The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current, February 25, 1976, Page page 4, Image 4

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    Wednesday, february 25, 1976
page 4
daily nebraskan
.Uniform eieiSueitooiii
bnGD?;:c3ll
ralph
Teachers grading students for their efforts is a
traditional part of the university system.
Not so traditional, though, is the idea of
students grading their teachers.
Student evaluation of teaching performance
was an issue that crested on the great wave of
"educational reform" in the late sixties. Students
wanted to have more to say about teaching and
began to develop a consumer attitude toward the
educational process.
It was a commendable step. While a true uni
versity includes much more than teaching (re
search, service and intellectual commentary for
example), teaching is the prime component-the
"why" of a university.
Current UNL stipulations call for periodic evaluations-some
from students and some from
faculty members. It is a vague requirement, but
many departments already exceed these guide-
ron wheeler
by
UEU,0)U7 YOU ICOK
SPIFFY? ALL fEAOY FOR
YOOX FffiST M mtvm
vims m mm,
CM US? iOORFACE i$
1 lnUIMsjr
I GUESS I Tl0
m NDO&B TCOTISHT.
word
Grassroots anti-fees effort:
'Ours is not to question. . . ?'
By Del Gustafson
The secretary smiles and tells you the Vice-Chancellor
for student affairs will see you now. You walk rather stiff
ly through the door, but are immediately at ease: the vice
chancellor rises, shakes your hand, smiles a disarming
smile, settles back into his chair; and puffs amiably and
serenely upon his pipe.
"You see, sir, my friends and I are running a party in
the ASUN elections. We have no previous campus political
experience or particular ambition to lead our fellow stu
dents; but -we do have a basic conception of right and
wrong which tells us it is wrong to compel 20,000 stu
dents, or anybody for that matter, to contribute to pri
vate organizations or newspapers. That, we understand, is
exactly what student fees do, and to end those fees is our
purpose for running."
The vice chanceflor puffs a little more vigorously on the
pipe. Then, with the confidence and mien of a father
about to explain those sublime and beautiful facts of life
to his adolescent son, he leans forward and tells you that
those fees really are just like taxes. And everyone, includ
ing mommy and daddy, have to pay taxes. .
Just when you're about to reply in that cocksure,
undergrad way-that you know few people who have to
pay taxes to support an organization dedicated to the
glorification of sexual perversion, or a newspaper-just
then, you look into that benevolent face. Argument be
comes out of the question; one doesn't argue with grand
father. . , .
Fee reduction
Feebly you try to recoup the lost moment. "I guess it's
a matter of opinion." He nods approvingly. "But what we
really wanted to know is, would you reduce or end fees if "
the students elected an anti-fee party?"
The vice-chancellor replies that if the students sup
ported an anti-fee position it probably would result in a
fee reduction.
You and your compatriots walk out of the office ele
vated of spirit, knowing justice will be done and truth will
prevail." Unfortunately, a month later, after a whopping 7
per cent turnout at the polls, justice and truth pull up
second.
Then you read it in the "Rag." The vice chancellor can
didly proclaims that even had we been elected, student
fees could not have been decreased-UNL simply couldn't
survive without them.
Never believe administrator
After resolving never to believe a college administrator
again, I continued to resist the argument that a college
must have student fees.
Now, I have been vindicated. Indiana University has
recently done away with the mandatory fee orr all its
campuses. To quote from the guidelines established by the
IU trustees: "Non-university controlled student-related
-activities will not be funded through either mandatory nor
optional fees but will be required to collect fees on an
'activity day or some other such event not connected
with registration."
Indiana's move is a wise one. It lays to rest the baffling
argument that students need to have their pockets picked
each semester by enterprising campus organizations to
obtain an education. By the way, anyone interested in
joining my new campus organization, "The Committee to
Horsewhip Ken Bader," should call 474-1182..
(Editor's note: Mr. Gustafson 's opinions, as those of other
editorial columnists, are solely his own. They do not
iiecciMtitruy re net t the opinion of the Daily Nebraskan.)
lines and demand regular student evaluation of
teaching.
The College of Arts and Sciences faculty mem
bers will consider a proposal to make uniform
evaluations part of the college policy. As a
standard, they would more likely be part of the
promotion and tenure consideration mechanism
when considering teaching skill. .
The proposal also calls for uniform review of
the evaluation by the chief administrator within
each school or department.
It is to be hoped that faculty members will
accept the proposal. In effect it would only ex
tend to the entire college a proposal that has been
part of several departments for a long while.
Moreover, faculty acceptance would be
tangible evidence of student opinion having some
real meaning within the educational community.
A university is a cooperative exchange, a
communication between teacher and learner.
Evaluations could signify that both students
and faculty members are at some time learners.
Vince Boucher
letters to
lie emxoi
In the Feb. 11 issue of ths Daily Nebraskan, Barb Ang
wrote a letter entitled, "Oppose McDonald's Zoning."
No one could have looked upon it with more disgust
than we did. We are the employes of McDonald's
Restaurants.
Our jobs are not easy, but we pride ourselves in
working as a team, working to serve the public, not just
take their dollars. Our smiles are not plastic, but warm
and sincere. A smile and a greeting are the first steps in
making new friends. We enjoy making people happy, and
we all make new friends everyday.
Our phenomenal growth can attest to that. Our restau
rants axe sparkling clean and well lit. We don't try to hide
dirt. We want every corner to echo with, "look, we care,
enjoy your meal in a pleasant atmosphere." Our own cor
porate standards for cleanliness far and away exceed those
set up by any government agency.
Our products are the absolute finest money'can buy.
Guaranteed 100 per cent beef, the finest potatoes in the
world, and properly calibrated soft drinks. Not exactly a
"soybean slop shop." It's plain to see good old Barb
didn't research her complaints very well.
She also states that "we may be the only campus on
earth to co-habitate with Ronald McDonald." Another
false statement. McDonald's is operating food services in
side the student union of a major university, and it is
working out fantastically! .
Barb Ang also asks in her letter, "Do we want
McDonald's sacks littering our campus?" We can answer
that. . .NO! McDonald's doesn't litter, people Utter! We
provide plenty of trash receptacles at all of our stores.
We have employes on every shift who make sure paper is
picked up, tables cleaned off, and spills wiped up. If
everyone was as Utter conscious as our employes, those
clean-up people wouldn't have to work so hard.
So next time you are walking to class, Barb, and you
glance back and see that nice looking student pick up the
candy wrapper you just dropped, look at her closely. She
just might be that one smiling at you over the counter on
your next visit to McDonald's. You, you're the one!
The tmpioyes of McDoiiaiu i
innocent
1 w
busfonc
eagan economics painted red?
By Arthur Hoppe
Rise today in defense of Ronald Reagan. No matter
what his critics may charge, there is not one shred of
conrete proof that he is currently a member of the Com
munist Party.
True, in the only major economic proposals of his cam
paign thus far, he has espoused the two basic principles of
Marxist-Leninism: redistribution of the wealth and gov
ernment ownership of the means of production.
But those certainly make him i Communist. Not
necessarily.
Actually, there is much to be said for Mr. Reagan's
bold Four Year Flan to redistribute the wealth. As you
know, he is calling for returning $90 billion (or $200
billion or something) worth of Federal programs to the
states.
Apparently, he is not referring to our Federal nuclear
warfare capacity, although this isn't too clear. He prob
ably means welfare programs primarily.
Vote with their feet
'Naturally, a poor state like Mississippi could not sup
port t welfare recipient as regally as a rich state like Cali
fornia. But, as Mr. Reagan points out, poor Mississippians
could "vote with their feet" by walking to California.
This influx of poor would, of course, impoverish Cali
fornia. But why should bloated California capitalists
greedily enjoy the fruits of their labor? And, eventually
under Mr. Reagan's plan, all 50 states would achieve the
Marxist dream and be equally poor.
More difficult to defend is Mr. Reagan's suggestion that
the $58 billion in Social Security trust funds, which now
earn 6.7 per cent in Federal bonds, might better be in
vested in the stock market.
Speaking in behalf of Mr. Ford, Elliot Richardson was
quick to say this would "put the U.S. Government in the
position of controlling every major Industrial firm in
the United States."
Well, what's wrong with the Government controlling
the means of production? With $58 billion to pay with
tho Government could buy short, sell long and maybe
even corner the market in hogback futures. It could make
a killing, if it was lucky.
Who needs It?
True, it would bankrupt a lot of widows and orphans
in the process and undoubtedly destroy the nation's faith
in Wall Street But as Karl Marx said about Wall Street,
"Who needs it?"
And think how excited-if that's the right word-our
trusting old folks will be when Mr. Reagan removes their
hfe savings from those stodgy old 6.7 per cent Federal
bonds to take a flyer in the stock market Heck, "ex
cited" isn't even close to the right word. .
But just because Mr. Reagan wants to destroy accumu
lated wealth, individual initiative, private property and the
free enterprise system, that doesn't mean he's a card
carrying Communist
Fair is fair. He could be a Trotskyism a Utopian
Socialist or-let's be charitable and give him the benefit
of the doubt-a Presidential candidate who doesnknow
what on earth he's talking about.
(Copyright ChrontellublihJrsa Co, 19761