Alumni Spotlight II- Foodies

Shay whippin' up something good

I have really enjoyed writing this new section of the blog that features alumni in a various fields around the country. Our first edition was all about Tulane fashionistas, and today we are going to meet six alumni that are involved in the cutting edge world of food. These guys are all involved in the culinary industry in some form and I got to catch up with them to see what they are up to and how Tulane helped them to get where they are today. Here goes...

Brennan Foxman - class of 2013 - Entrepreneur, Owner/Founder Wokworks- Brennan is a fraternity brother of mine who just graduated last week and is already prepped to open one of the most unique and anticipated restaurants in Philly. Wokworks is a casual restaurant that is opening soon in the Rittenhouse Square region of Philadelphia. The buzz in the press is already pretty hot for Brennan's new spot (Zagat even picked up on it!), which he says he will gear towards "fast foodies." His goal is to replace typical Asian take out with something much better- an organic, delicious wok-based meal that is both affordable and convenient. Brennan says the end goal is to eventually develop a strong national brand that delivers this type of quality and speed to cities everywhere. He also told me he got some great help and advice in this venture from a fraternity brothers of ours, Mike Casey, a Philly native who just opened Liberty Cheesesteaks here in NOLA. Which brings me to...

Mike Casey - class of 2006 - Entrepreneur, Owner/Founder of Liberty Cheesesteaks. Liberty has been one of the hottest openings in the New Orleans restaurant scene this year. Located just a few blocks off campus on Freret Street, Liberty has filled a niche in New Orleans that was not there quite yet- an authentic Philly cheesesteak, complete with Wiz and Amarosa rolls. Mike and my best buddy Joe had the concept for the restaurant a few years back, and last year took the leap of faith to get the venture off the ground. Liberty opened this spring to some great press and delivered a killer product. Mike's goal was not just to create a great sandwich by New Orleans' standards, but to make a chessesteak so solid that if the shop were in Philly, it would still be a top 5 cheesesteak joint. By all accounts he has succeeded- Liberty has gotten amazing reviews (including a whopping 91% on Urbanspoon). We profiled Mike in the second feature of our Tru TU young entrepreneur series, you can view the video here. It's a great one and worth having a look at.

Shay Spence - class of 2012 - Recipe developer, Royito's Hot Sauce & Freelance caterer / food blogger. I spent a few years recruiting students from Texas, Shay among them. Shay's always been one of my favorites, and he's spent the last year since graduation pursuing his passion for all things culinary. His full time job is at Royito's Hot Sauce company where he develops recipes with the hot sauces and caters events out of their food trailer- catering events up to 3,000 people at festivals like Austin City Limits and South by Southwest. Shay also runs one of the hottest up-and-coming food blogs in America right now, www.chezspence.com. Have a look at the blog- you'll love it. Shay told me that "even though my career path could not be further than my political science major at Tulane, I would not be where I am today without this school. I met some of the most interesting, fun, and intelligent people you could possibly imagine- not to mention studying in one of the most inspiring culinary scenes in the country." Shay's heading to NYC this fall to attend culinary school, so stay tuned to his blog because some of his best stuff is yet to come.

Michael Friedman and Greg Augarten - class of 2008 and 2009 - Co-owners/Founders/Chefs at Pizza Delicious. Tulane has a lot of New Yorkers, but one thing NOLA did not have was a really solid New York style pizza joint. Enter: Pizza Delicious. Co-founders Michael and Greg are both New York natives who decided that it was time for them to bring Big Apple pizza to the Big Easy. The two started Pizza Delicious, as a once-a-week pop-up style delivery service, and this past October, opened the physical Pizza Delicious restaurant in the Bywater neighborhood (thanks to a Kickstarter campaign, no less!). The place has exploded and is easily one of the most popular pizza joints in the city (in small part because of my patronage- I have been three times in the month of May alone). The reviews of PD have been killer too, you can read a few here. Greg and Michael told me that Tulane helped them realize the skills they would need to open and operate their own business and that many of their professors made them want to stay here in NOLA- and that those same professors now frequent Pizza Delicious on a regular basis.

Scott Himmel - class of 2004 - Owner and Founder, LunchOwl. Scott, who also happens to be a fraternity brother of mine (who would have thought we'd have so many entrepreneurs in Sig Ep?) has just launched a pretty cool concept- he's developed an innovated workplace lunch service. Scott founded LunchOwl, which makes it easy for office workers to eat right by delivering delicious and energizing lunches on a regular basis. Based in Cleveland, Scott partners with progressive companies that subsidize his service for their employees. The main mission Scott says is to harmonize work life with the healthy life. As a business major here at Tulane, Scott told me that the business school helped him "assemble a toolkit that I use daily." He even told me that courses he took with faculty members like Kelly Grant and Sid Pulitzer directly prepared him for this venture. It's not his first foodie entrepreneurial idea- Scott founded the ever-popular Campusmenus.com which he sold back in 2009. His LunchOwl concept has taken off very quickly having just started in its pilot testing phase. Stay tuned for him to expand, and quickly.

So there you have it! At a school with such strong entrepreneurial ties and a city as culinary diverse as New Orleans, I suppose it should be no surprise that so many great young foodie alumni have started to emerge over the last few months. All six of these guys have some great concepts that are just on the beginning of some serious growth and expansion. If you are in NOLA, Philly, Austin or Cleveland, check these guys out, before they get too popular!

Mike '06, Joe '05 and Alisha. Mike likes to be known as the Cheesesteak King of NOLA.
See here for why. (bonus points when you see my cameo)

Mmmmmm cheesesteak. 

The LunchOwl fridge in action! 

LunchOwl- Healthy, easy and delicious. 

Where is mine?

Wokworks founder Brennan with his chef, Allen Susser (side note, he is a James Beard winner) and his concept and development consultant Bruce testing out the perfect fortune cookie to go with their woks.

Here's Shay, probably thinking of some wildly creative and delicious recipe. 

Michael and Greg, the Pizza Delicious duo.

Lastly, I leave you with me + Pizza Delicious. 

Read More →

SMALL IS BEAUTIFUL

What is it that makes smallness lovable? That bigness should be impressive is understandable. We all respect Mount Everest as the world’s highest, and Mont Blanc as Europe’s highest mountain. The Nile impresses us as the world’s longest river. The tallest building (in Dubai, as I recall) takes the breath away. The longest novels, by Tolstoy, and even more so, Proust, hold us in awe.

Yet even weirder forms of bigness command our respect. When Georges Perec contrives a whole novel without the letter E in it, we wonder at so big an achievement, even though it serves no valid purpose. Big too is the number of frankfurters devoured in competition in limited time (hot diggedy dog!), an essentially gross achievement, but eliciting a left-handed admiration.

Someone has the largest number of Impressionist paintings in private possession; someone else the largest number of matchbook covers from the world’s restaurants, amazing even if not worthy of museum exhibition. Currently, a production of the Stratford, Ontario, Shakespeare Festival features the largest number of pinball machines simultaneously onstage, garnering inclusion in the Guinness Book of Records, awesome even if a greatness of questionable worth.

Still, a greatness predicating wealth or resourcefulness is enviable and therefore also admirable. The size of those presidential heads on Mount Rushmore commands respect, perhaps as great as the achievements of those heads of state. But awe is not tantamount to affection, such as we have for small things. Why?

Why do we all love puppies and kittens, often much more so than full-grown dogs and cats? Ditto babies, so winning that even mighty politicians will stoop to kiss them? And indeed most babies are cute as all getout, yet once grown up, rare is the politician who would kiss any one of them.

So what is it about smallness that we find so fetching? Why do even some boys like dolls? But not all small ones, e.g., dwarfs and midgets, are lovable, even if they’re not as nasty as Swift’s Lilliputians. Toy poodles and bichon frises, yes; Yorkies, conceivably; but definitely not Chihuahuas and some other portable breeds, whose very owners I reprehend.

Smallness scores, I think, in several ways. One is through aesthetics, as in the case of certain small dogs. Sometimes it is through cleverness, as when a sizable text is engraved on the head of a pin. Often it is the miniaturization of something big: a tiny piano, say, whether it works or not. A tiny snail, not being a reduction, does not impress, but a tiny hippo or rhino, whether live or a mere stuffed toy, does. It is an implicit cleverness, whether artisanal, or on the part of nature. Or an explicit cleverness, such as a flea circus, but who would be impressed by a non-artiste flea?

Or it may my be a sense of our superior power that endears a tiny, fragile thing, as long as it isn’t repulsive or vicious. A wild rat, certainly not, but a tame, white, laboratory one, why not? The fondness may be a form of patronization, of perhaps unconscious condescension.

But aesthetics are important. A ladybug or dragonfly appeals; a cockroach repels. A sparrow leaves us cold; a hummingbird does not. A toucan or booby, yes; a common starling or pigeon, no. Rarity also figures in this.

Of course, we like miniatures; something large reduced to toy size. A tiny car or train or whole railroad; a doll house with teensy furniture; in short, something we can play with. The teddy bear rather than the grizzly.

Littleness translates as daintiness. We admire small teeth not just for their whiteness, but also for their delicacy, their pearliness. The epithet “little” readily suggests lovableness. Thus a wife, regardless of her size, becomes “the little woman” at least in regions as yet unconquered by feminism. So a beloved New York mayor became known as the Little Flower. So we say “Good things come in small packages,” however much Fedex and UPS may disagree.

Thus, altogether, little children have become idealized., and Lewis Carroll, that platonic pedophile, becomes enamored of little Alice Liddell. Thus child actors become adored by adults—the Michael Jackson syndrome. The characters in children’s books be are beloved even by grown-ups, and are often not merely kiddies but actual dwarfs.  Never in children’s books are giants or giantesses fair and fine; of course, there is also the occasional nasty dwarf in the fairy tales, but outnumbered by the Tom Thumbs or Petits Poucets, not to mention Puss in Boots and Snow White’s merry companions.

Small is lovable even in miniature paintings; why else would they have been invented—surely not to economize in canvas or paints? Whereas giant frescoes may prompt admiration, charming miniatures elicit affection. As do small characters in paintings. I don’t know how much the Infantas loved their dwarfs, but we just love a Velazquez Infanta. Is there a warmer. more loving term than “cute,” except when pejoratively applied to an affectation? Surely not. Small is beautiful.

Read More →

Commencement 2013- a.k.a. The Circle of Life

Just a little example. My "full circle" with Maddie.
And if I could just give her  a little shout out-
She's heading to Georgetown med this fall.

Another commencement in the books! This one was a great one too- music by Allen Toussaint and Dr. John, both who got honorary degrees, and an inspiring speech by none other than His Holiness, the Dalai Lama. I've been to nine Tulane graduation ceremonies including my own, and they never get old. If you've ever been to a Tulane commencement, you know why- we just do things differently. Its fun, casual, funny and very heavy on the music. So basically, it's as if the city of New Orleans planned a graduation for its residents. I had many non-Tulane friends attend the ceremony this past Saturday and they commented to me how incredible it all was, and so different from anything they have seen.

Commencement is always one of my favorite days of the year. I am lucky enough to be in a profession that I truly love. Monday mornings roll around and I wake up saying "cool. I get to go to work!" (exception being this morning... let's just say I was a tad... social, this past weekend). The main reason I love this job so much is because of the students I get to work with on a daily basis. I meet these young, impressionable high school juniors and seniors, motivate them to enroll at Tulane, watch them grow on campus and then, all of a sudden, they are in their cap and gowns and the circle is complete. It's such a joy watching these "kids" grow up, fall in love with Tulane, make an impact on their communities, graduate, and hold both Tulane and NOLA in their hearts forever.


So my hats off to you all, Class of 2013. Welcome to the wonderful world of being a Tulane alumni. Don't be a stranger, now! Great video of the day below:

Oh, Hello Dalai Lama! 

Shots of the motor-boards I saw on graduation day. 

We gave the D-L a second line umbrella! 

Read More →

Topic 22. We all work or will work in our jobs with many different kinds of people. In your opinion, what are some important characteristics of a co-worker (someone you work closely with)?

We all work or will work in our jobs with many different kinds of people. In your opinion,
what are some important characteristics of a co-worker (someone you work closely with)? Use
reasons and specific examples to explain why these characteristics are important.

Sample essay 1.

We spend more time with our co-workers during a week than we do with our family. Thus, it's
important for our co-workers to be people we can get along with. I've worked in a lot of offices,
and I've found there are certain characteristics that all good co-workers have in common.

A good co-worker is very cooperative. She does her best to get along with others. She tries to
keep her end of things flowing smoothly to help others in the office. She realizes that if one person
doesn't get her work done, it can hold up everyone else. She has a positive attitude that creates a
pleasant working environment.

A good co-worker is adaptable. She is not stubborn about changes in schedules or routines, and
doesn't object to having her job description revised. That can make life miserable for everyone
around her. A good co-worker is willing to change her schedule to accommodate another worker's
emergency. She has no problem with new procedures and welcomes changes when they come.

A good co-worker is helpful. She pitches in when someone falls behind in his or her work. She's

willing to do whatever it takes to get the job done. She doesn't keep track of how often she has to
finish another's work or take on extra work. Some co-workers do their own job, period. They have
no sense of office community. They only want to do their work, get paid and go home.

A good co-worker is a sympathetic listener, and never uses what she learns against people. She
doesn't gossip. A bad co-worker uses negative rumors to take advantage of others.

Being a good co-worker isn't too hard, but some people just can't seem to manage it. Wouldn't it
be a wonderful world if everyone could?

Sample essay 2.

We all work with many different kinds of people. Different co-workers have different personality.
To me, my co-workers should have some important characteristics such as independence,
optimism, and teamwork spirit.

I think a good co-worker must have his own opinions. A co-worker should dare to propose his
own opinions. He should not say the same as others and hide his opinions. Only everyone tries his
best to analyze every aspect of a thing, it can be done best. So independence of thinking is
important for a co-worker.

An other important characteristic is optimism. If we have some difficult problems, he must be
brave and should not fear them. He should encourage others to find methods to solve problems.
This point is very important because one’s mood can influence others easily. Once a co-worker
shows a little fear of difficulties, others may become discouraged soon. So a good co-worker
should be optimistic.

In addition, teamwork spirit is an important characteristic of a co-worker. Although a co-worker
should be independent to analyze a thing, he should be tolerant to the different people and their
ways of working. He should be willing to dedicate his energy, time and knowledge to reach the
goal of whole team.

Independence, optimism and teamwork spirit are important characteristics of a co-worker. If
everyone in a work group has these characteristics, the group can overcome difficulties and reach
its goals.

Read More →

Topic 21. In general, people are living longer now. Discuss the causes of this phenomenon.

In general, people are living longer now. Discuss the causes of this phenomenon. Use specific
reasons and details to develop your essay.

Sample essay 1.

With the development of human society, people are living longer now. Many factors interacting
together to enable the longer life. There are three most important causes: the quality of food has
been greatly improved; people could have medical services; more and more people realize that
regular sports benefit their health.

The improving quality of our food is the most important factor of the longer life. We could have
not only enough food as we want, but also the healthier food. When we preparing food, we no
longer consider the cost, but pay more attention to the nutritions of the food. With the
development of transportation systems, inland people now could also enjoy seafood and tropical
fruit.

Furthermore, governments are paying more and more money on medical establishments. Citizens
could have medical services more easily. Because of the convenient medical service more
illnesses could be detected at an earlier stage. Also, many illnesses that had been considered fatal
could be cured today. The better detection and curement enable people's longer life.

Last but not least important is that people care more for their own health. Every morning you
could see people doing sports outside. More and more people have realized the saying "life is
locomotion". Regular sports build up a strong body. Naturally, people with stronger body could
resist more deseases.

To sum up, the development of our society causes the longer life of people. People have better
food and better medical services. And people spend more time on sports to biuld up stronger
bodies. As we could predict, people are going to live even longer.

Sample essay 2.

Nowadays, more and more communities for old people are founded everywhere all over the
world. When you walk in a department store, you will find that more and more products for old
people have been put on the shelves. The population of old people in the world is growing rapidly,
and the reason is people are living longer now. There are several explanations for this
phenomenon.

First, under the development of science and technology, it’s obviously the standards of living have
been improved a lot. People work less and relax more these days than ten years ago. More
entertainment has also been provided, hence people have more chances to entertain and keep a
good mood everyday, which is essential for being healthy and living longer.

Moreover, highly developed health system is another significant factor for people to live for a long
time. As the governments put more fund for health expenditure, more people are saved from the
torture of illness.

Further more, the improvement in medicine also plays an important role. There’s an undeniable
fact that after people discovered the mysteries of gene, more and more newly developed medicine
cured a lot of illness that can’t be cured before. Besides all these explanations we discussed
above, there are also many other reasons. But the main causes of people’s longer life is the
development of science and technology, efficient health system and improvement in medicine.

Sample essay 3.

With the development of modern medicine, people are living longer now. There are many factors
why people can live a longer life. In my opinion, there are three most important reasons: the
quality of food has been greatly improved; people benifit from improved medical services; and
more and more people realize the importance of regular sports and excercises to their health.

The improving quality of our food is the most important factor for a longer life. With the
convenience of modern transportation and food processing technology, we can find any food in
the market; and as our standard of living and income increases, we can affort to buy any kind of
food we want. we no longer worry about the cost, but pay more attention to the nutritious balance
of the food. Better food and better nutrition give us a healthier body.

Furthermore, the development of medical technolgy and method ensure a longer life for people.
Many fatal deceases which were considered incurable before can now be treated and cured.
Governments are paying more and more money on medical care and training of doctors and
nurses. People can access medical services easily: regular physical examinations ensure that
deceases can be found ealier and therefore can be treated in a timely fasion.

Last but not least, people care more about their own health and realised the importance of
excercises to their health. Every morning you could see people doing sports outside. More and
more people have realized the saying "Life is locomotion". Regular sports build up a strong body.
Sports like hiking, jogging, and swimming can all benifit our health. Naturally, people with
stronger body could resist more deseases, and therefore can live longer.

To sum up, the progress of our society is the reason why people live a longer life now. People eat
food and have access to better medical services. And people spend more time on sports and
excercices to build stronger bodies. As we could predict, people are going to live even longer in
the future.

Sample essay 4.


Today people are living to be much older than ever before. Some of the main reasons for this are
the improved health care and better nutrition available to everyone.

Medical care is more available to people. Although not everyone can get the best health care,
everyone can get basic health care and advice. When people are seriously ill, they can go to a
public hospital and be taken care of. Years ago, health care wasn't available to everyone. Some
people didn't live near a doctor or a hospital, and others couldn't pay for the care they needed.
They made do with herbal medicines or folk remedies. Of course, some of these worked, but not
for the more serious diseases.

The quality of medical care has improved. That's also a factor in longevity. Doctors know more
now about what causes disease and how to cure it. Years ago, doctors only knew about the most
basic diseases and cures. Medicine was not very advanced. You could die from something as
simple as an infection from a cut. Now we have antibiotics and other medicines to help cure
infections.

People are also living longer now because of better nutrition. We're eating better and more
healthfully than we used to. That's reduced the number of people with heart disease and cancer.
We try to eat low-fat foods and eat more vegetables and fruits, which are now available year-round.

Improved medical care and healthy eating habits has greatly expanded our life spans. What we
need to do now is make 'sure that everyone in the world has these benefits.

Read More →

Topic 18. What are some important qualities of a good supervisor (boss)?

What are some important qualities of a good supervisor (boss)? Use specific details and
examples to explain why these qualities are important.

Sample essay.

Even though job situations can be very different, there are several qualities that all good
supervisors have in common. A good boss treats all her employees fairly. She doesn't single out
one employee for better (or worse) treatment than the others. A poor supervisor has favorites.
Sometimes she'll even use her favorites to spy on other employees. She expects them to tell her
what the others are saying about her. This can cause a lot of bad feelings among employees.

A good supervisor gives clear and understandable directions, She doesn't constantly change her
mind about what she wants employees to do. She also doesn't get angry with an employee who is
confused and needs her to explain the directions again or more fully. Delegating authority well is
another quality of a good supervisor. She knows how to use the skills of her employees to best
advantage. A poor supervisor insists on doing everything herself. She is unwilling to give any
authority to others.

A good boss evaluates her employees on a reasonable set of criteria, not on how she feels about
them personally. And she lets the employees know what those criteria are, so they have a fair
chance of meeting them. She gives both praise and criticism in a straightforward manner. She also
offers guidance when needed. A poor supervisor will criticize without giving any suggestions on
how to improve.

Most importantly, a good supervisor sets the standards for her employees by her own behavior.
She works hard and treats employees like valuable assets to the company. This promotes good
morale among her workers, and this is of great benefit to her business.

Read More →

Topic 20. It is better for children to grow up in the countryside than in a big city. Do you agree or disagree?

It is better for children to grow up in the countryside than in a big city. Do you agree or
disagree? Use specific reasons and examples to develop your essay.

Sample essay 1.


With the development of the transportation system and some residence institution, the world is
getting smaller and smaller, and people are not restricted in only one area. In addition to the
convenient condition, because there are different places with different cultures, living standards,
education environment and other disparity, they are inclined to transfer from one place to the
other. Is it better to move around than stay in one place? I believe there are no uniform answers,
but in my opinion, I do agree with the claim that to move around is better than to stay in one
place.

Most people’s growth comes with the transfers in their life. As for me, when I was young I lived in
a small county. Because the school in there was not suitable to me, I transferred from my little
county to a city to get a better education. As soon as I got to the city, I was amazed that the world
here was so different here as my hometown .If I still lived in my hometown, it was impossible for
me to make the wildest guess at what the real world looked like. The first transfer has made me to
imagine my own life and spur on me to go further. With the confidence, I went into a university
which I would never think of it before. The university is located in a different city so that I have
to come into another world. Compared with my living city, the one is more complicated in which
there are different people, more convenient transportation, more competitive environment. I love
all of this very much. Communicating with different students and teachers, I have learned much
from them which will benefit me throughout my life and my lifestyle. Now I am in a graduate
school also so beautiful that I will never regret my selection of leaving my hometown because the
transfer has given me a splendid life.


Also, like we students, there are many adults transferring their work place in order to grasp better
opportunities. No matter in industry, in agriculture or in service, workers have rights to choose
their work companies which leads them to work from place to place and then they accumulate
precious experience and skills to get priorities to others.

People not only transfer in their own country, but also go abroad to get education, work or live
through the rest of their life in appropriate countries. We can see that many students including me
want to go to the foreign countries to study further and forge ourselves, and that many parents
send their little sons or daughters to foreign countries to study. After all, diverse circumstances
give persons new experience and broaden their narrow sight, even help them get more
comprehensive understanding of the world, the society and our life itself.

However, some people may say that if people move around, they will pay for much such as
money, time and energy. It is right to say that it takes one person some time to get used to his or
her new environment, new personal relationship which indeed influences the growth of children,
the efficiency of our work and the stability of our society and family. And I have to admit that
people should make considerate plans before changing their places and may not transfer aimlessly
and frequently. But I think sometimes it is just all the friction that has made the world wealthier
and more beautiful. Therefore, I still think it is better to travel around than to live in one place.


Sample essay 2.

There are advantages and disadvantages to a childhood in either the country or a city. It's hard to
say which is better. Growing up in the country means a certain amount of isolation. You're in a
small town or on a farm and not with a lot of people. Even more important, the people you meet
every day tend to be just like you. Most will be the same race as you, have the same background
as you, and will have gone to the same schools as you. In the city, the people you meet are all
different. There are different races and different cultures. You get a more interesting mix.

City people tend to come from a lot of different places and move around a lot. So, there isn't the
sense of community in the city that you have in the country. People in the city can live in the
same apartment building for twenty years and never get to know their neighbors. In the country,
everybody knows everybody. For a child, this means the country is more secure. A child can get
lost or hurt in the city and have no one to turn to. In the country, everyone's a neighbor. People in
the country feel connected to each other.

A child growing up in the city has the advantage of a lot of interesting and exciting places to visit.
He or she can go to the zoo, museums, art galleries and concerts. There are a lot of restaurants
with different kinds of food. It's easy to see every new movie that comes out. Children in the
country don't have a lot of these activities nearby.

All in all, I think a childhood in the city is better because it prepares you more for what real life is
like.

Sample essay 3.


Where is a better place for children to grow up, the countryside or the big city? The answer to this
question differs from individual to individual. As far as I am concerned, it is better for children to grow
up in a big city.

Some people argue that the countryside is an ideal place for children to grow up. For one thing, it
is less polluted than the city. The air is fresh in the countryside. The sky is bluer and the water is
clearer. Living in such a place is good to the children’s health. For another, as children like
playing, only the countryside can satisfy them well. They can run everywhere, play games in the
field, swim in the river. On the contrary, the city cannot provide such places for children. Maybe
they can only stay at home and watch TV.

Although I do agree that growing up in the countryside has one or more advantages, I insist that it
is far better to choose the city as the right place for children. To begin with, living in the city can
broaden their horizons. They can meet a lot of people and hear a number of things that will never
happen in the countryside.

In addition, city means more chance to receive better education. In most countries, it is no doubt
that the education level in the city is higher than that of the country. As a result, children can meet
better teachers and receive high quality of education in the city.

Last but not least, children can also develop many hobbies in the city. They can learn to play the
piano, draw and so on, which are impossible in the country.

In conclusion, I believe that it is better for children to grow up in the city not only because it can
broaden their horizons, but also because they can receive better education and have a chance to
develop many hobbies there.

Read More →

Topic 19. Should governments spend more money on improving roads and highways, or should governments spend more money on improving public transportation (buses, trains, subways)? Why?

Should governments spend more money on improving roads and highways, or should
governments spend more money on improving public transportation (buses, trains, subways)?
Why? Use specific reasons and details to develop your essay.


Sample essay 1.

Should governments spend more money on improving roads and highways or on improving public
transportations? There seems to be a difficult problem since many reasons should be involved.
However, after carefully pondering it, I buttress the last one, spending the money on improving
public transportation. The reasons are presented below:

There is no denying that improving the public transportation will surely alleviate the pollution
given off by enormous cars. If a city has not a developed public transportation, the air will be
polluted more heavily. What a dirty environment we will live in! Every day breathing into the air
filled with the flour of the gasoline, seeing the sky with the dull color will be the title of our life.
So the essence of environment has been realized by an increasingly number of people, to the
governments, the protection of environment is especially an undeniable mission.

Another reason I agree with it is that developed public transportation will decrease the frequency
of the traffic jams. Perhaps no worse word than “traffic jams” exists, to the businessmen who
believe in “Time is money”. Traffic jams not only cost the people time and expense, but also
create a bad mood for work. It greatly decreases the efficiency of the whole city. I imagine how
can a city whose avenue full of traffic jams develop its economics?

Finally, I want to say that improving the public transportation provide a great number of ways of
transportation for most of the poor people who can not afford to buy a car. It is known that our
citizens is not made of only people who has the ability to own a car, but the very poor people are
also included. I believe that however the technology is improved, the public apparatus should not
be ignored, because it serves the people all over the city.

Nevertheless, the private transportation has its own advantages, for instance, it can save a lot of
time in some cases, provide some convenience for people. But improving on roads and highways
is advantageous only conditionally. Based on the above discussion, I agree with the opinion that
the government should spend money on improving public transportation not only it can protect
environment and save time for people, but it also can create a convenient environment for all the
citizens.

Sample essay 2.

Governments should definitely spend more money on improving all forms of public transportation.
These include buses, subways and trains. This is the best way to preserve natural resources and
reduce pollution.

As a planet, we're dealing with a finite amount of natural resources. Once they're gone, they can't
be replaced. They can't fill our need for oil and gasoline forever. But we seem to forget that and
consume them at an incredible rate. In wealthier countries, some families have two or three cars.
As soon as teenagers get their driver's licenses, they're given cars so their parents won't have to
drive them places.

Public transportation hasn't been sufficiently developed. Because of this, suburban areas
surrounding cities have been allowed to sprawl more and more widely. This means that people
can't even go to the store without having to hop into the car. Everything is too far away from
where they live. If there were better and more frequent public transportation, people would be
able to give up their cars for local driving.

As a result of all the cars being driven, we're dealing with terrible pollution problems. In big cities,
there are days during the summer when the elderly and people with respiratory problems are
advised not to leave the house. Ten years ago this was unheard of! Now it's the norm. Public
transportation would cut down considerably on air pollution.

Public transportation also encourages a sense of community. People who travel to work together
all the time get to know each other. Cars isolate us from our neighbors. However, people feel they
need to drive because they can't depend on public transportation to fit their schedules. If more
money were available, buses, subways and trains could run 24 hours a day. Then they would be
available all the time to the people who need them.

I always try to take public transportation whenever possible, and I encourage friends and
neighbors to try it to. I think we must support public transportation in order to create a better
world.

Read More →

Topic 17. Some people think that they can learn better by themselves than with a teacher. Others think that it is always better to have a teacher. Which do you prefer?

Some people think that they can learn better by themselves than with a teacher. Others think
that it is always better to have a teacher. Which do you prefer? Use specific reasons to develop
your essay.

Sample essay.


Most of us can learn how to do something simple on our own with just a set of instructions.
However, to learn about something more complex, it's always best to have a teacher.

Teachers bring with them varied and useful backgrounds. They've been trained to teach
individuals in different ways depending on their style. For instance, some students learn better by
discussing a topic. Others learn more by writing about it. Teachers can help students learn in the
way that's best for each student. A textbook or a manual can only give you one way of learning
something. Plus they're only as helpful as your ability to understand them. A good teacher can
adapt her teaching to your needs.

Teachers help you focus on what you're learning. If you're learning something by yourself, it's
easy to become distracted and go on to other activities. Teachers keep your attention on the
subject. They also approach a subject logically, taking it one step at a time. On your own, it's
tempting to skip parts of the learning process you think you don't need. That can hinder your
ability to really understand the subject.

Learning a subject on your own is a very narrow way of learning. You can only use the
information you get from the textbook. With a teacher, you get the information in the written
materials as well as the teacher's own knowledge of the topic. Teachers can also provide extra
materials to broaden the scope of what you're learning.

There's nothing wrong with studying on your own, and a learner can always benefit from some
quiet study. For the best possible learning, though, a good teacher is the biggest help you can
have.

Read More →

Topic 16. It has recently been announced that a new restaurant may be built in your neighborhood. Do you support or oppose this plan? Why?

It has recently been announced that a new restaurant may be built in your neighborhood. Do
you support or oppose this plan? Why? Use specific reasons and details to support your answer.

Sample essay.


I can see both advantages and disadvantages to having a new restaurant built in our neighborhood.
I'm worried about traffic and how it will affect our neighborhood. However, I think that it will
benefit local businesses and increase appreciation for our neighborhood. Overall, I think it is a
good idea.

Traffic congestion is always a concern when you build something new. Our streets are narrow,
with parking on both sides. More cars traveling through the neighborhood could cause a lot of
congestion. Traffic means parking problems, too. Our neighborhood has very few garages
attached to the houses. Most of us depend on finding a space to park on the street. If the new
restaurant is built, we'll be competing for those spaces with the restaurant's patrons. Plus, if the
restaurant offers valet parking, it'll be even worse. Valet parkers work in teams to grab every
possible space available on the street.

I'm also concerned about the type of patrons this new restaurant will bring into our neighborhood.
A family restaurant wouldn't be a problem. However, if it's going have a bar and dancing, then
there could be problems. The restaurant would stay open later, and people leaving the restaurant
might be drunk. Who wouldn't worry about rowdy customers staggering around our neighborhood
in the early morning hours, looking for their cars?

I have to admit, though, there are advantages to a new restaurant. Our neighborhood could
certainly use the jobs the restaurant would provide. Not only that, the money neighborhood
residents would earn there would likely be spent at other neighborhood businesses. This would
give a boost to those businesses and make our neighborhood more prosperous.

A new restaurant would also attract a lot of people to our neighborhood. They could see what a
nice area this is to live. That might attract new residents to the neighborhood. That would be a
good thing, because we've been losing residents to the suburbs the last couple of years.
There are a lot of details to consider, but all in all, I support the idea of this new restaurant in our
neighborhood.

Read More →

Topic 15. Neighbors are the people who live near us. In your opinion, what are the qualities of a good neighbor?

Neighbors are the people who live near us. In your opinion, what are the qualities of a good
neighbor? Use specific details and examples in your answer.

Sample essay 1.


If you have a good neighbor, you are a lucky person. You have someone who cares about your
needs and your property, who is helpful in the little day-to-day situations that come up, and who is
supportive in times of crisis.

A good neighbor is someone who, for instance, understands that your children may occasionally
run across his lawn,- even though you tell them not to. He'll realize that children can be careless
about things like that, and he won't make a big fuss about it unless it becomes a regular thing. In
the same vein, he knows that you'll understand if some of the trash from his trash cans blows
across into your yard. In other words, he is sensitive to the unintentional things that can happen.
He doesn't make a big deal about them.

A good neighbor is also respectful of your property. For example, she asks your permission before
doing anything that interferes with what's yours. This means she wouldn't plant a huge tree in
between your houses without asking how you felt about it. If she wanted to put up a fence, she
would let you know first. She might work with you to decide where it should be placed. Maybe
the two of you would even split the cost.

A good neighbor would lend you some milk if you ran out. She'd give you a ride to work if your
car was broken, and let your children stay at her house in the evening if you got stuck working
overtime. You would do the same for her. Both of you would help make the other's life easier.

When something really awful happens to you, like a death in the family, a good neighbor will
volunteer to help in any way he can. This could mean something small, like making some
casseroles to put in your freezer to feed visiting relatives. Or it could mean something big, like
helping you get through the sadness of the funeral.

I think only someone who has experienced a bad neighbor can really appreciate a good one! A
good neighbor can be a good friend. He or she can make all the difference in the world to your
life.

Sample essay 2.


Neighbours are the people who live near us, and their behaviour influence our daily life. Good
neighbours can make us feel comfortable and give us many help, and everyone will benefit from a
good relationship among neighbours. In my point of view, these are three conspicuous aspects of
the qualities of a good neighbours.

One of the most important characteristic of good neighbours is that they have a good living habit
and are friendly to others. A person with bad habit will affect your daily life. For example,
children are most likely to be influnced by bad neighbors and carry on bad habits. On the other
hand, being friendly is also an important nature of good neighbors. If neighbours are unfriendly,
they are hard to approach and difficult to get along with.

Another important aspect of of good neighbors is that they should be willing to help others. In our
daily life, emergency situations may happen, and we may encounter difficulties which can not be
resolved by ourselves. At this time, the quickest help we can get is probably from our neighbors.
To some degree, neighbours are as important as relatives to us, because they could provide the
immediat help. In the same way, a neighbour who likes to help others will get help in return. Help
each others can form a friendly and harmonious relationship among the neighbours.

All in all, a good neighbour is someone who have a good living habit, is friendly and is willing to
help others. Taking into account of all these factors, we may reach the conclusion that a good
relationship among neighbours need the maintenance from us.

Read More →

Welcome Class of 2017!

May 1st has come and gone, and that means colleges across the country have started to get an idea how their classes of 2017 are looking. We here at Tulane don't take an official census until the beginning of October, as numbers definitely fluctuate for all universities and schools over the summer and as the school year commences, but this blog will tell you a little about our incoming class which we are very excited about.

First off, things went down a little differently at Tulane this year than in years past. Year after year we have targeted a smaller incoming class size, and for the most part seen little success as Tulane has continued to increase in popularity (not a bad problem to have!) This year to enroll a slightly smaller class, we admitted nearly 500 fewer students than last year and continued to focus heavily on admitting students who we felt were academically strong but also had high levels of interest in Tulane. This successfully led to a slightly smaller size of class on May 1st and for the first time in a few years, we were finally able to admit a small group of qualified students from our wait list as planned. Tulane has rarely admitted students off of its wait list, so we were excited to be able to do so this year. If you are still on our wait list and waiting to hear from Tulane and would like to express your continued interest in Tulane, please contact your admission counselor to do so.

The size of the class will be around 1575, but remember much fluctuates over the coming months. The size is slightly smaller and closer to the size of freshman classes we saw entering back in 2009 and 2010, which is the perfect size for our campus. So we are very happy about this. We admitted fewer students than ever and had an overall acceptance rate of around 26%, compared to 27.27% last year. Our SAT scores are the same as last year, and over 60% of the class who reported rank came from the top 10% of their class. So by all accounts, this is one of the brightest classes we have ever recruited at Tulane.

Now, 7 facts about the class of 2017...

1) The freshman class will be roughly 59% female. The ladies have it again this year.

2) The top ten states, in order, are: New York, California, Louisiana, New Jersey, Texas (all have over 100 students each) and then Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, Connecticut, and Florida round out the top ten. This is the first time that I can remember, possibly in Tulane's history, that Louisiana has not been the top state in the class. It was outpaced by both NY and CA this year.

3) So it is not surprising to note that the West Coast has increased from 11% of the class in 2011 to 17% this year.

4) The class of 2017 comes from 45 states and Washington DC. Only Utah, West Virginia  Hawaii, Alaska and North Dakota are not represented.

5) The class of 2017 is a very international bunch- we have students coming from Argentina, Canada, Chile, China, France, India, South Korea, Panama, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Belgium, Poland, Peru and Japan.

6) Here are the top 10 Most Represented High Schools: Highland Park HS (IL)- 15 students, Scarsdale HS (NY)- 13, New Trier HS (IL)- 10, Deerfield HS (IL)- 10, Staples HS (CT)- 9, Ben Franklin (LA)- 8, and the following schools all have 7 enrolled: Calabasas HS (CA), The Louisiana School for Math, Science and the Arts (LA), Wootton HS (MD) and Whitman HS (7).

7) The average freshman will travel 923 miles to attend Tulane from their hometowns.

So there is your snapshot! But more than just numbers and geographic, this class of first year students is a really cool bunch- I know many of them very well and am looking forward to their arrival on campus for New Student Orientation in June as well as for Welcome Weekend in August. More details to come soon, but get stoked- these kids are going to do some great things. We can't wait.

Read More →

A GOOD CRITIC

The recent, glowing obituaries of Roger Ebert raise the question in my mind about what makes a good critic, which Ebert hardly was. What gives the question some importance is the possible influence of the critic on a certain art, in this case principally drama, though with relevance to all the others.

The perfect critic, obviously, cannot exist. There are too many differences in taste that no single critic, however astute, can subsume and satisfy. Probably preferable is the one who reaches out to educated, but not overeducated, readers. In the past, this would have meant graduates of a respectable institution of higher learning, but even among Ivy League graduates there were striking differences.

Thus a degree in chemistry was and is different from one in literature, but even within the latter, one in Romance languages was very different from one in Slavic languages, to say nothing of English, a sort of omnium gatherum for optimistic future dilettantes.

Still, let us settle on the notion that a good critic would excel at three things: thinking, taste and style in a three-pronged approach—just one or two of which virtues won’t suffice. Let me explain.

Good thinking is the ability to determine whether a play (or novel, or film) makes sense. But sense in a work of art is very different from sense in, say, physics. Or even history, where respectable practitioners will disagree about whether Gladstone of Disraeli was the better prime minister, whether the Athenian or Spartan commanders were better strategists. There is no litmus paper that can incontrovertibly decide.

Good taste is a totally unscientific criterion. A respectable drama critic like the late Clive Barnes preferred Neil Simon’s plays to Bernard Shaw’s. I find that absurd. But how do I prove that, in this instance at least, my taste is better than his? Is preferring the plays of Lanford Wilson more tasteful than preferring those of Sam Shepard? Only in extreme cases  is taste demonstrable; say, in preferring Shakespeare to Tourneur or Massinger.

Now style. The theater critics of the New York Times have manifestly better style than that of reviewers for some marginal provincial publication. But however they may champion (as they sometimes do) some trendy, trumpery nonentity, of what value is their eloquent encomium? No one will dispute hat their style is superior to that of some fellow on the Mudville Clarion, but is that enough?

Yet in America today’s two main drama critics of the Times are the nearest thing to theatrical arbiters, if you discount such TV pundits as the late Roger Ebert. But how does one become a main drama critic at the Times? These chaps know how to write, which is for what the publisher or editor picked them.  But said publisher or editor proceeded on the basis of mere style; it is too much to expect those journalistic powers that be to have personally inspected the garbage crowned by proficient prose or the superior work left unappreciated by labile taste and insufficient thought. But the No. 2 or 3 reviewer is never promoted to No. 1 when that post becomes vacated. The successor is always chosen from among some other successful megalopolitan reviewers, American or British, proving that even style is not as important as imported prestige.

Assuming, though, that style matters over thought and taste, what does this really mean? If I may use a tennis analogy: the stylist is like the player who has a terrific forehand (style), but not much of a backhand (taste), and definitely not much talent for volleying. Yet there are all round tennis players (I’ll throw in even lobs and overheads), but no such all round critics to speak of.

But let us get to the problem of how the best possible critic is made. Orator fit, poeta nascitur, as the old saying has it: the rhetorician is made; the poet is born. Still, even if the critic, like the poet, is innately gifted, there are acquired qualities. What truly develops him is good reading, not only in his field but also in related others. This may be acquired partly through education, but must also feature intellectual curiosity. Responsible reading should encourage not only emulation but also refutation: one learns through both approval and rejection.

Experience, too, matters—enormously. For a drama critic, this means seeing as much theater as possible, but also reading the fine plays, mostly classics, many of which remain unproduced or unrevived. Important, too, is seeing theater in more than one’s own country, which, of course, presupposes knowledge of foreign languages. But it also predicates good, inspiring teachers, and demands, however costly, travel. And it also means good human contacts and intellectual exchanges, and willingness to learn from them. No knowledge of any kind, however seemingly remote, is totally dispensable.

But, clearly, learning from the great critics of the past is of the essence. These may be as universally recognized as Aristotle and Longinus, but may also be best known merely nationally. For English speakers, this means the likes of Samuel Johnson, Hazlitt, Matthew Arnold, Ruskin and Pater, Beerbohm and Shaw. For readers of French, this might include Taine, Lanson and Brunetière, and, more recently, Albert Thibaudet and Paul Valéry. It would certainly include, besides such full-time critics as the great Sainte-Beuve and Rivière, some all-important part-time ones like Baudelaire, Mallarmé, Gide, Camus and Sartre. Forgive me for skipping more recent ones, structuralists or semiologists, whom I find unreadable.

In the German Realm, there are Goethe, Schiller, Lessing and the Schlegel brothers, but also some writers better-known for other things, such as Loerke, Benn, Mann, and Brecht. Among  even more recent ones, I mention Hans Egon Holthusen, Berthold Viertel, Friedrich Torberg, and Marcel Reich-Ranicki.

Among the very recent whom I have read with profit, I signal Jacques Barzun, Lionel Trilling, Edmund Wilson and Dwight Macdonald, though none of them is that much concerned with drama, but all are very useful all the same.

However all along, as among some of the above, there have been occasional forays into criticism, or even dramatic criticism, by those of whom one might not necessarily think of as so inclined; take, for example, the poet Heinrich Heine, among whose superb prose writings there is much of interest for critics. Or so, currently, with the writings of the brilliant poet-essayist Hans Magnus Enzensberger.

The sad thing is that criticism is considered a minor art, and, to be sure, by some of its current practitioners it is not even that. A real problem is that to be fully appreciated, it requires also some knowledge of it subject. However compelling Jacques Barzun may be about Stendhal, if you haven’t read Stendhal you may not even want to read Barzun’s essay, let alone be able to fully appreciate it. Even the wonderful Walter Pater is remembered more for a few quasi-poetic bravura passages from his book about the Renaissance than for his fine criticism as a whole.

Criticism, admittedly, lacks a certain oomph. Although Oscar Wilde’s critical essays are as dazzling as his plays, if there weren’t for the latter, the former would be paid scant heed. Even the most magnificent modern dramatic criticism—think Kenneth Tynan, who wrote as well as any novelist or playwright, is unlikely to make it into the classrooms alongside of, say, Coleridge or Yeats, and they too more likely for their poems.

I wonder how many of you will bother even reading all of this. After all, it’s only about criticism.

Read More →