4A
Monday, September 30, 1996
OPINION
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
VIEWPOINT
Drilling during class time could have been avoided
Once again, poor communication between the University and workers on campus has resulted in class disruptions.
A drill bit grinding through the concrete wall serenaded students and their professor in a political science class last Tuesday morning in 207 Blake Hall.
For more than an hour, workers replacing emergency lighting in the second-floor stairwell drilled into the classroom wall. The professor and students were distracted.
Dean Mielke, construction manager for the University, said the work would continue for an "expanded period of time." He also said contractors were supposed to communicate with academic department officials to make sure construction noise didn't interfere with classes. Professor Ronald Francisco, chairman of the political science department, said no one had contacted him about the construction.
As soon as Mielke learned Tuesday that construction noise had interrupted the class, he said he spoke to the contractor and that the workers had stopped drilling during class times.
An occasional communication breakdown is one thing, but such a huge disruption to classes is another. Design and construction management officials should step up their efforts to avoid noise that makes it impossible to teach and to learn.
NICOLE KENNEDY FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Fixing crumbling classrooms requires everyone's patience
We've all heard the common hyperbolic campus anecdotes, and an unlucky few among us have experienced them: plaster falling from ceil-
experienced client: plaster fanning from ceilings onto the heads of students scribbling lecture notes, strange smells emanating from decades-old pipes and sinks in Malott Hall and music students going deaf from band practice in a room that is too small.
Stories such as these soon will be distant memories as the University of Kansas begins its largest building renovation program ever, dubbed Crumbling Classrooms. New construction and improvements costing about $44.2 million will begin early next year on the main campus, thanks to a bond-financed plan approved by the Kansas Legislature.
Although these much-needed improvements are a boon to students, care must be taken by University staff to minimize the distractions caused by construction. The Fraser Hall stairway fiasco is a recent example of the tensions caused by the conflict between construction and academia.
In a perfect world, contractors doing major renovations that affect classrooms and laboratories would complete the bulk of their work during summer and academic breaks when there are fewer students to be disrupted. But because of the extent of the renovations, this ideal will not be possible.
However, some of the planned renovations have the potential to disrupt the classroom environment more than others. The most extensive project on the drawing board, the renovation of Joseph R. Pearson residence hall, will have virtually no negative side effects for students and faculty in classrooms. However, the $9.7 million renovation and addition to Murphy Hall could produce enough noise to disrupt classes in nearby buildings.
KU staff in charge of construction undoubtedly will do their best to minimize inconveniences for students and faculty, but it would be impossible to schedule renovations and repairs to more than 60 buildings without causing some irritation. Throughout the construction, the University community should keep in mind the ultimate benefit of the minor annoyances they will experience.
BRENT SUITER FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
KANSAN STAFF
AMANDA TRAUGHBER
Editor
CRAIG LANG
Managing editor
MATT HOOD
Associate managing editor for design
KIMBERLY CRABTREE
CHARITY JEFFRIES
News editors
DARCI L. McLAIN
SARA ROSE
Public relations directors
Editors
Campus ... Sueanna Lódf
... Jasmin Strait
... Amy McVey
Editorial ... John Collar
Features ... Nicole Kennedy
Features ... Adam Ward
Staff ... Bill Petelilla
Associate sports .. Carlyn Foster
On-line editor ... David L. Teakau
Photo .. Rich Devlkind
Graphics .. Nosh Musser
Artwork .. Andy Robbock
Special sections .. Amy McVey
Wife .. Debbie Staine
KAREN GERSCH
Business manager
HEALY SMART
Retail sales manager
TOM EBLEN
General manager, news adviser
JAY STEINER
Sales and marketing adviser
JUSTIN KNUPP
Technology coordinator
Business Staff
Campus mgr ... Mark Ozdemik
Regional mgr ... Dennis Haupt
Assistant Retail mgr ... Dana Centano
Sales manager ... Jeffrey
Special Sections mgr ... Heather Valler
Production mgr ... Dan Kopec
Marketing director ... Lisa Quebbaman
Creative director ... Deanmond Lavelle
Classified mgr ... Shelly Wachter
Jeff Victor/KANSAN
Higher education ignores life beyond history books
Four years ago, I made some changes. I went part-time at my go-onwhere record store job, stood in a few lines, signed some papers and did what my high school friends would never believe: I went back to school.
Now I am approaching the end of this undergraduate journey. What have I learned? Quite a few things, actually. Was it worth my now $17,000 debt? No. I could have traveled
Through all of the gained knowledge — the hours immersed in poetry, theory, algebraic calculations and scientific experimentation — the lesson that carries the most truth is one that became obvious to me sometime last year: College education is overrated.
Most of us have come to the University under the guise of romance: We wanted to learn, pure and simple. The fact that a degree will accelerate our chances of climbing corporate ladders and landing desirable jobs is a nice perk. And the rhetoric — from parents, the media and friends — is unmistakable: If you want to compete in today's world, you need a degree. Have any of us stopped and asked why?
The response I hear most seems more like an excuse: A degree shows employers that the applicant is able to learn. Yet I know that not only was I able to learn while not in school, but also many of my friends who have been cloistered with their studies since their teens don't
STAFF COLUMNIST
know much about life outside academe. And to make matters worse, they often think their privileged frame of reference constitutes universal understanding.
Yet the worth we place on bookdependent knowledge is overwhelming when compared to the
than an auto mechanic? Granted, reading the bard requires discipline, but so does learning the intricacies of engines in this increasingly computerized society.
knowledge of people who have chosen other paths and have obtained skills more central to the importance of everyday existence. What will my degree show future employers? That I can regurgitate lines from Walt Whitman poems and find symbolism in virtually everything on this planet. I can't help but snidely think what a big deal that is in the whole scheme of things when I see construction workers on the highway or hear self-taught musicians on the radio.
The contribution of the scholar would not be subject to criticism if it were not for the unbelievable amounts of arrogance often displayed by these people. Many of us have sat in class as some professors scoff at people who never have read ancient poets. But in this world where people often are plagued by everyday but personally monumental concerns, do ancient poets matter for anything beyond entertainment?
This is not to say that we should collectively reject this institution and ramble off into parts unknown. It just seems that we should rethink our paths and, most importantly, place value where it belongs.
In fact, history does matter, and in that context, so do the scholars who dig up and keep the facts of our heritage. But the truth that there is life beyond these books, a life that will never be fully written about, only experienced, should not be dismissed.
There is no doubt that we live in a stratified society with valuations based on economic positioning. But what logic is there in esteeming a Shakespearean scholar higher
Spending thousands of dollars to prove to employers that a person is "able to learn" is excessive. The money we spend on undergraduate degrees could be better utilized if we refocused our energies and placed correct values on learned material versus personal, worldly experience. Simply because a person has acquired a piece of paper and the accompanying pride does not necessarily prove that he or she is a person worth knowing.
Leslie Bowyer is a Lawrence senior in English and art history.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Republicans fight ideas, not people on other side
Being a conservative Republican, I am familiar with most of the derogatory and false connotations surrounding my party affiliation. I know that some believe I am a warmongering, bigot, racist homophobe who likes to steal tollipops from kids. But now, the Republicans have been labeled as people who exclude individuals from their political party.
on in San Diego. I don't deny that some Republicans were asked not to air personal beliefs that conflicted with the general party platform during the convention. However, both parties have been known to do this. During the Democratic convention in 1992, how many pro-life speeches were given? I know of at least one governor who was asked not to speak his views on the subject. For the same reasons, Republicans have asked some party members not to speak about their pro-choice views.
This label seems to be based on events that occurred at the Republican National Conven-
Republicans and Democrats could go around in circles for
days arguing certain issues, and we would get absolutely nowhere.
What we need is to understand the role of government. We don't need tolerance. Tolerance misses the point. What we need is respect; respect for each other to openly disagree with one another. People on the other side are not what we are fighting. We are fighting ideas with opposing ideas in an effort to improve this country and to keep it the best nation in the world.
Ryan Kauffman Overland Park junior
Gender roles are arbitrary; short haircut isn't feminine or masculine
By the time this column is printed, my hair will be short. I didn't just trim my hair, or get a couple of inches taken off. I actually chopped off the majority of my hair.
Now, I don't think any of you will care about the fate of my hair six
STAFF COLUMNIST
minutes from now, let alone six hours. After all, hair is just a clump of dead cells that sits on the top of my head, so who cares if I choose to do away with most of it? Unfortunately, it seems most of my friends care, and none of them seem too fond of the idea.
The problem is not that they like my hair. The problem, as one of my friends so eloquently stated, is I "won't look feminine anymore!" It seems that the fate of my femininity lies in a clump of dead cells at the top of my head.
The question is, of course, does that mean I will look masculine when I get my hair cut? But that is not the problem at all. The problem is, I will be neither feminine nor masculine. My friend implied that I will become androgynous.
Perhaps I would have agreed with him 30 years ago because then, only women could have long hair and only men could have short hair.
But now that has changed, and to some people this change is a sign of the overall move toward androgyny in society.
Androgyny seems to be all the rave these days. Advertisers plaster billboards and magazine ads with boys who look like girls and girls who look like boys.
I am not certain if the point is to confuse or if it is to make us think. Sometimes it does both. I am certain the hope is that if we look long enough it will make us buy. Often, it does. And it's all advertising.
Using androgyn as an advertising weapon is a turn away from traditional forms of advertising, which follow exactly the opposite tendency, which is to highlight differences between the sexes rather than the similarities.
It is a trend that shocks some people, probably because it seems less "heterosexual" than looking at a partially exposed female body. It is boys with long hair, it is girls without breasts, and it is very different from what many people are accustomed to seeing.
However, in addition to shocking people, these ads make a statement about gender that needs to be said. They tell us the differences in appearance between men and women are arbitrary. The lines can easily be crossed, so what is the big deal? Men are men, women are women.
It should not matter that I want to cut my hair. Furthermore, it should not matter that I want to make as much money as my male counterpart. Gender roles are arbitrary; the fact that I am a woman should not even be considered.
The differences are less important than the similarities, so let's work through the differences and move on.
Stacy Nagy is a Topeka Junior in Russian and women's studies.
FATE
By Shawn Trimble