Latest News

Commentary, Opinion

Alleviate add/drop woes by shortening the add/drop period

by Vivek Gidla on

More in Commentary:

Add/drop distress marks the beginning of every semester. This past fall, students endured 18 dreadful days of waitlist purgatory, and endured 13 days until this semester’s Jan. 17 add/drop deadline. Apps such as //Get A Seat//, which give email notifications when a spot has opened up, only alleviate stress to a certain extent. How do we pragmatically address these add/drop woes? It’s simple: Shorten the add/drop period.

Every new semester is an opportunity to start fresh, and be on top of your courses from the get-go. Having a long add/drop period can get in the way of this. For potentially two weeks, students are unsure of what courses they will be taking, and by the time their schedule is finalized, plenty of material has already been covered. While students cannot be penalized for missed assignments or attendance during the add/drop period, they are still expected to catch up on the work that they miss—so much for a fresh start. A shorter add/drop period means a shorter period of uncertainty and a better chance of being on top coursework from the beginning of the semester.

 

 

 

A shortened add/drop period forces the student to think critically and more efficiently about the qualities they are looking for in their lecturer and course, thus narrowing the difficult decision down to a few concrete questions.

It may seem that shortening the add/drop period would force students to make decisions in a hurry. It’s worth noting, however, that too much time can lead to analysis paralysis—over-analyzing a situation so that a decision is never made—and mentally exhaust the undecided student and further frustrate the ones on the waitlist. A shortened add/drop period forces the student to think critically and more efficiently about the qualities they are looking for in their lecturer and course, thus narrowing the difficult decision down to a few concrete questions. For example, does the professor teach math on the blackboard or (blasphemously) read directly from lecture slides? In such a way, shortening the time to decide could lead to more effective decisionmaking.

Per Parkinson’s law, “work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion.” The habit of expanding a task to the provided time boundaries cannot easily be changed. When given the time, students use the full two weeks or more for course selection. While this time does provide space to try out courses before solidifying a schedule, two weeks is excessive to this end and prolongs stress and anxiety. The obvious solution is to shorten the add/drop period to reduce the time spent in limbo.

Granted, for a shortened add/drop period to work in this way, professors will have to make some administrative and scheduling changes, such as ensuring that course syllabi and grading schemes are accessible well before the start of classes. Such material should not be discussed in the first lecture, as it is an enormous waste of time. Students want to know how a professor lectures course material, not repetitive administrivia. The first lecture should be an honest sample of the professor’s teaching style so that students can make an informed decision more quickly.

The long add/drop period provides important time and flexibility when choosing courses, but this isn’t essential if students prepare ahead of time. Many students have an eloquent (if abstract) answer for what their 5-year goals are in a job interview—they should be able to plan what courses to take for the coming year. Students must be encouraged to plan their academic schedule a year in advance. A shortened add/drop period will work best if students are prepared with a tentative list of desired classes and their backups, and use the add/drop week to test the classes they are unsure of.

To correctly address add/drop frustration, truncate the add/drop period. The currently extended period of uncertainty hinders the chance to start the semester on the right track. Furthermore, a shorter add/drop time frame could encourage better decisions regarding course selection. Less time frantically checking Minerva, more time paying attention in class.

 

 

 

 

 

Vivek Gidla is a U2 student at McGill.

 

@McGillTribOp | [email protected]

 

 

 

 

 

 
Art, Arts & Entertainment

Interpreting reality in a digital age

by Grace Bahler on

More in Art:

[metaslider id=49639]

At Projet Pangée’s small gallery on the edge of Place des Arts, artist Lauren Pelc-McArthur is turning the digital into something palpable. With acrylic textures and neon colours, her pieces feel familiar, as if you have seen them before—if you’re a participant in the current worldwide digital age, it’s likely that you have.

McArthur’s pieces are part of Futuristic Future, an exhibit displaying various paintings and sculptures. Acting as a commentary on the digitalization of our world, the gallery, open now through late February, features works by Montreal-based McArthur, in addition to artists Amy Brener and Cat Bluemke. Curator Joani Tremblay, who had followed McArthur’s work for two years, connected all the artists’ pieces together as a means of observing rather than living in the digitalized world. 

Amidst the sea of luminescent paintings, glass prisms, and textured silicone sculptures is a unique take on humanity’s future technological presence. The physical presence of the artwork acts as an anchor in reality as the world launches into a very digital future. 

McArthur’s large, so-bright-they-burn paintings mimic the screens and images that society is inundated with every day. The artist explained the consistent use of backlit-reminiscent pinks and blues throughout—colours mostly seen on the screens of various devices—to make something material out of our digital lives. 

“[I’m interested in] what gets lost in translation when you’re taking work from screen space and turning it into tangible reality,” said McArthur, who has a background in both painting and graphic design. 

When you observe the way the paintings seemingly change as different angles highlight their multifaceted nature, it seems that turning the digital into something physical adds more than just a third dimension.  Walking into the gallery is essentially taking a step away from society’s techno-future. The pieces confront how the world is domineered by the digital and how technology is becoming so ingrained into our very nature that the projected outcome itself is not totally concrete—but the art certainly is. Acting as the ultimate interpretation of the digital age, Futuristic Future provides an artistic and somewhat surreal outlook on what our future will look like.

 

Futuristic Future will remain open to the public at Projet Pangée’s gallery (372 Sainte-Catherine Ouest) until Feb. 18. 

McGill, News

AMUSE members secure collective agreement with McGill

by Arvaa Balsara & Domenic Casciato on

More in McGill:

Two years of negotiations conclude in agreement

On the night of Jan. 9, members of the Association of McGill University Support Employees (AMUSE) voted 86 per cent in favour to ratify a new collective agreement with McGill. The union, which represents over 1,500 casual employees on campus ranging from floor fellows to library staff, began negotiations with McGill in May of 2015. The new agreement was drafted in a Nov. 25, 2016 meeting between AMUSE and the university.

These changes will be finalized when a final draft of the agreement is submitted by the administration and signed by AMUSE. In an email to The Tribune,  Robert Comeau, director of Labor and Employee Relations and part of the administration’s negotiating team, expects the agreement to be finalized sometime this semester.

“The administration is currently preparing the final English and French versions of the new collective agreement,” Comeau wrote. “It will then be reviewed by the union and we are hopeful that signature will take place in early February.”

AMUSE was unable to secure paid sick days for its members and, due to an open complaint they’ve filed with the Quebec Pay Equity Commission, they were also not able to implement an expanded list of job titles in the new agreement.

Although not all of their demands were met, the ratification of this agreement is a major victory for the union. Claire Michela, president of AMUSE, emphasized that their negotiations are not finished.

“[It was] not everything we wanted, but definitely everything was positive,” Michela said. “It’s clear that we had a collective agreement, before that was minimal […and] we were able to get things without giving anything up [….] It's not over.”

AMUSE-MUNACA merger progressing

On Feb. 23, members of AMUSE and McGill University Non-Academic Certified Association (MUNACA), two major labour unions on campus, will meet to approve the conditions of a merger to become one union representing both student and non-student permanent and casual employees.

The first steps towards the merger were approved in February 2015 as a result of pressures that both unions were experiencing in their negotiations with the university, which, according to Claire Michela, the current president of AMUSE, caused tension between the two organizations.

“By pitting us against each other, [the university] is able to reduce the inherent responsibility of management,” Michela said.

On Oct. 13, 2016, members approved proposed merger by-laws and a transition policy. By combining the two unions, both AMUSE and MUNACA hope to facilitate negotiations with the university and minimize any financial loss to the employees as a result of strikes.

Camille Tsalik, U3 Arts, is a work-study student represented by AMUSE and said that the strikes held in November 2016 prevented employees from working and only provided compensation for the time spent picketing.

“As someone [who] depends on my work-study pay for living expenses, the strikes were incredibly frustrating,” Tsalik said.

The current merger conditions propose that there will be three separate agreements, each covering one of the three bargaining units: The floor fellows, the temporary, non-academic employees which are both currently represented by AMUSE, and the permanent non-academic employees, which are represented by MUNACA.

Furthermore, the negotiations between the two unions have resulted in a proposal to consolidate the financial and executive structures of both unions. They will share a budget of approximately $410,000 per year, which will be a combination of their current budgets. Each of the three bargaining units will be represented by a vice-president (VP) and a labour relations officer in the new executive structure and will also share a president, a VP internal, and a communications officer.

“Without merging, the financial and executive structures wouldn’t be able to accomplish as much or be as strong of a union,” Michela said.


The first executive elections for the new combined union will take place in September 2017 provided that the current proposal is approved by both unions and their respective members.

McGill, News

Transition period in McGill’s Counselling and Mental Health Services

by Alexia Martel-Desjardins on

More in McGill:

In December 2016, Dr. Nancy Low was suspended from her position as Clinical Director of McGill’s Counselling and Mental Health Services (MCMHS).

The exact circumstances of Dr. Low’s suspension cannot be provided as both her office and Douglas Sweet, director of Internal Communications at McGill, said that they are unable to publically comment in any way about personnel matters.

Dr. Low’s suspension follows recent modifications that have been made to MCMHS since the beginning of the Fall 2016 semester, namely the harmonization of the two services into one administrative unit and the new definition of emergency appointments. These changes occurred after feedback and reports including the Student Services’ Cyclical Review, according to the Office of the Executive Director of Student Services.

When asked about the reason for Dr. Low’s suspension, a team from the office of the Executive Director of Student Services stated, “Dr. Nancy Low is on administrative leave. The University cannot comment on HR matters to protect the privacy of all parties concerned.” Calls to Dr. Low’s office were not returned.

Associate Clinical Director Dr. Giuseppe Alfonsi has assumed Dr. Low’s responsibilities for the moment, according to the Office of the Executive Director of Student Services.

The Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Vice-President (VP) University Affairs Erin Sobat said he was disappointed after hearing of Dr. Low’s suspension.

“We’re concerned that this seems like not a very healthy management move from higher up,” Sobat said.

Sobat said that SSMU has had a positive experience when collaborating with Dr. Low in the past. According to Sobat, Dr. Low voiced the worries of staff and students regarding the new stepped-care model.

“We have had very positive working relationships with Dr. Low,” Sobat said. “I think that she has been […advocating] for concerns with the transition to the stepped-care model […] coming from staff within Student Services that were not necessarily being heard or are still not being heard.”

The stepped-care model implemented in Fall 2016 consists in a change of procedure in the way patients are taken in. Instead of students choosing to visit Mental Health Services or Counselling Services, new patients are evaluated at one point of entry and are directed to the correct service.

“[The model] is moving away from not just prioritizing one-on-one psychotherapy, and that is a shift that is grounded in research showing there are other really effective tools out there [that are] more preventative and upstream,” Sobat said.

According to Dr. Alfonsi and the Director of the McGill Counselling Service Dr. Vera Romano, students who have used MCMHS feel the new structure is less confusing than the previous.

“Many students who have experienced the old system have expressed relief that there are less hoops to jump through and that they can get access to the resources offered by both units through a single process,” Dr. Alfonsi and Dr. Romano said.

Feedback from MCMHS staff, according to Dr. Alfonsi and Dr. Romano, mainly addresses emergency appointments and the difficulty of providing services while at the same time implementing important structural modifications.

“The major challenge for staff is coping with systemic changes when our units cannot close shop for a semester to ‘renovate processes,’” said Dr. Alfonsi and Dr. Romano. “The main pain point that continues to be expressed is priority appointments, which we have started to address.”

Sobat said that he believes Dr. Low’s suspension will impede the process of adapting to the new stepped-care model.

“We think it’s really only going to be successful if the staff feel that they are a part of these decisions and a part of these changes that are on board,” Sobat said.

Sobat also said that SSMU would prefer that students and staff be more included in the decision-making process of major changes within the student services system.

“We’d really encourage the administration to adopt a collaborative approach when it goes forward with these big structural changes,” Sobat said. “[The administration’s approach should] not only consult students, but also really involve their staff in those discussions.”

Students have complained about the new system’s lack of clarity, according to Sobat.

“There are […] continued concerns about the communication of the changes in Counselling and Mental Health Services,” Sobat said. “[MCMHS] keep saying they are going to launch a new website, that they’re going to have a communications plan, and that’s been very delayed.”

Also on MCMHS’ agenda for the Winter term is taking into account student feedback and the improvement of their services based on the new approach, according to Senior Director of Student Services Martine Gauthier.


“We are about to launch an application form for students to join our Student User Consultation Group to help inform all our Wellness initiatives, including the harmonization of Counselling and Mental Health Services,” Gauthier said.

Sports

In conversation with McGill Associate Professor of Sports Psychology Dr. Gordon Bloom

by Erin Dwyer on

More in Sports:

“Why Freshmen Should Not Play,” read a New York Times sports section headline in October 1983. University of North Carolina basketball coach Dean Smith wrote the piece based on his perception that first-year athletes tend to fail to cope with the academic intensity, homesickness, and unique social setting university brings while playing a varsity sport.

Associate Professor Gordon Bloom of the McGill University Sports Psychology Research Laboratory would agree that being a first-year collegiate athlete puts young adults under a lot of pressure. Previous studies by Bloom have revealed that freshmen students have to cope with many sources of stress and disruptions to academic and athletic life.

“Students who come as a first-year university student already go through stress and difficulties,” Bloom said. “When you throw in a sports commitment that involves practicing four to five days a week, games on weekends, and travelling, it’s extensive.”

Where Bloom disagrees, however, is the conclusion that first-years should not participate in varsity sports. Last year, Bloom and his colleagues published a study on how different coaching methods can be a driving force in a first-year athlete’s success. Before his work, there was sparse material focusing on the coach as a mediator of this stress and disruption.

“We wanted experienced coaches who have been here a long time,” Bloom said. “When you interview a first-year athlete, they are still spinning their head. We really got coaches that have been [coaching for] a long time and are known in their sports for having a solid program.”

The McGill study conducted interviews with eight Canadian Interuniversity Sport (CIS) head coaches with a minimum of 10 years experience. Coaches were asked to detail their experience of developing collegiate athletes from their first to final year.

“A lot of them said it was a challenge when they first started, they didn’t really know how much guidance first-year athletes would need,” Bloom said.

It soon became clear to the coaches, however, that their engagement with young players would need to be extensive.

“I certainly talk to my first-year kids every day,” one of the CIS coaches told the researchers. “Constantly I ask them, ‘How is everything going? How is school going?’ I don’t have to do that with veterans.”

The extensiveness of coach involvement surprised even the researchers.

“What stood out to me is that coaching really does involve more than teaching sports skills,” Bloom said. “There is a very strong life skills component to helping your athletes adjust and excel as an athlete, student, and a person.”

Given CIS head coaches’ hectic schedules, the study said they don’t approach developing first-year athletes alone.

“A lot of them said that they guide and help, but they also make sure the peers on the team are helping the athlete,” Bloom said.

Fostering this supportive atmosphere is also the responsibility of the immediate coaching staff.

“We have three captains,” one coach commented in the study. “They are extensions of me, our values, and the team culture. What we try to do is […] find someone on the team that you respect, you trust, you feel comfortable with. Let them be your anchor.”

Many reported that the process of developing successful student athletes begins before they step foot on campus by recruiting players who fit into a coach’s strategy and have both athletic and academic talent.

“I like to look at how the young [athletes] deals with adversity,” one CIS coach commented. “When things are not going well for them in a game, [I look at] how [he or she] faces and deals with that.”

Bloom and his colleagues hope that the results of their study can have a larger impact on coaching procedures in university athletic programs.

“Hopefully these results will tell junior coaches that their job is more than just wins and losses,” Bloom said.

 

Commentary, Opinion

Canada’s 150th: Reflecting on the past while celebrating the present

by Catherine Morrison on

More in Commentary:

As Canadians take 2017 to celebrate the 150th anniversary of Confederation, the year ahead should be a time for celebration. However, party preparations have recently been hindered by disagreement over the meaning of the anniversary. The Parti Québecois (PQ) recently announced that they have planned “L’autre 150ième,” a Quebec-focused celebration with the goal of promoting what they view as “a non-biased version of 150 years of relations between Quebec and Canada,” by highlighting events that might be left out of the federal narrative. The PQ’s announcement is a reminder of the perennial debate concerning whose history is celebrated by national commemorations. It is important to recognize that the rich history and culture of Quebec is unique and adds diversity to Canada. Yet it is most important for all Canadians to view the country’s many cultures as an asset rather than something to separate its people.

In fairness, the PQ isn’t alone in taking a skeptical view of Canada 150, and questioning the appropriateness of commemorating a Confederation that has not always treated all Canadians fairly. Throughout the past 150 years, there are many chapters of Canada’s history for which Canadians have no reason to feel proud: The treatment of First Nations, Inuit and Metis communities, the exploitation of Chinese railway workers, and the internment of Japanese and Ukrainians, to mention just a few. Although the PQ is right to remind us that Canada’s history is not always reason to celebrate, they are wrong in concluding that Canada 150 is all about the past. Geneviève Dubois-Richard, liaison and coordination officer at the Department of Canadian Heritage explained in an email to The McGill Tribune that beyond celebratory events, Canada 150 will include events such as “panel discussions on what Canadians desire for the future of the country; youth-led gatherings bringing indigenous and non-indigenous peoples in Canada together to help build relationships and move toward reconciliation; and, discussions around environmental stewardship.” As Canada 150 should certainly reflect on the country’s history, it should also be an occasion to celebrate who we are today, and inspire us to imagine how Canadians could improve it in the next 150 years.

 

 

 

At a time when the world is becoming more divisive and isolationist in the name of nationalism, Canada remains one of the most welcoming countries in the world.

As a country, Canada must move forward without denying or forgetting the past injustices that have been made or, for that matter, the ones that still must be addressed. At a time when the world is becoming more divisive and isolationist in the name of nationalism, Canada remains one of the most welcoming countries in the world. It remains a beacon for those who believe in creating more open, diverse, and inclusive societies—and that’s worth celebrating.

Although Canada’s successes in no way make up for its mistakes, landmarks such as the legalization of same-sex marriage in 2005, the establishment of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in 2008 and its report in 2015, and its high ranking in terms of the UN human development index’s standards of living, global school rankings and its response to the Syrian refugee crisis are certainly commendable. As Canada reflects on its past, it should not forget the present, and envision the country’s future in an increasingly globalized world.

This year, Canadians should take a moment to remember what it is exactly they are celebrating and what their contribution will be to the story that is told at Canada’s next major commemoration. Canada 150 is also something to be proud of. The anniversary is an opportunity to celebrate Canadian inclusiveness and diversity while giving us the occasion to share more of Canada’s stories with the world.

 

 

 

Arts & Entertainment, Film and TV, Pop Rhetoric

Hollywood awards itself

by Ariella Garmaise on

More in Arts & Entertainment:

When the Golden Globes kickstarted the awards show season on Jan. 8, the normally easy-going ceremony was set with an unusually tense energy. Award shows are a time for the entertainment industry to pat itself on the back for its accomplishments in film and television. This year, celebrities went even further to congratulate themselves on their liberal pseudo-activism in the face of the Trump presidency.

“I just think it can be gross sometimes, the way Hollywood congratulates itself all the time,” actor and comedian Zach Galifinakis  told The Hollywood Reporter in 2014. 

Since Trump’s election, Hollywood’s ‘liberal elite’ have been forced to face the limits of their power. The entertainment industry fancies itself the epicentre of American culture, but despite an almost unanimous outcry from Hollywood, Trump still won. Award shows now not only shed light on Hollywood’s successes, but also its failures—and Hollywood is unsure of how to move forward. 

In the first few moments of his opening monologue at the Globes, host Jimmy Fallon strode to centre stage, only to be met with a broken teleprompter. The broken monitor was a perfect metaphor for the entertainment industry’s difficulties in moving forward in the new Trump administration; quite literally, Hollywood is speechless.

The ensuing ceremony was filled with clumsy political messaging. The Hollywood Foreign Press and its guests are unsure of their role within America’s shifting landscape. On one hand, awards shows are making concerted efforts to avoid partisan debate. Fallon is infamously apolitical, and received widespread criticism for ruffling Trump’s hair in a bit on his show. Similarly, February’s Academy Awards host Jimmy Kimmel told Salon, “I do say whatever I want. I just try to keep in mind that mine is not a political show.” 

When receiving The Cecil B. DeMille Lifetime Achievement Award, Meryl Streep used her acceptance speech to steer the Golden Globes back into activist territory. Her speech, which condemned Trump’s racist, misogynistic, and ableist rhetoric, predictably ignited a media firestorm. It also begged the question: What is the role of the celebrity  in the Trump era? 

“[The Golden Globes is an] overrated collection of liberals gathered in a room to celebrate themselves,” said Tomi Lahren, host of the conservative talk show Tomi on TheBlaze. Lahren is notorious for inflammatory dialogue, yet this description is surprisingly apt; Hollywood’s insularity is often its biggest weakness. Yes, Streep’s speech was powerful, but it addressed  an audience of like-minded entertainers. The Golden Globes was quick to pride itself on the tremendous progress it has made, without recognizing gaping inequalities. 

Fallon’s monologue cheekily pointed out that at least this year, “not all the nominees are white;” however, Hidden Figures and Fences, two films with predominantly black casts, were continuously mistaken for one another throughout the night. Streep described how heartbreaking it was watching Trump mock Serge Kovaleski, a reporter with arthrogryposis. Yet Hollywood has a long history of failing to cast disabled actors: In 2015 Eddie Redmayne, a fully able-bodied actor, won both a Golden Globe and an Academy Award for his portrayal of Stephen Hawking, who struggles with ALS, in The Theory of Everything. Disability activist Kody Keplinger told the Huffington Post, “I couldn’t help rolling my eyes [at Streep’s speech]. The applause in the room felt almost self-congratulatory.” 

Self-congratulation is not inherently flawed. There are many movies, television shows, and other creative forces worth celebrating. It is problematic, however, when Hollywood congratulates itself at the cost of improvement. Awards shows are a good time to look at not only where the entertainment industry is doing well, but also where it can do better. Streep’s speech was undoubtedly moving, and public figures will always play a role in influencing public affairs. Still, in conducting a Trump post-mortem, Hollywood must recognize that the scope of its outward political effectiveness is limited. Hollywood must work against the structures of inequality within itself to make the most effective difference. 

A previous version of this article stated that Kovaleski has cerebral palsy. Kovaleski has arthrogryposis. The Tribune regrets this error.

Editorial, Opinion

Political conversation must break echo chambers at McGill in 2017

by The McGill Tribune Editorial Board on

More in Editorial:

On Jan 12, Conservative Party of Canada leadership candidate Kellie Leitch spoke at a meet-and-greet on Peel St., co-hosted by the Conservative Association at McGill University. In response, members of the Montreal community, including McGill students, staged a peaceful protest. While divisive, both the event and the protest are essential expressions of political engagement and should be respected. The interaction between the two exemplifies the varied and continuous dialogue that is vital to productive political conversation. Given the recent political polarization and degeneration of discourse on North American campuses and in American politics, it is increasingly important to create room for political conversation on campus. 

Leitch has raised considerable controversy on the campaign trail thus far, most notably for praising Donald Trump and for proposing the mandatory screening of immigrants for “Canadian values.” Protesters claim that Leitch’s platform and ideas are “morally reprehensible” and promote “bigotry, racism, and xenophobia.” Her presence close to campus and the involvement of a group of McGill students raises questions about the purpose of controversial figures on university campuses.

Whether the students in attendance at Leitch’s event and those that protested it ever see eye-to-eye, exposure to different perspectives is critical to meaningful political conversation. Without it, students won’t be introduced to new ideas, and risk becoming entrenched in a political camp without questioning their political beliefs. Confining political discourse to conflicting echo chambers has real consequences, as the rhetoric and outcome of this past American election demonstrated. To prevent ideological silos on campus, students must remain informed of opinions different from their own.

 

 

 

 

Whether the students in attendance at Leitch’s event and those that protested it ever see eye-to-eye, exposure to different perspectives is critical to meaningful political conversation.

Hate speech should never be tolerated. Accusations of racism and xenophobia, like those levelled at Leitch, deserve serious consideration. The rights of the students who invited Leitch must also be considered: As a student branch of a political party, the Conservative Association at McGill University is well within its rights to host a party leadership candidate to speak to student constituents, especially at an off-campus venue. Indeed, many student groups bring speakers to campus in order to spark conversations and share ideas outside the classroom. Such actions should not be discouraged. 

In many cases, differing views may never be reconciled—as Leitch spoke to her supporters inside the event and protesters voiced their objections outside, two different preachers were arguably addressing two different choirs. Points of fundamental disagreement are an inevitable part of contentious political conversation.

Just as Leitch’s presence is a valid contribution to the campus discourse of ideas, protest is also a valid response. As a means of both verbal and symbolic objection, peaceful protest is a different form of political speech than a formal address, but it is no less legitimate. It plays an important role in starting and maintaining communication between opposing groups. Importantly, protesters at the Leitch event did not attempt to disrupt the event from proceeding. Doing so would have the same silencing effect as cancelling the event. 

Political conversation takes different forms —sometimes it is a protest, sometimes it is a formal meet-and-greet—and it must be continuous. To this end, it is crucial to maintain space for the views of different groups and the potential for dialogue between them. Controversial figures provoke conversation; observers and commentators must engage rather than entrench. 

 

 

 

 

 

Science & Technology

McGill offers 3-D printing service to students

by Zapaer Alip & Alice Shen on

More in Science & Technology:

On Jan. 11, the McLennan Library held this year’s first “Introduction to 3-D Printing” workshop. The workshop taught procedures necessary for students to get access to the library’s newly acquired 3-D printers under the Research Commons initiative launched in September 2016.

3-D printing, sometimes known as additive manufacturing, involves printing successive layers of materials, often plastics, in precise forms to create an object under computer control.

While McGill University has several 3-D printers of various sizes and types, most are located away from the general student populace in labs and restricted to professors or researchers in certain faculties. The Research Commons is making this new and promising technology more accessible. Currently, three 3-D printers are available to students at the McLennan Library: Two Tinkerine Ditto Pro’s and one AirWolf AxiomE. In addition to the 3-D printers, the Research Commons offers an array of advanced technologies, including a data visualization video wall, virtual reality kits, and a 3-D scanner.

The 3-D printers were placed in McLennan Library in an effort to make them easily accessible to the majority of students at McGill.

“It’s in a convenient location,” Chantal Petgrave, U2 Industrial Relations and 3-D printing tutor, said. “A lot of students, no matter what faculty they are in, are going to come to McLennan library so it just gives easier access to 3-D printing. I think it also allows students who won’t normally be interested in 3-D printing an opportunity to discover something new.”

The workshop, hosted by Petgrave, introduced the basics of 3-D printing, including how to use 3DPrinterOS–the cloud-based online platform which the library uses to manage 3-D printers–and the procedure for students to use to start printing their own objects.

After completing the workshop, students can book time on 3-D printers through the Research Commons subpage on the McGill Library website–similarly to booking study rooms. While several colour choices are available in terms of print material, the 3-D printers are restricted to only print in Polylactic Acid (PLA), as other common plastics, such as Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) produce toxic fumes which require powerful ventilation infrastructure–something which the library space does not currently have.

According to Michael Groenendyk, the Research Commons staff member managing the 3-D printing service, it took McGill about a year and a half of planning to join the growing list of Canadian universities operating 3-D printing centres dedicated to students and faculty. Groenendyk acknowledged McGill has had a relatively late start compared to other universities, but highlighted the advantages of being a late adopter.

“We are only a few years behind, but [3-D printing] is becoming very popular,” Groenendyk said. “Ours is done better than the other ones, which is kind of the benefit of doing it later, as you can see all the mistakes and different ways people do it and assess everything.”

During a pilot trial run in the Fall 2016 semester, 3-D printing was free of charge to students. Starting this semester, students will be charged one dollar per hour of printing plus the cost of materials. There is a minimum of two dollars per job as the service transitions from a pilot project to a service.

“The rate of one dollar per hour will be applied after the model has been completely successfully,” Groenendyk wrote in an email to Tribune. “I won’t charge for failed prints.”

So far, Groenendyk estimates 150 students have completed the workshop.

Even with the price increase, the Research Commons 3-D printing service is possibly the cheapest and most accessible 3-D printing option in Montreal for McGill students.  

Hockey, Men's Varsity, Sports

Queen’s Gaels beat McGill Redmen in Carnival game

by Patrick Beacham on

More in Hockey:

 

 

 

McGill Redmen
1

 

 

 

 

 

 

Queen's Gaels
2

 

 

 

 

     The McGill Redmen (15-4-2) faced off against the Queen’s Gaels (15-4-1) on Jan. 13 in front of a roaring crowd of almost 1,200 McGill fans and carnival participants at McConnell Arena. Despite the home crowd’s fervour, McGill lost both the game and sole possession of the OUA conference lead as Queen’s took the game 2-1 with a winning goal in the final two minutes of play.

    “I thought we battled hard,” Redmen defenceman Francis Lambert-Lemay said. “We came in short, but we need to take less penalties because we were [penalty] killing all night and that killed us.”

    The Redmen came out aggressively against the Gaels, a break in a long trend of slow starts for the squad. McGill’s urgency in the first period could be attributed to the energizing effect of the masses of McGill students dressed in colourful onesies.

    “Those games kind of remind you why you’re playing hockey,” McGill forward Simon Tardif-Richard said. “[With] a lot of people like that, it’s a lot of fun for us players to play in front of a big crowd [….] I think that’s part of why we started really strong.”

    Despite the hot start, Queen’s managed to open the scoring at the end of the first period. Constant McGill penalties throughout all three periods led to an increased burden on the penalty kill team. The Redmen had to defend against a total of seven man-down situations throughout the game, impeding any offensive momentum needed to take on the Gaels’ strong defence.

    “We don’t control the refs, so we’ve gotta be ready to go out there and kill some penalties,” McGill defenceman Etienne Boutet said. “You get to play with one more on their side, so it’s hard, but whatever, that’s part of hockey.”

    The Redmen next face the Concordia Stingers on Friday, Jan. 20. McGill defeated Concordia 6-5 the last time the two teams faced off and with Concordia just behind McGill in the standings, the game is expected to be close and intense.

    “Concordia has a lot of speed offensively, so we’ll need to contain that,” Lambert-Lemay said. “And we’ll need to score goals because we scored one tonight [against Queen’s] and we need more to win games.”

 

Quotable: “If we would have that many people every game, we would win way more games than we would lose.” —McGill defencemen Etienne Boutet on the rambunctious crowd.

 

Stat Corner: McGill had three times as many penalty minutes as Queen’s on Friday night.


Moment of the Game: Gaels forward Eric Margo made a rebound shot from the slot immediately after it had deflected off of the goalie’s pad, scoring the game-winning goal for Queen’s with less than a minute and a half remaining in the game.

1 … 691 692 693 694 695 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue