Volume 94, Issue 40
Thursday, November 9, 2000
Letters to the Editor
To the Editor:
I have sat back and kept quiet all of my first year and up to my second year, but I can no longer sit back and not voice my concerns on an issue that affects a lot of my fellow students. This issue is specific mark allocations for class participation, which to me, is nothing more than BS.
For me, in Business 020 and now, in Business 027, I have a 10 percent final mark allocation for class participation. This allocation is complete and utter BS. Not every student likes to talk during class. Just because they do not like to talk in class does not mean they are not doing the assigned work, and they should not be punished because of it.
We, the students, through OSAP, our parents and jobs, pay to attend Western and thus should be able to learn and understand the assigned work material anyway we want to and not be told how to do so.
I know there are reasons for the mark allocation, which appear to be valid on the surface, but if you look at them for a moment and think about what they are saying and implying, they are not valid at all. The two reasons are:
(1) Business 020/257 both use the case method to teach the subject matter and thus class participation is vital to the success of the course.
(2) Forcing class participation, through the mark allocation, prepares the students for the business (real) world.
If the intentions of university officials are to prepare us for the business world, my first suggestion would be to treat us as the adults we are and give the benefit of the doubt when it comes to doing the assigned material. I have yet to hear of a job where 10 per cent of an employee's salary is dependant on whether or not the employee talks during a staff meeting.
I realize the odds of anything changing as a result of this letter are very small, but I still feel it was necessary for me to express myself on this matter and try to bring this subject to the public's attention. I know that some of you out there are not going to like what I have to say and this is perfectly fine with me, but what I would like and hope for, would be for you to voice your opinions on the matter and write your own letter to the editor and let everyone know what is on your mind.
Social Science II
Re: Take a page from the book of Skip, Nov 7.
To the Editor:
I wonder about Colin Butler's inscrutible purposes. Was he trying to be funny? Was he trying to illuminate our lives with journalistic insight and intelligence? Or was he attempting to offend a great number of people by taking cheap stabs at the Bible? I don't even think he succeeded on the third.
Butler writes so far below the intelligence level of anyone at Western that I doubt anyone, least of all Christian students, would be offended. As a pissant agnostic, I've thought about critiquing religion. Apparently, Butler's thought about it too.
But like a writer of a twelfth season Simpsons episode, Butler isn't the man to do it he only thinks he's being funny. He's wasting valuable Gazette space on irrelevance, when it could be devoted to something such as, say, ads for tobacco-sponsored cultural events.
There's only one other solution to Butler's lacklustre writing style. All we do is take the existing column and sprinkle it with humour.
Curtis W. L. Jonesf
Honours Sociology II
Re: Comix not funny, Nov 7.
To the Editor:
I know when I have been slapped in the face. Bryce Holiday has clearly hit me and my fellow Gazette comic artists with the white glove.
SO A DUEL IT SHALL BE!
Bryce, put your money where your mouth is and accept my challenge: A comic contest, this Friday me and you pal. You make a comic, I'll make a comic and we'll let the loyal Gazette readers decide a winner.
Unless you're afraid.
So this is it... high noon... comics at 10 paces. And by the way, I happen to find Hagar the Horrible pretty frickin' hilarious.
Copyright © The Gazette 2000