University of Virginia Library

Letters To The Editor

Canevari Defends Counseling Plan

My first inclination was to
refrain from responding to the
opinions expressed in The
Cavalier Daily this week.
However, I now feel that so
many misrepresentations and
so much misinformation has
appeared that, as Dean of
Students, I find it necessary to
respond.

The intent of the
Counseling Program changes is
aimed at strengthening the
scope of the undergraduate
program. Such changes will
allow more undergraduate
input into the program and will
provide for a wider range of
participation and sharing of
responsibilities among
counselors, i.e., the modified
framework will facilitate
interaction among members of
the program at all levels and
thereby allow the counselors to
devote more effectively their
time and energies toward the
individual students in their
dormitories, as well as
developmental programming.

Secondly, the philosophy of
the program will not change.
The concern for the individual
student and the relationship
between the counselor and the
residents on his hall are of
paramount importance.
Therefore, the greatest strength
of the program is in its almost
total undergraduate nature. It
is absolutely essential that this
philosophy remain unchanged.

The criticism leveled at us
for the manner and timing of
the formulation of these
structural changes is justified
and understandable. We
sincerely regret this. When the
selection committee
(composed of counselors)
made its recommendations for
screening applicants for next
year's counselor positions,
there was not sufficient time to
canvas all individuals if the
screening process was to be
implemented as recommended.
While this timing factor is a
definite limitation, it does not
justify the accusations and
misinformed opinions which
have been expressed in The
Cavalier Daily.

It is likewise important to
clarify that the Housing Office
did not recommend, or even
suggest, any of these structural
changes.

Robert T. Canevari
Dean of Students

—Ed.)

No Crooks

In The Cavalier Daily of
February 8, 1972, Mr. Marvin
Edwards stated that "according
to a survey conducted by
James Bowers of over 5,000
students at 99 U.S. colleges
and universities it is reasonable
to assume that a minimum of
one out of every four U.Va.
students has cheated at least
once while in school here."

I wish to take issue with Mr.
Edwards' generalization from
the national figures released by
the Bureau of Applied Social
Research at Columbia by citing
the figures received by the
Bureau when students at the
University of Virginia were
polled.

Contrary to national
figures, where instances of
cheating ranged as high as 60
per cent, the figures at the
University of Virginia showed a
maximum of 2-3 per cent of
those polled who stated that
they had cheated while a
student at the University. This
hardly indicates that "one out
of every four U.Va. students
has cheated at least once while
in school here."

The percentage of lying (1-2
per cent) and stealing (0
per cent) at the University
compared admirably with the
national figures of lying (60
per cent) and stealing (30 per
cent).

I believe that the Bowers
study at Columbia again
indicates that the University of
Virginia cannot be lumped
with other schools in relation
to acts of lying, cheating, and
stealing. Students at the
University have been and
continue to be far better than
the national norm in the area
of honorable conduct.

Register People

I would like to congratulate
the University about doing
something about the godawful
traffic situation on Newcomb
Road. Now the cars have their
lane, the people have theirs,
and the bicycles have theirs.
Excellent. On paper anyway.
In practice? Hogwash,
poppycock, rot, bull, etc.