The Los Angeles Loyolan, Volume 55, Issue 17 - February 27, 1978

VoL 55, No. 17 Loyola Marymount University February 27, 1978 Changes in grading systems recommended by committee FLYING DURK-Daredevil/clownster Mark Durkin succeeded in his attempt to soar over 10 student volunteers during halftime at Saturday’s Loyola-Seattle basketball game. (Loyolan photo by Greg Meny) Revisions for Honors proposed by Martin Ramirez The University Honors program, begun in 1958 “as a means of more creatively challenging the potenti¬ alities of the exceptional student and thereby contributing some overflow stimulus to the intellectu¬ al life of the entire academic community, 1 1 may radically alter its program in the coming years if the proposals of a faculty committee are approved by LMU officials. The Honors Program Review Committee; formed in September 1977 by Rev. John Clark, SJ, Academic vice president, and Dr. Ted Erlandson , dean of Liberal Arts, recently completed their re¬ port . This document contains a thorough review of the present Honors program, as well as a proposal for a new program. One of the key factors in the new program would be the role of the program director. His primary task would be to serve as the chief academic advisor for all Honors students (who would number from 1 10 to 120 once the program is fully operational in four years) as well as act as coordinator of the faculty teaching in the program. He could also assist the Admissions Office in actively recruiting high school stu¬ dents, the committee suggested. Required lower division Honors classes would consist of seminars in basic subject areas, including English, History, Calculus, Philo¬ sophy; and Religious Studies. In addition, there would be one upper division interdisciplinary seminar each semester. Instructors for Hon¬ ors courses would be drawn from designated faculty members in each department who would com¬ prise a permanent Honors faculty, something the present program lacks. According to Rev. Thomas Buck- ley, SJ, chairman of the group, such a program would “...allow us to draw the best possible students to Loyola Marymount, and to upgrade the general quality of the entire student body/’ In addition to academic require¬ ments, all Honors students would be required to spend several hours a week tutoring other students, through the Study Skills Center. By tutoring others, Honors students would hopefully gain a better understanding of their own studies, for one must have a good grasp of a subject in one’s own mind before one can explain it to others, Buckley noted. “We hope to pro* vide Honors students with a practi¬ cal experience in social responsibi¬ lity,’’ he said. As the program is presently structured, students can become part of the program at any time during their first three semesters at college, provided that they have demonstrated academic excellence in their previous studies. In the place of their core require¬ ments, Honors students take be¬ tween five and eight Honors class¬ es during their college years, generally on a one-per-semester basis. Honors classes are all three- Inside unit courses which require no prerequisites. In the senior year, each Honors student is required to complete a special project . Current enrollment in the present program is about 75 students. Some of the advantages of the present program which were noted by the committee are its flexibility and its relative inexpense to the University. However, the committee also observed that under the present program, an Honors student could conceivably graduate from the University having taken no courses [ in such subjects as Philosophy, Religious Studies and English, (Continued on Page 4) by Eric Rude A committee chaired by Dr. Graciela Limon, assistant professor of Spanish, has filed an interim report recommending some chang¬ es in Loyola Marymount ’s grading system. Their final report is due in mid-March. One of the major changes sug¬ gested in the report would be the abolition of the University’s system of keeping two sets of records of each student, one for LMU and one to be used for transcripts. Under the present policy incompletes, withdrawals, and no-credits do not appear on records sent to other schools. The committee was formed by Rev. John Clark, SJ, Academic vice president in the fall of 1976 to review grading policies at LMU. Its members include Limon; Dr. Paul Schumann, professor of Education; Dr. Gary Sibeck, associate dean of Business Administration; Dr. Carol Sullivan, associate dean of Liberal Arts; Dr. Terrence McDermott, associate professor of Mathema¬ tics, and Br. Anthony Smulders, CFMM, associate dean of Science. Three students, Lou Stagnitto, Marlene Leiva, and Bob Arranaga are also on the committee . The committee also recommend¬ ed that the basic letter-grade system should be maintained , but that action should be taken to curb “grade inflation.’’ The report sug¬ gested that certain changes by made in the specifications about grading listed in the University Bulletin, especially concerning the procedure for filing deficiency no¬ tices. The committee wanted the Bulle¬ tin to clearly state that teachers should send the notices to the Registrar’s office, who in turn would then inform the student. The committee’s interim report was sent out to faculty members on a recommendation from the acade¬ mic Assembly made at their Febru¬ ary 17 meeting. The opinions of the faculty are to be used in formula¬ ting the final report. Limon stressed that the views of the teachers were very important in relation to this report because “we are the ones who give the grades.’’ The committee considered re¬ commending that the grade of “F” be reinstated, but decided not to include that suggestion in the report. They discussed the reinstate¬ ment of the “F’’ but decided against formally recommending it, “though whether or not that is in our final report depends on the response from the faculty,” Limon noted. Limon added that this committee is only responsible for making recommendations and “is really the bottom of the scale” in making any changes in University policy.. She explained that the final report would be sent to Clark, who then submits it to the Deans’s Council, faculty advisors, the Academic Assembly, and the University Council. These groups must dis¬ cuss, amend, and decide on the possibility of complying with the recommendations. Frosh debaters pace LMU team IMUs Шаек Roots . •.....•Page 5 What was it like to be a Black student at Loyola in 1954? How far have Black students come since then? Loyolan writer Greg Clinton investi¬ gates these questions in the first of a two-part story. Heaven On Our Minds . . . Page 8 Eleven writers join together and gather memories to take this not-so-holy look at altar boy antics. Two freshman debaters, Jeff Thomas and Doug Cotton, “have won more debates as freshmen than any other team in the history of Loyola Forensics , ’ ’ according to debate coach Jay Busse, and are pacing another successful year of competition. Cotton and Thomas have placed first at four tournaments and second at another while compiling a win- loss record of 83-27. Cotton’s most significant accomplishment was obtaining the top speaker award at the National Invitational Tournament at W ake Forest Uni¬ versity. Cotton is the only ireshman to have been the top speaker at a major national tournament this year. Fellow freshmen Shane Swindle, Elliot Omiya and Mike Smith have improved upon previous records for freshmen in varsity competition. Swindle won first place at tourna¬ ments held at Lewis and Clark College and at Colorado College. Omiya and Smith placed first at Colorado and Cal State University,; Long Beach. Swindle captured the top speaker aw^rd at LMU’s own Invitational. Omiya placed seventh individually at the University of Utah National Invitational. at the University of Utah Invitation¬ al. Bobo and Boise were second at the Cal State Los Angeles Invita¬ tional. Over the last two years, LMU has participated in the Cross Examina¬ tion Debate Association. The CEDA’s debate format emphasizes persuasion rather than research and rigid objective judging in debate competition. “Last year we ranked 36th out of the 79 colleges and universities participating. This year we current¬ ly rank fifth,” Busse noted. “Our high ranking can be attri¬ buted primarily to the accomplish¬ ments of Sandy Homsky and Renier Milan. They have won two tournaments and placed second and third at two others,” he added. The LMU Debate Squad has attended 23 tournaments as of February 1. They placed first in nine, second in three, and third in ^one. Of the 23 tournaments, LMU has been among the finalists in all but four, and on three of those occasions they missed being final¬ ists on the basis of speaker points. Busse, however, is pleased with his team’s record. “The aggregate performance of the LMU Debate Squad is without precedent in our forensic history,” he stated. ТОяпк FMtfval ’78 . ..Ряой 17 The team also draws support DMtft rCftUVdl . . * . rd&C “ from Juniors Larry Bobo and John Boise. They tied Swindle and The Black History Festival provided a picture-perfect opportunity for Nels Thomas for first place at the Israelson to capture some of the happenings Дп this photo essay. PSCFA Winter Championships and FIVE FRESHMAN members of the LMU debate squad helped lead their team to a fifth-place ranking in the Cross Examination Debate Association. The pictured debaters are, left to right, Shane Swindle^ Doug Cotton, Elliot Omiya, Mike Smith and Jeff Thomas.