Home Blog Page 1096

Putting yourself to the test

By
EIC
-
0
So many acronyms.
Want to make it to grad school? Better get started studying for these tests.

So, you’ve gotten into university, you’ve chosen your major, and you’re knocking off those W, Q, B requirements one by one. Maybe you haven’t chosen your major, and have no idea what it’s going to be, but are still checking off those bachelor degree requirements. Whatever your situation, you know that you want to further pursue education after your bachelor’s degree.

Congratulations, you’ve held onto that eccentric ambition that most sane people have advised you to ignore: you’re gonna stay in school.

You’ve probably heard from peers, educators, parents, and professionals that graduate school, medical school, law school, and any professional school you want to pursue after post-secondary not only requires a bachelor’s degree, an outrageous curriculum vitae, reference letters, and a steroid-injected cumulative grade point average, but also that you perform well on an admission test.

Although there are many professional schools that require their own admission test, there are  three big ones you’ve probably heard of: the MCAT, LSAT, and GRE.

But what’s on these exams? What do they test, how are they scored, and are they really that important for professional school admission? We take a closer look at the big three tests — and what to expect from each.

MCAT

The Medical College Admissions Test, better known as the MCAT, is designed and administered by the American Association of Medical colleges. If you’re applying to medical school in Canada or the United States, you must write this test.

While the number of tests administered from year to year varies, it is being offered 33 times between January 2014 and January 2015. In this one-year period, a person is allowed to take the MCAT three times. Of course, taking the test three times is unnecessary, but if you’re unhappy with your score on your first attempt, you’re allowed to take the test twice more.

When you write the MCAT, it won’t be with a pencil or an exam booklet. Instead, you’ll sit at a desk, answering questions on a computer. Each question is multiple choice: there are 52 questions in the biological sciences section, 52 in the physical sciences section, and 40 in the critical analysis and reasoning section. You’re allowed 70 minutes for the first two sections, and 60 for the third.

Until recently, these were followed by a written response section, but that has since been replaced by a trial section, which is comprised of 32 questions over a 40-minute period. The trial section doesn’t actually count towards your score — it’s used to test out questions for future MCATs.

So what sorts of questions can test-takers expect? The MCAT contains questions on physics, chemistry, biochemistry, biology, and critical analysis and reasoning. The questions on physics, chemistry, and biology are said to be of introductory level difficulty, so if you’ve taken the prerequisites for medical school, these questions should be pretty straightforward. That isn’t to say that they’ll be easy, so study up!

The critical analysis and reasoning section of the test, on the other hand, is designed to evaluate medical school applicants’ ability to comprehend complex information and arguments. From the sample questions I’ve seen, the critical analysis and reasoning section includes a short passage — usually about a page — which is followed by questions about that passage.

For those of you looking to take the test during or after 2015, you can also expect a new section covering the psychological, sociological, and biological aspects of behaviour.

Raw scores from the different sections of the MCAT are each converted to a scale ranging from 1–15. Each score from the different sections is added for a total of 45 possible points. For example, a score of 13 on physical sciences, 14 on biological sciences, and 11 on critical analysis and reasoning will give you a sum of 38. Your raw score is then converted into a scaled score which compensates for variability between sets of questions used on the test — you’ll also be given info on what percentile of test-takers you fall into.

I recently spoke with a current SFU student who is a prospective med-school applicant; Matias Raski is finishing up a BSc in behavioral neuroscience and says he has already begun studying for the MCAT. “I’m not nervous,” Raski says. “I’ve done very well in all of my introductory science classes, and the MCAT will be just that: material that I’ve already learned and mastered.”

I asked the future doctor whether he thinks the exam reflects his readiness for medical school. “It does, to a limited extent,” he reflected. “It measures certain abilities like rote memorization of well-established scientific observations, but it doesn’t assess the full scope of skills required for success in medicine; perhaps the weight given to students’ MCAT scores in admission decisions should be adjusted accordingly.”

LSAT

Another daunting admission test is the Law School Admission Test, commonly known as the LSAT. If you want to practice law in Canada or the United states, you’ll have to take this one. Unlike the MCAT, the LSAT is only offered four times a year — every February, June, September, and December.

If you happen to flunk the first time you take the test, it’s not the end of the world. You’re allowed to retake the test, but there is a restriction on how many times you can write it — according to the Law School Admission Council, a test-taker can only take the LSAT a maximum of three times within a two-year period. As always, rule changes with these tests do occur; make sure to do your research.

The LSAT is made up of five components: three multiple choice sections, a written section, and an unscored variable section used to pre-test new questions. The multiple choice sections have between 24–27 questions each; its three multiple choice sections are what count toward your LSAT score. The written component is not graded and does not count towards your admission score; as in the MCAT, it’s there to help create new questions for future LSATs.

However, unlike the MCAT, the written portion of the LSAT is sent to the school you’re applying to — some schools will even use it to choose between applicants, so again, make sure to do your research.

You’re given 35 minutes per section, for a total of about three hours. There are three types of multiple choice questions that you will encounter on the LSAT: reading comprehension, analytical reasoning, and logical reasoning.

The reading comprehension section consists of a medium to large passage, varying in topic. This section requires careful observation in order to answer correctly. The analytical reasoning section, generally considered the toughest part of the test, consists of what some refer to as ‘logic games.’ You’re given a set of facts, a set of rules, and then asked which conclusions follow.

The logical reasoning section presents short to medium passages, and proceeds to ask questions about those passages. The questions might ask what can or cannot follow from what has been discussed in the passage; alternatively, they might ask which answers support or don’t support the argument presented in the passage. Finally, the writing section gives you a position and asks you to write in its defense.

The order of all these sections varies from test to test — therefore, it’s possible to begin the test with the writing sample, which is unfortunate, as this section doesn’t count towards your admission score, but costs valuable energy that could be used on sections that do count towards your score.

LSAT scoring is fairly simple. Your test score is converted to a scale ranging from 120–180. The law school admission council admits that, although the LSAT doesn’t completely predict the readiness and success of a student in law school, it does accurately measure characteristics that a law student must have, such as critical thinking, the ability to draw inferences from arguments, and the ability to organize information.

After looking through a few practice LSATs, it’s clear that the analytical reasoning section, or logic games, constitutes the most difficult portion of the exam. The facts and rules provided are fairly simple, but the time frame in which you must complete this section limits the ability to draw the right conclusions.

This is a general feature of the LSAT. It’s not that the questions on this test are extremely difficult; it’s that you only have about a minute and a half to spend on each question.

After reading long passages or attempting to diagram logical problems, you may have to re-read portions of text or rules. This can waste valuable time and affect your ability to answer questions later in the test. Having taken a few of the practice tests, I find myself taking an hour to an hour and a half to complete just one multiple choice section. Fair warning.

GRE

If you’re applying to graduate schools in Canada and the United States, you’ll most likely have to take the Graduate Record Examination test, or one of the many similar exams out there. Designed and administered by Education Testing Services, the GRE is usually administered on a computer, though some still do it the old fashion way: with a pencil and an exam booklet.

The computerized test is offered every 21 days, while the pencil and paper test can only be taken during certain times of the year. You can write the computerized GRE a maximum of five times per 12-month period. Since the pencil and paper exam is offered significantly less often, it can be rewritten as often as it is administered.

There are six sections on both the written and computerized GRE; each section ranges from 20–30 multiple choice questions, or contains written questions requiring long answers. The test is made up of three components: analytical writing, verbal reasoning, and quantitative reasoning.

The time limit and number of questions per section will vary depending on whether you take the computerized version or the written. For example, on the verbal reasoning section in the computerized version, examinees are given 20 questions per section, and 30 minutes to complete them; alternately, in the pencil and paper test, you must complete 25 questions in 35 minutes.

Despite the difference between the computerized and the handwritten versions, the analytical writing section always comes first on the test. The order of the other components will vary from test to test, but at least you’ll know what to expect when you begin.

Since the test is given to a variety of students across many fields, the components of the GRE are said to measure skills that are independent of any specific discipline. Each section presents its own challenges.

The first section aims to test examinees’ ability to articulate complex ideas coherently and concisely. In the verbal reasoning section, examinees are asked to draw inferences from passages, distinguish valuable points from irrelevant ones, and understand the meaning of words and the relationship between them. In the quantitative reasoning section, you’re required to solve problems by using mathematical models, and by applying basic algebra skills, geometry, and arithmetic to problems.

After a raw score is obtained, each of the two multiple choice sections — verbal and quantitative reasoning — get converted into a scaled score ranging between 130–170. The analytical writing section is marked on a 0–6 score scale.

Like the other admission tests, your score is scaled to account for slight differences between tests, but this does not mean that writing a test at one particular date gives you an advantage. Furthermore, your score will also be assigned a percentile ranking, so you know where you stand against other test-takers.

Mathew Gendron, a current SFU student who will soon apply to counseling programs at both SFU and UBC, wrote the GRE this past August. Sharing how he felt going into the exam, Gendron says, “I’d been calm, but a little nervous, throughout the whole process. The programs I applied for place less weight on the exam compared to other things like experience, and have a lower score requirement for the exam. So, I am grateful for that.”

How long did it take to prepare? “I’d say around 75 hours, mostly in the two weeks before the test,” Gendron says.

No matter what school you’re applying to, an admission test is usually weighted pretty heavily. Your score and cumulative grade point average can determine whether the rest of your application is even reviewed. So, if you’re planning on professional school after your bachelor’s, keep your grades up, learn all you can about what determines the acceptance to the school you would like to get into, and most of all, study hard.

SFU grad Joel Salaysay wins Best Fiction Film for Lifers

By
EIC
-
0

“When you wash dishes for a living, your mind wanders, not to fantasy worlds and distant universes . . . it wanders to familiar places, all the places in this world you’d rather be.” This quote, taken from Joel Salaysay’s short film Lifers, sums up his experience as an aspiring filmmaker working as a dishwasher to fund his projects.

Salaysay is a recent graduate from the SFU film program; over the past few months, he received both his Bachelor of Fine Arts degree and the Best Fiction Film award for this film, Lifers, at the 2014 Canadian Student Film Festival (CSFF). The festival, part of the Montreal World Film Festival, featured his film along with 26 other students films, nine of which were also created by SFU students.

The award came as a pleasant surprise for Salaysay who certainly didn’t expect to win anything.  For him, it was a reward in and of itself to have been featured in the festival. Nevertheless, “when you do [win] it’s really nice,” Salaysay said.

Lifers is geared primarily toward those who, like Salaysay, are in the process of finding a career for themselves, but it “struck a chord” with many different groups of people, according to Salaysay. Some have commented on the film’s accuracy. A number of older audiences enjoyed the film and, as Salaysay said, “a lot of people will relate because, who hasn’t worked in a kitchen at some point?”

This is Salaysay’s most personal film. He suspects that borrowing the concept directly from his own experiences led to the film’s authenticity and relatable details.

The term ‘lifers’ is a loose reference to prisoners serving a life sentence. It also alludes to being stuck in transition — doing something one doesn’t wish to do for the rest of one’s life.

Salaysay draws a connection to this using different metaphorical cues throughout the film. The sound of a recurring train at the beginning and end of the film has no real place in a kitchen. Yet the sound cue signifies being stuck on the line, headed somewhere one doesn’t wish to go or forced to see the same scenery again and again, never arriving at the desired destination.

Similarly, hands embody an important rite of passage for culinary experts working in a kitchen, like tattoos in prison. “The more you can tolerate without needing a glove or a towel to block the heat, the more distinguished you could become,” Salaysay explains. “It’s kind of a sign that you’ve been there for a long time and this is sort of your way of life, your baptism.”

However “[Lifers] is the kitchen from the perspective of someone who doesn’t see that for themselves as their career,” Salaysay continues. For him, the processes of dish-washing and making films are similar — with long hours, very little pay, and mental and physical exhaustion. Because he loves telling stories and creating films, the pain is worthwhile in filmmaking. Salaysay refers to a Jerry Seinfeld quote: “Success is finding the torture that you are comfortable with.”

Salaysay is proud of his accomplishments. This is his first time working with a larger cast and he is very thankful to have had such a great team. “Everyone really wanted to give it their all and that was really helpful.”

For the immediate future, Salaysay aims to continue creating. He is currently working on a new web series, but hopes that this award will open the door to write and produce a feature film.

Lifers will screen at the Vancouver International Film Festival on September 30 and October 8. For more information, visit viff.org.

 

Fathers and sons share laughs and tears in Delivery

By
EIC
-
0

So four guys walk into a comedy club . . . and end up making a hilarious and sentimental film about their attempts at performing stand up comedy. Mark Myers is about to become a father for the first time, but before his baby arrives, he sets out to accomplish two of his goals: make his own full-length film, and try stand up comedy. His three friends Sean Menard, Shane Cunningham, and 71-year old Bert Van Lierop accompany him on this journey.

The film’s title is a play on words, as it hinges on the delivery of a newborn baby, and the fact that in stand up comedy, the delivery of a set is what makes a comedian funny. Before starting this film project, Myers worked at Muchmusic, talking with musicians and working on reality TV shows.

He dreamed of making a movie before turning 30, and while he was unable to meet that deadline, he still invested all of his efforts into this project. The movie opens with Myers’ brother describing a dream he had about Myers’ film being called Deliver, and thus the seed for the film’s title is planted.

Despite the film’s premise as an exploration of the world of stand up comedy, there are many poignant moments as well. The many faces of fatherhood are explored, as Menard’s father is diagnosed with cancer just as Myers’ baby is about to enter the world. While it does deliver many laughs, the emotional moments in the film are just as important to the pacing of this unusual story.

“I have had people tell me that the film had an unexpected amount of heart,” Myers says, “ It made [them] laugh, cry, or even want to be a better dad.”

The documentary was filmed primarily in the Toronto area over the span of three months, with interview footage from the Just for Laughs Comedy Festival in Montreal constantly spliced into the movie. The crew was lucky enough to interview some famous comedians for this project, including greats such as Russell Peters and Bryan Callen. Several comedic sets are also featured in the film that are sure to elicit laughs from even the most stoic viewers.

Myers cites Steven Spielberg as an inspiration behind his production of the film, as he made it with a general audience in mind. “A lot of people can relate to the film,” Myers says. “There is no exact demographic [that it’s targeted to]. I just want to make people feel something.”

The candid narrative of Delivery paints an uplifting portrait about comedy and life. Cunningham is a charming yet socially awkward comedian, Van Lierop is downright hilarious, with many good stories to tell, and Menard’s final moments with his father are simply heartbreaking.

Finally, the passion that Myers has invested into this film really shines through, as he proclaims about his work and his stand up set, “I don’t want my kid to be proud of what I said, but rather to be proud of what I did.”

Judith Garay celebrates twenty years, twenty intersections, and twenty dancers

By
EIC
-
0

Inspired by Vancouver, its intersections, and its people, 20.20.20 presented a new perspective of the city from September 24 to 27 at SFU Woodward’s. Judith Garay’s sharp, determined choreography was impressively performed by her company, Dancers Dancing.

The back page of the program declares that 20.20.20 is “inspired by interactions of architecture, pigeons, overpasses, green spaces, mountain views, skateboards, and . . . people young and old.” I could see elements of each of these influences throughout the piece, most notably the pigeons. At certain points, the dancers flocked in pigeon-like fashion, moving in a stylized way that clearly evoked birds. They also seemed to emulate flamingoes at one point, standing on one leg for an extended period of time.

The idea of the intersection was also a large focal point of this work; in the opening sequence, dancers crossed the stage in diagonal lines that intersected at centre stage. As they passed each other, they paused to smile or acknowledge each other, but this action quickly turned into indifference and avoidance. This feigned indifference evoked walking down a busy sidewalk and avoiding eye contact for fear of having to interact on any level with a stranger.

The stage was often full of dancers, forming many patterns and moving in an organized chaos, almost colliding but always knowing exactly when to switch directions. This aggressive, focused choreography was balanced with a few slow, calculated segments where one dancer held another up from behind, controlling their movements.

Wearing typical everyday Vancouver attire, the dancers also used air quotes profusely as if to signify that what they were doing was not the real thing, only representative of it. As they moved around the stage and flocked together in a large group, they performed many common gestures that one might be caught doing while waiting awkwardly — things like scratching your nose or pushing your hair behind your ears.

The hopeful ending was beautiful; the dancers slowly walked forward, pausing after each step, as they looked off into the distance while pink petals raining down on a golden lit stage. These dancers were focused, determined, and energetic, much like the bustling streets of Vancouver.

Life on the Pale Blue Dot

By
EIC
-
0
My god... It's full of stars.
In the grand scheme of things, we are tiny and insignificant. But that's okay.

As you are reading this, you are currently hurtling through space on a remote chunk of rock, covered mostly in water and protected by a thin layer of atmosphere, at a speed of about 460 metres per second. This tiny chunk of rock, which we call Earth, is only a fraction of a much larger Solar System, which is also whirling around our Milky Way galaxy at about 220 kilometres per second. And it doesn’t stop there — our galaxy is also speeding through space, along with other nearby galaxies, at about 1,000 kilometres per second.

Just in case you forgot.

Those of us who aren’t science students usually don’t spend too much time contemplating the vastness of the universe, or the strange and wonderful ways in which it works; we leave it to the mathematicians, the astrophysicists, those who study in labs rather than libraries and with microscopes rather than Marlowe.

But in astronomy, the study of celestial bodies, there’s something valuable to be learned by everyone: a better understanding to be gained about what our real place in the universe is, and a healthy amount of perspective on just how important we really are (or aren’t).

Our universe is an enormous work of art, and we are only one pixel of that artwork.

As a latecomer to the study of astronomy, my biggest hurdles have been wrapping my head around how big everything is, how fast it all moves, and just how much of it there is. I’m sure this is a common problem for those who’re just learning about the nature of our universe — how there’s so much in existence that’s much too big or much too small for us to really comprehend.

Pop scientists like Brian Greene and Carl Sagan do their best  to translate these ideas with aphorisms and analogies, but the realization that we are only an infinitesimally tiny part of the universe is hard not to take personally. It’s the reason it took so long for our species to understand our Earth wasn’t at the centre of some grand, unified system — after all, how could we not be the centre of the universe? There will always be something comforting in the thought that we are special and unique, that there is nothing out there quite like us.

Of course, this couldn’t be further from the truth. We are surrounded by galaxies and moons and faraway planets so big and so small they defy comprehension. It’s highly unlikely that we’re the only planet to sustain life, and mathematically probable that some of these life forms bear resemblance to us. We have learned more about the universe in the past two centuries than the rest of human history combined and we still don’t know much about it.

As with most sciences, the study of astronomy is full of uncertainty; the unsolved mysteries of astronomy seem to only dwarf us further, to make humans seem even less meaningful. But my growing love of astronomy doesn’t make me feel small or insignificant. In fact, it’s taught me more about what my so called purpose on this Earth really is than most other things ever could.

I’ve never been a religious person — the idea of a higher power has never appealed to me. But in astronomy, in looking up at the stars and knowing that there are innumerable complex systems and designs that we still only partially understand, I feel the sense of humility and wonder that people describe when they think of God or other religious figures. The more I learn, the more fascinated I become.

For me, knowing more about the Earth’s place in the cosmos has helped me to understand how we, as humans, make our own meaning. We know what those living only a few centuries ago didn’t: that our universe is an enormous work of art, and that each of us amounts to about a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a pixel of that artwork.

But that doesn’t have to be a scary thought.

No one understood this better than Carl Sagan, whose genius for science was only matched by his generosity in sharing that knowledge with the world. In 1990, only a few years before his death, Sagan requested that the Voyager 1 space probe turn its camera back on the Earth from a distance of around six million kilometres — the now-famous image it took shows our planet as a tiny blue dot floating in the darkness of deep space.

“That’s here,” he wrote in his book Pale Blue Dot, named after the photo. “That’s home. That’s us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives.” In forcing us to take a look at ourselves from outside the context of our own world, with its own share of horror and beauty, he helped us to put ourselves in perspective.

“There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world,” he said. “To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we’ve ever known.”

Of all that astronomy has to teach us, this might be its most important lesson. Looking up into the night sky, it’s easy to forget that each tiny speck is another world, and that for every one light there are millions too dim or too far away to see. What we do on Earth isn’t made insignificant by the scope of what’s around us; if anything, our knowledge of what’s out there, however incomplete, is a testament to how far we’ve come, and how much further we’re capable of going.

Canadians need an alliance between the Liberals and the NDP

By
Peak Web
-
0

Politics are a complicated topic for millennials. In Canada’s 2011 federal election, according to Elections Canada, only roughly 39 per cent of Canadians between the ages of 18 and 24 voted. We live in an age where equality, acceptance, and inclusivity are part of the ideological forefront for young, upcoming voters. These are all statistics and insights that, undoubtedly, we have seen many times before.

The root problem is that politics are a tribal exercise that, generally, are hostile to the aforementioned millennial values. Modern politics — with the advent of unfettered social media — require a Machiavellian ruthlessness and pettiness that is alienating to a generation of individuals who are, more often than not, declaring themselves as progressively independent. Subsequently, the question arises: how do we blend millennial progressivism and quell economic uncertainty in the 21st century? The answer: a more customizable government, which would involve an alliance between the federal Liberals and the NDP.

Technically, I am a millennial, although I am creakily bordering on the elderly edge. I am part of the older generation that still remembers (not fondly) the hyper-conservative Reagan/Thatcher era. I want to see a world where people are free to choose who they are and finite labels become a thing of the past. And so, over the course of the last two years, I sampled what different political groups had to offer.

I joined the BC Liberals, held quorum with the BCNDP, wrote policy for the Canadian Libertarian Party, attended an Ayn Rand conference, donated money to the federal Liberals, and purchased membership in the federal Conservative Party. After becoming involved with these groups, I came to the conclusion that they were all deficient in some manner.

If the two parties do not join forces they will inevitably split the vote in favour of the Conservatives.

This uncertainty of representative affiliation is the new reality of millennial politics: we are Consumer Citizens. In an effort for full disclosure, I would like to say that I still do not know exactly how to approach progressive politics. Ultimately my exploration of various ideologies was in an effort to find the best way to create actual freedom for every citizen, whether it was with a large active government or a small litigious one.

However, the more I explored libertarian ideas, the more I realized that it was mostly a load of baloney, where selfish pro-business advocates were heartily trumpeting deregulation and the removal of government interference. Shortly thereafter I discovered author Matt Taibbi’s excellent novel, Griftopia, which outlines how the Ayn Rand-ian influence on American business almost crashed the entire world economy in 2008. So on the political spectrum I am not far left, or far right, or much of a centrist either. I am, lo and behold, a progressive independent.

The (albeit temporary) solution for millennials, I think, is for a merger between the federal Liberals and NDP. Between the two parties (one aggressively progressive, the other cautiously pro-prosperity) and between their two leaders (Mulcair is an amazing prosecutorial presence in parliament, and Trudeau has the charisma and tactical prowess to gather popular support) a Liberal New Democrat Party would gather the votes necessary to form a viable, majority government. The two parties are so similar in practice and appearance that — if they do not join forces — they will inevitably split the vote in favour of the federal Conservatives.

If we are going to say that millennials are Consumer Citizens, then let’s follow the standard marketing trends and make things more customizable. I want the Canadian Government, version 2.0.

University Briefs

By
Peak Web
-
9
Female-only hours at the Ryerson University gym

UBC gets a boost for speech pathology masters program

The University of British Columbia has received increased funding from the provincial government toward its Masters of Science in Speech Pathology program.

The $2.475 million initial investment will allow for 13 spots to be added to the existing 23 by 2016, with another $932,000 for the program yearly. The reasoning behind the bump in funding is that it will address the need for speech therapists in northern and rural BC, where these experts have been scarce in the past.

With files from The Ubyssey

Saskatchewan universities see large tuition increases

Universities in the province of Saskatchewan have seen the highest tuition increases in Canada this academic year, according to a recent Statistics Canada report. The changes will affect students at both undergraduate and graduate levels, with four per cent and 5.2 per cent increases respectively.

The tuition fees for undergraduate students in Saskatchewan has increased from $6,402 to $6,659 this academic year, making it the second highest in Canada, with Ontario in the top spot with an average fee of $7,539.

Ernie Barber, interim provost and VP academic of U of S explained, “Despite the fact that Stats Canada reported that we had the highest increase, that doesn’t mean that we have the highest tuition. Our tuition fees, even with the increases, are about where we intended them to be set.”

With files from The Sheaf

Female-only gym hours introduced at Ryerson

Ryerson University is attempting to reduce feelings of discomfort in their campus recreation facilities by instituting female-only gym times for places such as the campus pool, weight rooms, and various studios.

The pilot project was launched after a survey of female students found a large portion of participants wanted women-only hours. As of September 18, the number of women using the facilities had increased by seven times. U of T and York University have implemented similar initiatives in past years.

With files from The Ryersonian

Former UN high commissioner interrogates global governance

By
EIC
-
0
Louise Arbour made history by indicting Yugoslavian President Slobodan Milosevic, the first sitting head of state to be tried for war crimes.

Former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and Supreme Court of Canada justice, the Honourable Louise Arbour, visited SFU Harbour Centre last Thursday, September 25 to give a talk titled, “From Syria to Crimea, is Global Governance at a Loss?”

Presented by SFU and the School for International Studies, the talk discussed whether doctrines and institutions of global conflict management are in need of self-examination and reform.

The Peak sat down with Arbour before her talk to discuss her perceptions of the current state of international criminal justice, peacekeeping operations, and the international human rights system.

The Peak: How would you characterize the current state of global governance?

Louise Arbour: The toolbox of conflict prevention, conflict management, conflict resolution, seems to be pretty outdated. I think it’s kind of stuck. It’s very stale.

For instance if you compare the kind of progress that’s been made in technology, particularly communication technology in the last several decades, and you look at how the post-Second World War international institutions of global governance has basically just drifted, there’s not been much new thinking, new ideas, and no kind of institutional reform.

P: How do these problems manifest in Syria and Crimea?

Arbour: In Syria, we have been paralysed by the difficulty of understanding the real nature of the conflict. [It’s been] a very, very slow response. A response that was at the time much more rhetorical than real. We support the opposition, but basically we do nothing to really support [them].

Now Syria has morphed; I mean, the opposition has kind of exploded into all these subgroups that I think public opinion outside the region cannot even begin to understand, and I don’t think we have much trust that our leaders understand either.

P: Does this reflect a lack of institutional or political trust?

Arbour: I think it’s both. I think that we are, I hope, at the very low point of personal leadership. Frankly, again, I think that’s why, in his first election campaign, Obama came across as such a giant, both intellectually, morally, [and] politically. He was operating in sort of a desert of remarkable leadership.

I think this fatigue in personal leadership probably also represents fatigue in the fact that political institutions are not very attractive to people with talent, maybe because there is a lot of competition for enormous material rewards in the private sector. But also the political environment is so deteriorated that it must be that it’s not very attractive to people who would have these kinds of qualities.

P: What do you think might attribute to global governance being, as you put it, “stuck?”

Arbour: I think those who, either institutionally or politically, were or [presented] themselves to be ‘the leaders’ [. . .] have been very unsuccessful in keeping up with the times.

They held to their position of power, and to me we are in a transitional mode now where, maybe as a result of some benefits of the international development agenda efforts, developing countries are actually developing. And, they’re asserting some political claims; we see it on climate change. They’re essentially saying, ‘You got rich by polluting the planet, and now you want to tell us that we cannot use the same means to get rich ourselves.’ Well, you know that won’t go.

So I think those who had a leadership, be it political, economic, or institutional, since the Second World War, essentially have held onto their privileges without much vision as to how they should position themselves in a world where they won’t have this monopoly anymore.

P: How does this relate back to the issue of trust?

Arbour: I think a lot of developing countries, rightly or wrongly, are very suspicious about the purity of intentions of Western, rich countries purporting to advance universal values and ideals that just coincidentally seem to serve them very well. And I think that’s a huge part of the problem in the international human rights agenda.

The recipients of all this good advice don’t feel like they’ve benefitted all that much from it. There’s a lot of suspicion.

P: How do we take the next step toward reviving that trust?

Arbour: The diagnosis is considerably simpler than the remedy in this case. [. . .] What you have to do is accompany people at their own pace and in their own struggles, for freedom, for a decent life, but you can’t have this paternalistic, patronizing [method] which will necessarily backfire.

Inasmuch as we believe that these values are represented by the human rights agenda, [. . .] even if you sincerely believe that this should be supported, I think that we have to do a much more modest [job], and in some cases just accept that people are entitled to make different choices.

Students struggle to find parking at Burnaby campus

By
EIC
-
0
The capacity of Lots B, C and Discovery P3 is 1,950, but 2,300 outdoor permits were sold this fall.

Trying to find a parking space at SFU Burnaby this fall has become a daily struggle for some students, as the most popular parking lots -— Lots B and C — are often filled to capacity by lunch time.

Although those with indoor permits have been largely unaffected, students with outdoor parking passes have complained about the lack of space they paid for.

The Peak spoke to director of Parking Services, David Agosti, to find out the reasons behind this issue and the steps Parking Services is taking to rectify it.

“We’ve sold more or less the same number of permits as we sold in Fall 2013,” said Agosti, explaining that the issue shouldn’t be one of capacity. 

In Fall 2013, Parking Services sold 2,200 outdoor permits; this year, they sold 2,300. The combined capacity of Lots B, C and Discovery P3 is 1,950.

When asked what other explanation might account for the over-crowded lots, Agosti responded, “We’re thinking that part of it might be because of the teachers’ strike [. . .] a lot of education students and faculty would normally be in the classroom, [but] couldn’t be in the classroom and are instead up here.”

At present, Parking Services is trying to mitigate the influx of extra cars in several ways. Through collaboration with Facilities Services, SFU service vehicles have been redirected to park elsewhere to create more spaces. Also, turnaround areas are being reduced in size, and the extra space will be used to paint in more parking spaces.

Agosti acknowledged that these are short-term solutions, and said that in the long-term the Sustainable Mobility Advisory Committee (SMAC) is working towards better bus service to and from campus. They are also working to better understand student behaviour, bus pass-ups, and reasons people elect not to take transit.

In Agosti’s opinion, transit problems may explain the greater demand for parking space: “It’s possible that some people are saying even though I have an U-Pass, I can’t get on the bus.”

For those still struggling to find a place to park, Agosti suggested a solution for the immediate future: “If you’re arriving between 10:30 and 1:00, for now, skip C lot, go straight to B lot or Discovery P3” in order to save yourself time and stress.

Satellite Signals

By
EIC
-
0

Woodward’s

Last Wednesday, Andrew Yan, a senior urban planner with Bing Thom Architects and researcher with BTAworks, hosted a panel discussion titled “Vancouver in the 21st Century” at SFU Woodward’s.

The topic covered various aspects of life in Vancouver, “through the lens of social statistics and community cartographies.” Proceeds from ticket sales were donated to the Downtown Eastside Neighbourhood House Food Program.

Surrey

On Wednesday evening at Surrey campus, Susmita Maskey, a young Nepali mountain climber and social activist, spoke about her experiences as a coordinator of the historic First Nepali Women Everest Expedition, and her preparations for climbing the last of the Seven Summits, Vinson Massif in Antarctica.

Maseky has climbed Mount Everest three times and advocates empowering young women and supporting victims of violence.

Harbour Centre

Dietrich Jung of University of Southern Denmark’s Centre for Contemporary Middle East Studies delivered a lecture titled “How To Be a Modern Muslim: Global Social Imaginaries and the Construction of Islamic Identities” on Wednesday, September 24 at Harbour Centre.

His lecture discussed ways in which Muslims have dealt with subjectivity and social constructs in the modern era.

1...1,0951,0961,097...1,417Page 1,096 of 1,417

Simon Fraser University’s independent student newspaper since 1965.

Contact us: [email protected]

© The Peak Publications Society 1965-2024

Simon Fraser University’s independent student newspaper since 1965.

Contact us:
[email protected]

© The Peak Publications Society 1965-2024