Letter to the Editor

This is in regards to Rebecca Martin's January 28 article "Engineering students say classes, equipment inadequate."

She reported many true facts as to the state of the college of engineering. However, there are some journalistic mistakes that should be pointed out.

Martin alludes that the reason for the meeting announced by the provost for January 28 at noon was not known. One quoted student is not enough background on an issue.

The reasoning was to clarify the future of the college of engineering. Many students were aware of this, and the engineering clubs and organizations were aware of the nature of the meeting. Concerned students packed the room to capacity. There was standing room only, plus people spilling into the hallways.

Since last semester, there has been no communication(the provost admits students were left out) between administration and students on possible elimination (the provost uses the kinder word “merger”) of the engineering college. The various departments would all be moved into the School of Natural Science and Mathematics.

The provost has said at this time no formal decision has been reached on the future of the college.

There is a possible interim solution, where the college would remain for two more years while the problems she believes exist are addressed. If at the end of those years, not enough progress is made, the college would be eliminated.

However, this is not absolute. She may close the college before then. She stated that a decision would probably be made before spring break.

A little more research, or talking with any of the departments, would have revealed the omissions in the article. Granted, the article was geared toward the aging equipment, but the focus was lost halfway through the article

—Harim Martinez
Senior engineering major