On Feb. 12, the African American Student Union (AASU) and Institute Diversity, Equity and Inclusion welcomed the 2018 Florida democratic gubernatorial nominee and former mayor of Tallahassee Andrew Gillum to campus. 

Gillum, the keynote speaker of Tech’s Black History Month celebration, addressed campus’s theme of IMPACT: Identifying My Perspective and Acting Consciously Today. 

In discussing acting consciously, Gillum spoke about voter disenfranchisement and the work that has yet to be done in building upon the efforts of the past to achieve equality. 

“Sometimes we think of Black History Month as a stayed part of our history — that it belongs in the archives and the books of history or the arsenals of somebody’s library,” said Gillum.

“But the truth is black history is living — it’s breathing. We’re all building on what came before us. Each rung is supposed to go higher and higher.”

 Third-year CS Nikhil Deo further reflected on this growing dynamic between then and now.

 “I think it’s really easy to segregate the past from the present. It’s easy to say MLK [Martin Luther King Jr.] did all of this or Rosa Parks did all of this, whereas now you have to focus on this and that.”

Gillum explained that reliving through the past, a bridge can be built to connect to the present and even to the future.

“[My family] told me that it was my responsibility to walk through every single door the Civil Rights Movement had opened before me, and, more importantly, that when I got through those doors, it was my job to kick open some doors… so that some other folks might be able to enter.”

Gillum emphasized civic engagement, especially voting, as a path through which more can enter through those doors of the Civil Rights Movement. 

“Part of the living legacy of Black History Month and the sacrifice that was made before us is the fact that we can’t allow for the 1965 Voting Rights Act to just go by the wayside,” said Gillum. “It impacts our democracy, it determines who gets to be counted, who gets to be seen, who gets to be recognized, who gets to be included, whose concerns get to be addressed.”

As part of embodying the living legacy of Black History Month, Gillum challenged individuals to breathe that life into the past themselves.

“This Black History Month, we have to resurrect those images and those sacrifices from the past.” 

Fourth-year EE Andrew Loftus shared his excitement on working to resurrect those images not just for himself, but for the entire Tech community around him as well. 

“I think right now you have so much competitiveness and discord in the political sphere right now… and I was just really thinking about how [Gillum] was talking about just making sure that you’re always empowering others to create the change that you personally want to create. Instead of just focusing on how you can engage yourself, always try to open up doors for others.

 “I don’t know what I want to do professionally yet or if I would ever want to get into politics,” Loftus continued. “But I think that image of trying to bring power to people as you are given more opportunities personally — it’s a really beautiful way to look at creating a community out of political engagement.”

First-year CE Skylar Casanova further weighed in on the lecture’s emphasis of political engagement. 

“It has me thinking a lot about my perspective,” Casanova said. “And I also feel a lot more aware of issues that maybe I didn’t get a lot of light shed on in my life.

 “I have a lot of strong feelings about voter oppression now and am definitely getting more interested in researching that and advocating for registration and getting people more informed.”

The talk left Deo with similar sentiments regarding how individuals can not only become involved themselves, but can also encourage others to do the same. 

“I think the big message that I really take away from this — and am still thinking about — is the idea that we’re building upon the past. And it’s important to bring in the past into what we’re doing now.

“I think that’s something I’m going to keep pondering moving forward when it comes to encouraging people to vote or encouraging people to be active,” they continued. “Not just talking about what’s happening right now but talking about the future impact and what’s led to it up till now.”

With initiatives such as composting at the West Village Dining Commons, the opening of the Kendeda Building and the campus community garden, Tech has become increasingly focused on sustainability. The Institute takes pride in being at the forefront of reducing environmental impact — but is it really at the forefront?

Although these initiatives signal that environmental awareness and activism have become increasingly more important, some students remain skeptical of the overall effect of these programs. 

Elin Howard, fourth-year MSE, discussed her personal work in maintaining a sustainable lifestyle, and she pointed out that campus-wide efforts often do not reflect the day-to-day habits of students.

“My pet peeve on campus is people saying, ‘I’m studying science. I’m working in sustainability,’ but they don’t take any kind of personal responsibility,” said Howard. “I think it’s this huge disconnect, where someone will work for a sustainable company and then think that equals their personal responsibility.”

Howard continued explaining her viewpoint on the disconnect between theory and practice by discussing how the information students learn in class is oftentimes not transferred into their daily decisions. 

“I think it’s so ironic, because as an institute we talk all about changing the world and how we’re at the front of sustainability,” said Howard. “But if you walk outside and you look in those cans, tell me if anyone sorted their recycling correctly.”

First-year LMC Grace Pietkiewicz agreed with Howard that students often tend to opt for efficiency over sustainability. 

“For people in college, there’s so many things on their minds,” said Pietkiewicz. “And people are very selective about the issues they care about.

“You have to balance schoolwork and social life, living on your own and cooking for yourself,” Pietkiewicz continued. “And with all these different things, the hard issues like sustainability go to the back of people’s minds.” 

For Thiago Esslinger, second-year EAS and BCHM major and the current president of Students Organizing for Sustainability (SOS), the cause of these issues is often a lack of education on how to properly use the available infrastructure. 

“You don’t know the background of all the students, and I feel like I can safely assume the vast majority — me included — came into Tech not really knowing how to use this sustainable infrastructure, including things such as recycling,” said Esslinger.

Howard gave an example of a way in which she has utilized a sustainable infrastructure in her personal life.

“I would say I’ve started focusing more on my carbon emissions recently,” said Howard. “I think I’ve always been fairly low waste, but I think carbon emissions is something people don’t realize they’re making all the time in their decisions.”

One of the biggest contributors to carbon emissions are flights. Howard, who used to frequently travel between Scotland and Norway, where her family lives, has decided to change her travel habits to reduce carbon emissions. 

“I refuse to book more than one layover,” said Howard. “If I am going to take that flight, it’s going to be a direct flight even if it costs me an extra $400, which is a lot for a college student. But if I can afford to fly to Norway and back, I can afford to pay for my carbon emissions.”

In contrast to larger purchases like flights, Pietkiewicz discussed sustainable practices in terms of simpler daily necessities. 

“I bring my hot water mug everywhere,” said Pietkiewicz. “I have tea three or four times a day, and I won’t let myself get tea if I don’t have my reusable cup.”

In a similar manner, Esslinger listed his bamboo toothbrush and reusable water bottle as examples of making sustainable strides. He also shared the importance of using a  laptop to take notes digitally. 

When Howard was a first-year, like many others she knew, she made the mistake buying products she did not need. 

“I think a lot of freshmen go to their dorm, and they buy a bunch of stuff to put in it,” said Howard. “I have almost no furniture because every single roommate I’ve lived with has ended up having stuff. I can think of so many times someone thinks they have to buy a piece of furniture.”

Esslinger attributed the problems of overconsumption due to a lack of media coverage and awareness of the mistakes consumers are making.

“Take something like shampoo, for example — usually in a bottle that’s not recycled,” said Esslinger. “You use all this shampoo. The bottle is then thrown away, and then you go to the store and you buy another bottle.” 

“A lot of the time, people are not seeing where that bottle goes and not even caring about where the bottle goes,” Esslinger continued. “And I mean, to an extent, you cannot blame them for not caring because what does the media show?”

Esslinger stressed that this lack of information must be overcome in order for progress to be made. “Information on sustainability should not have to be sought out by people,” said Esslinger. “It should be provided.”

In terms of misinformation, Howard discussed the prevalence of wishful recycling, which occurs when people recycle products that can not be processed by the current recycling infrastructure in Atlanta. 

“It’s almost worse to do wishful recycling,” Howard explained. “Because it clogs up the plants and it ends up costing them more money per pound to recycle it since someone has to sort through. I’ve actually recycled less now.”

Opposite from the role of consumers, Howard also discussed numerous problems with the business side of the economy. 

“I think what everyone wants to say is that if consumers change the way we behave, then we can fix climate change,” Howard said. “And in reality, you’re never going to convince consumers, because most people just don’t care about it.” 

One issue Howard has become increasingly aware of is greenwashing, which occurs when companies  provides consumers with misleading information about the sustainability of a product. 

“I think that to fix our environmental problem, we’re going to have to fundamentally change the way that our world is running as humans are now, which is impossible,” said Howard.

In contrast to Howard, Esslinger remained positive when considering sustainability on campus. 

“When we look at ourselves and our ecological footprint, we can change ourselves,” said Esslinger. “And then I think people around us see us change, and they usually will change.” 

Esslinger  discussed ways in which students can work to change sustainability from within SOS, such as by assisting with the community garden or by joining a committee like Fridays for Future or Eco-Warriors. 

As the chair for Phi Mu’s Sustainability Committee, Pietkiewicz noted how sustainable change can be made from within Greek life on campus.  

“One of the main initiatives we already started is Meatless Mondays,” said Pietkiewicz “We had to talk to a couple of people like the chef and the kitchen manager to make sure it’d be feasible. And the chapter approved it pretty unanimously. Around 80% voted positively, which is a really great number.”

Although Pietkiewicz did receive some complaints about the change to no meat, she continues to remain positive and already has more ideas for sustainability efforts. This includes working closer with the Greek Sustainability Committee. 

“We’d love to do composting,” said Pietkiewicz. “It’s a big step, and I think it’s going to take a lot of effort to do, but it also would make a big difference.”

Pietkiewicz sees a lack of unity as the biggest threat to the success of Greek life initiatives for sustainability. 

“There’s so many things that can be done,” said Pietkiewicz. “I just had a meeting last week with a girl in another chapter. One of the things with Greek life is the chapters aren’t super well connected, and I think a lot of it is kind of competitive …. For sustainability, this shouldn’t be competitive.” 

Esslinger noted a lack of unity  that threatens progress not just on campus, but worldwide. 

“I think one of the big things that we lack, but I hopefully think we’re working towards, is communication between generations and inter-generational,” said Esslinger. “Take, for example, us as student organizations — we barely talk to each other.”

Esslinger hopes that in the future, the fight against climate change grows to involve everyone. “I think it’s very important to highlight that everyone can act on sustainability,” said Esslinger.  “It’s going to be slightly different for everyone and we should recognize how the climate crisis disproportionately affects people.”

Esslinger considers complacency to be the biggest threat to the environment. “Some people have the resources and they should contribute,” she explained. “They shouldn’t just sit around, because in an event such as the climate ecological crisis, doing nothing is perhaps the most damaging of all.”

This past weekend, the Tech softball team kicked off their 2020 season with the 21st annual Buzz Classic series here at Mewborn Field. Although the Jackets started out with losses against University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) and Washington, they ended the weekend with a 5-3 victory over the Ohio Bobcats. 

Reflecting on the Buzz Classic as the team moves into their season with another home series against Nebraska on Valentine’s Day weekend, the Technique sat down with some of the softball squad and staff to get a glimpse into the roster and overall goals for the upcoming season. Softball Head Coach Aileen Morales has invested countless hours in this team. Not only as a coach but also as a former Tech softball athlete herself, Coach Morales knows what it takes to build a successful unit and team. 

Although the overall weekend record might not reflect it, Morales discussed how proud she was of her girls and said, “We got better every single game. As a team, we saw that we can pitch and hit with anyone in the country.” 

Morales pointed out how the Tech team started out really testing their limits by playing back to back games against Washington, who is currently ranked number one. 

Coach Morales said the games “taught us about where our team is and how great our team can be. Our team grew each game and I loved seeing how invested they were in each other.” There is nothing like kicking off your season with a good challenge, but seeing Morales and the rest of the squad rally around each other shows fierce signs of motivation and ultimately immense potential as the Jackets move into the rest of their season.

Assistant Coach Caroline Hardy joined the staff midway through 2019 and is excited for what this season could hold. With five new rookie faces added to the roster this year, Hardy shared the freshmen class’s biggest strength is their “servant leadership and great work ethic.” 

Hardy said, “They work hard every day to make the people around them better. It has also been exciting to see [freshman] Emma Kauf develop in a leadership role as well.” Kauf scored her first home run during her first collegiate at-bat in the UAB matchup. 

Hardy went on to emphasize how Kauf and transfer pitcher Lexi Ray are going to be strong players to watch this season. According to Hardy, they both “work extremely hard to raise the bar for themselves and the people around them.” 

This is the kind of motivation a team needs to be the best they can be, and how inspirational that the energy runs all the way through the freshmen class.

Junior Breanna Roper, is a rising player and leader for the softball team this year. Last season she led the NCAA in hits (71) and led the ACC in doubles (18) for the majority of the season and started all 58 games at second base. Roper said she is most excited about the UNC series because they “always play competitively against each other and it’s all about who’s going to compete that day.” 

As Roper looks to what is ahead for the program, she talked about how much she loves this program and wants to “leave the program better than [she] found it.” 

Coach Morales has put together a competitive season for the Jackets squad, and in her words it the “most competitive schedule put together since her arrival.” With high expectations in the horizon, the team looks to reach their goals of “winning the ACC and making it to NCAA regionals” according to Hardy. 

And with the mentality of positive energy and strong motivation from the rookie athletes to the veteran players to the empowered staff, there is clear potential for this 2020 team. 

While many couples likely appreciate Valentine’s Day, the holiday can be a crude reminder of relationship status for those who are single. To make matters worse, romances overpopulate basically all forms of popular culture. Television series nearly always dedicate ongoing storylines to courtship; movies insert love interests regardless of their relevance to plots.

As such, Valentine’s Day can feel especially lonely. Fortunately, many films understand these feelings of isolation, longing and loneliness. For anyone experiencing Valentine’s Day blues, here are six movie recommendations that fit a variety of circumstances.

500 Days of Summer

“500 Days of Summer” is a quintessential romantic comedy for the hopeless romantics dealing with heartbreak and heartache. The 2009 film, directed by Marc Webb (“Gifted”), stars Joseph Gordon-Levitt (“Looper”) and Zooey Deschanel (“New Girl”) as a misfit couple, Tom and Summer. Their relationship is presented in a nonlinear fashion, jumping before and after their fling. Timestamps constantly mark which day of the titular 500 the storyline is in, allowing viewers to differentiate between them. The earlier half captures their progression from coworkers to an unofficial couple, whereas the latter half displays a heartbroken, depressed version of Tom after their breakup.

The movie is an absolute blast. From dancing sequences in the streets to Tom’s melodramatics, “500 Days of Summer” never fails to amuse and entertain. Its lasting power, however, stems from its universally identifiable presentation of love and romance. Tom’s yearning will almost certainly speak to anyone pining for a true love of their own.

Lost in Translation

While representations of love are certainly the natural go-to on Valentine’s Day, not all versions of loneliness specifically pertain to romance. Sofia Coppola’s (“The Virgin Suicides”) 2003 drama details two isolated individuals who are each unhappily trapped in a city far from home — Tokyo. Bill Murray (“Groundhog Day”) plays Bob Harris, an American celebrity shooting advertisements in Japan. Opposite to him, Scarlett Johansson (“The Avengers”) is a recently married college graduate named Charlotte, who was brought to the foreign country by her neglectful, self-absorbed husband. 

Staying at the same hotel, the two protagonists cross paths and develop an unlikely friendship, thanks in part to their need for English-speaking friends in a foreign land. While Bob and Charlotte’s kinship might initially seem shallow and built upon only circumstance, they forge a deeper connection as they wander and eplore the foreign city. They reveal themselves to be lonely, isolated individuals, lost in a crowded, noisy world. 

For those feeling homesick, isolated or directionless, Coppola’s drama offers solace. It only takes one authentic friendship or connection to pull someone
back to life.

Call Me by Your Name

Representation matters. In a world where heternormative behavior dominates popular culture, having the ability to identify with movies can be empowering for a lot of people. This is just one reason why Luca Guadagnino’s “Call Me by Your Name,” a drama about a teenage boy’s romance with an older man, is important for so many. More than that, though, the former Best Picture nominee happens to be a beautiful, heart-wrenching love story.

Set during the 1980s in the Italian countryside, the film stars Timothee Chalamet (“Little Women”) in his breakout performance and Armie Hammer (“The Social Network”) as Elio and Oliver. The pair of precocious, intelligent young men are united under one roof by Elio’s father, who employs Oliver as a research assistant. Sharing palpable chemistry, the men progress from subtextual flirtations to secret romance.

While “Call Me by Your Name” proves to be one of the best LGTBQ films of the 2010s, its beauty is profoundly moving for anyone looking for an unlikely romance.

The Edge of Seventeen

In 2016, Kelly Fremon Craig released her coming-of-age comedy about a socially awkward girl, struggling to find her footing in high school. Hailee Steinfeld (“Bumblebee”) shines as Nadine, the movie’s quippy, energetic protagonist. Simmering beneath the surface, Nadine struggles with mental health and problems at home — issues that are exacerbated when her best friend begins dating her brother.

Late adolescence and early adulthood are difficult times for a great many people, and “The Edge of Seventeen” understands that. Nadine fumbles her way through friendships, school, boys and family, yearning for a connection and feeling that will make her feel like she fits in her own world. 

The socially anxious and malcontents will be able to relate and identify with her struggles.

Swingers

Without a doubt, “Swingers” is the most bro-ey movie on this list. Written by Jon Favreau (“Iron Man”), the 1996 comedy chronicles a pair of aspiring actors as one of them navigates a recent breakup. Favreau plays the heartbroken protagonist, Mike; opposite to him, a young Vince Vaughn (“Dodgeball”) excels as his effervescent hype-man, Trent. In a star-making turn for Vaughn, Trent constantly encourages Mike to put himself back out there, frequently shouting things like “You’re so money and you don’t even know it!”

Although much of the film’s developments might feel a little womanizing in nature, the magic of “Swingers” comes from Mike and Trent’s dynamic. The electric rapport between Vaughn and Favreau ignites the movie, inspiring Mike — and viewers — to regain their confidence and put themselves back out there. Recently single individuals may be moved toward their own self-assurance through this comedy.

Frances Ha

This 2012 drama from Noah Baumbach (“Marriage Story”) is not a traditional Valentine’s Day movie. Frances — the lively protagonist, played by Greta Gerwig (“Lady Bird”) — does not explicitly cope with romance or heartbreak. Rather, “Frances Ha” celebrates the beauty of independence and finding oneself through a tumultuous, difficult period of early adulthood.

In her mid-late twenties, Frances struggles to find her footing in New York City. Her dancing career stagnates, and her friends pair off with romantic partners. As her best friend and roommate, Sophie, begins to settle down, Frances is left to fend for herself in the Big Apple.

With gorgeous black-and-white cinematography, the spellbinding “Frances Ha” proves a remarkable and empowering fit for the audiences looking to celebrate their independence on Valentine’s Day.

This past week the Black Feminist Think Tank (BFTT) welcomed Leah Wright Rigueur of Brandeis University and Congress’ Chief of Staff Sophia King LaFargue to campus in order to speak on a segment entitled, “From Shirley Chrisholm to Stacey Abrams: American Politics.” 

Dr. Sherie Randolph, co-director of BFTT and associate professor of history here at Tech, moderated this intriguing discussion and asked questions ranging from “How did we get here?” to “Why is AOC popular?”

Before responding to the first question prompted by Dr. Randolph, Rigueur commented on the unique environment curated by the BFTT as well as the importance of such an environment. 

“Part of the really wonderful opportunities like this is that we can ask a lot of questions and really hash it out in an environment like this,” she said. 

The unique environment of the BFTT was appreciated by all in the attendance, including students such as fourth-year IE Peyton Kliewer.

Kliewer applauded the event for the refreshing and introspective perspective it added to the issues that have been gaining the public’s attention in the current political climate. 

“Both guests had an intimate knowledge of the inner workings of politics,” said Kliewer. 

“They offered clarity and explanations of processes that aren’t easy to understand unless someone is behind the scenes or on the ground.”

Rigueur’s inside knowledge helped to clarify some of the trends currently observable in today’s  polarized political climate. 

“Moments of progress are often met with significant backlash,” said Rigueur. “Justice takes work; it takes blood, and it oftentimes takes  violence.” 

“When we think about democracy more broadly, democracy is a concept that has to be fought for,” she continued. “It is contested, and is one that has not really existed for the majority of the people in this country since the nation’s conception.”

As the conversation continued, Rigueur provided a context for the recent years of radical actions within America’s politics. 

“History allows us to be comfortable with the idea that unthinkable things are possible,” she said.

“It is unthinkable to us right now, but we dropped a bomb on not just one nation but on two different cities at the height of war … When you think about the nitty-gritty of that, it would have been the unthinkable, but it was still a possibility.”

LaFargue also addressed the possibility of the unthinkable in American politics, as she focused on the more conceptual side of politics.

“With the arc of the moral universe, it’s interesting that it is such a passive voice,” said LaFargue. “It doesn’t bend. It is forced, cajoled, pulled, badgered into leaning towards justice.” 

Students in attendance, such as fifth-year HCC Amber Solomon,  further weighed in on the dangers of a passive voice, noting the often marginalized perspectives of minorities on political issues. 

“There’s a few of us in my program interested in BFT [black feminist thought] but still nobody does that research,” Solomon said. 

For second-year IE Etienne Batiste, the event provided inspiration to become more involved with issues like black feminist thought.   

“What I took away from it would be that I need to get more involved in policy,” Batiste laughed before adding, “I just need to educate myself more because all the power is in politics.”

In a similar manner, the event motivated Kliewer to become more politically engaged, as she asked, “How can we, as students, effectively mobilize in order to get tangible results for things we want changed?”

“The biggest takeaway I got was how important it is to be active in politics on the local level,” continued  Kliewer. “That’s where the real change can happen, and much quicker than trying to get something implemented on a national level.”

Nearly everyone I have met here has a horror story about the Department of Parking and Transportation at Tech. Between the outrageous parking permit prices and always unwelcome parking tickets, PTS seems to be one of the most hated offices we can’t live without. 

To be clear, I am not talking about the entirety of the Parking and Transportation department. The bus and stingerette drivers who get me from point A to point B are all saints in my book, especially the midnight rambler driver who plays jazz through the bus speakers. My source of frustration is with the seemingly elusive goblins who deliver envelopes to my windshield without ever
leaving a trace. 

I remember the first day of FASET, where the nice friendly neighborhood GTPD officers came to ensure us that they aren’t out to get us in trouble. They stressed that safety is allegedly one of the number one priorities at the Institute, so why is the Parking and Transportation department so predatory in punishing students attempting to navigate life at Tech in a safer way?

Imagine this. Your friend who has a parking permit in the North Avenue South deck is completely plastered at an off campus party. They’ve downed  half a pack of Natty Light and can’t even walk straight. You, being completely sober and wanting to do the right thing, help lug your friend into the back seat of your car, praying they can keep from throwing up on your newly detailed
leather seats. 

You first pull into the North Avenue turnaround, and the limited pay to park spots are all taken up because it’s the weekend and everyone is visiting their boos and bootycalls. Your friend, waking up from their drunken nap throws you their wallet and instructs you to just park in the South deck before falling back into
their peaceful slump. 

After throwing their buzzcard to the sensor and pulling in, you realize this isn’t just going to be a simple drop off and drive away job. You want to ensure your friend who you care about very much gets into their apartment and into bed safely, so you illegally park in the deck. 

Throwing your friend over your shoulders, you try to work fast, attempting to get back to your car before the ticket gremlin has a chance to strike. You leave your friend carefully tucked in with a trash can, a glass of water and two Advils on their bedside, just like all your AlcoholEdu education taught you. There’s barely any time to revel in your work as the night’s sober samaritan before you notice the fifty dollar fine placed under your windshield wipers. Now that you’re fifty dollars in the hole, you may be regretting helping your friend, but just know that in reality, parking services failed you. 

This is just one of the many hypothetical situations students face when trying to navigate the parking situation on Tech’s campus, but the parking patrol, especially in the North Avenue South deck, has made it even harder to safely travel about campus. 

The first weekend of Spring semester, when parking knew students would be buzzing in visitors to relax after a hard week back at school, tickets littered the parking lot. Whether you parked there for 10 minutes or 10 hours, the fairy zipped in and out, leaving her magical money grabbers behind. They definitely were intentionally targeting students who would be buzzing in friends for short periods of time during the busy nights. Because of this, I have lost all respect for the employees that spend their time making the rounds and stealing money from the already struggling student body. 

Parking and Transportation could create more pay for parking spaces near the North Avenue apartments, or they could put a pause on fining students for parking in the decks for incredibly short periods of time. Will they do this? Most likely not, because the fifty dollars they gain every time a student parks in the deck in a time of desperation lines the pockets of somebody. You would think the employees are working on commission with the seemingly increased frequency of students getting caught for deck drop ins. 

There’s many issues with parking on Tech’s campus, but as someone who has seen people fined for a situation similar to the one I described before, these predatory practices totally negate the opinion that safety is the number one priority. 

Of course, there’s always security issues with allowing in people who do not have a permit to park in the deck, but the likelihood of someone with a permit buzzing in someone who does not have semi-lawful business being there is unlikely. If it is taught in programs like AlcoholEDU that we should do everything in our power to help our fellow students get home safely, why are we being punished for doing so? 

Don’t get me wrong, I definitely think that car owners without a permit shouldn’t be allowed to sit their car in the deck for days on end, but I would not mind if a student has to be buzzed in for a couple minutes to unload some heavy groceries into their apartment or has to take care of a friend for a couple hours or just simply wants to spend a responsible night in with their across campus friends. 

Things happen, and we shouldn’t be punished so harshly for reaching out for help and getting a friend to buzz us in. 

Parking and Transportation may think we are purposely parking in the wrong areas to spite them or to defy authority, but most of the time it comes down to helping a friend in a dire situation and risking getting a fine for it. 

The large fines we have to face feel like a big “F You” from the Institute we already pay thousands of dollars to attend. In order to improve their reputation, PTS should consider the real life situations faced by the student body and consider making policy changes that would reflect the supposed standard of student safety Tech preaches. 

Creating a space to welcome introverted individuals into collaborative work environments and leadership roles is beneficial for all personality types.

I recently read a trend report published by product design platform InVision. It calls for design managers to build team cultures that create an inclusive environment for introverted designers, as their contributions may often be overshadowed by their lack of extraversion. The report also points out that not all leaders exhibit “alpha” qualities, and that’s something that we should all lean into.

“Teach new skills on how to work with introverts. What makes introverts who they are is also what makes them valuable.”

The report recommends that teams ought to learn how to be inclusive of introverted individuals, allowing them grow in their own identities which allows them to produce their best work.

I always thought that being introverted set me back in projects and leadership roles. Networking with companies, attending happy hours and making connections paint a relentless obligation to be extroverted, outgoing and “always on.” As a mostly introverted individual, I find these social engagements to be emotionally and mentally taxing.

Even higher education, which often requires in-class participation in order to receive a decent grade average in the course, push extraverted individuals to the top, leaving behind introverted individuals, who need ample time to think about what they say before they say it.

I never felt the need to challenge this idea until I walked into my design internship at Atlassian last summer. The first person I encountered in the lobby asked if it was my first day there. “You’ll love it,” he told me. “And don’t be afraid to ask as many questions as you can.”

I don’t think I fully considered the weight of his advice until I was sitting at my desk the next day, minutes before my first one-on-one meeting with my mentor. I had all sorts of questions running through my mind: How do I request software access? Is it okay for me to sit and do work in the common spaces? What are our team’s core working hours?

I became nervous and fearful. I had thoughts about my classes at Georgia Tech that required me to participate, even when I had nothing valuable to contribute.

Who do I ask? What if I seem dumb for asking these questions? Was there someone I could ask that wouldn’t judge?

But the responses I received were given graciously and without preconceived judgment. Because these teams were already living a culture of learning and continuous improvement, introverted individuals’ needs were seen and heard in a safe way, which also encouraged others to put their fears of judgment aside and implement simple tasks that boost productivity and trust among teams.

My team taught me what it was like to be in an introvert-friendly environment. I learned that sending out an agenda before a meeting is crucial for getting introverts like me to speak up during a meeting. Likewise, previewing slides and activities eases group anxiety and allows them to formulate opinions in their own time. Requiring participation in classes and meetings is not a fair evaluation of performance, but participatory activities need to accommodate those who need time to mentally prepare for large group events. Normalizing team culture and rituals that invite introverts to thrive benefits everyone on the team.

There is a poem by Mary Oliver which begins with the line, “You do not have to be good,” a statement that goes against everything I have ever told myself. 

Lately, I have found myself plagued by this impending fear that I will never find something I am good at. It is so easy to simply stop setting goals for yourself, to stop dreaming for anything more when the prospect of failure makes those things seem hopeless.

 For me, my once hopeful self has been stifled by the fear that I am simply not good enough to even bother dreaming. It feels selfish to worry about this sort of thing, “why does it matter?” I ask myself. 

Although I am not sure, I know that it does. Going to school here, at Tech, where everyone seems to have a dream or a passion, it makes it difficult to be directionless. 

From the moment you set foot on Tech’s campus, you are expected to know what you want and where you are going. You are expected to be “the next,” but what do you do when you are unable to finish that sentence? The next what?

In my first year at Tech I thought I knew what I wanted but quickly discovered how wrong I had been. I changed my major from electrical engineering to computational media, two things that felt so far apart. At the beginning, that was enough, it felt as if I was at least heading in the right direction. I had recalibrated my life compass and had settled on my own true north. Except, now in my third year, I feel as if I am standing still. 

All of a sudden graduation feels so close, like this whole life experience is about to end and I am going to have to leave this bubble that I have become so comfortable in. I trouble myself by comparing my experiences to the people around me. Everything I have not done is somehow a strike against me. Insecure about my lack of internships and real-world experience, I wonder if I have run out of time to figure out what I want to do with my life.

Feeling farther than ever from any hopes or dreams, it is as if all of that recalibrating was pointless. As I circle through this endless loop of “where,” “why” and “what is all of this even for?,” it is so easyto forget all of the details, to forget to look around at where I am. 

When I stop, even just for a moment, and take it all in, I start to notice a few things. I start to see how far from that first year I have come: I have learned what I can and cannot handle, how to give myself a little bit of grace for all the things out of my control, that it is not my fate to fail at all things CS and that I really do belong here, among all these admirable and driven people. When the thought that I am stuck begins to creep into my mind and tempt my anxiety, I remind myself that just because I cannot see where I am going, does not mean I am going nowhere. 

It just means I need to lean into a little bit more faith in myself along the way. I do not have to know where I am going to get there, and I do not have to be good at something measurable and tangible in order to have hopes and dreams. 

So often I hold back because I am afraid to have dreams I am incapable of reaching; but if you let yourself quietly reach out and hope, I think you will find that one dream leads to another. While I may be feeling frustrated that I cannot see where I am going and that I have stubbed my toe in the dark one too many times, I am going to try to hope, trusting that even if this dream does not work out, it will lead me to one that will. 

Last Thursday, the college of Biological Sciences kicked of its first Frontier of Science Lecture of 2020 with a lecture by Joshua Plotkin. Plotkin is an Annenberg Professor of Natural Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania, where he co-directs the Penn Center for Mathematical Biology. Plotkin completed his Ph.D. with Simon Levin, a famous mathematical biologist and ecologist currently teaching at Princeton University. 

Throughout his career Plotkin has received multiple awards including the David and Lucile Packard Foundation Fellowship, the Alfred Sloan Foundation research fellowship and most recently, the Akira Kubo prize to society of mathematical biology.

Before he began his lecture, he talked about his motivations for speaking on information gerrymandering and undemocratic decisions. 

“Events of 2016 really forced the conversion of me. The belief that scientists have a real responsibility to not only hear any sort of upheaval in the American political landscape, but to change that. This talk is a product of that new agenda, as well as the results of vibration with terrific colleagues across several disciplines.”

Plotkin’s lecture centered around how the structure of social networks can distort decision making. Social media has fundamentally changed how information flows through our society. Today, most of the world gets its news from social media platforms rather than traditional news sites.  

In the past, national conversations were guided by traditional media that would help to center the conversation on any topic, in contrast with today, where people have the power to shut out any voice they don’t want to hear. In addition, social media is completely unregulated, and as a result is prone to misinformation and purposeful distortion. 

Since many voters receive their information from social media platforms, they live in partisan bubbles and are prone to misinformation on political issues, and as a result make collectively bias decisions. To test how this phenomenon influences voters, Plotkin designed a simple game called the motor game. The objective of the game was to test how humans contribute to collective decisions like voting in a national election, based on information being shared on a social network. Users have partisan goals yet, also value compromise to some degree. 

The game concluded that that “information gerrymandering” can bias the outcome of a vote. In the stimulated game, even if the two opposing parties are equally popular, chances are that one party will win up to 60% of the time.

To close out his lecture, Plotkin stated he, along with his colleagues in the scientific community, would continue to do more research to help find a solution to the problem of information gerrymandering.  

In addition, when asked about the responsibility of citizens he noted that we must demand transparency when it comes to media. “What can we as citizens do, and I feel like citizens have sort of even greater responsibility, or harder responsibility of scientists,  is to demand transparency and regulation of social media so the FCC exists because the US government realized as soon as radio and television was introduced that radio companies could be used political tools. So they devised the FCC to provide transparency and regulation, but there’s no FCC for Facebook right now. And yet, Facebook is manifestly a political tool that can be used by either party or even by foreign adversaries.”

The research that Plotkin talked about was published last year in Nature in a paper titled, “Information gerrymandering and undemocratic decisions.”

Last Wednesday, Feb. 5, members of United Campus Workers of Georgia (UCWGA) met at the state capital to rally for improved pay and conditions for workers of the University System of Georgia (USG). 

They had three main demands they advocated for. First, HB 116, a bill enacting a $15 per hour minimum wage for all employees of USG. Second, SR 291, a resolution proposing wage raises for salaried employees consistent with inflation and increased cost-of-living in the areas in which they work. 

Lastly, the proposal of future legislation mandating fee waivers for graduate-level employees in order to avoid the current “pay-to-work” system.

The existing proposed 2021 budget includes a $1,000 raise for USG employees making less than $40,000 annually, however, in many communities this represents a raise less than the increase in cost-of-living in the same time period. 

“Between 2001 and 2019, the cost of living rose by an average of 2.1% a year while faculty salaries at KSU went up by an average of only 1% each year,” the press release noted. 

Most minimum-wage workers for USG represent disadvantaged communities. These positions are composed of 64% women and 51% people of color, all making significantly less than $15 per hour, or $31,200 annually. 

Furthermore, graduate-level students currently pay full-price fees for the institutions they attend, although they also receive a salary. This “pay-to-work” system results in greatly reduced salaries for these students after the payment of fees. 

Tiffany Nguyen, a PhD student at Tech in the school of psychology and founding member of the Tech chapter of UCWGA, emphasized the financial stress of paying fees out of the limited salary received by Ph.D. students.

“Many grads aren’t guaranteed an assistantship over the summer, so while some people already have part-time jobs during the school year, many more people are forced to work at Starbucks or CVS Pharmacy to be able to pay rent over summer and in preparation for fees during the year. Actually, that was the advice we got from our first-year mentor,” explained Nguyen.

Full-time faculty at other USG institutions also came to the rally to express their concerns. Dr. Jill Penn, an Assistant Professor of Biology and Biochemistry at Georgia Gwinnett College, attended the rally and explained her perspective of the event.

“The rally was a huge succes.Congress members came outside to watch, kids visiting for the day from the schools took interest and press was taking photos and conducting interviews.” 

Penn noted how she has personally been affected by the issues at hand as a USG employee herself. 

She commented that wage stagnation leads to salary compression of senior employees. New hires will often make higher wages than current employees with more experience. 

In addition, USG employs a merit-based raise system instead of giving raises on a cost-of-living basis. 

“Merit raises are distributed unfairly and it’s impossible to not have biases from evaluators. I’ve seen people who deserve merit raises not get them and it makes for a difficult work environment,” Penn describes.

Another recent action by Governor Kemp that UCWGA opposes is the enforcement of the “Critical Hire Process” for employees of USG. The mandate went into effect on Dec. 19, 2019. It requires that new employees hired into USG are “critical” to the university. As a result, there is more documentation necessary for hiring university employees with salaries above $40,000 annually. 

Many members of UCWGA view this move by Governor Kemp as an effort to complicate the hiring process, with the hope of tightening USG budgets. Kate Diedrick, a researcher for UCWGA, explains their stance on this mandate.

“Public higher education institutions are not for-profit businesses pressured by shareholders and the profit motive. There is no need for this policy. These institutions belong to students, to workers and the public and these stakeholders should be the ones to define what jobs are critical to success.”

The congressional response to UCWGA’s demands has been mixed so far. Chuck Martin, the chair of the State Higher Educational Committee, felt that money was needed more urgently in other areas outside of higher education. 

Many members of UCWGA feel that the budget tightening for USG may be due to Governor Kemp’s recent tax cuts, much of which are beneficial to those making in excess of $100,000 annually. 

Dr. Penn explains that there are many ways for undergraduate students to take action. “Students can call and write their congress members, share stories on social media and raise their voices. There are people in congress who do want to help and they can do it if the people demand it.”