UCDavis is regarded as among the superior institutions of public higher education nationally,if not globally.According to the2008U.S.News and World Report survey,UC Davis ranks as the11th best public university inAmerica in terms of learning excellence.However,the presence of some incompetent and ineffective faculty members is an imminent threat that undermines suchreputable standing.

Having finished six arduous quarters here at UC Davis,I have always heard students complaining acrimoniously about how their respective professors inefficiently taught their classes.I,myself,have experienced going through suchapredicament in several of my general education and upper division classes in which the professors were terribly lackingtheability to make the concepts of the courses comprehensible to students.Having no means of determining the degree of competence of their professors,studentssuffer the consequences oftaking classes with such instructors.

Students become cognizant of a professor’s incompetenceonce they actually witness his or her teaching style,which could be evidentonthe first day of class or could take several lectures.One sign of incompetence is the inability to properly communicate the ideas to the students.Many of these “professors” are absolutely intellectuallygifted,but they lack the skill to effectively share and transfer that knowledge to the students.This issue iseven worsein manyforeign professors whose first language is not English,which makes already difficult course material even harder.Talking is the best way to transmit knowledge,but that is unattainable if professors cannot coherently and efficiently articulate their minds to their students.

There are also some professors whose definition of teaching is to read a PowerPoint-enhanced lecture verbatim while sitting comfortablyduring the whole period as students learn nothing from the course.In addition,some professors makethe course and its requirements so unreasonably elementary and effortless.As an outcome,students are not motivated to think critically beyond the basics of the course,which could then produce uncompetitive students.

In order to findoutwhether a professor is competent or not,students often utilize unreliable online rating websites,which are vast repositories of personal experiences of many past students about incompetent professors.However,students should not need to resort to such action just to avoid inept professors who should not been teaching at UC Davis in the first place.It should not be the case that the university retains incompetent professors in its faculty roster so that students can have a learning experiencein which they do not learn anything at all.

I understand that UC Davis has a rigorous hiring process of potential professors that produces first-rate faculty.Moreover,there are also competency review processes for academic personnel that aim to identifypoor faculty members who are not contributing to the effectual propagation of knowledge.But what is incomprehensible is the fact that despite all these screening and evaluation systems,under-qualified professors are still being recruited to this world-class institution.

It is also very frustrating that after such poor instructors are exposed and assessed,they are still given teaching assignments despite unacceptably inferior performance.Moreover,many unsatisfactorily-performing professors are still in the university becausethey are protectedby theirhighly valuedresearch works or their tenure.

Although UC Davis is a research university,the quality of education students acquire mustbe given paramount priority.The administration must make sure that the people it is hiring to teach are not onlyaccomplished professionals in their respective fields,but are alsocapableto provide high-caliber education to students.In order to continue maintaining UC Davis‘ status as a provider of a world-class education,it isimperative that we have a competent and efficient teaching force.And the only way to achieve that is tokick outincompetentprofessorsor train and reform them so students will acquire the top-notch education theydeserve.

REAGAN F.PARLAN welcomes your comments and suggestions at rfparlan@ucdavis.edu.XXX

In the past weeks, I’ve been dishing out a fair amount of criticism regarding our elected and appointed educational administrators without providing a whole lot of possible solutions. This is because, for the most part, I have tried to focus mainly on pointing out the problems, rather than turning people off with a solution that caters to a specific political ideology.

For example, if I were to propose a solution of raising taxes across the state to make up for the $4.8 million deficit in educational funding, I would probably cause a couple of people to ignore me, and my views on the education system, completely.

However, this week I have decided to break away from my standard mode of operations and provide my readers with an opportunity to make a small, but valuable, difference in our current educational crisis.

In the past months, the Davis Joint Unified School District has realized that help from state-level administrators is not coming, and that the responsibility of maintaining the excellence of public education has been left to the individual citizens of the district. This bleak, but necessary, realization has given rise to the Davis Schools Foundation’s “Dollar-a-Day Campaign,” which gives concerned citizens the opportunity to donate just one dollar a day, or $365 a year, to close the staggering $4 million deficit facing the district.

With the funds collected by the campaign, the district hopes to salvage hundreds of teaching, secretary and librarian jobs that would otherwise be cut due to budget shortcomings. According to the Davis School Foundation’s website, the $4 million that the “Dollar-a-Day Campaign” would raise could salvage the jobs of 24 high school teachers, 14 elementary level teachers, four music teachers, two librarians, four secretaries, three counselors, four district staff officers, as well as athletic programs across the district. Without these positions the district faces the possibility of overcrowded classrooms and a staff that is generally unqualified to handle the specific needs of its students.

As of Apr.21, the “Dollar-a-Day Campaign” has raised $733,000, which will be used to salvage at least 12 of the positions mentioned above. My first, and possibly last, call to action for my readers is to research the “Dollar-a-Day Campaign” at davisschoolsfoundation.org, and possibly even make a donation that will preserve the integrity of California’s public schools. The foundation estimates that if every student’s family were to make a $365 donation the district would receive an additional $3.08 million annually for additional programs. Even with these ideal circumstances, the district would be facing a deficit of a little under $1 million.

However, this figure does not consider the very real possibility that concerned onlookers from the UC Davis community would take it upon themselves to help salvage California’s public education system and contribute as well. Together, the university and Davis communities have the potential to greatly impact the lives of current high school and elementary school students, while also sending the state capital a message that, as citizens of California, we refuse to stand by and watch as the importance of our educational institutions is marginalized by government officials.

JAMES NOONAN isn’t used to taking a stand and offering tangible solutions, so go easy on him this week. If you must rant, do so at jjnoonan@ucdavis.edu.XXX

During a barbeque I went to last weekend, a friend of mine was talking about how he had recently (and reluctantly) bonked a girl whom he wasn’t too enthralled about. As usual, a few guys started chiming in and said the only reason why he was lamenting so much was because she was probably fug. He responded that in actuality, she was very pretty – she simply wasn’t funny enough.

I asked him if being funny is as important as he made it seem. Likewise, his other friend explained how he preferred to sleep with pretty girls at the moment, while his youth and charm were at their peak. Personality, he mused, can be worried about later, when it really started to matter.

So what’s more desirable, a cute girl or funny girl? Guys out there will most likely claim to want the latter, but those poor fools aren’t always aware how shallow they really are (just kidding boys, teehee!) I mean, a pretty face really goes a long way. It can get you free drinks, a cut in line, a promotion, a boyfriend and so on.

A cute face can also make the girl seem funnier than she really is. Think about it: all those quirky things about your girl you find “funny” are actually just adorable because you find her so damn cute in the first place (i.e., the way she hocks a loogey, curses like a sailor, crinkles her nose, cheats on you with your best friend, etc.).

Case in point: Basically every movie about a persistently annoying but gosh-darn irresistible girl whom you grow to love (Jeon Ji-hyun in My Sassy Girl, Jessica Alba in Good Luck Chuck, the ghoul in The Grudge). There was also this music video I saw about an anonymous hot girl at a club. She made eye contact with the leading man, followed him outside without his knowledge, pushed him against a wall, made out with him and then ran away laughing. The rest of the video consisted of him trying to find this ever-intriguing girl.

Now imagine the same thing, but with like, a 400-pound behemoth with eczema on her face. Not so cute, ain’t it?! Both girls did the same exact “kooky” thing, but only one came off as cute/funny and therefore, gets sought out by the guy. True, the guy in the other scenario still might want to find his mystery girl, but only in hopes to report her to the police and/or get a chance to stab her in the stomach because he does not want another guy to fall victim of this alley-lurking-she-hulk.

Admit it, guys say they want a girl that can make them laugh… as long as it isn’t with her face. In fact, they might just be satisfied with a girl who can “understand” humor, rather than a girl who can “create” humor.

I actually didn’t make up this concept; the same friend of mine did when he was talking about the two types of funny girls. The first is a girl who can understand a joke, laugh at funny movies and shows and can recognize a good quote here and there. The second type is someone who can, “like you know, be funny. Tell a joke or some shit.” And that’s really all he said about the second type, so I’m guessing it’s a working theory. He said that he preferred the second type, although few exist to his knowledge.

But then again, do few funny girls really exist, or do guys just pay no mind to them because they’re not considered “feminine”? Some say that humor is a guy thing and if a girl is funny, it’s probably because she has a hint of manliness in her. (And if something manages to remain feminine, it’s something that guys don’t find funny at all – like “Sex and the City.”) Sure, a guy wants someone who can dish out the playful banter in private, but in front of his buddies, she can’t be too funny lest she unknowingly emasculates her own boyfriend.

Okay, my views on guys may be bleak, but I’m only talking from experience. My friend Vanna once had a boyfriend who she could laugh with, wasn’t afraid of burping or eating Buffalo wings with and just be herself with. At first he said it was so adorable. Then a couple months went by and he started asking her why she never dressed up, wore makeup or shaved her legs as much as other girls. He eventually left her for some cute tart and well, you know the rest. Cute girl: 123,456,789. Funny girl: 0.

LYNN LA never said she was going to finish her other story anytime soon. She’ll tell you the rest when she’s good and ready (which will probably just be next week). In any case, she’d like to know your thoughts on humor, girls and looks. But remember that when you e-mailher at ldla@ucdavis.edu, ALL CAPS MEANS THAT YOU’RE YELLING AND SHE DOESN’T CARE IF IT’S ACCIDENTAL!

UC Davis is now beginning to see the first rounds of cuts, which will eventually result in a universitywide budget decrease of $1.4 million for campus units. The Cross Cultural Center (CCC), Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Resource Center (LGBTRC) and Women’s Research and Resources Center (WRRC) will be the first to experience the 7 percent cuts. Budget reductions must come from somewhere, but it is important to recognize how vital these campus units are to students at UCD.

Back when budget cuts were being proposed, Chancellor Larry Vanderhoef told the campus the student experience would not be compromised. However, protecting Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS) at the expense of valuable ASUCD units such as CCC, LGBTRC and WRRC is questionable. This year, CAPS will have a net loss of $0 while the CCC will experience a net loss of $2,211, the WRRC a net loss of $8,750 and the LGBTRC a net loss of $996.

As a representative of the student population, ASUCD is voicing itsopinion to the administration. These units provide a community for thousands of students at UCD and are an integral part of the college experience. The WRRC provides resources and a knowledge base for women’s studies majors and sexual assault victims. In some cases, it may be easier for a woman who has been assaulted to seek the help of her peers and professionals through a community environment. Additionally, students who fear prejudice as a result of their sexual orientation may prefer looking to resources at the LGBTRC as an alternate to CAPS.

Most notable, however, is the budget cut to the Learning Resources Center, which will undergo a net loss of $109,545. Tutoring services will be decreased as will the amount of students per tutor. The LRC is an important part of the student learning experience – professors and teaching assistants in large classes refer their students for assistance in math, science, paper writing, ESL writing, etc. This resource is also an important way for first-year students to become situated with the learning expectations of a large university.

It is important that services at CAPS remain available and uncompromised. However, limiting the budget and thus the quality of these equally important resources is not beneficial to preserving or promoting student life. These centers are invaluable in creating a campus community and connection among students.XXX

Scientific researchconducted on animals hasalways been a contentious topic in terms of the transparency and ethics behind it.Unfortunately,animal rights activists sometimes take extreme and violent measures againstthosescientists conductingtheexperiments.In response,a new state bill has been authored that seeks to limit various tactics used by anti-animal research extremist groups.However,the bill does not promise significant change.

Assembly Bill2296allowsUniversity ofCalifornia officials to withhold the names of researchers from public documents in an effort to further guard them.In addition,the billstates that anyone who intimidates,harasses or commits acts of violence against animal research scientists can be subject to punishment ranging from a$25,000fine to a year in prison.

Whilethe goal of protecting animal researchers from acts of vandalism and violence is admirable,the reality is that it does not drastically change things.The bill will not change the pre-existing scientificrequirements of animal researchorchange the varying public positions on it.AB2296is more focused on discouraginganimal rights activistsand hoping that will be enough.The bill seeks to prosecute those who commit crimes against animal researchers,but those acts of unnecessary violence are already illegal and should be prosecuted no matterwhothey are against.

The part that will best protect animal researchers is the withholding of names and information.If people have a problem with the research going on,taking action against an individual is not the solution.It is the institution that should be held liable for whatever research goes on in its laboratories.If people have a strong opinion against animal research,it is important that they express it in an appropriate manner.