daily trojan, Vol. 98, No. 66, April 24, 1985
|Save page Remove page||Previous||1 of 28||Next|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
large ( > 500x500)
Loading content ...
Charles Manson on KSCR tonight — see page 11 dSMH^ trojan Volume XCVIII, Number 66 University of Southern California Wednesday, April 24, 1985 Organized by students Anti-apartheid rally scheduled for today By James Jones Assistant City Editor The anti-apartheid protest planned by a coalition of students for noontime Wednesday at Tommy Trojan is receiving little attention from university faculty and administration. The protest is "perfectly understandable and will allow students and faculty to express themselves, their morals and values/' said Carl Christol, chairman of the Commission on University Investments in Companies Doing Business in South Africa — the university's official voice on the South Africa issue. "I am not saying I'm in favor of the students protesting but I am in favor of the free expression of ideas," Christol said. Lt. Dwight Sanders, watch commander for University Security, said security has no special plans for dealing with the protest. Jon Strauss, senior vice president of administration, said he feels "some frustrated people feel more can be accomplished by protesting than through the commission." Christol also pointed to the commission as another way for students to voice their opinions and concerns on the issue. He also said it is the commission's job to make those recommendations to university President James Zumberge, based on arguments raised both by the commission and the student body. "It is easy and fun to get out there and jump up and down about something," Strauss said. "But in terms of substantive influence on the commission and its findings, that report will carry more weight for the trustees than the rally will." "Clearly, the issue has captured people's attention — and rightly so — but the real question is what is the appropriate measure to effect the desired change." Christol said the 16-member commission is "moving rapidly in order to put forward a recommendation to President ^umberge which addresses the problem in a humane and responsible fashion." "The commission can come up with a range of recommendations from complete divestment to saying what we have now is fine," Strauss said. Christol also said there is little chance the commission will be able to make its recommendations to Zumberge before the end of this semester. He said the recommendations do have to be to Zumberge by mid-July so that he can review them before the next Board of Trustees meeting in August. "Ultimately, the new policy will be made by the trustees," Christol said. Since the commission was formed in March, only two students have appeared before the commission, although several others have recently applied, Christol said. The commission is reviewing a number of proposals — including divestment — and is looking into the application of the Sullivan principles, which many U.S. companies in South Africa have adopted, Christol said. He also said many academic institutions — including this university — support the Sullivan Principles. The Sullivan Principles state there must be nonsegregation of eating and working facilities; equal and fair employment practices for all employees; equal pay for equal work; initiation of training programs in managerial skills for minorities; increasing the number of minorities in managerial positions; and improving the quality of life outside the work environment for employees. Christol said he hoped the commission members would remain as available over the summer as they have during the school year. John Delorean talks about trial before packed crowd in Bovard By Lynn Balsamo Staff Writer John DeLorean, acquitted last fall on charges of drug trafficking, claimed in his speech on Monday at Bovard Auditorium that the government used his "carcass as a means of getting promotions and bonuses." In his first public speaking engagement since his 1984 trial, the charismatic former automaker spoke about the events leading to his arrest on charges of conspiring to sell $24 million worth of cocaine, the trial itself and the effect the whole ordeal had on his life before a captivated, packed crowd. "I'm lucky to be here now instead of 40 years from now," he said. "I personally believe they (government agencies) can get anyone they want. Nobody is immune to prosecution," he said. DeLorean began his speech with a brief autobiography, leading into his account of the facts behind his case, and then the reasons why he was charged and then acquitted. His automotive career began as a group executive in charge of North American truck operations for General Motors in 'Government agencies can get anyone they want. Nobody is immune from prosecution.' Detroit, Mich., before he came up with the concept of designing and marketing his own car. DeLorean eventually put the DeLorean Motor Co. together and located the production factory in Belfast, North Ireland — an area only speckled with peace due to conflicts between its Protestant and Roman Catholic inhabitants. Despite its location, the new company prospered, he said. But the failure of England's new conservative government to honor the agreements of the old (labor-intense) government — including export financing of $93 million — left the company's situation very unstable. Cars were being built with parts bought on credit to ship to suppliers and money was needed to pay off the bills, he said. But DeLorean's problems in Northern Ireland weren't just financial, as his factory office block burned down, destroying many of the company's records, and troubles also hit between December of 1981 and February of 1982 when the automobile industry was at a 40-year low. DeLorean's company owed the British government $800,000 in interest on a loan, (Continued on page 6) General education evaluations in circulation for student input Forms targeted on courses, not instructors By Richard Hatem Staff Writer Evaluation forms are currently being circulated by the university's General Education Program, in the hopes of accurately reviewing general education classes by including student input. These forms — not to be confused with the standardized forms that are normally distributed at the end of a semester — are targeted on the courses, not instructors, said Richard Fliegel, Caroline Ytom. left, was the recipient of the Community Service Award, and Maureen Curran in Grace Ford Salvatori Hall. STEVE FULTON DAILY TROJAN presented Tuesday by Susan Short assistant coordinator of the General Education Program. "We are examining courses relative to their objectives," he said. The main focus of the evaluation is to redefine a course's place within its current general education category, Fliegel said. "We are examining how clear the categories' objectives are being expressed through the specific classes," Fliegel said. "For example, are classes in the category of Empirical Approaches really giving exposure to how social scientists collect and examine information?" Another example of this approach can be found in the student evaluation form for Western Cultures II, in which one question asks, ' (Did) this course deal with broad and enduring issues of modem Western culture?" “We want students and professors to have a clear idea of why a course is in its specific category," Fliegel said. In an attempt to clarify these topical categories, the addendum to the bulletin of general education for Fall 1985 includes — for the first time — a description of the goals of each category- "This serves to inform students on course purposes and how they work," he said. The survey is also designed to gather information on the degree of difficulty and the workload of different courses, Fliegel said. "We want to see if the courses in each group are about equal." The General Education Program is also concerned with how students choose courses, Fliegel said. The survey provides a multiple choice response that includes references made by friends, an adviser or merely because the class was required for a specific major. Earlier this year, three national evaluators examined the General Education Program and submitted their results to the General Education Committee. However, these evaluations did not take student opinion into account, as this survey does. Michael Reilly, chairman of the Academic Affairs Research Action Unit of the Student Senate, said he was pleased that the General Education Program is acknowledging student reaction. The Student Senate conducted its own survey of student reaction to the program and submitted its findings to the general education committee. Taking their lead from the senate survey, the committee formulated its own survey, which is currently being circulated. "They're (the General Education Committee) trying to find out what their strengths and weaknesses are so they can consider changes before the three-year evaluation (of the program)," Reilly said. Fliegel said he was not sure how often the survey would be distributed in the future, or if it would at all. "We don't know yet — it does take time (to calculate results)."
|Title||daily trojan, Vol. 98, No. 66, April 24, 1985|