\_~~' - r v:

The Cadre, November 25, 1976 page 1.0..~

Eng/i5}: ‘ Campos/ti

Ian Galloway With the new push toWards literacy in the univesity, UPEI, always at the fore?- fron of intellectual progress, has decided to make a giant step

forward to ensure that her graduates will be

able to express them- selves coherently in English. No longer will caveman grunts, trans4 lated onto paper, be sufficient to nail down that co ted B.A. Egg seguitors will hence- forth be banished from the examination room (what examination?) How will this prosodical miracle be achieved? Simply by putting all students—yes, the whole crop— through a 3—months processing machine called an English composition;

course. This machine

is closely modelled

on an earlier versiOn which veterans of the educational system may recall operating in the Dark Ages some decades pago, around grades 7—9.

On the well—founded pre— mise that language learning is most ef— fective at a later age, our educational system has decided that, in respect to reading and writing, it is obviously more effective to teach mature university students than to cast pearls before young swine.

While applauding the initiative of the de— sapiring English depart— ment in trying to stop the rot in the quality of our graduate, it seems that Senate (hey! wake up you guys) might have offered more support to the en— deavours of these over— worked profs if only they had looked more carefully (or looked at all) at the consequences of their decision to give every mother's

You deserve

a break

today of

“r .7

son (and daughter—sorry!) ! an undercoating of English

comp to protect them in the stormy years ahead

.of them.

First, it is quite ob— vious that many students do come through the various school systems with a perfectly adequate ability to express themselves. This must be true, otherwise we have been graduating nothing but illiterate students rduring the last six years, and one must be charitable

enough not to believe that. I will even vouch for the fact that I have known some literate students. Why then make them jump through the-same hoop as those who are more de— serving of loving care' and attention? I

believe that an argument has been put forward that it will do them no harm. I find this argument totally resistible. If the classes are filled to

uflroujl, LOOPS-{~eflc‘ !*

‘,‘?ibltqf]7A?/Vuhfiy‘(f‘ffl;}>défl?hWCJ’g’

capacity and the profs prime responsibility is to rehabilitate students With a poor grasp of English, how can that prof possibly be teaching» at a level sufficient to interest the literate student? And even if it were pos— ‘sible to do so without ' losing those who are in » dire need of help, ‘ , would it not be so much more sensible for literate students to be in a re—u gular university—level.

English class where they might exercise their essay—writing talents’ to dispense with the English Comp course,

it would not only make; them feel that they had made a step up from ‘

. High School, but it would enable the prof in English Comp. to devote more‘time‘ to those most in need.

'of instruction by cutting

. down the enrolmentiin this coUrse. \'

’ the humblest sausage

,pearing like a cad, nay! r

‘backward glance to 500

Second, Senate failed to make any provision for standards (sorry to use I such offensive language) in this course. Even

machine has to churn out

a product which will pass inspection. But all that is 1egislated~4¥orYis that the student willi‘vzspéhd three months inQ§n8Efiglish comp class and, subject to the idiosyncratic evaluatim of the individual prof, win be duly pronounced fit

to exercise his/her new- found skill in other excib ing disciplines. The usua pressure on the indi— vidual’prof to pass studenu on normal intellectual subject—matter? By allowing such students

in order to avoid ap-

an oaf who, manifestly, cannot teach, is likely to result in a high pass rate which unfortunately will not betoken remark— able improvement in the next term's papers across all departments in the university. It is imp perative that some stan— dardized testing procer dure be sued which will sh show that students across the board have achieved a certain minimum standard. This is the only fair and ,reasonable way to " operate compulsory courses and this plea is tendered entirely in the spirit in which the original legislation was passed. I hardly need to point our to students the hazards, otherwise, of being in Prof. X's class'as ppposed to Prof. Y who in turn is easier/tougher than Prof. Z.

The ideal, of course would be pre—testing (in Sept.),'not only to eliminate students who were already above’ the standard, but to allow students.to-observe the progress they had made in a post-test at the end i of the term.

In closing, occurs that QT .pro ‘ ms ‘ could Of cofihgelfi.l§glved' by making thelpre-test a bar for entrance to university,.thus re— leasing all that high- priced help for jobs that .they are eminetly qualifia to do. But apart from our desire to fix our noble eyes on the future without so much as a P

years of university tra— dition—we need the money!