ny mes arpa en OY EB... short time ago, this paper circulated a questionnaire which all of you presumably received a copy of in your mailboxes. What we did was brainstorm a few questions which we felt had any degree of relevance to what the temperament of the college community at large was regarding its present political/financial climate. The intent behind that questionnaire was to open up some discussion about all of the issues surrounding this rather murky debate, seeing as the prevailing opinions, even the well- informed ones, have been based mostly on speculation. Very few people have facts and figures before them, especially students. This is partly the fault of students for not demanding detailed information earlier but | think that mostly the administra- tion should be Called to task for waiting until the financial situation of the college reached a point where cutbacks and tuition increases be- came inevitable before even informing the students that this was to be the case. So with that in mind, let’s look at some of your responses to our little survey. A fourth year Studio Painter who chose not to sign his/her response (By the way, not signing your criticism automatically invalidates your opinion. That’s my opinion.) states, “Over- wrought egos suck and this is a stupid questionnaire!” Very nice. Why don’t you make a painting about it? That might be a more constructive way of dealing with your obnoxiousness. Next! Lara Smith in fourth year Printmaking believes that things are good as they are “speaking for my- self.” Another nameless responder from 3rd year ECD, when asked what s/he thinks the problems are with the way things are run says, “Lots of stuff. Ask ECD 3 or GD 3 to show you work they are doing on promoting the college.” When asked if s/he can work within current college hours replies, “Not always. Hours should be 24 on weekends.” And in regard to college facilities: “Lack of up to date equipment will always be a problem.” And here’s the Accounting Clerk Eva Bouchard. “Budget problems are real - no easy answers. Must increase tuition, but agree that students taking more credits should pay more.” And some of Eva’s solutions: “Cut out all professional development, limit sabbaticals, cut out paid leaves, cut expense accounts, freeze on highend salaries. We need to ensure that students’ education is not hurt by cuts.” Right on, Eva! She also has something to say about the infamous article which appeared in our last issue “Crit Your Faculty”: “I think it would be more useful to have peo- ple’s names on articles of this sort, but not on private issues. | think the ‘eh : coment rome a pm a ce Sy onse to the anet poll — - commentary by T erry Dawes writer had some valid points but went overboard in solutions and shouldn't have lumped together all faculty. | agree that there’s very little account- ability for faculty and administration. They may be doing everything above board, but because of secrecy and’ lack of openness, things can look quite the opposite. There is very little communication between those in power and those with little power at the college.” | couldn’t agree more. Thanks, Eva. And just a note on the general lack of staff and faculty responses we received. Some of you were very supportive to what we were trying to do vocally and you explained that you simply didn’t have time to sit down and pen a lengthy article detailing all of your concerns. This is understand- able and thanks to those who ex- pressed regret at not being able to get something in on time. You know who you are. As for the rest of you, what is the problem? Are you afraid of losing your jobs over one little article? Or are you simply so apathetic or self- absorbed that you couldn’t care less? You are all so silent that | can merely speculate. But remember there is always next issue and a dwindling number of excuses. You may redeem yourselves. Andrew McKinley from 3rd year Graphic Design who commented that our questionnaire was very badly designed (We were hoping that, in this case, content would triumph over form, Andrew. Or was it the content that you were referring to?) has this to say: “The Planet and Student Union complain too much.” And his solution to this problem: “Get rid of them. It will cut $25 off my tuition fees” Yeah, | guess you could buy at least a case of beer with the money you save from doing that. Don’t worry about the~ government? Party at Andrew's place! And Andrew Fearnley also 3rd year Graphic Design (Hey Andrew, do you know this fellow named McKinley?) states: “Too much beuraucracy, not enough communica- tion.” Andrew calls for “more chal- lenging, real world projects, more cross-over between courses and departments.” His additional con- cerns include “more action from Student Union (What are we paying for?) Better cafeteria and hours. Need for vending machines with relatively healthy food.” : Here’s another comment on “Crit Your Faculty” from Marilyn Welch from support staff. “While | appreci- ate the information delivered in ‘Crit Your Faculty’, | question the delivery. Ideally, information about the availabil- ity of faculty according to contract should be given to students as they register. In the delivery of this anony- mous article, there are two contradic- tions: 1) the authour remains anony- mous to protect his/her job/career (life?) while exposing others’ jobs/ careers to attack. 2) the authour insists on accountability of faculty while remaining unnacountable himself/herself.” Cindy Courd, 3rd year studio believes the school should be open 24 hours. See Bryan Langland’s article in this issue for some interest- ing observations on access. There are a few responses that were quite lengthy and we're printing them as follows as if they were articles. Name: Shane Walker Year/Division: Foundation What do you feel are the problems with the way things are run?: First of all, | must say that | have no problems with the increase in tuition. In fact, the tuition at Emily Carr is far below the tuition of other post-second- ary institutions (a fact which can be easily verified). My problem is with the idiocy of having to apply for admittance to second year programs, | fail to understand why this is not done during the process of applying to Foundation. Why do! have to again apply, filled with the knowledge and apprehension that | may not be - accepted to the program of my choice? Why not accept the prerequi- site number of students (for each program) from the very first year? Frankly, it really pisses me off that | have to again demonstrate my talent, both artistically and academically, when those applying to painting or drawing, for instance, are guaranteed automatic acceptance without having to similarly demonstrate. It is no wonder that some of the art displayed in the concourse accurately fit the definition of ‘crap.’ You (those of you responsible for this particular idiotic system) should be able to determine how many students can be accepted. Or do you lack the necessary calculatory abilities? To be precise, are you that stupid? Can you work within current. college hours?: Yes. While it would be wonderful to have 24-hour access, | see no point to it. Frankly, the number of students working late (at least beyond 12 am) does not justify the cost of said access. What would be the point? Any additional concerns?: Why is the Foundation darkroom so small, and, frankly, inaccessible to students not in a photography course? After all, we are supposed to. be experi- menting in different médias [sic], of which photography is one. Frankly, sometimes | get the impression that we are thought of as nothing but incompetent children, and, therefore, are treated as such. Further, why is it that when we are enrolled in certain courses we are given limited access to necessary areas? For instance, the Printmaking area. Why is it that the work of students in upper years is considered more important than the work of students in Foundation? Vague Ranting Part One Feb. 10, 1994 [t appears to me there is an over- whelming movement of people like myself interested in becoming in- volved in a somewhat “intense” part- time study of the arts. | know for a fact that all but 2 people in my “Arts Access” class had to be “waitlisted” to get enroled [sic] for the next term. | have also had first hand experience in the “part-time portfolio assess- ment” evening of horror, where people are turned away in droves for classes which have a very high demand. ie. colour 1, etc. After attending various night school institutions which were less than “interesting,” | virtually “stumbled” across the Arts Access program at ECCAD. As a person in the world of business | find it hard to understand why the college “refuses” to recognize this apparent demand for their part-time program, and attempt to market it a little more aggressively. | am not suggesting a “drive through window” approach, but | do feel’ there could be an improvement in this area without jeopardising the credibility of the college. In fact I’m quite sure if the part-time studies classes were kept isolated (ie. separate campus facility) most people would hardly even know of their existence. | see paper circulated a questionnaire which all of you presumably received @ copy of in your mailboxes. What we did was brainstorm a few questions which we fet had any degree of relevance to ‘what the temperament of the college ‘community at large was regarding its present poltical/financial climate. The intent behind that questionnaire was to open up some discussion about all of the issues surrounding this rather murky debate, seeing as the prevailing opinions, even the welk informed ones, have been based ‘mostiy on speculation. Very few people have facts and figures before them, especially students. This is partly the fault of students for not demanding detailed information earlier but | think that mostly the administra- tion should be called to task for waiting until the financial situation of the college reached a point where cutbacks and tuition increases be- came inevitable before even informing the students that this was to be the ‘case. So with that in mind, let's look at some of your responses to our litle suney. A fourth year Studio Painter who chose not to sign his/her response (By the way, not signing your eiticism automatically invalidates your opinion. That's my opinion.) states, “Over- wrought egos suck and this is @ stupid questionnaire!” Very nice. Why don’t you make a painting about it? That might be a more constructive way of