page 8

Orientation Week in Retrospect

Student Apathy Exists Before Students Arrive at Vic.

What is wrong with students at Vic? Why did they absent themselves to such a large degree during Orientation week? Where were the 1000 freshers who, had they been well advised would have attended these functions.

Here is an approximate number of those who attended the Orientation functions:—

Welcome to the University, 250; Gymnasium Evening, 150 (most of whom, however, were senior students!); Church Service, 75; Film Society Evening, 150; Debating Club Evening, 170; Jazz Club Evening, 150; Commerce Faculty Evening, 70 (6 staff members); Arts Faculty Evening, 60 (6 staff members); Science Faculty Evening, 45 (15 staff members); Monday night Dance, 400; Tuesday night Dance 280.

These figures are a startling illustration of the apathetic attitude of most Vic Students. The numbers attending the dances were good, but surely the welcome, and the gymnasium display deserved better attendances than they recorded when it is realised that they preceded the dances.

The film, debating, and jazz club evenings all drew a fair sized crowd, but here again there was room to accommodate three times these numbers. If the above functions can be glossed over as drawing a reasonable number, then the faculty evenings can only be said to be very poorly attended (to put it mildly). In fact the complete absence of senior students, and the poor representation of freshers was damnably appalling. Agreed the faculty evenings are archaic (and word is around that many staff members and senior students are thinking along the lines of departmental evenings next year), but the numbers who attended hardly justified the organisation that went into these evenings. This apathy with regard to faculty evenings has spread to staff members (many of whom are busy during orientation week, but still some of their numbers found time to attend), and to members of the Executive who found the alternative programmes more entertaining than helping in the functioning of these evenings.

The Church service was another disappointment and accusations of the poor venue (Common Room) and lack of official recognition (from the Executive) cannot be really substantiated in such a low number of participants.

While I can point to apathy in attendances at Orientation functions an even greater apathy was noticeable in response to requests to senior students for aid in the running of Orientation activities. All clubs were circulated early in February and asked to provide information sheets advertising their club officials, activities and a general description of unusual aspects of their club. Of the 70-odd clubs in the university only 20 availed themselves of this opportunity and club members should (with many A.G.M.'s imminent) take the opportunity to ask their committees why their club was not represented in the information bureau.

In the staffing of this bureau apathy again reared its ugly head. Only a few stalwarts from the House Committee (aided by a few Evangelical Union members) kept going what was probably the most important undertaking for the Students' Association during Enrolment Week. Other clubs were circulated for help, but did not even bother to reply.

However, worse was to come. It was proposed to hold tours of the university during enrolment week with small groups of students divided according to faculties being given a quick but concentrated tour of the campus with accent to be placed on their particular fortes respectively. Accordingly seven major hostels housing students in Wellington were circulated and asked to co-operate. Not one hostel even bothered to reply. When members of hostels look to Executive and to the Students' Association in general for aid and for various handouts at semi-official functions throughout the year they could be expected to show some signs of co-operation, but I repeat not one hostel replied let alone offered any help.

This brings me to a major issue. Where does student apathy begin? It surely can't be part and parcel of those wide eyed innocent young people who fresh from the bond age of high schools, descend upon this university with a feverish look of freedom in their eyes and a de sire to get acquainted with all the wonders of a university life about which they have heard so much. No one can convince me that apathy begins here. So the obvious answer is of course the senior students when these know ledge seeking freshers and fresherettes arrive to whom do they turn for advice? Of course its second and third year students who they perhaps knew at school or have contacted them through their new board in Wellington.

Why is it then are the students proferring advice when they were responsible for the previous non-successes. These students can be only admitting, in fact advertising, the fact that they are failing to contribute to building a spirit within this university. These students either failed to attend previous functions or, if they did attend, did not contribute anything of importance to the evening's activities. Whichever way we look at it the blame lies with the senior students who now have the temerity to suggest to freshers that these functions are not worth attending.

This whole apathetic attitude permeates all of the Vic activities throughout the year with very few exceptions. This explains to some extent why Vic is always the recipient of the Wooden Spoon at both winter and summer tournament. Vic has some of New Zealand's leading sportsmen. We have New Zealand record and titleholders in Peter Hatch (swimming) and Dave Leech (athletics), and other leading sportsmen come from our present ranks! Dave Beauchamp (athletics), Richard Hawkes and John Souter (Tennis), Neil Wolfe (Rugby), George Gibbs (Yachting), and Gerda Buchler (Fencing). But these individuals although they bring honour and recognition to Vic, cannot win Tournament Shields alone, nor can they develop or maintain the Varsity spirit alone. Academically we have held our own with other New Zealand varsities and we have had our fair share of Rhodes Scholars (the last of whom, Colin Jeffcott was appointed last year).

However, it is up to you, who haven't done anything during your two, three, and four years here at Vic, to start doing something now by encouraging a better spirit amongst each new lot of freshers. Vic has, for a long time, had the reputation of being the most lifeless and apathetic of all the New Zealand varsities and it is about time somebody (in fact everybody) at Vic did something about it.

The excuse often presented as an accusation, that part-timers are the source of all this apathy is non-sensical and does not hold water when we examine the structure of Executive and its sub committees.

There are seven part-timers on Executive and six full timers (two of whom are about to leave on overseas scholarships). This ratio should not only be reversed, but the full timers should have a con siderable majority on the Executive. The various sub-committees and such activities as Extravaganza again show the part-timers (who not only have to work a forty-hour week, but also are required to obtain several units a year) to be dominant. Why can't full timers take a more active interest and part in these administrative functions? Perhaps it is that they can't even organise themselves let alone show the initiative necessary to organise others. Clubs which have a predominance of full timers on their committees show the least evidence of organisation.

Even the Anarchists whose avowed aim is the complete destruction of anything organised are to be commended about the majority of apathetic students. There will come a clay when the anarchists will succeed in obtaining the numbers required to oust Executive and for the most part students will not raise an eyebrow—except when they require a defunct Executive's aid.

This institution is crammed with the stay-at-homes, the beatniks, and the social party-going set. There is plenty of time to do that swot, to have these orgies, or to attend those cocktail or garden parties, but for heaven's sake get up off your great backsides and start, doing something to contribute to the creation and building of some spirit in this university.

—Cam. Murray.