Steve Wood (Temple News)

These days, it’s not uncommon to read about professional (read: paid) journalists who risk their lives for a story. In the world of collegiate journalism, the stakes are usually a bit lower. (Of course, there is a chance of being mugged at gunpoint in broad daylight after venturing into Northern Liberties for a story–but honestly, we all know you don’t need to be a reporter to get mugged in Philly.) Let’s face it, the life of the average DP staffer isn’t very dangerous.

However, it looks like one student journalist over at Temple is making some headlines. Last week, senior Steve Wood, features editor of the Temple News, went above and beyond the call of duty. In the name of journalism, he decided to spend his final spring break living among the homeless on the streets of Philly. Equipped with only $10, a tape recorder, and a few other survival essentials (such as a copy of Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment, as well as a can of pepper spray and a blue baby blanket, which were “parting gifts” from his parents), Wood set out “to put a face to the homeless,” as he explained to Inquirer reporter Melissa Dribben.

I have to admit, Wood deserves a lot of credit for his efforts. But was it really worth it?

First of all, you have to realize that while many of you were basking in tropical climates last week, Philly definitely wasn’t enjoying the same spring-like temperatures we’ve been having the past several days. In fact, a week ago, around the same time that I’m writing this post, I was inching down my icy driveway in the Philly suburbs to clean the snow off my car.

But what’s a little hypothermia, when the good name of journalism is at stake, right? After all, Wood’s first piece chronicling his week’s adventures, which came out on Tuesday, was pretty interesting.

Especially the part about the woman shouting, “That motherfucker is going to jail! Look, that fucker slit my neck,” as she revealed “bloody hands and a gash on her throat.” Good thing Wood had that can of pepper spray.

So was it worth it? Let’s just hope Wood’s documentary serves as more than just a showcase of Philly’s underbelly.

Sunrise, sunset (from the Facebook album “Spring Break”).

“Today’s college students are more narcissistic and self-centered than ever,” declared a recent CNN headline, announcing the findings of a study conducted by Professor Jean Twenge of San Diego State University and four other psychologists.

Twenge is, of course, right &mdash college students are conceited! A brief foray into Facebook is proof enough: My News Feed was a flurry of post-spring break activity all weekend as Penn students returned to their laptops. They couldn’t get their “SB ‘07″ albums up fast enough &mdash overexposed photos of nicely tanned bare chests and midriffs,against a backdrop of palm trees and white-sand beaches, brown faces with white smiles peering into the turquoise waters. The cream of the crop was reserved for facebook profile pics, after being Photoshopped to perfection.

Interestingly enough, many have reacted to Twenge’s study in defense of college students. In a Chronicle of Higher Education article, author William Strauss calls Twenge’s depictions “harsh, unfair, and unsupported by the data.” Well, we appreciate the thought &mdash but, who are you kidding?

College students are more self-absorbed than any other age cohort. And Penn arrogance, in particular, is unparalleled–after all, words like modesty and selflessness just don’t fall under the Wharton job description.

Can you really blame us? We’re on top of the world! We’re young. We’re single. We really only have ourselves to look out for. And we still believe our parents who told us we’re special and our elementary school teachers who told us to “reach for the stars.”

But I wouldn’t go as far as W. Keith Campbell of the University of Georgia, who worked on Twenge’s study. He fears that “narcissism can also have very negative consequences for society, including the breakdown of close relationships with others.”

Rest assured, Professor Campbell, we’ll wake up from our delusions of Facebook fame soon enough. Soon enough, we’ll be faced with the harsh realities of the real world. Soon enough, those happy hour calories will catch up with us, and we won’t be quite so eager to bare our midriffs. Soon enough, we’ll be back at the bottom, groveling our way up the career ladder. Soon enough, we’ll have families of our own, and we’ll realize that it’s not all about us.

We’ll learn soon enough. So, please, let us enjoy the spotlight while we can.

The design for the $5.2 million President’s House Memorial which also contains a memorial to President Washington’s slaves. (Kelly/Maiello Architects & Planners)

Independence Park in Philly’s Historic District is just a short subway ride from campus. But, it’s probably safe to say that we Penn students have more gusto for the bars and restaurants of after-hours Old City than Independence Hall. Even out-of-state tourists seem to show more enthusiasm before the Rocky steps than in front of the Liberty Bell.

Philly’s history may be old news to most people, but historian and Penn alum Edward Lawler, Jr., (College ‘80) of the Independence Hall Association devoted the past several years to proving that there’s more to the story of America’s birthplace.

Philly was the nation’s capital from 1790-1800, before everyone headed to Washington. It’s an oft-overlooked fact, perhaps because the temporary “White House”–where George Washington carried out his presidency and where John Adams lived for most of his term–was destroyed in the 1830s.

In 2002, when the fact that the Liberty Bell’s new home was to be built on the former site of Washington’s slave quarters was made public, all hell broke loose. Some of the darker aspects of Washington’s life, which had been buried with demolition of the President’s House, began to resurface. These included the stories of the nine slaves he had smuggled into Pennsylvania (slave-free since 1780) from Mount Vernon. In a The New York Times book review of Henry Wiencek’s revealing book, An Imperfect God, Janet Maslin concludes that Washington “was far more wishy-washy where slavery was concerned. His path to enlightenment regarding race was something other than a hero’s journey.”

Outrage over the controversial placement of the Liberty Bell culminated in a massive commemorative project, led in part by Lawler, to recognize this forgotten historic site and all of its overlooked inhabitants. On Tuesday, the city took the next big step in this important undertaking by unveiling the designs for the President’s House memorial to be built in front of the Liberty Bell Center within the next year.

I guess the moral of this history lesson is, “Nobody’s perfect.” We may be tempted to cast our forefathers in a hallowed light, but history is always much more gritty. So while we shouldn’t neglect to pay our respects to old George, let’s remember that our Founding Fathers weren’t infallible. Thanks to one historian dedicated to the truth, Philly is finally setting the record straight.

Paul Thacker: hater of the PowerPoint. (Media Bistro)

It’s a familiar scene: with the entire class looking on via the projection screen, the professor fumbles around with the mouse in search of the “Slide Show” button for his Powerpoint presentation. As a TA finally comes to his rescue, students exchange glances and snicker.

Technological innovations continue to change the ways in which we disseminate, access and process information. There has been a lot of dialogue about our ability to make effective use of information technology. But, recent debates in higher education have focused primarily on student technology literacy among students. Inside Higher Ed’s Paul Thacker, in an article entitled “Are College Students Techno Idiots,” reports the growing concern among librarians and professors “that students can use technology for socializing or entertainment but still have problems finding information, evaluating it and then putting it to use.”

But what about technology literacy among professors? When it comes to implementing technology in the classroom, professors fall across a wide spectrum. Some barely touch the computer the entire semester, while others come equipped with all the latest toys from Apple to incorporate into their lectures. Of course, age and discipline are significant factors that come into play, but the question remains: Just how tech savvy should professors be to teach today?

In a quippy opinion piece titled iCranky,” Professor Laurence Musgrove of Saint Xavier University responds by arguing that the “student as consumer” mentality in higher education forces professors to cater to an iPod generation of students and neglects the real goal of student learning.

Now, don’t get me wrong–I believe that technology is, without a doubt, a tremendously valuable resource for education. And yes, whether or not they choose to implement them, instructors should be aware of the technological tools available to them. But by no means is technology the panacea for all pedagogical problems. In fact, many professors have come to use it as a crutch, in lieu of quality old-fashioned teaching. (How many times have you fallen asleep through a lame Powerpoint presentation?)

Sure, entertainment is a plus &mdash but before we ask our professors to get up and dance, let’s make sure that we’re getting our money’s worth in the way of real knowledge.

Penn students Sigi Enciso, Alba Tuninetti, and Edgar Lopez Ramirez at the Valentine’s Day rally (Sarah Min/DP)

Cancun minus one week and counting. As students head to the south of the border meccas for spring break revelry, they hold nary a thought of those so desperately struggling to head in the opposite direction. Indeed, even in the midst of Witness Week 2007 (Penn’s second annual human rights awareness week), the human rights issues revolving around the US-Mexican border seem far from campus. Maybe part of it has to do with the fact that we’d be hard-pressed to find an undocumented immigrant student among us. Last year, the DP reported that although the University does not consider students’ citizenship status in the application process, the lack of financial aid and work opportunities poses serious obstacles for non-U.S. citizens, especially illegals.

Thus, while most of us leave these complex immigration issues for Washington to deal with, for many Philadelphians, they strike close to home. The Valentine’s Day snowstorm forced many couples to cancel their romantic reservations, but it didn’t deter the hundreds of Philly residents, including several Penn students, who met at Independence Park to mark the one-year anniversary of the 2006 immigrant rally. College sophomore Alba Tuninetti, who attended the rally with members of the Latino Coalition, says, “I don’t agree with how the government has been handling this. I believe it’s a human right to go into a country and live there without the government prosecuting them.”

Sofia Elizondo-Jasso, College senior and president of Mex@Penn, who attended last year’s rally, explains that it’s a complicated issue. “There are both push and pull factors perpetuating the flow of immigrants into the States.” Immigrants are not only seeking to escape desperate conditions in their homeland, but they are also “responding to a labor demand in America that would not otherwise be filled.” Both issues need to be addressed in solving the immigration problem.

What we don’t need are the human rights violations that have accompanied the denial of citizens’ rights to undocumented immigrants. Reflecting on all that has happened since last year’s rally, a New York Times editorial laments how, “hopelessly fixated on toughness, the immigration debate has lost its balance, overlooking the humanity of the immigrant.” Elizondo-Jasso asserts that the goal of these rallies is to raise awareness about the undocumented immigrant’s plight, noting that Mex@Penn members are trying to do their part by working with Casa de los Soles, a nonprofit Mexican community center in South Philly, to tutor children of immigrants. Tuninetti also adds, “What was nice about the rally was that there were other non-Latino groups there. It shows that they care.” She concludes by reminding us, “On a daily basis, we encounter immigrants, probably both legal and illegal. It’s not as far as students think.”

So before we pack our bags and head for warmer shores, let’s take a moment to consider those in Philly who are far from home.

There’s nothing more torturous than fighting that post-lunch food coma during an hour-and-a-half long lecture &mdash those interminable minutes while you’re floating in and out of consciousness, with nothing but meaningless scribbles to show for your earnest efforts to take notes. You lament the fact that, for all you got out of that class, you might as well have spent those precious ninety minutes in your own bed. It’s even more frustrating to know that if you could have just put your head down for a quick power nap, you could have avoided such prolonged suffering.

That’s the idea behind the Nap Club, recently created by Indiana University students Michael Duttlinger and Joe Spencer. In defense of their club, Duttlinger and Spencer quote studies that say “napping can heighten creativity, boost memory and increase alertness.”

Of course, we don’t need the Penn Sleep Center or any other experts to tell us that power naps are good for us. Midday napping is nothing new to college students. We claim these daily siestas a God-given right, often beyond the privacy of our bedrooms.

Still, these guys may be on to something. According to the Associated Press, the Nap Club provides “a quiet room with the shades drawn, a few desks and chairs, and six air mattresses, purchased through a small sum allotted to campus clubs. Up to 15 people can come in to doze. A moderator wakes them up at the appropriate time…” Beds and a personal wake-up call! For those who can’t afford to trek back to their bedrooms for a fifteen-minute power nap, this beats the Van Pelt study carrels!

Ripping the last page out of the printer, you dash out of the house and then slow down to a more dignified speedwalk, Wharton-style, on Locust. Arriving only a couple minutes late, no more than usual, you triumphantly add your paper to the stack. You haven’t done the reading for today’s class, but, hey, at least you finished your paper. Most of us here at Penn like to think that we’ve mastered the art of BS in the classroom. And once things really get going, you might even grace the class with some insightful (albeit inferred) contributions of your own. But it gets a bit tricky when you’re in a 10-person class.

Professor: Could someone start us off by briefly summarizing the chapter?

Silence. I lower my eyes and pretend to be completely absorbed in the text, waiting for someone else to take this one. The silence starts to become uncomfortable. And then, the realization–NO ONE has managed to do the reading in addition to the paper. Curses!

Professor (who’s arrived at the same conclusion by now): Has no one done the reading?

So there we are, pretty-much-grown men and women, faces burning, squirming in our seats like naughty schoolboys. I tell you, it wasn’t pretty.

It wasn’t until after class, though, that I felt the first stirrings of protest, indignation. Fie! What kind of professor assigns readings on the same day that a paper is due and expects us to actually read it, no less? No longer should we be subjected to such oppressive injustices!

Professors, like students, must adhere to certain rules of etiquette. Now, when it comes to classroom etiquette, you’ll find no shortage of resources–some morecolorful than others. Professors are pretty passionate about the topic, as I’m sure we can all testify, and many have gone to great lengths to expound on the subject.

But these codes of conduct are woefully one-sided, pertaining primarily to student conduct. On that note, I propose the Ten Commandments of Professor Etiquette. I’ll start:

1) Thou shalt not place students in unnecessarily stressful predicaments by assigning concurrent projects under the false assumption that said students are capable of responsible time management.

Kind of looks like an alien to me…

“Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible,” declared Lord Kelvin in 1885, less than 20 years before the Wright brothers’ first successful flight.
From our cozy perch on this side of science, puffed up with hindsight, we gleefully quote these experts who, along with their accomplishments, will go down in history for their serious lack of foresight. Science is no stranger to skepticism. . Still, in this age of tremendous scientific breakthrough, where men in space and cloned animals are a part of our everyday reality, we seem to be more skeptical than ever.

On Saturday, The New York Times announced that after a long, controversial history, the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) lab will close at the end of the month. Created in 1979 by Professor Emeritus Robert Jahn, PEAR was devoted to the “rigorous scientific study of the interaction of human consciousness with sensitive physical devices, systems, and processes common to contemporary engineering practice” — in English, what we call ESP and telekinesis.
I know. It sounds like the stuff of Steven Spielberg and George Lucas films — the scientific community thought it was pretty hokey, too, calling PEAR “an embarrassment to science.”

Princeton has never been thrilled to be associated with ideas that people classify alongside UFOs, Ouija boards, and tarot cards. So it’s no surprise that alumni like Jeffrey Shallit are celebrating the “welcome news” of what he calls the rotting of the PEAR.
It’s true. We may be the biggest not-quite-out-of-the-closet Jedi fans, but when sci-fi crosses over into the realm of reality, all those warm, fuzzy feelings from watching E.T. vanish.

Now, as an English major, I won’t pretend to know any of the actual science behind the research. Many have said there was none, but it’s clear that Jahn wasn’t just an addled dabbler in the occult. As his colleague Professor Alain Kornhauser asserts, “Jahn has approached engineering anomalies research with the highest elements of scholarship and scientific inquiry.” It’s unfortunate that such passionate research from a brilliant mind has to come to such an ignominious end. If anything, he should be applauded for his earnest pursuit of knowledge, his devotion to the spirit of science as “one of freedom in which any idea can be tested regardless of how far-fetched it might seem.”

Now, I’m not arguing that anything goes in the name of science. But there’s a principle at stake here. If we look at the heart of the issue, I think critics will have to admit that their resistance is about little more than saving face. Sure, some argue that PEAR was “a colossal waste of money” — but they’ll soon learn that Jahn, rather than eating up our precious tax dollars, relied largely on private donations to fund his research.
Physics professor Will Happer, another colleague of Jahn’s, sums up the matter pretty well when he says, “I don’t believe in anything Bob is doing, but I support his right to do it.” But I’m challenging you to take it one step further — to be open to the possibility that unorthodox ideas may yield real results.

But why insist on impossibilities when history has shown us time and time again that we live in a world filled with possibilities? Maybe I’m naïve, idealistic, downright ignorant. It’s altogether possible. But in a world of skeptics and cynics, it can’t hurt to have a little faith?

Mario may look like an innocent animated cartoon character, but The Spin has discovered that he is a really a malicious midterm-failer-maker. Just look at those eyes–(http://forum.forumactif.com)

Crunch, it’s midterm time.

Midterm periods are a heck of a lot more stressful than the finals period. At 30-40 percent of our final grades, midterms, like finals, can make or break the semester. And, inevitably, they all fall on the same day.

In comparison, life is good during finals time. We seem to enter a void where all the other stresses of life are put on hold — no relentless barrage of other exams, quizzes, and “quests,” plus papers, presentations, and projects, in addition to classes, meetings, interviews, volunteer work, part-time jobs, LSATs, MCATs, GREs. You can sleep in, sport sweats and partake in all the free food and coffee. Plus, there’s that sense of solidarity in common suffering, in knowing that everyone else is screwed just like you. (Our hearts go out to that kid running to a 9 a.m. final with a tell-tale cap or ponytail and Red Bull in hand.)

Now, I know a lot of you are probably saying, “This is college. Deal with it.” And you’re right.. The truth is, I’m starting to feel the pressure, and if anywhere, this is the place for fruitless rants.

P.S. If you’re seeking respite from midterm blues, let me suggest one of my personal favorites: Mario Kart! To escape reality, even for just half an hour, there’s nothing like assuming the identity of a blonde-haired, blue-eyed princess in a pink ballgown and tiara who also happens to be a racing fiend and drives like a bat out of hell!

So what’s your guilty pleasure?

Do the Huxtables make us feel too comfortable? (wikimedia)

It seems that precious little is sacred on college campuses — everything’s fair game for irreverent lambasting among college students: Students at a Texas college hosted an MLK Day party which “featured gang apparel, fried chicken, malt liquor.” A UConn law student party “featured gold teeth, do-rags, gang signs.”

And this isn’t just your daily dose of offbeat news — there’s a similar trend in mainstream headlines, too: “Asian-American parody inflames Princeton.” “Recent college parties mocking black stereotypes spark outrage.” And the latest from Penn, a law student charged with ethnic intimidation and attempted murder.

It’s as if we’ve come full circle in the diversity dialogue. Somehow, amidst all the talk of race and multiculturalism, the line between embracing diversity and being racist has become a bit blurred. According to University of Iowa professor of journalism Venise Berry, pop culture and media have a lot to do with the confusion. For example, we learn from comedians that as long as we make fun of ourselves, it’s OK to make fun of other ethnic groups. And also thanks to pop culture, we’re all fluent in racially-colored language (think FOBs, JAPs, Twinkies). As University of Dayton sociologist Leslie Picca explains it, “This is a new generation who grew up watching ‘The Cosby Show.’ They have the belief that racism isn’t a problem anymore so the words they use and the jokes they tell aren’t racist.” Having been on both the giving and receiving ends of racism, we seem to have become immune to it, viewing it as an inevitable “even harmless” fact of American culture.

The roots of racism go much deeper than any societal trend — or even any historical precedent. After all, we learn in Psych 101 that our brains are wired to categorize and make generalizations when we don’t have all the facts. And it’s probably also innately human to make non-neutral evaluations of the foreign and the unfamiliar. (Anyone who screamed bloody murder as a child when forced onto the lap of that unnaturally jolly fellow clad in red can testify to this.) So as long as our minds continue to organize information the way they do, we will be inclined to make unjust racist judgments.

But rather than complacent acceptance of the seeming inevitability of racism, our response should be to resist our less-than-admirable natural tendencies. We can’t go through life without making generalizations, but we can do without the self-aggrandizing, other-denigrating ones.