I found Aaron Kiel’s article “Honors Program Challenges Minds,” in the May 12 issue of the Campus Times, to be quite biased and highly inaccurate.
In this article, only two people were quoted. One was the director of the Honors Program, Dr. Andrea Labinger, and the other was the current vice-president of the Honors Society, sophomore Natalie Lehr. Anyone with any common sense would realize that these two individuals would do nothing but advocate the program.
What about all the students who have dropped the program since they were admitted to ULV as freshmen or transfers? Or, how about those who have dropped just this year? I would like to see some statistics on this information. There is a reason for the exodus from the program, and it is not the “stress” that Dr. Labinger refers to, I assure you.
Granted, I am a freshman, but I am an Honors student who has completed.one of the required interdisciplinary seminars and am currently completing another seminar, as well as a colloquium, this semester. I feel my views on the Honors Program as well as those of many of my fellow Honors students are, indeed, valid. Why were none of us interviewed by Mr. Kiel?
In the article, Dr. Labinger is quoted as saying,. “The idea of interdisciplinary courses I found very attractive.” I am happy to hear that the “idea” is appealing to the senses, but in reality, I believe the seminars to be ineffective. In both of the seminars which I have been enrolled, one professor of a single discipline consistently dominates class time, leaving very limited opportunity for students to “connect” with the perspectives of the other discipline. When this “connection” is not made, the seminars are· of little value. Arid if this interdisciplinary “idea” is so “attractive,” why are students not clamoring to raise their GP As in order to qualify for application to the program? Why are intelligent, capable students dropping the Honors Program and encouraging fellow members to do the same? The matter requires some follow-up.
I received an “A” in the Honors seminar I took first semester. However, I feel that I benefited very little from the time I spent in that class.
The Honors “idea” is a very good one, but it is in need of considerable molding before it can reach its full potential to attract and benefit students. Next time Mr. Kiel reports on a program which affects more than one person, perhaps he should investigate a bit further.
Tracey R. Landisi
The editorial concerning condoms being passed out at Spring Formal [May 12] finally brought light to the new attitude that the ULV campus is slowly gaining. Tradition is a sacred thing that UL V has thrived on for the past 103 years, which has kept much of the campus atmosphere stagnant in relation to the world outside of this university.
Condoms in the glasses at Spring Formal may have been seen as nothing more than a souvenir to some, a mockery to others, or they may have been a venue for open conversation about a partner’s sexual behavior.
According to the Campus Times survey, 73.6 percent of the students surveyed have engaged in sexual activity, and half of those students practice safe sex. Much of this can be attributed to the education people have received on the importance of condom usage. The writer of the editorial claimed that the condoms in the glasses were not for use, but in fact they could be used for sexual intercourse. They were purchased from a prominent drug store which advocates their usage. The writer also posed the question, “Is this the reputation the University … wants to have?” Being more concerned with our school’s reputation over the safety of our students is what has kept our school stationary in many of life’s issues and struggles.
As the year comes to a close, the ULV campus should be commended for its small, yet careful measures to finally open up its eyes. With the formal organization of the Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Union, Condom Gram sales and the Clothesline Project to stop sexual violence against women, the campus is taking a step towards concern for the world and its own students. It should not be thwarted by an unenlightened standpoint that would like to see UL V remain motionless in a world that is on the move.
Student Health Coordinator
I am writing in regards to David Sutton’s column, “Sticks and Stones” [May 12]. You see, I was the person who turned to my black friend while playing a video baseball game and asked the question, “Where’s my million dollar nigger when I need him?” I meant no disrespect to David, I was just mocking Cincinnati Reds owner Marge Schott, a crass woman who often uses the term to refer to some of her higher paid black players.
I never considered myself a racist, but I do say a lot of racial things. I thought I wasn’t doing anything wrong because I was just making fun of racism itself. But I know now that there are no acceptable reasons for racism; it doesn’t matter if you’re just kidding around. I apologize to David and to anyone else I might of have offended. I realize that I was part of a problem and not the solution.
The sad part is that’ this is where I and some people at ULV disagree. People who I spoke to think David is just blowing smoke; that he has nothing to. complain about, that we all say things and he should just deal with it. And the always popular, “Like you never say anything racist.”
This type of thinking is shocking to me at the college level. This is where we’re supposed to become more open-minded. And I’ll admit that I’ve never heard the word “nigger” more times than I have on this campus. Now I don’t know if it’s just this campus or if society took two giant steps back when I wasn’t looking, but I think we should all be a little more understandable of other Human Rights.