OCR Text |
Show Editorial Why Delay It is time for the course evaluation committee to get on the ball. Such a worthy project deserves better planning and organization than it has received. The evaluation, designed to judge the quality of courses and instructors, has apparently run into some hang-ups. Originally scheduled to appear spring quarter, the release date has now been postponed to fall quarter of the next school year. Why the delay? Does it take a year to complete forms containing six questions? The finances have not been handled any better than the questions. This year's committee was apportioned $1,500 (compared to last year's $1,000) to produce an enlarged brochure. It then requested and was given an extra $1,000 by Finance Board. Now the committee claims that it will require an additional $2,000 to complete the job. This money must be taken from the current year's budget to pay for next year's evaluation. If course evaluation were well planned how could such difficulties catch everyone by surprise? Much of the University's curriculum is scheduled for an overhaul during the summer months. The committee will now spend time and money analyzing courses which might not be offered next year. We urge the committee to take due notice of this fact in preparing the brochure. The Chronicle hopes that it is not too late for the committee to reorganize and redirect its efforts to make course evaluation a project that will significantly benefit this year's students. |