STONE WALL

Reqirements in the Division of History, Government and Economics are often worse than irksome; they destroy student initiative. The average concentrator in one field is compelled to take an elementary course in the other two. If the idea of coupling all three departments is accepted as a sound one, the harsh emphasis on elementary course remains to be considered. Should an upperclassman wish to take an advanced course in the History and Government Departments instead of History I and Government 1 he should be welcomed with open arms. Today he is coldly rebuffed for such presumption.

This reasoning does not apply to Economics A, since there is an essential difference between this course and Government 1 or History 1. Economics A is introductory, the others are elementary. It is manifestly impossible for a student to cope with labor relations, or money and banking, for example, without the preliminary theory of Economics A.

No such argument can be advanced for History 1 and Government 1. Although department heads will sometimes allow students to take an advanced instead of an elementary course if they are on the Dean's list and willing to go through reams of red tape, these exceptions are woefully rare. Any man, for example, who has taken History 5 has no business taking Government 1 afterward, unless he definitely wants to or is congenitally lazy.

Since the general abolition of requirements, men in charge of History 1 have been proud of the numbers of men they still "attract". They might better consider the divisional big-stick which rounds up students in unproductive fored-labor battalions. Where there should be an open gate to advanced studying there looms a stone wall of requirements. It is squarely up to the division to provide that gateway for students whenever they are stirred by ambition.