By Siobhan Murray
Writer
By Siobhan Murray
Writer
By Jason Pepe
Contributing Writer
By Ali Napoli
Contributing Writer
The Bucknellian: Where on campus would this living with pets be available?
Winkelmann: Right now, we are trying for this through the Affinity Housing Program, so it would most likely be in a small house. Where it would be would depend on how many people we would get. Everyone who commits to living in this program would have the ability to apply to have his or her pets live there. We would check the applications and make sure the pets have cleared vet records and are social. The application process will also help us have a variation of pets in the house, so we wouldn’t end up having a majority of cats or something of that nature. Not everyone necessarily has to have a pet.
The Bucknellian: What kinds of animals would you accept?
Winkelmann: We are really looking for smaller, caged animals. Animals like hamsters, rats, birds and small lizards are acceptable. Cats are acceptable, but again we would review applications before accepting any pets. Dogs at the moment don’t seem practical because the administration is having some problems with allowing dogs into the program. Smaller animals that can be contained are the best because you don’t really have to worry about them wandering. They are easier to control and maintain.
The Bucknellian: You mentioned earlier about how having a pet helped you through a hard time. Could this option of living be connected through Psychological Services, so kids could maybe use this as a therapeutic method?
Winkelmann: I would love to do that. One of the things that I want this program to do if it goes through is to do outreach. We could have open house hours where people could come and visit the animals for whatever reasons they might have. They could come play with them. We would also have educational events about pet care. I think it is very important that this be something that benefits the whole campus and community.
The Bucknellian: Are there any rules for the application? How could one go about applying?
Winkelmann: The application doesn’t really have any rules. We will accept applications from first-years through juniors. We don’t have any bias against owners. It would be easier if you had the animal for some time already, so you know it pretty well and are comfortable with it. As of right now, we need people to commit to living in the house, and then the application would follow. Everything would be via email, so applications could be submitted over the Internet. People with any questions are more than welcome to email me. I would be happy to meet with anyone if they are interested in living in the house. Right now we have about seven people and we need in total about 20 people. If you commit to the house and the pet community doesn’t end up going through, you aren’t bound to the house at all. You can still receive a raffle number [for the regular housing lottery].
Please contact Meagan Winkelmann (mew031@) for any additional questions or interest in this original residential experience.
By Alexander Slavitz
Writer
The University’s official policy on student-faculty intimate relationships received a major addition at Tuesday’s University faculty meeting. The Faculty and Academic Personnel Committee (FAPC) presented the updated policy at the meeting which, due to difficulty in settling on the right wording, took an extensive amount of time to write.
The newest policy contains a section that forbids non-consensual relationships between students and faculty, a section that forbids student-faculty intimate relations if academically related and a final section which is intended to extend to the areas not previous covered.
It reads: “Any sexual or romantic relationship between a faculty member and a student may damage the integrity of the academic and living environment at Bucknell, and is therefore strongly discouraged.” The presenter of this policy, Ben Marsh, professor of geography and environmental studies, emphasized that the main goal is not to guarantee enforcement but awareness.
This vague writing in the definition of what a student is was the topic of much controversy for the majority of the faculty meeting. The question was raised whether the definition of a “student” should include only undergraduates or whether it should extend to graduates as well. An amendment was proposed to limit the policy just to undergraduates, as graduate students can vary in age. The speaker pointed out that his wife was currently a graduate student, so in theory this policy would be forbidding their marriage.
To answer this, an audience member evoked the idea that if a 42-year-old graduate student meets a faculty member and there is no academic relationship between them, then there should really be no reason that a relationship cannot develop between these two people.
Eventually, an amendment to the policy was offered, reading “a full-time residential undergraduate” in place of the general word “student.” After a series of discussions ensued from this proposed amendment, it was decided to eliminate this amendment due to the possibility for loopholes and controversy. The final decision was to accept the initial, unmodified policy that was initially proposed at the beginning of the meeting.
This decision to deem intimate relationships between faculty and students inappropriate was based on the policies at many other comparable universities. When drafting the new policy, a list of U.S. colleges in a similar rural setting to the University was compiled and their policies on faculty-student relations examined. Out of all of the policies, most schools have declared the development of relations between students and faculty to be highly discouraged. If there was a concurrent academic relationship between these two parties, all of these policies deemed this a violation of their school code of conduct and deserving of disciplinary action.
While most schools do prohibit intimate relations between faculty members and students, this is not a uniform policy for all schools, as some have exceptions. Those who don’t directly discourage intimate relations between students and faculty still make a point to emphasis the huge risk that a faculty member is taking by engaging in intimate relations with the student. If a complaint is made by a student or employee about the relationship with the faculty member, the faculty member immediately becomes liable to disciplinary action.
By Jenni Whalen
Writer
Students and Lewisburg residents alike enjoy events like the Polar Bear Plunge because they bring together communities that are usually separated.
“I’m a returning plunger,” Jordan Sukys ’12 said. “My first experience was in the frozen winter of 2010. The event is not only incredible because it gets hundreds of people into a freezing river, but also because it provides an opportunity for Bucknell students and members of the local community to interact in a sociable, electric environment. The event seems to grow in popularity every year, and I hope that as it grows, relations between students and so-called ‘townies’ will improve as well.”
Alex Peterson
Contributing Writer
Last Tuesday, President Barack Obama delivered his yearly address on the State of The Union. With elections on the horizon, it’s no surprise that President Obama painted a picture of America headed in the right direction under his leadership. He pointed to the end of the Iraq War, the weakened state of al Qaeda and new jobs created over the past year as proof that America is still strong and will remain strong.
Obama proposed the blueprint for an America “built to last,” containing four basic tenets: new manufacturing, new skills, American energy and a renewal of values. He wants other industries to follow the recent success of the American auto industry, which is bouncing back after nearly failing and receiving government bailouts in 2008. Obama plans to bring outsourced jobs back home. He wants to equip American workers with new skills by discouraging tuition hikes and partnering community colleges with businesses so that people will have the skills that employers need right now.
As far as American energy is concerned, the President will use an “all of the above strategy.” The focus will be on clean energy investment in an effort to create jobs while staying competitive with foreign competition in the burgeoning wind, solar and battery industries. He wants to start taking full advantage of a domestic abundance of natural gas deposits in shale rock. If you’ve seen ‘Gasland,’ you can take that disgusted look off of your face, because he did promise that the drilling would come with health and safety regulations.
Now that the Iraq War has come to a close, Obama wants to devote half of the money we were spending on Iraq to paying the national debt. The other half will be spent on repairing our infrastructure, which will help a construction industry that has struggled since the recession.
Health care was not the chief concern of his speech and the national debt came up multiple times but was never a major talking point. Obama focused more on job creation and described how the nation is going in the right direction. He decried that anyone who says that the country is in decline “doesn’t know what they’re talking about.”
If Americans believe that the country is on the right track, Obama will be in a great position to win the election in November. A poll by Rasmussen Reports came out Wednesday showing that 29 percent of likely voters think the country is going in the right direction. Although that is not very good, it’s an improvement from 14 percent in August.
To wrap up his speech, Obama extolled the power of teamwork. Soldiers need to work together and focus on the mission at hand in order to succeed. So, if Americans work together, America will remain strong. Certainly, this is the kind of teamwork Obama wanted from Congress in raising the debt-ceiling this past year. Along with the question of who will be president next year, another question looms large: will his party be in Congress?
By Carleen Boyer
Writer
Dr. Michael Greenburg M.D. hopes to gain a better understanding of how the neurons in specific areas of the brain react to saccades, or rapid eye movements that help individuals to better perceive surrounding visual stimuli.
Greenburg, professor of neuroscience at Columbia University and President-Elect of the Society for Neuroscience, discussed his research last Monday. He researches a question that many neuroscientists have studied over the years: how are cognitive processes formed and what does this tell us about decision making in individuals?
“We can understand behavior not by observation of what the black box does, but knowing what’s inside of the black box,” Goldberg said, referring to the brain as the “black box.”
Through observation of brain function, neuroscientists work to understand how brain function is related to actions of an individual. Goldberg mentioned that some aspects of his research may suggest more about whether or not free will actually exists.
Joseph V. Tranquillo Ph.D., associate professor of biomedical and electrical engineering, organized Goldberg’s visit to campus.
“[The speakers] interact with colleagues who they deem to be different from them, and here what they get is someone from a completely different field coming in and asking them a question that’s kind of out of left field,” Tranquillo said.
Goldberg’s exploration of free will during his presentation provided a connection among different majors.
“At dinner, we started asking the question of ‘What happened to the old liberal arts canons?’ It was a really interesting discussion between faculty from different fields,” Tranquillo said.
The presentation received support from diverse places, including the Brain, Mind, and Culture group and the University Lectureship Committee, as well as the biomedical engineering, psychology and neuroscience departments.
By Lauren Buckley
Contributing Writer
By Siobhan Murray
Writer
By Christina Oddo
Writer
This event was sponsored by the President’s Office, the Provost’s Office, the Dean of Arts and Sciences, the University Lectureship Committee, the Departments of East Asian Studies, Art and Art History, Comparative Humanities, the Language and Culture Residential College, MacArthur Chair Program in East Asian Politics, the Bucknell University Press, Chinese Cultural Association and the National Consortium for Teaching about Asia.