University of Virginia Library

Architect Protest

Although your February 9 article
on the Architecture boycott was
substantially correct, we feel that
we must correct one error of misunderstanding.

In the article, Mr. Hubbard is
quoted as saying, "We've been
put off by saying 'a committee
is working on (the problem of the
mechanics courses).' "The statement
should have read to the effect
that they-meaning the Class of
1970-have had their proposals
put aside. The Fourth-Year Class
has been told that a faculty committee
is reviewing the entire curriculum,
and that the committee's
report will determine any changes
to be made. The Class' concern
was that any modifications by
the committee could do nothing
to correct the deficiencies of a
course already completed.

But our class has not yet put
forward specific proposals for
changing the curriculum, other
than those suggested in the Curriculum
Evaluation of last year.
We feel that, since we have a full
year of mechanics left to us, our
best course of action is to try to
work with the instructor to improve
the future coverage of
material.

But this correction in no way
lessens our support for the Class
of 1969. We felt, and still feel,
they employed the only means left
open to them for improving the
courses. Their suggestion of independent
but guided research is the
only logical approach to filling in
demonstrated gaps of knowledge.
We again urge that their proposals
be approved as soon as possible.