On Feb. 10, The New York Times published a piece regarding the notable increase in murders in St. Louis over the past few years.  “There was a 33 percent rise in homicides last year, to 159, compared with 120 in 2013 in this city of 318,000,” wrote Erik Eckholm. 2015 has had a bloody beginning as well, with seven people murdered in the first 15 days of the year.

The Editorial Board decided to discuss the explanations of why this city has seen a proliferation in murders while other cities’ murder rates have decreased. We also wanted to talk about the implications that these stories have on outsider perspectives  of St. Louis, as well as our own perceptions of the city.

The first thought that many of us had regarding the increasing murder rate was the proliferation of available guns. Apparently, this was The New York Times’ first thought as well: “By all accounts, the proliferation of guns among young men here is beyond control.” In the same article, Michael Shelton added, “It’s nothing to get a firearm.”

Some in our editorial board believe that more comprehensive gun control would help limit everybody’s ability to obtain a gun. Many of us believe that many of the guns obtained are not legally obtained, so a restriction on legal guns could help curb illegal gun purchases as well. One editor argued that gun control would do more to reduce murders across the country. He used the example of the three Muslim Americans who were murdered, execution style, in their home in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, on Feb. 10. Others believe it would be a tough sell to propose stringent gun laws to the ardent supporters of Second Amendment rights who aren’t contributing to violence in the city.

Other editors argued that murder rates in St. Louis are more complicated than access to guns. They cited how unemployment, poverty and lack of adequate educational opportunities may lead to a sense of hopelessness. One editor argued that gang activity is prevalent when there is no other option available and that drug use may be an effort to grapple with that hopelessness. Therefore, a focus on social disillusionment could be just as useful as the focus on the prevalence of guns in the area.

Then we started talking about how stories like these about St. Louis shape other people’s perspectives about the city. This is the second time in the past two years that St. Louis has been featured in The New York Times because of its murder rate. When members of the Editorial Board decided to come to SLU, many of our family members warned us of the ominous threat that is St. Louis. “Be safe,” said one; another stated offhandedly after returning home for winter break, “Oh, you survived!”

Even from people in the area, the city is seen as a dangerous place, a place not to walk through at night, and, in some areas, even during the day. The New York Times article mentioned that many of the murders are limited to eight neighborhoods. Despite this limited range of violence, much of the city is stigmatized, especially the north side. An extremely common refrain heard at SLU is “Don’t go past the Fox.” This widespread fear is an unfair representation of the city and its people.

In the end, we discussed the possibility that these stats don’t mean all that much. Most of us are not negatively impacted by the wanton violence in the city. Our preoccupation with the stats seems detached from the people most impacted by them. Instead of complaining about St. Louis’ reputation amidst the recurring stats about murder, maybe we should think more about why we feel so personally removed from the people in the firing line.

Over the past couple of weeks, the “Clock Tower Accords” have seen a resurgence in critical attention. Of the 13 initiatives stipulated in the agreements, the “mutually agreed upon commissioned artwork” has received a flurry of criticism coming from students and alumni alike.

Articles on collegefix.com, bizjournals.com, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch website and in last week’s edition of the UNews have all commented on the reactions and discussed implications of such a statue on campus.

One article interviewed several SLU alums who were all “raging mad” and were threatening to withhold donations over the sculpture.

The editorial board decided it was time to provide its perspectives on the accords, the sculpture and the reaction this agreement has received by members inside and outside of the SLU community.

Firstly, we discussed what the commissioned artwork would look like based on the information we have received thus far. We know that the artists, brothers Kyle and Kelly Phelps, have typically made smaller sculptures. Based on their past artwork, we believe that it is just as likely that this artwork will sit in the CGC, behind glass casing, as it is that it will be positioned outside, near the clock tower.

In a conversation with the editorial board, Dr. Pestello made it clear that the design, style, location and budget for the proposed artwork are still under discussion.

Some editors discussed hesitance to label the “Clock Tower Accords” a historic moment, while others stated that SLU’s involvement contributed to the larger narrative happening around us.

We also discussed whether the donors’ plans of withholding donations to the University would really make much of an impact. Pestello may have a more difficult time explaining the agreements to older donors, but younger, more sympathetic donors could be more persuaded to donate in comparison to past years.

One question the Editorial Board came back to was why this agreement is the one that is causing such hostility. One editor stated the criticism could be partly attributed to a disdain of the arts by some. Others postulated that it was the physical manifestation of all the other agreements that made the sculpture such an easy target to critique.

Some of the critiques have come from people who have been concerned with what they see as a lack of self-governance. Some alumni questioned why they hadn’t been consulted about the agreements. Some of the editors wondered whether these disgruntled students and alums are similarly angry about the tulips and palm trees planted every year without their permission.

One editor commented that the protest harkened back to the more activist-oriented 1970s and that the current backlash to the protests and agreements is disconcerting. Another added that even though he didn’t agree with everything the protesters said, he was glad they were there.

We eventually agreed that the “artwork” itself is probably misunderstood as a symbol much larger than what it probably will be and the selective anger regarding, of all things, a sculp-ture (SLU’s favorite thing) is a bit hypocritical.

Every so often, two holidays rudely decide to be on the same day. This weekend, those holidays are Mardi Gras and Valentine’s Day. (Yes, Mardi Gras is technically on Tuesday, Feb. 17, but St. Louis celebrates it Saturday, Feb. 14.)
For most, one of these holidays gets preference over the other. We are giving our input on which holiday we like better and how we’ll celebrate. Enjoy!

Despite Valentine’s Day’s origins as a pagan fertility festival (which usually gets me psyched), I can’t get behind a holiday appropriated by Hallmark and those chalky, candy hearts for the sake of profit.
I also don’t like the vibe of Mardi Gras; as far as day-drinking goes, there are more enjoyable occasions in which one can partake. So I’ll be working, grimacing as each drunk reveler asks to use the bathroom. “Yes you may use the bathroom, but please throw up elsewhere.” – Ryan McKinley
Although many people devote Valentine’s Day to their romantic significant other, I’ve always seen the day as a time to show love and appreciation to everyone in my life. My mom would always make the day special for my siblings and I – heart-shaped pancakes for breakfast, pink flowers on the table, and small gifts – so I have a tender spot for the holiday in my “single” heart. – Deirdre Kerins
Valentine’s Day is dumb. Romance should not be saved for certain Hallmark holidays. I think that romantic gestures, date nights, flowers, etc. should be a common element of any relationship. Mardi Gras is a different story. I have two pieces of advice for celebrating Mardi Gras: Embrace it and eat three hot dogs before the festivities commence. Trust me. – Katherine Kelliher
One Mardi Gras, I ate an entire king cake and only narrowly avoided ingesting the tiny plastic baby inside. Many years and lessons in self-control later, I have no love for the holiday. As for Valentine’s Day, I think the human race can do better than having a day dedicated to PDA and anatomically incorrect muscular organs. My ideal weekend will be spent out of audio and visual range of wild revelers and sappy lovebirds alike. – John Schuler
In third grade, when Valentine’s Day still included writing cards for everyone in class, I streamlined the process by penning “I like you” on every one of my notes – anything to make the task easier. My plan backfired, however, when a girl in my class, Molly, shared the message with her friends (who apparently didn’t notice that they had received the same message). The embarrassment was real; for weeks, my classmates made fun of me for so publicly professing my (nonexistent) love for Molly. Valentine’s Day has forever been a reminder of the struggles of my nine-year-old self. – Paul Brunkhorst
I will not be celebrating either holiday, as I will be working all day. I got the chance to experience Mardi Gras in St. Louis during my freshman year, so I don’t feel that I’ll be missing out on anything new this year. If you’ve never gotten the chance to go downtown for the big parade, do it. Yes, it’s loud and crowded, but it’s a fun experience. St. Louis makes a bigger deal out of Mardi Gras than any city other than New Orleans. Have fun! -Josh Connelly

Enjoy our Holiday themed thumbnail

Adnan Syed / Online Editor

Jessica Park / Chief Illustrator

The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has captured Western media’s attention after another round of high-profile executions, this time of two Japanese nationals and one Jordanian pilot, which took place over the past few weeks.
Both the Japanese and Jordanian governments attempted to negotiate with ISIS for the release of the hostages. Jordan even offered a trade for pilot Moaz al Kasasbe in exchange for al-Rishawi, a jihadist imprisoned for her role in a suicide bombing in Jordan in 2005.
Nonetheless, both Japanese journalists and the Jordanian fighter-pilot were brutally executed, on video.
The Japanese government has provided non-lethal aid to the coalition forces fighting ISIS and will continue to do so, despite the warning and execution.
The Jordanian government, however, pledged to avenge al Kasasbe’s death. As of Sunday, Feb. 8, the Jordanian military has already launched 56 airstrikes against ISIS targets. Jordan’s Air Force Chief, Mansour al-Jabour, stated on Sunday that these airstrikes were “just the beginning” of their campaign to avenge the death of the pilot. Al Kasasbe’s father has demanded the “annihilation” of ISIS to revenge his son’s death. Meanwhile, most Jordanians have rallied behind King Abdullah’s plan to crush ISIS.
Surprisingly, with almost every country in the world condemning the actions of ISIS, Jordan is the first country not directly involved in the fighting (i.e., Iraq and Syria) to call for the annihilation of ISIS. Despite the United States’ direct involvement in Iraq since 2003, this country hasn’t done too much more to stop ISIS, beyond sporadic air strikes and aid to other countries fighting the group. It seems the administration is trying to toe a middle ground between supporting countries more directly affected by the group while also avoiding greater incursions into a region Obama has attempted to avoid during his presidency.
We debated Jordan’s new conviction. Some of our editors expressed trepidation with Jordan’s new attitude, thinking that the country may be playing into ISIS’ hands. Others believe that they shouldn’t judge the actions of Jordan, with a few citing the hypocrisy of Americans judging the knee-jerk reaction of Jordan to a threat abroad.
While ISIS’ conquest of more territory has largely stalled, the extremist group still holds an enormous swath of territory in the countries of Iraq and Syria. Since its first gains and the declaration of a Caliphate in June 2014, the group has proved remarkably resourceful and brutal. The group has managed to recruit thousands throughout the world with an extensive Internet infrastructure to broadcast its message, goals and executions.
Unlike any other terrorist group, ISIS has managed to control territory, aggressively push for more territory, bring in a massive number of new recruits, manipulate the fractured nation states of Iraq and Syria and benefit from an international system unequipped to destroy one of the most brutal and oppressive groups seen in decades.
It is ISIS’ territory that makes the group so bizarre in comparison to other terrorist groups. One editor commented that the reason most terrorist groups are nearly impossible to destroy is that there are no targets to neutralize, no tanks, no bases; there are no easy determinants of success.
Terrorism based on ideology is idea-based and it’s impossible to destroy an idea. ISIS is especially dangerous because it has territory and possesses an idea that is proving attractive to a startling number of people.
One editor asked if there was any way of getting rid of ISIS and other extremist groups. The answer seems impossible and is more complicated than many people give credit for. Nonetheless, we must continue to ask that question and challenge the answers we give.

As the editorial board contemplated the State of the Union address, we decided to give our thoughts on the state of SLU.  Consider this a progress report for SLU President Fred Pestello as he enters his second semester at the helm.

Upon his arrival in July, students noticed the large amount of time he spent meeting and talking to people on West Pine.  He seemed to be out there every day, and unlike former President Lawrence Biondi, Pestello rarely used a golf cart.

Whether a calculated public-relations move, or the trademark of an outgoing personality, we see that this informal outreach to the SLU community has been extremely important to the President since his arrival. In addition to the casual meet-and-greets, Pestello has also made the conscious effort to visit many of the Chartered Student Organizations at SLU to establish contact with student leaders across campus. In addition, Pestello reportedly attends every SLU men’s basketball game and cheers the Billikens on- not from a box- but in the stands. His ALS “ice bucket challenge” with the athletic department last fall, and the establishment of his personal Twitter profile (@SLUPresident) to reach students, parents and the rest of the University community, testifies to his dedication to accessibility.

Another aspect of Pestello’s tenure we admire has been his commitment to slated projects.  After introducing the new housing plan at SLU, seemingly only days later, construction crews broke ground for the new residential hall between the Simon Recreational Center and Beracha Hall, along Laclede Street.  Likewise, at the conclusion of Occupy SLU, SLU officials, Tribe-X members, Black Student Alliance members and the Metro St. Louis Coalition for Inclusion and Equality signed a number of agreements regarding the recruitment and retention of black students at SLU, and various other community outreach programs.  Quickly thereafter, numerous committees sprung up to execute the agreements. While the success of these various agreements remain to be seen, we believe that Pestello’s penchant to act quickly, illustrates his good faith in the University community to accomplish its goals.

Finally, we’ve been extremely impressed with Pestello’s ability to handle controversy and contribute to dialogue. On a small scale, Pestello helped many people who, by accident, illegally parked on SLU’s parking lots because a scammer offered the space to people seeing a show at the Fox.  Pestello waived the SLU parking tickets given to the unwitting patrons; an act of grace that one editor said would not have happened two years prior.  Even the decision to allow a sit-in on campus would have been an impossible feat previously.

On a much bigger scale, Pestello’s ability to juggle the demands of student-protesters, students, parents, and other St. Louis community members, while contributing to SLU’s campus-wide dialogue by offering valuable insights in his daily emails, was nothing short of a masterpiece. While there is still much to accomplish for the University, overall, unlike the state of the Union, the state of SLU is actually quite strong, and Pestello is one to thank.

Jessica Park / Chief Illustrator

The State of the Union on Jan. 20 elicited so many diverse responses from the Editorial Board that we had each member write their own thoughts on the speech and the country as a whole. The State of the Union is…

Deirdre Kerins- Fluff. Too much applause. And Ruth Bader Ginsburg nodding off in the middle of the President’s speech.  She clearly has her priorities in the right place. Sleep > SOTU.

Ryan McKinley – The State of the Union is concerning. A nationwide protest movement has been mobilizing for the past six months and our President still can’t talk candidly on race. I appreciate mentions to equal pay for women and the acknowledgement of trans people, but as a country we still have more work to do to make honest dialogue possible.

Joshua Connelly – The state of the Union is in flux, in both good ways and bad. On the positive side, nationwide unemployment is at a six-and-a-half-year low; the nation is moving rapidly toward marriage equality; and the president is finally starting to show signs of the man who promised change back in 2008. On the negative side, current tension between civilians and police may be the highest since the 1992 LA riots, and a good portion of Congress still does not believe in climate change (or at least denies human responsibility for it).

Katherine Kelliher – The state of the Union continues to take one step forward and two steps back.  While the rate of the economy continues to increase and foreign relations progress, immediate changes need to be made regarding tensions amongst the American people.  Before the state of the Union can truly progress, this country needs to understand the importance of equality among people.  Specifically, women deserve equal pay and racial profiling must end.

Paul Brunkhorst – The state of the Union is one of a constant battle between words and actions. Our current government seems to be developing a dangerous precedent; governing nowadays is more about what is said, not what is actually done. Instead of proposals, policy speeches, and limited executive orders, it would be nice to see actual lawmaking.

Lexie Vasos – The State of the Union is a dream killer and an ego contest between the elite of the nation. The address continues to prove that the pride of the parties comes before the people of America as Barack Obama pitches his ideas to improve the country and the Republicans sit with blank stares.

Maggie Needham – The state of the Union is inconsequential.

Kyle Smith – The State of the Union is the Oscars of American politics. For one night, Congress becomes the venue for an annual “Who’s who” of our nation’s capital, complete with seemingly endless applause, mildly amusing punchlines, and–if we’re lucky– an embarrassing gaffe. And, much like the real Oscars, I say: skip it. I’ll just read the recap in the morning.

Tim Wilhelm – The state of the Union is one of crippling fatalism in the face of an era mired in catastrophes (whether real or overinflated) at every turn. There seems to be a kind of reveling in a sense of national doom: employment, education, foreign affairs, environment, economy and onward in litany. In the shadow of an uncertain future we steep in nostalgia for a bygone past. A focus on unity as opposed to faction seems to be the only thing capable of solidifying security in the present moment.

On Wednesday, Nov. 19, an exposé from the Rolling Stone illuminated a particularly gruesome incident of rape on the University of Virginia’s campus, and subsequently the larger systematic issue of sexual assault on college campuses across the country.

The news from UVA arrives as SLU is concluding its own sexual assault questionnaire, which all students are required to complete before Tuesday, Dec. 9.

The Rolling Stones article lays bare the gruesome gang rape of a first-year woman at a fraternity house on UVA’s campus and the subsequent instances that deterred the survivor from reporting her rape to the authorities.

The article depicts UVA as an institution dedicated to its own prestige and storied history, combined with a dangerous rape-culture that creates an environment hostile towards survivors of sexual assault. At various stages after the woman was raped, she was told by her friends that if “she’s going to be the girl who cried ‘rape’… we’ll never be allowed into any frat party again.” At the time of publication, none of the men who committed the rape had received any punishments from UVA or law enforcement.

UVA’s culture of sexual assaults and rapes is depicted in an alternative fight song: “Never let a Virginia man an inch above your knee, he’ll take you to his fraternity house and fill you full of beer, and soon you’ll be the mother of a bastard Cavalier!” This fight song is still sung by one of the school’s a cappella groups.

It would be easy for people at SLU or any college campus to see this and declare that something like this wouldn’t happen on our campus, that the conditions leading to gang rapes and the perpetrators completely evading punishment are unique to UVA, but such declarations would be naïve. By the time a woman graduates from college, there is a 20 percent chance she will be a victim of sexual assault. For SLU female undergrads, that percentage amounts to over 1,000 women.

One example of the pervasive culture of violence towards women and men victims of sexual assaults is the rarity that perpetrators (99 percent are males according one study) face any form of consequences for the sexual assault. One of our editors remarked that in athletics, men sometimes feel particularly untouchable. This arrogance together with the fact that perpetrators are rarely reported, or rarely face real consequences and you see a situation where “[sexual predators] are not acting in a vacuum [on college campuses] . . . They’re echoing the message and culture that’s around them: the objectification and degradation of women.”

Survivors of sexual assault face a pervasive culture of victim blaming. People argue that sexual assault victims should be conscientious of their alcohol consumption and utilize the “buddy system” while at parties.  These criticisms divert attention from the perpetrator’s actions. One editor remarked that reporting a sexual assault is difficult, as survivors internalize this victim blaming and become ashamed or embarrassed, which leads to underreporting.  Re-living the assault while filing a report is similarly painful.

So, there is a culture that exists on every college campus that allows sexual assaults to inevitably continue.  As an editorial board, we discussed a couple of options to combat this culture and make SLU more hospitable for victims of sexual assault, and more accountable to all students.

The first suggestion aims to hold the University more accountable to the student community by treating sexual assaults in the same manner as all crime incidents on or near campus- complete with an email every time one is reported including the time and place of the crime.

Another suggestion is a more victim-centric measure, such as the propagation of victims’ groups to allow survivors to meet, forming a safe space for support, affirmation and empowerment.

Finally, more preventative actions can be taken, such as classes that discuss the legal definitions of sexual assault and consent, as well as discussing the implications of these theories in real-life scenarios. These suggestions are neither comprehensive, nor easy. They require a shift in priorities for SLU and other universities, requiring an effort that is equitable to the magnitude of the problem

On Nov. 10, President Barack Obama stated that he supported net neutrality and would like to treat the Internet as a “public utility” in the United States.  Obama stated that labeling the Internet, as a “utility”, would acknowledge, “the Internet has become an essential part of everyday communication and everyday life.”

Obama’s  statements reject those made by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Tom Wheeler, who has proposed that Internet service providers, such as Comcast and Charter, could auction faster Internet speeds to the highest bidders. The Washington Post reported that the argument between the Obama administration and the FCC has the potential to be a major policy fight. Meanwhile, the vast majority of people, according to a University of Delaware poll (81 percent), were in favor of net neutrality; keeping the Internet neutral for all companies and individuals.

The poll also suggested that people would be more likely to support net neutrality the more they learned about it. Since a couple of Editors were uninformed regarding the subject, we saw it fit that we provide our opinions regarding net neutrality in hopes of creating a more knowledgeable student populace on the subject.

In 2003, Tim Wu, a Columbia University professor, helped bring net neutrality into a growing debate that has reached a fever pitch this year. The FCC proposed the creation of “Internet fast lanes” for the highest bidders, which caused over one million individuals to comment on their proposition. This Editorial Board is also concerned with what an auction service would look like to the average Internet user.

We are also concerned that more successful companies like Netflix, Spotify, Facebook, Google and other popular services would be able to “buy” faster speeds from Internet providers, and thus gain another avenue to monopolize with their respective service. Loading speed means more to younger generations with split-second attention spans, so faster loading speeds would provide a tangible advantage to big companies. Auctioning Internet speeds, then, could prevent start-ups from gaining the traction necessary to challenge established companies.

For example, imagine if Myspace could load content twice as fast as the newly emerging Facebook. Would people have jumped ship from one service to the other? Maybe not.

There is also a concern that Internet speeds could be tiered, leaving start-ups and non-profits with slower loading times and dwindling page views compared to more established companies and services.

We talked about why we venture to the Internet so frequently, and, in addition to looking at cute puppy videos, we go there for information. We use the Internet because there are vast amounts of information available. With loading speeds the same for all companies, all of this information is equally available to consumers. We can find out about Kim Kardashian’s butt at the same speed that we can research non-profits in the area; a beautiful ideal that we hope to continually protect in this country.

It began with one. Overlooking the clock tower during Occupy SLU, a live-stream camera linked to SLU’s website provided a live-view of the protests last month.

Then, there were more. Five cameras dot SLU’s campus, showing live feeds to anyone who cares to watch. These cameras, overlooking the clock tower, the Quad and Griesedieck Hall, the Busch Student Center, the Billiken’s sport complex, and the medical school campus, were installed Oct. 14, as mentioned by President Pestello in an email to the SLU community.

The cameras create unique questions and concerns regarding privacy, parental input and even budgets.

Our Editorial Board unanimously agreed that the installations of these cameras were directly caused by the protests, and fearful, less savory responses from parents and alumni demanding to know what was happening on campus. We speculated that the camera installation was an attempt to support SLU’s  narrative of the protests occurring on campus. Better than an email from the president of the University, the camera allowed people to see that the protests were neither violent, nor engulfing the University. Sometimes, it takes seeing in order to believe.

However, several Editors expressed concern about the cameras’ continued presence on campus. For one Editor, treating the protests as a spectacle felt “Orwellian”. We’re all aware that the Department of Public Safety (DPS) has a myriad of cameras that they track, but it’s another issue  to have our campus available to be viewed by anyone. A few Editors felt uneasy at the rapid proliferation of the cameras, and voiced concern that SLU will continue to add cameras. Some Editors offered the idea of limiting the number of cameras to the current total and only making these feeds available to SLU community members with a SLU ID username.

In addition to concerns that SLU is using public surveillance too eagerly, there are also concerns regarding the money used to install and maintain these cameras. The Editors familiar with bandwidth speeds remarked that five cameras constantly live-streaming use precious resources from a student body already frustrated by slow Wi-Fi . While the cameras proved useful for some during the week of the protests, and may prove useful again during the potential protests over the non-indictment of Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson, for the most part, these cameras seem altogether wasteful. Our campus is uninteresting 99 percent of time; other than students enjoying the weekend too much, or the infrequent protest, this campus would be extremely boring to watch. One of our Editors noted, “It’s a novelty, but it’s not a cool novelty.”

Despite all of the negative attributions we as an editorial board have placed on the cameras thus far, a few of us have managed to find positives to the online streaming. One Editor used his computer, instead of walking the 10 feet to a window, to see if it was raining outside. Another Editor posed the idea of doing a flash mob in front of the camera in an effort to show that the cameras could be used in recruiting more Billikens.

Other than the vague concern of additional proliferation of cameras on this campus, the cameras don’t hinder us in any way. If people want to watch our boring campus, let them. Hopefully a flash mob (or another protest) livens this place up for viewers.

Many SLU students have yet to complete their class registration. For those that are on the fence, we at the UNews would like to recommend some of our favorite classes. We hope you enjoy our suggestions!

Ryan McKinley: Intro to Women and Gender Studies has to be the class I recommend most. It’s a class that can do more than teach you; it can change your perspective, the way you view the world, and that is a beautiful thing.

Maggie Needham: I highly recommend Saher Alam’s creative writing class. It is a unique environment where you get to read and talk about stories written not by far-away authors, but by those sitting in the classroom with you. Through this, you’re able to learn a lot about the craft of writing fiction.

Deirdre Kerins: One class I highly recommend is a writing course with Dr. Meyer (News Writing, Editing, or even Film Studies). You will never receive an “A”, but your writing skills will grow exponentially, and everyone from teachers to future employers will be impressed.

Josh: While I agree with Deirdre that Dr. Meyer is a must-have professor, I also feel the need to highlight another member of communication department, Amber Hinsley. Professor Hinsley’s Journalism: News Writing course (CMM 210) is the class that convinced me to switch my major to communication. She will help develop your professional writing style, while also helping you become more familiar with both WordPress and iMovie.

Kyle Smith: Intro to International Politics is easily the most interesting – and challenging – course I’ve taken in the past two years. I had the luxury of taking this class my freshman year with the ever-fascinating Dr. Lomperis, who, sadly, will be retiring this winter. Dr. Lomperis peppered his fascinating 50-minute lectures with personal anecdotes from his incredible life experiences. Though the class will surely be different without him, I still highly recommend this course for anyone with an interest in how the world works.

Katherine Kelliher: I have been fortunate throughout my years at SLU to have  amazing professors. It is quite challenging to recommend only one so I will recommend three: Dr. Dan Kozlowski of the Communication department, Dr. Jean-Louis Pautrot of the French department, and Dr. Wynne Moskop of the Political Science department. All of three of these professors will challenge your mind and encourage your drive for learning.

Paul Brunkhorst: I was a swimmer my freshman year, and U101 for athletes was by far my favorite class. I learned a lot of useful things, like how to use a planner and write meaningful one-page reflections.

Jess Winter: I’m a passionate promoter of Intergroup Dialogue – a course that has reshaped my way of thinking and how I see my peers. It focuses on race, ethnicity and how we manage our own identities within a system of privilege and oppression.