Home Blog Page 1104

The end of textbooks

0
Oh hai didn't see u thar
Open textbooks aim to make education accessible for everyone, regardless of their financial status.

How much did you spend on textbooks this semester?

You don’t have to answer that. We all know that feeling of disappointment that comes with shelling out more than $100 on a textbook you’ll probably never use again. For decades, academic publishers and university bookstores have charged students hundreds, sometimes thousands, of dollars for textbooks, adding to already high tuition costs and ballooning student debt in Canada. For the most part, post-secondary students are encouraged to accept this as a hard truth of university life: if you want to go to school, you’ll have to pay.

It’s this dominant ideology of the university as a business — and knowledge as a commodity to be bought and sold — that the open education movement sets out to challenge. Releasing for free hundreds of textbooks, course materials, primary sources and other learning resources digitally under creative commons licenses, educators and experts across the country are fighting to make education a resource that’s open and available to everyone — teachers and students alike.

For students looking for a cheaper alternative and faculty looking for a more teachable format, open textbooks are a breath of fresh air.

There are dozens of organizations creating and promoting open textbooks across the world; most are concentrated in the United States, where pushback against rising textbook costs and the monopolization of markets has inspired instructors to go rogue. In Canada, the biggest promoter of open textbooks is right here in British Columbia. BC Campus, a publicly funded organization based out of Vancouver, is compiling a collection of free and readily available open textbooks designed for classrooms in BC and across Canada.

But what would a campus using open textbooks look like? Here at SFU, students and faculty across disciplines are working with BC Campus and other organizations to create and promote these new teaching materials, tailor-made for our school — and if they succeed, it could mean big changes to the way you’re earning your degree.

A Broken System

Walk into the SFU Bookstore in the Maggie Benston Centre. Go on, I’ll wait. Now browse a few of the titles on sale on the store’s first floor. Have you ever wondered why those textbooks cost as much as they do?

In Canada, textbook publishers — behemoths such as Pearson, Nelson, and Oxford University Press — have a monopoly on the production and distribution of peer-reviewed textbooks at Canadian universities. The reason they’re able to set their prices so high is because our Copyright Act protects them in doing so. When publishing non-Canadian course material, publishers are able to prohibit others from doing the same, and they’re allowed to tack on an extra 10 to 15 per cent on the import tax.

This leads to the sort of pricing we’re used to seeing for introductory course materials in fields such as physics, psychology, and biology. On average, students in Canada spend $500–1,000 every year on textbooks and courseware; in the United States, this number rises to $700–1,200. It hasn’t always been this bad — in the US, for instance, textbook costs have risen 812 per cent since 1978, and at a much higher rate than tuition costs — or inflation, for that matter.

Where’s that money going, you might ask? Well, most is going directly into the pockets of publishers — 80 per cent of the average textbook’s cost goes to its publisher, to cover the costs of distribution, production, and creation. Only a fraction of the remaining cost goes towards SFU and its bookstore, which lost $418,000 in the last fiscal year, according to Leah Bjornson’s report for The Peak this past May.

Apart from overcharging students and faculty alike, publishers also do their best to ensure that students have a tough time avoiding the sticker price. New editions for old textbooks are released every few years, often with only minor changes to the fine print. And good luck trying to save by buying books internationally and transporting them back to Canada; under our current copyright law, this is illegal.

“We’re really hoping that, through this campaign, professors are going to start thinking about how much money students are spending.”

As a result, professors are often forced to assign expensive textbooks for courses that only refer to a few chapters — and given that students are forced to buy whatever textbooks instructors assign, many teachers will opt for the more expensive choices in order to get the highest quality content.

So what choice do students have? As it turns out, there are ways to get around the rising cost of textbooks, though we often have to work for them.

One choice many students make is simply not to buy textbooks at all; in fact, a study from the US Public Interest Research Group Education Fund showed that 65 per cent of all post-secondary students had taken at least one course without buying the textbook, with full knowledge this might hurt their grade. About half of students went even further, deciding which courses to take depending on whether or not the textbooks and course materials were affordable.

At SFU, many students bypass the SFU Bookstore by joining a Facebook group called the SFU Textbook Trade Centre. I’m a member, and if you’re reading this, there’s a pretty good chance you are, too. As of this article’s publication, the group counts 17,226 students as members, and by the time you’re reading this, that number will have grown. That’s over half of SFU’s entire student population trading and exchanging courseware, all in an attempt to avoid paying exorbitant fees for materials which, relatively, cost pennies to make.

Other means of saving on textbooks have put our bookstore in a financial slump. In an article for The Peak in February of this year, Melissa Roach exposed the decline in sales that has occurred over the past few years: only 67 per cent of SFU students are actually buying textbooks, and of those, only 68 are actually going to the bookstore — others are using resources such as Facebook, Craigslist, Amazon, Books2go, or even illegal downloading sites such as The Pirate Bay.

Despite book publishers’ stranglehold on the textbook market, students are increasingly finding new ways to get learning material without breaking the bank. But it shouldn’t be this difficult. For students looking for a cheaper alternative and faculty looking for a more teachable format, open textbooks are a breath of fresh air.

Education for All

Open content is still a fairly young concept. It was introduced in 1998 by David Wiley, a professor and essayist and longtime advocate for open education resources (OERs). Apart from educational materials, open content activists have also helped to distribute health care information, literary resources, and other creative content across the web and into the hands of those who may not have had access to these materials otherwise.

For a resource to qualify as ‘open,’ it has to fit all five of Wiley’s criteria: it must be retainable, so that users can own, make, and control copies; reusable, so that content can be used in all manner of ways; revisable, so that educators and students can change and update material; remixable, so that different content can be combined to make something new; and redistributable, so that others can gain access to the content.

These pillars — the five Rs, as they’re known to OER activists — are the backbone of the open education movement. For those who’ve made it their goal to democratize and make available learning material for the public, open textbooks must fulfil all five of these requirements.

Enter Clint Lalonde, one of the education technologists for BC Campus and manager of the organization’s Open Education division, whose goal it is to make OERs available at all of BC’s universities and colleges. Open Education’s latest and most ambitious undertaking is the Open Textbook Project — the first of its kind in Canada.

“[The project] started in October of 2012,” Lalonde says. “Since then, it’s expanded to Alberta and Saskatchewan, and we’ve been working closely with those provinces to make open textbooks happen in their jurisdictions as well.”

“[Open textbooks] actually have measurable implications for learning within courses.”

To date, the project has compiled 57 different textbooks from 35 different subject areas. Of those, 20 have been peer reviewed, and several professors at SFU have already begun using the texts in their classrooms; editing and shaping the content as they see fit, and saving students hundreds of dollars in textbook fees. “With an open textbook, faculty can customize even further — to change some of the stats in the textbook, or some of the examples in the textbook — and really make them relevant to the course,” says Lalonde.

“Because they can do that, it means better learning outcomes for the students.”

The project is split into three phases. The first is to review existing open textbooks, and ensure their quality and accuracy; the second is to adapt open textbooks and tweak them to fit into specific classrooms; and the third is to create new open textbooks from scratch. Though the latter seems ambitious, Lalonde is optimistic — he shares with me a story of working with several other educators (including two from SFU) to draft an introductory geography textbook in four days. “Four long days,” he says.

For faculty building these textbooks from the ground up, there’s no barrier between course materials and the knowledge they’re trying to impart to students. No more skipped chapters or stale information — each text is tailor-made for the course it accompanies.

Lalonde also mentions that the open textbooks created and approved for the project will be available in different formats for students with physical and mental disabilities. “We’re working with an organization in the province [CAPER] that actually does work for students in the province who have disabilities. So, whenever a request comes in, we’re able to translate textbooks into different formats — for example, turning a textbook into an audiobook for students who have visual impairments.”

Given the success of the project, which began less than two years ago, it’s easy to envision a future where paper textbooks and publishers become obsolete. However, it isn’t that simple — many students prefer the experience of using a physical textbook to a digital one, and others don’t have the financial means to buy devices capable of downloading electronic textbooks. For Lalonde, the answer is in partnering with the SFU Bookstore, which offers to print all of BC Campus’ open textbooks on demand for between $20–40 — still a steal compared to your average course material.

“University bookstores are going through some [difficult] times right now, and it’s not only coming from open textbook projects,” he says. “We’ve tried to partner with bookstores as much as we can.” For our own SFU Bookstore, whose earnings in 2014 are projected to be even lower than last year, this might be the best news they’ve had in a while.

Open Education at SFU

Since BC Campus began their program, several institutions across the province have begun to promote the use of open textbooks on their campuses. Kwantlen Polytechnic University, for example, has embraced the project, and encouraged its instructors to adapt their courses for open materials.

Brady Wallace, arts & social sciences representative for the Simon Fraser Student Society, has been an integral part of the SFSS’ push to promote the Open Textbook Project at SFU. “It works perfectly,” he says. “The BC Open Textbook program is something that’s been around since 2012, and we’ve seen success from other universities and institutions in BC — just none of which have been research-based. We’re hoping that SFU can fill that void, and become the first research institution to really take part in the project.”

Along with SFSS president Chardaye Bueckert and several other members of their board of directors, the student society has started a campaign to increase awareness of the program among teachers and faculty, and encourage the administration to spread the word. “The administration has said that they’re interested in the project, and that they’d love to see it happen,” Wallace says.

In order to demonstrate student interest in the project, the SFSS has been petitioning students. You may have seen a signup sheet at The Ladle or the Highland Pub, or on the SFSS website — SFSS representatives even came shuffling into The Peak offices on our production day, urging us to sign on the dotted line.

When I interviewed Wallace last Tuesday, he’d already collected around 1,400 signatures; 4,000 by the end of the month is the goal. In the coming weeks, the SFSS will roll out a social media campaign and promote the project at frosh gatherings and other social events, in the hopes of collecting enough student names by October 1 to bring to the university.

“This campaign is, ultimately, pushing for usage of the open textbooks which are already available online,” Wallace says. “We understand that academic freedom remains with the professor, and we can’t force these textbooks on them, especially if they’re not up to par for an individual instructor. But we’re really hoping that, through this campaign, professors are going to start thinking about how much money students are spending; not just on courseware, but also tuition, and everything like that.

“We want to get profs thinking, ‘How can we make education more accessible to university students?’ We want to be moving in the direction of open source — whether that be, instead of a prof producing a custom textbook, just posting links on Canvas, or using open texts from the library.”

It’s already begun. Educators across BC and elsewhere — like Britta Ricker and Cristina Temenos, the two SFU profs who helped Lalonde build a textbook in four days — are helping make more open textbooks available to the public.

As the SFSS spends the remainder of the month increasing awareness of the OERs available to the staff and students of SFU, BC Campus will continue to work towards providing more open, peer-reviewed content to students across the country. For Lalonde, the move towards open education is obvious, if slow-going — open textbooks are cheaper, more accessible, and customizable enough to never need a shiny new edition or a few extra chapters.

“Ultimately, it goes beyond the economics of open textbooks being a good deal because they’re free; they actually have measurable implications for learning within courses,” Lalonde says. “Students who actually have these resources, strangely enough, do better.”

So say goodbye to that pile of dusty textbooks in your closet; their swan song has finally begun.

Nail polish is not the answer

1

Four undergrad students from North Carolina State University recently came forward with a nail polish that changes colours when

exposed to date rape drugs such as Rohypnol, Xanax, and GHB, thus enabling the wearer to dip a finger into a drink and test it for safety.

The feminist reaction, on the other hand, took a more critical approach. While acknowledging that the invention was born out of good intentions, many feminists took to social media to suggest that rather than challenging rape culture, this product actually contributes to it — a controversial claim, to say the least. But upon further research, I’ll have to agree that these critics are in the right.

Essentially, critics claim that while the new product means well, it specifically puts the onus on women to protect themselves from rape. This normalizes rape, making it seem like an inevitable part of life that people have to accept and do their best to avoid. This attitude absolves rapists of responsibility because it makes rape seem unavoidable, and thus contributes to rape culture.

In fact, the responsibility is often placed on women to prevent sexual assault. They are often told to avoid wearing clothing that reveals too much, to be careful with how much they drink, to travel with friends, to keep an eye on their beverages, the list goes on. But women should not have to test their drinks in every bar they walk into.

The nail polish concept absolves rapists of responsibility as it makes rape seem unavoidable.

Another powerful critique is that the nail polish completely removes men from the equation. Men are also victims of sex crimes, and this preventative method only targets women, as the discourse surrounding sexual assault often does. This point struck me, especially since feminists are often accused of neglecting men or working against them. If we want to successfully combat rape culture, we need men and women to work together and open the lines of communication.

Honestly, I feel rather ashamed for not having thought critically about it on my own. Do I feel the men who invented the product intend to contribute to rape culture? Absolutely not — they were trying to do a good thing. However, their approach was misguided.

Unfortunately, because of the established patriarchal society that we live in, it’s difficult to break out of our existing mental framework and consider alternative ways to combat these crimes. Feminist concepts may be difficult to wrap our heads around, as feminist perspectives on these matters are far from common knowledge, and are often misunderstood. This is why it’s important to turn the conversation on its head and question the way we’ve all been conditioned to see the issue of sexual assault.

The fact of the matter is that these feminist critics have a point, and the longer we fail to educate ourselves and consider this point, the more we perpetuate an environment conducive to rape culture. I’d like a world where we all feel safe, but I don’t think nail polish is the answer. These young innovators should be congratulated for their efforts but we, as a society, must do better.

Stealing culture

1
Ironically, this illustration was sent to us under the title "oriental."
"Educate yourself, ask permission, and pay attention to the messages you may be sending, even without meaning to."

I don’t particularly like being told what to do, and I like having my intentions misinterpreted even less; it’s these predispositions that have made cultural appropriation a difficult issue for me to work through. Of course, it’s easy to look at me — white skin and all — and think of my reaction as typical. But, just like the issue I’m exploring, it isn’t that simple.

Cultural appropriation is a term most of us have heard, but not one that all of us understand. Generally, it describes the incorporation of one culture’s tradition by someone outside of that culture, both as the result of privilege and ignorance. This can mock or belittle another group’s traditional practices or beliefs, and ignore the history of violence and prejudice endured by these cultures.

However, cultural appropriation shouldn’t be used to describe a group’s or individual’s actions without thoughtful consideration on both the part of those doing the appropriating and those affected. As a rule, we should aim to define cultural appropriation not only by the use of another’s culture, but by the intention behind it.

On the internet, one can find countless examples of cultural appropriation: from celebrities distastefully clad in traditional garments to music festivalgoers sporting sacred feather headdresses. These examples are insulting, and set our society back in terms of overcoming prejudice and discrimination. Whether or not we’re aware of it, appropriation can change and distort the way we perceive different cultures.

We all have a responsibility to understand what cultural appropriation is, what it means, and how best to avoid it.

While cultural appropriation should not be considered a synonym for racism, the two are inextricably linked. Whereas racism is generally more overt — joining the KKK, for instance, or using racial slurs — cultural appropriation is usually much more subtle, and often condoned by our society. Sometimes, those who appropriate cultures don’t even know they’re doing it. Which is why we need to talk about it more.

Cultural appropriation is nothing new; it’s been happening since there have been cultures to appropriate. Because of this, some argue that appropriation is natural, that it’s a foregone conclusion when two different cultures interact. However, this stance fails to take into account the fundamental difference between appropriation and appreciation. One is done with consent, respect, and understanding; the other isn’t.

The difference between the two isn’t always obvious. For example, I once had a Chinese-themed birthday. We ate Chinese food, I wore my Cheongsam, and hanging from the ceiling were cheap paper lanterns straight out of a Chinatown restaurant.

Out of context, this sounds like a prime example of fetishizing and belittling one culture for the amusement of another. But here’s the thing: when I was nine, I thought that it was the best party idea ever. So did my half-Chinese mother.

I come from an ethnically mixed family, and am of Chinese, French Canadian and English descent. This means that I grew up having Dim Sum with one grandparent and Yorkshire pudding with the other, and that was my idea of ‘normal.’ Even though I may look white, Chinese culture has been an important part of my upbringing, and remains a key aspect of my identity.

People often noticed my Anglo-Saxon features and wrote me off as ignorant for identifying with Chinese culture. To me, it was unfair that I couldn’t participate in certain activities or wear certain clothes without negative connotations — all because of history that I wasn’t alive for, hateful acts done by those I will never meet, and the ideals of those with whom I don’t agree.

But I’ve since realized that how I feel doesn’t make a difference on this issue. The groups that are most sensitive to cultural appropriation are those that have suffered judgment and prejudice in ways that I can never truly understand.

Ultimately, appearances send a message, and, unlike my wardrobe, I can’t change the features I was born with. I can look into my grandfather’s almond eyes with love and familiarity, but that doesn’t mean I have those same eyes. There is no way I can expect people to know my cultural background at first glance, and that’s something I’ve struggled to accept my whole life.

But it’s helped me to better understand where the line between cultural appropriation and cultural appreciation is drawn. A balanced exchange between both groups, done with appreciation and respect, is what we should aspire to, even if it’s a difficult concept for many to understand.

This might be the toughest aspect of cultural appropriation for me to reconcile. After all, today’s global community is filled with fusion: there are marriages between people across racial and cultural boundaries; recipes, music, art and dance being shared, mixed, and recreated. But this doesn’t make cultural appropriation obsolete; in fact, it’s more important for us to understand now than ever before.

With so much intermingling of culture, we all have a responsibility to understand what appropriation is, what it means, and how best to avoid it. It’s complicated, and likely to become even more so in the future. The best any of us can do is to encourage communication and understanding between cultures, and to make sure that we pay adequate respect to the cultures we’re borrowing from.

Educate yourself, ask permission, and pay attention to the messages you may be sending, even without meaning to.

SFU named “Campus of the Year” by Fair Trade Canada

0
SFU opened the first fair trade Starbucks in Canada in 2013

At an awards ceremony last Thursday, September 11, in Ottawa, SFU was named “Campus of the Year” by Fair Trade Canada. The university beat out Canada’s other fair trade campuses — UBC, McGill, Ottawa, Trent, Guelph, Brock, and Selkirk — to win the inaugural award.

Mark McLaughlin, SFU director of ancillary services, spoke to how this award reflects the hard work SFU has put in over the past two years. “SFU has played a leadership role in Canada within the Fair Trade Campus movement, because it believes that when we all work together, we can make a difference improving the lives of farmers, artisans, and their families in developing countries.”

SFU showed its commitment to the movement in 2013 with the institution of Canada’s first fair trade Starbucks on Burnaby campus. SFU has also reached out to other campuses across Canada to support them in their own fair trade initiatives.

“The more campuses you’ve got on board, it’s really going to have an impact with the farmers and their families in developing countries,” said McLaughlin. “You can change the world with a cup of coffee.”

Consideration for the award is based on the three fundamental criteria of the Fair Trade Campus project: availability, visibility, and continued momentum. Fair trade products must be made available to students, with sales targets on these products, and the school must work to increase awareness and provide education surrounding fair trade.

The “Campus of the Year” distinction is given to a school that not only maintains Fair Trade Canada requirements, but goes above and beyond them. “We could have been a fair trade campus and kept it local, but we felt we had an opportunity to leverage our campus, and to play a leadership role. Our president asked us to go out and engage the world,” said McLaughlin.

SFU’s students have also taken an active role in the movement. They began the initiative to make SFU fair trade 10 years ago and continue to play a role in the process today.

SFSS president Chardaye Bueckert commented on SFU’s fair trade initiative and the efforts made through the SFSS-run coffee shop, Higher Grounds. “The SFSS is proud to serve fair trade coffees through Spirit Bear,” she continued, “We are proud of the prestigious award that SFU had won and are also proud of our contributions to encouraging fair trade practices on our campus.”

The next step for SFU in the fair trade fight concerns the Tim Hortons on campus, which, although exempt from the fair trade regulations because of its franchise status, has been pressured to provide fair trade options. The university disallowed Tim Hortons from selling their new dark roast coffee on campus because they want any new products offered to be fair trade.

“Tim Hortons really sticks out like a sore thumb on our campus because they have no fair trade coffee,” McLaughlin said. “We’ve let Tim’s know that their days are numbered if they don’t switch to embrace fair trade.”

McLaughlin spoke to the nature of fair trade in relation to all SFU students: “Fair trade resonates with our students because they come to our university with the hope to make a difference and change the world. By supporting fair trade, they are making this impact.”

In honour of the success of the fair trade initiative, this Tuesday, September 16 will be declared Fair Trade Day at SFU. The day will be celebrated by an event in Convocation Mall open to the SFU community, where President Petter will accept the “Campus of the Year” award.

Vancouver campuses undergo classroom renewal project

0

Over the next three years, SFU Vancouver will improve campus classrooms and study spaces at Harbour Centre and other downtown sites as part of a classroom renewal project.

The campus has received $2 million from SFU’s University Priority Funds, which was created in 2011 “to align resources with strategic initiatives,” in order to update spaces at its different sites — Harbour Centre, the Morris J Wosk Centre for Dialogue, the Segal Graduate School of Business, and the Goldcorp Centre for the Arts at the restored Woodward’s Building.

During the first part of the initiative, the project team will focus on Harbour Centre, which opened its doors to SFU students in 1989. “A lot of the classrooms haven’t been changed in 25 years,” said Laurie Anderson, executive director of SFU Vancouver. “It’s time for an infrastructural upgrade to improve what we do in classrooms.”

During the last six months, the project has been seeking input from faculty and students to ascertain how they would change these spaces to become the “best, most optimal learning environment[s].” Anderson explained, “Generally speaking, what people want is more flexible spaces, more colourful furniture, more lightweight so it can move around — something more attractive than your institutional greyness that we tend to have. And as much technology [as possible].”

Anderson is also looking towards the Burnaby Classroom Renewal Project for inspiration. The project, which began in 2011, has already completed significant upgrades in spaces such as the student lounge area located below the Images Theatre.

“We’re trying to learn a lot from what Burnaby has done, because their classroom renewal took a lot of input from different people, lots of students, faculty, and that’s the same that we’ve done here,” Anderson said.

Through this consultation, and combined with research from experts in the learning environment industry, the team outlined three principles to follow when designing the new spaces.

The first involves explicitly acknowledging that learning happens outside as well as inside the classroom. “A lot of the space around here — upstairs, downstairs, all these little places we have — these are centres for learning as well because the [student experience] spills over into the hallways and the lobbies,” explained Anderson.

The second concerns practicality — for example, the implementation of more electrical outlets. Finally, the third principle is the notion of how flexible a space can be. A current example can be found in SFU Harbour Centre’s student learning commons, which feature lightweight, rolling furniture and whiteboards that can either divide the space or be pushed back to open the area to large groups.

Similar features will be implemented over the winter break in four classrooms at Harbour Centre.

Anderson expressed his own excitement for the upcoming changes. “We think [this campus’] scale is such that we can make this a really welcoming place for students to be,” he said. “It has a small university feel, it’s a mini-university setting, and so we want the classrooms to be bright, flexible, attractive; the kind of places people will want to be.”

He feels the classroom renewal project will contribute to making Harbour Centre even more of a scholastic hub in the downtown district. “When this place opened in 1989, you couldn’t get people down here,” Anderson said. “Now, as you say, it’s the exact opposite. You can’t keep them away; everyone wants to have class downtown.”

We must scrap helmet laws to encourage and improve cycling

4

Many consider cycling to be dangerous. While riding quickly on the open road, sometimes difficult to see, cyclists are exposed to the world. One poor decision by a driver or cyclist could result in a serious accident. Good thing they wear helmets, right? Maybe not.

Copenhagen, Amsterdam, New York City, London, Paris, and countless other major cities have one thing in common: cyclists are not required to wear helmets. The result? Increased cycling activity, successful bike-share programs, and improved safety and infrastructure.

Helmet laws remain a significant barrier for cycling adoption. Vancouver’s proposed bike-share program has been stalled for years over the somewhat laughable concept of a helmet vending machine. Such a program is logistically difficult due to the required space, helmet sanitation, stock and replacement.

As a result, expected costs are far greater than they would be otherwise. The cities with successful programs found that mandatory use of helmets would severely limit participation in their bike-share programs. Both tourists and locals find it either too difficult to carry a helmet or balk at the idea of sharing one.

Our helmet laws have caused Vancouver’s proposed bike-share program to be declared dead before arrival, not too different from Melbourne’s results, where its use rates for bike-share programs are half of the target projections. Some cities, such as Victoria, even offered free helmets in an effort to boost their bike-share use rates. Unsurprisingly, it didn’t work.

Both tourists and locals find it either too difficult to carry a helmet, or question the idea of sharing one.

But what about that vulnerable cyclist who shares the road with large, heavy vehicles? Won’t a helmet keep them safe?

Studies on helmet use and injury prevention have continually found one thing: helmets have no discernible effect on reducing cycling injuries or fatalities.

One Canadian-focused study conducted by the University of Toronto’s School of Public Health found no link between helmet use and reduced hospital admissions for cycling injuries. In the event of minor cycling accidents, the head is not often a point of contact; when major accidents occur that do involve the head, the force is usually great enough that a helmet is near useless.

Removing helmet laws will start a positive feedback loop that will improve cycling safety to a far greater extent than mandatory helmet use. If we rescind our helmet laws, more cyclists will be on the road, and when it comes to cycling, there is safety in numbers. The increase in cyclists will raise demand for more bike lanes and driver education. In turn, this will lead to increased perceived safety and visibility of cycling, thereby attracting more cyclists.

Our focus on helmets is backwards; not only does it prevent potential cyclists from riding their bikes, it also removes emphasis from injury prevention in the first place. Instead of working to stop accidents, we are working to reduce head injuries while allowing the rest of the body to be seriously injured in an accident. The focus on helmets also shifts blame to the victim, similar to the broken logic that victims of sexual abuse are at fault if they dress in suggestive clothing.

If you look at the countless studies and real-world examples, I can’t help but hold a strong opinion that modernizing our bike laws is the best way to increase cyclist safety, public health, and the number of cyclists in our cities. This entails making helmets optional — not mandatory — and constructing more bike lanes while increasing efforts to educate drivers.

If we do this, maybe we can finally launch that bike-share program we’ve been long awaiting.

SFU student becomes an ally for artists

0
The team of four art admirers collaborated to put together the site.

This week, an SFU business student launched ArtsAlly, an online portal that allows art lovers and creators to buy and sell local art.

Michelle Martin, Beedie School of Business student and the founder of ArtsAlly, hopes that the portal will help Vancouverites make connections, support local artists, and build the local community as well as the local economy.

Through family and friends, Martin witnessed the struggle for artists to sell their art, as well as the competition artists face from department stores that sell cheap, generic, manufactured art. This struggle inspired her to find a more efficient way for artists to connect with a wider community.

“Vancouver has the highest per-capita number of artists in Canada. It is really rich with artistic talent. The challenge is that there are more artists than buyers,” explained Martin.

The online portal puts local art at the fingertips of local art consumers. With ArtsAlly, Martin says Vancouverites will be able to discover local art from their electronic devices, and order that art to their home or office as either a rental or a purchase.

The portal, which already features hundreds of art pieces, does not favour one particular type of art, rather, the pieces featured on the website are chosen based on the quality of the artist’s work.

Nevertheless, Martin acknowledged a regional focus: “Being hyper-local is core to our identity and our group. Artists who capture places we know and are familiar with — such as Stanley Park, North Vancouver, East Vancouver, or the city at night — are things that resonate with me personally and with most buyers as well.”

Even though the art featured on the portal is at the forefront of the initiative, Martin is also keen on building relationships with the artists. She told The Peak that she has a particular interest in working with artists “who take their craft seriously and see their art as a career.”

Martin explained that ArtsAlly is an important new service to the community because it bridges connections between artists, the business market, and art buyers and renters. Vancouver is a progressive city and has a large art culture that has the ability to thrive. Martin hopes ArtsAlly will provide artists with an easy, accessible way to allow their art to do just that.

In the end, Martin acknowledged the creative potential of Vancouverites, reflecting on Emily Carr University’s newest campaign slogan, “Creativity is our greatest natural resource.” She stated, “BC has always been looking at resources and the sustainability of the community. ArtsAlly has the ability to bridge worlds and challenge relationships. My hope is that ArtsAlly will be a part in moving that vision forward, of creativity being our greatest natural resource.”

Satellite Signals

0

WEB-woodwardWoodward’s

The Audain Gallery at SFU Woodward’s will continue to display the Lossless: SFU MFA Graduating Exhibition from September 4 to 27 during gallery hours :Tuesday to Saturday from 12:00 p.m to 6:00 p.m. The show features MFA candidates’ material from the 2014 graduating class of SFU’s School for the Contemporary Arts. Individual exhibits include sculpture, video performances, and installation projects.

 

vancouverHarbour Centre

Friday night welcomed the public to a free roundtable discussion titled, “Perspectives on the Ukraine Crisis.” The evening, which included leading Canadian and international scholars on Russian and Ukrainian politics, asked questions such as, “What explains the outbreak of violence, and how and why is Russia involved?” and “What are the ramifications for Canadian foreign policy?”

It’s a punderful life

0

Though my reign as The Peak’s humour editor has only spanned a couple of weeks, I’m inclined to say that I’ve been funny for a couple decades now. An official paycheque for my humour is as validating as it gets, but — at least in my mind — throughout life, I’ve always come back to humour as a device.

Humour is a way to meet new people and engage; a way to diffuse awkward situations; a way to cheer someone up and let their happiness osmosis over to me. The point is, I love to joke around and I can rarely go long without making some kind of quip or cackle. My favourite type of humour? Puns.

Puns are frickin’ amazing. They’re like the humour editor of the joke world: it’s hard to take ‘em seriously and sometimes they try a little too hard, but if you lower your expectations and inhale some nitrous oxide, you might just get a laugh out of them.

Though, I’m not saying every pun is worth writing an editor’s voice over. Every time I hear someone make a “camping is in tents” joke, I feel a happiness molecule inside of me die from rolling its eyes too hard. Lazy, overdone puns give the genre a bad name and we should all agree to a 100-year moratorium on them — if everyone who’s heard that joke is dead and gone, only then will it ever again be considered original and funny. Moral of the story: quit making the same fucking joke.

Puns have made some powerful enemies over the years.

As a form of humour, puns rarely get the praise they deserve. Have we become desensitized to the wit that comes with clever wordplay? Is the pun market over-saturated with dad’s one-liners and internet commenters?

Puns have made some powerful enemies over the years. In 2010, Jon Stewart ripped wordplay a new one, in a segment where he called out news sources for distracting from reporting the news by having some kind of pun attached to it. While clever headlines make the news all the more bearable for me, Stewart has a point when you think about how much time went into pun-construction instead of actual journalism.

Even Samuel Johnson, the famous English writer behind such triumphs as A Dictionary of the English Language and The Lives of the Poets, reportedly called puns “the lowest form of humour” — though keep in mind that “Your mom . . .” jokes likely hadn’t been discovered by this point. If humour was a totem pole, puns would probably be the part that’s underground.

I’m saying that puns are my favourite form of humour, but I also think that it’s impossible to create a universal hierarchy to humour. Plenty of people scoff at internet memes because they generally take the same joke or idea and just apply it repeatedly to different scenarios but that doesn’t make them any less funny. Look at knock-knock jokes, for Christ’s sake.

What do I hope to achieve by writing about puns in my once-in-a-semester opportunity to address The Peak’s readers directly? To be perfectly honest, I’m not sure. Maybe I want you to see puns as more than just the early symptoms of a ‘dad sense of humour’ or a funny banner reading along the bottom of the evening news.

Mock puns all you want, but in a world where the highest-rated comedy on television — and by a substantive margin, I might add — is The Big Bang Theory, I’ll get my kicks from somewhere else. It’s all for puns and puns for all.

Letter to the Editor

0

Dear editor,

In response to the counterpoint on “Does Greek life belong at SFU,” from the semester’s first edition of The Peak, I found that both Mr. Arjan Mundy and Ms. Katrina Trask missed the point. Squabbling over the theoretical merits of Greek life is an endless and fruitless discussion.

Firstly, SFU’s ‘ban’ on Greek life doesn’t really matter, at least not in a practical sense. This supposed ban is symbolic, as SFU’s complete lack of enforcement on the school’s current frats and sororities would imply. The reference point that people use for this prohibition was a statement made by the SFU council to state the outcome of a school-wide referendum in 1966: “Fraternities and sororities are not desirable on this university campus.”

To effectively ban fraternities and sororities from physically or even virtually existing, SFU would need to take extraordinary measures, many of which would surely invade students’ privacy. While one may dislike the goings-on of Greek organizations, their existence at SFU is now matter-of-fact.

The frats and sororities at SFU only want two things. The first is for SFU to lift whatever invisible ban has been placed on them. The second is to be able to book some rooms in the Maggie Benston Centre. This second request requires the Simon Fraser Student Society’s (SFSS) involvement, as Greek life requires SFSS recognition as either a club or a constituent group to be allowed to book rooms.

However, the SFSS has a policy mandating that membership to all clubs be inclusive, and this acts as a regulatory hurdle for the official formation of Greek organizations. But fraternities and sororities would be exploiting the very same loophole that many SFU clubs are already exploiting; while membership into the club would be inclusive, participating in the club’s primary activities would be exclusive.

The spirit of this anti-exclusionary policy is also being violated by the Women’s Centre, a constituent group, where I, as a self-identifying male, am not allowed entry (most of the time). So while the spirit of the ‘every club must be open to everyone all the time’ policy sounds good, it isn’t practical — we obviously shouldn’t crack down on the Women’s Centre.

Finally, nobody’s forcing you to join a frat or sorority. People join gender-exclusive organizations like Men’s and Women’s Centres for social support much the same way students join Greek life. The notion of gender-exclusivity actually contributes value to these institutions; isn’t brotherhood the whole point of joining a fraternity?

Greek life is inherently gender-exclusive and that’s largely why people join in the first place. And let’s remind ourselves of something here: fraternities and sororities are not criminal or illegal, they do not impose their opinion or will on others, and they are not motivated by hate. As they don’t violate any of these three stipulations, it really isn’t necessary to forbid Greek life from existing.   

Sure, many people don’t like the type of person who would join a frat or sorority, and maybe I’m one of them. But this is beside the point. The SFSS does not make the world a better place by using red tape to block Greek organizations from booking rooms. And labelling these groups as illegitimate while awkwardly trying to prohibit their existence is neither an effective nor feasible plan.

Sincerely,

Johnny Reginald,

SFU Student