- W
opinion
Tom Weist, junior in the College of Arts and Sciences, is a
member and past chairman of the Arts and Sciences Advisory
Board.
have recently talked with some students around campus
who have completed the foreign language requirement at
least two years ago with a grade of 'B'or above. I asked them, .
"How do you scy 'put the chair in the corner, "' or I gave them
some other short sentence to translate. Six out of seven
thought a while and said, "I dont know,"the other finally
stumbled through the translation. "
-from a student's letter on the language requirement
No rule of the College of Arts and Sciences has drawn as
much criticism as the language requirement. No other
requirement, in the students' opinion, has as little value to
their education. None seems as easily forgotten.
The University's role in society and in students' lives has
changed. In 1900, four per cent of the 18-20 age group
attended college. Today, 48 per cent attend. Most likely the
student of 1900 was either rich or he was gifted and interested
in being a professional scholar. Today he is most likely neither.
A "liberal education" probably servtJ the needs of the
student of 1900, but it does not serve the needs of today's
students. Not all students have gifts that blossom in a liberal
education, and not every student will need a liberal education.
Students have written 45 letters to the dean of the College
of Arts and Sciences concerning the language requirement. The
letters called for more vocational emphasis in their educational
program. The vocational aspect of college education is implicit
in the mass enrollments of American colleges. If the
curriculum is to meet the current student's needs, it must
allow for a greater variety of students choosing among a wider
variety of opportunities.
The curriculum of the College of Arts and Sciences is facing
its first major revision since 19S4. Priority in this revision must
not be given to "maintaining the standards of the college," or
to producing "men who have an acquaintance with all the
fields of human endeavor," or to producing "cultured men" or
to avoiding asking colleagues "to break their rice bowls and
leave."
Priority must be given to the education of all the students
on what they need to know. This duty to the student and his
individual needs is the ultimate mission of the college.
Requiring that each student take four semesters of a
language no longer serves this mission. For the vast majority of
students who do not plan to be professional scholars, a second
language is not a vocational need.
Those who claim four semesters of language gives students a
necessary understanding of "cultural pluralism" need only
consider what the average student retains from language study.
Those who make the untested hypothesis that four semesters
of foreign language is the most efficient way of giving students
an understanding of cultural pluralism should look at those
same results.
There is no better evidence of the failure of required
language study than the students' hostility toward it. The vast
majority of students hold the opinion that the language
requirement "wastes their time" and their time is better spent
in "more useful areas."
We have come to accept that the best evidence of a
professor's teaching ability is the opinion of his students.
Similarly, the best . gauge of a course's value is the opinion of
the students taking it.
Required language study does not serve the needs of most
students. It does not serve their vocational goals nor does it
use their talents to give them social or cultural insights.
Required courses must serve the needs of the students.
m j
w3n
It.
Roasting the reviewers
Dear editor
I was a member of the cast of The Survival of St.
Joan, and would like to make a few comments on the
review in the Daily Nebraskan.
Admittedly, they were right about show not
allowing much room for characterizations, but they
forget completely that it is an opera form not a
drama form. The emphasis must be on the music and
dance in a production which depends upon
ensembles. Many things could have been perfected,
but remember this was not a Broadway production.
The cast was entirely amateur.
Kosmet Khab was founded on class plays 61 years
ago. The Khib has held to the tradition of allowing
nonprofessionals to participate in the spring show.
You don't have to be a drama or music major to be
involved since it is not affiliated with either
department of the University. I think the review may
have hurt this effort more than Kubert and Gray
realize.
The fact that we, the cast, are amateurs drsn't
mean the show was bad. On the contrary, tlw show
was an outstanding effort. It infuriates me to think of
the months of work put into this production only to
have it ripped apart by a review like the one given in
the Daily Nebraskan. The production placed a great
deal of respomablity on all die people involved. Most
of the performance weight rested upon the principal
actors, many of whom were very experienced and
generally over 30.
The choreography of the show may not have been
totally fantastic at all times, but the majority of
dances were well done. I know this was the most
difficult dancing ever attempted in a Kosmet Klub
production, requiring physical endurance and
flexibility. Try outs attested to this.
If your review hasn't done too much damage,
participating in these productions may continue to
involve future cast members who care about this
University's activities and traditions and who love
music and dance.
Kay Johnson
Journalistic delinquency
Dear editor
The Lincoln's Gazette's sensationalism without
fact is by far the most effrontary insult to journalism
this campus has ever seen. I am referring to the two
articles about the "Rag" in the Gazette 's last issue.
Those people assume too much in their
publication ?). They assume we know the facts when,
in the first place, they don't even know them. Name
calling is the policy of juveniles or people who think
like juveniles. In doing so they make an assume or
anybody who will bow down to mere rhetoric of
facts.
It seems to me that Doc Kurtenbach's integrity
(which is one of his most important principles) seems
to have gone down the drain. By the sound of his
own voice, and the applause of the groundlings he
inevitably makes the jump from logic to mere
rhetoric.
Any fool can come without destructive criticism,
but it takes a man to come out or up with
constructive criticism.
Gordon E. Musch
Visionary complaint
Dear editor
Although I am in basic agreement with the review
on "St. Joan," it seems to me that our
overly-vehement critics have struck out on one point
Kubert and Gray give high praise to the technical
portion of the play. They evidently didn't notice the
many viewers who had to move to other seats in
order to see even a portion of the screen, which was
blocked by the enormous steeples. Anyone seated on
the rides had at least one-fourth of their vision cut off
by those very poorly placed obstructions.
It seems that Kubert and Gray were in such a
frenzy to write just another scathing review that they
failed to notice what was a major objection to many
members of the audience.
Mark Lowry
Freedom fighters
Dear editor:
In Pilger's "Vietnam ization or automated
genocide" editorial, Monday, April 17, he said, "Yet,
while it has remained clear that military efforts in
that part of the world have been ineffective, Nixon
agains responded with more American military
movement."
I would bring to Pilger's attention that were it not
the American involvement it is highly probable that
all of Laos, Cambodia and South Vietnam would now
be "liberated," as the North Vietnamese say. If he
doesn't think that sounds so bad, I suggest he try
writing anti-government policy editorials there to see
how long his editorial "liberty" lasts and whether he
might consider fighting for that freedom.
Craig Johnson
Cursory coverage
Dear editor:
In your editorial of April 13, you suggest that part
of the blame for Nebraska being a "cultural,
wasteland" can be laid at the feet of those students
who fail to take advantage of those fine opportunities
brought here by various campus organizations.
Perhaps so. -
I should suggest, however, that this year a good
share of the blame for that failure can be attributed
to the performance and the editorial policies of the
Dairy Nebraskaa. A case of this performance
happened last weekend involving the free concerts
given at the Nebraska Union by the McCoy Tyner
Quartet and by Doc Watson. The former are among
the formost avant-garde jazz musicians in the
country. The latter is simply the best flat-picking
bluegrass and moutain guitar player who ever lived.
Nothing like cither has ever been here. Both concerts
were underattended, in part, I think, because of the
refusal of your entertainment editor, Larry Kubert,
to publicize either event, save in the most cursory
fashion.
That my ox is somewhat gored in that Kubert
refused to print an article I wrote praising and
publicizing Doc Watson, as he refused to print one by
Vic Lewis on McCoy Tyner, is true. That his further
bumbling meant the two articles could not be
published elsewhere in the paper is also true. But that
this adequately represents his performance all year is
true as well.
Time and time again Kubert has refused to
publicize significant cultural events on campus
because space was needed to push the James Gang
and Grand Funk Railroad. And Jesus Christ as Mick
Jagger. And other trivial, equally expensive events in
no way connected with the University.
As long as the Daily Nebraska n has such a policy,
your sanctimonious attack on the taste of University
students seems odd.
Cater Chamblee
WEDNESDAY. APRIL- -19; t972
THEcvDArtY NEBRASKAN
PAGE 5
t . , .
