Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Room 300, Erb Memorial Union
RO. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online Edition:
www.dailyemerald.com
Wednesday, April 3,2002
Editor in Chief:
Jessica Blanchard
Managing Editor:
Jeremy Lang
Editorial Editor:
Julie Lauderbaugh
Assistant Editorial Editor:
Jacquelyn Lewis
Editorial
Professors should
help students buy
expensive textbooks
Every term, students flood local bookstores searching for deals on
textbooks. With University fees and tuition rising, many students
struggle to pay for texts, which seem to get more pricey each term.
It’s time University professors pitched in to give students’ pocket
books a break — after all, many professors benefit financially from
assigning class texts that they authored. And it’s unreasonable to ask
students to shell out money each term for books that rapidly lose
value and end up being worth a fraction of what they cost. The least
professors can do is put copies of their books on reserve at the library
for students who aren’t financially able to purchase their own.
The Knight Library will take purchase requests from professors and
students if the book is not an academic text, such as math or science
books — these books are often stolen or become outdated. The library
does purchase novels and supplemental readings for University
courses and encourages professors to put their personal copies of aca
demic texts on reserve.
That leaves it up to professors to purchase texts for their class out of
their own pockets. But while many professors expect students to shell
out hundreds of dollars for books, they refuse to make the same pur
chases to help their students. Putting a $90 math book on reserve for
200 students works out to less than 50 cents per student. It’s a small
price for professors to pay, and it would help everyone be able to
afford to attend the classes. And it’s assumed that professors are
in a better position financially to afford to purchase a textbook than
students are.
The alternative for professors is to keep allowing copyright violations
of texts, or to expect that some students will not be able to purchase or
read the material at all. Some students are more likely to borrow and
copy entire texts from their friends to avoid having to pay the price at
the bookstore — though such copying is illegal.
Putting books on reserve in the library is easier for both students
and professors. Students should have the option of reading in the
reserve room, and professors need to make these choices widely t
available. It is unfair to punish students who cannot afford texts by
refusing to put books on reserve when the alternative is much more
economical for everyone.
Editorial Policy
This editorial represents the opinion of the Emerald
editorial board. Responses can be sent to Jetters@daiiyemeraid.com, .
Letters to the editor and guest commentaries are encouraged, Letters
re limited to 250 words and pest commentaries to 550words. Please
nciude contact information. The Emerald reserves the right to edit
for space, grammar andsiyle.
Editorial Board Members
igiii
Jacquelyn Lewis
assistant editorial editor
Steve Baggs Emerald
NYC 02
BY: STEVE BAGGS
Letters to the editor
Requirements fail to diversify
At the University, the matter of
their “multicultural requirements”
has been an issue of concern for the
students. Right now, we students are
concerned that our current require
ments are not diversifying our edu
cation as they were designed to do.
At the current state, students
can take such courses as basic mu
sic, geography and general biology
to fulfill their requirements. These
courses do, indeed, educate stu
dents, but do they really provide
them with diversity? Do they
teach students about racism, other
cultures or unified causes?
Our education should be fash
ioned to prepare us for the future
and the very diverse world that
we will be working and living in.
Students, faculty and communi
ty members need to be made aware
of this problem. Eugene and the
University have always been prid
ed on being diverse places to live,
work and study. But what multi
culturalism are our students really
coming out with?
Hilary Evonuk
communication
disorders and sciences
No one is permanently
rich or poor
Ralph Nader was incorrect to
state that corporations control all
(ODE, 3/8/02). Corporations are
controlled by their owners, not the
reverse. Perhaps Nader would pre
fer that corporations were owned
by the government — like the Sovi
et Union of old, or have corpora
tions were controlled by the gov
ernment, like Germany’s National
Socialist Party and Italy’s Fascist
Party of the 1930s.
In regard to the growing dispar
ity between rich and poor to
which Nader referred:
An absolute majority of the peo
ple who were in the bottom 20 per
cent in 1975 have also been in the
top 20 percent at some time since
then. There are some who remain
permanently in the bottom 20 per
cent. But such people constitute
less than 1 percent of the Ameri
can population.
Real income per capita has
risen 50 percent over the same
span of time when household in
come has remained virtually un
changed. How is this possible?
Because households are getting
smaller. Higher incomes enable
more people to afford to go out
and set up their own households.
And who should be surprised
that 60-year-olds have higher in
comes and more wealth than 30
year-olds?
Moreover, that was also true 30
years ago, when today’s 60-year
olds were just 30. But these are not
different classes of people. They
are the same people at different
stages of their lives. The whole
classes of people who live perma
nently in poverty or in luxury in
the United States do not reach be
yond single digits.
Robert P. Kelso
San Marcos, Texas