1. SafeRides

Elon students are always complaining about the wait for SafeRides and can never understand why the driver won’t cram just one more person into the back of the van. But when else are we going to have a free taxi service available upon a moment’s notice to drive us and our friends around to parties?

2. Club Belk

We’ve cursed the place during our late nights there and put up fights when we got kicked off the second floor for being too loud. But who else can say their library is known as a club and has complimentary Panera pastries on Wednesday nights?

3. Elon Bubble

It’s pretty much impossible to leave your apartment, dorm or house without running into someone you know. We’ve all had those days when we’re not looking our best and would rather not see anyone or feel like we can’t face the embarrassing thing we did the night before. But once you leave this place, you might just miss the familiar faces that held you responsible for your bad hair days and questionable decisions.

4. Surveillance

No one likes being called out by their professor when you haven’t done the reading, but in the real world you get fired if you don’t fulfill your responsibilities. Here, you just get some one-on-one time with a professor and a few questions about your study habits.

5. The train

We wonder how many cumulative hours of lectures have been spared by the train that runs on the south side of campus. We might see it as an irritating interruption to our day, but chances are the sound of a train will always remind you of your time here.

Last Thursday, Jeff Stein, senior adviser to the president, sent out an email containing Elon University’s Board of Trustees’ statement regarding Chick-fil-A’ s presence on campus. The Board explained how Elon’s response to the controversy was to create a 15-member Vendor Policy Study Committee. The Board studied the committee’s findings and considered all stakeholders before coming to a well-thought-out decision. They assured the student body of their pledge to dig deeper into the facts, their respect for human differences and their commitment to understanding different points of view. Their final decision is that Chick-fil-A will remain on our campus.

The Board listed three primary factors for its decision. The first one specified, “There is no actionable cause to remove Chick-fil-A from campus,” clarifying there is no evidence of discrimination regarding Chick-fil-A services.

According to the Board, since the vendor does not actively discriminate against its employees or its customers, its removal is not warranted. This deeply discredits members of the Elon community who spent this school year professing to the committee and to Board members how the mere presence of Chick-fil-A represents hate, exclusion and humiliation. The LGBTQ community‘s issue was not that Chick-fil-A actively discriminated on this campus. The email from the Board made it seem as if they had accused the vendor of this. The real issue is symbolic and more pervasive. 

This is the civil rights issue of our time. Arguments for keeping Chick-fil-A claim Elon should not be a place that restricts freedom of speech. They argue we can’t give in to the political beliefs of every person in our community. The Board’s email specifies it is “reluctant to put the University in a position of monitoring or making value judgments about the lawful philanthropic giving of vendor.” The letter went on to say, “Removing Chick-fil-A solely on the basis of the owners’ stated views or their lawful philanthropic choices would stand in opposition to Elon’s mission statement, which encourages freedom of thought and liberty of conscience.”

Our Board likely wouldn’t host a vendor that donated to a campaign whose aim was to eliminate women’s suffrage or a vendor that allocated a part of its profits to promote Jim Crow laws that mandated segregation. So why are we OK with a vendor that has supported organizations that believe being gay is a sin and have funded conversion therapy?

These are all instances of discrimination.The only difference is our university and our country haven’t yet determined this is a type of discrimination for which we will not stand. The Supreme Court is currently deliberating on two pieces of legislation that will determine the fate of marriage equality in this country. Our country hasn’t advanced enough to see that discrimination is discrimination whether it’s because of the color of one’s skin, the number of one’s X chromosomes or one’s sexuality. Discrimination should not be supported on this campus or in this country.

A statement from the members of the Board claims they “desire that Elon be a safe and respectful environment for every member of the community.” The reality is the decision announced last week does not create this environment for the LGBTQ community and its allies. In fact, it doesn’t create this environment for any of us.

If our university had chosen to remove Chick-fil-A, it would have made a statement that we are ahead of the times because we won’t stand for a type of discrimination that will one day be seen as unacceptable as racial segregation or the denial of women’s suffrage.

Last month, @Elon_Black_Prob tweeted, “Just because the professor mentioned diversity doesn’t mean you all stop writing typing and texting to look at the lone black person.” Two weeks ago, @TheElonGay tweeted, “Stop what you’re doing and go pet the cats/bunnies/puppies outside Moseley! #CuteOverload.”

These posts are funny because they’re Elon-centric and they point out some of the ridiculous things Elon students do. In a way, they have defined our community and some of the individual groups within it. But most students don’t spend time considering the stereotypes these accounts promote.

Last month, a controversy involving @TheElonD began after the individual behind the account posted a tweet when the Elon University baseball team beat North Carolina State. The tweet read, “The Elon baseball team just gave @ncstatebaseball #TheElonD. Waiting on the Smith Jackson email because that may or may not be rape.” Some students expressed their disdain for this tweet because it made light of rape culture on our campus.

Sure, some Elon students were offended by this tweet, but few seem to consider the real implications of a series of seemingly harmless Twitter accounts that divide our campus into clean-cut stereotypes. Think about it. There’s an account that defines what it’s like to be gay on our campus, another that describes what it’s like to be unaffiliated with Greek Life, what it’s like to be black, to have less money than the majority of Elon students and many more.

It seems the most outspoken and perhaps the wittiest voices are coming through with these accounts, but, these voices may not be the most accurate representations of our student body.

When @ElonGDIProblems retweeted @SororitySouth when they tweeted “Happy wife, happy life!” and added “#makemeasandwich,” doesn’t it serve to further the divide between Greeks and non-Greeks? And when    @Elon_Black_Prob tweeted, “If I put in a work order why hasn’t my light been fixed? Must be because I’m black,” it’s amusing, but also highly stereotypical. Each account is like its own clique that portrays a pigeonholed image of what it’s like to be a part of that crowd.

Elon does have a few accounts directed at the entire campus. Two examples of these are @ElonConfessions and @OnlyAtElon. Although they too can promote stereotypes, at least they are promoting campus-wide generalities as opposed to those within individual on-campus groups. The point is these anonymous Elon-centric accounts are amusing and really quite clever. We just ought to consider what we’re saying about ourselves and our university with these accounts. They glorify stereotypes and while this can be wildly entertaining, we should also take a step back and consider if they are accurately portraying Elon and whether or not this is the image we want to send. to the rest of the world In particular, we are influencing prospective students who can easily access these accounts and will likely form an opinion of our university by scanning these Twitter feeds.

Do we really want to be telling prospective students that the black students at Elon believe their work orders aren’t being processed because they’re black? And do the non-affiliated students really believe girls in sororities are here for their MRS degrees?

Probably not, but prospective students might think they do. These tweets are all in good fun until someone takes them seriously. We should take a moment to think about how these accounts serve to promote stereotypes and how our campus culture comes across to prospective students and to others outside the “Elon bubble.”

After news broke of a North Carolina resolution claiming the state can make its own laws regarding the establishment of religion — one that would question the federal government’s authority to decide what is constitutional — email inboxes overflowed with complaints, comment boards became saturated with concerned citizens and watercooler conversations were abuzz.

At Elon University, many students were misled by the influx of media reports from credible media outlets and social media sources. They were led to believe the state was seriously considering adopting some sort of official state religion.

Accurate and thorough research were not driving the conversation surrounding the subject. Instead, multiple misrepresentations from news sources and the propagation of these stories from blogs, Facebook, Twitter and word of mouth created a distorted interpretation of this resolution. People jumped to conclusions and spread falsities without an accurate understanding of the issue — a representation of the larger problem with the media and the way media consumers intensify issues by propagating misleading information.

The North Carolina House Joint Resolution 494 was not, as widely reported across many news outlets, intended to establish an official state religion. It was meant to deliver a symbolic counter to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of several residents who object to Rowan County commissioners’ opening their meetings with Christian prayer.

In short, the resolution was intended to allow the county commissioners to end invocations at public meetings with the words, “In Jesus’ name, amen,” quite different from declaring Christianity the official religion of North Carolina.

Every year in legislatures across the country, scores of resolutions are introduced at the request of constituents that carry little legal weight or promise of being ratified. Reputable news sources are well aware of this, but they still chose to publish the misleading, attention-grabbing story that claimed North Carolina was on the path to establishing an official state religion — and media consumers chose to believe it.

North Carolina House Joint Resolution 494 and the uproar after its proposal serve as a representation of the larger issue with the current media culture and the public’s role in spreading information quickly, whether that information has been confirmed or not. The effect is that stories are often misreported, misinterpreted and blown out of proportion.

As media consumers, we are also guilty of failing to question the validity of the facts. For many, it seems logical to reach a conclusion when multiple reputable news outlets are reporting a semi-uniform set of “facts.” It is easy to interpret the issues as seen through the lens of mass media and through what your friends post on social media, but you may be missing the crux of the issues at hand. This is certainly what happened with regard to Resolution 494.

In order to have a true understanding of the issues, you must resist the temptation to take unfounded conclusions at face value, even if these conclusions are drawn by what you consider to be reliable news sources.

The truth is the media are not the only factor responsible for the dissemination of misleading information. Media consumers also have access to their own ways of publishing content on a variety of social media outlets, meaning we share the responsibility.

By choosing to react to an issue before fully understanding the implications, we sensationalize the stories. A status, blog post or tweet accusing North Carolina of robbing its citizens of religious freedom adds more fuel to the misinformation cycle. Spreading grossly misleading information diminishes the significance of stories that actually have useful social connotations.

Individuals need to be careful not to reinforce the cycle of misinformation by spreading news before obtaining an accurate understanding of an issue. As media consumers, we have not only the ability, but also the responsibility to put an end to the perpetuation of misleading information.

A breaking news story simply cannot be taken for fact. It is our responsibility to sort through various news sources and check our facts to find the real story.

On March 8, the North Carolina Supreme Court made a decision that directly affects Elon University students. According to the ruling, private university campus police in North Carolina are effectively exempt from public records laws that require public records be disclosed in reasonable circumstances. This is a major loophole in the law.

Any member of the public can walk into a police station and request public records from state and local government bodies. All 50 states have public records laws to ensure these bodies remain transparent. An excerpt from the public record law of North Carolina reads, “The public records and public information compiled by the agencies of North Carolina government or its subdivisions are the property of the people. Therefore, it is the policy of this State that the people may obtain copies of their public records…”

The N.C. Supreme Court was split 3-3 on whether to affirm or reverse the Court of Appeals decision, which dictated that campus police are not public law enforcement agencies. Since the previous decision is left undisturbed, the appellate decision stands although no precedent was set.

The case got its start in 2011 when former Elon student Nick Ochsner requested the arrest records of a fellow Elon student for a report on Phoenix14. But Elon’s campus police withheld many details of the report, including the arrest narrative. He filed suit in Alamance County Civil Superior Court against Elon, but the judge found the Elon campus police complied with public records laws. Ochsner appealed to the North Carolina Court of Appeals, which found Elon’s police records are not public records and its campus police department is not a public law enforcement agency.

Although Elon is a private university, its campus police operate under North Carolina’s Campus Police Act, which says its officers have full law enforcement authority, including the power to make arrests. Such power should not come without accountability to the public.

Public servants are meant to enforce the laws, not decide what information should be withheld or disclosed. The citizens need to stay informed in order to maintain checks on their law-enforcing bodies. Elon campus police perform a function of government by enforcing the law and ought to be transparent when carrying out state functions.

As it stands now, Elon and other private universities in North Carolina are not held to the same standards as other law-enforcing bodies. Public universities like the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill are required to include a full summary and description of the crime, while private universities can be as confidential as they want with their information, according to individual campus police policies.

But the fight is not over. House Bill 142 recently passed and has now gone to the Senate. The bill would essentially make the following information public record for campus police agencies: contents on arrest and incident/investigative reports, the circumstances surrounding the arrest, recordings or transcripts of emergency calls to campus agencies, communications between campus police employees pertaining to arrests and investigations and a daily log of crimes reported to the agency.

Furthermore, Elon’s values seem to be aligned with open records laws. On March 11, Elon hosted workshops, lectures and panel discussions in support of North Carolina Sunshine Day. The events were presented by the North Carolina Open Government Coalition, whose aim is to enhance the public’s access to government activity, recordings and meetings. The organization’s central goal is to educate people about their right to gather public information.

Accountability and transparency are two of the most important vehicles by which we, as college students, are guaranteed fair and equal treatment under the law. By not releasing records, Elon students could be at risk. What if the details of Alexis Gray’s arrest weren’t disclosed by the police? We wouldn’t have known about a serious threat to our safety.

The issue of whether campus police reports should be as transparent as state public records is a crucial one to Elon and to the rest of the state. By giving campus police departments the powers of a public law enforcing body but not requiring the same accountability and transparency, we are allowing a police force that cannot be challenged by the public.

Catalyzed by sweeping budget cuts and fiscal shortcomings, debate has emerged concerning the practicality of liberal arts majors. Despite the perception that these majors lack real world application, they remain a crucial part of the American collegiate tradition.

Coupled with public university overcrowding and underfunding, concerns about the allocation of state funds and subsidies have caused politicians to express their growing disdain with equal state support of all areas of study.

Many administrations are already choosing to allocate their academic resources for STEM programs in lieu of the liberal arts. Emory University recently made major cuts to its journalism and visual arts programs. Trinity University, St. Mary’s University and the University of the Incarnate Word are doing away with their liberal arts majors in favor of professional and “high demand” degrees, namely business administration.

On the state level, this reallocation of funds will lead to a slippery slope that could potentially diminish the role of liberal arts programs so much that they become obsolete.

As a private university, Elon would not be directly affected by cuts to state university funding or decreases in subsidies based on major. Elon’s embrace of the liberal arts continues to garner support as one of the essential elements of the school’s growth. Elite, private liberal arts universities feel the least pressure to change. That being said, liberal arts curriculums at smaller and less endowed schools are more likely to fall victim to this shift in higher education.

The move away from liberal arts degrees and toward “job producing” degrees comes conveniently in a time of job uncertainty. As more students perceive a shortage of jobs, they abandon their interests in the arts in favor of job security.

But this line of thought is misguided, given that liberal arts majors have a wide range of core skills and, more importantly, they know how to solve problems. In the past two years alone, more than half a dozen Rhodes Scholars have come from public institutions in the United States, all of which offer degrees in the liberal arts.

Former Whitman College president Thomas Cronin’s definition of the liberal arts as “freeing us from prejudice, dogmatism, and parochialism, from complacency, sentimentality and hypocrisy, from sloppy reasoning and careless writing” is especially telling of their importance.

At Elon, the liberal arts curriculum prepares graduates of all majors to communicate, research, think critically and assume leadership roles. Recognizing the importance of a diverse education, Elon requires students in traditionally professional majors, such as business and engineering, to take liberal arts classes. Elon recognizes the importance of combining elements from both areas to help students develop varied skill sets.

Elon’s curriculum serves as a model for educational ideals in this country. Cutting liberal arts programs is not only misguided — it also has the potential to stifle higher learning for years to come.

Leadership is about more than dress suits, handshakes, pleasant Twitter accounts and annual holiday parties. It is a responsibility to enrich the minds of a generation, challenge others to consider different perspectives and have the courage to stand up for what you believe in.

At Elon University, we are settling for middling leadership when it comes to contentious issues. We seem to be satisfied with our leaders, but are they doing enough to warrant our devotion? Perhaps we are too quick to accept our administration’s pleasant, politically correct statements in the face of controversy.

As you may recall, Elon’s Board of Trustees created a Vendor Policy Study Committee last October in response to the controversy concerning Chick-fil-A. Elon made a wise decision in creating this committee. Other universities made rash decisions on whether to let Chick-fil-A remain on their campuses while ours is taking the time to come to a well thought-out decision. Not only is the committee examining the policies and practices of Chick-fil-A, but also those of other vendors with whom our university has relations. We applaud Elon for this, but there is a problem: This committee has diffused accountability.

Do any of us know where our administrators stand on the Chick-fil-A issue or on other controversial issues that would require them to take a stand and risk offending someone? Probably not, unless you’ve had one-on-one conversations with members of the administration. 

There’s a debate occurring in higher education as to whether administrators ought to stand up for such issues. We realize donations and application rates are at risk, but there are some things worth standing up for.

Dr. Steven House, provost and vice president for academic affairs, made no statements regarding the Chick-fil-A debate. Shouldn’t we be hearing from someone who has done so much for our university? He’s the ‘‘chief academic officer’’ of our university, one that preaches service, global citizenship and a commitment to diversity.

In 2001, he became the founding dean of Elon College, the College of Arts and Sciences. He helped develop the Elon College Fellows Program and worked with faculty to develop Elon’s application to have a Phi Beta Kappa chapter on campus. He is clearly an integral part of our university, but apparently has nothing to say when it comes to contentious topics like Chick-fil-A.

President Lambert has made a mere two statements regarding the issue, none of which involve taking a stand. On Oct. 18, 2012, he made his first public statement.

He spent the first few paragraphs objectively explaining how the issue has generated debate on our campus. He clarified that a decision had not yet been reached, but named committee members who would present to the Board of Trustees later in the academic year. He provided an email address for people who wished to offer their input on this issue and informed us of a discussion that was to be held regarding the broader issues at stake. It was all very matter-of-fact.

On Oct. 30, Lambert released another statement. He listed each member of the committee and expressed his gratitude to those on it.

He went on to say, “As a university community, we do not and should not avoid respectful debate about the controversial issues of our day.”

After the racial slurs that were made last year, our administration launched a “Not On Our Campus” campaign. President Lambert and Smith Jackson spoke at a special College Coffee to demonstrate Elon’s commitment to tolerance. According to an article on E-Net, Lambert told the student body the easy road would have been for individuals to do and say nothing, to ignore injustice and to let discrimination proceed without comment. Isn’t that precisely what is happening with the Chick-fil-A debate?

While it was respectable for our administration to take a stand against racism, it was not praiseworthy. We all agree that racism is unjust; we don’t all agree on the legal definition of marriage.

Derek Bok, former president of Harvard University, was an advocate for many issues during his time as president. In 2000, he co-authored a book that changed the debate on affirmative action in America. In this book, “The Shape of the River,” Bok essentially defends affirmative action in college admissions. His stance certainly created controversy and generated criticism, but he defended his convictions, a hallmark of strong leadership.

Reverend Theodore Hesburgh, Notre Dame’s president from 1952 to 1987, also provided strong leadership in the face of controversy. Hesburgh faced criticism in the 1960s and 1970s with his liberal views on civil rights and his support of Martin Luther King, Jr. In 1972, he made another bold move by opening Notre Dame’s doors to women. He was not universally liked and probably would not have enjoyed as many retweets as President Lambert, but there’s no denying his courageous leadership.

Although our administration clearly cares a good deal about our community, it is also clear they are simply not doing enough. Our university leaders should be role models, but if they’re failing to stand up for crucial issues facing our generation, who will? With Student Government Association elections taking place today, now is the time to strongly consider what it means to be a worthy leader. As a student body, we shouldn’t be settling for uncourageous, politically correct leadership. We ought to be demanding more.

Cartoon by Jessica Grembowski.

Elon University prides itself on more than academic excellence. In addition to the lessons we learn inside the elegant brick buildings, students are encouraged to become socially conscious, global citizens.

Fostering religious tolerance is a crucial part of Elon’s pledge to promote diversity. Despite the services available to students of various faiths, the administration felt it could do more to support religious diversity and education for its students.

As of Fall 2012, the overwhelming majority of Elon students — 66 percent — identify as Christian. Roughly 30 percent do not identify as religious at all, 5 percent of students are Jewish, only .3 percent of students identify as Muslim and .1 percent as Buddhist.

The Truitt Center for Religious and Spiritual Life supports more than 15 student organizations, reflecting the religious diversity of our student body. This includes a Zen meditation group, a gospel choir, a group for Jewish students called Hillel, an interfaith group called Better Together, Catholic Campus Ministries, the Muslim Students Association and SANE (Student Atheists and Non-Religious at Elon).

Despite the numerous outlets for students to express their religious beliefs, Elon has committed itself to doing more. The school recently initiated a series of changes to substantiate its commitment to bringing greater religious diversity to the student body.

Perhaps the most notable change on campus will come with the completion of the mu

lti-faith center, the Numen Lumen Pavilion, in early spring. The center will consist of two prayer rooms and a large space for worship and reflection along with a kitchen and multi-purpose room for dinners, speakers and events.

The Numen Lumen Pavilion has been constructed so students of varying beliefs can learn, explore and share stories about their faiths and backgrounds. It is also intended to serve as a place for non-religious students to share their worldviews.

This January also marked the opening of the Sklut Hillel Center, offering a home to the existing Jewish group on Elon’s campus.

Elon is embracing a pluralistic view of society and is now, more than ever, placing an emphasis on expanding religious diversity on campus. There is a renewed purpose for bringing students together in spaces where they can practice and celebrate their own traditions while learning about others’.

In addition to Elon’s pledge to provide more faith-based outlets, the student body is also doing its part. Two students have proposed the idea of bringing Zeta Beta Tau (ZBT), the nation’s first Jewish fraternity, to campus.

ZBT representatives are currently meeting with interested Elon students who will serve as the founding brothers of the Elon chapter.

If we as students fail to take advantage of the multi-faith center, or if we choose not to embrace the new fraternity, we will be doing ourselves a great disservice. Ignoring these new religious forums would undermine Elon’s commitment to diversity. We must not only embrace the new additions, but also become active within them.

The roughly 30 percent of students who do not identify as religious who may think these changes do not concern them should reconsider. The center is not meant exclusively for people who identify as religious. It is meant to be a forum where students can express their diverse spirituality.

Elon has committed a significant amount of time and money to expose its students to religious diversity. It is preparing us for an increasingly global society in which we will be working, negotiating and collaborating with people who see the world differently from us. Religious understanding and receptiveness are attributes that can benefit students of any major.

Will adding a new space for discussion, a new fraternity and sprucing up already established organizations realistically foster tolerance among students? If students are willing to embrace these changes and act on them, then yes, it certainly can.

Elon students must make a point to visit the multi-faith center, support the idea of a Jewish fraternity and look into the various clubs that foster religious expression. Religious acceptance will only come to Elon if the students are instrumental in the process and committed to sustaining it.

On Dec. 30, 2012, at a concert venue in Atlantic City, N.J., Kanye West made an announcement. He said, “Stop the music for a second. Can we make some noise for my baby mama?”

Meanwhile, the United States economy was scheduled to fall off a cliff.

“Fiscal cliff” is a term coined by Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, that describes a combination of tax increases and spending cuts that were to come into effect at midnight on Dec. 31.

Instead, the debt ceiling was raised once again, preventing the automatic budgetary revisions from taking effect.

Essentially, the fiscal cliff is an economic concern that arose because our representatives can’t agree on how to manage the budget. They averted the cliff that economists predicted would send us back into a recession, but they only delayed the real problem.

So how did we get into this mess in the first place? In 2001, President George W. Bush and Republicans in Congress could not get the 60 Senate votes needed to pass Bush’s initial 10-year, $1.7 trillion tax cut, so they used a tool called reconciliation that allowed them to pass the tax cuts with a simple Senate majority of 51 votes. The snag in this plan was that these tax cuts were to expire after 10 years; he was simply prolonging our economic woes. President Barack Obama further evaded the issue by striking a deal with the Republicans in 2010 to extend the tax cuts for another two years. On Dec. 31, 2012, these extensions expired.

According to a Washington Post article published Jan. 15, the federal government will reach the legal limit on its ability to borrow sometime in the next 30 to 60 days. The current debt is $16.4 trillion, a number technically above the statutory limit. Republicans in Congress are refusing to further raise the debt ceiling while Obama is not budging when it comes to spending cuts.

But why all this talk about the economy? Elon students have bigger issues than being pushed off some metaphorical cliff, don’t we? Well, not necessarily. The fiscal cliff is an issue that has the potential to significantly affect college students.

In an interview published earlier this month, David Brooks, an op-ed columnist for the New York Times, made the following comment:

Despite the adverse effects that will surely impact college students not so far down the road, students continue to show apathy toward this issue.

Our question for the Elon student body is why aren’t we taking the fiscal cliff deal seriously? Why do we, as students, with so much invested in our futures, fail to take notice of something that will undoubtedly impact our financial stability?  It seems that there is a tendency to get wrapped up in Elon-centric issues, but at a certain point, we need to open our eyes to the things going on around us or we will be in for a rude awakening. Is the Elon bubble just too cushy a safety net? That remains unclear, but what is plainly clear is our treasury is running out of money and our government is running out of time. Whether or not we choose to acknowledge it, our generation is going to be the one to pay the price.

When we think of school spirit, we may think of bleachers filled with energetic students echoing chants with their school mascot painted on their chests and faces.

But as much

as we talk about the strength of our close-knit community here at Elon University, we as students do a poor job of actively supporting that community. School spirit, living “the maroon and gold life,” whatever you want to call it — it isn’t exactly noticeable on campus.

Why is school spirit so hard to find at Elon? It’s because Elon students are in the midst of an identity crisis.

And we don’t mean the Republican or Democrat, gay or straight, Team Edward or Team Jacob kind of identity crisis. From the moment we arrive at Elon, we are bombarded with different images and ideas of what our years at Elon are supposed to represent. And while most students find meaning and purpose through their studies and extracurriculars, there remains no consensus on what symbol all Elon students are meant to rally behind.

From Freshman Convocation to commencement, Elon students are instilled with the idea that they are acorns that will grow into saplings, not Phoenix rising from the ashes.

It is time that we let the Phoenix out of its cage in an effort to revamp school spirit.

Some of you may be wondering: Is school spirit really a big deal anymore? Who cares if you don’t show up to a football game or wear a Phoenix shirt to class? Why should I have to pay extra to get tickets to the spring show? To that point, we agree with you. There’s much more to community and school spirit than just showing pride for pride’s sake. But maintaining a high-spirited atmosphere is crucial for making our school an enjoyable environment for students to thrive and achieve in.

This simple yet effective concept is often overlooked at Elon, but can mean the difference between just being at school and being at our school.

One reason school spirit is so poorly demonstrated is that everywhere around us we do not see the Phoenix rising, but instead the Phoenix that sits in its nest — in Alumni Gym, in Rhodes Stadium or on the baseball field — a symbol you would be hard-pressed to find anywhere else.

You won’t get renewed community support without indoctrinating students from the very beginning with the central idea that we are all Phoenix. But in order for that to occur, it has to mean something to be a Phoenix.

Another explanation for the lack of enthusiasm is the mindset that many of us adopt once we cross Elon’s threshold. School spirit often gets cast aside in the midst of our desire to earn as many credits as possible while simultaneously balancing extracurricular commitments and a social life. We often get so caught up bolstering our resumes for life beyond college that we forsake the opportunity to involve ourselves in the local community. The university certainly realizes this, and tries to appeal to every college student’s weakness for free food and other incentives to evoke more student involvement in Elon events.

But it is not enough to sell T-shirts, send emails, put up flyers or give students incentives to attend Elon events and cheer on the Phoenix. While these ideas are great and should continue, relying on material incentives will not change the day-to-day culture of Elon or revitalize school spirit.

Head football coach Jason Swepson acknowledged the impact the lack of community support has on Elon’s athletic performance this season.

“We just didn’t create our own energy. We had to,” he said in an interview following Elon’s loss to Furman University on Oct. 27. “There was no one in the stands. We had to create our own energy and hopefully we can learn from it and move forward. It felt like a coffin out there and it didn’t help.”

Students attend games when students believe they are part of the team, that our pride and school spirit is somewhat intertwined with the success of our athletics. And believe it or not, athletes perform better when they know they have the support of their peers.

We understand we are not a large university and do not place as much emphasis on school spirit as we do on academics.

But having school spirit is about more than just a mascot or a rallying cry. It’s an idea that is rooted in the foundation of Elon University. It’s about being part of something bigger than yourself.

There are several simple ways you can demonstrate your school spirit here at Elon: wear your maroon and gold once a week, attend a home game or sponsored concert, support campus wide competitions or involve yourself in events like Homecoming or the Spring Show.

School spirit memorializes our Elon experience — not just for us but also for future Elon students. Avid school spirit often draws additional alumni support, which translates to a better college experience for all of us.

But most of all, school spirit gives our college years meaning: it gives our victories and defeats context, reminds us of our past and points us toward our future.

For some of us, graduation day will arrive before we know it, and as students, we should learn to appreciate our school before we leave for good.