Wednesday • October 22, 1997
om Page“ —
iterbackstmte% * 'I a a
ptesident Computer
rushing, spt.fi 1
n'noononttJH
Consultant program
' Aggies 36-; Jl CU
coachR.C.v .
.benefits student life
1 in the gam
d, butwect
i’t capitafe A 1 Texas A&M to -
‘sdidtraii^% da y> the onl Y
■arlyinthei- ^organization
tate opened e think of as being
lansweredfiper efficient and al-
nsemanagt ays looking to deal
enseandfoith problems well
i ofA&M'spefqre anything bad
olockedpuiappens is PTTS.
return.A new program,
" sunender-owever, specifically
ints in Redesigned to help stu-
5eld. What'sents, is stepping for
int that? ard to improve the
uality of life here on campus. This pro-
n . s MissOL :ani i s the Resident Computer Consul-
itinues in t (RCC) program,
orsecanit; M ore often that not, the University
l.onghoms a i ts un til a problem crashes across the
’ lslt - (lt ublic eye before doing something about
. Ross street has caved in, so the Physical
'] / nl lant just routes traffic around it until it
^ lv j' ;ts around to putting it into the budget.
Vci the! ^ iere * s no parking, so we spend sever-
1 years building a new garage and contin-
,1^ 3 preaching that there is more than
Id goals,pit 1 parking on campus.
Phil D ® ut ’ ^ or once i n tbe history of this fair
md45vai(!i [1 ^ vers ity, a university organization has
of20con ; ' !en a problem in its childhood and is
came teas king steps to squash it before it gets out
condquan; hand.
ifter-attemp Since the Computer Information Ser-
leli Jonesiace (the CIS we all know and love) has
jen making a big push to “wire” every
ack lamest ill on campus with ethernet access, a
orst outings led has arisen for informed, knowledge-
-for-40fori )le staff members in every hall.
In a stroke of intelligence unrivaled
to injury,fame the last time something intelligent
usts after liti:
happened, the RCC program was born.
Doug Keegan, RCC for Clements Hall,
said, “[RCC’s] provide easily accessible
face-to-face support for residents with
computer problems or questions.” Keegan
was also quick to point out that the entire
program was currently being funded
without a fee increase.
And it is about time. It has always been
tragic, but true, that the University has
made a point of not fixing a problem until
it was too big to ignore — or some alum
nus donates a lot of money.
This is not to say that I’m complaining
about this system. After all, I like cruising
Fish Lot late at night, looking for the
white whale of a parking spot. It’s relax
ing, after a few hours. And I personally
like walking down the damaged part of
Ross street. It’s like playing with death.
Who knows, maybe a gaping chasm to
the center of the earth and a doubtless
warm reception will open up below me.
And by putting problems off until they
are larger, more expensive and can be
foisted off on the next few generations’
pocketbooks, I can practice to be a United
States congressman.
The University cannot go back in
time and fix problems that are enor
mous today, but it can look at itself and
take preventive action before things get
out of hand.
It would take intelligence and thinking
on the part of the University to do so, but
it is not like students do not expect this to
be the outcome anyway.
Chris Huffines is a sophomore speech
communications major.
Chris
Huffines
columnist
O The Battalion
PINION
Taking baby steps
A&M needs a childhood development center
T exas
A&M is
finally
trying to meet
one of the
growing
needs of a
changing
population by
building a day
care for its
students and
employees.
Although this project is long
overdue, another method of inte
grating the children of the com
munity into the campus that
should be given consideration is
an early childhood development
center.
Early childhood development
centers are elementary and
preschool classrooms that allow
researchers to observe children’s
educational and social develop
ment in a learning environment.
Ordinarily, observers have to in
vade a teacher’s established class a
few days or weeks at a time to
watch how students learn. By do
ing so, the researchers introduce
artificiality and bias into the ob
servations because the students
and teachers know they are being
observed.
Any group being observed in
this way will change their behavior
to what they think the observer
wants to see.
Any graduate of a public school
has experienced this phenomena
during teachers’ appraisal time.
Good behavior while the ap
praiser is in the room is rewarded,
and bad behavior is punished. The
classroom the visitor sees is not
necessarily the everyday environ
ment the students experience.
This effect is eliminated in a
childhood development center.
The Early Childhood Develop
ment Center on the campus of
Texas A&M University at Corpus
Christ! is an elementary school in
the Corpus Christ! Independent
School District on the university
campus.
One hundred and ten children,
between the ages of three and 10,
attend the school. The center is a
part of the department of educa
tion at Texas A&M at Corpus
Christi.
Undergraduate and graduate
students use the facility to observe
children while they are learning
and playing. Student teachers also
work in the classroom setting and
interact with students without
ever leaving the college campus.
The students also benefit from
this arrangement. The teaching
methods are the newest the acade
mia has to offer. The curriculum
writers have creative leeway to try
innovative subjects.
The facility is staffed with fresh
and eager people, not teaching
veterans burned out with years of
dealing with educational bureau
cracy.
The center’s main focus is di
rected toward the children’s overall
development. Physical, emotional
and social development receive as
much attention as students’ intel
lectual development.
According to the homepage for
the center at Texas A&M at Corpus
Christi, by the time a child is nine,
he or she has acquired most of the
intelligence that is acquired in a
lifetime.
A child’s ability to succeed in
middle and high school is deter
mined heavily by how well they do
with basic skills learned in the ele
mentary grades.
Early development centers are
an asset to both education and psy
chology students. Elementary edu
cation students who must work
with children as part of a require
ment for class have ample oppor
tunity to participate in the center’s
programs.
Psychology students can use
the opportunities provided by the
center to observe children’s social
development in a natural environ
ment.
The large number of students in
both areas of study also ensures
that classrooms will always have
plenty of staff on hand who are
ready to work with the children.
A&M should consider building
an early childhood development
center on campus to complement
the day care center.
Facilities similar to the one at
Corpus Christi can be found on
campuses across Texas and
throughout the nation. The best
university in the state should have
one also.
Anna Foster is a junior
journalism major.
f The Wi
-2) at Texas
loyal Mei
season sti
the APpol
e Texas-0
.he Big 12lil
National
tSftAiL Call
Texas coadi , - ■.
orget profanity,
i more to® ■ . ■ ■
outraged aspect the work
liave called exception with the Bat-
cementir [i on ’ s commentary on profanity
i radio tai Bonfire activities, specifically
i the q u yHots.
sc so-callt pj 1 . st 0 p a jp j 1QW can an y 0ne
fg™ issify a word as “obscene?”
■ n W)-3u, • antec j ) there are obscene things
0 . n the world, but obscene words?
TetoehdJ^ecause I think sex with farm
.. d limals is obscene, that doesn’t
11 eclude me from talking about it.
5 j 2.i]af Th e federal government ran
- JonesStad to phis dilemma when they
h‘ imnlica' ‘ ec ^ to ma ke the words “breast”
Aggies? a h°rtion” illegal on the in-
e” again rnet - of a sudden, no one
A&Mlosttfidh discuss breast cancer on
Texas Ted l e internet without committing
e AggiesioThine. This is just silly,
e samel® Second, assuming one can
o Lubbod ass 'fy words as obscene, which
;ned RedPes should they be? What makes
merousiifp-t” any different than “feces?”
; to betlif °w is “dick” any different than
season. >enis?” How is “p—y” any differ-
bie LethridJ than “vagina”?
nnieHah All of these pairs of words refer
And Rid? [the same things. I use all of
blishedlii iese words in everyday conver-
back,soo itions and do not understand
ig thefe)w they can be called “obscene”
even “profane.” Some people
ers worse ight throw around phrases like
) be fireddHrient interest” or “community
ual affair andards.” I, for one, don’t care
:sts betwee fi a t the community “thinks.”
dedded immunities can not think.
Only individuals can think.
— : Community thinking” is just a
// hasii invenient name for following
municatio'b herd. These same people
^|tid criticize Bonfire partici-
for playing “following the
I CClT F d F r ” At worst, one might say
11r| I a t|they are impolite, but I do
)t consider being impolite ille-
lor immoral.
Next, if we were to assume that
ftain words, perhaps selected
random, were to be considered
bscene,” who is to say no one
n use them? We do have free-
>m of speech and freedom of
e press in this country, or have
>u Forgotten?
. This country would be much
Q^flfjferent if someone had decided
attthe ideas of Martin Luther
ng, Jr. or Susan B. Anthony
BONllfN immoral. Granted, we do
2
ME
T
not have a cause as global as ei
ther of these people, but we still
have the right to say what we
want.
People have no right to impose
their own morality on anyone
else, and we (the Bonfire people)
do not appreciate your attempt to
do so. Just because we do not
agree with your ideas about what
is acceptable does not mean you
have the right to tell us what we
can or cannot say.
Looking at the issue from a to
tally different perspective, any
body who has taken sociology
(and paid attention) can tell you
that different social groups com
municate using different vocabu
laries and speech patterns in or
der to promote unity.
People just naturally feel com
fortable around those who talk
and act alike. Note, that accord
ing to Kevin Jackson, this is one of
the three stated goals of Bonfire:
safety, spirit and unity.
Finally, almost every student
at Texas A&M goes to Bonfire
when it burns in November, as do
most of the staff and faculty. Av
erage attendance at Bonfire is
around 60,000 people.
Maybe 10 percent of the peo
ple will actually help build it.
Many of us give up every week
end from first cut until Bonfire
burns. Many of us give up several
afternoons during the week at
unloads and swamps. If you do
not appreciate our language, at
least appreciate the work we do.
I do not see how the other 90
percent have any right to com
plain. While this type of language
may not have been associated
with Bonfire in 1909, I’ll bet it was
there. So-called “foul language”
goes with Bonfire like dirt: it just
kinda happens.
We choose to display our lan
guage, like our dirt, because we
are proud to build the largest co
operative effort at this University.
If you want to help, please come
out. If you do not, please do not
whine about how we do our job.
Kevin Horn
Class of ’96
Equality not given to
Bonfire organization
You have been trying to advo
cate the “change for the better” of
Aggie Bonfire through your sensa
tionalized articles and preachy ed
itorials. I would normally attribute
this to a bunch of people reluctant
to descend from their ivory tow
ers, but it seems another disturb
ing trend is occurring. There
seems to be a general emascula
tion prevalent in today’s society.
I reserve the right to be associ
ated with an activity that has not
succumbed to the pressures of
society to conform. I am not a
sensitive man, I do not have a
feminine side. I did not grow up
hanging out at the mall. I grew up
working hard on a ranch.
I am secure enough in myself
not to run away crying when
someone calls me a bad name. I
reserve the right to be associated
with an activity that is overridden
with testosterone.
On campus, NOW can spread
the message in the MSC to
whomever wants to come and lis
ten. You can argue that it is in a
distinct area and does not require
the participation of anyone not
interested, or who would be of
fended by the content.
When was the last time that
the average student not associat
ed with Bonfire ever made it out
to the polo fields? How is this dif
ferent from other activities con
sidered by many to be offensive,
such as homosexual issues, or
that Tom Short guy everyone has
to listen to?
As an open-minded person, I
must recognize that other organi
zations have legitimate reasons
for doing what they do. Why does
this only work one way? The fact
remains that this is a public uni
versity, which means all view
points should be in the open. We
have the right to act as we con
sider appropriate.
John Wayne is rolling in his grave.
Kyle Wundt
Class of'99
World-class status
threatened by pots
Aggies, yaTl have me worried.
I plead with all of you to take a
step back from being an Aggie,
with all that this entails.
Look carefully at the images
that come from these Aggies. The
“Profanity on Pots” issue is
ridiculous. I could have sworn I
heard that Texas A&M was a
“world-class” university, full of
intelligent, mature students who
all have an eagerness to learn
new things.
Is this what we see when we
take a look at the “Profanity on
Pots” issue? Do we see intelli
gence and maturity, with a desire
to learn new things? Or, do we
see ignorance, immaturity and a
desire to adhere to tradition?
Edward Citzler (author of the
“Unfounded articles take aim at
Bonfire” Mail Call letter) said,
“Bonfire has always been this
way. Profanity always has been a
part of Bonfire. Bonfire provides
an outlet for stress, where a per
son can scream at workers pro
fanities that would never be said
in public.”
Aggies, is this image of Bonfire
representative of a world-class
university dedicated to intelli
gence, maturity and learning? A
mature, intelligent student of
knowledge would understand that
traditions are not always positive.
After all, is the tradition of
racism that has engulfed this
country for more than 200 years
positive, just because it is a tradi
tion? I hope not.
So Aggies, stop, look and try to
live up to your continuous efforts to
make this a world-class university.
Jayson Pope
Class of’99
Bonfire discussion
needs reevaluation
I don’t know about the rest of
the Ags out there, but I am get
ting tired of all the crap being
written about Bonfire pots and
their vulgarity.
Bonfire, like other traditions at
Texas A&M, is here to unite Ag
gies, not pull us apart. Everyone
is getting so caught up with what
is offensive and politically correct
that they are losing sight of the
real purpose of Bonfire.
The pot I wore last year dis
played Christian symbols. Those
symbols can be just as offensive
to non-Christians, but no one
made a big stink about it. A pot is
a personal expression, and it
should be allowed to say whatev
er the wearer desires, be it a cross
or a curse word.
Everyone needs to reevaluate
the purpose of Bonfire. When we
stop griping about vulgar pots, the
behavior of those wearing them,
stop labeling people as too sensi
tive and stop harassing newspa
per columnists, then we can truly
build a great monument.
Teny Lea
Class of '98
Coverage shows
abuse of position
I would like to pose a few ques
tions for people to think about
amidst all of the commotion over
Bonfire pots.
If the Battalion is such a highly
acclaimed college newspaper,
why not report on meaningful
state and national events instead
of matters such as this? It seems
as if the only reason why the pot
issue was brought up was because
the Battalion could come up with
nothing better to write about.
Which is a pretty pathetic reason.
If the Battalion likes to take a
liberal stance on most issues, why
is it wasting paper (trees) on this
issue? For those who have writ
ten these articles or at least agree
with them, how many times have
you been to/participated in cut
or stack? My guess would be
none. And yet you will still claim
Bonfire as something you took
part in when bragging about it to
your t.u. friends and when you
watch it burn. Why should it be
any of your concern what people
put on their pots and their
clothes? After all, isn’t this a free
country?
It seems that the only people
who think of what is on the pots
as sexual harassment or assault
(which are using these terms in
an extremely far-fetched man
ner), never actually go out and
help build Bonfire.
This is the fourth Bonfire I
have taken part in, and not once
have I ever heard somebody say
that they find the pots offensive.
Not even women, and not even
during events such as father/son
cut. Like usual, the Battalion has
blown things way out of propor
tion and taken things (quotes in
cluded) way out of context.
And yet in the Tuesday editor
ial you state that you are trying to
present the “truth”, when in fact,
as always, you are presenting the
“selective truth”. Selective in a
way that you seem fit.
My last question is: why does
the Battalion do articles such as
these? Instead of attempting to
upset as many people as possible
and split up as many people as
possible over some issue that
should be of the least of society’s
concern, why not try to motivate
people and bring them together
to benefit society?
Use your position, don’t abuse
it. Just thought I would bring up a
few thought-provoking questions.
Trip Fran ty
Class of’98
Yellow journalism
threatens tradition
In response to the articles about
Bonfire:
I’ve been reading the articles
in the Battalion about Bonfire for
the past few days, and I’ve come
to one conclusion. “Yellow jour
nalism” has returned, and it’s tar
get is Bonfire.
The idea of “yellow journal
ism” came from the time when
newspaper men would create
news to sell more newspapers.
That’s exactly what the Batt is do
ing now. With its widely-biased
articles against Bonfire, it is
threatening one of the biggest
symbols of Aggie spirit.
With each new article that
bashes Bonfire, and the students
that build it, another log is taken
away from stack.
And the accused is not given
fair representation. The only Pro
-Bonfire remarks that the Batt
prints are the small amounts of
space that occupy the Mail Call.
And even those remarks are
side by side opinions of people
who are anti-Bonfire. If these peo
ple are so disgusted by what we
are doing out on the polo fields,
then why do they still come? Or
are they getting all their informa
tion from the Batt articles?
By the way the Batt paints the
picture, Bonfire is nothing more
than a throw back to Prehistoric
times where men carried around
big sticks, grunted obscene nois
es, and were amazed when they
created a fire.
In reality, Bonfire isn’t about
“sexual phrases” and “obscene
language”. It’s about student uni
ty, bonding. It’s when over 300
students can come together, as a
single body, and work toward a
single goal.
There are no ethnic or reli
gious barriers. The only rule is:
You must work. And perhaps that
is what most frightens those that
speak out against Bonfire. The
idea of manual labor.
When all this is over, those that
are so opposed to what is hap
pening at Bonfire site will still be
there when it bums, watching in
awe with the rest of us.
Perhaps you shouldn’t ask
how the fire is built, but merely
say “Thank you for this symbol of
Aggie spirit.” Otherwise, pickup
and pot and come out to Cut, be
cause like the saying says, “From
the outside looking in, you can’t
understand it.
From the inside looking out,
you can’t explain it.” Evidently,
the Batt doesn’t understand it.
See you when it burns!
Hunter Ekvall
Class of ’99
Only workers have
right to complain
It would seem that Mandy
Cater, a few letter writes, and the
university are upset about say
ings on pots. I have a suggestion
which I think might help.
Let Mandy go to cut and take a
can of spray paint. At the end of
every day in which she cuts all
day, someone will let her paint
over an offensive saying.
Soon, nothing offensive will
remain at bonfire, and many
people will be motivated by her
hard work.
Please see Mail Call on Page 10.