UMass Lowell Connector Logo

Stiff competition at the annual student-professor debate

Al Gentile
Connector Editor

DISCLAIMER: NONE OF THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED BY STUDENTS AND PROFESSORS AT THIS EVENT NECESSARILY REFLECT THEIR ACTUAL VIEWS ON THE GIVEN SUBJECT

“It’s a good thing to get the students and professors on a more personal level,” said Danielle Brouder, psychology major and president of the Political Science Club.

On Wednesday Oct. 29 students and professors came together in Weed Hall for a whimsical debate session hosted by the Political Science Club for their annual Student-Teacher Debate. From the crackpot superlative awards handed out to faculty (among them “Still a Student at Heart” and “Hardest Name to Spell”) to the tongue-in-cheek discourses on the virtues of reality television, it was clear that having a good laugh was the goal of the debate.

Among the issues addressed were the value of voting in the upcoming mid-term elections, the dangers of reality television and the legalization of marijuana. For each argument, a student-professor team was put together to debate each issue either on the positive or negative outcomes of each case.

The purpose of the debate, contrary to similar events, was to bring faculty and students together in a comfortable setting, share laughs and make connections. Mostly freshmen and transfer students were in attendance. “We want to get the freshmen and transfer students together so they can feel welcome and warm because coming to a new school might be frightening,” Brouder said.

Morgan Marietta, a political science professor, extolled on the virtues of debate. “Smart people know what they think, but really smart people know what other people think,” he said. Commenting on his defense of the legalization of cannabis, Marietta said, “I don’t believe anything I just said, but that’s not the point.”

Jonathan Whiting, an accounting major, wore a green sweater while defending the legalization of cannabis. “Debate allows you to not only see both sides of an argument but firmly defend an end which makes you better educated yourself for being able to defend it,” Whiting said.

“It opens up your mind,” said Tyler Farley, double majoring in political science and economics. “It challenges you to know the other side’s argument and to know yours better and how to go after the weaknesses of the opposing side.”

To Farley, the high point of the night was community health and sustainability professor Leland Ackerson’s literally phallic and overwhelmingly comedic opposition of the legalization of marijuana. “He was stiff in all ways,” Farley said.

Related posts