Page 2
Student fees:
The Carolina Journal
February 11, 1971
Attendance controversy stymies SGA
How are they spent?
Every semester UNCC students
“like good little boys and girls”
pay their student fees(i.e. general
fees) which amount to S74.50
each. According to the records
office enrollment for last semester
was 4,068.
With figures as such, total
student fees should amount to
$303,066.00
The money is neatly packed
away by the administrators and
records are dilligently kept of
every penny spent. What then?
Where does the money go? What
is it used for? And most
important, if the money is paid by
the students who has control of
it? Who has the final authority?
Also for the last couple of
years, a certain percentage of all
student fees are automatically
separated from the rest of the
money and placed in a
“contengency fund.” To date the
“contengency fund” amounts to
approximately $10,000.00
Once again students should
know who has final authority of
this fund. What is it used for? And
is there a ceiling on this fund or
will it continue to grow in the
hands of the administratiov.?
This editorial is the first of a
series designed to explain the
division of and the expenditure of
student fees. Along with this, the
Journal will answer all other
questions concerning student fees
and report the opinions of certain
individuals and groups on various
issues that involve student fees.
The Journal firmly believes
that if every student is required to
pay $74.50 each semester under
the ambiguous category of
“general fees,” then every student
is entitled to an explanation; in
any forms but “general,” as to
what happens to his $74.50 fee.
Editorial
policy
Opinions of the
Carolina Journal are
expressed on its editorial
page. All editorials are
the opinions of the
Editorial Board. Letters
and columns represent
only the opinions of the
individual contributors
(continued from page 1)
legislators. The bill was defeated,
however, by a vote of 7-6.
Beth Timanus made a
recommendation from the
cheerleaders that Chet Snow, in
contest • to the constitution, be
allowed to participate as a
cheerleader for the remainder of
the year. LaVera Farnsworth
proposed that if “Mr. Snow had
been interested enough at the very
beginning of the year, that he
would have tried out with the rest
of the cheerleaders.” This
question was left unanswered
when the motion went to a vote
and Mr. Snow was instated as a
member of the cheerleading
squad.
President Hickok, in his report
to the legislature, reminded the
assembly that elections for
members of the to-be-formed
University Senate were slated for
March 3. He also expressed some
disquieting thoughts about the
Senate’s possible effect on the
already existing SGA. He stated
that there were some
“frightening” aspects to the
Senate constitution. He cited the
representation factor saying
“we’re very much outmanned on
the Senate.” He explained that
“this in itself is not bad” since it
gave students authority in areas
which they could not tread
before, however, he said, “if they
operate against each other, (the
Senate and the Legislature), they
can surely destroy each other.”
Speaking of the Senators to be
elected Hickok pointed out that
'"‘if they are against the SGA, they
can destroy it; they can destroy
the legislature.” He suggested
that, in order to keep this power
in control. Senate nominations
must be reviewed by the Ways and
Means Committee of the
legislature. “There should be an
investigation of each person who
wants to run; if nothing else, just
to make sure that they ARE
students,” he added.
Ed Wayson made the
suggestion that the legislature
should consider withholding any
nominations until certain changes
be made in the Senate
constitution. This thought was
left hanging, however, since no
formal recommendation was
presented.
Marlene Whitley, chairman of
the Ways and Means Committee
made an announcement pertaining
these nominations. She said that
any perspective candidate for the
Senate will have to put, on sheet
of paper his name, school address,
phone number, present Q.P.
average, and anticipated number
of semester hours to be carried
next year. This information
should be given to her or placed in
the Ways and Means Committee
box behind the Union
information desk.
She further explained that this
is with the understanding that all
nominees must present themselves
for interview before the
committee Friday, February 19 at
11:45 in the Sanford Hall Library.
If, for any reason, a candidate
cannot attend this meeting, he
must present a written
explanation for his absense.
Nominations accepted at this
meeting will be presented before
the SGA assembly.
Unions
(Continued from page 1)
The $15 a day loss estimate
was based, in part, on the number
of dorm students.
According to the contract
between the administration and
Saga, the administration pays Saga
2 cents per day per dorm student
to keep the Union cafeteria open
from 2 to 6. The administration
also receives from 5% to 8% of the
total revenue from food services.
Thus, the $15 “loss” could
have been interpreted as the
amount saved by closing the
cafeteria since the figure was
related to a fixed cost of each
dorm student instead of the actual
operation of the snack bar.
Course Evaluation book on the way
Student Body and Faculty
Members;
A lot of complications have
developed since the course
evaluation packets were handed
out during the week of January 5.
These complications are being
worked out, but it brought an
important matter to my mind-the
UNCC community should be
informed about course evaluation.
The purpose of this letter is to fill
you in on what has gone on, what
is going on, and what is planned
for the future.
Course evaluation is an effort
to bridge the lack of
communication between the
faculty and students concerning
their common interest in attaining
the best education possible. 1 am
not stating that there is a present
lack of communication, for it is
evident that there exists a
student-faculty understanding
from the atmosphere in the
classrooms and committee efforts.
The purpose of course
evaluation is not to evaluate a
faculty member unjustly or put
“the word” on him when he
doesn’t deserve it. It is hoped that
the faculty can use the booklet as
a guideline to help them in the
classroom. Also, it is hoped that
the student can depend upon the
The Carolina Journal accepts
all letters to the editor, provided
they are typed and limited to a
maximum of 300 words. All
letters must be signed and the
address and phone number of the
writer must be included.
The paper reserves the right to
edit all letters for libelous
statements and good taste.
Address letters to
Repercussions, The Carolina
Journal, in care of University
Center.
Dear Editor,
In my capacity as a poacher, I
roam the back woods of the
university. Recently, however, 1
have been appalled to find that
the university community is
turning its land into a garbage
heap and making my job, and sole
source of income, extremely
unpleasant. I would like to
address the following ditty
(derived from an idea willed to
my great-grandfather by his old
friend Jay Keets) to the university
community;
Ode to Garbage
Thou still unravished woods of
quietness.
Thou forest child of silence
and low pine,
Sylvanhistorian, what canst thus
express
A need for green more
awkwardly than rhyme:
What cast off beer cans hunker on
thy trails
From hunters or from
students, or from both.
Intemperate in the woods of
UNC?
What paper bogs and bottles
these? What pagans loath
To pick up trash? What struggle to
escape
The glass and garbage? What
absurdity?
Sincerely,
Joey Collegey
Resident Muskrat
Trapper
booklet as a reliable guideline for
course selection.
The main problem, we as a
staff have to deal with, is attaining
these goals using the course
evaluation forms handed out.
Much criticism has been voiced on
the course evaluation form itself.
The form was developed by a
course evaluation committee
composed of faculty members and
students. A year of thought was
put into the form.
The question at hand is
whether or not the form was
definite in its stated goal. The
most criticism has been made
upon that contention. I feel that
it was fairly obvious the form
dealt more with teacher
evaluation then course evaluation,
although some course evaluation
was incorporated into it.
In order to provide a better
evaluation form next time, a
questionnaire will be handed out
to both students and faculty
members this spring. The
questionnaire will be an
evaluation of the evaluation; 1
know that it sounds like the
beginnings of a beauracracy, but
this is the only way we can
develop a form that will be of
value to UNCC.
Space will be provided for
comments, either specific or
general. From the returned
questionnaires the staff, witli
outside opinions and help, will
develop a better form for this
spring’s courses. I might also add
that student concern will
determine how often the booklet
will be published.
Presently we are working on
the content of the book. It will be
available to students during the
last week of April. To meet the
publisher’s deadline, much help is
needed. Opinions and help are
much welcomed. If interested, slip
your name or suggestions under
the SGA door in the University
Center.
Vicki Hinson
Dorm court a farce?
THF CAROIJPfA ^OURNAi; . .. UMCC . . .
IVIARCIA WALKsa .... EDITOR
MIKE WcCULLE-y . . . .mNJlCIJSre EDITOR.
MIKE COIvi-B-y. .. -BU^rWEjg^ mWAGER
SUSAU S^TTQTt. - . . EDITOR
DOWNA RALEY.... ART^ EJ>ITOR
MIKE rJAMI^OW.... jS*PORT^ EDITOR
BECKY GLEnriff ,.,. copy editor
MIKE WHORLEY. . . . 5TAFP ARTIET
. . . RBET OF THE GANG... SALLY ALLISON, PECftV
CALDWELL, JAMES CUTMBERTS0N,DCA/ , STEPHAAI
4 PREYEU5. RON FOSTER, JOt GALLACHER. BRENM GLEMN,
{jeiUBOLPEB, SARAH 1(R0HN..LINCA Mc'aRLEY. 5iANEi
’ AAcKNIGHT, tLAV OWEN, CHARLIE FEEK
. „ . iFPOKTff reporters
DON COUSAR, AAiKE .HOLLAAIP, ffAMK DAVE
TAVLOR,..
. . . photogaapherp
T«/A ALSOP, AlCHAKD BARTHOLOMEVi EDDiE HAHmUM,
MIKE SMITH... TOURNAt, OFFICES
LOCATED IN RtH.,UnIvHLsitV GENtER.
Dear Editor:
Attending a “trial” in the
“Sanford Residence Hall Court”
January 12, 1971, I was able to
observe a most complete, farce of
a trial.
The two girls on trial were
obviously guilty of having males
in their room during hours other
than those designated for
visitation, but the manner in
which they were tried was
ridiculous. No one was given any
type of oath before he tdok the
witness stand, and no effort was
made to clear up an obvious
contradiction in the testimonies
of two witnesses.
Peggy Fox, our Chief Justice,
was obviously unprepared for any
deviations from standard
procedure, (e.g., a move for
dismissal of the case), and had to
ask advice from mere observers in
the courtroom.
The council for the defense.
who had been recommended by
the school, was sadly lacking in
defensive skills and seemed to be
hurting the defendants more than
he was helping them. He appeared
to enjoy the audience before
which he was performing and to
expand the whole story in order
to give himself a larger part.
Dean Rash and another
supposedly neutral bystander
were meanwhile writing notes of
advice to the prosecutor.
There is also a possibility of
sorority prejudice in this case,
since two of the five judges and
two of the three witnesses against
the defendants just happen to be
in the same sorority which both
defendants have dropped out of
within the last year.
The final blow to our “judicial
system” came when the judges
returned with a verdict of
“guilty” with a penalty that the
dorm court is not authorized to
impose.
The penalty was “Definite
Disciplinary Probation,” which,
according to our constitution, i*
not within the dorm court’s
power to impose, and a “paper of
not less than 500 words, including
in your paper the hours of
visitation in your house, how you
were able to find out the hours,
and an explanation of what you
feel is the purpose of having
rules.”
Does that sound as much like
junior high to you, as it does to
me?
I would appreciate it if yoU
would print this in the Carolina
Journal, so that everyone may ^
made aware how urgently in need
of drastic revision our judicial
system is. Perhaps something cad
be done BEFORE another trial is
as big a farce as this one was.
Name Withheld By Request