5 The Cadre November, 11 1997 
     
    
   
   
    
     The legacy of 
     
     soc/anth; 
     
     part two 
     
    
   
   
    
     continued from page 3 
     
    
   
   
    
     1997 immediately petition the 
     
     Dean of Arts, Dr. Philip Smith, 
     
     to remove both Dr. Nagarajan 
     
     and Dr. Horwich from the re- 
     
     view committee by Thursday, 
     
     March 13, 1997 and replace 
     
     them with impartial appoint- 
     
    
   
   
    
     ees. Be it also resolved that if 
     
    
   
   
    
     the review is allowed to pro- 
     
     ceed with such improprieties 
     
     as are obvious to the Student 
     
     Union, and the reviewers are 
     
     not removed, the Student Un- 
     
     ion will not recognize the find- 
     
     ings presented to Senate.” NO 
     
     reacton to the motion was ever 
     
     recieved by the UPEI Student 
     
     Union. 
     
    

    
     In an effort to get a re- 
     
     sponse to the motion, a request 
     
     was made by student senators 
     
     tohavethe SU motion included 
     
     in the agenda for the March 
     
     14, 1997 Senate meeting. The 
     
     item was not included, and 
     
     when Dr. Epperly was ap- 
     
     proached for a reason for the 
     
     exclusion, her response was 
     
     that the issue would be better 
     
     dealt with in a President’s 
     
     Report (Note: no copy of this 
     
     report can be found). Student 
     
     senators tried to reintroduce 
     
     the item at the Senate meeting, 
     
     during the approval of the 
     
     agenda, but were blocked by 
     
     other senators. No formal 
     
     motion was made to introduce 
     
     the concerns of the Student 
     
     Union, and the Senate never 
     
     officially recognized the pre- 
     
     vailing problems with the Soc/ 
     
     Anth Department. 
     
    

    
     The reason for the ad- 
     
     ministration’s backing of the 
     
     reviewers became apparent 
     
     this past summer. In hindsight, 
     
     the ignoring of the SU motion 
     
    
   
   
    
     by the Senate, by the adminis- 
     
     tration, and by Dean Smith is 
     
     quite understandable. It is now 
     
     known that the reviews were 
     
     actually part of a mandatory 
     
     five-year curriculum evalua- 
     
     tion of the department. The 
     
     reviewers were approved in 
     
     the Spring of 1996, six months 
     
     before any investigation into 
     
     the problems of Soc/Anth. 
     
     Their only mandates were to 
     
     decide if the courses offered 
     
     in the calendar were reason- 
     
     able — no authority was given 
     
     to investigate student com- 
     
     plaints regarding professors or 
     
     marks. Complaints could be 
     
     heard, but would not be re- 
     
     flected in the official report. 
     
    

    
     Since the review was 
     
     merely an investigation into 
     
     curriculum, there seems to be 
     
     no conflict of interest on be- 
     
     halfofthe reviewers. As Dean 
     
     Smith stated, Horwich’s tie to 
     
     the department “does not 
     
     hinder his ability to offer a fair 
     
     assessment of the 
     
     Depatment’s curriculum and 
     
     scholarly efforts.” But the im- 
     
     pression students received re- 
     
     garding the mandate of the 
     
     reviews was entirely false. 
     
     Neither the Student Union 
     
     Ombudsman nor the soc/anth 
     
     students were informed that 
     
     the review was nota forum for 
     
     their particular complaints. 
     
    

    
     To date, there has still 
     
     been no formal, public review 
     
     of the problems that occurred 
     
     over the last three years and 
     
     no recognition from the ad- 
     
     ministration of any problem in 
     
     the department of Sociology 
     
     and Anthropology. 
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
     : pees, =e i Be 
     
     Election and — 
     
     Referendum Results — 
     
     All right. Kristen Patterson finally found out who is what, and what is who: 
     
     Vice President External: ma x \ grits es 
     
     Adam Kenny — es 
     
     Senate Representatives: ; ‘ 4 
     
     Michael Drake 4 
     
     Stephen Patrick Hann 
     
     Board of Governors Representative: a 
     
     FidelMurphy earl ab 
     
     Arts Representative: isha ea oA8 ; : 
     
     Melissa Doucette _ et ie: 3 she 
     
     Business Representatives: Hoa sc gee eae 
     
     Kyle Hanns sighs) ¢ Seah | 
     
     Dale Proude=:st98,0. Give) 9s 
     
     W. Darcy MacDougall 
     
     First Year Representative: Brae sae iit eae RG E he 
     
     Duncan Quinn Crawford Nei, 
     
     Senior Class President: suerte. entre sr 
     
     ' Bernadette Mary Lynch meee: 
     
    
   
   
    
     Congratulations everyone. Itseemsthat approximately 5% of the ers vst 
     
     a A 
     
    
   
   
    
     which is one of the best turn-outs in a while. 
     
    
   
   
    
     concerned, the majority voted in support ofa student radio service so here’s hoping the station 
     
    
   
   
    
     has a long life. 
     
    
   
   
    
     5s. See . x 
     
     phe Le Ee at aad ot oe 
     
    
   
   
    
     Ss eae Sagan Sige 
     
    
   
   
    
        
     
         
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
         
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
        
     
    
   
   
    
       
     
    
   
   
    
     9} 
     
    
   
   
    
     y to go apathetics! As far as CIMN is 
     
    
   
   
    
     Seats. be a 4 
     
     ‘ : 
     
    
   
   
    
     oy BES Sn 7