Today’s approval of the proposal proves to us that the UC Board of Regents will stop at nothing to achieve their desired diversity quota, even if it comes at the cost of the entire California education system. When you guarantee admittance to a higher proportion of the lowest performing high schools, and lower the proportion of the top students in the state, it is absurd to think that the quality of students will do anything but go down.

The committee voted for it over the objections of thousands of people who are concerned about lowering UC standards. These committee members and the UC Board of Regents as a whole abdicated their responsibility to the people of California by approving something that will decrease the value of education provided in this state.

There is no justifiable reason to lower standards for the UC system, especially at a time when doing so will make it more difficult to discern the most qualified applicants. This does not give incentives to hard working California students and puts the emphasis on the wrong type of admission criteria.

Tierney Burke

If you’re lucky enough to have a professor who uses it and knows it well, Smartsite can be an extremely useful class resource. But for many students, the “cutting edge” courseware technology is full of problems.

Smartsite, the online course collaboration tool, was introduced on campus in 2006 and fully implemented in 2007. Since then, the tool has received mixed reviews from the students and faculty who use it.

The primary complaint from the student perspective is that Smartsite is not user-friendly. Some classes from the past still appear in the shortcut bar on the main page. A plethora of links and buttons often makes it difficult to find what you’re looking for. And many professors seem incapable of consistently putting their assignments and lecture notes in the appropriate categories.

In addition to these problems, there is the broader issue of some professors using MyUCDavis instead of Smartsite for their course websites, which only further serves to confuse things.

The best solution to these issues will require three changes.

First of all, professors should invest more time and effort into learning how Smartsite works and how to make it work for them. Even a half-hour or hour training session will give an instructor more information than they will probably need for most courses. Despite how simple it is to learn, many professors seem insistent on not learning how to use this resource, generally to the disadvantage of their students.

Secondly, the software needs to be improved and streamlined so that the basic and most important functions are the most prominent. There are many ways in which Smartsite could be made simpler and more intuitive. One example of this is that only classes a student is currently enrolled in should appear on the main page.

And finally, the course website feature of MyUCDavis should be removed entirely. IT officials have said they are unable to merge MyUCDavis with Smartsite – if that is the case, let’s get rid of the clunky and archaic MyUCDavis course sites completely. Smartsite will not gain the strong foothold it deserves until it is the only option professors have for course websites.

On the whole, Smartsite is a valuable resource that has the potential to greatly improve the teaching and learning experience at UC Davis. The idea behind it is great, but Smartsite itself will continue to be confusing and lackluster until these necessary changes are made.

UC Davis reports the highest level of sexual assaults and violence on campus of any school in the UC system.

Due to recent budget cuts, these high offense rates could be on the rise.

The UC Davis Gender Education program will be cut following the 2008-2009 school year if it is not added to the budget of the Women’s Resources and Research Center.

The GE program operates at an annual budget of $49,698 – $61,698 for the program’s fulltime GE specialist position and $12,000 for operating expenses.

Given that 12,300 students have enrolled in a total of 330 classes in the GE program’s 10-year history, asking the university to pay $61,698 per year for such a service hardly seems unreasonable.

UC Davis‘ sexual assault and violence issues should be taken more seriously. The administration should be displaying additional concern about such problems, and cutting the GE program’s funding sits on the opposite end of the spectrum.

That said, even if the university refuses to offer funding, there’s no excuse for the program to fold at the completion of the academic year.

Asking UC Davis students to pay a small fee to take GE classes is a reasonable solution. Seeing as approximately 1,200 students participate in the program annually, the GE program could finance itself by charging $5 per person per class.

The program supporters‘ current plan – circulating petitions and a letter writing campaign that led to a meeting with Fred Wood, vice chancellor of student affairs, on Thursday – made for a good start.

What the GE program needs next is further backing from Wood and his colleagues. Sexual assaults and violence on campus are no laughing matter and it’s frustrating that the administration hasn’t given this issue the level of attention it deserves. 

Student government is usually pretty harmless. Aside from the occasional overly ambitious candidate soliciting signatures for the Association’s quarterly popularity contest, often loosely referred to as an election, its direct impact on student life is rather minimal. In fact, when they’re not spending countless hours mesmerized by the sounds of their own voice, I’d reckon that ASUCD officials are relatively normal and competent people.

However, it is sometimes the case that the usually benign and self-important Association presents an issue that is genuinely harmful to the UC Davis student body. It is because of such an issue that, today, this normally insignificant institution had found its way into my extremely significant column.

The issue to which I am referring is the misguided and reckless ballot measure known as “The Green Initiative Fund,” or TGIF for short. TGIF thrives on the recent trend of demonstrating a self-righteous interest in the environment and sustainability in order to appear chic and eco-friendly in the eyes of your peers. (e.g. Al Gore, Dave Matthews, Neil Young, etc.)

The specifics of TGIF are rather simple. The measure calls for the formation of a seven-member “Grant-Making Committee,” that will control and allocate a slush fund harvested by tacking on a four dollar increase to your perpetually rising student fees. The TGIF website estimates that about 60 percent of the grants will come from student proposals, while 40 percent can be used to fund projects initiated by the committee itself. While the initiative may seem harmless at first glance, a closer look proves that it is nothing but a shortsighted attempt of student government to legitimize itself by providing yet another useless service.

For the sake of argument, let’s assume that UC Davis doesn’t already have the highest student fees in the UC system, or that the campus doesn’t already receive more funding for environmental research than almost any other school in the country. Both of these assumptions are obviously untrue, but these are the kind of statements one has to believe in order to view TGIF as anything but unnecessary financial burden to an already overburdened student population.

Even if both of these assumptions were valid, TGIF would still be far from perfect. A major source of criticism against the half-baked ballot measure is that it lacks any form of oversight. The seven-member Grant-Making Committee has final and absolute say over how the money is spent, and there is almost no criteria defining what projects are worthy of funding. In a recent Aggie article, a TGIF volunteer aptly summed up this lack of oversight by saying, “We’re taking responsibility for others‘ sustainability.” While such sentiments may seem selfless and honorable to TGIF volunteers, in the mind of a rational person they can sound a whole lot like, “We’re forcing students to give us money, and not asking their opinion about how we spend it.“

Another major problem with TGIF is the haphazard way in which the Grant-Making Committee is assembled. The initiative calls for a total of four undergraduate students and three faculty members, with environmental credentials ranging from minimal to non-existent, to fill the committee. Perhaps the most troubling aspect of this ill-planned committee is the presence of faculty members providing input on how fees increased by a student vote are to be used. Essentially, TGIF is asking students to self-impose a fee increase, and then partially surrender the ability to allocate those funds to three non-student committee members.

Whenever I present such criticisms to those in favor of TGIF, I always get the same shallow response of, “Well it might have its problems, but passing it would be a step in the right direction.“

I understand that such an argument could prove extremely convincing to the addled minds of those who might view TGIF as a positive thing, however it ignores one of the initiative’s fundamental flaws. Should the fee increase pass after the Feb. 18-19 election it will be valid for the next 10 years, meaning those “problems” can’t be ironed out until 2019.

Rather than deal with the consequences of a poorly developed plan for the next decade, I recommend students vote down TGIF.

JAMES NOONAN hates poorly planned legislation almost as much as he hates dirty, smelly hippies. Tell him what you hate at jjnoonan@ucdavis.edu.

Considering that this Saturday is St. Despicable’s Day, it’s fitting that I finish going over proper Breakup Protocol. Now before anybody gets huffy, I’m legally obligated by the state of California to acknowledge that everyone is different and stereotyping is a no-no (especially when the frowny-pants guys over at the ACLU give me a call).

However, saying something like, “girls usually do this…” when I really mean, “the girls that I have known in my experience that run in my social circle whom I shall base my knowledge and assumptions on usually do this…” saves an awful lot of time and space, doesn’t it? Okay, let’s get at it.

Refrain from the drunk dialing. Sometimes I wish cell phones came with a breathalyzer and if you failed, you couldn’t make a phone call. Of course, that’s sort of impractical because you wouldn’t be able to call your sober friend (aka: my mother) for a ride either. I suppose the breathalyzer thing might work if you pre-programmed certain numbers that your phone can’t connect to if your blood alcohol content was above, say, 0.03 percent (remember kids, even tipsy dialing is drunk dialing).

That being said, ex-boyfriends, would-be boyfriends, and oh-my-god-how-I-wish-that-guy-was-my-boyfriend, should be on that list. I tell you, nobody wants to wake up to a phone call at three in the morning with someone on the other line sobbing, “Oh shit, I’m so drunks right nows, but I have to tell yous somethings…”

And this “somethings” is never anything good. It’s never about the most recent Lakers game, or what’d you think about Slumdog Millionaire (overrated or best movie ever?!) or your opinion on the president’s stimulus plan. It’s always going to be something serious, it’s always going to be about your relationship, and it’s always going to end badly.

Next time you see your drunk friend (who recently got out of a relationship) sneak off to make a little phone call, do her a favor and take out the battery as fast as you can and hand it back to her.

When she asks you why her phone’s not working, tell her how everybody complains about the Verizon network plan, and that somehow, having no reception also makes the screen turn black for some odd reason. It might make her chuck her phone against a wall, but it pays off knowing her ex is sleeping soundly somewhere else, not judging his ex-girlfriend (your best friend) for acting desperate. Everybody wins, hooray!

Let yourself go. Since immediately dating someone else is never a good idea, let yourself go for a bit before you enter the dating world. It’ll feel good rebelling from the lame standards your boyfriend used to put on you.

Why do you think girls always chop off their hair after a breakup? Because guys love long hair; it fulfills some sort of perverted sexual fantasy of dating a Pantene Pro-V spokeswoman. You’ll also feel relieved that you don’t have to pluck every out-of-place hair on your body and you can throw away those white jeans you hate that you bought only because he liked them (because honestly, nothing screams sophistication like white jeans that have the zipper in the back).

Try your best to contain the crazies. Now I’m not saying that all girls are crazy. In fact I’m actually theorizing that the proverbial “crazy ex-girlfriend” doesn’t exist, and it’s actually a myth created by lame ex-boyfriends, who in attempts to exonerate themselves of any blame while also flattering themselves, midjudge certain actions by their ex as “crazy.“

Then again, some girls really do some crazy shtuff. So try not to sneak into his AIM, break into his Facebook account and read his inbox or write a desperate blog that reveals how you’re still pathetically in love with your ex. Keep it classy ladies.

If it helps, remember WWGKD: What Would Grace Kelly Do? I mean, her official title is “Her Serene Highness the Princess of Monaco” for crying out loud. Would Serene Highness Grace stalk her ex-boyfriend by conveniently “running into” him in front of his apartment? Would Serene Highness Grace get drunk at a party and sob to her ex that she’ll immediately leave the poor schmuck she’s already with? Would Grace motherfucking Kelly sleep with her ex in order to validate herself? No, she would not. Because she is a princess – and so are you, kind of.

LYNN LOO LA hopes that the bad luck on this Friday the 13th will carry over the next day and punish every couple on Earth, everywhere. To cheer her up, send her a Vday e-card at ldla@ucdavis.edu. To brighten up her day forever, she double-dog dares you to send to the Aggie office, a real Valentine to her. How’s that for desperate cry for love?!

There is no greater thrill than the rush of snow skiing; rifling down a freshly powdered mountain, the wind in your face and adrenaline pumping.

But no pleasant experience comes without its price. Here are some things you should expect to face the next time you hit the slopes.

The Lines

Most ski resorts are designed so that anyone can take a lift to the top of the mountain and make it down in one piece; there are paths of varying difficulty leading to back to the main lodge. Now, this is great if you’re the nuclear family from Walnut Creek, but for everyone else it means one thing; lines. I’m not talking about the cute little lines one occasionally endures while waiting for a Coho latte. I’m talking about waiting for 30 minutes while roasting in the sun only to get on a lift to complete a run in less than 8 minutes. And like Sisyphus and his rock, you will repeat this process constantly for the rest of the day.

Novice Snowboarders

I know all you snowboarders out there are going to despise me for saying I am amazed that more people don’t get seriously injured by out-of-control snowboarders. Granted, there are plenty of newbie skiers threatening the slopes, snowboarding’s overwhelming popularity has resulted in way too many people trying to snowboard who should not be allowed anywhere near a mountain. Inexperienced boarders often spend more time on their butts than actually moving, making going downhill become the same as navigating a minefield. When they actually do move, these rookies fly down the hill like madman with little regard for their own lives or the lives of any ski school children having the misfortune of getting in their way.

Getting Old

Long gone were the days when the “pizza” was all it took to conquer a mountain. Back when you were 5 feet tall and weighed less than 100 pounds, making it down the mountain was no problem. But now you are older; you actually have muscles that are more than willing to be injured. Even if you frequent that ARC and consider yourself to be in shape, it’s a safe bet that tomorrow you won’t be having a “Good Morning Beautiful” day. As you huff and puff up and down the hill, the 8-year old brutes seem to be skiing circles around you. This makes you wonder if you are indeed already passed your prime.

Lunchtime Darwinism

As if on cue, everyone at the ski resort will try to eat lunch at the same time. As the lodge cafeteria is the only place to go, pandemonium is inevitable. After waiting in yet more lines to spend even more money on overpriced food, you arrive at a quandary; where to sit? With too many people and not enough tables, you can almost hear Darwin laughing his head off from above. People are tired and irritable. Pissed-off mothers of three prowl the cafeteria like rabid velociraptors in search of a free table. If you were smart, then you came with a large group, allowing you to stake out tables over a wider area and increase your chances of success. Finally, you will find a table where the people appear to be done, but this is just a hopeless dream. As you awkwardly loiter with your bowl of clam chowder, they will take their sweet time, look up, make eye contact, but ignore you as if to spite you, and refuse to surrender the table.

Black Diamonds

Feeling adventurous, you ignore the signs saying “Easiest Way Down” and follow the bright orange signs warning “Experts Only.” You think you are a pro, so only a double-black diamond will do. Once at the top of the double-black, you look down and immediately regret your decision. As if the absence of gradual decline weren’t enough, several moguls dot the hillside like zits clinging to an unlucky teenager’s face. You might be lucky enough to make it down without falling, albeit as gracelessly as an elephant on ice skates; however, realistically, you will have tasted snow before you make it to the bottom.

The Beer

Let’s face it; this is what you really came for. Having survived the days’ perils you feel like you deserve it. At first you order a pint of your favorite beer, but reconsider and tell the bartender to wait: better make it a pitcher.

MIKE HOWER assures you that a pint of your favorite beer can’t solve all your problems, but a pitcher can. You can reach him at mahower@ucdavis.edu.