Monday, February 27, 2006
The Unpopular Tour
Story by Mike Wille
Did anyone happen to see that peloton that just blew through our state, or was it just me? During the last week, 16 cycling teams, 128 riders in all, pedaled 596 miles in pro cycling’s Amgen Tour of California. According to VeloNews magazine, this has been the first cycling tour of California since 1971. Supposedly there have been other proposals over the last three and a half decades but their wheels were never given a chance to hit the ground.
This year’s race was able to spin into action due to the Anschutz Entertainment Group (AEG), a company that has invested $35 million in hopes of growing the race over the next five years, budgeting a mere $7 million dollars a year to host a massive state-wide undertaking. AEG didn’t solely get stuck with the bill, however, since the world’s largest biotech company, Amgen, flexed some of their $14 billion annual turnover to sponsor the race for the first three years.
Californians in the ten major cities from Santa Rosa to Redondo Beach had a fleeting opportunity to view the cyclists blazing past their workplace or residence at some point during the tour. Although many fans may have missed the voices of the tour’s toughest critics – those apposed to Amgen’s title sponsorship because the company was the first to biogenetically engineer EPOGEN, also known as EPO, a drug that stimulates the body’s production of red blood cells. The drug is used by cancer and kidney patients to help combat anemia but has also been used illegally by cyclists to increase performance.
I hiked part way up Sierra Road with my family to watch the 1,943-foot climb for King of the Mountain during the second stage, and although the cyclists flew past in an impressive blaze of commotion the overall feel seemed somewhat lackluster compared to what I’ve seen broadcasted during the Tour de France. There were no red devils chasing cyclists with pitchforks, no bare-bellied lunatics parading around with a flag of Texas for a cape, and few people ventured far past the shoulder to get close to the riders – perhaps in fear of the of the “tour Nazi’s” continuous yelling to GET OUT OF THE STREET!
Police estimates boast over 1 million spectators for the entire course but the crowd seemed somewhat thin, nothing like the 15 - 20 deep at the finish lines of the France’s tour. That may have something to do with France’s estimate of 15 million spectators that come to partake in a 100 year old tradition, almost 25 percent of the country’s population. California’s tour in its first launch since the early 70s reeled in a mere 2.9 percent of the 34 million person population.
Needless to say, race directors seem to be happy, the press seems to be positive and Southern California native and winner of this year’s tour, Floyd Landis, said he would enjoy the sweet taste of success by heading to In-N-Out after his eight-day ride. The race doesn’t quite have the lore of France’s tour but plans are already being made for next year’s race. Crowds or no crowds, steroidal uproars and devil’s with pitchforks be damned, I’ll be heading out next year to watch another lap of history in the making.
Did anyone happen to see that peloton that just blew through our state, or was it just me? During the last week, 16 cycling teams, 128 riders in all, pedaled 596 miles in pro cycling’s Amgen Tour of California. According to VeloNews magazine, this has been the first cycling tour of California since 1971. Supposedly there have been other proposals over the last three and a half decades but their wheels were never given a chance to hit the ground.
This year’s race was able to spin into action due to the Anschutz Entertainment Group (AEG), a company that has invested $35 million in hopes of growing the race over the next five years, budgeting a mere $7 million dollars a year to host a massive state-wide undertaking. AEG didn’t solely get stuck with the bill, however, since the world’s largest biotech company, Amgen, flexed some of their $14 billion annual turnover to sponsor the race for the first three years.
Californians in the ten major cities from Santa Rosa to Redondo Beach had a fleeting opportunity to view the cyclists blazing past their workplace or residence at some point during the tour. Although many fans may have missed the voices of the tour’s toughest critics – those apposed to Amgen’s title sponsorship because the company was the first to biogenetically engineer EPOGEN, also known as EPO, a drug that stimulates the body’s production of red blood cells. The drug is used by cancer and kidney patients to help combat anemia but has also been used illegally by cyclists to increase performance.
I hiked part way up Sierra Road with my family to watch the 1,943-foot climb for King of the Mountain during the second stage, and although the cyclists flew past in an impressive blaze of commotion the overall feel seemed somewhat lackluster compared to what I’ve seen broadcasted during the Tour de France. There were no red devils chasing cyclists with pitchforks, no bare-bellied lunatics parading around with a flag of Texas for a cape, and few people ventured far past the shoulder to get close to the riders – perhaps in fear of the of the “tour Nazi’s” continuous yelling to GET OUT OF THE STREET!
Police estimates boast over 1 million spectators for the entire course but the crowd seemed somewhat thin, nothing like the 15 - 20 deep at the finish lines of the France’s tour. That may have something to do with France’s estimate of 15 million spectators that come to partake in a 100 year old tradition, almost 25 percent of the country’s population. California’s tour in its first launch since the early 70s reeled in a mere 2.9 percent of the 34 million person population.
Needless to say, race directors seem to be happy, the press seems to be positive and Southern California native and winner of this year’s tour, Floyd Landis, said he would enjoy the sweet taste of success by heading to In-N-Out after his eight-day ride. The race doesn’t quite have the lore of France’s tour but plans are already being made for next year’s race. Crowds or no crowds, steroidal uproars and devil’s with pitchforks be damned, I’ll be heading out next year to watch another lap of history in the making.
Monday, February 20, 2006
School Needs More Athletic Support
Story by Mark Howell
There are many problems with San Francisco State University such as budget cuts and increase in tuition, but the problem I think that should be addressed is the lack of athletic support this university gets.
One of the main reasons that we do not have athletic support from the school is because we do not have a football team. The last time San Francisco State had a football team was about 10 years ago and then it got to expensive to keep and so they got rid of it. I believe this was a big mistake by the university because by getting rid of the football team meant that you could lose your support from former sport alumnus. In my opinion, football is the greatest sport ever and it draws the most viewers and generates the most money and so why would the school ever get rid of a sport that can actually help the school financially?
Another reason why school athletics does not have support is that our sports programs are not that good. Now, do not get me wrong, I am not saying that we have bad athletes, I am just saying that we need to have a stronger program in order to win. I played high school football and we had a winning season my junior year because our football program was good, but when my senior came around, the program lacked disipline and we had a losing season. So I believe a key to a winning season, especially for our basketball team , is to have more disipline in the program. And in result our teams at school may start to win a few games which will draw more fan support and students will actually start coming to the games.
Sports are a big thing, especially in college, and I don't see no reason why we shouldn't have good sports teams. We have plenty of good athletes that want to play but that urge to play will soon die off if you are not winning. And winning is the key because as I said, once teams start to win, there will be more fan support and people will start to attend games. Even alumni will start to take notice and will probably donate money to the sports programs.
And I don't believe the university is doing anything to encourage students to have more support in school athletics. One of the reasons why I believe this true is because they tried to get rid of all sports including intermural sports last year because of budget cuts. But thankfully, there were enough sports fans at SF State to save sports at SF State. I know a lot of people that would have been angry if the vote when the universities way because there are still some sports fans at SF State that don't want to see sports at school fade away. They already got rid of our football team because of budget cuts, what's next?
There are many problems with San Francisco State University such as budget cuts and increase in tuition, but the problem I think that should be addressed is the lack of athletic support this university gets.
One of the main reasons that we do not have athletic support from the school is because we do not have a football team. The last time San Francisco State had a football team was about 10 years ago and then it got to expensive to keep and so they got rid of it. I believe this was a big mistake by the university because by getting rid of the football team meant that you could lose your support from former sport alumnus. In my opinion, football is the greatest sport ever and it draws the most viewers and generates the most money and so why would the school ever get rid of a sport that can actually help the school financially?
Another reason why school athletics does not have support is that our sports programs are not that good. Now, do not get me wrong, I am not saying that we have bad athletes, I am just saying that we need to have a stronger program in order to win. I played high school football and we had a winning season my junior year because our football program was good, but when my senior came around, the program lacked disipline and we had a losing season. So I believe a key to a winning season, especially for our basketball team , is to have more disipline in the program. And in result our teams at school may start to win a few games which will draw more fan support and students will actually start coming to the games.
Sports are a big thing, especially in college, and I don't see no reason why we shouldn't have good sports teams. We have plenty of good athletes that want to play but that urge to play will soon die off if you are not winning. And winning is the key because as I said, once teams start to win, there will be more fan support and people will start to attend games. Even alumni will start to take notice and will probably donate money to the sports programs.
And I don't believe the university is doing anything to encourage students to have more support in school athletics. One of the reasons why I believe this true is because they tried to get rid of all sports including intermural sports last year because of budget cuts. But thankfully, there were enough sports fans at SF State to save sports at SF State. I know a lot of people that would have been angry if the vote when the universities way because there are still some sports fans at SF State that don't want to see sports at school fade away. They already got rid of our football team because of budget cuts, what's next?
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Problems with online classes
Story by Marcelina Blea
Several problems surround the “online learning and educational” websites SF State uses for handling classes online. Online learning and online classes are two separate things. There are classes offered online only, in which the students and teachers never meet each other. Webpages expire in these websites, as due dates pass. I have taken four online only classes, at my last college, San Joaquin Delta Community College.
However, with several regular university classes offered at SF State, there is often an external component, available on the internet only, which supplements the class. In addition to meeting in person in the classroom, students are asked to log into an external website to view materials, such as the syllabus or take quizzes online. It’s as if, there is another book required for the class, yet only accessible online.
When used properly these websites are very efficient. Students can take quizzes, view their grades, the syllabus, communicate with other students, use a message board, view materials, amongst more.
This concept doesn’t always work smoothly. There are too many external educational websites used by professors. This semester I have three professors using three different websites. They are Blackboard,iLearn and Grouphub. The website used by professors needs to be uniform. This way the student can see all their classes on one page. They also will be able to access all their classes from one page. We can call it the “One Stop Online Learning Center.”
It is confusing to remember all the urls for all these online learning websites. The Blackboard website has even included a link to iLearn. Just click on the small banner at top reading, “Looking for your iLearn classes?” Problems continue to arise when trying to log in. Just like any other website, you need a user name and a password. Blackboard is the easiest to use, requiring your student I.D. number and PAC. Professors hear it all the time “I couldn’t log in.” With iLearn, a professor can manually add students to the system, preventing the unable to login problem.
Even when students can log in, they don’t always do so. This can be frustrating as students don’t read the announcements or contribute to group projects.
One English class I took at SF State used Blackboard very effectively. What helped was the teacher did not require students to login until the first day of class. They also went over how to use the message board function properly. In this class, we carried out group projects and were able to communicate with each other. Meanwhile, in my current journalism class (using Grouphub), we can’t seem to communicate well enough to coordinate a reporter with a photographer.
The key to making these websites is proper communication and consistency. In the astronomy online only class I took, the teacher stopped giving online quizzes half way through the semester. Also, not all professors keep the grade book up to date.
Professors prefer different online teaching and educational websites. However, there should still be one main way to tie all three websites into one login method. Maybe through our personal www.sfsu.edu/student page. Or maybe have the links to the classes through one main page. This way every professor can choose the online learning website they prefer.
Several problems surround the “online learning and educational” websites SF State uses for handling classes online. Online learning and online classes are two separate things. There are classes offered online only, in which the students and teachers never meet each other. Webpages expire in these websites, as due dates pass. I have taken four online only classes, at my last college, San Joaquin Delta Community College.
However, with several regular university classes offered at SF State, there is often an external component, available on the internet only, which supplements the class. In addition to meeting in person in the classroom, students are asked to log into an external website to view materials, such as the syllabus or take quizzes online. It’s as if, there is another book required for the class, yet only accessible online.
When used properly these websites are very efficient. Students can take quizzes, view their grades, the syllabus, communicate with other students, use a message board, view materials, amongst more.
This concept doesn’t always work smoothly. There are too many external educational websites used by professors. This semester I have three professors using three different websites. They are Blackboard,iLearn and Grouphub. The website used by professors needs to be uniform. This way the student can see all their classes on one page. They also will be able to access all their classes from one page. We can call it the “One Stop Online Learning Center.”
It is confusing to remember all the urls for all these online learning websites. The Blackboard website has even included a link to iLearn. Just click on the small banner at top reading, “Looking for your iLearn classes?” Problems continue to arise when trying to log in. Just like any other website, you need a user name and a password. Blackboard is the easiest to use, requiring your student I.D. number and PAC. Professors hear it all the time “I couldn’t log in.” With iLearn, a professor can manually add students to the system, preventing the unable to login problem.
Even when students can log in, they don’t always do so. This can be frustrating as students don’t read the announcements or contribute to group projects.
One English class I took at SF State used Blackboard very effectively. What helped was the teacher did not require students to login until the first day of class. They also went over how to use the message board function properly. In this class, we carried out group projects and were able to communicate with each other. Meanwhile, in my current journalism class (using Grouphub), we can’t seem to communicate well enough to coordinate a reporter with a photographer.
The key to making these websites is proper communication and consistency. In the astronomy online only class I took, the teacher stopped giving online quizzes half way through the semester. Also, not all professors keep the grade book up to date.
Professors prefer different online teaching and educational websites. However, there should still be one main way to tie all three websites into one login method. Maybe through our personal www.sfsu.edu/student page. Or maybe have the links to the classes through one main page. This way every professor can choose the online learning website they prefer.