Arizona Daily Wildcat
Wednesday May 14, 2003
In the midst of exams, field trips, parties, homework and sleep, many events instantly changed the course of our lives as students and impacted the university for decades to come. In nine short months, the school saw a triple homicide, a riot, a historic tuition hike and a redefinition of its place in Arizona higher education. Looking back over all that has happened in the past two semesters, what do you think was the issue of the year?
When other events long forgotten, nursing school shootings will still be remembered
John Mackovic cried. The regents raised tuition by a few bucks. The team we worshiped didn't make it to New Orleans. But so what?
In thirty years ÷ no, in five years ÷ few will remember any of those incidentals.
When Robert Stewart Flores Jr. opened fire on his three professors and then killed himself, the north end of campus stood still. The south side realized that the shootings could just have as easily been in the ILC or the student union.
It was also a defining moment for campus leaders. Campus saw who was willing to step up to the plate and hold the community together.
Now, it's true that the shooting may have little long-term effect on campus. Most students do not feel any different about their safety today than they did before the shooting.
Still, the magnitude of fear, frustration and confusion that the shootings brought to campus in October has not been seen since.
UA made headlines on CNN and in The New York Times. UA was even in papers abroad the next day and it wasn't for tuition increases or slick public relation campaigns about "excellence." Those things are happening at nearly every university across the country.
No, this year the nursing school shootings overshadowed everything else.
Daniel Scarpinato is a journalism and political science senior and the editor-in-chief.
Monumental tuition hike will rule our world
Given everything that happened this semester ÷ a triple homicide and a riot on the same day, for one ÷ it's tough to say something that happened without much hype or hoopla was the biggest story of the year. Nonetheless, if we're talking in terms of lasting impact, both for students and for the university itself, one issue stands out above the rest: the tuition hike.
It is remarkable how little opposition the hike ÷ by far the largest in UA history ÷ generated, considering the fanatical resistance to last year's proposed $300 markup. It can't be that students don't feel the effects of the jump; $1000 is huge, especially considering UA's astonishingly low tuition. Instead, the lack of opposition is probably due to the fact that the hike is a genuinely good idea, both in that it provides the school with millions more in funding to buoy its dwindling faculty roster, and in that it redistributes tuition money ÷ in the form of increased financial aid ÷ to those most likely to feel its effects.
Desperate times call for desperate measures, as UA students have painfully learned this year. Let's just hope that those desperate measures pay off in the long run, and this hike turns out to be the shot in the arm it was meant to, and must, be.
Caitlin Hall is a biochemistry and philosophy sophomore and a senior columnist.
Election signals big shift at state capital
Last November, Arizona elected its first Democratic governor in more than a decade. Thanks in no small part to southern Arizona, including UA student voters, Democrat Janet Napolitano was able to narrowly defeat Republican Matt Salmon.
After her victory, Napolitano followed through on a campaign promise to safeguard funding for our state's universities in her first budget. This is the first time in a very long time that a governor has fought for our universities and has truly realized the value in higher education. While previous Republican governors have paid lip service to K-12 education and ignored our universities, Napolitano has put money in the budget where her mouth is ÷ helping education, children, and families.
Napolitano plans to continue her fight for our state's universities as the debate over the upcoming budget proceeds. Given several attempts by Republican legislators to raid university funding to pay for tax cuts and special interest programs, UA is very lucky she's fighting for higher education!
When Arizona elected Napolitano, it signaled a shift in state politics. The governor's office no longer cowered under the lobbying of special interests, and began to work for all of Arizona ÷ including the universities.
Kendrick Wilson is a political science sophomore and a senior columnist.
Changing Directions will define year for UA
In a year scarred forever by the triple murders and related suicide in the College of Nursing, it is difficult to imagine any other issue rising to the level of "The Issue of the Year."
When the history of the University of Arizona is written, however, this year will be noted as the beginning of the "Changing Directions" initiative of the Arizona Board of Regents and the "Focused Excellence" strategy of the University of Arizona.
In the course of this academic year, decisions have been made that will significantly change the future developmental trajectory of this university:
The Regents have empowered the university to manage enrollment growth by shaping admissions policies to achieve higher levels of academic success and greater diversity.
The Regents have adopted pricing policies that will move resident undergraduate tuition rates from 50th to 33rd among the 50 senior state universities, and at the same time adopted financial aid policies that should make UA more affordable.
The university has begun to focus resources on programs that meet national standards of excellence, recognizing the need to eliminate some programs.
There may never be a year in which we see more profound changes in basic policies of the University of Arizona.
Peter Likins is the president of the University of Arizona.
Bioscience bill will revolutionize research
The bill that's winding its way through the state Legislature will change medical research at UA.
It passed the House of Representatives last week, and if it passes the Senate and wins the approval of Democratic Gov. Janet Napolitano, it will provide UA with more than $100 million to revolutionize its research efforts.
That money would help create new buildings at the Arizona Health Sciences Center, where doctors will search for ways to treat sick people based on their unique genetic makeup.
That's a revolutionary approach to medicine that could mean longer lives and better health care
Though the buildings were planned before this year, the past 12 months have seen UA and the state commit more time and money than ever, trying to make Arizona that research mecca.
Perhaps the most pivotal moment in this effort came in late June, when Dr. Jeff Trent, a nationally renowned geneticist, announced plans to bring a top-flight group of biosciences researchers to Arizona, and create the Translational Genomics Research Institute (TGen).
Today, TGen is the most public manifestation of the state's biosciences investment. But when the research buildings are completed in late 2005, leaders will point to this school year as the time when biosciences became a priority.
Jeff Sklar is a journalism and political science junior and is a senior news writer.
Twisted teeter-totter must be removed for sake of campus sanity
This issue did not receive embedded reporters, 24-hour news coverage, analysis from military generals or touching photographs in international magazines. Actually, the Arizona Daily Wildcat was the only publication to give it coverage.
While Focused Excellence, the tuition increase, basketball ticket reform, the tuition increase, fall break, anti-war protests, not to mention the tuition increase, impacted students, there was only one important issue in the back of every student's mind throughout the semester.
Why hasn't the broken teeter-totter thing been taken down?
Sure, we're familiar with its symbolism. The midnight blue teeter-totter is chained to the ground near Old Main representing the loss of playtime as a college student. It was put up and damaged within a short time after being approved by the Public Art Advisory Committee.
But it is broken. Broken. It desperately needs to be removed. It is preposterous that we started, fought and ended a major war before the teeter-totter could be disassembled. It is ridiculous to leave this ugly piece of art up any longer.
On March 27, Carl Morgan, an electrical engineering senior, wrote a letter to the editor claiming he would take down the damaged art free of charge.
For all of us not graduating, please Mr. Morgan, get permission to remove the structure down from the committee. We must not let this metal metaphor stain our campus any longer.
Jessica Lee is an environmental science senior and opinions editor.
