Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (April 16, 1987)
8 S enior finals. Parking. Housing. Core curriculum. Gynecological exams. Do students have a say? lower children no longer wander the nation’s college campuses, waving banners of protest and crying out for the cause of the day. A new breed of collegian has replaced the socially aware student of yesteryear; it is no longer hip to parade daily for peace. Granted, there still remain a brave few who go against the grain to speak their minds. But often they are accused of being agitators and aggravators — rebels without a cause. But the A&M student body is not apathetic to the point of complete silence. Muffled groans of displeasure can be heard occasionally when something near and dear to students’ hearts is being threatened — like their lives, liberty or sacred tradition. T JL t- he most recent point of controversy and apparent dissatisfaction among the student body is the issue of senior finals. Several weeks ago, a plan was approved to accomodate senior finals which will require all students to take final exams beginning the Friday of chairman of academic affairs, says the plan’s acceptance is not the main reason for displeasure. Rather, it was the fact that the students’ carefully researched plan was not approved, and the Faculty Senate’s hastily written plan was approved. Dingmore says the entire procedure shows a total disregard for student opinion. The Faculty Senate’s reasons for supporting senior finals ranged broadly, but the body was mainly concerned with the opinion that a University the size of A&M has to require senior finals to maintain its high academic standing, Dingmore says. The disadvantages of requiring senior finals are many. The recently approved plan involves a seemingly impossible finals schedule which affects not only seniors, but all students. Dead Week is almost non-existent, since Finals Week starts before Dead Week ends. This system also complicates the situation for graduating seniors. If any complications arise with finals or with final grades, seniors may have to miss the graduation ceremony and receive their diplomas in the mail. Future action that can be taken Most of the attendees at these meetings were faculty members who supported the idea but wanted to make minor modifications. The big controversies were over which colleges would gain and which would lose students, and whether the guidelines would be specific or broad. Jim Cleary, one of the Student Government members who was involved in the core curriculum plans, says the process was always very open to student input. “Most of us were very pleased by the way the Faculty Senate solicited our opinions,” he says. “There was always a student on the committee. ” He says Dr. Sam Black, the chairman of the core curriculum committee, is part of the reason it worked so well. He got student support for the plan, which made the committee’s recommendation “tons better” than that of the senior finals committee. Students expressed concern that the science requirement was too specific, and it was changed in the final version of the plan, he says. However, Cleary says that there was little knowledge about the plan in the student decisioi to sign < room ir require student instead John the reas student followir many d half-em semest< of whic White f elimina How vacanc becaus becaus closing dorms I 600 fev Fall 191 The dissatis concer affect tl percen When students talk, does Wciyenrter'n'r live music & more! Deranged Durans The Locomotives BAD SNEAKERS Lipoman Jan 18 Yrs & Otuer Welcome 1 Jus Wcnna Oance! 4410 College Main Bryanjx. 77801 846-1812 Dead Week and ending the following Wednesday. As the situation now stands, the new finals schedule will be tested in Fall 1987, but seniors won’t start taking finals until Spring 1988. The finals plan, which originated in the Faculty Senate, was approved by President Frank E. Vandiver, even though a Student Senate subcommittee in charge of investigating possible solutions to the problem disapproved of the plan. As soon as the senior finals issue originated in 1984, a Student Senate subcommittee was formed and after two years of work, came up with a plan which was a compromise between the Faculty Senate, the Student Senate and the administration. However, the compromise did not ever reach President Vandiver. The Faculty Senate did look over the bill, but did not approve it, choosing instead to quickly formulate its own plan. The Student Senate subcommittee reported to the Faculty Senate and to President Vandiver that the plan was unacceptable, yet the President approved it. Jerry Dingmore, student senate’s includes making sure the mother’s clubs, the former students associations and other Aggie organizations are informed of the progress of the issue. Dingmore says it will be up to the organizations if they choose to take action, which could cause President Vandiver to reexamine the proposal. However it turns out, it is evident from opinion around campus that students don’t feel they had a say in the senior finals issue. A -Viother important issue in the news lately has been the recently- approved core curriculum, which has been in the planning stages since many of this year’s graduates started college. Although the plan will affect the courses future Aggies are required to take and will, in effect, turn some four- year programs into five-year ones, little student interest in the issue was seen. Few students came to three public hearings on the subject, perhaps because the plan will not affect students who have already chosen the major with which they will graduate. general student body. Two questionnaires by Student Government indicated this. “Most students really didn’t know what was going on,” he says. “As long as we didn’t get any negative responses, we decided to be in favor of it. It seemed very logical to us.” Two weeks after the Faculty Senate approved the final plan and sent it to President Vandiver for his signature, the Student Senate passed a resolution supporting the core curriculm. The vote was 37-11. Only 55 percent of the student senators were at the meeting. '*■ ousing has also been at the root of much student concern this semester. In addition to the various confrontations between the housing office and individuals and groups of students (e.g. the Walton Hall E-Ramp incident and the Dunn Hall issue), there have been complaints lodged by the students against housing policies and plans. The most prominent issue on most been a increas The revenu renova Vandiv submit said th< the del: sale of Center contro' Thrc organic center gynecc prescri] Katii Emily I about \ whent disconi Dr. ( health staff m “Wf
