Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  


    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient. Victoria University Student Newspaper. Volume 39, Number 16, July 12, 1976.



Dear John, and members of the geography department,

I'd like to agree most firmly with Garth Baker who saw it fit to pass comment about GEOG 101, its organisation and its characters some weeks back in Salient. Matters concerning organisation have been pretty pathetically formulated this year, and there have been that many changes within the course structure that its no longer funny

To take a few examples:
  • the muck-up in getting tutorials underway even though the tuts are held at the same time, and then the additon of two further tutors which necessitated drawing some students out of existing tutorials.
  • then the disorganisation of tutors. I'd like to take the example of my tutorial as it was on one occasion - after waking at 6.30am I proceeded to carry out the usual morning procedure, followed by my journey, by way of four modes of transport to my destination. Come 9.05 the tutor arrived and by the time he settled, 9.10 was upon us. He then returned (marked) essay number one and asked for any comments. 9.20 then arrived and we departed. What a waste of time - and tutorials count towards terms.

My impression before I came to this institution was that much of your knowledge gained was from the tutorials. But whoever gave me that impression obviously never undertook the study of GEOG 101, for I. along with others with whom I have conversed, have found stage one geography tutorials utterly boring. But because of some ill-designed and pathetically unoriginal rules, students must attend 80% of tuts through the year for terms.

The third example of typical GEOG 101 disorganisation is found in the 1976 course outline or rather the two course outlines which have been allocated per student. In outline number one, we have the dates, lecture themes or headings and the lecturers for the human geography section, but only the dates for the physical section. In that outline were included the dates of 25 and 28 June and I and 2 July - all of which fell in the mid year study break.

Obviously somebody never did their homework.

But we were never told about the mistake, even though a second outline was on the loose. In the second outline, the study fortnight was catered for correctly but only dates and the initials of lecturers were given.

So geography students heave in their folders two conflicting course outlines both inadequately completed, while not being aware which of the two is correct, if either are correct at all.

— then we have the question of which essays are compulsory and which ones are not. Both myself and other students are uncertain in regard to this question and also the question of which essays count towards the final mark.

(a)Tutorials should be investigated and/ or revised.
(b)Tutors should reconsider their roles towards the subject and its demands.
(c)Geography term requirements are hopeless.
(d)When are we GEOG students going to get a set of sheets, stapled together, which have a list of correct lecture dates, the lecture themes and the lecturers; each essay question, when the essay is due and whether the essay is compulsory or not and whether it counts to final marks - not a load of half pie drivel
(e)If Ralph 'Wheels' can't take a few darts, the guy probably couldn't represent a zero isobar line around the atmosphere of Venus. C'mon Wheels, they aren't going to kill you, only an indication of a few yawns.

GEOG 101, its organisation and its structure need a good swift kick where it hurts.

Signed Facetious. Ostentatious, The Lot.