Page Two
TH^ SAL^MIT^
Monday, April 30
TV SalMiiil*
Editor-in-Chief Dee Wilson
Business Manager Alden Hanson
Advertising /Manager Chris /Minter
Monday, April 23, 1973
Offk* Hours: 5:00-7:30 p.m. Weekdays
Phone 723-7961 Ext. 250
or call 748-1481
Student Grill Fails
1973
Free Press
Jg Grill since its rather hesitant start of two months ago. Accordi
Students may be wondering what has happened to the Studei
to Mr. Place, it has for all practical purposes, folded. Student
mj
editorial
In Student Government meeting on April 17th, Dr. Chandler
announced the change in policy which would occur concerning inter
visitation on Salem campus. The crux of this announcement was
printed on page 1 of The Salemite, April 23rd issue. In his state
ment, Chandler outlined a plan for visitation allowing for six campus
wide weekends in which dorms would be open to male visitors as
well as one additional weekend for visitation to be determined by
individual dorms.
His announcement was met with little enthusiasm and even less
approval by the student body. Indications of this student discontent
became public with the posting of signs on campus urging all stu
dents interested in a revision of Dr. Chandler’s proposal to attend an
important meeting the following day. Approximately 150 students
came to the meeting in which confusion reigned. Only a handful of
those present understood the purpose for the meeting and the facts
which lay behind this student irritation. Much uncertainty existed
concerning the statement of the original petition composed by stu
dents last fall, the final recommendation of Faculty Advisory Board,
and the evaluation of the committee of students, faculty, and Trus
tees meeting in January. Thus, a majority of the students’ compre
hension of the facts was severely limited. It was determined however
to walk in an orderly fashion to Dr. Chandler’s office where a formal
statement of student dislike for the proposal was read. Dr. Chandler
expressed his desire to study the statement more carefully and the
crowd dispersed. But, the discontent remains, and can be overheard
in student conversation at the dinner table, while ambling to the
post office, and while sitting in a dorm room.
Most students feel the proposal read by Dr. Chandler was entirely
different from the request of the original petition. They particularly
disliked the concept of pre-planned weekends, arguing that this type
of arrangement fosters an “open house” atmosphere as opposed to
the more “natural” atmosphere of a regular weekly visitation policy.
The desired informal environment cannot exist when visitation is
connected with social functions on Salem campus.
Students were further irritated by the fact that the administrative
proposal does not truly alter the status quo. Since at present, Salem
College students have the right to petition for open house on certain
designated weekends, i.e. social weekends. Moreover, they disliked
the idea of not being allowed to determine the hours of visitation
themselves.
Fault was also found with the proposal being subject to review
in January, 1974. Many students consider it as thwarting all efforts
to modify the proposal before this time, consequently adding a
greater time lapse to the already slow process - a process stretching
out over a two year period.
It was these factors which provided the stimulus for the im
promptu meeting at the Lily Pond and the resultant reading of the
student petition. However, even at this student meeting the facts
were greatly obscured. Although both students and administration
probably inadvertently and unconsciously obscured the facts, never
theless many students remained confused. Confusion was specifically
noted in the issues concerning who was responsible for the proposal
read in SGA meeting, why it appeared in such an altered form, and
what process is necessary to effect any change in policy on Salem
campus. There existed a need to get the facts straight and out into
the open. The administration has a responsibility to present the
facts to the students, and the students have an equal responsibility
of being aware of the facts so that well-planned action can be taken.
In this issue is presented an evolvement of the petition into its pre
sent form in hopes that a greater understanding of the situation will
occur.
dalpmttp
EDITORIAL STAFF
News Editor Clark Kitchin
Assistant News Editor . . .
Nancy Duenweg
Feature Editor Margy Dorrier
Assistant Feature Editor . . .
Cindy Greever
Layout Editor Becky Minnig
BUSINESS STAFF
Circulation Manager.
\/lailing Managers
Copy Editor . .
Fine Arts Editor
Headlines Editor
Photographer. .
Managing Editor
. . Carol Perrin
. Joan Spangler
Katherine Skinner
. . . Anne Tillett
. . Mandy Lyerly
Muse of Inspiration ....
Mr. Bernhard von Nicolai
/'dvisor Mrs. J. W. Edwards
IHE SALEMITE is the Uncensored
\ ce of the Salem Community.
Application to mail at second-class
jxjstage rates is pendingaat Winston-
Salem, N. C. 771Q8.
To the Editors:
ganization in setting it up has been rickety ; and interest died soon
, . „ .here after it opened. The idea was a good one; and it was one that mrt
In my box this morning th obstacles from the school in getting its start. The beer lice!!
r o handwritten note (u - wanted for it is available. The costs of running such
snack bar would be low; only the cost of the food and the student
help would be included. The snack bar, if it were re-established
would give valuable work time to scholarship students and otheri
who want to make extra money on campus. With all these pros
why did the students let the idea go?
Obviously, it is too late for anyone to get to work on re-startiiu
the snack bar for this academic year. However, someone should
take the initiative for next year to get it going again. (Individuals
lould plan it, or the student government could designate the
organizing of it next year.) It would give students an extra 1
to be able to relax on campus - and who knows? Gas may be so
high in September that we won’t be able to afford all those mile
or-so treks to the Trophy Room or Tavern. At any rate, the snack
bar should become a reality next year instead of an abandonee
idea.
- Clark Kitchin
was a handwritten note (un
signed) saying “Obviously there
is no ‘freedom of the Press’ at
Salem.” Although I would like
to speak with the writer to be
sure I understand the message, I
can assume the reference is to
coverage - or lack of coverage --
of the April 18 reading of the
petition to Dr. Chandler.
I would like to take this op
portunity to suggest some of the
facts about newspaper publicity.
Of course, anyone can call a re
porter and invite him or her to
campus. However, when the re
porter is here there is no way to
control what appears in the
newspaper. We can offer infor
mation, facts and figures, and
suggest leads for various points
of view. What is written is strict
ly the reporter’s business. A re
porter is a professional who uses
his own judgement on what and
when to write. That is freedom
of the press.
Case in point: Charles Mc-
Ewen of the SENTINEL was not
called by this office. As far as I
know there had been no decision
suitable for release. How changes
campus are arrived at is an
College Continues Grade
on
internal affair and is rarely of
general public interest. This was
the finding by Mr. McEwen. In
his judgement there had not
been sufficient action taken or
general agreement arrived at to
warrant a story. While he was
here he was asked by some stu
dents not to write a story, and
by others to use only their ideas.
Another reporter might have
considered the “meeting” and
“demand” funny, and might
have written a spoof on “Susie
Salem Strikes Again.” Often the
loudest yells for freedom are
actually equally insistent on con
trol.
It is the old saw about free
dom carrying responsibility
which is impossible to duck.
When I call a reporter I am re
sponsible to see that he gets all
possible information. The same
obligation holds when I am
called by a reporter.
Obviously the business of a
newspaper is to carry news - not
to carry torches for special
groups or factions. So used, or
tried to use, the publicity often
does harm to the promoters,
and to others perhaps not con
sidered in the zeal of being
heard.
The purpose of a News Bu
reau is to release the news of
public interest to the public
Perhaps the office can be of
more assistance to students who
have news of interest to the
general public.
Pat Terry
. Piecey Myers
Susan Gregory
NOTICE
Member U. S. Student Press Associa
tion, Intercollegiate Press, Alternative
Features Service.
Published weekly, excluding exami
nations, holidays and summer vaca
tion, by Students of Salem College.
Subscription Price $5.00 yearly.
Mailing Address P. O. Box 10447
Salem Station, Winston-Salem, N. C.
27108.
Canton, N.Y. - (I.P.) ~ The fol
lowing is a brief review of an
important grading policy study
carried out at St. Lawrence Uni
versity. Submitted by Assistant
to the Dean Paul R. Johnson,
“It has become the basis of fac
ulty discussion or subject as part
of a general curricular review.
“Because of its rather useful and
realistic treatment of an issue
being examined on many cam
puses, I felt it might be benefi
cial to others to have the high
lights of this study given wider
circulation.”
Noting that “any grading sy
stem can be effective based on
the integrity of its application,”
the French Grading Report ob
serves that while “within the St.
Lawrence community we might
well choose any one of a num
ber of options and be reason
ably happy with that choice . ..
the uncompromising fact will
still remain that grading policies
and grades have a broader utili
ty” than instrainstitutional hon
ors and regulations.
Evidence was cited of diffi
culty in placement in graduate
schools and professions by stu
dents with a significant propor
tion of non-traditional grading
in their record. The report con
cluded this introduction to its
study by saying,
“The conclusion that emerges
from this commentary is that
grades are important primarily
after he leaves St. Lawrence. To
arbitrarily institute a revised sy
stem that may jeopardize the
student’s future opportunities is
thus unreasonable and unfair.
“The task is to retain a sy
stem guarantee that evaluation
carried out in each course is as
meaningful as it may possibly be
within the limitations of the
various symbolic systems avail
able.”
The report goes on to review
the arguments for and against
several of the most common
symbolic and non-symbolic grad
ing systems, both traditional and
non-traditional. Finally, a sum
mary of committee opinion am
recommendations is drawn
Highlights include the following:
1. The committee favored
ABCD/No Credit or ABC/No
Credit overall grading format,
should be noted that the com
mittee preferred the No Credit
option for courses failed rather
than the traditional ‘F’ grade or
the non-entry of failed courses,
The failed course would not be
computed in the cumulative
grade point average.
2. The committee favorei
continuing the current four
course Pass/Fail option over ei
ther reducing or extending the
number of such options.
3. The committee favored the
concept of the “X” grade as i
grade for “work in progress.”
This is intended to be used for
courses in which necessary work
could not be completed within
the designated semester. This
grade is not to be confused with
the “Incomplete” grade assigned
to students who simply fail, fw
legitimate reasons, to complete
the course work within the se
mester.
4. The committee strongly fa
vored the use of a proposed
written evaluation form. Inten
ded as a means of more complete
“feedback” to students on
course achievement, this evalua
tion form would be used in
cases of pass/fail grading an
when students receive the Ne
Credit or failing grade in replan
ly graded courses. The
could also be used for courses
taken in a student’s major
become part of his department
file. In addition, it may be usea
in other special cases at the re
quest of a student or at facutj
initiative.
CeSL program will have the
artist Robert Gwathmey speak
ing to the group on Friday, May
11th. He is a Southern artist.
CeSL is also sponsoring an open
house for all students and facul
ty on Tuesday afternoon May
8th in the Club Dining Room.
There will be many exhibits on
display with all students in the
program present to discuss their
individual projects. Refreshments
will be served and it is hoped
everyone will attend to discover
what the CCSL group has been
accomplishing this past semester.
Leg. Board Meets
Discusses Issues
I. The meeting was called to order by Averell Pharr.
II. A petition concernign the furnishings of the libiury i
readh?
furnished®
room was read. It proposes that this room remain
the same traditional manner. Before approving the
Leg. Board decided to ask Mr. Place to report on
the Ubrary
III.
There will be required SGA meetings on April 25 at 12
'on April 26 at 12:00.
-30 anil
IV. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
ittei
RespectfullyB*®;^