4A
Tuesday, February 6, 1996
OPINION
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
VIEWPOINT
University works to improve underclassmen experience
The freshman and sophomore years at a large university can be a very confusing time.
Although her advisers helped Alisha Ewertz figure out which classes she needed to take this semester, they didn't help her with the rest of her time at the University of Kansas.
Ewertz, Salina freshman, said she wished the University had a system to help her plan her entire college career. University administrators know the experience could be better.
"Probably the biggest obstacle is that this has become a large university," said David Shulenburger, vice chancellor for academic affairs. "It's possible for students to disappear into the nether regions."
Fortunately, plans are underway to improve the academic experience for freshmen and sophomores. The University is acting on most of the 30 recommendations made by the Freshman-Sophomore Academic Experience Committee, a group of faculty and administrators who are trying to help provide a positive academic environment for un-
THE ISSUE:
Underclassmen
derclassmen.
One plan would ensure that freshmen have at least one class with fewer than 25 students. The plan would expand a summer program that helps underclassmen adjust to college life and provides a center for teaching effectiveness.
Because students know best what they want from their advising sessions, it would be wise for the University to allow the students to decide.
Shulenburger said students would revise the most challenging problem, advising. A committee has been appointed by Student Senate to discuss the best ways to improve advising for underclassmen.
What happens during the freshman and sophomore years can influence a student's entire college experience. By making this time more comfortable and less confusing, the University is helping underclassmen get the most out of their academic experience.
CRAIG LANG FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Drinking on Statehouse floor impairs legislative process
Most people believe that the elected officials working in the Legislature are sober when making important decisions. That is not always the case in the Missouri Statehouse. Missouri legislators retain an obscene, yet time-honored tradition which allows drinking on the job.
Although the majority of alcohol consumption takes place in private offices, it is not unusual to see legislators in the hallways or even on the House floor holding alcoholic drinks. Can you imagine? It is unnerving to even consider the idea that these powerful politicians may not always be making decisions with a clear head.
Alcohol does indeed affect one's ability to act appropriately, and, most importantly, make well thought-out and reasonable decisions. It is frightening to think elected officials legally can get drunk on the grounds of the Statehouse.
Recently a bill was introduced in the House that completely would ban
The Missouri Statehouse tradition of allowing alcohol on its grounds should be banned.
drinking or possessing any kind of alcoholic beverage on the property of the Missouri Statehouse. Without a doubt, this bill needs to pass, and the behavior of those who consume alcohol on the job needs to stop.
It is perfectly reasonable for voters to expect sober representatives, and it is absurd that drinking while conducting session has been allowed this long.
The scary thing is, it is possible some lawmakers are working, thinking and voting while intoxicated. Drinking at the Statehouse does not exemplify responsible behavior, gives the general public a negative impression of their lawmakers and should not be tolerated.
TARA FITZPATRICK FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
KANSAN STAFF
ASHLEY MILLER
Editor
VIRGINIA MARGHEIM
Managing editor
ROBERT ALLEN
News editor
TOM EBLEN
General manager, news adviser
---
OTHER NIEHAUS
Business manager
KONAN HAUSER
Retail sales manager
JAY STEINER
Sales and marketing adviser
JUSTIN KNUPP
Technology coordinator
Campus    Joann Birk
        Philip Brownlee
Editorial    Paul Todd
Associate editorial    Craig Lang
Feature    Sheridan
Reporting    Tom Erickson
Associate sports    Bill Petula
Photo    Andy Rutledge
Matt Flickner
Graphics    Noah Musser
Special sections  Novaelle Summery
Marketing    Matthew
Wire    Tara Trenayn
Illustration  Micleo Leaker
Business Staff
Campus mgr...Karen Gerch
Regional mgr...Kelly Connelys
National mgr...Mark Otkmenk
Special Section mgrs...Norm Blow
Production mgrs...Rachel Gahlil
Marketing director...Heather Valler
Public Relations dir...Cary Brealhoe
Creative director...Ed Kawaltse
Clearedmgr ...Stacy Wehngarten
Intermphy co-op mgr...T.J. Clark
See what you think
The following are general student comments that were given to Hector Clark, associate professor of mechanical engineering, on his evaluations for Mechanical engineering 306, which he taught last semester.
Professor Clark's dry sense of humor made the lectures more interesting as well as humorous.
He is humorous and adds color to the class. The quizzes came before we really covered material and became kind of annoying, though.
Cynical, crusty old bastard,
but amusing at times. I love not
having homework.
I think the only thing that disturbs (in a slight early-morning-neck-che-sort-of-way) is the predominance of old tests. It seems that the frat boy and old ME buddies system is favored, which leaves those without these resources rather clueless.
The personal anecdotes were funny and informative. After all, I'm convinced 90 percent of engineering is people — people skillis.
The GTA did a very poor job in Dr. Clark's absence. Dr. Clark made a dry subject interesting. I like your wit.
Speak up during lecture.
Liked: It's over. This class was unclear from the start. Class was entertaining at times, but the subject matter could have been disclosed on 18 and 1/2 by 11 sheet of paper.
One wonders if this class has any practical uses. Why the heck is this class required for anything?
Liked: the professor teaching it. Professor Clark uses wonderful examples to illustrate his points in class—actual parts of equipment, models of molecular arrangements, etc., which are quite helpful in understanding concepts and processes. He inspires interest in engineering and in learning in general.
A little enthusiasm every now and then would be nice.
You are a good teacher, but you need to have a better attitude toward the students and helping them. Thanks, though.
I'm proud to say I have had the Hector Clark experience, and it wasn't that bad. I disliked the quizzes very much. However, I didn't read, so it is my fault. Overall, Hector Clark is an effective teacher.
As consumers students deserve right to evaluate product
By Tom Moore for the editorial board Illustration by Micah Laaker
We live in the information age — an age where information is supposed to flow freely and without restriction. Given that, the present KU policy on faculty evaluations looks as if it is drawn by the CIA. Students have the right to know if the faculty member they are about to be subjected to is a bad instructor. Students are consumers who have a right to know about the quality of the product they are purchasing.
Some professors want evaluations to remain unavailable to students. Elizabeth Banks, professor of classics, said that proposals to open faculty evaluations were "incredibly tasteless." Her hostility to the proposal that students be allowed to read what their peers have said about faculty stems from what she perceives as a consumer mentality that has burst onto college campuses.
"Consumer mentality does not have a place in higher education," said Banks, who has been at the University of Kansas since 1966. "It is anti-academic." Students deserve value for their money. They have a right to information which pertains to their education. If Banks had her way, they wouldn't be entitled to any of these.
"This University and its administration thrive on secrecy," he said. "Secury is wrong; it is dishonest. I congratulate students for parading around the walls in the hope that they will come down."
Thankfully, not all faculty members share Banks' view. Hector Clark, who has been an associate professor of mechanical engineering at the University since 1981, said that it was reasonable for students to look at evaluations.
To those who think other professors could do a better job or that students are incapable of accurate evaluations of faculty, Clark charged that the faculty, when examining colleagues, was like junior high-school students selecting cheerleaders.
"They look for conformity," he said. "This is one of the reasons why we have a mediocre University."
"If students think it gives them more information then fine, but I don't see evaluations telling them that much," he said. "When I was a graduate student at Northwestern, evaluations were open to students, and nothing much either good or bad happened."
Some faculty see no severe consequences one way or the other. Scott Harris, assistant professor of communication studies, said that evaluations were neither a good nor a bad thing.
"My own sense is that the instrument itself is so flawed, so varied from department to department, that the things really have no utility," he said. "If students are going to engage in shopping for courses based on these evaluations, then they should improve the evaluations. The problem is that some faculty already feel under siege. They may see this as one more problem"
Allan Cigler, professor of political science and government, found that present methods of evaluation simply were too flawed to be of use.
The University of Kansas is no ivory tower, yet its policy on faculty evaluations makes it seem like a concrete bunker. Secrecy breeds mediocrity, and mediocrity surely is tasteless. It is not an infringement into the privacy of the faculty to say that the lowest of the low - the students - have a basic right to information that may well affect the course educational career.
---
We live in a free and open society. Higher education is not set apart. It should be subject to the same pressures that the rest of the nation is.
The debate is how much secrecy is good and how much credit the faculty and the administration of this university give the student body. There is no reason to assume that public exposure would hurt the quality of education at this University.
OUT FROM THE CRACKS
By Jeremy Patnoi