Many schools, however, have banned gum-chewing in the classroom because students are placing the finished gum in places that do not start with ‘gar’ and end with ‘bage’.

This policy should be reconsidered.

Statistics have proven that chewing gum in the classroom raises test scores.  A group of 108 students, ages 13 to 16, were assigned to chew gum during math class while doing homework and classwork, and in a matter of 14 weeks, their math scores increased by a whopping 3%.

Chewing gum has also proven to keep students more concentrated in class. Statistics show that chewing gum is a way to keep focused and alert. This is the reason why athletes chew gum during games in order to be alert and focused.

Besides the mental benefits, it also is a very low calorie snack that in the long run, could potentially decrease childhood obesity. Instead of snacking on high calorie snacks like Oreos or chips, students can pop in a piece of Wrigley that has only 5-10 calories.

So, if schools continue to eliminate chewing gum in the classroom, their efforts to keep their classrooms clean will backfire on their test scores. It will also upset the students and cause further rebellion, making them less willing to focus in class and try their best. Next thing you know, the school is being monitored by the government due to the low test scores and the decreasing number of graduates.

Though some teachers may find finding gum under the desks a pain, distributing detentions to students who put gum under desks will  teach them to not do it. Also, having different policies about how loud a student can chew and whether the gum chewing is distracting to other students can be put in place. By doing this, students will learn how to respect school policies.

Nonetheless, If schools are really interested in finding ways to better students’ learning experience, they should reconsider the gum-chewing policy. Though it can get messy, the outcome will better the school and students.

I was raised to have morals, virtues, and self-respect and seeing people get famous for having none of the above shows me that having morals may gain you respect, but it doesn’t make you popular.

That message is the same message that surrounds our society. The media purposely capture and focus on the scandals that make the news so eye catching and jaw dropping. You don’t see any magazines covering the good deeds of people helping out in Darfur, but it’s almost impossible to walk into a store and not find out about Miley Cyrus posing semi-nude under a blanket.

The scandals and people on the Jersey Shore were just too much for me. Come on, “The Situation,” really? How cocky can Mike Sorrentino get? The only reason he is considered “The Situation” is because he’s a heartless instigator who, like many, thrives on drama. As poor little, over-tanned Nicole “Snooki” Polizzi got socked in the face, Mike was objectifying yet another easy girl. I suppose that is his version of having a good time, but at the end of the show he just looks like a creeper that everyone hated.

My mother had always warned me: “You can be pretty on the outside, but ugly on the inside.” I never understood that until I watched the spoiled, overly conceited Angelina “Jolie” Pivarnick whine about putting hangers on t-shirts and get upset over a married man breaking up with her. Although she looked kind of pretty, her hideous attitude and behavior overpowered her looks.

In most episodes, I laughed at the irony of Snooki wanting to hook-up with every cute “guido” and wondering why the guys she just shacked up with weren’t looking to become serious with her. Someone should tell her that when you lack respect for yourself, other people tend not to see your self-worth, let alone take you seriously.

I found the drama extremely entertaining, but I pitied the dumb, promiscuous, and sometimes even dangerous things the cast was willing to do just to make their names known. This show helped me realize why my parents are as traditional and conservative as they are: it’s because they didn’t want their daughter to feel the need to sacrifice her dignity for the approval of others. I’m not saying that people like the cast of the Jersey Shore were raised wrong, I’m just saying that their priorities of fame and self-worth are out of order. Maybe it’s not their fault, given our media’s priority of selling stories rather than spreading virtue. Morals might not bring huge publicity, but at least it fills the emptiness a meaningless hook-up or a night of partying tends to leave.
I’m probably old-fashioned, but if becoming as grimy as Paris Hilton means finding the Hollywood spotlight, I’d rather be hidden in the darkness of normality.

A couple weekends ago, I attended a program called Women of Distinction at Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts. I was only there for three days, but during my short visit I realized 3 things that college will leave you, take from you, or give to you, making me even more excited to get there.

1) Near or far, the environment will leave you surprised.
You’d probably laugh at the list of “must be worn” east coast inspired outfits I tried to put together, or the different classics I brushed up on, just to be sure that I would have good conversation fillers. You could even call me insane for spending hours reading page after page of College Confidential on what every prospective student should ask during a college visit.

I tried to be as prepared as I could for this opportunity, but my efforts were beyond fruitless. The only thing I got right was an umbrella. I had packed sweaters, coats, thermals, wool socks, scarves, fur caps, even mittens. Little did I know that every building on campus would have the heater on blast, leaving me desperately wishing for a T-shirt.

I don’t usually take showers at 2 am either, but I am guessing college has a way of flip-flopping schedules. My host, Mindy, definitely had the most odd daily routines. Napping in the afternoon, to eating breakfast at 12 after her first class, to being able to get dressed for a party in under five minutes – she never failed to surprise me. She left me with a bit advice, “Don’t expect anything.”

2) All identities will be taken away, no one knows you.
Most of my academic preparation was useless as well. When given the opportunity to talk to professors and provosts, I found myself in the most random discussions talking about the most interesting subjects. There was no way I could have known to familiarize myself in topics such as circadian rhythms or the struggle of the black writer.

At first I was intimidated by the newness of the situation, but I quickly realized it wasn’t as much about fact as it was about opinion. Coming in with an open mind led to the exposure of amazing concepts. I didn’t feel stupid, not for one second. I had no idea what narcolepsy was, but instead of being lost I was enlightened. It felt natural coming in with questions.

At college, no one knew me. They didn’t know what type of kid I was. I was just like everyone else there, and I guess the whole “I can be whoever I want to be” comes with going to any new place, but in college it’s almost expected.

Never in the world would I be caught at an Afro-Jazz dance lesson. But hey, no one knew that, so I went on chanting Swahili and Jamaican Patois while awkwardly contorting my ribcage.

3) College will give you limitless opportunities: social and academic.
West-Quad Story, a battle to the end between a female acapella group from Smith and a male group from the University of Connecticut blew my mind. Those students looked like they loved singing more than a fat boy loves cake. Watching the acapella group made me realize how many different things I could be a part of in college. There are so many more people and everyone pursues their interests.

I met people from 32 states during my stay, two from Hawaii, and some from Minnesota and Iowa. Everyone had such unique stories. There was almost nothing in common, and instead of freaking me out, I was more curious about their lives.

At college, everyone was here for the same thing; getting out in the world. There’s just something motivating about seeing people not a lot older than you talking about their futures with determination.

Whether they are waking up at 4 in the morning to go rowing on nearest river, or spending most of their free time in the lab transcribing tapes of child behavior, or just eating in the dining hall, they are taking advantage of what college has offered them.

I admit, Twilight’s one of my guilty pleasures – don’t judge me.

The storyline of a vampire and a human’s forbidden love can be pretty cliché, the actors of the movie may be a little below par, and I’m sorry that Stephanie Meyer completely screwed up your view on what vampires are – but these minor flaws couldn’t possibly outweigh the major success that the book and the movie have received in the past year alone.

It’s the captivating love story that draws readers in and brainwashes them into instant Edward Cullen fans. Twilight is about two teenagers in love and the obstacles that can get in the way of the relationship, which makes the basis of the story relatable to the female audience.

Enter Edward Cullen. The fictional sparkling vampire that almost every girl pines for. Why? He’s passionate, loyal, devoted…and not real. He’s the perfect boyfriend they’ll never be able to have, which makes them wanting more. Plus, you add in his relationship with Bella and bam! – there’s your classic love story.

Who cares if it’s unrealistic? It’s FICTION. It’s meant to completely encompass you in a world different than your own – with the reality of love and all knowledge of “real” vampires pushed aside.

Well, there’s the book, but once the book turns into a movie… and you get an explosion of everything Twilight! Usually when a movie version of a book comes out I don’t seem to enjoy it as much. But seeing the movie gave the characters a face and the most exciting, action packed scenes of the books come to life. Plus it doesn’t hurt that every single actor that was cast into the movie is extremely attractive. (Shoutout to Taylor Lautner…)

And if it’s so bad as some of you think it is, then that definitely explains why Twilight won “Best of Book of the Year” by Publishers Weekly, and peaked at #1 on the New York Times Best Seller list.

The movies themselves are getting even more popular as time progresses. According to the Los Angeles Times, the midnight ticket sales for New Moon is $26.27 million. To top that, the recent release of New Moon smashed on the ticket sales of Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince ($22.2 mil) and even the Dark Knight ($18.5 mil).

So here’s a quick solution for all you Twilight haters out there: if you don’t like the movie or the book – don’t watch it, and don’t read it. Simple as that! Might as well get used to it now, because gauging as to how successful New Moon is and with the anticipated release of the third installment Eclipse this June, you’ll be seeing, hearing, and watching fans go crazy over the Twilight Saga for years to come.

Games are supposed to be littered with bloody helmets, Richter-scale registering hits, and contorted bodies straight from the mind of Picasso. But as an avid football fan, I can tell that the sport is becoming more about contact, and not collisions. The game of organized violence and chaos that millions of Americans have loved for almost a century is becoming more civilized, and it makes for a lesser game.

In recent years, the NFL has passed a series of new rules and clarifications that limit the aggression with which its athletes can play. At the forefront of the issue is the protection of quarterbacks, who are recognized as the marquee players of the league.

Owners like the New England Patriots’ Robert Kraft aren’t shy about their concerns to reduce injuries to their stars.

“What makes [the NFL] special is special players. It’s like going to see a great movie and the star isn’t in the movie. It’s the same principle” said Kraft, in his support of stricter rule implementations to protect quarterbacks would-be tacklers.

I understand this mindset of league owners. The NFL is a multi-billion dollar beast, and owners want to protect their investments, especially the guys who help light up the scoreboards and sell tickets. I get that quarterbacks have always been the most defenseless players on the field because they can’t brace themselves for any kind of hit.

I also know that signal callers are grown men who willing signed up for this career. These rule changes are starting to accommodate the players, instead of having the athletes adapt to the chaotic nature of the game itself.

While the league authorities do have some legitimate concerns, their intents to make the game safer are actually diminishing the level of play. Stricter rules have made officials overly trigger-happy with the penalty flags. Simply grazing a quarterbacks’ leg has the potential to draw a roughing the passer call.

For their whole lives, these athletes have been taught to play with the mindset that every play is their last. And now these strictly enforced rules tell defenders to scrap that notion, and that they should hesitate instead.

In football, any moment of uncertainty can completely change the complexion of a game. As such, players are not rewarded, but punished for playing with the reckless abandon that has been embedded in their hearts.

Football is a stop-and-go sport; plays last for little more than fifteen seconds at a time. For that reason, some look down upon the game for its lack of excitement.  The appeal comes from seeing some of nation’s strongest, quickest athletes voluntarily sacrifice their bodies for the sole purpose of gaining one yard.

By making defenders think twice about how they approach their job, the gentler NFL is ripping away the soul of the game. My complaints don’t stem from come from some overly-macho attitude. Rather, they come from a fan’s legitimate concern for the identity and quality of the game.

I still love watching football, but it pains me to see a sport defined by physical and mental struggle be in danger of becoming a shell of itself.

When I first met my beautiful wife, Jill, I never thought I would marry a gringa.  I am a traditional man in many ways.  I don’t easily invite change into my life. I didn’t immigrate to the U. S. until I was 33 years old. I had an established career in Lima as a lawyer.  I only came because my father had immigrated years earlier and as his son I was eligible for U.S. residency as long as I came to live in the U.S.  I never thought I would stay.  Then I met that strong-headed gringa, so much the opposite of me, and my heart really had no other choice.  I fell in love.  I still talked about returning to Peru and entering politics.  When I asked Jill if she would marry me, she made clear that that if we were to get married and have children she wanted to stay in the U.S.  Although secretly I thought I would be able to convince her otherwise later, I agreed.   I was in love.   Neither of us had any idea at that time we were choosing a life of embracing and celebrating difference.

Embracing difference may sound politically correct, or perhaps even romantic or poetic, but I am the first to admit, it isn’t all harmony and hugs on the road to the sweet embrace.  It takes listening to what sounds like sour notes and understanding to someone else they may be quite melodious.  Surely, every marriage takes work and give and take, but a bi-cultural union means those negotiations are constant, and plateaus of common understanding are fewer and farer in between.   Imagine arguing about foreign ideas in a foreign language.  I’ll never forget my wife insisting she need “her space”.  What space? She had lived comfortably in a studio apartment for years, our two bedroom home was much bigger. What more space did she need?

Like preparing a Thanksgiving banquet, getting through misunderstandings like these, requires serious time and effort before you can relax and enjoy the flavorful outcome of the fruits of your labor. Yet, there are several advantages to embracing difference. If one enters a union, conscious they are indeed embracing someone who represents difference, when the sour notes of discord are heard, they aren’t as shockingly disturbing.  In fact, they come to be the expected soundtrack of life.

When such differences do cause discomfort, they can always be blamed on cultural difference, instead of being personalized.  So while I may feel impatient, and even disgusted while my wife plans table decorations with real acorns and leaves (can she get those things sterilized before she puts them on the table?), in the end I will smile and blame it all on Martha Stewart, and hope that no bugs crawl onto my Peruvian pavo.

She will be equally appalled when I ask her to help me hoist the turkey onto its breastbone halfway through the cooking process.  Ultimately, though, she’ll take the cooking mitts out of my hands and get them good and greasy as she turns the beast onto its breast and warns me I’d better have it carved before anyone sees the unsightly bird.   Later she will explain to her family, it is Peruvian tradition to have the turkey carved before the guests arrive.

When the meal is served and the compliments of the table setting and the Peruvian pavo roll in, we will both bask in pride, thankful that we succeeded in blending our differences with love and patience, and created something worth our efforts.  We will pray and thank God that for the most precious products of our bi-cultural embrace, our children, Sofia and Luis Antonio!

Luis Gonzales teaches Spanish at MCHS.

Of course you did.  If you own a television set, a radio, or a functioning pair of ears, you most likely heard about it within the hour it happened.  And since then, pretty much everything there is to know about the pop culture icon has been rehashed by all major media outlets.  His accomplishments and his failures have been highlighted and re-examined, his life nitpicked and dissected to the point where we tire of hearing anything about the man, as majestic as his reputation may be.

But it’s important to take note of something most people gloss over.  Most of these pieces were written by people who were exposed to a different portrayal of Michael Jackson—almost an entirely different person—than many of those in high school today.

Our generation didn’t grow up knowing the Michael Jackson of the 1980’s, at the peak of his power and renown.  Instead of seeing the white-tuxedoed singer tearing up stages worldwide, we saw images of a gaunt, skeleton-like man fending off accusations of child molestation. Even though he was never found guilty in court, the spilt blood of Jackson’s reputation mixed well into the ocean of American media, and exponential amounts of paparazzi swarmed to fix their lenses on Jackson to catch his every mistake,

We grew up knowing not the Michael Jackson of his glory days but a stew of buzz words that would appear alongside the man’s name in almost every headline, tabloid or otherwise: “plastic surgery,” “Jacko,” “Jesus juice,” “molestation,” “Neverland,” and “creep”.

And the strongest of them all: “freak,” the word used to condemn and exile.

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, “freak” means “a person, animal, or plant which is abnormal or deformed.”  By some standards, Michael Jackson is certainly abnormal.  But deformed, unnatural?  This is partially thanks to the media and their assistance in transforming an already-eccentric musician into a virtual mutant whose doings they played out like a soap opera.  Or horror movie, to be more accurate.

Teens today have grown up in the shadow of Michael Jackson’s reputation as a music god, having been constantly barraged with information to the contrary: that Jackson was just that word, a “freak”—resigned to his oddball behavior and publicity stunts as he seemed to discard any dignity he had earned.

Ever since his slow return to mainstream commonality from the atmospheric stardom gained by  the albums “Thriller” and “Off The Wall”, it seems Michael Jackson—now, more accurately, Michael Jackson’s reputation—has suffered an endless stream of disdain, insult, and accusations of scandal that seem to eclipse whatever merits he had earned. Although a new sense of newfound respect for the singer did emerge after his death, this was founded just as much on the ability to profit from the artist’s legacy than an appreciation for the person the world had just lost.

Some students’ views of Jackson, while filled with admiration for his achievements, demonstrate a deeper curiosity aimed at the life behind the act.

“My perception of him is that he was a very confused man,” said senior Vinay Sharma.  “He never got the chance to grow up, so he lived out his childhood as an adult, with other children.  I think he was mentally sick, because of his lifelong stardom and being constantly in the spotlight.”

Let’s be honest.  If Michael Jackson had not died on June 25, 2009, chances are there wouldn’t be such coverage of him unless he had been again accused of an outrageous act.  The true tragedy here is not that the world has lost a musical genius and one of its best entertainers, or even that a man died under mysterious circumstances, although these events are undeniably dismal.  The true tragedy is the tabloid culture’s reduction of one person (because in the end, as his death makes clear, that’s all he was) to a buzz word, crass jokes, and higher prime-time ratings—a fabricated persona on which an entire nation passed verdicts as it saw fit.

Admittedly, when Jackson died, I felt as if the world had lost a paper cutout; a contrived persona devoid of meaning, opposite of the revolutionary artist generations before me had worshipped.

“He was a staple in America,” Sharma said.  “From his last trial to before he died, the media ripped Jackson apart, portraying him as a freak. But when he died, it was newsworthy, and the media worshipped him.”

As is the case with any human life, there is more to know about Michael Jackson than will ever be learned or understood.  But in a sense, our generation missed out on the positive points of his life and was instead saturated with the negative.  The man named “The Most Successful Entertainer of All Time” by Guinness World Records will undoubtedly remain in the memory of many, but it is unfortunate that the media’s endeavors to profit from the newest tidbit of Michael Jackson gossip—most recently, it’s that his Propofol-fueled death has been declared a homicide—has reduced a human life to a two-dimensional album cover or the ticker tape on the bottom of the nightly news.
In the end it comes down to individuals’ attempts to shed the prejudices they have been showered with in their age and see the musician in his or her totality.  Michael Jackson was not a “freak”, although he may have done some freakish things.  Neither was he a god, despite his towering reputation and achievement of pop immortality.  As his death reminded us, he was only a man—one with both successes and struggles, and who deserves to be acknowledged accordingly.

For a long time, it was not on my priority list. I found myself asking my friends to hang out on Sundays just so I wouldn’t have to go to church. These weekend outings eventually replaced my spirituality and caused me to lose focus in God; I felt as if I wasn’t Catholic. I thought I could do it alone, but I discovered Catholics need some sort of a community to obtain support, love, and share in both the strain and progress.

When Catholics pray and worship in a community, they realize that the people are the source of God’s presence. “There is a sense of belonging when surrounded by similarly struggling people in church,” said Ann Tabora, theology teacher and moderator of CMT. “Belonging to a community of faith means you are part of a global event. People in Europe and the Philippines are participating in the same celebration as we do.”

What if you don’t see the positive influence of the church community? Catholics may see church as hypocritical or boring. “They might not like the priest or the way the choir is singing. They let the small annoyances of daily life get in the way of their relationship with God,” Tabora explained. Church should not be looked at as an institution of people rather an institution of God. The human flaws found in church never overpower the focus on the actual worship.
In such a stressful and preoccupied world, we often give up on church and find alternatives to maintaining spirituality. When I wasn’t going to church, I relied on my own moral system and modeled things from the media and experience. What I learned was that spirituality is not only dependent on personal standards. There needs to be structure. I couldn’t stand the inapplicable scripture passages and long wait for bread and wine, but I realized that it was the discipline in discovering the meaning of these things that mattered.

Without the church, it would be difficult for us to find a sacred space for personal nurturing and recharging with so many distractions. Those who complain that they don’t have the one hour for church should understand the necessity of sacrifice when developing spirituality. “Liturgy is our work. ‘Liturgy’ literally means ‘the work of the people’. It’s our prayer that completes the cycle of the church,” Tabora claimed. Ultimately, it’s our presence in church that gets us closer to God.

PDA exemplifies that Bobby and Kelly are proud of each other, they are happy together and they have nothing to hide about that. It’s like winning an Oscar, what’s the joy of showing your gratefulness and basking under such a great feeling if there were no audience to envy or cheer you on for it?

And how can I not mention a reliable source, Ms. Britney Spears, “public display of affection, feels like no one else in the room but you.” Behold. Bobby and Kelly like each other and when they are together, they don’t notice anyone else. Had it not been for such feelings, Bobby and Kelly would have a boring relationship rather than days filled with “gimme gimme more.” More love, that is.

On the contrary, I would have to agree that not all types of PDA are acceptable. Making out in the hallways is definitely a huge no-no in my book; also in the student handbook, which says only hand holding is allowed. But come to think of it, why can’t we just let all the Bobby and Kellys out there be? It’s their relationship, not ours. It’s their feelings and certainly not our place to stop them from feeling pride towards one another (regardless if it’s purely physical attraction or love itself).

As for PDA being deemed as disrespectful to the community around us, I find it a bit more disrespectful if we are to point fingers and gossip away of how disgusting Bobby and Kelly are. Besides, Bobby and Kelly are too caught up with each other enough to care what others’ opinions are about their relationship. Looks like the public eye has no choice but to watch, look away, or simply shut it.

Looking back on my first Homecoming dance at this school, one thing in particular sticks out in my memory. Not the loveliness of my dress, the uncertainty of my budding frosh friendships or getting too excited when “Toxic” came on. The incident that comes to mind is going to get my purse and witnessing something that could be described as “excessive affection” by the student handbook. I instantly turned around and headed back to the dance floor, my face flushed and red.

Upon further realization, I decided that I had no reason to be embarrassed. The ones committing the act should have been humiliated by their behavior, not me. This experience is only one of the reasons why I believe public displays of affection (PDAs) are needless and done not necessarily out of attraction to each other, but rather to attract attention from others.

I admit, I’m definitely a bit more old-fashioned when it comes to matters of the heart, but I’m not adamantly against all forms of PDA. Holding hands? Precious. A quick kiss on the cheek to say hello or goodbye? Go for it. But engaging in anything more than that in the public eye is pretty unreasonable. Primitive, really.

Sure, I understand. You’re in love and you want everyone to know it. But unfortunately, life isn’t “The Notebook.” Watching the wild chapters of your fairytale romance unfold is not on everyone’s to-do list, and that fact should be honored.

No, I’m not just a bitter singleton jealous of all of the couples around me. When I’m in a relationship I prefer not to be put on display by my significant other. It seems to me that a couple hanging all over each other is seeking to be noticed instead of trying to foster their relationship. Acting properly in public is not only respectful for everyone else, but it also shows respect for one another.

Perhaps the most inappropriate place to participate in PDA is at school. Why would two people want to get hot and heavy when teachers and administrators are undoubtedly wandering nearby? Awkward!

As members of the human race, we should be able to control ourselves and abide by not only the laws of the school, but also those of courtesy and good manners. I’m not one to be all gung-ho about following every rule to a tee, but I do believe that there is a time and a place to engage in affectionate behavior, and school is certainly not that place.

I think it would be most fitting to end with a line from a well-known Bible passage: Love is never boastful or conceited. So the next time you feel like showing off your relationship to the world, please, think twice. Because Jesus can see it, and so can I.