a image 12?.

 

 

Illinois Tech’s probation percentage
has reached a dangerous level. The
academic council deserves criticism for
[the way the probation policy has been

affected by the changeover to the new

four—point grade system.

As it now stands 761 students out of
2890 day undergraduate students who
could be liable for probation are in that
status—~253 percent, or about one in
four.

Something is wrong somewhere: is it
the student’s fault? Look at the proba~
tion figures from spring, 1949, to date:

Semester Spring ’49 Fall ’49 New
Day Undergrads 3,543 3,356 2,890
Probation ........... 507 471 761
Per cent ............ 14.3 18.3 25.3

These figures are particularly sig—
nificant since they cover a period in
which the cumulative grade point av—
erage determined academic standing.
Look at the terrific jump in one semes—
ter, and remember that a “1.0 before
is not a 2.0 now” as brought out by a
recent editorial.

Is 25 percent too high? Or even

the 14.3 per cent of Spring 1949?

Dean of Engineering John T. Ret-

taliata seems to think so, for, ac-

cording to his opinion expressed
last spring, the upper limit should
be 10 percent.

 

 

It is the opinion of this newspaper
that the possible consequences of the
move were not examined completely.
We realize that the adoption of a four—
point system puts us on a basis com-
parable with a majority of other col-
leges, and we welcome it for that pur—
pose.

The question of changing the grad-
ing system differs from that of rais-
ing or lowering the probation level. We
feel that this important point has been
overlooked. This difference was of no
concern to three elements of our ad—
ministration.

This difierence was of no concern
to the registrar’s office, which, follow—
ing procedure, merely read data from
the IBM tabulator and sent 500 proba—
tion notices after the semester had
started.

This difference became of no con—
cern to the Academic council until a
portion of these 500 receivers of ill

news complained that it jeopardized
their positions of responsibility in stu-
dent activities or employment by the
Institute itself.

Some gracious attempt, however, was
made to alleviate this situation when

 

 

 

the Academic council hurriedly revised
the probation policy to exempt at least
students in the above categories.
Finally, this difference seems of no
apparent concern to some instructors.
it may well be that this is the greatest
problem facing students.
We, as students, are told that we rep-
resent a highly selected portion of the
college population, qualified by high
intelligence and aptitude to pursue our
studies. Though this swells our chests,
we are confused by a situation in which
some members of our instructional
staff persist in handing this “cream of
the crop” a liberal dose of E’s and D’s,
neglecting “curve" grading, while the
probation level creeps up. Here we
are, the “cream of the crop,” sand~
wiched in; squeezing from the top is
a practice defended by “academic free—
dom,” squeezing from the bottom is a
practice defended by academic neces-
sity. The result: 25.3 percent “cream”
squeezed out.
What might be done about this. As

a first step, we think that the probation
level should be dropped. A level re—
duced to 1.8 might be found consistent
with a reasonable number of students
on probation and can be compared to a
1.0 in the former three—point system.
Regardless. of the arguments
against a revision of the probation
policy, it must be faced that the
dangerously high nuniber of students
on probation is a threat to student
morale and, consequently, to the repuu
tation of the institute.
Secondly, We sincerely hope that this
editorial is enough to arouse in our
faculty a serious consideration of their
grading methods. In grading, it should
be remembered that E's are more puni-
tive than they once were, and that a
grade distribution that seemed satis-
factory under the three—point system, if
continued, may well be contributing to
our already swollen ranks of proba~
tioners.
As a parting comment, we feel that
the increased number on probation and
their discouragement has done great
disservice to any attempts on the part

of students and faculty to reduce cheat—

ing on examinations.
The Editors of
Technology News

‘As t See rr’ was ommitted fromw

this issue to permit a greater space
allotment for the editorial about

to secure insignia“ ban

To the Editor:

it has come to the attention of the
members of Honor I that there has been
a grave misinterpretation of the char-
acter of and the ideas behind the ban on
letters and insignia foreign to Illinois
Tech. ‘

In place of the physical persuasionused
on hundreds of other college campuses
and used here at Tech in the past, Honor
1 was anxious to have the approval. of
ITSA in its campaign, since it does not
believe in dealing with an intelligent stu~
dent body by such base physical means.
The ruling sanctioned by ITSA prohibits
members of the student body from wear~
ing letters! and insignia not awarded by
the Institute. Fraternity and club in~
signias affiliated with Illinois Tech are
not infected by this measure. There will
not be any disciplinary action taken by
the academic committee on discipline nor
at any time was action of this type con-
templated or desired. The dean of stu«
dents has promised his cooperation in
this matter but did not make any men~
tion of dismissal from school as a part of
this cooperation. Honor I asks only that
the students cooperate when asked by its
members to remove foreign insignia.
Honor 1 went to ITSA seeking only
approval by the representative stu-
dent governing body and not seeking
any dictatorial powers, as has been
mistahenly assumed by many people.

Honor 1, in making this move, acted
in good faith and felt that it was taking
a step towards developing an awareness
of lllinois Tech activities and tradition
amongst the student body. The menu
bers of Honor I feel that the editors of
Technology News and our other student
leaders are correct in their campaign
against the lethargy and apathy which
at times seems to exist on the campus.
Therefore, it was decided that Honor 1,
as a‘representative of the athletic pro—
gram, should step forward and help
carry the crusade onward in a concrete
manner with action instead of words, in
order to help promote allegiance and
loyalty to the Alma Mater.

Honor l’s idea is to minimize club
and prep school loyalties by elim-
inating the insignias of non~campus
groups. Honor l would replace these
old associations with an active con-

Editorial Note: . '

   
 
 
 
 
 
  
   
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
   
   
  
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
  
  
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
  
  

sciousncss of what our school offers
and what it should mean to all Tech
men.

From the standpoint of the athlete
himself, it may be said that at a school
like IIT the athletes’ reward is not mess
ured in terms of student or press adula-
tionwrather, it is measured by the ex:
perience gained from cOmpetitive etiorts
and in the everlasting lessons of fair
play, sportsmanship, and the will to win.

x Honor!

We heartily endorse Honor its
desire to reduce apathy toWard
school activities, but we take issue -
with the means they employ.

Forced removal of foreign insig-
nia will incur resentment, such as ,3
that expressed editorially last week,"
rather than increased appreciation; ,
of the importance of athletics on .. . ‘
this campus. What seemed to Honor-

l and to lTSA to be a logical moth. _
mi of attaching the problem appears ,
to us to be detrimental to attainu
merit of their goal.

We would, therefore, silggcst that
Honor l embark on a positive prom,
gram independent of the sanctions
of the dean of students, and so
formulated as to gain the approval
of the student body rather than its

 

antipathy.‘ John Scannell
Mel li‘riedlander
mu «W V i“ if

    

"resonator

Published every Friday during the school year by the
students of illinoit Institute at Technology. 3300 5. Federal,
Chicago IL. lllinois. Entered as second class matter
October In, W40, at the post office at Chicago, Illinois,
under the Act of March 3, ”179. .

    

Advertising Service, Inc, 420 Madison Avo., New York
I7, N. Y. Advertising rates furnished upon request. Sub-
scriptionwDomes‘lic: $5.50 per term. Foreign: $2.00 per

term.

it" a i?! ,
Editarminmflhlof .................. Ell MWHEMF:
Bituminous Manager ............... €1th NEWEN
Associate Editor .............. MDHNNIE BEST

. . .llt'li-llNl EMANNEM.

  
 

Managing Editor . .

 

 

 

 

 

The little moron’s watch had stopped
ticking and he tried to find the trouble.
Finally, he took the back off," probed
into the works, and found a dead long.
“No wonder it doesn’t work,” he said,
“the engineer is dead.” ‘

“Do you lmow what good clean
fun is?”

“No, what good is it?”

~>' it a;

A traveling buyer had been on a trip
for three months. Every few weeks he’d
send a telegram home to his wife, say-
ing, “Can’t come home. Still buying.”

The Wife stood it for a while, but
when the fourth month started, she de-
cided to do something. She sent him a
telegram. “Better come home, I’m sell—
ing what you’re buying."

Then there was the farmer’s daugh-
ter who always went out with city slick-
ers because farm hands were too rough.

The minister was explaining to
his congregation the essential dif—
ference between faith and scientific
knowledge.

“Now, brethren, it’s like this.
Tlliere’s Brother Johnson sitting on
the front bench with Sister John-
son and the five little dohnsons.
She knows that they're her chil~
siren—«that’s knowledge. He he"
lieyes that they’re his children-m

 

 

 

 

probation.

 

 
 

 

 

that’s faith.”

a H ,Nll
Eighth

 

Getting out a newspaper is no picnic.
If we print good jokes, students say we
are filthy; if we don’t, they say we are
too prudish. If we publish original mat—
ter, they say we lack variety; if we pub—
lish things from other newspapers, they
say we are plagarists; if We stay in our
office, we ought to be out getting mate-
rial; if we’re out rustling up a story, we

office; if we wear old clothes, we are
poor college students; if we wear new
ones, we got the money from our graft.
What the hell are we supposed to do,
anyhow? Like as not someone will say
we swiped this from an exchange. We
did.
ac. e:- at
Customer: You made a mistake
in that prescription 1 gave my wife.
instead of quinine, you used sirych—
nine. ,
Druggist: You don‘t say. Then
you owe me 20 cents more!

x -r.- -x-

Love is the delusion that one woman
differs from the rest.

“Why on earth do all the fellows call
Liz ‘Muscles’?”

“‘Whyl ’cause they all want her in
their arms, of course.”

{termite Gus—sis.

 

   

 

Represented for national Advertising by the National '

News Miter ............. Willi coon
Sport‘s roam ................ MlllRY sunrise
Feature Editor .................. 8018 GREEN
Copy Editor ...................... MW WW5
Copy Editor .................. uoasur ZEVI’E‘Z
Promotion Editor ...... , ....... . .WWE Militia
Newsletter Miter .......... Which Wtfllltfiwtmh

aren’t attending to business in the,