As you’ll perhaps recall, the previous entry in Beth’s ongoing series of sensationalizing months-stale  tidbits of Lewis & Clark student politics is the reason this is a valid Google search.

P.S. Thanks Angela Webber (’10) for linking me to the Willamette Week’s coverage.

1. It is good.
2. It features a lot of LC students doing backup vocals and such.
3. It is cheap ($6).

GET IT!  GET IT!  GET IT!  GET IT!  GET IT!

Or at least listen to it and tell him how much you like it (only do this if you liked it).

WELL THAT’S FIXED NOW!

Also, happy 1 year-ish anniversary of lclark.us!

Also, welcome to our new president Barry Glassner.

Also, good luck to LCSSA, our school’s union.  It has been in contract negotiations with the school for… months (?) now and I don’t know how that’s shaping up, but here’s to an amicable solution for both parties (or the union).

Also, starting next week, smokers have to utilize the toxic hovels mandated from above designated smoking areas in low-traffic areas of campus instead of the convenient but right-on-the-campus-tour walkway between Howard and Watzek (Oh you know I kid.  Heartsies.).

Also, I GRADUATED IN MAY AND I’M STILL WRITING ABOUT MY UNDERGRAD COLLEGE.  WHAT AM I DOING WITH MY LIFE?!?!?!  Actually, I just got my post-college internship upgraded to a real job (in the field of my major!!), so I’m super psyched about that.

Still looking for students who are interested in keeping this pet project of mine going for the coming year.  I’ll probably still post occasionally if I hear about something LC-related that piques my interest, but I wouldn’t mind if someone else wanted to take over for the more day-to-day/week-to-week posting.  There’s only so much I can know/care about as an alum with new adventures taking up my time.

Currently, my plan for this website is to keep it maintained but to phase myself out as a content creator.  We’ll see how that works out.

Good luck with RA training, RA friends!  I hope you’re having a good time! (this is not sarcastic… RA training is awesome).

Good Night and Good Luck?

That makes it all the more embarrassing when news like this gets out…

The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality has issued a $77,927 penalty to Lewis & Clark College in southwest Portland for discharging chlorinated wastewater from a swimming pool to a nearby stream for more than four decades.

…

When notified of the discharge, Lewis and Clark College immediately cooperated by ceasing further discharges from the pool. The college is constructing a system to discharge the swimming pool wastewater to the sanitary sewer.  Lewis and Clark’s corrective action is reflected in the penalty.

So, we’re stopping. But how did we not know this was happening for over 40 years?

Read the whole news release from the DEQ after the jump.

Also… we have a new President! Y’all knew that already, right?

DEQ Issues $77,927 Penalty to Lewis & Clark College for Wastewater Discharges without a Permit

Lewis & Clark College has until Aug. 24 to appeal the penalty.
The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality has issued a $77,927 penalty to Lewis & Clark College in southwest Portland for discharging chlorinated wastewater from a swimming pool to a nearby stream for more than four decades.

Located at 0615 SW Palatine Road in Portland, Lewis & Clark constructed the Zehntbauer Natatorium, which houses an indoor swimming pool, in 1969. Since that time, the college has been disposing of wastewater from the swimming pool through its stormwater conveyance system, which discharges to an outfall pipe into a stream to the north of the campus.

On Oct. 12, 2009, while investigating an unrelated water quality complaint, City of Portland Bureau of Environmental Services staff observed a discharge of chlorinated water from the outfall pipe into the stream.

Bureau of Environmental Services staff took a water quality sample from the stream. After chemical analysis tests showed a chlorine concentration in excess of water quality standards, they referred the case to DEQ for civil enforcement. DEQ determined that the chlorine concentrations in the stream exceeded the concentration considered acutely toxic to aquatic organisms.

When notified of the discharge, Lewis and Clark College immediately cooperated by ceasing further discharges from the pool. The college is constructing a system to discharge the swimming pool wastewater to the sanitary sewer.  Lewis and Clark’s corrective action is reflected in the penalty.

DEQ issued this penalty because chlorine is a toxic chemical that has negative effects on the aquatic environment and is especially harmful to fish. DEQ staff conducted a biological condition assessment of the stream in July 2010. The assessment concluded that the density and diversity of aquatic invertebrate populations in the stream were significantly impaired due to water quality impacts that likely resulted from the chronic chlorine pollution.

Of the total penalty amount, $66,727 represents the economic benefit the college gained over the years by failing to connect to the sanitary sewer.

Another great example of an LC celebrity is Tim with(out)-a-tail.  His campus-wide reputation for having a tail pinned to himself was so far beyond his own friend circle that I knew freshmen who’d never met Tim, and who started attending LC after Tim had stopped wearing his tail, who knew him as “Tim without a tail.”  They actually had no personal recollection of Tim *with* a tail, but he was still “Tim without a tail.”

There are plenty of others worthy of mention: smiling suit-guy (guess what he did), Jimmy (whose laugh is extremely unique.  He’s not “the dude with a weird laugh” because at any table in the Bon, at least one person knew his name was Jimmy, so when he’d start laughing at something, it was the unspoken job of the Jimmy-knower at the table to inform everyone else that it was Jimmy, and soon pretty much everyone at LC knew his name was Jimmy, even if they’d never seen his face), and the elusive ”KAZ,” whose name was etched into basically every blue fiberglass lunch tray at the Bon.

The purpose of this post is to thank these heroes for making our campus interesting.  Simply their existence creates an intangible unity that no amount of icebreakers or community-building can accomplish.

So, who is your favorite L&C celebrity?

Oh, you didn’t? Well, here’s the reason I’m writing about this:  guess where Lewis & Clark ranked!

If you guessed anything between 287 and infinity, you may be correct!

We even lost to South Dakota School of Mines & Technology, which, aside from having a quaint and mockable name, is proud that it  received $30,ooo and an endorsement from Halliburton.

yeah that Halliburton.

So, why were we left out?  I don’t know, but I have brainstormed a few possibilities:

1. Perhaps we are actually not that “green.”
2. Perhaps we didn’t play nicely (intentionally or otherwise) with Princeton Review or whomever crunched the data on their behalf.  I know that the college doesn’t have time to bend backwards for every rando making a list… perhaps we just didn’t make available enough information to be included.
3. Perhaps PR dropped the ball/didn’t know the ball existed to begin with.

As for #1, I disagree.  Or, at least I think I do, and here’s why:

• We have a LEED certification requirement for all new projects, and have numerous examples of LEED-certified (and Silver, and Gold) buildings.
• We are longtime partners with Bon Appetit.  The Bon won’t even make you goddamn hashbrowns for breakfast if they can’t do it sustainably.  This is the company that actually stopped using bananas for awhile because of the carbon footprint.
• The strength of our Environmental Studies program/Environmental Affairs Symposium/community service recognition/remember this thing?
• Icing on the cake (possibly the entire cake as well): we have arguably the best Environmental Law school in the country.  No asterisks, no qualifiers.
• DID YOU NOT EVEN LOOK AT THE WEBSITE THEME?!

So, if it’s not number 1, maybe it’s number 2.  I hope not.  Princeton Review, like any other organization that culls student testimony, has its share of problems with veracity and reliability (the only people who are compelled to share opinions are people who either really hate the school or really love it), but it’s also a huge resource that every prospective student consults.  Even if we disagree with Princeton Review’s methods, it doesn’t mean we are above needing their help when it comes to advertising to new students.

I can’t speak to number 3 either… I don’t really know the ins and outs of public relations, or how one gets in cahoots with an organization like Princeton Review.  What I do know is that our website’s link about our own sustainability in comparison to that of other colleges returns a 404 error.

EDIT: The website functions correctly once again! Woo!

• Those three trees are definitely going bye-bye for the greater good.  Perhaps we can use some of their wood to erect a Monument to the Unknown Tree, which will stand as a reminder that every time we need to expand and modernize the janky parts of campus, the administration is ruthlessly biased against beings without central nervous systems.

Remember: The cap and gown belong to you.  Your graduation gown is made from natural wood sourced exclusively from renewable, managed forests. The fabric is proven to completely decompose in soil within less than a year.  The Eco-Zip coil zipper tab and teeth are made from 100% recycled PET.  Jostens will donate $1 for each Lewis & Clark gown to an environmental sustainability project. Please do not return your cap/gown.

Following the Free Speech forum that took place last Friday (and was pretty cool), I’ve noticed an increase in vocal student support for saving three hella-old Douglas Fir Trees on our campus.  Today,  I was invited to this Facebook page.  From the page:

There are three beautiful, old Douglas firs that have lived near the chapel for years. However, their time is running out. The administration has decided to cut down these old-growth trees to make way for the expansion of the chapel. We are not against the idea of adding a new space for shows and receptions, in fact, we adamantly support the idea of adding new venues to this campus. However, it is unnecessary to cut down these trees to allow space for the expansion- for instance, there is a large patch of grass near the chapel that could be used. The administration has said that they would use the wood from the Douglas firs in the new building and would also plant more trees, but to us, this seems besides the point. It does not make up for the fact that they are cutting down very old trees. The ends don’t necessarily justify the means.

Lewis and Clark prides itself in being an environmentally friendly school- we invested a huge amount of money in the construction of a green building (Howard), conserved water this summer by not watering the grass, one of our most demanded and respected majors is Environmental studies, and we are nationally recognized for our Environmental Law school.

When prospective students go to Lewis and Clark’s website, they will come across the following:

“Lewis & Clark College is located in Portland, Oregon, U.S.A.—possibly one of the most environmentally rich corners of the Earth. Without leaving campus, you can explore forested trails for moments of quiet contemplation. The Pacific Northwest abounds in natural wonders, from rugged ocean coastline to high desert and from mountain peaks to Hells Canyon. In the midst of so much beauty so worthy of protection, it’s not surprising that our law school is currently ranked first in the nation in environmental and natural resources law.”

…in the midst of so much beauty so worthy of PROTECTION…

Yet, the administration has decided to cut down three old Douglas fir trees. This is ethically corrosive to the integrity of this institution. This is a call to arms- raise your voice- join us and question the administration. We firmly believe that there must be another option that doesn’t involve the killing of these trees. Help us start the discussion.

Please send an email to the following:

Dean of the College, Julio C. de Paula: casdean@lclark.edu
Associate Dean of the College, Jane Hunter: hunter@lclark.edu
Facilities Manager, Larry Atchison: atchison@lclark.edu
Dean of the Chapel, Mark Duntley: duntley@lclark.edu

Personally, I don’t know enough of the details to have a well-informed opinion on the matter, but I thought I’d pass the info and link along to anyone who might be interested.

EDIT 5/1/10: I removed the e-mail addresses and full names from the forwarded e-mails, in case the people who were cc’d don’t want to have that much information posted publicly online.  If, for some reason, you need to see that information, let me know and I can forward you Adrian’s e-mail.

ORIGINAL POST: Adrian forwarded me an e-mail he sent to our student body president (who has kindly forwarded it to the student listserv).  Adrian asked me to post it to this website as well, so here it is in its entirety.  Everything below this first paragraph came from Adrian.  I want to apologize that I didn’t see his e-mail until after the forum today (I was out and about this afternoon).  None the less, here it is:

Basically, scooters are the most awesomest things ever, and if you don’t have a car, you need one. The main place to find them is Craigslist, where they run $400-1000 depending on year and model. A few things to watch out for:

• Never buy a scooter where the seller doesn’t have the original title in hand. It may be stolen, and even if it’s not, it won’t be road-legal until you find the original title holder and obtain their release. Expect hundreds of dollars in time and paperwork.
• Never buy a scooter that doesn’t run. The seller will tell you it’s a cheap fix, but you don’t know whether it just needs a carb cleaning or whether the entire engine is shot to hell.
• Buy Japanese. They’re more reliable, and in the event they do have issues, repairs are cheap and easy.

I confess, this isn’t a purely altruistic post. I’m graduating, and I happen to be selling my 1999 Yamaha Riva scooter. For $650, you get a modern bike that runs great and is 100% street-legal. I’ll even throw in a helmet! Gas won’t run you more than a buck or two a week, and it’ll be easy to sell once you’re done with it. To make things even better, I have garage storage available for it, right across from campus, for THE ENTIRE SUMMER. That’s right, $650 and there will be a pair of baller-ass wheels waiting for you when you get back from break, all ready to go.

Call me: 415-412-0315

pic related: it’s my sweet ride

“If you haven’t heard, Reed College is under careful watch by the government with a firm expectation for zero-tolerance regarding illegal drugs (yes, this includes marijuana) after two drug-related student deaths in the last two years. Last week Reed’s President Colin Diver and Vice President/Dean of Students Mike Brody were summoned to a special meeting and told that there will be *undercover police and uniformed police presence at Renn Fayre this weekend*. Given that many LC students do attend the annual event, we want you to be aware of this information so that you can make informed decisions, if you are in attendance.”

The end of an era? I suppose we’ll see this weekend. I suspect, though, that cops will simply find students smart enough to ingest drugs in their private spaces, and then enjoy their effects out at the Fayre.

SPRING Schedule

Exams are from Monday (M), May 3rd – Thursday (TH), May 6, 2010

CLASS TIMES	CLASS DAYS	TIME PERIOD	EXAM DAY		EXAM TIME
08:00A-09:00A	MWF	1	M		06:00P-09:00P
08:00A-09:00A	MTWTHF	1/7	M		06:00P-09:00P
09:10A-10:10A	MWF	2	TH		08:30A-11:30A
10:20A-11:20A	MWF	3	T		01:00P-04:00P
11:30A-12:30P	MTWTHF	4	W		01:00P-04:00P
11:30A-01:00P	MW	4/5	W		01:00P-04:00P
11:30A-01:00P	WF	4/5	W		01:00P-04:00P
11:30A-01:00P	TTH	4/5	T		06:00P-09:00P
12:40P-01:40P	MWF	5	W		08:30A-11:30A
01:50P-02:50P	MWF	6	M		01:00P-04:00P
08:00A-09:30A	TTH	7	T		06:00P-09:00P
09:40A-11:10A	TTH	8	M		08:30A-11:30A
1:50P-03:20P	TTH	9	T		08:30A-11:30A
03:00P-4:30P/03:30-5:00P	M/TH	10	TH		01:00P-04:00P
03:30P-5:00P/03:00-4:30P	T/F	11	W		06:00P-09:00P
07:00P	M,W or MW	12	T		06:00P-09:00P
07:00P	T,TH or TTH	13	TH		06:00P-09:00P

If you’re going to have an event on a college campus, and you plan not to allow people to bring bags into the event, YOU NEED TO TELL PEOPLE THAT BEFORE THEY ARE AT THE DOOR.  College students carry things in bags.  We have our books, our computers, our weed, etc.  If you plan not to allow us to bring our bags, we need to make alternate plans so we can arrive without them.  Telling us “no bags” at the door is not sufficient notice, homies.

complainy complainy whine whine complain

peace.

In the talks that followed, information trickled out, including PioLog articles and conversations with Adrian (he’s the kid who did it), and it became clear that the incident was an attempt to catalyze discussion about Hawaii club’s ‘Be A Maori Warrior’ posters.  It failed, it was a stupid way to attempt such a conversation, and it was certainly disheartening and disruptive.  Personally, I think Adrian should be found guilty of *something*.  And he was… of Harassment, Disorderly Conduct, and a “Hate or Bias Related Incident.”  I’m not going to dispute the disorderly conduct.  I’m not even going to dispute the harassment charge (even though I think it can be argued that his actions don’t fit our harassment policy).  What I am really miffed about is the third violation.  You know, the violation of the policy that doesn’t exist: “Hate or Bias Related Incident.”  It was a policy created in light of this incident (and is still nowhere in writing, at least that is accessible to students).

It’s kind of like when Se7en came out and the MPAA basically had to invent a new description to explain just how many ways of “Rated R” that movie was.

Except this time it resulted in a significant blemish on someone’s conduct record (and not an MTV Movie Award).  Sure, at the end of the day, our school’s stated policies are basically irrelevant, and the administration doesn’t even *need* to justify its actions if it doesn’t want to.  But in the interest of fairness, transparency, satisfaction, and all those other buzzwords that are constantly tossed around by everyone, I think it might be a good idea to stick to the policies we state, and not make up violations because we get a ‘there ought to have been a policy against that’ feeling.

Administrators Latricia Brand (Associate Dean of Students & Director of Multicultural Affairs) and Jeff Feld-Gore (Associate Dean of Students) were quoted in this Friday’s Pio-Log that they felt that the ‘Hate and Bias-motivated Incident’ policy could be applied:

“I think that the appearance of bias, without having clear understanding of the intent, is something that the code at least can be interpreted to include,” said Brand.

“It’s a living document,” said Feld-Gore, who said that the policy was explained to him by Brand.

HATE AND BIAS MOTIVATED INCIDENTS

The College appreciates the complexity of defining language and actions that are not acceptable in a community which values freedom of expression. All members of the Lewis & Clark community must be free to hold views that others may find distressing or offensive. However, freedom of expression does not include the right to intentionally and maliciously aggravate, intimidate, ridicule, or humiliate another person.

The College has a comprehensive discrimination and harassment policy (see p. 224) which articulates our commitment to combat racism, sexism, homophobia, and other forms of bias. To further clarify the types of language and behavior that are unacceptable, the U.S. Department of Justice’s definitions and examples are offered:

“A hate crime can be generally defined as a crime which in whole or part is motivated by the offender’s bias toward the victim’s status. A hate incident is an action in which a person is made aware that her/his status is offensive to another, but does not rise to the level of a crime.

“Hate crimes are intended to hurt and intimidate individuals because they are perceived to be different with respect to their race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, or disability. The purveyors of hate use physical violence, verbal threats of violence, vandalism, and in some cases weapons to instill fear in their victims, leaving them vulnerable to subsequent attacks and feeling alienated, helpless, suspicious, and fearful. These acts of hatred can leave lasting emotional impressions upon their victims as well as entire communities.

“Federal and state reporting requirements vary in the definitions and victim categories for hate crimes. The FBI Uniform Crime Reporting Program (28 USC §534), Campus Security Act (20 USC §1092), state, and local hate crimes legislation list specific crimes which are identifiable as a hate crime, including murder, manslaughter, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, motor vehicle theft, arson, forcible and non-forcible sex offenses, intimidation, destruction, damage or vandalism of property in which the victim is intentionally selected because of the actual or perceived race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, ethnicity, or disability of the victim.

“When they do not fall into one of the listed criminal categories, hate offenses are referred to as bias-motivated incidents. These incidents may include cases of minor harassment, verbal slurs, etc.”

Hate- and bias-related incidents are demeaning to all members of the campus community and subvert the mission of the College. Any hate- or bias-motivated act is unacceptable and will not be tolerated.

First, it’s important to note that “p. 224″ doesn’t exist.  From what I can find, this PDF is only 39 pages long and the entire Pathfinder is 89.

Regardless of my personal opinion about the following factors, I want to clarify that I do not intend to argue here that Adrian is not guilty of any wrongdoing, nor do I intend to insinuate that a policy to cover the grey-area Adrian uncovered is necessarily a bad idea moving forward.

It is, however, very unjust to apply any such policy to his actions retroactively.

Our policy is worded in terms of motivation.  Based on the discussions and articles about this incident, it is 100% clear that this was not an act motivated by malice towards an individual or a group of people.  It was an act of parody that used extreme racist imagery to highlight what was perceived to be racist imagery in another flyer.  It was a bad, failed piece of satire, because no one was talking about the original posters, just the extreme amount of poor-taste that went into these flyers, but it was still motivated by satire.  Even if you found this to be the most offensive thing you’ve ever seen (even I think they were probably the most offensive thing I’ve seen at L&C), that cannot change the fact that the motivation was not malicious.  The motivation was not racist.  Our reaction certainly implied it, and without a backstory, it would be logical to assume that this incident was motivated by malice….  but we have a backstory, and our reaction to an act does not change the reasoning that went into producing that act.

To shoehorn this incident into the clear-cut boundaries of a policy that doesn’t cover it is arrogantly irresponsible of the powers that be.  To create a new set of guidelines, change some wording (“motivated” -> “related”), and essentially morph the policy into something it never was, without getting student input, and then immediately apply it to events that happened before this new policy was even considered necessary (and without allowing the student body to even see this new policy in writing), is wrong.

I’ve noticed that Feld-Gore seems to especially favor two words (evidence: same Pio-Log article).  First, “no,” which is what he said when Adrian appealed his decision by making an argument not unlike the one I’ve just presented.  His second favorite word, at least lately, seems to be “comment” (of course, this is preceded by the first favorite word), which is a convenient, irrefutable cure-all to any questioning his actions may inspire.  FERPA is one thing, but, for example, “Why didn’t you send out the letter?” is a valid question, I think.

In my opinion, no one, regardless of what they’ve done, deserves to be found guilty of violating an imaginary policy.  It’s probably too late for that.  Furthermore, I think that arbitrary decisions justified by acts of non-information are not a stable foundation for a college’s conduct system.

Also, this entire incident, its followup, and fallout totally remind me of this.  Like a lot.

Now I invite you to tell me in the comments section why I’m wrong.

Program A: Wednesday, April 21 & Friday, April 23

6:30p - BAD HOUR by Kimberly Fanshier ‘09
Directed by Ana Erikson
(Note: this will be presented in the Fir Acres Theatre Courtyard)
“Follows two childhood friends as they leave the place they are from for the first time and discover the cost of reinventing yourself.”

7:45p (approx) - THE SECRET IN THE WINGS by Mary Zimmerman
Directed by Erin Dees
“A cluttered attic and the imaginations of children spark an exploration into unplumbed depths of fairy tales.”

8:45p (approx) - AMERICAN SLIGO by Adam Rapp
Directed by Matt Lundberg
“The dysfunctions of the American Family are at the center of this dark comedy as the audience joins the Sligo Family for what could be considered their last supper.”

—————————————-

Program B: Thursday, April 22 & Saturday, April 24

7:00p - THE SHAPE OF THINGS by Neil Labute
Directed by Alex Ramirez
“An invitation to question the motives behind our relationships to one another; ask yourselves: how far is too far?”

8:30p (approx) - DEAD MAN’S CELL PHONE by Sarah Ruhl
Directed by Emily Gregory
“One insistently ringing cell phone is all it takes to pull one hapless woman into the depths of a strange, fantastical world and the lives (and deaths) of the people who inhabit it.”

9:30p (approx) - ARTAUD IN HELL
Written and directed by Sander Gusinow
“A dark sojourn into theatre theoretician Antonin Artaud’s ‘theatre of cruelty.’  This bloody, chaotic, dreamlike madness is not quite fun for the whole family (above the age of 15 recommended).

Enter U-Car Share.  It’s a car-sharing company a la Zipcar, and the school has come to an agreement with them such that next year we will be able to utilize their services.   That means that anyone can rent a car for $5/hr, plus mileage.  While it is a bit expensive (not for this service, just in the scheme of a college student’s budget), it is an awesome addition to the transportation options of L&C students.  It’s way, way better than a taxi, that’s for sure.

Even though I won’t be at L&C to see whether this takes off or not (woo graduation!), I’m really glad that the option’s finally there.  I’m not sure who all pushed for it (I know the ball got rolling on the subject last year in ASLC meetings), but if you had a hand in making it happen, thanks!

Check your e-mails from Brad and Celestino for information about how to sign up for free.

So… DON’T SMOKE POT AT THE FLAG POLE THIS YEAR UNLESS YOU’RE REALLY RICH.  Rolled cigarettes and pot-flavored incense are hilarious alternatives that might get you in trouble but I still want to watch what happens to you so do it.

Now, I know what you’re saying… it’s what I said: “police at my college?!?!”  But then I thought about it for awhile and talked to some people.  Yes.  While that may not be an ideal situation, I don’t think the college has much choice.  See, the whole flagpole ritual, while liberating and unifying and all that stuff, is also a non-ignorable, predictable, annual instance of mass law-violation.  For all sorts of reasons (legal, philosophical, financial, and otherwise), it is not in the college’s best interest to knowingly allow the congregation to occur.  Couple this with the publicity the event has garnered in recent years (word-of-mouth and otherwise), and it’s simply not something that any administration that’s doing its job can turn a blind eye towards.

So, what can you do? It’s simple, really… BE LESS CONSPICUOUS!

Now, some may say, “But Cary, 4/20 is about sticking it to the man and lighting up in public so we can show the man that we don’t care about his rules! Hiding defeats the purpose!”

Maybe… but if you do it my way you can get high.

P.S. I imagine Campus Safety will probably be down at the flagpole, so you could probably hotbox their shack and no one would know….

Somewhere around the time of drafting the new Constitution last Spring, my opinion started to change.  I remember working hard with the rest of the Executive Council (especially Brad Elkins) to reorganize the student government from the ground-up.  When we were done, we had almost completely scrapped our old, ineffective, whined-about framework and turned ASLC into a potentially transformative representative democracy.  The fervor and competition of this 2010 Spring election is an affirmation that we did it (mostly) right.

It may be true that ASLC has a reputation for irrelevance, but that reputation is no longer deserved.  With the addition of Jason Feiner and Celestino who take it very seriously, ASLC Senate is a legitimate decision-making body, and its decisions do hold weight with the administration. “But resolutions don’t even mean anything!” you whine.  You’re wrong, actually.  While they are by no means legally binding, and can be ignored, you underestimate the power of the statement “The student body voted, and it officially endorses plan of action x.”  In the decision-making process of a college, those words can’t be ignored without serious consideration of PR fallout and other undesirable consequences.  We’re never going to be able to wrestle full control of all aspects of our L&C Experience from the realities of finance, PR, admissions, contractual obligations, and long-term administrative goals, but ASLC Senate has demonstrated that it is exponentially more legitimate than its past incarnations, and the people with power have taken notice.

ASLC is no longer broken.  ASLC is exceedingly transparent. All decisions are made in public meetings, with public debates and parliamentary procedure.  ASLC has venues for any student to propose a constitutional amendment directly to the student body.  Anyone can come to an ASLC meeting and put anything on the official agenda for discussion.  ASLC’s problem no longer lies with being truly unrepresentative.  Now, it’s your (our) problem.  ASLC only works if we take some initiative to be informed, to draft resolutions, to talk to our senators, and to attend meetings.

“ASLC doesn’t do anything,” “It’s time for a change in student government,” “I will give the students a voice,” “we need transparency,” these should no longer be our chief concerns–these problems have already been remedied (if not completely, to a very large degree).  The only problem with ASLC is that you still don’t actually care about it.

How many times In the past few weeks have you heard “would you like to take my survey?” or at least some variation of it? I know I have not only hear it innumerable times, but, as a member of the Psychology Methodology class, have now uttered it many more times than I have heard it. So what is it about our majors that leads us all to having to do surveys at the exact same time? I get it. Its the whole end-of-the-semester-final-project-didn’t-have-the-skills-until-now thing. But the problem? Our already over-surveyed student body is surveyed out.

Our professors expect us to have high numbers of participants for statistical significance purposes, and we have a student body that tells us “I took that last week.” What do I say in response to that? “No, that was a different survey, you should take mine too.” Because honestly, how can I say that in the context of our social values without seeming rude. So I just smile and thank them for their time, thinking about my shrinking n. I understand. I used to walk away, saying no thanks, too.

Is there a solution to the problem that is an over-surveyed, already apathetic student body? Not that I can think of. Perhaps we need to start being more creative when we come up with our research for these classes, and find something that won’t over burden us. Yes, a survey seems to be the easiest route to go. Except for the fact that everyone else is doing the same thing.

My opinion? Either make it short and be prepared for rejection and possible failure, or don’t do the survey.

This is my official endorsement of Dith Pamp for ASLC president. (The unofficial endorsement took the form of a sticky note on my dorm room door.) Here’s the lowdown on why I believe Dith is the strongest candidate for the ASLC presidency.

• Dith has served on the ASLC Cabinet for the past year, helping to create the Senate as our student government went through major restructuring
• Dith has worked for better student group budgeting for three years, and has served as Treasurer for the past year, advocating for financial transparency from the College
• Dith has worked as an RA for three years, serving as a community builder, resource, and liaison between students and Campus Living since she was hired as a freshman
• Dith has been present and involved in campus life for the past three years, giving her a definite edge over her opponents who have been abroad
• Dith has functioned as the student voice on controversial issues such as the new smoking policy, transferable print balances, and the LC work study program
• Dith is the only candidate who has attended a Senate meeting… and she has attended all 25 of them!

Also, you should vote for Dith because I drew a cute picture of her.

ASLC election ballots go out via email on Friday at noon and are due by Monday at noon. Please vote! For your voice to be heard, you gotta speak up.

Paul Wolfowitz is speaking tonight! And it’s about spreading democracy!  I wonder what the hippies will yell at him.

For a full schedule of events, and other pertinent information, check the symposium website.

Friday, an article was posted to The Source detailing the upcoming changes to smoking policy and enforcement, with the news that the Executive Council of the College had approved these changes.  E-mails were also sent to students, staff, and faculty of all three colleges.  By  now, most of you are familiar with what’s going to happen, as we’ve gotten plenty of notice about the process (and invitations to all sorts of forums on the matter).  This is also the third time that lclark.us has posted an article on this topic, so if you read this blog regularly, you definitely have some idea of what’s going down.

Since I know you’re on the internet and you don’t have time to click hyperlinks, here’s my summary of the information contained in the Source article (if you think I misrepresented something, let me know in the comments):

• smoking will only be allowed on campus in designated smoking areas (“DSAs”), out of the way of heavy traffic.
• as a result of community input, the number of DSAs has been increased to 13 (from an original 8)
• “Each DSA will provide cover, a place to sit, an ashtray, and a trash receptacle.”
• “Campus Safety will not be mandated to police smokers. Instead, the college would like the community to take responsibility for enforcement. Faculty, staff, and students should remind smokers who are not complying with the new policy to use the DSAs.”
• Failure to comply with repeated requests to relocate may lead to an interaction with Campus Safety, and at Campus Safety’s discretion, a $25 fine.
• here are maps of the proposed locations for DSAs, along with a draft of the new policy.

Friday afternoon I spoke with Health Promotion & Wellness Associate Director Melissa Osmond and man-with-so-many-job-titles-they-don’t-entirely-fit-in-the-directory John Hancock, to learn more about the changes.

First and foremost, I know a lot of people are wary of the introduction of fines.  I asked about that.  I was assured that fines were to be used truly as a deterrent “[we envision] fines as being a very infrequent event,” explained Hancock.  Osmond added that the fines would be separate from the conduct system, similar to how parking fines are separate from the conduct system [Ed note: I don't mean to insinuate that she compared parking fines to smoking fines in any context other than this].  They also brought up an angle that I hadn’t considered, and is worth admitting, which is that fining is as effective on students as it is on staff, faculty, and visitors.  It is indeed difficult to subject a visitor or staff member of the conduct system in any meaningful or productive way.

The staff members in charge of drafting L&C’s policy examined the smoking policies of many institutions with either smoke-free campuses or with designated smoking locations, and also looked at how these schools chose to transition to more restrictive smoking policies. Regarding this research, Osmond noted that “one of the most successful ways [to transition smoothly] is for the community to embrace it.”  By emphasizing self-enforcement within the community, rather than relying on designated officers or Campus Safety, the drafters of our new policy hope to facilitate such a transition.

Osmond and Hancock also expressed that one of their chief concerns is the well-being of people with allergies and other severe conditions that are exacerbated by second-hand smoke.  Hancock noted that one of the intentions of the new policy is to “empower students when there’s a health issue involved.”

Finally, I get the definite impression that both Osmond and Hancock are sincere in their calls for community input.  Not only have there been forums held on this topic since last Spring, but there continue to be forums, and meetings for the purpose of understanding and catering to the needs of the community.  One example, which is noted in The Source article, but which is, I think, definitely evidence of this, is their willingness to meet with concerned hookah-ers in order to understand and respond to the impact of the new policy on the hookah subculture at L&C.  Of crafting the new policy, Hancock explains, “it has been a challenging process, and we’ve tried to involve lots of people. [...] [We want to] create a healthier community, but also feel good about the process.”

So, homies, that’s what I’ve got.

The upcoming forums, which are listed in the e-mail and article, are:

Monday, April 12, from noon-1 p.m. in LRC Classroom 6 at the Law School
Monday, April 12, from 4:30-5:30 in Rogers 220 at the Graduate School
Tuesday, April 13th from 12:00pm-1:00pm in Council Chamber, Templeton Student Center

Edit: After I posted this article, I notified John Hancock and Melissa Osmond and asked if there was anything they felt needed clarification or was unfair.  I received this comment from John, which I’ll repost for you all in the interest of accuracy:

I read the comment about fines.  I hope it’s clear to everyone (and we will make it clear in the fora and in our other educational activities)that under the new policy, we want to create an environment where smokers will be attracted to using DSA’s (for example, because they’re covered), and where community members will feel reasonably comfortable asking smokers to use DSA’s.  Fines will be a last resort, and could only be used by Campus Safety “when an individual has made it readily apparent, through repeated violations and/or repeated  failure to heed requests, that s/he is not open to complying with this policy.”  In other words, no smoker should ever be surprised to experience a fine, because, prior to that time, s/he will be given numerous cues to use the DSA’s. Basically, fines will be reserved for individuals who thumb their nose at the
policy.

If our community members have alternative ideas for how to more effectively intervene with such individuals, we would welcome suggestions.  The workgroup itself did consider alternatives, but rejected them.

just a friendly reminder to check your e-mail today, and especially check the one called “DO THIS ONE! 2010 Student Activities Survey and a chance to win $25 gift card from Powell’s!“

There was a technical difficulty with the first one they sent out, but it’s fixed and it’s important that you fill out this one. It works and you’ll maybe win a prize!  Also, the only way to make Templeton become less lame is to tell Student Activities what they could do to make it cool (Student Activities has money and Student Center-delameifying-powers).

If only they would send you an e-mail asking you for your input, with a Powell’s gift card bribe.  Well, I guess one can dream….

Seriously, this survey only took me like 7 minutes, and I went slowly.  See if you can beat my record!

Hey did you read the PioLog this week?  I did.  You know what I don’t get?  This.  Campus Living has sanctioned a repeat-violator of college policy by requiring that he live on campus an extra semester.  Between the article and what I could glean from the ASLC Senate minutes from yesterday‘s meeting, where they passed without opposition a resolution condemning the sanction, it seems that an unnamed sophomore went for his fourth time into the conduct process, and was handed this rather unusual (I wish I could say “unprecedented” with certainty, but from what I hear it’s not) punishment.  I realize that administrators at LC often take issue with the idea of “punishment” in the strict retributive sense (and they should), but I can’t really think of any other way to describe what this was.

As many of you know, our school, as a guideline, does not believe in fines (at least that’s what we are told every year at community programs about the conduct process and college policy).  Sure, we can be fined for property-related violations (theft, vandalism, etc.), but we don’t get fined for breaking the alcohol policy, for example.  The reasoning is that fines may be unreasonably harsh for people without money and/or unreasonably gentle for those who have money.  The school likes to stick to sanctions that impact all students the same, regardless of the amount of money a student has.

Assuming the previous paragraph is still true, (if it isn’t, that’s new to me) I see no way to justify sanctioning a student by extending his on-campus residence requirement.  The most pressing issue, I feel, which was briefly mentioned in the PioLog article and discussed during the ASLC meeting, is that such a sanction constitutes a financial imposition by the college upon an individual student (we don’t do that, remember?).

Let’s assume the student chooses the *cheapest* on-campus options for his compulsory fifth semester.  Since he would presumably be a Junior, we’ll grant that he is allowed to live in the apartments.

The apartments cost $3,250/semester (which is considerably more than the dorms), however the cheapest meal plan, which only costs $600/semester, is only available to apartment residents.  A student could live and eat in the apartments for $3,850, plus the cost of additional groceries.  If the student resides in the traditional dorms, the least he could pay is $2,529 for a double, plus $2,132 for a 14 meal plan ($4,661 total).

Alternatively, one could find accommodations off campus with some peeps.  Let’s be liberal and say that this student is willing to pay $400/month for rent (near campus, the reality is often much closer to $300, or even $250). On top of that, our student friend will pay $5 per meal.  That’s also a vast overestimate, but we’ll go with it because he only shops at Market of Choice.  Furthermore, our homie will need to pay bills in his new house, so let’s say he pays about $100 a month (I looked through my past bill payments from this school year and I have never paid more than $100 in a month total).

Even with these inflated numbers, my completely unscientific estimation process has our student paying less to live off-campus:

400*4 + 5*3*7*16 + 100*4 = $3680/semester off campus in comfy house with friends

3,250 + 600 + groceries = ($3,850 + groceries)/semester on campus in apartments

2,529 + 2,132 = $4,661/semester on campus in dorms

Okay, so that’s not convincing you because I invented all those numbers.  Well, that’s okay, you’re good to be skeptical.  Don’t trust someone who invents numbers to prove a point.  One other less-pressing concern I have (aside from the general “so living on campus is a punishment, huh?”) is that sanctions like this may unintentionally impact the rest of the community.  Some of you are familiar with the brief hubbub that arose two years ago when the Associate Dean of Students proposed sanctioning drug policy violators by forcing them to reside in the substance-free housing dorm.  At the time, the argument was made that by forcing the substance-free people to live with drug abusers, Campus Living was actually punishing the substance-free kids, and undermining the entire idea of a substance free dorm.  I don’t think it’s too unrealistic to make this observation in a more general sense.  If someone has repeatedly shown that they cannot uphold the standards of the community, how are we doing the community any service by forcing that person into a position where he can continue to upset the people around him?  To be fair, in this recent specific instance, I don’t know who the person in question is, nor do I have any reason to believe that he’s not generally swell.  All I’m trying to say is that forcing a residential community to be subjected to the antics of an individual who has repeatedly shown that he doesn’t want to play by that community’s rules seems to me to be counter-productive for all parties.

In summary:

If you agree with me, Karen, and the ASLC Senate, please contact Campus Living and the Dean of Students and (cordially, articulately) let them know that sanctioning students by extending their residence requirement is unacceptable.

STALK HER ON THE FACEBOOK AND TELL HER HOW MUCH YOU LIKE IT/HER.

The play draws on the Yiddish theatre tradition and the legend of the Golem to explore modern ideas about cultural collision, sectarian violence, and revenge. The play is set in Vilna in 1899, as a troupe of actors is performing a story placed in Vilna in 1540. Written by a company member, the “play within the play” tells of the creation of a Golem by two poor Jewish cobblers to avenge a family death perpetrated by a mob.  At first the play appears to be a comedy but as the story progresses, a darker undertone grows stronger as the Golem becomes an out of control force of random violence.

March 11, 12, 13th @ Fir Acres Theatre

$5 LC students, $7 alums/non-LC students/staff/faculty/seniors, $10  general.

Click here for the details.

The annual Lewis & Clark College Gender Studies Symposium starts this week on Wednesday!

This year the symposium explores an unusual and often ignored theme in the realms of gender studies: the science of gender and sex. Join us for three days of over 25 panels, presentations, workshops, and performances centered on topics ranging from the biological basis of gender identity to Darwinian feminism to the medicalization of sexuality to how Portland sex workers reduce the transmission of HIV/AIDS.

This student-steered symposium brings together local community members as well as experts and attendees from across the nation. Every year, a cohort of LC students work with faculty advisors to begin planning this symposium nearly a year in advance. If nothing else, please attend a panel or two to support all the work that has gone into making this symposium rock.

The full program can be found online here. All events are free and open to the public, in case you needed more incentive. Also, there will be buttons. Drop by the info table outside Council Chambers to get free buttons and printed programs.

Greetings CAS Students:

My name is Dan Terrio, Chief Technology Officer at Lewis & Clark. I am writing to you today to make you aware some changes in procedures with regards to handling received copyright infringement claims.

If you are not aware, this past fall Congress passed the Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA). The new law includes provisions addressing illegal peer-to-peer file sharing on college and university networks. The law requires regular communication with students about college policies with regards to copyright; a formal plan to effectively combat copyright abuse on the campus network that must include one or more technology-based deterrents; and we must offer alternatives to illegal downloading (and uploading).

The purpose of this message is to let you know what our formal plan is for combating copyright abuse on the LC network. As the institution’s registered digital millennium copyright act agent, I regularly receive (over 10 per week, on average) copyright infringement claims from agencies such as the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), NBC, HBO, FOX, etc. These infringement claims identify the file name, the time of infringement, and the IP address associated with the infringing activity.

From that IP address we can usually determine the individual on our network that has made that file available for sharing. In the past we had sent email notification to the individual, asking for a reply to confirm receipt and understanding about the infringement claim.

In my observations, most students that I have spoken to about copyright infringement claims, have been unaware that they had been sharing files. There seems to be a misunderstanding that although a peer-to-peer application may used to download files, in most cases, there is a “piece” of the application running all the time, sharing all files on a computer.

It is not the intent of the College to block the use of peer-to-peer software applications, as there are legitimate and legal uses for those applications. However downloading and sharing (freely) copyright protected files does violate federal copyright law.

In light of the requirements of the HEOA, we will begin to use new procedures beginning Monday, March 1.

When an infringement claim is received, if an individual can be associated with the IP address identified in the claim, we will immediately suspend network access until it can be verified at the IT help-desk that the peer-to-peer application/software has been removed or sharing has been turned off. Anyone that has network access suspended will know when he or she logs onto the network, as he or she will be redirected to a webpage explaining the situation and providing information as to how to have network access restored.

Personally, I don’t think these changes are even going to affect the vast majority of us, but I guess we’ll see.  What I think is actually more notable is the barely-mentioned provision of the Higher Education Opportunity Act that mandates that schools:

(B) will, to the extent practicable, offer alternatives to illegal downloading or peer-to-peer distribution of intellectual property, as determined by the institution in consultation with the chief technology officer or other designated officer of the  institution.’ [link]

So, the obvious question: what action is L&C taking to provide us with an alternative to illegal downloading?  What does that stipulation even mean, legally?

The simple/obvious route would be to say “use hulu.com and go buy a Netflix account,” but is that enough?

I don’t even mean to imply that I agree with the idea that the college owes us something in order to deter us from committing information crimes on our own, but it would seem that the government does… so hook me up.

P.S. If you happen to be one of the students who get caught and lose internet access for awhile, quit using Limewire or public BitTorrent trackers and do some research (and then never pirate anything ever again).

The Doc began with the admirable sentiment that to be datable, you have to like yourself. Contrary to this positive sentiment, throughout the performance the Doc’s humor frequently descended into name-calling and derision. Full disclosure: he repeatedly singled out one of the authors of this article. Rather than asking me my name, he referred to me exclusively as “Freaky.” He expertly steered the audience into laughing at me, disparaging me for my sexual preferences and practices. While I am self-confident enough to handle ridicule, that does not give anyone the right to deploy that style of humor against another person. It certainly does not teach self-appreciation.

The Doc promised that his performance would be inclusive of all sexual orientations and gender identities. In reality, his treatment of the LGBTQ community was demeaning. He opened his talk with a disclaimer that his advice was applicable to all students, whether gay, bisexual, transgendered, or aroused by the microphone stand. Not only was this a false promise of inclusivity, it belittled the LGBTQ community by equating same-gender attraction with attraction to an inanimate object, thus reducing it to ridiculous. He tacked the phrase “we’re all adults here” onto his disclaimer, implying that potential criticism of his performance’s privileging of heterosexual experiences would be immature and not worth his consideration. However, the Doc’s language was so explicitly gendered that it was almost impossible for queer listeners to tease out any advice we could apply to ourselves. The Doc made it clear that much of what he said was not meant to apply to LGBTQ people. More than once he had an aside in which he was “politically correct for a second” and explained that though his advice may or may not apply to queer people, what was important was that it did apply to straight people. Queer students left the performance with the understanding that we were a politically correct aside to dating. A truly inclusive performance does not preface itself with a disclaimer about its inclusivity; instead, inclusivity is inherent throughout the performance, eliminating the need for a disclaimer.

In addition to assuming queer audience members would be able to reframe his advice to fit their deviant ways, the Doc stereotyped men and women. His performance did not acknowledge or value differences between genders. The Doc relied upon convenient gender tropes, equating women with feelings and sensitivity and men with facts and boorishness. He admonished men for asking women the wrong questions, advising that a man should ask, “How did that make you feel?” instead of who what when where why. The implication is that men should feign interest in a woman’s feelings in order to con her into dating him. It would have been far more valuable for the Doc to advise honest communication and consent.

The concept of consent was absent from the Doc’s performance. Although never stated explicitly, the tone of the performance sounded a lot like if she says no, she’s playing hard to get. He told the women in the room that one way to know a man is interested is when he is not deterred by the barriers a woman puts up. He explained further that women have a flashing neon sign that reads “you have a penis, I don’t trust you” on their foreheads. A man that is interested in a particular woman will ignore her neon sign and persist in his quest to get to know her, and ostensibly to bed her. The message is clear: though the woman is apparently portraying that she is uninterested in the man, the man must persevere because she doesn’t know, or doesn’t show, what she really wants. Her no actually means yes.

The Doc sought audience response – unequally – to prove his claims about gender. In his advice to women regarding how to keep a boyfriend, the Doc prescribed “FEED HIM.” Then he asked the men to stand if they were even remotely hungry. Men shot to their feet – it was, after all, more than four hours since most of us had eaten brunch. Point made, he moved on, never asking women to stand if they were hungry, therefore neatly perpetuating the ideology that men eat and women feed them. Some of the gender stereotyping the Doc evinced from the audience could lead to dangerous misinterpretations. When an image of puppies flashed onto the screen, it was met with a rousing, “awww!” to which the Doc said “Men, when you hear ladies make that sound, it means you’re in for some serious lovin’.” Take note: it is quite possible to perceive something as cute without going to bed with it.

The performance did have a few enjoyable moments that could have been expanded to project a more positive, useful message. When the Doc inventoried types of bad kissing, he avoided gendered language and used humor without targeting specific individuals. Advice on how to be a good kisser would have been a helpful next segment. The section listing where women like to be touched could have been useful had it been expanded to include men too; the erogenous zones the Doc identified are body locations abundant with nerve endings in people of all genders. Instead, women were transformed into a Twister board for men to touch in the right spots without bothering to ask the girl if it is okay to touch her in those places first. The Doc’s advice for approaching a love interest, “be a fat penguin – break the ice!” would have been more helpful had he provided effective ways for people to overcome their reservations.

It is not impossible to host a show that combines dating advice and humor to create an empowering and sex-positive message – New Student Orientation hosts Sex Signals every September! Some people left the Dating Doctor feeling offended, alienated, or apprehensive about the Doc’s advice. More concerning to us is that the vast majority of people we spoke to left believing they received an afternoon of great dating advice and some quality entertainment. For a community that prides itself on its ability to think critically, Lewis and Clark students disappointed us by their obedient swallowing of the Dating Doctor’s faulty prescription for how to woo and screw.

-Maisha Foster-O’Neal & Allison Weith

There will be food, dancing, and booze for those who are of-age.  It’s $15 in advance , with a $5 discount if you take the the shuttle from campus (as in you will be handed a $5 bill when you get on the bus), or $20 at the door.

Finally, it’s worth noting that Spring Fling is taking place at the brand-new PDX venue The Leftbank Annex, which has its grand opening this week.

come to SPRING FLING on February  27th at 8pm.  Check the Facebook page for all the details.

Here’s the text of the advertisement in question:

Looking for a part time offer where you can earn $1400 to $2400 every two weeks?

Are you dedicated? Over 21? Computer literate? And have access to the internet one to two hours a week?
If you answered ”Yes” then we have your career waiting for you!

Canes Ultralights Inc. is currently seeking store managers, assistant managers,payroll reps and payment clerks to work at your own flexible schedule! And it only takes a little bit of your time!

If you think you have what Canes Ultralights is looking for,
contact us with your resume @ rjordan263canesultralights@gmail.com
that’s rjordan263canesultralights@googlemail.com

Hurry..don’t wait! This great opportunity is limited so contact Canes Ultralight Inc. today!

Here’s why it’s fake:

• The Better Business Bureau has no records of a company called Canes Ultralights Inc.
• vague purpose, type of business, job description, etc.
• typos
• the e-mail address is unofficial and does not even match itself.
• the company does not have a website or even a web presence aside from this exact ad, ver batim, pasted all over the place.
• no one pays a college student $1500 for two hours of work unless it’s illegal.
• there’s an unanswered Yahoo! Answers page asking if it’s a scam.

So…

An announcement has been posted to The Source about the Board’s approval of the budget for next year.  It’s kinda depressing.  Not that I thought it wouldn’t be.  There are already rumors flyin’ around, none of which I have heard substantiated on the record.  So far, all we have to go by is the announcement, which gets pretty vague near the end (perhaps just from uncertainty rather than intentional omission).

Here’s what I’m seeing (let me know if I misinterpreted something):

• tuition increases, especially in the law school.
• $500,000 decrease in budget support from endowment
• salary freezes for faculty and non-union staff, 2% salary increase for Law School faculty and staff
• computer purchase program moved to bookstore’s jurisdiction (net gain of 3.5 positions).
• one new Law School position
• 1% reduction in institutional contribution to employee retirement plans
• $500,000 Strategic Initiatives Fund held as contingenc
• elimination of the vanpool
• a tighter policy on College cell phones
• lower insurance and workers compensation costs
• implies that there will be no layoffs
• 

The Board of Trustees has unanimously approved the 2010-2011 budget, which maintains faculty and staff salaries and wages, maintains positions, and reduces by one percentage point the College’s contribution to employees’ retirement funds.

Under the financial plan voted on by the Board at its meeting last Friday, CAS and Graduate School tuition will increase by 4 percent and 2 percent, respectively; Law School tuition will rise by 9.75 percent for new students, and 4.9 percent for returning students.  “Over time, the Law School’s tuition has fallen significantly below other comparable schools,” said Carl Vance, vice president for business and finance.  “Even with this increase, Law School tuition will still be thousands of dollars less than peer schools’ average.”

In presenting the budget to the Board, Vance stressed that uncertainty from the recession continues to cloud the institution’s financial situation, as it did in last year’s budget process.

“Because net tuition revenue remains the primary source of income for all three schools at Lewis & Clark, each will be tested in 2010-11 by students’ ability and willingness to pay for private higher education,” Vance said.

At this point in their admission cycles, both CAS and the Law School have matched last year’s applicant pools both in size and quality.  (For the Graduate School, it is too early in the process to make any judgments.) Despite those positive signs, operating budget margins are being substantially increased for all three schools as a hedge against possible net tuition drop-offs.

In addition to the effects of the recession, the budget must absorb the impact of the reduction in endowment spending rate enacted last year, which will mean a $500,000 decrease in budget support from the endowment for the 2010-11 fiscal year.

As one major response to the financial challenges, wages and salaries are being frozen for faculty and non-union staff in the Graduate School, CAS, and Common Services; a 2 percent compensation increase is budgeted for Law School faculty and staff.  “The Board of Trustees specifically noted that these are tactical decisions in response to the recession,” Vance said. “The Board remains committed to increasing salaries in the future so Lewis & Clark is competitive with peer institutions.”

By moving to a self-operated bookstore CAS plans to add a net of 3.5 administrative and staff positions.  The new bookstore will assume responsibilities from Information Technology (IT) for campus computer sales, which will require changes in several IT positions.  The Law School plans to increase its faculty by one.  No new positions are planned within the Grad School.

Additional savings are being realized through the one percentage-point reduction in the institution’s contribution to employee retirement plans, from 10 percent to 9 percent. Vance explained that those involved in the budget process preferred lowering the retirement contribution over the other two logical options for reducing compensation costs—layoffs or salary reductions.

“Of the three options, cutting retirement benefits has the least impact on employees,” Vance said. “Most employees with discretionary income still have the option of taking money out of salary and putting it into retirement. And those staff members who would prefer maintaining take-home pay will be able to do so.”

Just as in this year’s budget, the $500,000 Strategic Initiatives Fund—normally allocated for select one-time projects—will be held as a first-line contingency against enrollment deficits. In addition, the new budget reflects decreases in operating costs achieved through the planned elimination of the vanpool, a tighter policy on College cell phones, and lower insurance and workers compensation costs.

With an eye toward greater cost efficiencies in the future, the College is engaging Pappas Consulting Group to study current administrative structures and make recommendations for possible improvements to the next president.

“We’ve been living under the cloud of this recession for roughly two years now, but next year is probably when private higher education in general and Lewis & Clark specifically will be hit the hardest,” Vance said. “Fiscal year 2010-11 will be the real test. I’m hopeful we will start coming out on the other side of this challenging period it in 2011-12 and will find ourselves on more solid footing in the years to follow.

“With this new budget, the Board, Executive Council, and I are confident that we have realistic projections for revenues and expenditures, and that the necessary contingencies and margins are in place to get us through the year with our financial health and workforce intact, and while continuing the highest quality education for our students,” Vance added. “We have weathered the financial storms up to this point, and I feel very strongly that we will continue to do so in the year ahead.”

This feature is also accessible be going to the Pioneer Log website and clicking “comment on this story” at the end of  a post.

Check out our top story this week on gender, hiring, and salaries of LC professors, and leave a comment if you dare.

Inspired by Salute Your Shorts, The Serious Club brings their signature form to The Laff Shack (opening for Dustin Diamond), Thursdays at 6:30pm. Weaving together shades of D-Day and Saved By The Bell: The College Years, The Serious Club creates an incredible tapestry of late-Victorian family politics but still with engaging, grounded scenework. Like the subprime mortgage crisis meets improv, The Serious Club’s laugh-ripping brand of comedy is sure to leave you tickled to the point of exhaustion. Be sure to catch this near-equity-eligible group the Naperville Gazette calls ‘bonkers.’

Via The Improv Show Description Generator.

Background on the club.

Theme housing options are designed to enhance your residential experience by supporting your academic interests or lifestyle preferences. Themed communities allow students with common interests and pursuits to live together and support each other through planned activities and informal interactions. [link]

Already, we have the opportunity to apply to live in halls themed around wellness/health, a shared Exploration & Discovery course, multiculturalism, the environment, visual/performing arts, foreign languages, and outdoor pursuits.  With the addition of an Interfaith community next year, we’d each be hard-pressed to find a floor that didn’t appeal to a personal identity or interest of our own.

My question, I guess, is whether this is a good thing.  I honestly (non-rhetorically-honestly) don’t know whether this sort of factionalizing is achieving the intended outcome.  I’ve heard that the theme floors can and do greatly enrich some students’ college experiences.  I can’t argue with that, nor would I really want to if I could.  That seems all well and good.  I can’t help but consider, however, if others’ college experiences are being affected in some way by lacking daily community interactions with large portions of those whose interests or identity has led them to pursue living on a floor populated largely by likeminded individuals (not necessarily in specific opinion, but at least in a shared identification).

Is Lewis & Clark large enough to be able to offer so many theme floors and still maintain a diverse and enlightening communal-living experience for those of us who never chose to pursue life on a theme floor?  Perhaps some of the best “college” learning happens outside the classroom–in dorms and lounges and evenings in Portland.  Especially during the first and second year of school, people’s friend groups are largely comprised of hallmates.  If most students’ halls are guaranteed, by the existence of theme floors, not to be comprised of those of us who are the most passionate about the various identities and interests represented by theme floor opportunity, especially things as contentious as religion and diversity, is the community better off?

Likewise, are the lives of theme-floor-living students impacted detrimentally by their lack of interaction with people who have very little in common with them, accounting, of course, for any benefit of living on a theme floor?  This is not to say that theme floors are populated by people who are remarkably similar–they’re not–but reflecting on some of the great friends I’ve made at Lewis & Clark… there’s no way we would have interacted with each other if not for the serendipity of random housing assignment.

Here’s the angle I approach the issue: in college, people with similar interests *will* find each other.  Artists will find artists, religious students will find religious students, environmentalists will find environmentalists.  The social system on any campus is such that people can network and associate remarkably easily.  From what I can tell, the only two institutions in place to force continued interaction between a random (used more in the “unconnected” definition than in the true definition) group of people at L&C are housing assignments and Exploration & Discovery (freshman-year seminar class).  As housing is increasingly becoming more nuanced towards preferences people think they have, do we lose some of the academic and social richness that often comes from taking a group of unconnected people and forcing them to become friends (or at the very least amicably coexist)?

Obviously, I don’t know the answer, but I am hesitant to simply accept the notion that themed housing, especially in the abundance that L&C provides it, is beneficial to large-scale community interconnectedness.  Dare I make a baseless hypothesis that the existence of things like theme floors may even contribute to the apathy many have observed of the student body here.  Does it not seem to follow that if we strongly institutionally reinforce the tendency to seek interaction with people of similar interests, it’s no wonder that our community seems to be troubled by issues of non-cohesion and indifference towards occurrences outside of our specific interests?

As I said before… this is just my musing, and I’m sure someone else has probably thought of it all first… I might be totally wrong (and I don’t really know how one would even begin to find out how to test this sort of thing).  I’ve also probably simplified the issue much more than it deserves.  Either way… it’s something I sometimes think about.  So I’ll tell the internet about it.

Why you absolutely must have a Templeton office.

My thesis proposal is due tomorrow morning. Tonight, campus smells bad from the damp stupid rain. The path to the library is wet and cold, and every room in the library is probably filled with sniffly giggly phone-talky people. And this is why your goal should be, as a student at Lewis & Clark, to get your own office.

People complain about apathy at Lewis & Clark, how no one shows up to events even when awesome bands are playing – how there is no community or institutional memory (though I have some problems with these claims on their own..) All of this apathy, though, and people transferring away from LC–works for the advantages of those who love LC and stay here.

When I came to Lewis & Clark I had no experience with newspapers, reporting, or newswriting; I wasn’t an English or Comm major, and I wasn’t terribly great at making friends or influencing people. Now I am the editor-in-chief of the Pioneer Log. The clips and experience I’ve gained by pulling my own bootstraps at the Log have gotten me internships and hopefully a real-person job and real-person grad school admission someday. The pond at LC is tiny tiny, and if you stick to anything, you can get it. Maybe not Pamplin Society membership–maybe not that national internship everyone at well-connected colleges is vying for… but you can be an oversized fish. Just think of the possibilities in all the upcoming ASLC elections–none of those are looking to be terribly contested: your chances are good! Getting involved inside the LC workings is really, really easy, and really, really rewarding.

I feel like part of a legacy tonight, as it creeps toward 1 a.m. and I sit in the Piolog office. I know there’s probably someone over in ASLC, studying or sleeping or abusing power to seduce freshman; I’ve bonded with the ASLC kids mostly by proximity (and our similar extreme importance within our own inflated image of what LC means). Other nights there would be people at KLC, there may be someone over in the Womyn’s center… there is community here. And big, beautiful offices where you can study, store stuff, sleep…

We also complain at LC about the cost. It’s high. Very high. But LC’s money just bought the Piolog two huge and obscenely nice Macs for our office. LC money will be sending me and 5 other Piologgers to a National Journalism Convention in a couple weekends. LC’s money bought me a t-shirt at Piofair and the cool photo booth there… it prints my newspaper, brings me free concerts and speakers: networks me with alumni and gets me lots of free meals (everything worthwhile is catered.)

I guess what I’m saying is that getting involved at Lewis & Clark has really given me an opportunity to take back what I’ve given to the school. Is that the point?

I’ve seen a lot of musing in various circles, and I wanted to write down some thoughts I’ve had and heard before they escape from my mind….

Seeing this play out reminded me very much of “Willamette Week” scandal of early 2008, which, to paraphrase an overly complex, emotionally-charged situation, revolved around the publication of a front-page article in the Willamette Week.  Many members of the student body felt the need to take sides in the issue (like ya’ do, apparently) and lo and behold, anonymous “critiques” in the form of angry Facebook groups and seriously offensive flyers plagued the campus (until we found something else to gossip about).  I don’t bring this up to re-hash the past, but I find it really, really intriguing that in my four years on this campus, this week’s poster debacle is (at least) the second time I can recall a high-profile instance of students choosing to passively hurl anonymous, simplistic attacks rather than actually engage in a dialogue with someone who has the power to create a positive change.  Perhaps this sort of thing happens on any campus, and I’m just unaware because I don’t go to any college but this one.  In the off chance that L&C *is* unique in this respect, I have no choice but to wonder why.  I know how much the administration cares about sensitivity, diversity, and understanding, and can’t imagine how it could be held responsible.  I can only assume the student body values these concepts as well, given the myriad student groups and events devoted to addressing and discussing various issues of race, sexuality, religion, politics, and other points of social contention.  I doubt it’s faculty-related… the modus operandi of these posters’ passive-aggressive flailing for attention doesn’t seem to mesh with the extent to which our (or at least my) professors emphasize the critical importance of scholarly discourse, the scientific method, and preserving integrity.

We have so many people (professional or otherwise) and channels within this institution to constructively address grievances, it is confusing–to say the least–why we as a student body so frequently fail to communicate productively.  It seems to me that, on paper, we should be more than equipped to handle disagreements (and, what in this most recent case was a misunderstanding) without defaulting to proliferating MS-Paint-facilitated hodgepodges of the most incendiary phrases and imagery the first page of a Google search will provide.

The PioLog article did cause me to consider one other angle: perhaps we are more inclined to spin around in circles yelling because it’s much easier than actually trying to solve a problem (though I don’t know why this would make LC unique in any way).  This is, I guess, common sense, but I’d hope we could have moved beyond that technique of conflict resolution.  Given an especially illuminating quotation from the article, I’m not so sure that all of us have:

The anonymous student said he created the posters to “highlight the history of blackface,” which he said was parallel to the Maori issue. “I didn’t really want to be involved in the conversation, I just wanted people to think about it.”

Read as much into that as you will (and I’m always willing to extend the benefit of the doubt when it comes to direct quotation), but I think it illustrates exactly the problem.  It’s much easier to catalyze discussion than it is to actually participate, and for some reason we have romanticized the former rather than the latter.  The events of this week should drive home for us conceptually that if even one person loudly expresses him/herself without making an effort to consider others’ ideas and criticisms in return, we end up with a campus-wide furor (rightfully) devoted to discussing issues that were not at the heart of (or even related to) the original point of contention (not to mention coping with the consequential feelings of anger, endangerment, and/or frustration that result).  Nobody wants that.  At least that’s what I’d like to think.

Anyway, I’m going to sleep now.

So, If you have e-mail you’re probably already aware of this, but if not I will enlighten you.  There was a course listserv that got set up improperly, such that when the professor tried to e-mail his students, it actually e-mailed thousands of students, staff, and alumni (presumably his class *did* get the e-mail as well, so mission accomplished).  Then he sent out an apology e-mail for the first e-mail’s unintended collateral damage on unsuspecting inboxes.  Everything up to this point should seem out of the ordinary,  but understandable and relatively unremarkable.

Then, self-important professional-types started sending in demands from Blackberries!  See, Lewis & Clark College currently does not have a course that teaches “if you hit reply-all, it will reply to everyone, you idiot.” So, today has been full of 70+ hilariously passive-aggressive e-mails sent to literally the entire Lewis & Clark community, rather than the intended recipient–one unfortunate professor who didn’t have any control over the situation in the first place.

From: Barbara Luscher <****************@*******>

Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 12:21 PM

To: 10sp-************@lclark.edu

Subject: PLEASE DELETE ME FROM YOUR MAILING LIST IMMEDIATELY

PLEASE DELETE ME FROM YOUR MAILING LIST IMMEDIATELY

OK, Mrs. Important-Pants.

Not only has this event been a wonderful indicator of how stupid grown ups are, it has provided the community an opportunity to tell the alumni that right to their stupid faces (on the internet you can say anything to anyone and it is removed from having any consequences in the “IRL world”).

Guys, we have to keep this alive.  I propose, as some have already begun doing, that we CC the listserv in question any time we want to e-mail anyone anything.  Got it?

Molly Gibson provides proof of concept:

Molly Gibson <***********@lclark.edu> Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 1:32 PM
To: Lindsey <*************@yahoo.com>
CC: “10sp-**********@lclark.edu”
Subject: surprise kitty

I’m especially excited about the potential of the proposed creation of a nanoscience program, which is made possible by the Keck Foundation’s gracious $250,000 grant.

The College of Arts and Sciences also received a stipulation-free $500,000 grant from Fred W. Fields. One wonders how we will we apply these new assets toward the betterment of the institution.  Financial Aid?  Exciting new academic programs? Wisely invested to bolster our endowment?  Pens, and toner?

According to the Dean of the College, as quoted in the Piolog’s new article on the matter, the answer to that question may well be “yeah, that last one”:

Julio de Paula, Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, said that this money will be used for the “2010 calendar year.” It will go toward general college operations, “nothing in particular,” said de Paula. “In these times of financial trouble, this donation will be especially helpful.”

When asked by the student body how we would use half a million dollars of unanticipated funding, a high-ranking college representative basically said “eh, the usual.”  Not only  is this a hilariously squandered PR opportunity, it conveyed an attitude that made me a tad bit concerned.  Now, I’m almost certainly being hypercritical of a single quotation and blowing it out of proportion, but I do want to convey, in case there’s any question, that there are myriad areas where this college could benefit from any help it can get (off the top of my head):

• Financial Aid, so students (especially upperclassmen) whose financial situations have worsened won’t be forced to drop out of college.
• “LC Workstudy” so students (especially underclassmen) can work on campus next year without having to qualify for Federal Workstudy.  This is especially important given that the bookstore, which has historically been one of the main sources of non-workstudy on-campus jobs will once again be under the full control of the institution and presumably subject to workstudy limitations.
• An Arabic foreign language program.  Like seriously.
• Varsity Men’s soccer (and/or other sports programs that need creation or improvement)
• improving accessibility in buildings around campus
• any number of technological upgrades for specific academic departments
• give Campus Safety monster trucks

I’m sure I’m not the only one who has an opinion on this (and I’m sure there are plenty more bullet points I missed that are just as worthy of attention).  de Paula quotation aside (I’m sure it was probably a misquote or is missing some context), we *really* need to make sure that this money goes towards the betterment of this institution as a place for students, staff, and faculty.  Some tangible results would be really nice, too.

So, administrator-types, um… just keep that in mind.

If that’s the case, it’s pretty clear that the mature, responsible thing to do would have been to schedule a chat with one of the many mediators on this campus whose job it is to facilitate such conversations (Dean of Students, Ombuds, Office of Multicultural Affairs, ADs, etc. etc. etc.) and talk it out.

To be honest I can’t even believe I’m writing this post right now.  Not only am I bothered by the act itself, but I’m bothered that one or more of the people with whom I am associated via our mutual existence at this institution is actually *that* stupid.  As far as passive-aggressive whining goes, I thought the huge anti-smoking-gazebo sign in Howard was hard to top, but anonymous racist person(s), you have set a new bar.

Maybe admissions needs to add an interview question like “do you think racist imagery is a hilarious tool at your disposal to be employed whenever you are mildly irritated?” And if they say yes we can just send them over to Reed.

I’m going to refrain from posting the details, since I don’t know the entirety of the situation and don’t think it’s fair to the person to post their name/photo (which are contained in the e-mail) on the public internet without a compelling reason, especially in this context.

Campus Safety trespasses people for various reasons (not a lot of people, but it happens a handful of times each semester) and it hardly ever (read: never) necessitates a community-wide e-mail.  I’m guessing this e-mail’s existence implies (Campus Safety has reason to believe that) this guy probably did something pretty bad (though it’s important to note that the e-mail doesn’t say that he’s dangerous). So, there’s that.  So watch out and call Campus Safety if you see that dude.

I beat the Oregonian to a story by a little less than two months, so that’s kinda sick I guess.

An LC undergrad recently taped an episode of College Jeopardy! So there’s that.  Apparently, there will be a large viewing party in Council Chambers.  If she didn’t win, that’s gonna be awkkkkwarddddddddddddddddddddd.  Either way, congratulations Lyndsey!

(kids cover your ears) Current word on the street is that this is a record year for condom-dispersal, which is probably good.  I imagine it has something to do with the fact that the school seems to have taken efforts to keep them in *constant* stock and has made the refill bags for halls available to RAs at the 0ften-visited Campus Living office, rather than the old system of keeping the bags behind the counter at the health center (which means now RAs don’t have to go out of their way at all to get a refill for the hall).  This is a good thing.  On paper, it might be easy to infer that the higher numbers imply some sort of waste or stockpiling, but it should also be considered that perhaps the difference may be attributed simply to ease of availability and greater supply. K.

I’m sure the new PioLog will probably catalyze some discussion or another.  Or if you have a cool idea for a post, let me know.  Or just ask me for account permissions and post it yourself!

Cool stuff going on soon: (aka “Cary goes down the list of things he’s been invited to on Facebook”)

Thursday the 28th:
Platteau Spring Open House (art, slam poetry, food, more) 7-9:15, The Platteau
Improv Attacks! (lulz) 8-9:30, Council Chambers

Friday the 29th:
Senior Soiree (Seniors only! haha! Register before hand if you plan to come!) 4-6, Stamm

Saturday the 30th:
Glowdeo Dance Party (hey guys remember the last time we had a glow party in Stamm and the curtains got all stained and Facilities said “NO MORE GLOW PARTIES!” hahaha I don’t either bro we’re kids we don’t listen to your rules and your society.  In seriousness, this will be a very cool event–mechanical bull+donuts!) 10p-3a, Stamm

Classes start next week, that’s kind of crazy isn’t it?

I’ve been in Tacoma for most of break, so I haven’t really had anything worthy to report.  Sorry for the boringness.

Once cool stuff starts happening again, I shall let you know.

The Hearings Officer finds that the underlying traffic analysis used by the College’s traffic experts lacks sufficient credibility to allow the Hearings Officer to assess the traffic impacts created in the event the law/graduate school housing is approved. The Hearings Officer found reason to question the basic traffic count estimates, trip generation estimates from the proposed law/graduate school housing, traffic generation estimates by “law school interns”, and the law/graduate school “family traffic” estimates. The Hearings Officer is not saying that the information is “wrong.” However, the Hearings Officer is saying that unexplained methodologies[...], mistakes[...], and lack of consistency of information [...] render the College’s traffic expert’s data and conclusions unreliable.

Or, if that doesn’t make sense, Phoenix Wright can help you out.

The Law School housing was only one portion of the proposed changes, most of which were approved.

Here’s the summary of the hearing (the references to “Conditions,” denoted by letters, only make sense in the context of the document, so refer to the report if you’re really, really curious):

Denial of the request to expand the boundary of the Master Plan to include the following properties:
• 425 SW Maplecrest Drive [1S1E28DA 300]
• 9919 SW Boones Ferry Road [1S1E28DA 4300]
• 10015 N/ SW Boones Ferry Road [1S1E28DA 4400]
• 10015 SW Boones Ferry Road [1S1E28DA 4500] • 10025 SW Boones Ferry Road [1S1E28DA 4600]

Denial of the request to approve law/graduate school housing on the boundary expansion land west of SW Boones Ferry Road (boundary expansion area).

Denial of the request to remove previous conditions so that lighting and public address systems can be installed at Huston Field.

Denial of a request to modify operational conditions related to Griswold Field, excepting the request to modify the noise reporting condition is Approved.

Approval of a Conditional Use Master Plan amendment and update, which incorporates the following proposed improvements:

• The development of new academic buildings, student housing and other alterations/additions/improvements as identified on Exhibit A.14 (not including requested law/graduate student housing project and lights/PA system at Huston Field).
Approval of requested modifications to conditions

•Condition Q (LUR 97-00074 CU MS): clarify TDMP reporting requirements.
•Conditions U, V, and W (LUR 97-00074 CU MS): these conditions deleted.
•Condition A.7 (LUR 97-00074 CU MS): omit students studying overseas and taking distance learning classes from calculation of enrollment.

I think smokers are smelly and gross, but that worries me less than
this nanny-state parentalism. I would rather smell tobacco here and
there than see our already decentralized social spaces become even
more desolate. As a school without a real quad, and lacking a central
gathering point for large numbers of students to meet, talk, and
relax, the last thing our social dynamics need is to exclude a group
of students from the few places people still do get together.

I’ll laugh at my smoker peers when they’re dying of lung cancer at 70.
In the meantime, I enjoy their company and conversation, so please
don’t banish smokers to the far corners of campus for the sake of
spearheading the anti-tobacco movement. If you guys are dead-set on
this silly plan to establish smoking ghettoes, place them wisely, and do your best not to destroy the social fabric of our school any more than it has been already. While they may be stupid hipsters bent on lowering their life expectancy for the sake of their rebel image, smokers are people too.

Sincerely,
David Shackelford
Non-smoking believer in individual rights.

What do you think about the smoking areas? Do you feel like you were part of the process behind the policy? This PioLog editorial argues that we simply haven’t been paying attention, but I feel like I keep myself pretty informed about things at LC, and this flew under my radar. Whatever you think, take the survey and let the school know how you feel.

Edit: It sounds like there was a good amount of discussion and publicity about this last year, while I was abroad in Japan. I withhold judgment on the process to this point, though I still think the outcome is dumb.

The details:

So here’s how you can have a chance at winning a $10 iTunes certificate: go to the Facebook page or website, and find out something you didn’t know about how to talk with someone who can be hard to talk to.

Drop me an email (valeriew@ or ombuds@) and write a sentence or two about what you learned. I’ll then enter your name in the hat for one of the 6 iTunes certificates I’ll draw the first week in December. Be sure to include your contact info so I can let you know if you’re a winner.

For all the details and to see if you qualify, visit LC’s H1N1 information site.

via The “Blog” of “Unnecessary” Quotation Marks.

We got an e-mail yesterday from Dean Celestino Limas informing us of the Executive Council’s approval of a new smoking policy, intended to become effective for the 2010-2011 year.  The plan calls for the construction of 8-10 gazebo structures around campus (including Law and Graduate).  These structures would become the only places on campus which smoking would be allowed.  Furthermore, the administration considers the possibility of a smoke-free campus by August 2011:

Dear Lewis & Clark Students,
Last year the Substance Use and Abuse Task Force was convened by then President Hochstettler to examine a number of substance related issues. One area of focus was tobacco use on campus by students, employees and visitors and input on this issue was solicited via large group meetings, individual community member visits, as well as an institution-wide survey this past spring. After analyzing the results from all three and discussing the options as a task force, the group presented a final report to the Executive Council in late May with several recommendations, including one related to the Institution’s smoking policy. This recommendation asked that Lewis & Clark transition from its current policy of no smokingwithin 25 feet of any building to establishing designated smoking areas across campus with all other areas being smoke-free beginning the next academic year. The recommendation also called for the subsequent year to have the campus transition to an entirely smoke-free environment.
The Executive Council strongly considered these recommendations and while there was much interest in the idea of a completely smoke-free environment, there was a significant desire to help our community transition through this process with continued evaluation from its members after some change had occurred. Therefore, I am pleased to announce that the Executive Council has approved the recommendation to move to eight designated smoking areas on campus beginning in August of 2010 with all other areas being smoke-free. In addition, the recommendation to move to an entirely smoke-free campus will be revisited as a campus discussion in the fall of 2010 and at that time, a recommendation will be made to either 1) remain a smoke-free environment with the exception of eight designated smoking areas, or 2) move to an entirely smoke-free campus beginning in August of 2011.
One question that remains is where exactly will the eight designated smoking areas be located throughout our three campuses and what will those areas include as amenities for smokers. That has not been determined as of this moment and in order to make this decision, we are asking Associate Dean of Students/Director of Wellness Services John Hancock and Associate Director for Health Promotion Melissa Osmond to seek input from the campus community. The Substance Use and Abuse Task Force will function as a working group to advise Ms. Osmond and Dr. Hancock through this process. An online survey will be distributed in early December to gather input as to where the designated smoking areas should be located. The survey will contain several options for possible locations and ask community members to offer their perspectives on which are the most advantageous. Once live, the survey will remain open until January 15 to ensure a robust sample. The campus community is also invited to discuss the matter in person at an open forum on December 3 at 12 p.m. in Thayer of Templeton Student Center.
Questions and comments regarding the transition should be directed to Melissa Osmond, Associate Director of Wellness. Thank you for your support with this transition and please be certain to complete the survey and/or attend a forum about the designated area placement. Have a good week and be well, everyone.

Best,
Celestino

The survey referenced in the letter was conducted online late last February, delivered in the somewhat-hilariously-titled “Have An Opinion About Spoking On Campus?” e-mail.

Early this week, the PioLog learned of the Executive Council’s approval of the changes.  An investigative article was posted to the PioLog website yesterday about an hour before the e-mail announcement (the article is also today’s dead-tree-form cover story).

Anyone who visited J.R. Howard yesterday saw the large student-made sign, which was hung well before the dean’s e-mail:

Finally, last night the College of Arts and Science’s representative student government, the ASLC Senate, passed a bill condemning the new policy, urging the administration to commit to upholding our current policy instead of creating a new policy (the bill is yet to be posted, but the meeting minutes are linked).

So that’s basically what has happened so far, I think.

Regardless, thanks for the coverage.  Read the article if you haven’t!

http://www.lclark.edu/college/student_life/piolog/news/story/?id=3044

30-27. Congratulations, Pioneers!

Tonight and tomorrow, 7:30 PM.

Cost: $10 general admission; $7 alumni, faculty, staff, senior citizens, and non-Lewis & Clark students; $5 Lewis & Clark students. Tickets are available at the Box Office (open M-F, 1-5 p.m. beginning Monday, Nov. 2, and one hour before performances). Or, call 503-768-7495 during Box Office hours to reserve tickets.

So, 2009, financial crisis, etc., etc.  The school’s been grabbing for ways to save money any way it can–not watering the lawns, reduced RAZ hours, and stringent rules regarding student employment are all tangible examples of the institution’s belt-tightening.  Try as Student Financial Services might, there were some students whose need for aid could not be fully alleviated, and those students are not at school this semester.  I have friends from the past three years who, because of the economy, are not going to be graduating with me this May.  I’m sure most returning students know people who were put in similar situations–continuing college for ’09-’10 was simply not an option given the financial circumstances.

In general, I don’t think there’s much else that can be done.  SFS has a tough job of distributing its funding so that as many of us can return as possible, and I think that, for the most part, they do their job very well.  Sometimes, especially when money is tight, there are inevitably going to be some students whose needs cannot be fully accommodated.

In light of this reality, I find it patently offensive (especially this year) that my college would decide to allocate a total of $22,500 to be awarded as prize money  in two upcoming half-time competitions ($5000 for a field goal, $17500 free-throw contest) in an attempt to boost attendance.

I wish I could say this was photoshopped for the blog post. I can't say that.

These events appear to be sponsored by the Pioneer Athletic Club–our sports boosters–which is part of the Athletics department. Let’s first examine if this is a valid use of PAC money.

According to the PAC website on lclark.edu,

We continually strive to improve facilities and annual funding at Lewis & Clark so that our teams can compete at the highest level. The college has been very supportive in covering basic expenses for travel, uniforms, and equipment. However, there are always areas in which additional support will enhance students’ experiences and opportunities for success. Gifts to the PAC provide the much-needed annual support to supplement our teams’ annual budgets.

That’s all well and good, I think.  So when I donate to this noble organization, how can I expect my funds to be used?

All gifts to Athletics are used to support our teams and programs. Specific needs vary from year to year, but the primary areas supported by Pioneer Athletics Club include services and facility improvements as well as equipment purchases that are not otherwise funded. Computers, weight room equipment, public address systems, scoreboards, and many other amenities for our student-athletes have been made possible thanks to PAC memberships. Only small amounts of unrestricted funds are used to pay for expenses associated with the Pioneer Athletics Club (e.g., printing, mailing costs)

Or, if we want to believe what is written on the lcpioneers.com version of the PAC website,

Over the years, PAC funds have enabled the athletics program to obtain equipment and services that are not otherwise funded. Computers, weight room equipment, public address systems, scoreboards, and countless other amenities for our student-athletes have been made possible thanks to PAC donations.

Clearly, these funds are intended to help improve the quality of life for LC athletes, as well as the quality of our sports teams as a whole.  So, how does a halftime contest constitute a valid use of money that should be spent improving our sports programs, especially in a time when our community is constantly asked to sacrifice privileges and aesthetics in the name of the institution’s well-being?  Even if we consider how many more people will be in the stands waiting to win a butt-load of money cheering for our team (for two isolated matches, before half-time), I think it’s almost impossible to argue that there isn’t a better use of this money, especially at a division 3 college with a student body notorious for its apathy towards anything that involves teamwork and sweat (unless the game in Frisbee or is only popular on other continents).

For argument’s sake, let’s just allow that this money may be spent on such a contest without compromising the mission statement of the benefactor… we must now examine it from the angle which I *actually* find offensive–Lewis & Clark Athletics is taunting us with $22,500 while my peers are dropping out of college months from graduation because they can’t pay up.  Even in the entirely likely situation that no one completes whatever semi-impossible athletic task set is before them, this is still an important matter of principle.  The college has chosen to wave its money around while simultaneously claiming that it can’t squeeze out one more dollar for aid (and that when it can, it does).

One may argue that these contests are going to help us.  After all, a lucky winner will come away with a lot more financial security.  But that’s exactly why we have Student Financial Services in the first place.  The students who actually *need* that money, for whom that money might make the difference between a semester in Portland and a semester on mom & dad’s couch, are not going to have any better chance than those of us who are already able to afford tuition.  Let’s not forget that the students who really-really need the money won’t even be in attendance, because they’re not even here this semester–

Hell, let’s even grant that a student who really needs the money is going to be the one selected to compete.  Is it not insulting that the college would put one of its students in the demoralizing situation of having the continuation of his/her education rest on how accurately s/he can throw a basketball?

This is a poorly (and callously) planned publicity stunt.  If PAC wanted to help athletes specifically, it would be spending that money on something useful for our athletes.  If PAC wanted to help the student body as a whole, it would be giving that money to Student Financial Services, who has the resources to make an effective allocation to students in need.

$22,500 may not seem like a lot of money (and in the scope of an entire college’s budget, it’s not), but it is the difference that would allow a student (two students? three? more?) to finish the semester(s) they need in order to graduate.  To literally gamble it on a sensationalized spectacle is a disservice to the students and alumni of our community.

Friday (Tomorrow), LC Music Coalition facilitates you getting your face rocked by two of Portland’s awesomest bands: Church and Explode Into Colors. This Summer, both acts were featured prominently at Rotture’s PDX Pop Now! Festival. You may also remember Church; they opened for Starfucker PYRAMID at another LCMC-organized show in Stamm last Spring.

This free-for-LC-students show is definitely a great way to spend your pre-quiet-hours Friday evening. COME DANCE PLANT YOUR FEET IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM AND NOD YOUR HEAD!

CHURCH
EXPLODE INTO COLORS
The Trail Room; Friday 11/6/2009; doors at 8:30, music at 9.
Free for LC Students.

the famed 'honor-principle' hard at work

For context (not that it really makes a difference), the article in question was published in response to criticism the paper received for publishing an article that some perceived as too irreverent in regards to the Holocaust.

The story dropped at a particularly touchy time for our school, as our administration has been scrambling for the past two weeks to determine an adequate response to misguided bathroom-graffiti (multiple campus-wide discussions of community responsibility and diversity? discussions about how best to facilitate discussions about community responsibility and diversity? isopropyl alcohol?).

We’ve certainly gotten our fair share of unfavorable press as a result of the incident (though I guess we can glad we don’t have to deal with the ****storm that Reed’s PR department, not to mention the kids who edit their paper, must be going through right now).

Is it insensitive for me to suggest that we find a way to move on?  Certainly, people are going to take offense any time some HILARIOUSLY EDGY, ORIGINAL COMEDIAN alludes to the Holocaust to compliment a SATIRICALLY DENSE, WELL-THOUGHT OUT commentary on how OPPRESSED the fake newspaper is when people complain about how it published some other EQUALLY POIGNANT articles about trivializing the Holocaust (hey guys I was being facetious there did you see that? I bet you didn’t get it because it was such a controversial viewpoint I just adopted).

Let’s not forget about OregonLive and InsideHigherEd: Your page-view-driven exploitation of an (unfortunate) emotionally-sensitive misunderstanding is, without a doubt, going to bite both Reed and L&C in the face (However, it is, in an odd way, refreshing to read inflammatory articles about Portland higher education that *weren’t* written by Beth Slovic).

I think what I’m trying to get at is this: It was a poorly-conceived article, and in bad taste, but from there we should have our talks and reflections (which happened last Tuesday), lick our wounds, and move on.  It’s important for us to keep in mind that The Pamphlette‘s intent was not to cause this kind of controversy, just as the editors responsible should be regretful of the hurt they’ve caused and realize that this sort of humor rarely accomplishes its intended effect.

Teachable moment? Yes.  Front-page news?  Hardly.

Not that this should surprise anyone, but according to our calculations, it’s actually almost $1000 cheaper to buy every meal with cash (even more so with flex points) than it would be to use a meal plan.

Here’s how I see it:

With 14-flex, the most popular and most-recommended meal plan, a student can attend fourteen meals a week.  The two most expensive meals are dinner and lunch, $8 and $6.75 respectively.  If we assume that a person attended every single lunch and dinner possible (on the weekends, it’s brunch, but brunch is also 6.75–so it’s moot), taking into account that the Fall’s finals period ends mid-week, and that there’s no food service for Thanksgiving break, we get something that looks like this:

((6.75+8)*7) * 16 – (6.75+8)*2 – (6.75+8)*4 = $1,593

In English, that’s:

((cost of food in a day)*(days in a week)*weeks in semester – (mealtimes without food service)

Then calculate it for the Spring semester:
((6.75+8)*7) * 16 – (6.75+8)*7 – (8+6.75) = $1,534

How much is a 14-flex plan? $2178/semester.

2178-(1593+150) = $435
2178-(1534+150) = $494

Edit: To clarify–that’s (cost of meal plan) – (cost of meals with flex + 150 flex points included in 14flex plan) = difference, in dollars, between having a meal plan and not.  The sums are per semester, so add them together to get our annual total of $929.

By this math (which doesn’t even factor in the 10% bonus if we purchase flex points), it is at least $929 cheaper not to be on the most popular meal plan, even if one were to pay to eat the same amount of the most expensive meals.

I don’t know *why* this discrepancy exists, but it’s certainly interesting to think about. I can’t find any information on the website about where the meal plan money actually goes (I imagine that the school gets a cut and Bon Appetit gets a cut). Perhaps there’s a different arrangement between the college and Bon Appetit for food that is purchased directly? Regardless… even if the explanation is innocuous (which I expect it probably is), I think we deserve to know why it looks like we’re being fleeced out of $1000.

Perhaps I’m just being cynical (I hope that’s the case).

The Green is awesome, for real. Anyone with an lclark.edu e-mail address can access the website and post or comment on articles, advertisements, and other web content.

IMO, the grass motif would be better if we actually had any left on campus

I’d love to see The Green become an oft-utilized tool for promotion and community cohesion. I’m certainly skeptical that it can overcome our general apathy for anything that isn’t related to Stephen Malkmus (Pavement reunion? Really? You’re not going to top Slanted and Enchanted…just give up!), but if The Green can somehow find a way to catch on, I think the school would certainly benefit.

Until then…

and he only logged in to take this screenshot.

I’m a smart, capable college student. Safer sex sounds like a pretty okay thing, so sure, I’ll go get tested before I start gettin’ it on with my ladylove. I didn’t get tested before messing around with my previous partner, but it was pretty easy to tell Sex Ed to shove it, because being both of the female persuasion, my partner and I were pretty low-risk. But I decided to do things right this time! Sex Ed will be so proud.

First step: Call Mom. (It’s okay, she went to Lewis & Clark too, she’s a chiller.) “Hey Mom, I wanna get my lady parts checked out before I start sexing my girlfriend. Insurance covers that, yes?” No, of course not. I had my benevolently-titled Annual Women’s Wellness Exam in January, so I’m not supposed to need another one for several more months. I can’t see my regular speculum-wielding OBGYN without it cutting into my own summer earnings, and that’s uncool. Mom’s advice? “Call the campus health center.”

So I called Nancy Kalvelage in the Lewis & Clark Health Center. Nancy, incidentally, knew me when I was a tiny fetus down with dancing to Obo Addy’s African Drumming class. Sweet little Nancy (who doesn’t seem to remember fetus-me at all, given her mispronunciation of my name) informed me that her services are free but the actual labwork costs $108, and that’s not including an HIV test. As a rule, mandatory textbooks are about the only thing I will drop that much cash on in one go. I am an unemployed college student – see articles on LC Work Study for details.

So I called Multnomah County Health Department. Little known fact: MCHD is fifteen kinds of awesome. Fees work on a rolling basis, meaning if you say “I’m a student and I’m broke, here’s a dime,” they’ll still test you. (Thanks, government subsidies!) When I called, the phone answerer set me up with an appointment for the very next afternoon. They mixed up my first and last name, but I’ll overlook it. Hyphens are confusing. Total cost for getting tested for gonorrhea, Chlamydia, syphilis, and HIV: 20 bucks, because I’m under 24, and therefore “high risk.” (Never mind that I have zero symptoms and have never had sex with a man.) Other cool features of MCHD’s STD testing clinic: you can get anonymous testing or give a pseudonym; they don’t ask for health insurance information; they’re nonjudgmental, meaning they don’t give a shit if you’re a sex worker or a junkie or gay; and se habla español. As a bonus, they are about four blocks from Pioneer Square, which I can attest is a totally runable distance should you happen to exit the clinic at the same time the Raz is chugging past.

Summary: If you want to get tested for STDs, don’t bother with the on-campus health center. Head straight on over to Multnomah County Health Department. They will hook you up, son. For cheap.

Here’s the news:

I hope you are well and I wanted to share some exciting news with you this morning.  As you know, our campus bookstore is operated by Barnes & Noble and many students may not be aware that they have been providing that service for the past 23 years.  However, our contract with Barnes & Noble expires at the end of June 2010 and this past year we asked an independent consultant, Campus Bookstore Consulting, Inc., to study the operation of the Lewis & Clark bookstore. Through meetings with the campus community and analyses of the store’s operation and performance, the consultants concluded that Barnes & Noble is doing a competent job of running the bookstore but that students, faculty, and staff would benefit from a store that is more uniquely ‘Lewis & Clark’ and better able to respond to our community’s needs.

After carefully studying the bookstore issue from several perspectives, we have made the decision to take over operation of the campus bookstore at the beginning of July 2010 when the Barnes & Noble contract expires.  This means that the new self-operated bookstore can be run in a less rigid manner compared to corporate stores and give us the opportunity to create a more service-focused and creative bookstore.

We are very excited about all of the possibilities that lie ahead and want to include undergraduate and graduate students in the planning process.  While the transition is months away, we want to begin our preparations and would appreciate student suggestions regarding the new bookstore.  Members of the campus community are invited to offer their suggestions for the bookstore in two ways: by attending one of two campus discussions or by sending an e-mail to Wendy Washburn, assistant to the provost and liaison to the bookstore, at washburn@lclark.edu.  The first discussion will be focused on feedback from Undergraduate students and be held at 7 p.m. on Tuesday Oct. 6 in Stamm West of Templeton.  The second discussion will be focused on feedback from Graduate students and that will occur in late October.  We are still planning the exact date and time of that forum but it will be held on the Graduate Campus and an email will be sent to Graduate students when this is finalized.

We would like to thank Barnes & Nobles for their service to our community and we look forward to all that is to come with this new venture.  This is a genuine opportunity for us – students, staff, and faculty – and we plan on doing all that we can to ensure its success.  Please join us for one of the upcoming discussions or send an email to Ms. Washburn (washburn@lclark.edu) with suggestions.  Thank you and enjoy the weekend, everyone.

At least two of my peers (or–dare I imagine–I?) have parents who do not understand satire.

Also, Student Health Services, what the hell is this? And this?  I’m glad SHS is there to discredit these baseless falsehoods perpetuated by evil, hateful comedy writers.  SWINE FLU IS SERIOUS BUSINESS IT WILL GIVE YOU A MILD FEVER AND MAYBE A COUGH; IT IS NOT A LAUGHING MATTER.  I KNOW SOMEONE WHO MISSED 2 DAYS OF CLASS BECAUSE OF IT.

On the other hand, that means that at least two people read the PioLog, so I guess there’s that.

Let Buzz Aldrin hit you all with some real talk.

It will seriously be a great time!  Free!  7:30pm Trail Room.  10/2/2009

One of the important functions of the Business Office is the preparation of all paychecks.

If an event occurred that required the campus to be closed, we would make our best efforts to ensure that faculty, staff, and students would get paid.  That event could be swine flu, snow conditions, or some other similar incident.  For those employees that are still be using paper time sheets at that time, the Business Office would try to use the prior month’s data if the current month’s information was not available.

However, if the campus is closed, we might find it impossible to generate and distribute paper checks.  Therefore I strongly recommend that every employee, faculty, staff, and student, enroll in direct deposit if missing one paycheck would be more than a minor inconvenience.

Obviously we hope that none of these events occur but prefer to be prepared.

Thank you.

George

It’s great that we’re prepared and it’s great that we can vaccinate against H1N1, but mentioning it close to twenty times in the combined previous two “Opportunities and Announcements?” I think the only people who are obsessed with the Swine Flu are the people who are telling us not to be obsessed with the swine flu.

This is especially awesome (from O&A III.2):

H1NI STUDENT RESPONSE VOLUNTEERS NEEDED

Call to service! Lewis & Clark needs your support. The H1N1 flu virus that is currently circulating globally is a new strain of flu.
According to the CDC and WHO epidemiologists who are tracking the pandemic, there have been more cases of illness in people
under the age of 25. That’s YOU!

What can you do to help? The H1N1 Student Response volunteers will serve the campus community by supporting
fellow students who are sick on campus by delivering meals to students who are in voluntary isolation on campus.
As a H1N1 Student Response volunteer, you will:

1. Attend orientation/training

2. Commit to serving 2-3 hours/week (this can count towards your $1,000
SIS Educational Award!!!)

3. Serve as an ambassador for healthy habits on campus by knowing
resources and behaviors

YOU ARE AT RISK FOR THIS (relatively mild, treatable) ILLNESS THAT KILLS PEOPLE (who are not part of your demographic) EVERYONE PANIC BUT DON’T PANIC BUT REALLY ACTUALLY PANIC BUT YOU’RE OKAY.

John Hancock, Director of Wellness at L&C, helps distribute food to LC's enswined.

Wash your hands, cover your cough, stay home/get medical attention if you are really sick.  Get a shot if you are really worried. Problem solved (for us)?

If you’re interested in understanding how our college is run, and finding the rationality behind certain decisions, they’re a great place to look.  They’re also a great resource for finding out whether something was (or was not) on the table of discussion at a certain point in time.  I’m kind of lame, but I really enjoy reading this kind of stuff.

Plus, due to their nature as a summary from long-past events, you can find lots of great, out of context quotations, which were probably actually completely benign, logical comments when said in the meeting, but turned into awesome or outrageous statements when transcribed into minute-form…

“in 1991, the portfolio path option was created. It was a marketing ploy.” (Honesty FTW!)

“Do we want students who cannot use the computer or who cannot afford $125 for a test?” (Can’t tell if this was rhetorical, facetious, or both… fun to guess though)

“[...]about the Committee on Standards and Progress. No one seems to know the composition of that committee” (there should probably be some standards about the composition of… oh my god who will set the standards?)

“The Subcommittee on Petitions and Waivers referred a student’s petition to waive physical education (PE) credits in lieu of previous military service to the AAAS Committee.” (this committee is raising a militia right under our noses)

“The lack of communication with the family is sad.” ( :-(  )

“Dean Sexton then announced that Lewis & Clark College was selected as one of the top 50 colleges in the U.S. by Cosmo Girls” (Why was Dean Sexton reading Cosmo Girl?)

“It was decided that information sent to the faculty should be kept simple.” (professors are actually frightened by big words….)

“Bret said IT doesn’t have a strategic plan because he doesn’t believe they work.” (I think IT may actually take pride in not working.)

I have become quite fond of the one outside Stamm, the one in the room in Watzek on the first floor–with the soda and candy machines (across from the lockers and computer showroom), the one right inside the door of the Business Office in the Manor House (use the patio entrance), and, for some reason, the fountain on the second floor of Howard residence hall.
What other good drinking fountains am I missing?  Which fountains should I avoid?

First and foremost: If you’re a student who’s having difficulty getting work because of these sudden changes, especially if you’d been promised a job before the changes were made, make an appointment with Glendi Gaddis ASAP.  SFS has always been open to discussing your aid and working out hardships.  It worked for me (yes, I got my jobs back!).

That being said, I haven’t really changed my mind about this whole thing overall.  This was still poorly-planned, rolled out without sufficient notice, and is, as of my writing, still tangibly, negatively impacting plenty of my coworkers who are trying to figure out their eligibility for the jobs they were promised.

I am, however, glad that the college seems to be genuinely making efforts to accommodate those of us who were negatively impacted.

Two explanatory e-mails (below the jump) were sent out hours ago to various communities of the College of Arts and Sciences.  One was sent to students, the other to faculty/staff.  One wonders if these changes also affect the Law School and Grad School (and if not, why?); these e-mails were only sent to CAS (I don’t intend this to be a Fox-News-style we-can-lie-if-it’s-a-question question, but an actual honest inquiry).

TL;DR: so far, D- for rollout, A-ish for catch-up.

To students:

from sfs@lclark.edu>

to cas-students <cas-students@lclark.edu>

subject Student Employment

Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 3:47 PM

Because of some confusion and misinformation about changes to the student employment program,  Student Financial Services has prepared the following Q and A.  If this does not address your questions and concerns, please contact us and we’ll be happy to discuss it further.

Warmly,

Glendi Gaddis

Director of Student Financial Services

***************

Why is Lewis & Clark changing the way student employment is done?

The Enrollment Management Group in the College of Arts and Sciences asked Student Financial Services to implement some important changes in our student employment program this fall.  Rocky economic times have affected the ability of many families to finance the costs associate with enrolling at a school like Lewis & Clark.  Applications for assistance have increase and more families are demonstrating higher levels of need than we have seen in the past.  Our top priority is to ensure access to a Lewis & Clark education–a commitment we’ve upheld this current academic year by increasing the total amount allocated to financial aid in the college’s budget nearly 10 percent.  The changes in the student employment program are another important part of how we are helping students finance their Lewis & Clark education.

What’s the change?

All funds available for student employment, whether their source is the Federal Work Study (FWS) program or the institution’s own operating budget (LCWS), will be awarded to students through Student Financial Services. Approximately 1,070 students have received work study awards for the current academic year. To make sure there are positions available on campus for the students who have been offered work awards, departments have been asked to hire only students with a work award.

How is the change being implemented?

We are aware that many supervisors made hiring commitments to students before these modifications to the student employment program were fully communicated and before students knew if they had been awarded Work-Study. For this reason, as we move through implementation over the course of this year, we will work with supervisors on a case-by-case basis. Financial realities dictate that not all students can be offered work on campus, but we want to be sure that hiring commitments supervisors made to students can be honored to the extent possible.

What if I don’t have a work award?

There are opportunities for students without work awards to work on campus. Bon Appétit,  Barnes & Noble bookstore or specialized areas such as ASLC or SAAB are able to hire students without a work award. You can also look at off-campus jobs in the area which are posted on-line at http://www.lclark.edu/offices/student_financial_services/student_employment/. Students wishing to pursue internship opportunities should contact 3CE at  (503) 768-7114.

How do I get a work award for next year?

Work awards will be distributed through the financial aid process for 2010-2011. Students wishing to be considered for a work award should submit the required financial aid applications by the priority filing deadline of March 1. More detailed information about the application process will be available in December.

What if I have other questions?
If you have general questions about student employment, please contact SFS at (503) 768-7090 or sfs@lclark.edu.  We want to help!

From: Office of the Provost [mailto:provost@lclark.edu]
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 1:55 PM
To: cas-staff; cas-faculty; cs-employees@lclark.edu
Subject: Student Employment

To the Lewis & Clark faculty and staff,
To ensure that students are given the work-study opportunities they need to finance their Lewis & Clark education, and to make sure that we do not lose out on available federal work-study funds, the Enrollment Management Group in the College of Arts and Sciences asked for some important changes in the way our student employment program is implemented this fall.   We believe these changes will benefit the institution and, most importantly, our students.

• All funds available for student employment, whether their source is the Federal Work Study (FWS) program or the institution’s own operating budget (LCWS), will be awarded to undergraduate students through Student Financial Services. With the advent of this change, departments should initially seek to hire students who have an Employment Request and Authorization (ERA) form produced by Student Financial Services, documenting that the student has received a work-study award and is eligible to be hired. Approximately 1,070 of our 1,900 undergraduate students have received work study awards for the current academic year.

• Student employment allocations are now listed as a single line item within departmental budgets.   Departments may use these funds to pay students with either FWS or LCWS awards and are relieved of the administrative burden of monitoring two separate budget items for student employment.

• In order to maximize federal resources, more students who demonstrated financial need have been awarded funding through the FWS program.  As a result, approximately 880 students currently registered for the fall semester have received a FWS award, an increase of 225 students over last year.

On August 25 and August 27, Chris Logan, Student Employment Specialist, conducted supervisor training sessions that included information on these program modifications.  Additional training sessions will be offered in September.   During this transition period, departments that have made a good faith effort to hire students from the pool of students currently awarded work study but have been unable to fill positions are encouraged to contact either Glendi Gaddis, Director of Student Financial Services, or Anastacia Dillon, Associate Director, for assistance.
I want to extend my thanks for your understanding and cooperation. I know that many supervisors developed an approach to hiring students that worked with the way student employment has been administered in the past, and that change of this sort can be frustrating.  I also know that this campus community has rallied around our top-priority commitment to the principle of ensuring access to a Lewis & Clark education during these economically difficult times—a commitment we’ve upheld with our nearly 10 percent increase in financial aid for this fiscal year. I hope this change in the work-study procedures will be seen in the same light: it is an important part of how we are helping our students finance their Lewis & Clark education.
Thank you all for helping to make this work for our students.

Sincerely,

Mervyn Brockett

Associate Provost

don't worry, i already submitted this to passiveaggressivenotes.com

It’s certainly true that the Bon has had its problems with theft;  I myself have witnessed people passing entire tubs of ice cream out the window, or stuffing loaves of bread or fresh pies inside their coats as they meander towards the exit.  Certainly, this type of thing is not within our community guidelines.  At the same time, it’s a little ridiculous to make people finish the apple they’ve bitten into before permitting their exit.  Can’t we come to some common ground here?

I think–perhaps incorrectly (we’ll see)–that this new hard-line approach is only going to spur on more disgruntlement, and even loftier and more daring attempts at pilfering food (I have yet to see a successful attempt on the entire tub of bacon).  If there’s one thing that we can generalize about our student body (aside from its apathy), it’s that we don’t tend to like it when the man tries to crack down (just ask the stop signs on campus [might I note how apt that the stop sign was chosen as a motif for these flyers?]).

I think some straightforward, honest P.R. work would probably further Bon Appetit’s loss-prevention aspirations more than its paranoid “YOU CAN’T EAT BEYOND THIS DOOR” policy.  Stop-sign flyers?  Not so much.  I sure know I’d respond better to some frankness (“we are a company and a necessary part of your community; it hurts us $[x] amount when you steal from us; we want to trust you, please respect us; please don’t steal from us.”) instead of these condescending, vague arguments about sustainability and limited offerings.

I know Bon Appetit is capable of the positive PR approach–the program outlined in the second half of that flyer, about bringing professors to lunch, has always been a (lesser-known) program (at least as long as I’ve been at LC)… it’s not “Beginning Fall 2009.”  See?  Policies don’t need to change, just the way you pitch them to us.

That all being said–peers, please don’t take obscene amounts of food from the cafeteria.

Tonight, Council Chambers is host to comedian Nick Thune.  It should be a pretty awesome time, I imagine.

On the evening of the 3rd (Thursday), Star Trek (the new one) is going to be shown on the huge movie screen in Council Chambers.  FREE!

Pio Fair happens on the 4th!  Free food, plus come meet all of the clubs and activities you can join.  This is one of the most useful events of the year if you’re interested in seeing all of the different opportunities on campus.  Everything from improv club, to our World of Warcraft guild, to language groups, to our Frisbee team will be represented.  Attend this.

LCMC has a few cool shows coming up as well, but I think I’ll save that for another post closer to the actual dates.

Cool Bon-employee Ryan has taken over;once again gracing the shelves of Maggie’s are brands you’ve heard of, food that’s probably not too good for you, and a bunch of candy.  Many of the crunchy-hippie favorites are still available (Koala Crisp FTW!), too.

I am excited about this change.  Does anyone really want a $5 hemp toothbrush?  I’ll take my overpriced Doritos and Coke any day.

don't show this photo to Dakota.

I support these noms

Dear Colleagues,

I write to inform you that Dean Julio de Paula will be stepping down as Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at the end of the 2009-2010 academic year. During his four years at Lewis & Clark, Julio has proved himself to be a superb academic leader. He is highly respected in all quarters of the institution.

Julio has made this decision for personal reasons, including his need to spend more time with his family.

The good news is that Julio is committed to remaining at Lewis & Clark. He and I have agreed that, following a sabbatical year in 2010 and 2011, he will return to a faculty role as professor of chemistry and will carry an additional portfolio of responsibilities stemming from some of his most transformational work as dean. Since arriving at Lewis & Clark in 2005, Julio has demonstrated impressive acumen in the area of fund-raising. Under his leadership, the College has secured major funding from foundations and agencies including the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and the Mellon Foundation in support of important curricular initiatives. Over the past two years, Julio has been centrally involved in planning for the expansion of our science facilities; developing promotional materials for the new science center; and working to secure major gifts from individuals, foundations, and government agencies in support of this major capital project.

Relinquishing the deanship will give Julio more time to focus on securing support for the science expansion and other academic projects. He intends to continue this work on a sustained and intensified basis even during his sabbatical year.

His title in his new role will be Professor of Chemistry, Associate Vice President and Director of Special Projects.

Needless to say, it is a great disappointment for Lewis & Clark to have Julio leave the Dean’s Office, but we can rejoice in the knowledge that we will retain him at the institution, and benefit from his curricular leadership and redoubled efforts on the fund-raising front. This will be particularly important for sustaining and advancing the Board’s number one priority, namely, realizing our plans for the new science complex.

Julio’s announcement raises important questions concerning the timing and the process for finding his replacement. I am initiating conversation with the CAS Faculty Council about its preferences in this matter.

In conclusion, we owe Julio our thanks and commendation for all he has done for Lewis & Clark and for his commitment to continue his work on our behalf.

Sincerely,

Jane

I saw a pretty great comment posted to my textbook post and thought it was worthy of some plugging on its own (if you disagree with me about Proposition 8, more power to you; I invite you to tell the internet all about it in the comment section):

If you’re buying your textbooks (or anything, really) through Amazon, before you checkout go to textbooks4change.com and click the button, and 7% of the money from your purchase will be donated to the Courage Campaign’s work to repeal Prop 8 at no extra cost to you!

Textbooks4change was started in part by LC student Nicola Warmuth (’12), which I think is pretty damn sweet.

-Maisha Foster-O’Neal

Thanks for publicizing this Maisha! My only comment is that in order for the money to be donated to the Courage Campaign you have to click the link/button on our website BEFORE you place your purchases in the shopping cart.
Check out our website for more info: Textbooks4Change.com
-Nicola

It’s important to note that this doesn’t just work for textbooks, but all your Amazon.com purchases.  Definitely keep Textbooks4Change in mind any time you plan to buy something from Amazon!  With no extra effort or expense, you can support a good cause and acknowledge the hard work of an LC student.

o hai guys let me screw you over while presenting it as being helpful

So, that pretty much throws a wrench err’thang (yeah I went to college, what?).  I hope this was just something that ‘the man’ handed down without actually thinking of the ridiculously complicated implications, and that it will soon go by the wayside.  If not, here’s what will go down:  Much of the hiring for this coming year (especially this semester) has already happened.  Proactive students who secured non-workstudy jobs last semester or over the Summer will come back to find that their employers are no longer supposed to hire them.  Speaking of supervisors, I don’t see any way that this change can possibly avoid bogging down supervisors with a crap-load of extra work, figuring out how to manage, organize, and train, at the last minute, a staff of, in some cases, ten or more part-part-time workstudy students when a staff of three or four non-WS workers was sufficient before.  Oh yeah, that’s not all… perhaps the coolest part is that there are only 600 Federal workstudy students at our school:

90s-era clipart makes memos more official

I was a declared math major once (Linear Algebra?  No, thank you), so I’ll crunch this for you: 100*(1-(600/1999)) = roughly 70% of the student body is unemployable by the college.

wow, no way! I like ambiguous white space too!

No word on if there will be a longer-term, overarching fix; currently, I.T. has been whitelisting sites as people complain about not being able to access them.  Hopefully when everyone comes back and tries to access all sorts of different sites, this will become a large enough problem that it can’t be brushed aside.  Until then, here’s what you need to do:

If a website won’t load properly because of the L&C network, you’re probably running into this issue.  As I said earlier, we’ve already seen it wreaking havoc on our access to popular sites like Hulu and Digg.  Take note of the time of the failure, your IP address*, and the website where you experienced the problem, and send that information to infosec@lclark.edu.

*To find your IP address on Windows, Start > Run and type “cmd” and hit OK.  In the terminal that will show up, type the command ipconfig and hit Enter.  Your IP address will be displayed, and should begin with “149.175.” if you are on LC’s network.

*To find your IP address on OS X, Apple menu > About This Mac > More Info… > Network.  Your IP address will be displayed next to either “AirPort” or “Ethernet,” depending on how you’re connected.  It should begin with “149.175.” if you are on LC’s network.

I’m psyched, however, to see that we’re making up for lost time. On Saturday, August 29th, at 9pm, in Stamm, we’re welcoming back one of Lewis & Clark’s favorite bands.  I could gush about how great they are (because, dude, they are), but basically it comes down to this: if you don’t go to this concert, you are most likely lame.  I think this is technically part of the wrap-up of New Student Orientation, but there are flyers all over Templetron, and that must mean it’s fair game for the greater L&C community.

One feature that caught my eye early on, and still hasn’t lost potential to be awesome and useful, is the MyLC portal.   Initially, it might seem pointless.  It does, after all, only show information that is readily available elsewhere.  But that’s sort of the point.  Instead of complaining that “[x] isn’t on the homepage,” or “you don’t link [x] anywhere,” one can use MyLC to maintain a list of links relevant to personal interests.  lclark.edu has to serve as a website for three different colleges’ staffs, faculties, and students. Inevitably, when a single page has such varied responsibilities, it cannot contain all of the information that any single person might like to have readily available.  Enter MyLC.  By managing the links on the right-hand column, you can keep a clear list of any relevant webpage (LC or otherwise).  The fact that there is integrated Digg and del.icio.us support is icing on the cake.  MyLC also features a simple RSS reader, which one can configure to filter and display LC news.  Actually, the reader supports any RSS feed, not just lclark.edu ones (for example: ours, any Twitter account, or breaking news).  If used as intended, MyLC is a page with an easy URL (lclark.edu/mylc) and simple interface, with links to relevant websites, plus real-time content, as selected by you.

never pass up an excuse to draw on things in MS Paint

I’m interested to see how MyLC will change as the site becomes more set-in-stone.  Hopefully, it will catch on.  There are a lot of cool directions the web developers could take it if they were so inclined.

If you haven’t poked around on it, I recommend you give it a try. Log in using your LC e-mail account credentials.

Here are some  ways to shave dollars from the price of your textbooks.  Most of this is already common knowledge, but maybe it’ll useful to someone.

• “the official way”–The Lewis & Clark College bookstore does its best to stock as many used copies of books as possible.  Used books are legit.  If you want to use the LC Bookstore as your primary retailer for the bookage, it can be a good idea to place your order early; used books are first-come, first-served.  The Bookstore is taking online orders now! Via their website, you can place orders for any/all of your texts now and then pick them up when you arrive on campus.
  pros: low-hassle/effort, support the college, ensure purchase of the correct editions
  cons: often is not the least-expensive option, support the book-juggernaut Barnes & Noble (if you think this is a con)
• shop online–The Bookstore *can* be the cheapest place to purchase your texts, but often, it’s not.  There are myriad online retailers (and students) looking to undercut school bookstores.  The upshot: consumers win.  Perhaps the smartest way to shop for your texts is to go to the bookstore, find the ISBNs of your textbooks, and search for those books online.  Every edition of a text has a unique ISBN, a ten or thirteen digit number.  Presumably because Barnes & Noble dislikes competition, it does not list online the ISBNs of your textbooks.  you’ll have to go in and write them down yourself.  It’s worth it, though; by searching the ISBN rather than the title, one can purchase the correct edition, with certainty.  When you visit the store, take note of the prices and availability of your texts, then search for them online and see if you can find them for less.  Some reputable websites: half.com, amazon.com (“[x] Used & new from $[x.xx]“), chegg.com, abebooks.com
  pros: best deal, build buyer-reputation at sites like eBay
  cons: shipping and mail can be slow, can’t preview what you’re buying
• Powell’s–Just as one can find killer deals online, Powell’s (and Powell’s Technical Books) downtown can be an indispensable textbook resource.  Unlike many retailers, Powell’s stocks many different editions of the same title, and makes a point to display them all.  Powell’s can be especially good for finding Exploration & Discovery books.
  pros: it’s Powell’s
  cons: it is impossible to leave Powell’s with fewer than three books you did not originally intend to purchase.
• international versions–many book publishers have versions intended for sale outside the United States.  These “international versions” of textbooks are often dirt-cheap by comparison.  These editions often differ only aesthetically, often sporting bland soft covers.  If you can find an international edition of your textbook, and don’t mind having an ugly or perhaps less-durable book, you can save craploads of money.  Regardless of the legality issues surrounding the sale of these books, it is, to the best of my knowledge, not illegal to purchase them (also, I am not a lawyer).
  pros: cheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaap
  cons: different cover, sometimes harder to find correct edition, legality concerns
• the library–L&C (not to mention Portland) has a pretty impressive library system and many of your textbooks may be available for free.  Some professors make sure there’s a copy or two of important texts on hand in the Course Reserves.  If there’s a book you only need for a short period, or that you won’t ever actually need to have at lectures, the library can be the perfect solution.  Also, it can be cheaper to check out a book at the public library and just eat the overdue fines than to actually buy and resell the textbook.  If you can handle the moral implications of doing something douche-y like that.
  pros: free
  cons: can’t keep the books, limited availability, nobody likes a book-hog
• gigapedia–this post is meant to be informational; what you do with that information is between you and the copyright lobby and god.  For better or worse, the internet grants you access to hundreds of thousands of liberated (read: “pirated”) e-books.  Gigapedia.com. Google is your friend.  That’s all I have to say about that.
  pros: free, easy
  cons: illegal, deprives professors and academics of royalties, dubious content origins, don’t have a physical copy, open to malware

One final tip: if your books are late arriving in the mail, consider purchasing them from the Bookstore and use them until your cheap books arrive (or until the deadline full-refund returns).  As long as you keep the book in pristine condition (or the same condition it was in when you bought it), you should be able to return it without hassle.

The 2009-2010 school year brings some reformatting (yet again) to the Campus Living department.  As was widely debated by those in the know, and ignored by everyone else, there’re some name changes you should be aware of:  RAs are now officially RAs again, but this time the ‘A’ is for “Advisor,” the only part of the “CLA” title which survived the great undo-Houston’s-renaming-of-everything movement that we saw after he sold out to Grinnell in 2008 (Once a Pio, always a Pio, right Houston?).  Naturally, the role of Resident Assistant Campus Living Resident Advisor is now fundamentally different thanks to this new title.

Furthermore, RDs (CLCs) are now ADs.  The Resident Director Campus Living Coordinator Area Director title, like the return to ‘RA’, will allow our beloved authority figures to operate efficiently and effectively—once again liberated from the bureaucratic burden of a three-letter acronym.

It doesn’t stop with titles!  There are some interesting jurisdictional changes this year as well (“jurisdiction” used loosely, not in the “If I spill my bong in the hallway of  Platt and run to Hartzfeld I am immune from extradition” sense):  Apartments-Hartzfeld has been dissolved as a “complex” and has been absorbed by two other staffs.  Stewart-Odell-Akin’s staff, headed up by AD Charlie Ahlquist, has been expanded to include the RAs from the apartments, just as Platt-Howard’s staff, headed by AD Liv Edens, now includes Hartzfeld.  Updated portmanteaus are certainly incoming; personally, I’m a fan of “Howartzfatt” (from the mind of the brilliant Nate Anderson ’11). The most pressing question, however, is “Will there will be new key-lanyards?!” Only time will tell.  I can hardly contain the excitement, you guys!

Sexual harassment awareness training.  The school requires you to have it if you work here (this is a good thing).  A few of my friends recently have been talking about the online “sexual harassment test” that they’ve been asked to take (as part of beginning new on-campus jobs; my friends are not sex offenders).  Since this is a small community and people talk, one of those friends showed the page to me.  Being a fellow computer nerd, it only took about… two seconds for us to dive into the source code.  We found all sorts of nifty things.  Basically, this web application should be taught by our CS Department, if we had a course called “What never to do during coding unless you intend to ignore all common sense and convention” (I think this would probably be a 400-level topics class taught by Peter).

Now, before we go any further:  This post is not at ALL a commentary on the necessity of sexual harassment training.  I am all for it.  I think it’s great.  I do not mean to criticize it as a practice.  All analysis within this post is intended to critique the construction of the proprietary Sexual Harassment Training website that L&C uses, and NOT its content.  I think of it like this: even if… a building became the greatest Children’s Hospital in the world, an engineer would still be within his right to criticize the I-beams.  Especially if they were installed backwards and held in place with Scotch tape.

So on we go.

Even the page source of this thing is full of fail.  The JavaScript they used could be condensed down to a functionally-equivalent single-line of code:

document.writeln("<FRAMESET rows=\"130,*\">
<frame src=\"testw.htm\" name=\"Feedback\">
<frame src=\"test"+Math.round(Math.random()*5) +
"c.shtml\" name=\"Code\"></FRAMESET></HTML>");
Their solution?
72 lines: 
view-source:http://training.newmedialearning.com/psh/lewisclark/student/test.htm 

That's not at all the best part, though.  What this friend figured out is that anyone with a web browser (read: you) and a passing interest in JavaScript (or enough curiosity to dig around in the code), can read the answers to the test, without any "hacking" that a normal person couldn't figure out with enough time, Google-ing, and/or desire.  So here's what we did (you can too, from any of the computers in the labs!):

	
Use Mac OS X (this may work in the Windows version of Safari, I didn't try)
	
Open up Safari
	
Safari > Preferences > Advanced > Show Develop menu in menu bar [check this option].
	
Go to the quiz
	
Highlight the text of a single answer; right-click and select "Inspect Element"
The bottom-portion of your browser should now look something like this
	
Click the triangle next to the line that's highlighted in blue.
You'll be faced with something that looks not entirely unlike this:
 <input type="radio" name="Q1" onclick="CheckAnswer(1,1,0,'FeedbackContent1')">
All we care about is the third argument in CheckAnswer.  If it's a 0, it means that the answer you highlighted is incorrect.  If it's a 1, that answer is correct.  So, for example, if you highlighted and inspected "TRUE" for question 3, and you end up with a 0 in CheckAnswer, we know that question 3 is, by process of elimination, false (because "0" means that the selected answer [in this case "TRUE"] is incorrect).
Now, I am not advocating that you should skimp on knowing the policy or being ignorant of how your actions will affect others.  If you have never read the policy, I urge you to do so now (and, poor coding aside, the PSH program as a whole is a pretty great resource).  Also, take the test honestly, you sillygoose; it's not a very hard test.
I just think, as (an aspiring?) Computer Scientist, not to mention as a customer, that if money is paid to write a web application that functions as a quiz, the quiz-takers better damn well not be able to just crack it open and look at the answers.  I just can't help but wonder how much Lewis & Clark shelled out for this web application (I hope it was cheap).  I guess it's a good thing that Google will help us there, too.  According to Lewis & Clark's website, it has over 1000 employees (still not OVER 9 THOUSAAAAAAND).  Thanks to this PDF (page 15) of a contract I found between the University of Memphis and New Media Learning, we can estimate that the PSH service's price is between roughly $5000 and $7500 a year.
To be fair, I'm sure the College probably went with the flow, saw the impressive list of customers on New Media Learning's website, and decided it was the best option.  In all honesty, it was probably a good decision to go with New Media's supposedly tried-and-true package.  I have no reason to believe that L&C  didn't do its research and approach the task with its overall best interests and intentions in mind.  Coding something like this yourself takes time, know-how, and energy (and to be honest, I'm glad the school devoted its web-development resources towards revamping the website).
At the same time, New Media Learning, LLC, you're not off the hook... If I'm an undergrad with no JavaScript experience to speak of, and I can find a way to cull 98.6+% of your page's source code... 
To sum it up:

don't buy "new media" from a company called "new media" IF THEIR OWN WEBSITE LOOKS LIKE THIS.


         ]]>
			http://lclark.us/2009/08/12/how-not-to-use-javascript/feed/
		0
	
		
			caryyoung
		

		
			inspect
		

		
			browser
		

		
			doingitwrong
		
	
		
		
		http://lclark.us/2009/08/08/five-somewhat-atypical-things-to-get-excited-about/
		http://lclark.us/2009/08/08/five-somewhat-atypical-things-to-get-excited-about/#comments
		Sun, 09 Aug 2009 04:59:43 +0000
		kennner
				

		http://lclark.us/?p=78
		]]>
			1. A new room. “Hmm, what am I going to do with this foot tall owl decoy? Oh, duh. Obviously put it in my closet in Odell. Or on my windowsill.” Seriously, one of the best parts about college is having a room that is all yours (okay, maybe half yours. or a third. or a fourth. whatever). When I left for boarding school, I came home to find that my mom had sold my bed. “Oh, honey, we really wanted this air hockey table, so I sold your bed.” Well, thanks mom. Can I sleep on it? No, of course not. (she did the same thing with my bicycle and my pet bunny). I slept on the couch for TWO YEARS.

But AT COLLEGE, I can come back to my room and my bed will still be there, along with my owl decoy and chili lights and other assorted special things. A dorm room is like a great, ugly, blank canvas, waiting for you to make it THE MOST AWESOME THING EVER.
2. Those gazebo things on campus. Where is that, lower campus? By the reflecting pool. I love those things. When it’s nice and kinda dusky out it’s good to sit there and dangle your feet off the edge. What have I experienced in those dimly lit little gazebo ledge things? Endless guitar playing with Spackman, a fabulous post-break up haircut by Blankenshiz, many arguments with CLeja-they are truly magical places. To do whatever. Except for homework.
3. Homework. Quite atypical for me, the eternal slacker, to jump for joy about. But then I think about what I did today. I woke up. I went and watched my family consume gigantic lobster rolls. I went to the beach. Wow, that’s all very emotionally taxing and all-wait, no it isn’t. I need to make my brain work hard again.
4. PioFair/Having the code to both Unisex AND the Womyn’s Center. I HAVE INFINITE POWER. Maybe I can start a war between both groups. That would be exciting, right? And I’ve totally switched sides. I’m with the Womyn now. The Womyn’s Center would totally win because we’re smarter and better and smarter and better and…
I like clubs, clubs are good. Clubs are how I met 76.3% of my friends. And PioFair is when you walk around and see all the clubs that you have the possibility of joining. It’s like an all you can eat buffet, but with…clubs. Oh yes, I am going to be a writer someday. Can you tell? Maybe I’ll actually for real join sailing club this year, instead of fake-joining like last year.
5. Being back in Portland (this isn’t really atypical because Portland rocks). I love Portland. My favorite places are:

Stumptown Coffee at the Ace Hotel (12th & Stark, I believe). This place is sweet, totally not your grandfather’s morning coffee place.
Powells Books, because they will definitely have at least two copies of Feminism and Pop Culture, while there aren’t any copies of it on the entire little hook thing of Cape Cod.
the Escape. Can I tell you why? How censored is this blog? I’ll just leave you imagining.

SanSai sushi place on 23rd. Holy god best sushi place ever. I’d totally get married there, have a baby shower there, have another important milestone celebrated there, and the service would still be as bad. You can rely on it!
This was going to be a list of SEVEN somewhat-atypical things to get excited about but my friend wants to go to sleep and I have to drive seven hours tomorrow. You know how it goes.

         ]]>
			http://lclark.us/2009/08/08/five-somewhat-atypical-things-to-get-excited-about/feed/
		1
	
		
			kennner
		
	
		
		
		http://lclark.us/2009/08/06/j-f-g-i-but-i-cant/
		http://lclark.us/2009/08/06/j-f-g-i-but-i-cant/#comments
		Thu, 06 Aug 2009 23:51:47 +0000
		Cary
				

		http://lclark.us/?p=63
		]]>
			As most of you know, the Lewis & Clark webpage received a ground-up redesign this Summer.  I think the new design is an aesthetic improvement, and there is certainly the possibility for many useful and innovative features in the months to come.  Getting this site up and running as flawlessly as was accomplished is certainly not an easy task (despite some speedbumps, this was a good rollout!).  For the most part, I’ve been impressed, both with the content itself and with the developers’ willingness to accept (and implement) suggestions.

But  one feature on the old website, which was functionally imperative above all others, managed to wind up on the cutting room floor this time around: Google-powered searching.
Certainly, one takes pride in a search engine built from scratch (I sure would).  I also admire the stick-it-to-the-man quality of designing a custom site-search when the best alternative happens to be controlled by the most powerful advertising corporation in the world.
But at some point, I think it’s important for Lclark.edu’s designers to swallow a bit of pride and give us back the option to run a Google-powered search from within the website.  I see that Rob Schecter has posted on the Feedback site that this is an “interesting idea,” and points out that the Google and LC searches for “Registrar” are relatively similar.  While this is the case, the Google and LC searches for things like “cyoung” or “Cary Young” are extremely different (in that the Google one is actually useful).
Error 404: The Cary you were trying to access does not exist

There’s also the problem that the new search seems to completely ignore “tilda sites.”  In other words, any websites created by specific individuals (students, staff, faculty) and uploaded to their personal lclark webspace (lclark.edu/~[name]).  If I search for “Platteau” in the new search, none of the results point me to Platteau’s site.  If I search for it using Google’s index, the first hit is the Platteau website.  Another example: if I search “Orego” (Professor Peter Drake’s personal research in the field of the board game Go), the new search delivers one hit, and it has nothing to do with Drake’s research.  On a Google-indexed search, Drake’s website is the second result.
I’m not done.  Not only is the new website search apparently broken when it comes to effectively indexing lclark-hosted material, it also does not support the syntax that makes Google’s search so powerful:
If I were interested in, say, searching for information about Fields Dining Hall (and NOT Fields Art Building), I could search in Google “Fields -art,” and it would eliminate any search results that contain the word “art.”  Doing this, Fields Dining Hall is in the first five results.  In LC’s search, “Fields” returns nothing useful on the first page, and “Fields -art” seems to bias the search towards returning art-related results… exactly the OPPOSITE of what I wanted.
Art building is decidedly not the Bon
All I ask is that we re-implement a Google Search option on the website, just like we used to have.  I love the UI of the new search, and I love that we have staff here talented enough to develop a search from scratch, but at the same time, I also love actually being able to find things.  I strongly feel that the community would love the option to choose between searches, especially if the default is unhelpful for a certain query (which it is, judging from the amount of search-related problems users have submitted).
IN THE MEANTIME:

Voice your opinions on the official feedback page for the new website (Vote 3!)
Use my Google-search site, or put “site:lclark.edu” into your Google search queries to search LC.
????
PROFIT.


         ]]>
			http://lclark.us/2009/08/06/j-f-g-i-but-i-cant/feed/
		11
	
		
			caryyoung
		

		
			cyoung
		

		
			not_dining
		
	
		
		
		http://lclark.us/2009/08/04/portland-or-jesus-favorite-city-surprisingly-not-just-because-of-powells-and-voodoo/
		http://lclark.us/2009/08/04/portland-or-jesus-favorite-city-surprisingly-not-just-because-of-powells-and-voodoo/#comments
		Tue, 04 Aug 2009 19:30:24 +0000
		Cary
				

		http://lclark.us/?p=56
		]]>
			LC’s VP for Public Affairs and Communications, Tom Krattenmaker, recently contributed an op-ed to USA Today.com detailing why the progressive political and social climate of cities like Portland is actually ideal for modern evangelical Christianity:

As observed by the widely respected religion scholar Rodney Stark and others, history teaches that the church is often at its vibrant best in competitive, pluralistic environments, where it has to be at the top of its game. The age-old dynamic appears to be playing out today in Portland, and in a way that might be consoling to those troubled by signs of evangelicals losing the upper hand in American culture and politics.
Also, check out the comments section if you want an awesome example of people completely missing the point of what I thought to be a pretty straightforward, inoffensive article (you get to see some some killer hyperbolic generalizations, too).  I mean, I don’t think commenter Roland David even read the same article that I did….
It’s always cool to see LC’s peeps getting’ published, especially in the mainstream national media.
If you liked his article, you might want to check out Krattenmaker’s blog.

         ]]>
			http://lclark.us/2009/08/04/portland-or-jesus-favorite-city-surprisingly-not-just-because-of-powells-and-voodoo/feed/
		0
	
		
			caryyoung
		
	
		
		
		http://lclark.us/2009/08/03/how-to-make-our-college-e-mail-work-more-awesomely/
		http://lclark.us/2009/08/03/how-to-make-our-college-e-mail-work-more-awesomely/#comments
		Mon, 03 Aug 2009 08:53:45 +0000
		Cary
				

		http://lclark.us/?p=49
		]]>
			Lewis & Clark has a deliciously antiquated webmail service.  It’s actually relatively easy to use, but in its simplicity it lacks the clever helpfulness of modern things like AJAX, good spam filtering, a friendly user interface, or disk space.  I’ll try to not get too carried away with the Computer Science/design-related criticisms of our webmail…it suffices to say that it lacks a certain 21st century flair.  With that established, if you love the current setup, good on you–change nothing and ignore what I’m rambling about.  I’m sure it has some advantages.

If you’re looking to make the LC e-mail experience less suck-filled, there are a few things you can try:

Use Thunderbird

For those unfamiliar, Thunderbird is an e-mail client application (a la Microsoft’s Outlook or Apple’s Mail.app) developed by the same peeps responsible for Firefox.  It runs on pretty much any operating system you can think of, plus it is the official e-mail client of the college.  That being the case, Lewis & Clark’s Information Technology department has a configured-for-LC version available on their website.  To make the most of the Thunderbird experience, read the helpsheets on IT’s page.  Thunderbird is highly customizable and, perhaps most usefully for us, it supports offline reading and composition and integrates with the campus’s directory.  Give it a shot (or don’t…I can’t tell you how to live your life, man).

Use your mail service of choice (G-Mail/Hotmail/Yahoo!,AOL,etc.)

The other popular choice is to forward your LC account to a pre-existing e-mail address at another domain.  This can be done very simply: on LC Information Technology’s Account Management webpage, type your username into the field labeled “Setup a Vacation Message or Forward Your E-mail” and log in.  On the next page, specify the forward address (the e-mail to which you want everything to be sent), make sure that Auto-Reply is off and delivery is on, then type your password on the bottom of the page and submit.  Now, instead of being delivered to your LC account, your e-mails will show up in the inbox of the forwarding account.  Forget the LC webmail service and make fun of the kid next to you who still uses it (I’ll wait).
With G-Mail, one can go crazy with all kinds of customization and filtering, but I want to offer two quick ways to manage two or more e-mail addresses from one account.  Perhaps you can do all this spiffy stuff with the other services, but I don’t use them, so I wouldn’t know:

Set up a filter that will label all of your LC e-mail. This can be done by going to Settings > Filters > Create New Filter and applying it to all mail To [your name]@lclark.edu.  You can then choose to customize how you want to treat your LC mail.  At the very least, you will probably want to apply a special label to differentiate it from your other e-mail.
Send mail as your LC e-mail address from your G-Mail account.  G-Mail offers you the ability to send e-mail as an address other than the one associated with your G-Mail account (once you confirm that you do, in fact, control the second e-mail address). This feature is really easy to configure: in G-Mail, go to Settings > Accounts > “Add another email address you own.”  Type your name and LC e-mail address, then hit Next and Send Verification.  Follow the instructions in the e-mail Google sends to your LC address to complete the process.  Once confirmed, you gain the option to choose between sending as your G-mail address or your LC address when composing new e-mail.

Now you’re e-mailing like a pro (read: nerd). Go outside, nerd.

         ]]>
			http://lclark.us/2009/08/03/how-to-make-our-college-e-mail-work-more-awesomely/feed/
		5
	
		
			caryyoung
		
	
		
		
		http://lclark.us/2009/08/02/official-first-postfounding-manifesto/
		http://lclark.us/2009/08/02/official-first-postfounding-manifesto/#comments
		Sun, 02 Aug 2009 08:26:47 +0000
		Cary
				
		

		http://lclark.us/?p=20
		]]>
			Well, I finally did it.  If you know me, you’ll know that I’ve been talking about this project for months now.  Hopefully it won’t fizzle out.  You can expect this site to change a bit (or completely) in the coming weeks…while I’m hammering out the details, please feel free to contact me with any ideas or offerings of support you may have: contribute.lclarkus@gmail.com

Ideally, this will be open to a multitude of LC-community contributors.
I hope to turn this website into a tool; people can post about the daily goings-on at the school, plug events, discuss hot-button LC issues in a public (but also civilized) manner, or offer tips/tidbits that make life at LC cooler, easier, or more meaningful.  Lewis & Clark College has relatively few public outlets for student thought; try as the Pioneer Log might, too many great bits of information about our school slip through PioLog‘s cracks and are forgotten, ignored, or unpublicized.  The Real Life at LC blogs give an outsider a basic understanding of our school, but those websites are (understandably) moderated heavily with Public Relations in mind.  KLC, bless its heart for doing what it does, only broadcasts online and reaches tens of people (I still love KLC though).   Furthermore, none of these media outlets have been able to foster any sort of online community.  I’d like for our student body to have an online presence.  It’s, in my opinion, unfair that prospective students may only choose between the school’s own heavily-groomed website or an equally-skewed Princeton Review-style gossipfest to find out information about what life on Palatine Hill is like. Hopefully you see the point I’m trying to make, even if you don’t agree.
With this easy-to-remember, easy-to-read, easy-to-contribute website, I hope to create a non-institutional, unfiltered outlet for student, staff, and faculty voices–speaking about whatever the individual contributors deem important.  I should clarify–by “unfiltered,” I do not mean “unmoderated.”  This is not a place for hate-speech, nor is it meant to replace juicycampus.  The people (currently just me) who maintain this website reserve all rights to moderate and edit patently offensive or libelous content, and we make no pretenses about that.  By “unfiltered,” I mean that I would like for this website to be a place where people may feel safe to coherently, intelligently express themselves and/or inform, no matter how these expressions are going to be interpreted–by the student body or the College.
I realize that the LC student body’s rather epic level of apathy towards… well… anything… is what kills most student-driven projects like this one, and I don’t yet have a plan to overcome that.  If you do, I’d love to hear about it.
This website does not have an agenda.  It is not meant to be another place to scrawl angry anonymous words or yell with our ears plugged.  I think we have enough of that at Lewis & Clark already.
Though with this I will unintentionally invoke the expression “us-vs-them,” I intend for to lclark.us to be a website by “us,” the people who are a part of–and who experience–Lewis & Clark College.  The school has its own online presence, but now, if this whole thing works out, so do we.
Come back in the coming days and weeks to see if I can get this to catch on at all.  If nothing else, you can watch me fail!  Hit that RSS button.

         ]]>
			http://lclark.us/2009/08/02/official-first-postfounding-manifesto/feed/
		2
	
		
			caryyoung