An Apology By JOHN LOTT Collegian Editor Ihe signed column of last Fri day written by Mel Ziegler about Pro! R. Wallace Brewster’s Politi cal Science !i course has provoked a wave of letters and telephone calls from Dr. Brewster’s colleagues and from students. If one conclu sion can be drawn from this re sponse, perhaps it is this: Dr. Brewsters reputation as an instruc tor, scholar and human being ap pears unassailable. What has been brought under serious question is the responsibility and judgment exercised by Editorial Editor Zieg ler in writing the column, and by The Daily Collegian Editor in per mitting such remarks to be pub lished. The Collegian has received let ters from the Dean of the Liberal Arts College, from several political science prolcssors, from 'he depart ment s tiding head expressing the feeling of the department as a whole, and from students who have Brewster Analysis Called Critical Generalization TO TlUi EDITOR: As a sth term student majoring in Po litical Science and having had Dr Brctvstcr lor Political Science 3. I would like to ex press my dissatisfaction with Mr. Ziegler's Critical "Analy sis” ol Dr. Brewster and his Course. Mr. Ziegler's desire to expose the Penn Slate student body and faculty to Ihe “state ness” of Dr Brewster’s course, and to open our eyes to the "m ore prepared” incoming freshmen is indeed admirable. However, ''mollhtence” has done little more than criticize, and his generalizations and simplifications of Political Sci ence 3 and of the man who tenches ll clearly reflecl Mr. Ziegler's inability to balance resource and reason. Granted, there is much room for improvement in Political Science 3. but I sincerely doubt the usefulness of such'a method as Mr Ziegler lias employed. Rather, the products of hi«= method may be resentment and diss a t i s faction. Perhaps, strangely enough, these pro ducts may have even served as the motivating factors for this particular column of “mel fluence.” —William Slrawn A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE FOLLET BOOK COMPANY WILL BUY BOOKS NOT USED ON THIS CAMPUS Editorial Opinion taken Dr. Brewster’s course. We also have received a telephone call from an officer of the University chapter of the American Associa tion of University Professors and several late-night anonymous calls All the opinions expressed support of Dr. Brewster as a man of integri ty whose teaching and published work is widely respected. And all protested and questioned the sense of responsibility displayed by the Collegian in this situation. It has been pointed out that Dr Brewster has long been a champion of student rights, especially in the realm of a free student oress. It has been noted that his work in the AAUP has illustrated this, and that, indeed. Dr. Brewster has been one of the leading supporters of a student course evaluation program. His textbook, in addition to being hailed for excellence by the State Department, has also gained highly -favorable critical reviews abroad. In an attempt to offer construc tive suggestions to improve the first LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Restraint Urged TO TIIE EDITOR: The Depart ment of Political Science ,el comes constructive criticism from any and all students of ils course offerings. The mem bers of the Department, how ever, are unanimous in de ploring the unsubstantiated, un founded ad hominem attack unon an individual professor. The venomous nature of that attack could hardly serve a I HATE \ Ifl BV GOLLV.NOBODV BETTER /VZT\ THE WHOLE r SET IN MV U)AV TODAV! | -j | ■ Ji~ I — c i u "1 Il’M 60NNA 6ET SIAIJ6tfIH?O>, Today Is The Last Day Books Will Be Accepted Thursday Is The Last Day Books Will Be Sold CUP ft SAVE ACCEPT BOOKS LAST DAY TODAY SELL BOOKS THURSDAY, JAN. 13 IS THE LAST DAY RETURN MONEY FOR INCORRECT BOOKS JANUARY 13-14 RETURN MONEY AND UNSOLD BOOKS JANUARY 17-21 TO THE EDITOR: The recent attack on Professor R. Wallace Brewster by Me] Ziegler is without doubt a serious abuse constructive purpose. In the of freedom of the press, future, we hope that those who One might be inclined to dis claim to write under the pro- miss it as juvenile (and, as it tection of free speech and free turns out, ignorant) exercise press will exercise the right in criticism were it not filled with a degree of restraint and wi(h maJiciolls wn om and un responsibuitv. , . „ . . . . bridled viciousness. —William R. Monat „ . Acting Head surely a responsible news- Department of paper requires maximum Political Science standards of mature judgment. —Raymond Ayoub Professor of Mathematics THE USED BOOK AGENCY NON-PROFIT STUDENT OPERATED USED BOOK AGENCY Due Course Evaluation booklet, Mi Ziegler chose a particular course and its professor as an example. Mr. Ziegler has taken the course and received an above - average grade. He himself has maintained a consistently high academic stand ing. He wrote on the assumption that these factors qualified him to make a critical evaluation. Perhaps his approach and as sumptions were unfortunate. Sub sequent reaction has obviously made it embarrassing, not only tc Dr. Brewster, but to The Daily- Collegian as a whole. While Mr Ziegler’s basic aim was to point up the weaknesses of the course guide his overall comments have obvious ly appeared to some readers as an unprovoked attack on Dr. Brewster. Such was not the intention However, after reviewing the situa tion, The Daily Collegian Board of Editors believes it necessary to make public apology to Dr. Brews ter for any unintended embarrass ment stemming from this incident, Serious Abuse o-Loeil Advertising Managers, Robert Sayers and Victor Sandham; Co-Credit Managers, Diant Specht and Kenneth Bender; Classified Advertising and Promotion Manager, Ruth Roseff; Circulation Manager, Dick Welssman; Office Manager, Sally Snyder. City Editors, Dtb Stoddard and William F. Lee; Sports Edlfor, Alex Ward; Assistant Sports Editor, Lew Thompson; Editorial Editors, Joyce McKeever and Mel Ziegler; News and World Affairs Editor, Laurie Devine; News and Features, Kathy Case; Personnel Director, Sally Brown; Editorial Columnist, Richard 0. Spasnolll. JOHN LOTT Editor PAGE FOUR LOCATED ON THE GROUND FLOOR OF THE HUB The student Course Evaluation booklet published last week has made a notable advance in the area of student involvement in academic affairs. Bu( in its present for mat the booklet falls short of its maximum value. A useful course evaluation will offer guidance both to the student pondering a choice of electives and instruc tors and to the professor in analyzing his own effectiveness. Such generalizations as "it contributes (or does not contribute) to a well-rounded education" or "ihis course serves (or does not serve) as an adequate introduction" aren't really saying anything that will benefit either stu dent or instructor. The booklet is filled with these useless ambiguities. Currently courses are evaluated through questionaires distributed among student enrollees with the statistical re sults religiously converted to prose form. The questionnaire is a collection of twenty yes-no answer-type questions, concluding with a solicitation for “additional comments”. As it is, however, the questionnaire is too rigid and inflexible and often irrelevant. A yes or no answer to such questions as “Do you think this course has contributed to your well-rounded education” or “Can you ea-ily find the important material in the text” will not necessarily provide an accurate indication. A new type of question naire which will require more than an overly-generalized response from the student, with space provided alongside the question for him to express his feelings in his own words will provide a more intensive analysis of the course. The major failure in the first Course Evaluation book let is evident with ils use of compiled data. Once a more imaginative questionnaire is drafted, student reviewers responsible for writing the course summaries should be left with ihe freedom to convert the data into meaningful analyses, instead of the dry verbalized data that is now used. Students in high academic standing who have com pleted the particular course they are reviewing with either an A or B grade should be employed to do the writing. Another vital improvement for the course evaluation processes would be. to de-emphasjze the classroom policies of the teacher in favor of more concern with his ability to arrange and deliver his material. Whether the instructor bases his exams on the text or his lectures is not nearly as important as the substance of the course. A Student-Operated Newspaper 60 Years of Editorial Freedom Satlij (Enllpntan Successor to The Free Lance, est. ISB7 Publisher: Collegian, Inc. Owner: Collegian, Inc. Known bondholders, eic.: None Circulation: 9,000 Copies Printed: 9,000 Member of The Associated Press TUESDAY, JANUARY 11, 1966 SELLING YOl mefffuence Course Evaluations Last in a series ARTHUR RAPP Business Manager By MEL ZIEGLER Editorial Editor In Memory of William Jeffrey Honorary Sigma Phi Alpha, 1934 If I have done any deed worthy of remembrance, that deed will be my monument. the Brothers and Pledges of Alpha Kappa Lambda, successor to Sigma Phi Alpha 600 D 6RIEF! Prejudiced Melfluence Note to Mr. Zeiglcr- Attached yon will find a carbon of n tetter to the editor. It trill probably never find its trail to print, therefore I felt obli gated to send you a copy. TO THE EDITOR: Two basic issues seemed to have emerged concerning the recent USG publication “Course Evalua tion.’' The first concerns who shall judge This issue con cerning the qualifications one needs in order to offer respon sible and constructive criticism has managed to generate suf ficient controversy. Ot equal importance, is the question con cerning what should be done with the data once it has been collected and tabulated 1 sug gest that the data, as such, are “dumb", and will remain so until spoken for by an individ ual interested in answering a question or proving a point. Further, that researchers in both the collection and inter pretation r>! (lata have an un canny wav of seeking what they want to see in the data: of abstracting in relation to their desires and expectations In relation to tile second —Agesilaus tvev and snoopv are HAVING A FIGHT! \3 0© •° • 1 STAND STILL, AND Fight like a man!! ersr £sp l point I would like to focus attention on Mr. Zeigler’s re cent article, "Whv a Professor Failed." 1 would like to U'k Mr. Zeiglcr In clarih the bases tram which he made his inter pretation. Unless USG offered him additional data not pre sented m the ''Evaluation.” I see no reason to accept his conclusion that Dr. Brewster should he considered a failure. Mr. Zeiglcr, if he did no' ob serve additional data, appears lo he the taihire Ills article is seems prejudiced and sensa tional in its approach. Such techniques, although they sell papers and create public impr est. appear to be irresponsible. Certainlv (he license to edi torialize implies some measure of responsibility. Unfortunately Mr Zeiglcr did not seem to demonstrate his re.-PonMbilil'- either to his m anv readers or to Dr. Brewster. In conclusion 1 would submit that Mr. Zeiglcr needs to re examine his own methods be fore undertaking lo evaluate the methods of others. —David E. Butt Instructor of speech
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers