Page 4-Thursday, May 3, 1979-The Michigan Daily Get r o graaes Michigan Daiy Eighty-nine Years of Editorial Freedom 10 B p nd earning 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Ml. 48109 Vol. LXXXIX, No. 2-S News Phone: 764-0552 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan Return of draft not necessary M ONDAY A HOUSE Armed Services sub- committee approved a proposal to reinstate military registration for 18-year-old men after the 1980 elections, and rejected another motion to draft up to 200,000 men per year for the federal reserves. Both registration and drafting of young Americans are unacceptable methods of bolstering our armed forces at this time. We acknowledge the growing weakness of con- ventional U.S. defense capabilities, and recognize our allies' declining confidence in them due to Soviet buildup of forces in Eastern Europe, Africa and East Asia. But the U.S. is presently at peace and the threat of war is not imminent. Inter- national security and stability form the foun- dation of our present foreign policy. These cir- cumstances do not warrant such drastic methods of conscription or even the draft's precursor: registration. The volunteer method of raising troops has not met success since the Vietnam War. Draftees re- sisted and deserted due to the loss of civil liberties as well as the cause for which they were forced to fight, during that confrontation. But we feel young men are no more prepared to forfeit their service and lives against their will at this time. Indeed, to conscript an army of conscientious objectors would improve perceptions of American military strength no more than the present Soviet advan- tage in troop and tank reserves. Already, the average individual can expect to give up three to four years' income during his lifetime to the arms race. The expense of rein- stituting a draft would most likely be borne by taxpayers who largely disagree with it. The Defense Department would be better off tackling gross waste on present operations and make the volunteer forces more efficient and financially appealing, instead of embarking on this program. Reinforced conventional forces which meet the Soviet display of strength would not only fill in gaps in our defense, but would also be a more ef- fective deterrent to armed conflict than the nuclear hardware on which we now rely. Conven- tional capabilities might also check escalation if a violent outbreak does occur. Nevertheless, the status of international security does not justify the registration or drafting of American citizens at this time. SPRING EDITORIAL STAFF ELIZABETH SLOWIK Editor-in-Chief JUDY RAKOWSY Editorial Director JOSHUA PECK ArtsDirector MAUREENO'MALLEY LISA UDELSON Photographers STAFF WRITERS: Sara Anspach, Amy Diamond, Julie Engebrefht, John Goyer, Patricia Hagen, Vicki Henderson, Adrienne Lyons, Beth Persky, John Sink- evics, TimYagie By Richard Meisler The function of grades is revealed by using a little imagination. Imagine that the grading system was abolished today. If you are a teacher, are you sure the students would come to class, laugh at your jokes and treat you with respect? If you are a student, would you do what your teachers want? I recently talked about education with a group of college students. They felt that the pressures of term papers and txaminatiots left them no timeto really absorb their subjects or even to think about them. There was no exception. He was a young Vietnam veteran who had been badly injured in combat. He recieved a government disability pension. He lived frugally, and his pension met his forseeably financial needs. THE VETERAN handled college very differently from the other students. He concentrated on the classes from which he learned and didn't worry about the others. He got some low grades, but didn't let them bother him. He went to school to learn, not to receive good grades. The other students in the group wished that they could follow his example. None of them dared. They feared that low grades might damage their future em- ployment possibilities. I have never seen a better illustration of the nature of grading, which has to do more with money and. power, than with learning. The grading system gives power to teachers over students. The main function of grades is to punish students for not doing what their teachers want them to. Students and parents are terrorized by the way a teacher can harm a student's future prospects. GRADES TEACH people to rely on the judgements of others about their learning. Students fo not learn to evaluate their own learning, a skill they will need in most anything they do. Students are taught by the grading system to obey instead of learning to learn. Years later they find that they don't know where to begin the process of learning something new unless there is a teacher to tell them. Teachers believe that grades are necessary to help students learn. Grades tell students how well or poorly they are doing. If this is their function, why do they have to be recorded on per- manent records where they can cause so much damage? Most students, however, will tell you that their grades really don't reflect their learning. Students receive good grades when they give teachers what they want, which means they usually learn less. Learning needs to be evaluated in many settings and for many purposes. Graduate and professional schools need to assess a student's previous lear- ning. Employers and licensing agencies need to do the same. Let them do it. It is not necessary that the lower-level schools god the teachers do it for them. Let somebody else do the judging. For when teachers judge instead of teach, a wedge of power is driven between the teacher and the student. They are no longer on the same side. That has been there for most of us for so long we dot even notice it. The pursuit ofi learning has been replaced by the pursuit of grades. The solution is simply to end grades. Dr. Richard Meist/er has been an educator and ad- Ministrator at several si/oo s qf higher learning since the ear/' sitles. LETTERS TO THE DAIL Y. Nukes threaten life To the Daily: When the explosive energy of atomic fission was demonstrated, Albert Einstein said, "Everything has changed but your mode of thinking. We drift toward unparalleled catatstrophe." This year to the centennial of his birth. He died in 1955. One wonders what this pacifist would think if he could see the nuclear arms and nuclear power situations today. The United States has 30,000 nuclear bombs and the Soviet Union about 20,000. Nuclear weapons in England, France and China would add several thousand more. We are producing nuclear warheads at the rate of three per day. Some of today's bombs are a thousand times more destructive than the one dropped on Hiroshima. One Trident submarine can hit 408 cities with three to five times the destruction of Hiroshima. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute estimates that within ten years 35 nations will have the potential, through the nuclear power plant fuel cycle, for producing these bombs. An all out nuclear war between Russia and the United States would cost us 140 million lives and the Soviets 113 million. George Kistiakowsky, former presidentital science advisor says, "Either we have to learn to live with the Russians or we and the Russians will die about the same time." It doesn't apear that we are drifting toward catastrophe any longer, but that we are being propelled by the arms race and by the worldwide promotion of nuclear power. Shortly before Margaret Mead dies. on November 15, 1978, she was asked what her hopes were for humankind as of the year 2000. She answered in the following way. "It is my profound coming these extreme dangers and other dangers related to the use of imperfectly understotod and poorly controlled scien- tifically based technologies, I have no doubt that mankind will continue to develop in ways as yet undreamed of." Albert Schweitzer. theologian, philospher, physician, musician and African missionary once said, "Man has lost his ability to forsee and forestall. He will end by destroying the earth." What substance or substances he was-talking about is not-clear. But if one were to be picked, cer- tainly plutonium could be it. For this reason a good many concer- ned people are convinced that the time is here when any nation possessing a nuclear weapon sh- ould be considered guilty of a crime against humanity. The same might well be said of nuclear power. First, because technically and politically the nuclear fuel cycle appears in- separable from weapons proliferation. Secondly, the record for accidents, leaks and spills from nuclear facilities is such that if it continues, the extra burden of radiation may create increases in cancer and genetic defects which are passed on forever. An'd, third, to phase out nuclear power is the only way to stop the production of lethal, long-lived radioactive wastes which no one really knows what to do with. TGfra-t A. Drake. NJ. hope that a sufficient number of people with a high tradition of literacy, learning and concern for other human beings may survive to keep alive the human ex- periment. Our chances of sur- vival are becoming fewer everyday that we allow nuclear weabonry and an economy based on the use of plutonium as a fuel to proliferate around the world. But if we do succeed in over-