| OCR Text |
Show www.dailyutahchronicle.com 5 OPINION Tuesday, January 18, 2011 Diversity should extend to age T he Office of Equality and Diversity "is deeply committed to enhancing the success of LOREN diverse faculty, students, and LAMBERT staff, as part of our broader goal to enrich the educational experiences and success of Staff Writer all members of our University community." Although requires places where graduates the U gives laudable patronage can return, not just to low-key, to gender, race, color, and sexual less academically rigorous orientation, it is understandably institutions, but also to academic but misguidedly silent as to age power houses such as the U to diversity. refine and reinvigorate their base Although age diversity might of knowledge and retrain for be adequately represented in the new careers. degenerative-disk, disease-filled Furthermore, our economy is spines of the U's administration based upon the unsustainably and in the Einsteinium hair of high consumption of resources. its faculty, the opportunity to inAs a consequence, as our popuclude age variance as a desirable lation increases, the resources fueling this consumption are addition to the U's goal to be "deeply committed" to diverquickly dwindling. This cansity should not be overlooked. not last. To avoid class warfare, Peppering a student body with we must learn to disperse and such non-traditional students exchange wealth by evolving is as worthy a goal as beefing it into a broad-based society that up with a Pac-io worthy football lionizes—over bigger cars, exteam. travagant toys and huge houses—learning, skill development As scientific technological advances accelerate and change and cultural enrichment through the job market, and economic lifelong education. Studies show cycles erase then create thouthe more highly educated and sands of jobs overnight, an aging academically oriented a society workforce needs to be evermore is, the more productive, healthy intellectually nimble. This and culturally rich it becomes. When we choose to spend our time and money taking a night course, purchasing a massage or participating in a yoga class instead of water skiing on Lake Powell, we might survive as a species for another millennia. Our universities should take the lead in this area and create a college campus life that is as youth oriented as it is age accommodating. Rather than detract from an exuberant, rich college experience, a student body consisting of graduates returning for further educational enhancement will create networking opportunities between these older scholars who already have connections back into their communities in careers that many traditional younger students might be seeking. These older students would also invariably bring a diversity that is often missing from our youth-oriented culture, and that comes from raising families, creating businesses and facing, understanding and planning for our own mortality instead of just intellectualizing about it. Lastly, a preparatory handout from www.alzbrain.org, an information center for Alzheimers, showed that just as regular exercise is essential for physical health, regular academic challenges stave off many agerelated brain abnormalities such as dementia and Alzheimer's disease. Instead of keeping aging baby boomers off the road and out of your way, universities should creatively invite their graduates to consistently return for further education. It could keep younger, traditional students from enrolling their parents into that other tier of popular American institutes— the retirement home and assisted-living facility—and thereby rescue their inheritances. Such a student body would more truly resemble the diversity the U claims it seeks. letters@chronicle.utah.edu "The study found a cognitively active person in old age was 2.6 times less likely to develop dementia and Alzheimer's disease than a cognitively inactive person in old age.This association remained after controlling for past cognitive activity, lifetime socioeconomic status, and current social and physical activity" Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/ U's behavior suggests a guilty conscience or more than a year, the U actively, consistently and knowingly behaved with non-responSTEWART siveness, elusiveness and THORPE promise-breaking. The U's expensive price tag to access public records is also a message even in StaffWriter itself—it holds public records for ransom and this violates the records request under the federal law, Freedom of Information Act purpose of open-records laws: facilitating and guaranteeing public (not regarding the U). It cost a access to public records. Waivnominal fee, covered multiple ers of public record requests are years, requested multiple types of not uncommon for government records, and after a few months it institutions to do for precisely came by mail, digitized on a CD. this reason. I have done a public If I'd done a similar request to F the U, a $2,420 "toll fee" would, without question, prevent me from accessing public records. But here's one more kicker to it: Early on, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals even modified its Government Records Access Management Act request to reduce the document volume for the explicit purpose to reduce fees, but the U still did not lower the fee total. Now, what does that tell you? Effectively, the U is saying that unless we pay it a hefty ransom, the U won't free our public records. The U, like kidnappers, feels that not only should it have full control over the terms of the exchange, but also that it doesn't need to keep its own promises made to us. The U's entire conduct in this speaks loud and clear of an attitude of insolent antagonism against our public access to public information. Whether the U wins or loses in court, the public sense of trust in the U has been injured, and it will be scarred. Lastly, the U's behavior hints it just might be illegally hiding something ugly that it doesn't want the sunshine to see. letters@chronicle.utah.edu PETA INVESTIGATES THE U Sometime prior to November 2009, PETA conducts an eightmonth undercover investigation of U animal research labs. Jan. 27, 2010: The U March 22: USDA, in agrees to produce the requested records subject to redactions and a fee charge of $2,420. response to a PETA complaint, conducts inspections and fines U for eight violations of federal animal welfare laws. 2009 April 2: The U produces some July 14:The U Sept. 10, 2010: Sept. 17: PETA notifies of the documents requested, and indicated it would produce documents of the GRAMA request within 30 days. None of the redactions have stated justifications. says it needs additional time, and that it will produce additional documents no later than July 30. The U produces the remaining portion of the GRAMA request initiated Nov. 11, 2009. the U of significant deficiencies in the production of the records, and that the U failed to provide justifications for the redactions as required by Utah code. Dec. 8: The U denies PETA's appeal, says deadline for appeal was Oct. 10, 2010. 2010 NOV. JAN. FEB. MARCH APRIL MAY JULY SEPT. NOV. Nov.11: PETA Feb. 8: PETA modifies March 27: Gov. Gary May 19: Additional portions July 31: The U produces addi- Nov. 24: The undercover investigation made public. PETA files a GRAMA request for records between Jan. 1, 2008 to Nov. 11, 2009. GRAMA request to exclude"all protocols that are funded by NIH" in effort to reduce the fee charge. Herbert signs bill into law ending mandatory requirement of animal shelters having to sell animals to U for experimentation. of the GRAMA request still have not been produced by the U as promised within time requested. PETA sends letter requesting update of the GRAMA request status. tional documents as per GRAMA request, and also indicates it would need an additional 15 days to produce the rest of the GRAMA request. None of the redactions have stated justifications. U still has not responded. PETA appeals to U Records Officer. Dec. 21, 2010: PETA files lawsuit against The U. LETTER TO THE EDITOR Open carry ban results from intolerance Editor: To the extent that the debate over the U's open-carry ban is a "distraction from the U's true mission," it is one entirely of the U's making. It is precisely because U President Michael Young has "made it a point to contest gun rights on campus" that this is an issue. The moment he concedes that the U does not have authority to "restrict the lawful possession or carrying of firearms" (see UCA § 53B-3-1o3), his problems with the Legislature will vanish, and the debate will cease to "sizzle." Remi Barron's claim that "the U has never arrested anyone for violation of the policy" is disingenuous. It's only true because every single time a gun carrier has been confronted, the police have managed to bully, cajole, threaten, or intimidate them sion because the U's mission statement into backing down and concealing, despite includes "promote diversity and equal opthe gun carriers clearly having the weight portunity, and respect individual beliefs." of Utah law on their side. The only proper course for an instituThis is not an issue of "public safety." tion that seeks to honor those words is The firearms in question are already carto open its arms and welcomingly accept ried on campus by concealed firearms those who are different. It simply will not permit holders. They are just kept hidden do to allow bigotry and prejudice to win from view and not even Young is foolish the day and force peaceful and lawful gun enough to claim that the U can ban that carriers to disguise themselves and hide type of carrying. Accepting open carry as their differences to comply with the mathe lawful activity it is will not increase jority's stuffy sense of propriety. It's time the number of firearms presently carried to let concealed firearms permit holders to on campus, only their visibility. step out of the shadows and be accepted No, this is an issue of tolerance, and for who they are. specifically the lack thereof by the ivoryBrent Tenney, tower elites. It's interesting that "the U's 2009 U Alumnus true mission" would enter into the discusInformation Systems Letters to the editor should be sent to letters@chronicle.utah.edu. Letters should be fewer than iso words and must include the writer's name. Letters from students should also include the writer's major and year in school. Letters from U faculty and staff should include department and title. Letters from alumni should include the year the writer graduated. All other letters must include the sender's name and city of residence. All letters become property of The Daily Utah Chronicle and may be edited for style, length and content. States' rights not threatened by school standards Ifa4 LOGAN FROERER g‘ StaffWater T he Utah Senate Majority Caucus passed a motion last week recommending the State Board of Education abandon the recently adopted Common Core Standards, a set of requirements for proficiency for elementary and high schools. This move simply panders to a political base fascinated by local control and states' rights and would threaten the quality of education both before and after college. The Republican caucus has already agreed on the motion, prior to the start of the general session later this month. "We're raising the question of local control," said Senate Majority Whip Wayne Niederhauser. The rhetoric used to justify the motion is centered around resisting what is perceived as federal intrusion. These fears are hardly founded and are more political than beneficial to the state. Returning to old state standards without serious updates would be a step backward. Utah's standards, before the Board of Education adopted the Common Core, were given a C grade by the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a national group that advocates "advancing educational excellence" through "research, analysis, and commentary." In contrast, the group gave the national Core standards a B+, citing Utah's "lack of specific content expectations" as a primary factor. Those updates, sadly, do not appear to be on the mind of our Legislature. When asked what changes Utah had in mind, Niederhauser said he "couldn't answer that definitively." At this point, "there's not been a lot of discussion of specifics," he said. The Republican caucus is spewing language about state control, without plotting what that control will be. Niederhauser also did not answer what kind of costs, time and personnel would be needed should the standards be dropped. Although this might not seem an issue for a college to be concerned with, lower standards in high school would degrade the quality experience at the university level. The less students are capable of when they arrive at the U, the lower the quality of discussions among peers will be, and the more time and money will have to be spent on remedial classes, in which information could have been completed in high school. In the class of 2009, only 73 percent of Utah high school students were ready for a college-level English composition class, and only 44 percent were ready for collegelevel algebra, according to a report from the ACT. These poor standards directly influence the quality of what the U can offer. Last fall, the U taught six sections of Math 99o, Elementary Algebra, as well as II sections of Math Imo, Intermediate Algebra. There is no reason these classes cannot be taken care of at the high school level, which would save the time and money needed to provide classes for other pursuits. The more rigorous standards are in high school, the better universities can function. None of this even touches the fallaciousness of the fear-based argument that these standards will lead to federal control. In a blog post defending the standards, State Superintendent Larry Shumway said the standards "simply outline clearly what is expected for students to learn by the end of each grade level." Teaching methods or what content should be included is not a part of the standards. All that the voluntary standards dictate is what the outcome of learning should be, however teachers and districts determine to proceed. These standards are not a threat to states' rights, and abandoning them would likely set back the quality of the state's education. Whether that will be heard over the cries for states' rights and against the perceived federal intrusion emanating from our legislators at the Capitol is another matter. letters@chronicle.utah.edu g2* E=3 Utah high school students had: Ei= 73 percent readiness for college English composition. E 44 percent readiness for college algebra. a=5 Petterly p is a Girt sli=3 e=3 ezt) _f_ |
