Latest News

a, McGill, News

Annual joint Board-Senate meeting discusses community engagement

by Chloe Nevitt on

More in a:

Last Tuesday, the Board of Governors (BoG) and the Senate held a joint meeting discussing McGill University’s community involvement. Panellists from a variety of research backgrounds addressed the ways through which McGill could strengthen its relationship with the community.

During her opening remarks, Principal Suzanne Fortier explained that the meeting’s topic was chosen to address McGill’s depiction by the community as being a difficult partner to work with in industry and research.

“[Universities] are good at thinking deeply and rigorously about various issues [and] topics, [and] pushing to see beyond the obvious,” Fortier said. “I think it’s extremely important that we engage other partners in these endeavours.”

Also on the panel was Mark Andrews, associate professor from the Department of Chemistry; Cécile Branco-Côté, U3 Arts student; Dr. Gaétan Lantagne, senior director of the Hydro-Québec institute (IREQ); and Steve Maguire, professor and the Desautels Chair in Integrated Management. McGill Associate Vice-Principal (Research and International Relations) Sarah Stroud moderated the event.

Stroud commented on the nature of engagement and innovation within a McGill context.

“I think innovation in its broadest meaning is taking ideas, discoveries, and knowledge that originate at McGill and putting them to work outside the bounds of our two campuses,” Stroud said.

She then asked the panellists to elaborate on their own interpretations of innovation. In response, Andrews explained the relationship between academic learning and the community. 

“[As scientists,] we have a moral commitment to bringing to the public [what] we’re doing,” he said. “[But] I don’t think we [at McGill] do a good job of declaring to the external community how we’re [doing that.]”

The idea that McGill nurtures entrepreneurship but falls short on communication was echoed by the other panellists, and notably by Branco-Côté, the only student present on the panel. Branco-Côté praised the university for its support to creative projects.

“I think McGill does a great job at supporting creative initiatives,” Branco-Côté stated. “It’s […] easy to get resources and generate initiatives to get involved in projects.”

However, Maguire said he felt McGill could improve in relaying its action to the community.

“There’s patchwork in the university’s activities,” explained Maguire. “I don’t think we’re doing a good job of declaring to the external community about what we’re doing, [and] I think that needs to be first of all clarified, and then communicated.”

Lantagne agreed with the sentiment, and spoke to the importance of evolving with community changes, rather than trying to stop them.

“Breaking down […] boundaries to other universities and society facilitates solving some of our internal problems,” Lantagne said. “No one faculty or department in university brings the knowledge to solve that problem.”

After 30 minutes of roundtable discussions, student representatives were asked to present the conclusions drawn from the individuals at their tables about what needs to be addressed to improve community engagement. The Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) President Courtney Ayukawa discussed the importance of avoiding a narrow definition of innovation.

“Service to the community is in the McGill mission statement,” she said. “We need to be investigating, evaluating, and answering community needs, questions, and demands.”

Post-Graduate Students’ Society (PGSS) Academic Affairs Officer Jennifer Murray provided a clear three-step action plan that could be used to connect the theoretical to the practical: First, avoid bureaucratization; next, promote the break-down of barriers; and finally, create key performance indicators.

“[We need to] just make it easier for people to work across departments, across disciplines, to come up with good ideas,” Murray said.

Most of the discussion centred on capitalizing interdisciplinary relations and encouraging communication. Despite this, the meeting was apprehensive when discussing experimental learning techniques that could question the validity of quantifiable traditional education.

“We should encourage divergent thinking, we should encourage experimental learning, and we should encourage risk-taking as part of innovation,” Arts and Science Senator Chloe Rourke said. “A lot of the times, the way which students are judged can be very conventional way of thinking […] which can limit the way students can challenge themselves.”

a, Editorial, Opinion

Editorial: PGSS healthcare fee reduction highlights benefits of effective representation

by McGill Tribune Editorial Board on

More in a:

In recent negotiations with health care provider Blue Cross, the Post Graduate Students’ Society (PGSS) was able to secure a significant reduction in health insurance premiums for all international students, including undergraduates. (more…)

a, News, PGSS

Councillors push for transparency in fee approbation reform process

by Philippe Dumais on

More in a:

Non-tuition compulsory fee reform

Graduate students will be consulted this Winter on a reform of the non-tuition compulsory student fees approbation mechanism. Non-tuition compulsory fees, or Frais Institutionnel Obligatoires (FIO), are associated with mandatory university services. They are paid by all students to apply, enroll in, or attend university. Currently, they are also collected by student societies recognized by the administration under a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA).

Under the current system, students are consulted upon the introduction of fees categorized as faculty, program, and course-related, explained PGSS External Affairs Officer Julien Ouellet.

“We [currently] have the power to veto the university when they want to implement such fees,” Ouellet said. “The current decision-making process, however, [is] very quick [and] raises concerns of legitimacy and transparency [….] I need more information to make decisions on your behalf.”

Currently, all decisions regarding the FIOs are made by the Fee Advisory Committee (FAC).  This committee is composed of members of the academic staff, SSMU, PGSS, McGill Association of Continuing Education Students (MACES) and the Macdonald Campus Student Society (MCSS).  Each member holds veto power over FIOs that concern its members.  The proposed reform would allow the PGSS External Affairs Officer to consult with students rather than make decisions on his own.

The reform proposes to have all compulsory course-related fees approved through a vote by the executive team of the affected Post-Graduate Student Association (PGSA). All faculty-wide fees would then be approved by a PGSA referendum.

“We would submit a ready-made motion to the PGSA president and financial affairs officer that would contain the FIO’s amount, the course to which it would be applied, and the name of the affected PGSA,” Ouellet explained. “The [PGSA] president would then be required to hold a vote at their next PGSA committee meeting. A simple majority of all committee members in attendance would be required to pass the motion.”

The consultations will examine the possibility of keeping the Fee Advisory Committee (FAC), which is currently the authority that decides which fees will affect PGSS, as well as retaining the PGSS representative to act as a liaison between PGSAs and McGill. They will also consider eliminating the position of the PGSS representative and granting those responsibilities to the executive committee as a whole.

The PGSS will hold consultations during Winter 2015 to obtain feedback from students in order to make the fee reform process transparent.

2014-2015 FEUQ action plan

The President of the Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec (FEUQ), Jonathan Bouchard, presented the organization’s action plan for the coming year at the council meeting, expressing that the focal point of the FEUQ’s campaign is to bring the provincial loan and bursaries program up to date.

“The cost of living has evolved by 44 per cent over the last 20 years,” Bouchard said. “Allowable expenses, [however,] have only increased by 23 per cent.  There is a huge discrepancy between the reality and what is actually covered by the program. Our goal is to update the need assessment.”

Bouchard continued to explain that FEUQ’s actions for the coming year will revolve around two axes. 

“We need to participate in the different commissions, meet the different members of the National Assembly and form a broader coalition around this action plan,” he said. “The newly elected government has a very strict economic action plan to eliminate deficit—that involves mobilization on campus and participation of students in different local and national forums.”

The presentation was followed by a question period. In response to student questions regarding the current anti-austerity demonstrations, Bouchard explained that the FEUQ would be protesting austerity measures.

“[The] FEUQ is a part of the organization that has launched the campaign for the demonstration on the 29th of November,” Bouchard said. “The organization involves many groups from civil society and unions […. It’s] an informal collective organizing a demonstration.”

PGSS Council passed a motion supporting the Nov. 29 demonstration and encouraging its members to participate.

a, McGill, News

Dentistry continues raising funds to pay off new facility loan

by Aislinn Kalob on

More in a:

McGill University’s Faculty of Dentistry is currently reviewing how to better inform incoming and future students of a $2,500 fee, which will go towards paying off the $18.3 million loan for the new facilities. $7 million has been raised towards this deficit so far. This fee was voted upon by students in a referendum passed by McGill’s Dentistry Students’ Society (DSS) in October 2013, but was stipulated to only affect incoming students from the Fall 2014 semester onwards.

Dean of Dentistry Paul Allison and the DSS have met with students multiple times over the past year to address student awareness of the fee.

“We realized that maybe not all incoming students were aware of this [fee],” Ioana Dumitru, Development associate for University Advancement of the Faculty of Dentistry, said. “So we’re trying to make this information more accessible. We’re putting this up on our website and making sure it’s well communicated to everyone so that they know [….] We are trying to keep the communication lines open, and we’ll continue to have those conversations.”

Undergraduate Dental Program (DMD) president Ryan Siciliano expressed that the administration has been transparent while working with students.

“The DSS and faculty have been working together and exploring options for the first-year and future students,” he said.  “This includes making the website more clear in regards to the fee, bursaries becoming more visible, and exploring future options regarding this fee.”

The continuation of the fee is contingent upon results of any future referenda by the DSS, which would allow students to decide on the question of any future fees, although a concrete date for a referendum has not been set.

“This [fee] is on top of trying to get donations from alumni, and getting a government contribution, so we’re trying to dig into every pocket, have everybody contribute,” Dumitru said. “It has been agreed that we will look into possibly doing another referendum. We don’t know yet, but basically, the students will always be asked whether they are willing to contribute.”

This is not the only source of funding the faculty is seeking to pay off its new facility. Outside sources have already contributed millions of dollars to fund the project, and could determine how the fee is calculated down the road.

“We still have $11 million dollars to go to pay all of this off,” Dumitru said.  “If, and only if, in the meantime we get a big donor who wants to donate all of this money, then that will change, what we ask the students to pay back.  It’s very possible that the target will change.”

McGill’s Faculty of Dentistry officially relocated all of its activities from the Montreal General Hospital to 2001 McGill College Avenue on Sept. 3.  The space houses dental and graduate students, clinical and preclinical teaching, clinical and community research, and the faculty’s community outreach activities.

“Even though we’ve only been in our new home for a few months, we are already experiencing the many benefits of this cutting-edge teaching and learning facility, which is not only more accessible to our patients, but is also designed to optimize interactions among our community of clinicians, students, and faculty members,” Allison said in a statement issued this past October.

The new facilities have been well received by faculty and students.

“We have always had outstanding students, professors and staff members in Dentistry—now we have facilities worthy of their talents,” Allison said.

a, McGill, News

University Health and Security Committee to review smoking policy

by Noah Sutton on

More in a:

McGill University’s smoking policy will be up for review by the University Health and Security Committee (UHSC), which may include discussion of a smoke-free campus.

The current policy specifies that all smoking must be at least nine metres from any building entrance in order to comply with Bill 112, which was passed in Quebec in 2006. As of last September, the policy also applies to e-cigarettes and has established designated smoking areas on a trial-basis.

According to Music Senator Maximillion Scebba, who sits on the UHSC, the current policy does not include information on methods of enforcement. The UHSC seeks to update the policy but specific changes have not been planned.

“What [the current policy] doesn’t do is talk about how it should be enforced, so that’s an issue we will be addressing,” Scebba said. “There’s no one policy in particular we’re looking at changing. We might be drafting a new policy, or amending the current policy but there’s no particular article on it that we’re looking at specifically.”

The idea of a smoke-free campus will also be discussed, but it is not the focus of the discussion.

“The focus of the discussion is policy update and whether or not [a smoke-free campus] will be implemented is up in the air,” Scebba said. “It is on the table and catalyzing the discussion but it’s not the ‘big-take’ home. It’s good to get people thinking about it and smoking policy as a whole, [but] if they were to ban smoking on campus I don’t think it would work because I don’t think the university would have the resources to enforce it.”

Some students see the idea of a smoke-free campus as a good one, but questioned McGill’s ability to enforce it.

“I think it’s great that they have no smoking zones on campus, but I think [a smoke-free campus] would be hard to enforce,” Sarah MacRae-Korobkov, U0 Arts, said.

Others did not carry strong opinions about the need for policy update.

“I don’t really have an issue with the current policy—I don’t really think about it,” Daniel Guagliardo, U1 Arts, said.

The USHC will meet on Nov. 22 and will be discussing further policy updates.

a, Science & Technology

Art in the digital world

by Deboleena Mazumdar on

More in a:

On Nov. 5, as part of McGill Innovation Week 2014, art and technology enthusiasts alike gathered in Tanna Schulich Hall for a panel discussion on art and innovation. The event was organized by Standpoints, a student-run cultural think-tank.

The night’s speakers included Stéphane Aquin, curator of contemporary art at the Fine Arts Museum of Montreal; Philippe Demers, co-founder and managing director at MASSIVArt; Fabrice Marandola, associate director of artistic research at the Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Music Media and Technology (CIRMMT); and Frédérique Marseille, co-founder of Art Bang Bang.

The evening’s discussion began with a question from the emcee: “What are the latest and most striking innovations in art according to you?”

Speaking from their experiences, the experts brought unique and often opposing perspectives to the discussion about the role of technology in contemporary art and its effects on the artistic experience for both artists and viewers.

“It gives a new medium—[before] you could paint, you could make sculptures, you could use wood,” explained Marseille. “Now, with technology, you can use tools like computers and photoshop [to make] gifs, memes, and videos.”

A recurring theme throughout the talk was how technology has revolutionized the art industry.

“The use of sensors in music [by which] sound can be produced without physical impact has created a disconnect between the musician and his instrument,” Marandola said.

A portion of the discussion focused on how the internet and social media has created opportunities for artists to expand their mode of expression.

Demers specifically discussed how the Google Cultural Institute’s Art Project has made high-resolution images of art from the world’s most prestigious museums accessible to anyone with an internet connection.

“You can get your curiosity piqued, and then go to Google or Wikipedia to learn more about it,” explained Marseille.

After the discussion, the panel members engaged in a question and answer session with the audience and were asked to express their views on the ‘museum selfie’ phenomenon—the act of taking a selfie in front of an art piece. Each of the panel members admitted to taking selfies at one point or another.

“The internet allows people from all over the world to appreciate the same image and relate to common experiences,” Demers explained.

According to Marseille, the internet is the greatest tool artists currently have to make their art accessible.

“It’s an accessible way for people to get in tocuh with art,” Marseille said. “It’s an open door for people who want to learn more about it but don’t know where to start.”

The larger the audience, the more chance an artist has to develop fans.

While the discussion was dominated by the opportunities technology has provided to appreciate and disseminate art, Aquin nonetheless concluded on a more old-fashioned note.

“Robotic art has not replaced the validity and relevance of traditional [art] forms,” Aquin said.

Instead, things like Instagram and Facebook have provided a  unique  and new expression medium. These tools also allow anyone and everyone to get involved in art.

“There are lot of apps now that give people the opportunity to make new images,” explained Marseille. “You can match pictures on your phone with other pictures and create new perspectives.”

All the panellists spoke on the merit of technology to express art. However, certain aspects of art—in the physical form—cannot be forgotten.

“You can’t hang a computer on your wall,” said Marseille.

a, Research Briefs, Science & Technology

Research Briefs—Nov. 11, 2014

by Clare Lyle on

More in a:

Neuroscience of choking under pressure

The experience of choking under pressure—in an exam, at the free-throw line, or in a presentation—is a familiar one. This week a study published in The Journal of Neuroscience attempted to explain what goes on in the brain when the stakes are raised.

While monitoring their brains with an MRI scanner, researchers had participants play a video game. They were then told that they could win or lose varying amounts of money depending on how they played.

The results were somewhat counterintuitive. Individuals with high loss aversion performed best when they risked losing money. In other words, people who were most scared of losing money performed best when they had a lot to lose. When offered a large sum for winning, though, these loss-averse gamers choked.

The opposite was true for less loss-averse individuals. High rewards elicited better performance, and potential losses caused them to choke.

The researchers found that the part of the brain related to this phenomenon was a region called the ventral striatum. Increased activity of the ventral striatum was linked to improved performance. Those who were highly loss-averse experienced the most activity when they risked losing money, while the less loss-averse experienced decreased activity in the ventral striatum.

These results may have wide-reaching implications, especially for individuals in high-stress jobs like surgeons and pilots.

Bats create sounds to ‘jam’ sonars

Life is tough for the Mexican free-tailed bat. Not only does it have to contend with parasites and predators, but new research shows that it also experiences sonar jamming from other bats.

This species lives in some of the largest colonies in the animal kingdom, with some caves housing up to a million bats. These massive groups necessitate intricate social systems, involving over a dozen different vocalizations used in communication. One of these signals, it turns out, does a lot more than say hello.

Bats hunt via echolocation, which involves using sound waves to determine the location of their prey. Right as they swoop in on their dinner, they emit a series of high-pitched vocalizations called a feeding buzz. Sometimes the sound waves produced by two bats can jam each other, but usually when this happens, one or both of the bats will switch to a different frequency.

A biologist from Johns Hopkins University has found that these bats can deliberately jam each other by producing a sound that interferes with a feeding buzz. When a recording of this particular sound was played right as bats honed in on the moths they were hunting, it caused them to miss their targets.

So far the Mexican free-tailed bat is the only bat species to exhibit this behaviour, although one species of moth has also been found to jam its predators’ sonar.

Direct brain-to-brain interface in humans

Telepathy may sound like something out of a fantasy novel, but a recent paper published in PLOS ONE indicates that it may not be as far off as we once thought.

A team of scientists from the University of Washington have succeeded in creating a non-invasive interface through which humans can communicate brain-to-brain. The researchers used electroencephalography (EEG) to measure brain activity from one subject, then transmitted that information over the internet to a device that used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to activate different parts of a second subject’s brain.

The experiment involved six subjects (grouped into three pairs) who had to play a game involving shooting down rockets that were trying to invade a city. The catch was that only one member of the pair (called the sender) could see the screen, and the receiver, located in a different building, had access to the controller.

To shoot down a rocket, the sender imagined moving his or her right hand. This brain activity was picked up by the EEG and sent to the part of the receiver’s brain that controlled motion via TMS, causing the receiver’s hand to jerk up.

The pairs’ success in the game varied wildly, from one pair that shot down 83 per cent of rockets to another whose hit rate was only 25 per cent. Upon analysis, poor performance was linked not to the brain-to-brain interface being unreliable, but rather to the sender not playing the game very well.

The researchers point out the potential to extend these results to sending information from one person’s brain to multiple people, although they emphasize that current technology is still a long ways away from the mind-control rays of science fiction.

a, Football, Sports

Changing the Game: Concussions in football

by Remi Lu, Mayaz Alam, Wyatt Fine-Gagné, Elie Waitzer on

More in a:

Since the issue of concussions in football began to capture headlines in the late ’90s, the NFL has implemented several measures to reduce head injuries in the sport. After moving kickoffs up five yards in 2010, the league reported a 43% reduction in concussions on kickoffs. Still, the risk of concussion remains high across all levels of the sport today, and ex-players are bringing more concussion-related lawsuits than ever against the league. Here are four ways we would change the game.

Lead with the shoulder

Injuries in sports are inevitable. In sports like football, in which two teams try to violently stop each other from moving, injuries are not just commonplace, but sometimes life-threatening. One way to reduce the amount of head-related injuries in football would be to alter the manner in which defensive players play.

Rugby, a similar sport with a violent nature but without the protection of helmets or shoulder pads, places a large emphasis on shoulder tackling. Pete Carroll, head coach of the Super Bowl-winning Seattle Seahawks, recently introduced an instructional video that advocated for shoulder tackling in place of tackling while leading with the helmet. The results can’t be denied–the Seahawks defence was one of the most dominant in league history last year.

The key, however, will be to introduce these tackling methods to children when they start learning the game. By emphasizing safer ways to wrap up ballcarriers earlier on, athletes can learn better habits at a young age and develop muscle memory that will dissuade them from endangering themselves. Additionally, any time that a player–offensive or defensive–leads with their head, they should receive an automatic penalty from the pee-wee level up to the NCAA and the NFL. Doing so will make sure that players can keep their heads in the game, and out of the hospital.

– Mayaz Alam

Don’t deny the science

A number of solutions to football’s concussion problem have been bandied around—mostly from baby boomers and their children, who refuse to let go of nostalgic and idyllic Sunday afternoons of beer and guacamole. Yet the issue with these desperate solutions is that they fail to recognize one key fact: The NFL is fundamentally incorrigible when it comes to concussions.

At such high speeds, waged by powerful and heavy athletes, the contact-driven game of football becomes a whirlwind of pending concussions and other injuries. It no longer becomes a matter of if an athlete is injured, but when. With increasing amounts of research being released about the deadly effects of concussions—spotlighted by the numerous concussed athletes that have committed suicide—football’s days are finite.

Professional leagues can only offer band-aid solutions to a deeper problem, be they empty boasts about more protective equipment or stricter sideline and return-to-play protocols. Any true solution lies outside of the hands of the professional leagues—as hard as that may be to swallow for those who ascribe to the handle-it-yourself, ‘macho’ American football culture.

Despite the recent light shone on the true depths of the effects of concussions, concussion research is still an extremely young and relatively unexplored field of study. As such, the ‘concussion-limit’ is still an exercise in subjective judgments made by the doctor, therapist, and athlete. If scientists are able to map out a greater understanding of the brain’s relationship to concussions—both in frequency and amplitude—real adjustments may be made to the game, based on the knowledge that emerges from this research.

Furthermore, the “man up, suck it-up, and stand up” culture in football locker rooms needs to undergo a root-level change. Concussed athletes are rushed back to the game due to pressure from coaches, fans, or themselves, exacerbating any issues and preventing recovery. This dismissive attitude toward concussions can only be changed on a superficial level in today’s professional leagues. The power to truly change this mindset lies in the huddles of youth football games and the coaches that teach young athletes the tenets of the game.

The flagging days of professional football are inevitable, and will arrive in the next few years. It’s time for athletes and businesspeople to sit down; if they truly want their game to be saved, they’ll have to let scientists and youth coaches into the locker room.

– Remi Lu

Invest in technology

Concussions cannot be completely prevented in any full-contact sport, and are tricky to treat in the sense that they inflict most of their damage long after the hit or collision has occurred. The earlier a concussion can be diagnosed, the less damage a player stands to take in both the short and long term. Accepting that 100 per cent prevention is impossible without drastic rule changes to the game, the best possible scenario for harm reduction would be a wearable piece of technology that instantly alerts the player when he’s been hit with a force that surpasses the known thresholds common to traumatic head injuries.

A company called Battle Sports Science has developed a device they call the Impact Indicator 2.0, a micro-sensor that fits inside the chinstrap. After a hit, the device will light up green if the player is healthy, or red if the player may have sustained a concussion. While it’s a step in the right direction, there are several issues with this model. The Impact Indicator 2.0 is extremely accurate at measuring the G-force and duration of an impact, but is not able to account for rotational events—such as whiplash—that may lead to concussions but leave the light glowing green. Furthermore, according to Dave Halstead, technical adviser to the NFL Players’ Association, it is dangerous to advertise such devices to athletes as preventive rather than diagnostic, as they may feel empowered to play with less caution on the field.

As of now, only two active NFL players (Pierre Thomas and BenJarvus Green-Ellis) use the Impact Indicator 2.0 in real games. For this technology to make a significant impact, the NFL—not a private company—needs to invest heavily in perfecting a device of this type and making it mandatory for all of its players.

– Elie Waitzer

No helmets no problems

As a guest on the Dan Patrick Show in 2012, former Steelers’ wide receiver Hines Ward declared that removing players’ helmets would prevent concussions. Ward was one of the most physical receivers to ever play the game, delivering big blocks on a regular basis, but without a helmet he would likely be a markedly different player.

Modern football helmets are designed to protect players’ faces and skulls rather than their brains. They allow players to lead with their heads when delivering punishing hits, and ultimately may contribute to more reckless play. Instead, players should wear some form of padding on their heads that provides protection without allowing for heads to be used as a weapon on the field.

This change would have to be coupled with adjustments to both the rules of the game and other equipment worn by players. Shoulder pads would need to be shrunk and softened significantly, and certain types of hits would need to be deemed illegal. With these alterations, it seems likely that the nature of football as a sport would change as well. Games would no doubt feature more offence, but this shift may be one that many fans would welcome.

Changing the helmets in football, however, is not a solution to the concussion issue by itself. In rugby–a similar sport in which players do not wear helmets–concussions are currently a hot topic as well, but far less so than in football. Monitoring symptoms will still be crucial to players’ health, but with a change to the helmets, football would be made safer and perhaps–if it were a boon to offences–even more entertaining.

-Wyatt Fine-Gagne

a, Student Life

Indulging in Montreal’s diverse culinary scene

by Remi Lu, Alycia Noë, Natalie Wong on

More in a:

With many award-winning restaurants, it is not a surprise that MTL à TABLE is an annual success in Montreal. (more…)

1 … 886 887 888 889 890 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue