Faculty council mustn’t use AI to avoid hard questions

TO THE EDITOR:
On Friday the Faculty Council will consider a resolution adopting the Achievement Index as a supplement to GPAs in awarding academic distinction to undergraduates. The resolution also calls for recording the AI on student transcripts.
While I respect the efforts of the Educational Policy Committee in developing this proposal, I hope my colleagues will join me in voting against the resolution. Here’s why.
The AI is a poor assessment policy. The recent SACS reaccreditation process emphasized the need to put educational goals first and use assessment tools to measure achievement of those goals. Let’s really worry about assessment, and not avoid the question by emphasizing ranking instead.
The AI provides an alternative to GPA ranking, but fails to look below the surface. The real question is, “What are we ranking and why?” Graduate schools look at achievement in students’ majors and recommendations from their advisers. University awards should be based on measures of excellence.
Generic GPA is a poor proxy for excellence when fine distinctions must be made. Let’s challenge departments to recommend their top 10 percent of majors for University distinction, or develop an index to convert GPAs by major to establish an even playing field.
The AI uses a missile to kill a mouse, but fails to hit the mark. The AI’s stated purpose is to award academic distinction fairly, yet the proposal affects all students. It supposedly reflects collective faculty judgment but uses statistically insignificant differences in ranking students in a new and confusing way. Can flawed use of GPAs really be cured by equally flawed arrays of students using different statistical algorithms?
The AI uses a new form of “artificial intelligence” to absolve faculty members from understanding and addressing underlying problems of student performance and grade inflation. Do entering students differ in their competence in writing and science? Do students who gain advanced standing through AP credit influence statistical norms? Are those in some disciplines easier graders than others? Let’s not use AI as an excuse for avoiding hard questions like these.

Judith Welch Wegner
Former Chairwoman
Faculty Council

____________________

Letter wrongly described scholarship requirements

TO THE EDITOR:
Professor Bob Proctor’s description of minimum academic standards for Morehead-Cain Scholars in his April 23 letter was inaccurate. The requirement for Morehead-Cain Scholars is a 2.7 semesterly and cumulative GPA for the first and second semesters (freshman year) and 3.0 thereafter. However, if a student falls below this minimum, he or she does not immediately “permanently lose funding,” and instead would be placed on academic probation, during which the foundation’s advisers would be available to help the student with strategies for improving his or her GPA. It would also be unlikely that a student with a GPA above the minimum cumulative requirement would be penalized for a 2.99 semester — particularly a student who is “dependent upon” the scholarship and who is attempting a challenging and difficult major.
The pros and cons of an Achievement Index aside, it is common for full merit scholarship recipients to have minimum GPA requirements. Morehead-Cain GPA requirements are below the mean GPA for all UNC undergraduates and are not unreasonable for any major.

Charles E. Lovelace, Jr.
Executive Director
Morehead-Cain Foundation

____________________

Column right to highlight performing arts problem

TO THE EDITOR:
Kudos to Erika Stallings for calling attention to a growing problem with Carolina Performing Arts in her guest column on Wednesday. The recently announced 2007-08 performance calendar features a guest performer almost every weekend, leaving few opportunities for our own campus organizations to take advantage of the beautiful theatre at Memorial Hall.
This is our campus and our hall, it is not the Carolina Ballet’s or Merce Cunningham’s. Although I love the performers who come to Memorial Hall, it is unfair for the University to ignore the needs of its own students.
The rising cost of renting the hall also squeezes out student organizations that have performed in the hall for years, but can no longer afford it. They do not have the same financial resources as professional performers.
I would like to add that the University won’t need to worry about student performance groups if it continues to take away their rehearsal space too, like the dance studios in the women’s gym.

Alison Grimme
Journalism
Senior

____________________

Take time to reach out to someone at Virginia Tech

TO THE EDITOR:
In the wake of the tragedy at Virginia Tech, we have the opportunity to reach out and touch the lives of the students affected by this tragedy. Eve Carson made the suggestion to find someone at Virginia Tech to “adopt.”
For student groups, search for a “sister organization.” Student leaders, look up your counterparts in Blacksburg. Then, make some contact with them. Let them know they are in our thoughts. Need somewhere to get started? Get a shoebox, throw some candy and some pictures in it, and then write a letter. Be creative. Be genuine. Be Yourself.
If you need any help, we are personally available and extremely willing to do anything we can. We are not experts, but we will call upon what resources we have. We are available by e-mail, Facebook and phone. We also urge you to call upon your fellow students here in Chapel Hill and take advantage of this opportunity to grow closer to those in the UNC community as well.
As the school year draws to a close, keep in mind that time is of the essence. This is a call to action. We know many people feel helpless, but this is simple, cheap and easy yet personal way to positively affect the Virginia Tech community.

James F. Eby
Carolina Advocacy
Executive Branch

Logan Liles
Carolina Advocacy
Executive Branch

When I walked into Memorial Hall, there was a clear plastic podium with an unobtrusive mic attached to it onstage. When I got back from meeting with my photographer, that podium was gone.

And I was kind of confused. But Carolina Union Activities Board President Erika Stallings set the tone for the evening by saying that the podium wouldn’t be representative of lecturer Spike Lee’s style.

This was, she said, going to be a Spike Lee joint at Memorial Hall.

What follows are brief quotes — what I was able to gather in between blips of being awestruck in the second row — from Lee’s lecture.

“A funny thing happens when you wait by the phone — the phone gets turned off.”
Spike said this in reference to his time spent immediately after his graduation from New York University’s film school and after his student Academy Award win. He waited for the call for a gig, but nothing ever came. He later said that one must get out there and work to make their dreams a reality.

“Parents kill more dreams than anybody. No need to applaud that.”
Spike urged everyone in the audience to follow their dreams so that they can be happy and, as he said, sometimes this entails going against the traditional grain.

“Ghetto is really a state of mind. That’s why they call it a ghetto mentality.”
In his discussion of gangsta rap versus hip hop, Spike made mention of how many aspire to be “ghetto.” In dispelling this aspiration, he broke down the idea by saying it merely was something trivial, a figment.

“The days of ‘I know he’s callin’ me a bitch and a ho, but I like the beat’ are over. We have to start listening to lyrics, to substance.”
Lee railed against gangsta rap particularly for what it stood for in his eyes. This sentance was used a means to dispell the notion that he finds social value in the genre.

“We’re going to hell in a handbasket.”
Lee on the state of the United States, particularly in reference to the denegration of society and the government’s involvement in the Middle East.

“Don’t be hoodwinked into thinking everything’s alright. It’s still messed up down there.”
Lee has garnered critical acclaim for his documentary on the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. The documentary, “When the Levees Broke: A Requiem in Four Acts,” was Lee’s segue into discussing the situation in New Orleans following Katrina, and this statement from the ensuing question-and-answer session spoke volumes about Lee’s dedication to the relief effort.

“HBO wants to continue it, the process. The story is not dead. One criticism that I find particularly true is that it’s too New Orleans-centric. We have to focus on other areas.”
Spike Lee fielded a question about the status of his cinematic work in New Orleans. His response offers the hope that his work in the Gulf Coast isn’t done yet.

“We still don’t know the real deal.”
Spike said this in reference to two current issues of race in America. Its most immediate reference was to the Tawana Brawley case, in which a black New York woman claimed a a number of white men raped her. This incident was mentioned briefly in Lee’s Oscar-nominated film “Do the Right Thing.” Lee also used this as a segue into his (very brief) discussion of the Duke University lacrosse scandal. The statement, he said, applies to both cases.

“Technology has leveled the playing field in terms of filmmaking.”
When asked about how filmmaking has changed since Spike began his career at New York University, Spike had a simple answer. People now can edit their films on their computers. When Spike was in film school, he said people went to school to get access to equipment and cheap crews. Now, he said, that’s not an issue.

“Baseball is a tough place.”
Lee said this in response to whether or not he thought Jackie Robinson, who broke baseball’s color barrier, would be disappointed that his vision of a fully integrated league hasn’t survived. Lee also pointed out that only seven percent of the MLB is black.

“You have to be better than other races if you’re a minority. You can’t use racism as a crutch.”
This was Lee’s advice to a Hispanic woman who asked him how to succeed in life in the face of racial discrimination.

“Anybody that says (that historically black colleges and universities merely are a continuation of high school) is someone who’s not intelligent. HBCUs are still essential. Look at Notre Dame. Loot at Yeshiva. Hell, look at Brigham Young.”
An audience member from the North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University asked Lee what he thought of the idea that some people view HBCUs as a continuation of high school. Lee, a graduate of Morehouse College, an HBCU, promptly refuted the claim.

“That’s why diversity is so important. The impact that colleges and universities make on students is immeasurable.
Lee said this in response to an audience member’s question on how to effectively bridge the racial divide in a collegiate atmosphere. Understanding diversity, he said, is the key.

“The more we can learn about each other, the better. You really can’t give lip service to diversity.”
Again, here Spike Lee mentions why diversity is the key to helping to eliminate the racial divide. It isn’t something to pay minimal attention to, he said. According to Lee, it’s the crux of the matter.

Harry Kaplowitz
Arts Editor

Students should support baseball team tonight

TO THE EDITOR:
On behalf of our players and coaches, I am encouraging everyone to come out to Boshamer Stadium tonight to watch your fourth-ranked Tar Heels take on East Carolina at 6 p.m.
ECU will bring a large and vocal crowd, but this is our home game and we need your support to help build a true home field advantage at The Bosh. The Pirates would love nothing more than to come in here and beat us, and your support can play a role in a Tar Heel victory.
Our players will feed off a large and enthusiastic crowd pulling for them, so come out and enjoy a beautiful spring night and watch your Tar Heels in action. Admission is free with your UNC OneCard, so come be a big part in helping us beat ECU. Go Heels!

Mike Fox
Baseball Coach

____________________

Marijuana should be legal because it is not harmful

TO THE EDITOR:
Regarding Clint Johnson’s April 20 article, if health outcomes determined drug laws instead of cultural norms marijuana would be legal.
Unlike alcohol, marijuana has never been shown to cause an overdose death, nor does it share the addictive properties of tobacco. Like any drug, marijuana can be harmful if abused, but jail cells are inappropriate as health interventions and ineffective as deterrents.
The first marijuana laws were enacted in response to Mexican migration during the early 1900s, despite opposition from the American Medical Association. Dire warnings that marijuana inspires homicidal rages have been counterproductive at best.
White Americans did not even begin to smoke pot until a soon-to-be entrenched government bureaucracy began funding reefer madness propaganda.
By raiding voter-approved medical marijuana providers in California, the very same Drug Enforcement Administration that claims illicit drug use funds terrorism is forcing cancer and AIDS patients into the hands of street dealers. Apparently marijuana prohibition is more important than protecting the country from terrorism.
Students who want to help end the intergenerational culture war otherwise known as the war on some drugs should contact Students for Sensible Drug Policy at www.SchoolsNotPrisons.com.

Robert Sharpe
Policy Analyst
Common Sense for Drug Policy

____________________

Bible says God would be OK with marijuana use

TO THE EDITOR:
In response to the April 20 article “Health Effects Unclear For 4/20 Celebrations,” another reason to re-legalize cannabis that doesn‘t get mentioned is because it’s Biblically correct since Christ God Our Father (The Ecologician) indicates He created all the seed-bearing plants, saying they are all good, on literally the very first page.
The only Biblical restriction placed on cannabis is that it is to be accepted with thankfulness (see 1 Timothy 4:1-5).

Stan White
Dillon, Colorado

____________________

ITS should announce policy of deleting spam to public

TO THE EDITOR:
I have painfully learned that ITS at UNC has a policy of deleting mail that it suspects may be spam without notification to either the sender or receiver. I have been told by a representative of ITS that ITS refuses mail from computers from which it believes that “spam has originated or been relayed.” On one occasion that I know of, mail from a particular server at AOL was rejected for several days, apparently because it was believed that spam was being relayed from this computer.
Presumably thousands of non-spam e-mails were rejected until (at my request) the server was reinstated. What is particularly obnoxious is that neither I nor the sender were ever notified. The ITS representative advised me that the sender should complain to AOL for not receiving notification that his e-mail was blocked.
The justification for this is stated on the Web site help.unc.edu as, “UNC-Chapel Hill reserves the right to discard mail identified as spam without notification to sender or recipient. In addition to spam, legitimate e-mail from organizations that permit the relaying of spam may be blocked, at the discretion of UNC’s system administrators, until efforts by the other organization to prevent further abuse can be corroborated.”
While I am in favor of blocking true spam, the blocking of a source such as AOL because it inadvertently forwarded spam seems ill-advised. Furthermore, the UNC community should be notified of this policy directly

Elliot Cramer
Professor Emeritus
Psychology

____________________

Tour guides work hard to woo prospective students

TO THE EDITOR:
I’m writing in response to James Dillard’s column in which he lambasted the UNC cattle herders — oh, excuse me, I mean tour guides. Mr. Dillard, you may have gone on a tour, but listening to one and administering one are two different things.
You may have been too busy coming up with your clever quips to realize how hard tour guides work and how much information we give out during the course of an hour. Maybe we slip up once in a while, but as an economics major, I trust you understand that every once in a while an outlier can be expected.
It’s not easy to stand in front of strangers and field questions about everything from partying to professors who, by the way, are required by the University to hold four office hours a week. Meaning it’s your fault, Mr. Dillard, if they don’t know your name. Maybe you were “rolling too deep” in the back of the tour to hear that tidbit.
I can tell you in my two years as a tour guide that people appreciate, even love, the tradition and history at Carolina (which includes Davie Poplar). It’s a big part of what draws students here — the sense of school pride, a shared experience.
Please remember, Mr. Dillard, that Charles Kuralt did not say it was the graduate school admissions rates or the job prospects that bind us to this place. He said what binds us is that UNC is the University of the people. That is what we as tour guides are charged with showing people. And that, Mr. Dillard, is what we do.

Claire Williamson
Junior
Journalism

AI could allow Moreheads to major in other subjects

TO THE EDITOR:
The Achievement Index could eventually provide valuable supplemental information to the eternal GPA for fairly awarding campus-wide scholarships. The present uneven grading traditions between departments now put half of our students at a disadvantage to the other half of our students.
Every major should be equally accessible to all students. But under the current system, the Morehead program’s use of the GPA discourages their students from working class backgrounds from attempting science majors. If a Morehead scholar receives lower than a 3.0 for just one isolated semester, he or she will permanently lose funding. But in many departments the grades of B minus (worth 2.7) and C plus (worth 2.3) are still honorable grades, earned by many students (including some Moreheads) performing at their best.
Most of these Morehead scholars could instead earn A minuses and B pluses in some other subjects with the same just-below-median ranking in those classes. Students dependent upon scholarships do not now have the luxury of risking a stringently graded major. Reliance upon the raw GPA undercuts the goal of increasing diversity amongst high school science teachers.
The AI should be distributed only on an advisory basis within UNC while it is publicized. It would initially be used by scholarship administrators only as an additional reference point. Once the index is more widely understood, UNC could give more weight to it internally. This could begin in 2012, once it could be said that all students were told in advance about the future phase-in of the AI.

Bob Proctor
Professor
Mathematics

____________________

Offering incentives could increase organ donations

TO THE EDITOR:
I thank the DTH editorial board for highlighting the growing shortage of donated organs in the US. The current national policy based upon the altruism of individuals is killing thousands of people every year. Policy makers need to look into other options to increase the number of registered organ donors by giving incentives to them. Since 2001, there have been more live organ donors in the US than dead organ donors for kidneys. This is preposterous considering the number of people who die daily who could have donated organs.
While I like the theory that a market for live donations will optimize the supply of organs, this is limited because living donors can only donate a single kidney, part of the liver, lobe of a lung, or a portion of their pancreas. Another concern is that living donors would not need to risk surgery if there were a greater number of cadaver donations.
Therefore, states should offer greater incentives to increase the number of dead organ donors. To do this states could offer a tax credit or a discount off the price of a driver’s license to people who sign up to be an organ donor, give preference to people on the organ donation lists who have already signed up to be an organ donor, or pay for the funeral of the deceased donor.

James Pitcavage
Graduate Student
Public Health

____________________

Students were immature to reply to listserv e-mail

TO THE EDITOR:
Good Burger happens to be one of my favorite movies of all time. I, however, didn’t care Thursday night to have my inbox filled up with e-mails from students that think the proper forum for movie watching and party planning discussion is a listserv that was sent to students with classes in Chapman Hall or Caudill Labs.
Who thinks it’s funny to annoy so many people at one time? I recognize that some of the population was amuse. I’m not trying to judge anyone’s sense of humor, but most likely the vast majority of students were not.
One e-mail said something to the effect of, “If you don’t want to get the e-mails, unsubscribe to the listserv.” This advice won’t help the people tomorrow morning that weren’t checking their e-mails during this drawn out thread and will wake up to an inbox full of immaturity.
Also, the listserv was not put in place for people to discuss non-lead in water issues.
I remember reading about responses to the Pit Breakup from outside the student population. A lot of the responses mentioned that the enormous crowd and the chanting of “slut, slut, slut” showed our students at their worst. The news observer said that we know better than to act like that. And we do know better than to act like that.
This is another example, although on a smaller scale, where students have poorly represented the population. We’re all adults, we shouldn’t need to be babysat. That’s what growing up means. But it also means we have taken on the responsibility to act with thought to and respect for others.
Whether you like it or not, each one of us represents the Carolina community as a whole. If we want the legacy to continue as strongly as it always has, we all need to grow up.

Michelle Tolbert
Junior
Economics

____________________

Decision shows Court’s outdated sexist notions

TO THE EDITOR:
Wednesday’s Supreme Court decision demonstrates how prevalent outdated notions of gender are in the minds of some of the country’s most prominent officials.
In upholding a ban on the abortion procedure known as intact dilation and extraction (probably better known as “partial birth abortion” — the emotionally raw misnomer that conservatives have successfully attached to it), the Court decided that its members’ moral qualms were more important than the opinions of actual medical professionals.
Not only that, however, they also justified their decision with the sort of sexist reasoning that has been used to discriminate against women for centuries. The Court’s decision, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, says, “Respect for human life finds an ultimate expression in the bond of love the mother has for her child.” It also said that “some women” who choose abortion later develop feelings of “severe depression” and “loss of esteem.” Therefore, intact dilation and extraction should be banned to prevent women from making “so grave a choice.”
This reasoning is an expression of old sexist stereotypes that women are so flighty and irrational that they will make decisions that aren’t really in their best interests. Therefore, they need responsible and level-headed men like Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito to step in and override their judgment before they do something they’ll later regret.
It’s easy to feel like men and women have equality in the United States today because such blatant examples of sexism as denying women to right to vote no longer exist. However, reading the Supreme Court’s decision shows that many of America’s governmental elite still cling to outmoded sexist beliefs that women cannot be trusted to make important decisions on their own.

Matthew Braswell
Junior
Political Science, Sociology

From DTH senior writer Jessica Schonberg:

Booking it to Blacksburg

I had about five seconds to decide if I wanted to go to Blacksburg. State and National Editor Erin France screamed at me to get out of the newsroom so I grabbed a stack of notebooks and ran out the door. I didn’t grab the bag with my keys, my wallet or any other of my personal belongings in it. When we left we didn’t know very much about what was going on at Virginia Tech except that about 20 people were dead. We listened to news coverage the whole way there and it became apparent that this was going to take way more than an afternoon to report so we went ahead and booked a hotel room.

Day 1

When we got there the media was just starting to flood in. The folks at the Collegiate Times were generous enough to let us use their newsroom in the student union to set up camp.

The first day was a frenzy of trying to figure out the story. Each press conference was more packed than the last and security got tighter every time. By the end of the night the room was so packed people were locked out and had to watch the conference in an overflow room on TV. The huge parking lot was completely full of news trucks and so was every spare patch of grass. We didn’t have official media credentials and the folks working the door were starting to give us a hard time about it. First thing the next morning our ad director e-mailed us some homemade press passes that Timothy, the photographer with us, took to a copy shop and got laminated. It’s amazing that your own little Photoshop project is legitimate enough to get you through the door, but it was.

We worked on our story until well after midnight. We never stopped. As a journalist, it is exhilarating when major news breaks. As a human, it is very difficult to suppress your feelings about the situation so you can effectively do your job. We didn’t get to our hotel until after 3 a.m. and probably slept less than three hours, but when we woke up the next day the adrenaline was pumping and we were ready to go.

Day 2

Our second day there I spent almost the entire day on campus talking to people and immersing myself in the student body. As I did this, the adrenaline started to wear off and it became harder and harder to focus on doing my job.

Administrators on campus planned a big Convocation ceremony for Tuesday afternoon to give the community an opportunity to come together and grieve. I showed up two hours early because I was concerned about getting through security and the line was already wrapped around the building that houses the basketball arena.

The tears were flowing inside that stadium. And it wasn’t a show for TV and it wasn’t because people were just a little bit upset, it was because people were truly aching from the devastation on their campus. I can’t imagine how scarred I would be if my own fond memories of Carolina were tainted by such bloody and horrific incidents as those at Virginia Tech. I cannot begin to tell you how hard it was to look at those faces of pain and anguish and keep a straight face. That could have been our campus. That ceremony could have been to grieve our friends and community members. Sitting there with my notebook and pen, furiously scribbling down the sights and sounds taking place around me, I have never felt more heartless. People around me were grieving and I was pushing away grief that I know doesn’t even begin to compare to what they were going through. I positively hate the color orange, but Tuesday at that convocation there is nothing I wanted more than to be wearing a Virginia Tech T-shirt.

Back home

Now that I have had a chance to watch a little more TV coverage of the tragedy, there is something I think is being misrepresented. The way that many news outlets are talking about campus makes it sound like the spirit of Virginia Tech will never recover. In contrast, the feeling I got walking around that campus was one of resilience. People are bound and determined to overcome this tragedy and to continue to love Virginia Tech as much as they always have. The spirit of the school will never be exactly the same as it was, but the spirit isn’t broken either. There is a very powerful feeling of unity and strength that can only be experienced by walking around and talking to those who are dealing with this horrific incident firsthand. People have remained amazingly positive in the face of great tragedy.

Another thing is the generalization that everyone is mad at the Virginia Tech administration. They aren’t. Feelings are very mixed about the way the situation was handled. I urge everyone reading and watching the news to use caution before jumping to conclusions about who is at fault. From talking to students at Virginia Tech I can tell that they are taking their time in passing judgment.

It wasn’t until I got home that everything really started to sink in and the emotions started to flow. I think some people have the idea that journalists are story-hungry workers with no compassion. We are story-hungry, but we are emotional as well. We have to strike a balance between being reporters and being people and sometimes that balance is hard to find. For me personally, it involved setting my feelings aside until I got home. I can assure you, however, that it all came out when I got back. My heart goes out to the entire Virginia Tech community. Blacksburg is a community just like Chapel Hill where people are bound together by their love of a university. Their love is being put to the test right now and I wish them the best of luck.

Editorial wrong, students are taking stand on environment

TO THE EDITOR:
If people came past Polk Place on Saturday afternoon they saw a whole crowd of people gathering. We were taking part in a nationwide day of action asking Congress to finally start doing something about global warming. Contrary to the editorial published in the DTH last Wednesday, students are making noise, and you’ll hear a lot from us in the next few weeks.
In fact, people in more than 1,300 locations across the country were doing the same thing that day — it was one of the largest grassroots environmental actions in many, many years.
As students at UNC, we’re speaking out because global warming is real, and, as the upcoming generation of decision makers, it’s up to us to influence the debate and solve the problem when our Congress remains inactive on the issue.
We’re calling on our Senators Burr and Dole, and Representative Price, to commit to cutting America’s carbon emissions 80 percent by 2050. This won’t be easy, but it’s by no means impossible if we get started soon. We hope many of our fellow students will join us. It’s our chance to make a little history.

Megan Turek
Junior
Journalism

____________________

Editorial failed to accurately describe Duke lacrosse case

TO THE EDITOR:
I can’t believe you’ve pushed me to this, but I feel it’s necessary to defend Duke athletes given the absurdity of your April 13 editorial.
You said the three Duke Lacrosse players are not guilty, but not fully innocent. In fact Attorney General Roy Cooper said, “We believe these three individuals are innocent of these charges.” Such a statement seems about as clear cut as you can get.
Yes, what they did was stupid and reckless, but most college students and people in general do stupid and reckless things from time to time.
To say that the accuser isn’t blameless drastically understates the wrong that she perpetrated against not just the three players, but against all of society as well. To call a man a rapist is to say he belongs with the scum of the earth. It seems strange that nine months later she’d decide she couldn’t remember being raped in the first place. Now women who have actually been raped might be more reluctant to come forward and the rest of us will be too skeptical of what she says.
The accuser’s actions pale in comparison to the railroading job District Attorney Mike Nifong did on the players. He invented a case, sensationalized it to the public and ruined three men’s lives all for his own political gain.
Even if they are able to return to their lives now that they’ve been exonerated, the three lacrosse players have wrongly had to endure a year of hell. While Nifong was right to apologize for his own stupid and reckless actions, he will never be able to give the three men what he’s already taken away.

Nathan Barber
Senior
Business Administration

____________________

Coke debaters disregard some economic principles

TO THE EDITOR:
The respondents to C.P. Helms’ April 11 letter to the editor have their hearts in the right places, but unfortunately are disregarding some basic economic principles in considering the Coca-Cola unionization debate.
I can certainly agree that I would like to see Colombian Coca-Cola employees earn a living wage for their labors. Unfortunately, the power a corporation of Coca-Cola’s size wields enables it to subvert such aims.
Coca-Cola’s goal, as a private company, is to try to maximize its profits. If Colombian workers unionize and demand higher wages, Coca-Cola will face the potential for profit loss, and will be forced to reconfigure its operations.
They may outsource: a measure we often see from American companies’ customer service departments. They may also displace labor with capital, in the same way that many grocery stores have replaced their cashiers with self check-out machines. Either way, many Colombians currently employed by Coca-Cola would lose their jobs.
Unfortunately, this is simply the nature of the beast. As much as I would like to see increased wages for these Colombian workers, unionization is not the best means toward that end.
If Coca-Cola’s back is pushed against a figurative wage-wall in Colombia, it will relocate or replace workers with machines. If you truly care about these workers, drink a lot more Coke, because it will help to create more jobs.

Matthew Churinske
Senior
Economics and Psychology

____________________

Acheivement index won’t change value of UNC degree

TO THE EDITOR:
The Achievement Index, whether implemented or not, will not change the fact that a degree from the University of North Carolina is more than a few numbers on a page.
I personally do not have the highest GPA, and I don’t have the best GRE or SAT scores. However, none of that has prevented me from achieving my goal of attending a top ranked graduate school.
The Achievement Index will not change how people view you as a student. No one wants to be summarized as a number (although I am quite fond of my PID).
People may be confused about what it all means and the arithmetic behind it. But it does not change the fact that if you work hard and challenge yourself, you will graduate from an amazing University with a great education.

Lauren Dunbar
Senior
Environmental Science

New grading system could change UNC for the worse

TO THE EDITOR:
The Faculty Council is currently considering implementing a new philosophy and system of grading, the Achievement Index, in addition to the GPA.
Members of the executive branch — both the current Carson administration and the past Allred administration — have harbored strong doubts about AI. We had hoped to allow students to gather more information about the complex topic at an upcoming forum. But we now feel the need to take an immediate public stance on the issue in the face of strong advocacy in favor of it by some members of the Educational Policy Committee. AI could radically change the Carolina experience for the worse, and would affect Carolina students long after graduation.
Please attend the information forum, which will be held on Friday at 3 p.m. in Toy Lounge on the top floor of Dey Hall, if you’re a student and you care about preserving the excellence of the Carolina experience — and how your grades will be seen after college. To find out more about AI and our stance beforehand, visit www.unc.edu/studgov.

Eve Carson
Student Body President

Mike Radionchenko
Undergraduate Representative
Educational Policy Committee

____________________

Edit board should be less skeptical of new Congress

TO THE EDITOR:
In response to Wednesday’s editorial “Branching out from past” I have a few comments. First, I think the edit board needs be more positive. Criticism of the previous Congress is fine as long as its goal is to be constructive.
The student body’s perception of Congress has a lot to do with the picture the edit board paints. I hope the edit board will take this responsibility to heart this coming year.
Former Speaker Farley has elicited three political cartoons, and has been constantly lambasted by the edit board. Bashing the former speaker might be fun, but I think he’s taken enough of a beating for one year on the back page of the DTH. But that’s yesterday’s old news. Let’s move on now.
Looking to the future, the edit board may be skeptical of efforts to ease tensions but these efforts are already paying dividends. Congress and Carson administration officials are busy working together behind the scenes.
For the first time in recent memory, the student body president and speaker of Congress have co-sponsored legislation. Increased collaboration and consensus building among the Congress leadership has made working together more fluid. The first “Eatin’ Before the Meetin’” where Congress members all ate supper together was a huge success with nearly 20 people attending, many from all walks of life, political and ideological persuasions.
The end result? Congress met for quite possibly the shortest, most efficient meeting ever just under an hour. It was also the most civil, respectful meeting in recent memory. I am so proud of the new Congress. I am optimistic we can build on these improvements, the edit board’s skepticism notwithstanding. I hope the edit board would consider coming to Congress and seeing first-hand the changes taking place.

Tyler L. Younts
Speaker
89th Student Congress

____________________

Letter stooped to new low defending rich and mighty

TO THE EDITOR:
With all due respect to the most honorable Mr. C.P. Helms, I must agree to disagree. His likening of the battle between Coca-Cola and labor unions to a contest in criminal court is ludicrous. Coca-Cola has not been labeled “guilty,” its business practices have simply been called into question.
Secondly, Helms unfairly equates organization within labor to corporate collusion. I am embarrassed that a student at this University fails to see the need for labor unions. Multinational corporations like Coca-Cola are massive, which necessitates organization among the “small” people so that they can earn a living wage. When you call labor wages “unfair,” you insult those responsible for the immense wealth of this nation.
Moreover, your assumption that liberals don’t identify who they stand for is unfounded. Liberals shout for the voiceless, struggle for the sake of the oppressed, and wrestle in the stead of the weak. Why? Those people are worth fighting for.
Mr. Helms reaches a new low in his pathetic defense of the “rich and powerful.” The wealthy and dominant people of the world can defend for themselves. By ascending the rungs of the capitalist ladder, they have proven their mettle. Congratulations to them.

Tim Wander
Junior
History

____________________

Letter showed callousness in defending rich over poor

TO THE EDITOR:
Seldom have I read such an eloquent defense of the rights of the oppressors as C.P. Helms’s letter to the editor Wednesday.
Ensconced in luxury, and making one out of every five dollars earned in the U.S., the rich and powerful of this country don’t have enough lobbyists, politicians, and lawyers to defend their interests. And corporations, some of them having a net worth that exceeds the majority of the world’s countries, need someone to defend them against the heinous interests of workers who selfishly want to feed and clothe their children and have heat for the winter.
It’s the rich and powerful who are really being oppressed with “fair competition” and “anti-trust” and “child labor” laws. No wonder they have to outsource to make maximum profit! If workers in Colombia are allowed to unionize, it could cut into Coca-Cola Chairman and CEO Neville Isdell’s $32.3 million salary.

Jodi Mills
Library Technical Assistant
Undergraduate Library

Former director clarifies points on potential minor

TO THE EDITOR:
I apologize for responding so belatedly to the articles and letters that began appearing two weeks ago concerning the Program in Sexuality Studies. I am on leave now, but as the former Acting Director of the Program and the recipient of the much-misquoted letter from former Provost Robert Shelton outlining the financial arrangements he and the Sexuality Studies Board agreed on last spring, I should clarify a number of points.
When the provost’s Committee on LGBTQ Life and Study split into the LGBTQ Board (which serves the entire campus), and the Academic Program in Sexuality Studies, Provost Shelton and I determined that the $11,500 budget that had previously gone to the committee should be allocated to the new board, while the director of the program would receive two course releases per year in order to allow him or her the time to launch a fundraising campaign so that the program might eventually become financially self-sufficient. Thus the $11,500 budget was never intended for the program, and was never in dispute.
Administrators did tell us, however, that they were not going to follow through on the previous provost’s commitment of course release time for a director for the academic program, which meant that no faculty member was, realistically, able to undertake the major job of trying to run the program, and as a result it has effectively been suspended.
If, as it appears, a decision has been made to honor the earlier commitment at least in part by providing one course release to a director in the future, I am delighted to hear it. Provost Gray-Little and Dean Levine’s letter to the DTH to this effect was the first indication the board has had of the change in policy.

Erin G. Carlston
Associate Professor
English

____________________

Letter was wrong about collective bargaining issue

TO THE EDITOR:
Nathan Barber is, as usual, wrong, this time about collective bargaining and public school teachers. He says that they should not be paid a dime more than they are worth, but the fact is they already are paid much more than a dime less. The evidence: In the private market, teachers are often paid more. Lobbying the legislature is not enough, so added pressure is needed from organized unions.
Nathan is right about one thing: teachers do leave for greener pastures, but teachers are leaving and retiring (and schools growing) at a faster rate than they can be replaced. North Carolina is short thousands of teachers, positions that are not attractive to many college graduates looking for the best possible salary for their education. Only when teaching positions pay well, and thereby attract professionals who otherwise go into private schools or private industry, do students get an education worth their tax dollars.

Dustin Ingalls
Senior
Political Science

____________________

Liberal actions against Coca-Cola are hypocritical

TO THE EDITOR:
Liberals’ responses to the accusations against Coca-Cola involving its Colombia labor practices highlights the horrendous hypocrisy that defines the liberals of this nation. These people claim to fight for the rights of the accused, innocent before guilty and all, but in reality liberals apply this principle only when it suits them.
Outcries against Coca-Cola, including the cancellation of business contracts, condemn the firm before it has been given a fair trial. Yet, liberals don’t hesitate to protect the rights of the murderer or illegal immigrant at all costs, namely America’s well-being.
Moreover, pro-labor liberals scream for collective bargaining and criticize Coca-Cola for allegedly “trying to stomp out workers’ abilities to organize.” In reality a labor union is nothing more than collusion within the labor markets in an attempt to force wages to rise above the fair level. But these same people demand corporations compete fairly in the marketplace, no collusion welcome here.
Liberals say they stand for freedom, liberty and the people. What they don’t specify is who those people are. Liberals apply their principles with a despicable degree of discrimination. They refuse to grant the rich and powerful equal rights with the small guy.
So next time you hear a liberal say he hates discrimination or people taking advantage of others, hand them a mirror and tell them they’re looking at the problem.

C.P. Helms
Sophomore
Business Administration

____________________

America should question its own policies abroad

TO THE EDITOR:
In response to the article “Murder in Colombia: the real thing?” as a Colombian, I really appreciate the efforts of the author in highlighting the decades-long internal violent conflict that has torn the country. However, insinuating that the University is partially responsible for union deaths due to its financial ties to Coca-Cola is preposterous.
Multinational corporations use anti-union tactics all over the third world, maximizing their profits through the exploitation of local workers. The United States does far worse things that contribute to the bleeding in Colombia. It pours millions and millions of taxpayer dollars to the government, which are largely spent on ineffective “counterdrug and counterterrorism” operations that only perpetuate homicides, kidnappings, violence and insecurity.
Instead of fighting Coca-Cola for their alleged involvement in union murders, Americans should examine the foreign policy of their country and hold their leaders accountable for contributing to the violent conflict while neglecting to implement policies targeting the reduction of drug consumption and addiction at home.

Estefania San Juan
Senior
Political Science

Bodies exhibit exploits dead for sensationalism

TO THE EDITOR:
Bodies: The Exhibition, the new exhibit at The Streets at Southpoint, consists of bodies that have been flayed and plasticized is very controversial, and for good reason. According to Premier Exhibitions their exhibit consists of unclaimed bodies supplied by the Chinese police. One could easily conclude that the bodies are those of the poor and the disenfranchised. Perhaps they are the bodies of prisoners, even of political prisoners. Clearly the deceased did not give permission for the use of their bodies.
After processing, the bodies are 70 percent plastic. Real bodies help sell tickets and bring in the crowds. But real objects are never necessary to teach. That’s why we have Hollywood, textbooks and newspapers.
The exhibit claims that seeing it is good for your health, and that people will stop smoking and eat right when they see the consequences. We see people who cannot breath because they smoke and are morbidly obese. Nothing could be more real, yet we continue to smoke and overeat.
Even if permission had been granted that would not make this and similar exhibits acceptable. Bodies should be treated with dignity and respect, in honor of the deceased. Their unnecessary use here crosses that line.
The ends here do not justify the means. The cost to human dignity and to the human spirit does not justify the questionable educational benefits. It is fascinating, but so is an auto accident. And there’s the rub. There is nothing real about this plasticized version of humanity, except the use of real bodies.
See the Web site I have created for more information: dignityinboston.googlepages.com/durham.

Aaron Ginsburg
Sharon, Massachusetts

____________________

Registering early does give athletes advantage

TO THE EDITOR:
Despite what has been said by varsity athletes to the contrary, registering early does give them an advantage. These athletes have made a decision to participate in that sport, and they should be held to the same standards as all other students. If this system were put in place, who says that we shouldn’t give people with afternoon jobs early registration? Or maybe even people who participate in IM or club sports?
As students, we all make important decisions on how to use our time. We all have a responsibility to represent the University in our own ways, and just because you choose to represent it on the field or court doesn’t mean you are entitled to anything more than what other students receive.
So toughen up, because it may mean more of those early morning practices followed by those dreaded 8 a.m. classes. But then again, you chose your path.

Travis Hall
Sophomore
Journalism

____________________

Campus groups should aim beyond simple awareness

TO THE EDITOR:
I wholly encourage causes that need community awareness to have awareness weeks, for example Transgender Awareness Week, but Jesus Awareness Week? I’m pretty sure they already had that and it was called the Crusades.
I have no problem with “Jesus Week” or “Jesus was a Cool Guy Week,” but it seems to me that people are already pretty aware of Jesus. In fact, the vast majority of “awareness” related activities are for causes that most people already know about.
Another example is the Wall of Stereotypes, which was great at raising awareness for middle-schoolers who hadn’t yet learned how to discriminate against their classmates, but for UNC students it merely encouraged creativity among campus bigots.
Either organizations are not descriptively labeling their events, or awareness has become the ultimate goal for all clubs. Since both options stink, I propose we create a new event to have meaningful discussion on this topic. I propose the Awareness Awareness Week.

Nathaniel Gindele
Junior
Philosophy and Biology

____________________

Collective bargaining gives reward to sub par workers

TO THE EDITOR:
In response to the April 8 editorial “Better than Beijing,” to say that permitting slavery 142 years ago gives North Carolina a bad track record on worker’s rights is both erroneous and irrelevant sensationalism. Your comparison of slavery to North Carolina’s ban on collective bargaining for its employees is fundamentally flawed for one very basic reason: No one is forced to work for any employer at any wage.
Allowing collective bargaining would reward sub par employees by increasing their pay and job security while giving the state less incentive to pay and otherwise reward employees who show better performance. In the case of the state’s schoolteachers, the likely result would be that we’d get stuck paying underperforming teachers more and lose better ones to private schools that will pay more for the cream of the crop. In a more extreme scenario which your editorial board seems to favor, it results in the teachers going on strike, and kids learning nothing at all. Either way, the people of the state lose.
The state shouldn’t be forced to pay its employees a dime more than they’re worth. If it pays them less, there is nothing to stop employees from quitting and seeking work elsewhere. That they don’t leave in larger numbers is evidence that no egregious violation exists.
Thanks to North Carolina’s booming economy, better opportunities shouldn’t be hard to find for capable employees as overburdened and underpaid as those in Chinese factories.

Nathan Barber
Senior
Business Administration

Editorial wrong, NCSSM students don’t get full ride

TO THE EDITOR:
I am writing as a graduate of the N.C. School of Science and Math in response to the April 5 editorial regarding the NCSSM tuition grant to say that the editorial board is clearly misinformed.
First and foremost, NCSSM graduates do not receive a “full ride” as the editorial stated. Only tuition is covered. For UNC, this is currently $3,456 per year.
The editorial also alleges that the grant is awarded on the sole basis of the high school that students attended. But all North Carolina students have the opportunity to apply to NCSSM with full knowledge of the tuition grant. If a student is accepted and decides to remain at home, they are essentially turning down the tuition grant and the challenging environment of NCSSM of which living away from home is an aspect. The editorial failed to mention that admission to NCSSM is a highly competitive process resulting in a student body that truly represents the state’s best students.
However, there is no reason to believe that NCSSM students enjoy a clear advantage in competing for general merit scholarships, nor is there evidence to support this view. Attending NCSSM does not necessarily carry the same weight as valedictorian status at another school. Many students give up being a “big fish in a little pond” at their previous high school, only to become an “average student” in comparison to their peers at NCSSM.
The editorial goes on to point out that the tuition grant is an incentive for students to attend NCSSM, which is an argument for rather than against the grant. Applications to NCSSM skyrocketed after the tuition grant was introduced, making the admissions process even more selective and the student body even more deserving of merit awards. I agree that scholarships should be given to the state’s best and brightest students, and in my opinion, all NCSSM graduates fall into this category. Go Unis!

Ramsey Cardwell
Freshman
Chemistry
NCSSM Graduate

____________________

Editorial gave thoughtless reasoning for ending grant

TO THE EDITOR:
I agree with the title of the editorial on the NCSSM tuition grant, but disagree with practically every reason it gives. I graduated from NCSSM, but my education is a far cry from a “full ride.” Tuition for spring semester was about $1,730, a double room with A/C $2,300, student fees about $800, a meal plan about $800, books $350. The tuition grant defrays less than half.
The editorial claims that NCSSM students are given free money that they could have won from scholarships. Science & Mathers do apply for merit-based scholarships, but don’t hold a monopoly on them. Programs that know of NCSSM also know those applicants are not the only worthy kids, there is no mythical advantage.
The tuition grant alters who applies to NCSSM. Alums lament the changes in the incoming classes as they shift the character of NCSSM itself; many would like to see the tuition grant repealed for just that reason. Yet the editorial failed to explain how changes within NCSSM could bear on the fairness of the grant.
Students who didn’t go to NCSSM at 16 don’t get free tuition, but that’s irrelevant. Before spouting tangential reasons to revoke the grant, find an NCSSM grad and ask his/her opinion. I think you’ll find that while most would agree that being “singled out for this honor” is backwards, few would have given up attending NCSSM for any reason, money or no. Many support ending the grant, but not for the blind-sighted reasons the editorial gave.

Teresa Schubert
Sophomore
Linguistics

____________________

Early registration does not give athletes an advantage

TO THE EDITOR:
As student-athletes, afternoon practices aren’t the only activity that interferes with classes. We also have to find time for jobs/internships and take leadership roles outside of sports because every athlete isn’t on scholarship and the job market looks beyond one’s GPA and involvement in athletics. Trust me, as a business major, I know from experience.
Also, afternoon practices don’t fairly represent an athlete’s commitment to the sport. Most sports have multiple morning workouts a week, weight training sessions, and additional “optional” workouts. These workouts, a majority of time, conflict with class schedules as well.
Obviously, there’s still plenty of time for 15 hours of class. However, the real problem arises when an athlete can’t register for a class that’s required for their major. The situation usually involves a closed section during the day and an opening in the afternoon, which we don’t have the option of taking. Many student-athletes switch their majors multiple times not because of a lack of interest, but because of these conflicts. And since the vast majority of student-athletes don’t go pro, it’s unfair that a student-athlete can’t pursue their interests because of a commitment to a sport they love and scheduling conflicts.
It isn’t the fact that student-athletes are looking for “one more advantage over other students” when registering for classes, because we don’t have any advantages. It’s the fact that as student-athletes representing this fine University inside the classroom and in competition, we sit at a disadvantage while trying to reach our full potential.

Adam Schauer
Senior
Men’s Swimming and Diving

____________________

Athletes need to register early for several reasons

TO THE EDITOR:
As a journalism student and varsity gymnast, I am disappointed by the narrow mindedness of the April 5 editorial regarding priority registration for student-athletes. Your snide comment that there are spaces still open in the Sociology 101 class at 9 a.m. implies that all student-athletes search for “easy” classes to take, and that the reason we are pushing for priority registration is so we won’t get stuck taking early morning classes.
I don’t think you do understand the enormous time constraints facing student-athletes. Besides practice, we are often on the road during the week, so it is imperative that we are able to plan our schedule so that we miss as little school as possible.
I agree that all students have responsibilities. But student-athletes aren’t one-dimensional either. Please don’t presume that we are singularly focused on our sport.
The purpose of early registration is not to give freshman athletes an edge over seniors during registration. I believe that we are students first, and the purpose of priority registration is to get us into sections of classes that we need to take, while simultaneously giving us the chance to represent our University to the best of our ability.

Courtney Turco
Senior
Gymnastics