UROP offers students, faculty interaction
To the Daily:
Your editorial, The lost pedagogue (09/16/03), unfortunately failed to take into account that the University supports a vigorous and renowned program to do just what The Michigan Daily claims is absent here: “(tie) undergraduates more into the University’s research projects.”
Late last year, U.S. News and World Report, in its annual college rankings, gave the University’s Undergraduate Research Opportunity Program its No. 1 spot for such programs. The definition for the category included students or teams being “mentored by a faculty member” with the students doing “intensive and self-directed research or creative work” that results “in a product that can be formally presented.”
I agree with your editorial that undergraduates need exposure to hands-on research. I have found that UROP students who participate in research projects get to see the connections between coursework and scholarship, attend faculty office hours more often, and, importantly, study more, develop critical thinking skills, gain research competence and explore new and cutting-edge fields in ways not possible in the classroom. But I respectfully part company with you when you assert the University is not doing enough in this area.
The University has one of the largest, most comprehensive undergraduate research programs in the country and one of the few to focus on first- and second-year students, span all academic disciplines and systematically create a community of student researchers. Since 1988, the program has grown from 14 student/faculty research partnerships to over 1,000 such partnerships. Approximately 60 percent of the projects are science focused, 30 percent social sciences and 10 percent humanities.
I encourage any undergraduate reading this letter to contact the UROP office to learn more about the vast opportunities to participate in research at the University. As I write this, more than 1,000 first- and second-year students and almost 100 juniors are developing research partnerships with more than 550 faculty members from all University schools and colleges. Many more are continuing to work on projects they began last year. The faculty, in fact, have opened their doors to undergraduates and offered their time, leading-edge technology and enthusiasm about research to mentor thousands of University undergraduates over the past decade.
Sandra Gregerman
Director, Undergraduate Research Opportunity Program in LSA
Paul serves own end, complete communication distinct from edited message
To the Daily:
In Ari Paul’s column, Security for Sale (09/17/03), he cites a statement I made to him via e-mail. Unfortunately, he chops apart my words to serve his own ends. I have inserted the entire e-mail I sent to him here:
Hey Ari,
There are actually some really good articles on why certain support aspects of the military should be privatized, such as cooks, janitors, etc. That way, those who choose to serve in the military can perform jobs such as radar technician, infantry grunt, etc. I believe (former Michigan Review Publisher Matthew) Franczak wrote a column on this my frosh year (2000-01).
Anyway, the idea of having a privatized fighting force (as opposed to support), I would imagine, is an issue of security. That trusting a private business that exists outside of direct government control, access to military battle plans, etc., might compromise secrets. And in general, the idea of hiring a rent-a-grunt to defend American interests irks many.
At the same time, though, the idea of a privatized military would ensure the best product at the optimal price, in theory. The military bleeds money even when it does work with outside contractors such as Boeing. I wouldn’t mind seeing a little more fiscal control.
So, there are very valid arguments for going both ways, I believe I support the first one.
Reveling in the Wolverines’ victory,
– RWD
As one can easily see, I expressly support the privatization of some aspects of the U.S. military, and do not appreciate Paul’s twisting of my thesis.
Paul’s failure of logic challenges the mind, as his point-and-see example doesn’t prove anything. Paul claims that I point out “not only the flaws of capitalism but how they can compromise our security, well-being and way of life.” How does calling for the privatization of non-combatant jobs in the military call for the end of capitalism? Doesn’t it, in fact, encourage privatization, in part? This streamlining not only would decrease costs for the military, in terms of training and retention, but would also increase morale, as soldiers would spend more time training to fight, and less time swabbing the deck.
We have seen rank-and-file failures of purely government-driven programs from education to social healthcare; it is sad that Paul not only cannot see this, but must stoop to the mischaracterization of others’ ideas to promote his own.
Ruben Duran
LSA senior
Editor in chief, The Michigan Review
Piskor mistaken in lumping diverse sorority members into one category
To the Daily:
To Jess, my fellow northern Michigan friend, Rushing by, too cool for a root-beer float (09/16/03): I am 145 pounds, curvy and eat a lot. Ice cream is my favorite food. I don’t own Prada. My bike gets me to class.
My friend Liz was in Africa for a year, my friend Katie put herself through college and is now employed by Teach for America and Alice-Kate is both an amazing philanthropist and actress.
These character profiles don’t match up to your definition of a sorority girl. Why is this? Perhaps you’ve never tried to get to know a person involved in the Greek system – it’s full of beautiful people. Sometimes one will come across a rotten sorority girl. Yet, I can say with a solid foundation that ugliness holds no favor to fraternity boys or University journalists for that matter.
In a class of mine last year, I saw a girl with beautiful red hair, amazing Gucci sunglasses, and a killer outfit with an attitude to accessorize. “Wow” I thought, “This girl could definitely be materialistic, and even whiny.” I went up and talked to the girl and discovered one of my dearest friends ever. She’s funny, she’s interesting, and above all, she’s kind.
To answer your query, it doesn’t suck to be so cool.
Carolyn Schilling
LSA senior
Piskor’s comments on sorority girls judgemental and unwarranted
To the Daily:
I am infuriated. While reading Jess Piskor’s opinion piece Rushing by, too cool for a root-beer float (09/16/03), I found myself agreeing with him that, yes, a free root-beer float to passersby is a nice, warm-hearted gesture.
Yet in the midst of propelling himself as a selfless, fun-loving guy, Piskor turned his article into a weakly-based, full-fledged attack on sorority women. I myself have been in a sorority and can tell you that though there are some girls who fit Piskor’s description, I can first-handedly assure you that they are not representative of the whole. I completely resent the fact that Piskor assumes these friends of mine are the counterparts to frat boys that wear demeaning T-shirts. To the contrary, the friends I have made through the sorority have been some of the most generous, genuine and non-conformist women I have ever met.
They have begun their own national philanthropic organizations, are studying to be brilliant screenwriters and doctors and some even (gasp) favor resale shops over Burberry, Prada, and Tiffany’s. They and I are individuals who have not been “broken down” by our sorority, yet have gained incentive to find our own uniqueness and support while doing so.
I can assure you that every single one of them would have stopped by to say “hello” and chat over a root-beer float. In assuming that the sorority system is filled with a pack of homogenized bitches, Piskor has successfully kept alive the stereotype that hinders the University from being the “open-minded” campus its reputation so suggests. It now seems as though the anti-Greek opinion of Piskor is on the same level as the rude dismissal of a free root-beer float offer. It must suck to be that judgemental.
Liz Burpee
LSA senior