ill-informed bureaucrats to entrap citizens for a crime that should be considered a misdemeanor at best. Our judicial system has better things to do than send marijuana smokers to jail. It is a waste of money and resources.
The legalization of recreational marijuana use has started a domino effect around the country. As popular demand increases, more and more states will begin to legalize marijuana, at least medicinally. Alabama seems unlikely to change its laws, and will seem archaic and close-minded in short time. We don't need draconian marijuana laws to see how outdated many of Alabama's laws are. Did you know it's illegal to play dominos on Sunday in Alabama?
If an individual wants to smoke marijuana, melt into their couch and watch "The Big Lebowski," then that is their prerogative. Who are we, or the government, to tell someone they can't do something if it doesn't interfere with the lives of others?
(01/15/14 8:54pm)
We value our limbs. But when we see the price of textbooks skyrocketing, we start to fill our bathtubs with ice. The rate at which textbook prices increase double the rate of inflation. We are starting to get the feeling that buying college textbooks is a scam. We're also getting the feeling that we shouldn't take medical advice from a guy in an alley.
Students don't exactly have a wide array of options when it comes to purchasing books. There are the local bookstores, but they seem to have become more of a tourist attraction than a book store.
It seems odd that off-campus bookstores have the gall to call themselves "bookstores" when you have trek through Auburn memorabilia to get to the books at the back of the store. We are looking at you J&M "Bookstore."
The only option outside bookstores is the Internet. Students can order books from sites like Amazon or Chegg, but there seems to be a quality control issue with ordering textbooks over the Internet. We would prefer our books in one piece and free of promiscuous stains and drippings.
Surely, we thought, the Auburn University Bookstore is at the center of this scheme. But upon further investigation, we found they are doing more to save students money than what we initially gave them credit for... Oops. The bookstore complies with the Higher Education Opportunity Act, which address the cost associated with higher education.
The Bookstore has partnered with software companies that allow them to buy books in bulk online to pass on saving to students. They also offer students rental options, used books, a buyback program and in-store credit. Through this effort, The Bookstore has saved students $1.7 million over the past two years and is still looking for ways to save students money, according to Assistant Bookstore Director Rusty Weldon.
We honestly had no idea. Our lapses in journalistic judgment know no bounds. To be fair, $10 for a book that costs over $100 hardly seems fair. That's barely enough money to go to Skybar and drown our sorrows in... Root beer.
We have discovered the real villains are the publishers. They would have us think used books, the printing expenses and the increased demand for digital content are causing prices to spike. While these claims might loosely be based on reality, the blatant attempts to gouge prices and manipulate their consumers are unacceptable.
Publishers know they have their consumers trapped. Students are, generally, forced to buy the textbook their professor assigns. As a result, publishers set whatever price they want.
New editions published every year with little variation force students to needlessly rebuy books. Publishers justify raising prices by bundling digital content with their textbooks. This software often has an expiration date, which undermines the resale of the book.
The publishers control the market. They raise prices and republish their textbooks on a whim. Professors can help by encouraging students to buy older editions of textbooks. Beyond that, students will have to be smart shoppers and pay attent--Squirrel!
(12/06/13 9:22pm)
In the Thursday, Dec. 5, issue of The Plainsman, the editorial board published an editorial titled "Bammers are in a class of their own." It was not our intention to insult the entire Alabama fanbase. Our editorial was meant as a satirical piece that addressed the extremist fans we referred to as "Bammers."
We acknowledge both Auburn and Alabama have their fair share of fanatics who reflect poorly on their larger fanbases. It was our mistake in not pointing out that Auburn has extremist fans as well.
We want to make it known we have nothing but respect for the University of Alabama and the general fanbase.
An editorial is a piece based solely on opinion, which is completely different from an article that employs typical journalistic objectivity. We can assure you this opinion piece does not affect our commitment to journalistic standards of integrity.