Nearly three years ago, I came to the University of Northern Colorado to fulfill my high school dream to become a print journalist. Since then, I have experienced my share of triumphs and failures that have not only shaped my journalistic abilities but ultimately improved my work ethic and motivated me to become persistent, resilient, and steadfast in purpose. Through the in-class instruction that I have received from my journalism professors and the field experience that I have garnered through my job as a staff writer and a Student Senate beat reporter at The Mirror, I have learned how to report on difficult and challenging issues; ask tough questions; report every angle from an objective perspective; and thoroughly research every point of view.
One of the most influential classes that I have taken as a journalism major has been JMC 410: Advanced News & Feature Writing in which I have been able to improve my editing skills and step out of my personal comfort zone by utilizing different writing styles to present various issues on my beat. By doing this, I believe that I am better prepared for the various tasks and assignments that I may encounter in a newsroom.
Not too long ago, I found a maxim that simply read, “Don’t give up on something or someone that you can’t go a full day without thinking about.” For me, journalism is something that I can’t go a full day without thinking about, and one day, it is my hope that I will one day work for a large news organization like the Associated Press, New York Times, or the Washington Post.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Senate members conclude academic year with farewells
The Student Senate concluded its meetings for this academic year by hosting a banquet that commemorated the achievements of this year’s Senate cabinet.
“You’re all really a tremendous group of people,” said Dean of Students Raul Cardenas. “I’ll always remember the work that you’ve done and the mark that I think you all have left on this campus.”
Among the recognized accomplishments was the creation of the Student Judiciary, which will function as the university’s new student-led judicial body beginning in the fall semester, if it is approved by the UNC Board of Trustees. If instated, the five-person judicial body will hear a wide range of student grievances, including those concerning academic, legislative and ethical issues.
Some Senate members acknowledged that their participation in the Student Senate not only provided them with leadership experience, but also allowed them to grow as individuals.
Sen
“Student Senate has really changed our lives because without it, we wouldn’t be who we are today,” said Student Body President Justin Puckett. “I can look back on my senior year of high school and remember that being above a 3.0 student was a fantasy; being Student Body President wasn’t even an option at all. But when I compare where I was four years ago when I first came here to where I am now; the change is amazing.”
-- Originally published in The Mirror on April 30, 2010
“You’re all really a tremendous group of people,” said Dean of Students Raul Cardenas. “I’ll always remember the work that you’ve done and the mark that I think you all have left on this campus.”
Among the recognized accomplishments was the creation of the Student Judiciary, which will function as the university’s new student-led judicial body beginning in the fall semester, if it is approved by the UNC Board of Trustees. If instated, the five-person judicial body will hear a wide range of student grievances, including those concerning academic, legislative and ethical issues.
Some Senate members acknowledged that their participation in the Student Senate not only provided them with leadership experience, but also allowed them to grow as individuals.
Sen
“Student Senate has really changed our lives because without it, we wouldn’t be who we are today,” said Student Body President Justin Puckett. “I can look back on my senior year of high school and remember that being above a 3.0 student was a fantasy; being Student Body President wasn’t even an option at all. But when I compare where I was four years ago when I first came here to where I am now; the change is amazing.”
-- Originally published in The Mirror on April 30, 2010
Student Senate finalizes special election results
The Election Judiciary Board unanimously ruled Tuesday two grievances filed by Timothy Andrews, a director of Academic Affairs candidate, against political rival Benjamin Schiffelbein were not meritorious in a decision that officially ended this year’s special election.
In his first grievance, Andrews, a junior secondary education major, alleged that Schiffelbein violated an election bylaw and committed an act of election fraud by providing free T-shirts — that were advertised on a Facebook fan page — to potential voters as a part of a campaign to garner support for his candidacy.
Schiffelbein admitted the T-shirts were to endorse his candidacy, but argued they were only given to those who asked for them and already supported his cause.
“In order to wear a T-shirt with a political preference tattooed on your chest, it is implicit that you are a very passionate supporter,” said Schiffelbein, a sophomore political science and philosophy major, in his testimony to the Election Judiciary Board.
In his second grievance, Andrews alleged that Schiffelbein committed an act of defamation after Schiffelbein’s brother, Will Schiffelbein, a sophomore political science major, replied unfavorably to a campaign e-mail sent to students through a class Listserv. Andrews said he used Blackboard to send e-mails out to candidates endorsing the “People’s Choice Ticket,” which encouraged students to vote for nine specific candidates for Student Senate positions. In response, Will replied with an e-mail sent on the Blackboard Listserv that denounced the ethical decision of candidates to campaign on class Listservs and criticized the current practices exercised by the Student Senate.
Benjamin said he had no knowledge of the e-mail’s content prior to the Election Judiciary Board hearing and stated that his brother’s actions do not reflect his own. Schiffelbein withdrew his grievance after the second ruling was announced.
-- Originally published in The Mirror on April 28, 2010
In his first grievance, Andrews, a junior secondary education major, alleged that Schiffelbein violated an election bylaw and committed an act of election fraud by providing free T-shirts — that were advertised on a Facebook fan page — to potential voters as a part of a campaign to garner support for his candidacy.
Schiffelbein admitted the T-shirts were to endorse his candidacy, but argued they were only given to those who asked for them and already supported his cause.
“In order to wear a T-shirt with a political preference tattooed on your chest, it is implicit that you are a very passionate supporter,” said Schiffelbein, a sophomore political science and philosophy major, in his testimony to the Election Judiciary Board.
In his second grievance, Andrews alleged that Schiffelbein committed an act of defamation after Schiffelbein’s brother, Will Schiffelbein, a sophomore political science major, replied unfavorably to a campaign e-mail sent to students through a class Listserv. Andrews said he used Blackboard to send e-mails out to candidates endorsing the “People’s Choice Ticket,” which encouraged students to vote for nine specific candidates for Student Senate positions. In response, Will replied with an e-mail sent on the Blackboard Listserv that denounced the ethical decision of candidates to campaign on class Listservs and criticized the current practices exercised by the Student Senate.
Benjamin said he had no knowledge of the e-mail’s content prior to the Election Judiciary Board hearing and stated that his brother’s actions do not reflect his own. Schiffelbein withdrew his grievance after the second ruling was announced.
-- Originally published in The Mirror on April 28, 2010
Student Senate hosts special election open forum
The Student Senate hosted its special election open forum on Wednesday to provide candidates a final opportunity to express reasons for running for a position.
“I know there’s a lot of mixed emotions out there about how we got to this process and how we got to this point (…) but I’m excited that students are excited,” said Student Activities Director Evan Welch, who has also assumed the role of election commissioner for the special election. “I think it’s good that — for better or for worse — it has sparked passion in students — whether they’re glad to run because they didn’t know about the last election or whether they’re mad as hell because they don’t think Student Senate knows what they’re doing. Students are fired up, and that is one thing that I have been trying to do through my position, but I didn’t necessarily think that this would have been the call to action for students.”
Welch said the amount of candidates running in the special election is a large improvement in comparison to previous years — the pool of candidates reached 26 students at its highest participation rate. Welch said this year’s special election marked the highest candidate pool in the last four student government elections.
“Students are not knowing one of the most important things on this campus, and that’s elections,” said Dan Beal, a junior communication major, who is a non-traditional student and a presidential candidate in the special election. “This tells me that there’s a communication breakdown somewhere. We have to analyze what’s going on and get the word out to students.”
The revision and standardization of the plus-minus grading system and the increase of communication between Student Senate and the campus community were the main topics addressed by candidates during the open forum.
“I’ve talked to several hundred students over the past couple of months concerning this, and the general consensus is that nobody likes the A-minus,” said Josh Divine, a sophomore mathematics major, who is running for the director of Academic Affairs. “If I’m elected, that’s one of the first things that I’m going to try to get rid of. Director Bradford has been trying to do that so far, and it hasn’t worked.”
Benjamin Schiffelbein, a sophomore political science and philosophy major, who is currently running against Divine for the director of Academic Affairs, said he disagreed.
“I actually enjoy the plus-minus grading system because I think it allows professors to be more exact with their grades,” Schiffelbein said. “If the problem is that I got a 90 percent as opposed to a 93 percent and I get a little less of a score on my GPA, then I think the burden falls on me to maybe spend an extra five minutes studying and 10 minutes doing my paper.”
-- Originally published in The Mirror on April 23, 2010
“I know there’s a lot of mixed emotions out there about how we got to this process and how we got to this point (…) but I’m excited that students are excited,” said Student Activities Director Evan Welch, who has also assumed the role of election commissioner for the special election. “I think it’s good that — for better or for worse — it has sparked passion in students — whether they’re glad to run because they didn’t know about the last election or whether they’re mad as hell because they don’t think Student Senate knows what they’re doing. Students are fired up, and that is one thing that I have been trying to do through my position, but I didn’t necessarily think that this would have been the call to action for students.”
Welch said the amount of candidates running in the special election is a large improvement in comparison to previous years — the pool of candidates reached 26 students at its highest participation rate. Welch said this year’s special election marked the highest candidate pool in the last four student government elections.
“Students are not knowing one of the most important things on this campus, and that’s elections,” said Dan Beal, a junior communication major, who is a non-traditional student and a presidential candidate in the special election. “This tells me that there’s a communication breakdown somewhere. We have to analyze what’s going on and get the word out to students.”
The revision and standardization of the plus-minus grading system and the increase of communication between Student Senate and the campus community were the main topics addressed by candidates during the open forum.
“I’ve talked to several hundred students over the past couple of months concerning this, and the general consensus is that nobody likes the A-minus,” said Josh Divine, a sophomore mathematics major, who is running for the director of Academic Affairs. “If I’m elected, that’s one of the first things that I’m going to try to get rid of. Director Bradford has been trying to do that so far, and it hasn’t worked.”
Benjamin Schiffelbein, a sophomore political science and philosophy major, who is currently running against Divine for the director of Academic Affairs, said he disagreed.
“I actually enjoy the plus-minus grading system because I think it allows professors to be more exact with their grades,” Schiffelbein said. “If the problem is that I got a 90 percent as opposed to a 93 percent and I get a little less of a score on my GPA, then I think the burden falls on me to maybe spend an extra five minutes studying and 10 minutes doing my paper.”
-- Originally published in The Mirror on April 23, 2010
Friday, April 16, 2010
Senate election results nullified by grievance
The Election Judiciary Board determined Thursday that a grievance filed against Election Commissioner Michael Goldstein was meritorious and voted by a three-fifths majority for the Student Senate to issue a special election and void all of the results from last week’s Student Senate election.
“I think that a lot of people in the room were really shocked,” said Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Facilitator Chris Hansen. “There’s still a lot that’s unsure right now.”
The grievance filed by David Wright, a senior anthropology major, alleged that Goldstein violated four different sections of the Student Senate’s Election Code.
In his grievance, Wright said Goldstein’s affiliation with Delta Tau Delta Fraternity created a conflict of interest that “can’t guarantee there is not a bias toward other candidates when there is a member of his organization is running for a position on Student Senate.” Goldstein denied these allegations and stated he disclosed his affiliation with Delta Tau Delta Fraternity when he applied for the election commissioner position.
Wright also alleged that the assistant commissioner for student involvement violated an Election Code bylaw by failing to provide an informational meeting with several campus organizations “detailing the election procedure and ballot issue for the upcoming election,” according to the Senate bylaws, and claimed Native American Student Services, as well as other cultural centers, did not receive such information. Goldstein submitted a written statement by the assistant commissioner for student involvement that acknowledged meetings were not set up with the Interfraternity Council, Panhellenic Council, Student-Athlete Advisory Council and the vice president for Clubs and Organizations.
Wright further alleged that Goldstein failed to follow a provision under the election procedures because a final ballot naming the final candidates was not submitted to the school newspaper for publication. Goldstein said he was not able to submit a final ballot for publication because there was an ongoing grievance that was being settled prior to the election.
“It would not be in the good interest of Student Senate to print a ballot that could have been changed with the grievance that could have been possibly overturned by the dean of students,” Goldstein said.
Although Election Judiciary Board members unanimously decided Goldstein only violated two particular sections of the Election Code, three of the five voting members voted that the violations were serious enough to warrant a special election, which may not occur until next semester.
“I think they looked at what was best for the students and acted upon it,” Wright said. “I think justice for the students has been served. I feel more comfortable with the situation now. I think a better turnout will come of it, and change will come of it to look at the bylaws and the quality of the commissioner that we hire.”
Hansen said the Student Senate may appeal the Election Judiciary Board’s decision to Raul Cardenas Jr., the Dean of Students and assistant vice president for Student Engagement at the University of Northern Colorado.
“It’s a little frustrating, but certainly nothing that Student Senate or myself can’t overcome,” said Student Trustee Matt VanDriel, who was also a presidential candidate in last week’s election. “I won before, and I have confidence that the students want me to represent them and that I’ll do OK on the next election, too.”
-- Originally published in The Mirror on April 16, 2010
“I think that a lot of people in the room were really shocked,” said Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Facilitator Chris Hansen. “There’s still a lot that’s unsure right now.”
The grievance filed by David Wright, a senior anthropology major, alleged that Goldstein violated four different sections of the Student Senate’s Election Code.
In his grievance, Wright said Goldstein’s affiliation with Delta Tau Delta Fraternity created a conflict of interest that “can’t guarantee there is not a bias toward other candidates when there is a member of his organization is running for a position on Student Senate.” Goldstein denied these allegations and stated he disclosed his affiliation with Delta Tau Delta Fraternity when he applied for the election commissioner position.
Wright also alleged that the assistant commissioner for student involvement violated an Election Code bylaw by failing to provide an informational meeting with several campus organizations “detailing the election procedure and ballot issue for the upcoming election,” according to the Senate bylaws, and claimed Native American Student Services, as well as other cultural centers, did not receive such information. Goldstein submitted a written statement by the assistant commissioner for student involvement that acknowledged meetings were not set up with the Interfraternity Council, Panhellenic Council, Student-Athlete Advisory Council and the vice president for Clubs and Organizations.
Wright further alleged that Goldstein failed to follow a provision under the election procedures because a final ballot naming the final candidates was not submitted to the school newspaper for publication. Goldstein said he was not able to submit a final ballot for publication because there was an ongoing grievance that was being settled prior to the election.
“It would not be in the good interest of Student Senate to print a ballot that could have been changed with the grievance that could have been possibly overturned by the dean of students,” Goldstein said.
Although Election Judiciary Board members unanimously decided Goldstein only violated two particular sections of the Election Code, three of the five voting members voted that the violations were serious enough to warrant a special election, which may not occur until next semester.
“I think they looked at what was best for the students and acted upon it,” Wright said. “I think justice for the students has been served. I feel more comfortable with the situation now. I think a better turnout will come of it, and change will come of it to look at the bylaws and the quality of the commissioner that we hire.”
Hansen said the Student Senate may appeal the Election Judiciary Board’s decision to Raul Cardenas Jr., the Dean of Students and assistant vice president for Student Engagement at the University of Northern Colorado.
“It’s a little frustrating, but certainly nothing that Student Senate or myself can’t overcome,” said Student Trustee Matt VanDriel, who was also a presidential candidate in last week’s election. “I won before, and I have confidence that the students want me to represent them and that I’ll do OK on the next election, too.”
-- Originally published in The Mirror on April 16, 2010
Friday, March 12, 2010
Student Judiciary to serve as check to Senate
After nearly six months of rigorous structuring and planning, the Student Judiciary is on its final leg of becoming a secondary judicial body that will serve as a check to the Student Senate and the academic appeals process.
“It’s been a very long process to get this going, so we’re relieved to finally get it rolling,” said Student Body President Justin Puckett. “It’ll be good for the students for the organization to have more transparency and a better system of checks and balances on the Student Senate.”
Puckett said the final plans for the Student Judiciary are still being refined, but said the independent judiciary body would alleviate some of the duties delegated to the Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Facilitator, who is the only person who currently handles grievances filed by students or faculty members. In addition to grievances, Puckett said the Student Judiciary would also act as an added option to the academic appeals process already in place.
David Wright, the Rules and Bylaws Team chairman, said the committee has assisted in creating the Student Judiciary by writing and refining its bylaws to correctly spell out its function. Wright said the Student Judiciary would be comprised of the five Student Senate representatives from several colleges across campus and the Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Facilitator, who would listen to arguments, evaluate the circumstances of the case and deliver their judgment.
“Right now, the way a current grievance appeal is filed, this council can arbitrarily deny what the grievance board has decided, and the student may have no other recourse or may feel like they don’t,” Wright said. “What this will do is bring a separate body out of the Student Senate.”
If approval is granted, Wright said the Student Judiciary will be fully functioning by the fall semester of this year.
“It’s been a very long process to get this going, so we’re relieved to finally get it rolling,” said Student Body President Justin Puckett. “It’ll be good for the students for the organization to have more transparency and a better system of checks and balances on the Student Senate.”
Puckett said the final plans for the Student Judiciary are still being refined, but said the independent judiciary body would alleviate some of the duties delegated to the Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Facilitator, who is the only person who currently handles grievances filed by students or faculty members. In addition to grievances, Puckett said the Student Judiciary would also act as an added option to the academic appeals process already in place.
David Wright, the Rules and Bylaws Team chairman, said the committee has assisted in creating the Student Judiciary by writing and refining its bylaws to correctly spell out its function. Wright said the Student Judiciary would be comprised of the five Student Senate representatives from several colleges across campus and the Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Facilitator, who would listen to arguments, evaluate the circumstances of the case and deliver their judgment.
“Right now, the way a current grievance appeal is filed, this council can arbitrarily deny what the grievance board has decided, and the student may have no other recourse or may feel like they don’t,” Wright said. “What this will do is bring a separate body out of the Student Senate.”
If approval is granted, Wright said the Student Judiciary will be fully functioning by the fall semester of this year.
Senate debates polling bylaw change
The Student Senate discussed a bylaw change on Wednesday that would provide the Election Commissioner with the discretion to open new polling locations for the upcoming elections.
“The main reason why I brought this up was to definitely increase voter turnout,” Election Commissioner Michael Goldstein said. “Personally, I just think the numbers that we had last year was just sad. We have about 13,000 students at this university, and we really only have about one-tenth of the student population voting.”
According to figures released by the Election Commission, about 744 students voted in last year’s Student Senate election compared to nearly 2,542 students in 2008 — representing a 341-percent decrease in voter turnout from the previous year.
Chris Hansen, the Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity facilitator, said there were several factors that may have contributed to the low voter turnout, including a small pool of candidates running for positions and a sense of apathy from the student population that resulted from the ineffectual operation of the Student Representative Council in 2008.
“There’s no way to prove that one thing was the cause, because it was certainly a multitude of factors that played a role (in the low voter turnout),” Hansen said.
Some of the Senate members voiced their concerns about the bylaw revision by saying it might cause problems in the future if the exact parameters are not precisely written in the bylaws.
“I have a really big problem with this because I don’t believe the election commissioner should be deciding where a polling place should be,” said Maggie Wright, the College of Humanities and Social Sciences representative. “I think it should be spelled out in the bylaws, so we don’t have this grey area.”
Director of Finance Michael Johnston suggested the responsibility be placed on the shoulders of the person appointed to the position.
“The best way to go about it is to put it up to the personal judgment of one person and have that person’s integrity and personal responsibility to govern what is right and have a grievance if he or she did something wrong,” Johnston said.
-- originally published in The Mirror on February 26, 2010
“The main reason why I brought this up was to definitely increase voter turnout,” Election Commissioner Michael Goldstein said. “Personally, I just think the numbers that we had last year was just sad. We have about 13,000 students at this university, and we really only have about one-tenth of the student population voting.”
According to figures released by the Election Commission, about 744 students voted in last year’s Student Senate election compared to nearly 2,542 students in 2008 — representing a 341-percent decrease in voter turnout from the previous year.
Chris Hansen, the Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity facilitator, said there were several factors that may have contributed to the low voter turnout, including a small pool of candidates running for positions and a sense of apathy from the student population that resulted from the ineffectual operation of the Student Representative Council in 2008.
“There’s no way to prove that one thing was the cause, because it was certainly a multitude of factors that played a role (in the low voter turnout),” Hansen said.
Some of the Senate members voiced their concerns about the bylaw revision by saying it might cause problems in the future if the exact parameters are not precisely written in the bylaws.
“I have a really big problem with this because I don’t believe the election commissioner should be deciding where a polling place should be,” said Maggie Wright, the College of Humanities and Social Sciences representative. “I think it should be spelled out in the bylaws, so we don’t have this grey area.”
Director of Finance Michael Johnston suggested the responsibility be placed on the shoulders of the person appointed to the position.
“The best way to go about it is to put it up to the personal judgment of one person and have that person’s integrity and personal responsibility to govern what is right and have a grievance if he or she did something wrong,” Johnston said.
-- originally published in The Mirror on February 26, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)