Faulty Parking Permit Systems Students Pay For
By Michelle Romero
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Ever since the decision to implement a solely online buying system in January 2007, students have been the poorer! The Foothill-De Anza Police Department’s decision to compel students to buy quarterly parking permits online has stripped students of their right to chose. This “advancement” leaves students without options. While the online buying system is a fantastic new opportunity to avoid waiting in long lines, students should never be cornered in to one buying option.
By forcing students to purchase online, the Department is able to charge additional fees for whatever it sees fit. In fact, to purchase a quarterly permit online, the student pays an additional $3.25 “convenience” charge. What is convenient about more money out of student pockets?
The online system does allow students to elect not to pay by credit card online and instead pay by cash or check in the Cashier’s Office. However, this method is the exact method students have been using to purchase permits in previous years, only now students must enter their personal information in to an online system, print an order number, and then go stand in line. Again, what is so convenient about that?
If that is not bad enough, purchasing a daily permit is out of the question. The outdated machines are a scheme to steal student dollars. The Department fails to properly maintain parking lot permit machines causing several unnecessary parking tickets, which the student then has to pay for! One citation makes the student $35 poorer.
Several students have reported faulty machines in virtually every lot. One student even said, “I went to three different machines to try to buy a permit and there was a dollar stuck in each one!” The fact is, even if students try to abide by the laws of the parking lot, they are many times cited unfairly due to faulty machines.
Outdated machines accept only dollar bills and coins. Some even older machines still only accept coins. Assuming that students are well prepared with dollars and change, the machine may actually time out before the second dollar is ever accepted. This has happened! It takes several attempts to get one crisp dollar through the machine.
Students do not have the time to waste waiting for the machine to do its job! Class should be more important than fighting with a difficult machine until it chooses to function. Therefore, the Department should do its job and properly maintain its equipment.
To accommodate students and staff, the Foothill-De Anza Police Department may want to look in to enabling the parking permit machines to accept student Owl Cards and credit or debit cards. At the very least all systems should operate at a functional level and students should never be forced in to one buying option. Scheming honest students is not a laughing matter.
Word Count: 468 (excluding titles), 482 (with titles)
This was an editorial piece.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Thursday, February 8, 2007
COLUMN
ASFC Smart Shop Finds Loophole in Copyright Law
By Michelle Romero
Journalism Student
Thursday, February 08, 2007
With the outrageous prices of textbooks nowadays, it is no wonder Foothill College is seeking to find alternative methods to provide curriculum materials at affordable prices.
Teachers are encouraged to use the ASFC Smart Shop to sell teacher-made textbooks to students from $1-$30 depending on the amount of pages copied. These prices pale in comparison to the Bookstore prices which are often more than $100 per book!
While this is not a new idea, more teachers are utilizing this feature in the 2006-2007 school year and many students have felt the relief.
On the other hand, a large percentage of students are still plagued by high priced textbooks. In fact, the majority of teachers who use this method to provide their class with curriculum are English teachers.
Students majoring in other fields do not notice so much of a change in their wallet as they are still shelling out the big bucks in the Bookstore or struggling in the first few weeks of each quarter, as they fall further and further behind waiting for their books to arrive from online orders at half.com and other low-cost retailers.
Although many students do benefit from this service, it is important to consider one thing—does the prestigious honor code of the college have value? Is that value important to the students when it comes to their own pockets?
It has been preached from class to class beginning with each student’s first quarter to regard the honor code in all written work, being careful to properly site, avoid plagiarism and copyright violations. Therefore, students should be relieved to hear how the "fair use" clause of copyright law allows for this alternative.
The Smart Shop takes precautions not to make itself a target of copyright infringement. A bright orange sign behind the counter reads: “We do not copy books with the copy machine behind the counter. Sorry for the inconvenience caused.”
When asked about one professor's English 1B syllabus which includes several direct copies of excerpts from copyrighted textbooks, employee Kai Sio of the Smart Shop replied, “Some teachers take [material] from the textbook. They give us the copied pages and we copy it.”
Therefore, if the teacher makes the first copy of the original text, the Smart Shop will print it. Several students have seen teachers incorporate pages of original copyrighted text in their course readers. However, there is a loophole in copyright law which allows this.
A “fair use” clause allows teachers to copy materials for class or nonprofit use in accordance with four factors: 1) the purpose and character of the use in regard to whether it is intended for commercial use or nonprofit educational use; 2) the nature of the copyrighted work; 3) the amount of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and 4) the effect of the use upon the potential market of the copyrighted work.
In essence, under the “Fair Use” clause the ASFC Smart Shop can claim they charge students for the price of the paper, not the content. The fact the material is for educational use and is copied by the teachers is also fair.
One flaw in this loophole, however, is how copying several pages, articles, or chapters from copyrighted work, affects the author’s ability to sell product in its campus market. If the necessary pages for class use are provided at $2.00 per packet, the author loses potential revenue from having sold the entire textbook to hundreds of students who need to take the same class.
The issue is for all students and staff to decide. There are several teachers who take the time to pick and choose from an array of material, paraphrase, and cite correctly making for an incredibly cost effective, accessible alternative textbook. Others throw a packet of copies together and call it good.
It should be a priority concern of the college to set standards for teacher and student use of this system to refine its flaws, so that it can ensure its honor is never threatened, and that quality material is never discarded at the expense of hastily made copies created for the sake of saving money alone.
As is, most teachers who use this alternative, use it in conjunction with copyrighted books which the student must also buy. When used properly, it is an excellent opportunity for the college to offer more affordable course materials overall by incorporating this method, and more teachers should participate!
By Michelle Romero
Journalism Student
Thursday, February 08, 2007
With the outrageous prices of textbooks nowadays, it is no wonder Foothill College is seeking to find alternative methods to provide curriculum materials at affordable prices.
Teachers are encouraged to use the ASFC Smart Shop to sell teacher-made textbooks to students from $1-$30 depending on the amount of pages copied. These prices pale in comparison to the Bookstore prices which are often more than $100 per book!
While this is not a new idea, more teachers are utilizing this feature in the 2006-2007 school year and many students have felt the relief.
On the other hand, a large percentage of students are still plagued by high priced textbooks. In fact, the majority of teachers who use this method to provide their class with curriculum are English teachers.
Students majoring in other fields do not notice so much of a change in their wallet as they are still shelling out the big bucks in the Bookstore or struggling in the first few weeks of each quarter, as they fall further and further behind waiting for their books to arrive from online orders at half.com and other low-cost retailers.
Although many students do benefit from this service, it is important to consider one thing—does the prestigious honor code of the college have value? Is that value important to the students when it comes to their own pockets?
It has been preached from class to class beginning with each student’s first quarter to regard the honor code in all written work, being careful to properly site, avoid plagiarism and copyright violations. Therefore, students should be relieved to hear how the "fair use" clause of copyright law allows for this alternative.
The Smart Shop takes precautions not to make itself a target of copyright infringement. A bright orange sign behind the counter reads: “We do not copy books with the copy machine behind the counter. Sorry for the inconvenience caused.”
When asked about one professor's English 1B syllabus which includes several direct copies of excerpts from copyrighted textbooks, employee Kai Sio of the Smart Shop replied, “Some teachers take [material] from the textbook. They give us the copied pages and we copy it.”
Therefore, if the teacher makes the first copy of the original text, the Smart Shop will print it. Several students have seen teachers incorporate pages of original copyrighted text in their course readers. However, there is a loophole in copyright law which allows this.
A “fair use” clause allows teachers to copy materials for class or nonprofit use in accordance with four factors: 1) the purpose and character of the use in regard to whether it is intended for commercial use or nonprofit educational use; 2) the nature of the copyrighted work; 3) the amount of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and 4) the effect of the use upon the potential market of the copyrighted work.
In essence, under the “Fair Use” clause the ASFC Smart Shop can claim they charge students for the price of the paper, not the content. The fact the material is for educational use and is copied by the teachers is also fair.
One flaw in this loophole, however, is how copying several pages, articles, or chapters from copyrighted work, affects the author’s ability to sell product in its campus market. If the necessary pages for class use are provided at $2.00 per packet, the author loses potential revenue from having sold the entire textbook to hundreds of students who need to take the same class.
The issue is for all students and staff to decide. There are several teachers who take the time to pick and choose from an array of material, paraphrase, and cite correctly making for an incredibly cost effective, accessible alternative textbook. Others throw a packet of copies together and call it good.
It should be a priority concern of the college to set standards for teacher and student use of this system to refine its flaws, so that it can ensure its honor is never threatened, and that quality material is never discarded at the expense of hastily made copies created for the sake of saving money alone.
As is, most teachers who use this alternative, use it in conjunction with copyrighted books which the student must also buy. When used properly, it is an excellent opportunity for the college to offer more affordable course materials overall by incorporating this method, and more teachers should participate!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)