OCR Text |
Show v• Monday, Oct. 24, 2011 Page 13 & 111 "-Free Speech Zone Opinions on this page (columns, letters unless otherwise identified are not from Utah Statesman staff, but from a wide variety of members of the campus community who have strong opinions, just like you do! This is an open forum. Want to write something? Contact: statesman@aggiemailusu.edu Utah State University • Logan, Utah • www.uta statesman.com OurView NOTHING HAS DISAPPOINTED ME MORE WAN TO WATCH Its PRESIDENT GM UP ON LEADING'. Top professors teach every ethnicity A n ongoing study by the National Bureau of Economic Research reports that minority students tend to perform better academically when their instructors are of the same ethnicity. So, logically it might follow that in order to accommodate USU's wide range of minority students, departments should hire minority professors proportionate the number of minority students in that field. For example, if 5 percent of students are Hispanic, 5 percent of instructors should be, too; if 2 percent of students are Asian, 2 percent of instructors should be, and so on. That model, however, seems a bit too simplistic to us. We like what Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Director David Ottley said — when USU hires an instructor, his or her qualification for the job is the deciding factor, not race or gender. The NBER study seems to suggest that the most important factor in student-teacher relations is ethnicity. We understand the claim. Aside from the statistics, which are hard to argue with, it's common sense that someone with the same background, values, mindset and perceptual lens should be able to connect better than someone without them. Our question is this: Does a professor need to share a student's ethnicity in order to share those same characteristics? Our belief is the phenomenon of minority students doing better academically under minority professors is largely psychological. That is to say, taking a class from someone who shares traditions and characteristics is comforting to us and helps us open up, but it doesn't really affect pedagogy. The majority of The Statesman editorial staff is white. So are the majority of our professors. And still, we find ourselves constantly complaining about certain white professors and also constantly praising other white professors. Many of us also enjoy and even connect with our minority professors. In fact, some of our favorite professors are not from our home countries or ethnic backgrounds. What we do share with those professors is a passion for the subjects we're studying, common professional goals, a shared interest in our success and of course mutual respect. In cases like these, we see that ethnicity is not a deterrent to compatibility. If anything, the diversity is an opportunity for both of us to grow and gain perspective. And so our argument is this: while sharing an ethnic background with students provides obvious advantages, a truly qualified professor can transcend cultures. The best professors, arguably, are those who have learned to teach anyone, and who have themselves overcome cultural obstacles — perhaps even overcoming their own culture. The real challenge, then, is to learn to connect to anyone. Yes, language barriers are troublesome, and yes, someone who shares your religion and values may be easier to identify with, but in college we're preparing for the real world, and the real world is going to be choc full of people different from us. Crossing paths with a professor of a different background from you is an opportunity to gain two educations: one on the curriculum at hand, and one on learning to deal with diversity. ForumLetters Women have a choice in abortion To the editor: Regarding the opinion piece on abortion — Logical Fallacy No. 1: Limiting abortion is limiting women's choice. This presumes that the woman had no choice in the action that caused pregnancy or the actions that lead up to sexual intercourse. Advocating such a stance — excluding instances of rape, extreme coercion or incest — is to actually assert that women are subject to an animal impulse, against which they have no "choice" but to inextricably succumb. How's that for degrading women? Logical Fallacy No. 2: Imposing responsibility on Letters to the editor • A public forum the parents of conceived children is an attack on choice. Very much like the first fallacy, but addressing the "crying foul" of laws against abortion. Recoiling at imposing law neglects the need for justice for the unborn child. While it is plain that both the man and the woman are responsible for the offspring conceived, unfortunately, physical laws place an unavoidable consequence on the woman. On the other hand, government must intervene to place responsibility upon the male. Therefore ways are provided to mercifully assist the woman in dealing with her responsibility, such as See Page 14 A bou tU S Editor in Chief Catherine Meidell Copy Editor D. Whitney Smith News Editor Rob Jepson Assistant News Editor Megan Allen Features Editor Kellyn Neumann Assistant Features Editor Allee Evesen Sports Editor Tavin Stucki Assistant Sports Editor Tyler Huskinson How immigrants shape the U.S. From the left AColumn Divided Two students take two angles on one political issue From the right Ani Mirzakhanyan Assistant Photo Editor Carl R. Wilson Web Editor Steve Kent Editorial Board MIKE I URNHAM In difficult and uncertain economic and political climates, fear and prejudice can grip even the best of us. Throughout American history racial and ethnic minorities — usually immigrants — have often born the brunt of it. This unfortunate pattern continues today with the recent enactment of Alabama's HB 56 — the harshest immigration legislation in the country. The law allows police to check the immigration status of every person suspected of being in the country illegally and requires schools to disclose the immigration status of every student. Similar measures were included in Arizona's immigration bill — on which the Alabama law was modeled — but were blocked in federal court. The law's results have been disastrous to say the least, and it is primarily the children who are suffering. Students' educations have been interrupted as either they, or their parents, have been forced into hiding. Parents who came to this country illegally with children who are American citizens are now frantically looking for legal guardians in the event they are deported. Crops remain unharvested and jobs unfilled as immigrant workers flee the state, exacerbating their dire economic circumstances. The law comes in the wake of the misnamed Secure Communities Program enacted in early 2008 under President Bush, but was heavily expanded subsequently under President Obama. According to recently released data from the administration, the program deported approximately 400,000 people last year — the most recorded in eight years by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency. Two centuries ago immigrants flocked to the U.S. There was plenty of work, and getting in the country was as easy as buying a boat ticket. Today, U.S. immigration has more obstacles than a Japanese game show. What happened? The reason behind restricting immigration flow is primarily economic. Cities, states and nations need a population that is sustainable. Several problems, including a decrease in living standards and an increase in crime, will arise if a sizable group suddenly immigrates. The U.S. was once able to sustain a large flow of immigrants, but now, due to labor regulations, expensive social programs and an evolving workforce, it would be insane to completely open the borders and expect the economy to stay afloat. Immigration needs regulation. Many controversial laws have been passed to achieve this goal and the Secure Communities Act is on its way to nationwide implementation. The most disputed parts of these laws allow police officers to request immigration papers and check the fingerprints of those in custody against immigration records. Critics argue that these provisions will foster racial profiling and make immigrants think twice before calling the police in dangerous situations. I sincerely understand the fear of racial profiling, however, I believe that fear is illogical. Most police officers, believe it or not, aren't racist. Most officers also understand that being involved in anything that even looks like racial profiling will attract negative press and possibly cost them their jobs. Of course, it goes without saying that abuse of this power would inevitably lead to retaliation from immigrant communities and make ►See Page 14 ►See Page 14 I'm bummed to hear about Steve Jobs. He totally changed the way our generation communicates. Photo Editor Catherine Meidell Rob Jepson Kellyn Neumann Tavin Stucki Ani Mirzakhanyan D. Whitney Smith Steve Kent About letters • Letters should be limited to 400 words. • All letters may be shortened, edited or rejected for reasons of good taste, redundancy or volume of similar letters. • Letters must be topic oriented. They may not be directed toward individuals. Any letter directed to a specific individual may be edited or not printed. • No anonymous letters will be published. Writers must sign all letters and include a phone number or e-mail address as well as a student identification number (none of which is published). Letters will not be printed without this verification. • Letters representing groups — or more than one individual — must have a singular representative clearly stated, with all necessary identification information. • Writers must wait 21 days before submitting successive letters — no exceptions. • Letters can be hand delivered or mailed to The Statesman in the TSC, Room 105, or can be e-mailed to statesman@aggiemail.usu.edu , or click on www.utahstatesman.com for more letter guidelines and a box to submit letters. |