Pols 101

Generally, students thought the course was 'not bad'. Noone was wildly enthusiastic, but only a handful were very dissatisfied. The typical response was a qualified approval such as 'fairly useful', and 'at times it was interesting'.

Teaching: Students who commented on the two-lecturer arrangement approved of it, but lectures were criticised for being too dry and mundane. Dr Robinson tended to read out his study guide Notes on New Zealand Politics, and many students called for a more "conversant" teaching. One captured the general feeling in saying "lectures could be more psychedelic, to excite and stimulate the mind". Many felt students should participate more in the organisation of the course, and that there should be m more room for concentration on particular aspects of interest to individual students.

One student complained that there were too many sexist comments, and pointed out "Women in politics will never have equal opportunities if you constantly reinforce stereotyped humour about their present role"

Content: There were two very clear trends in students' comments: the content was superficial, mainly general knowledge. Most attributed this to the short time (6 weeks) over which the course was taught, and many were frustrated by it, calling for more "in depth" study. — it concentrated on the formal structure of the political system (eg Parliament) rather than on the social implications of politics (how it really works). There was little analysis of policies and not enough criticism.