Dave Hendrickson writes: >This is not at all intended as flame-bait, but I work with a lot of RPI grads >and their impression is that the courses that many of the hockey players take at >RPI are hardly rigorous. A guy like Juneau, who graduated with an engineering >degree *while adjusting to/learning English*, is considered the exception. >Guys like Oates and Carter were viewed as being hockey players first and >foremost who *did* take a lot of soft courses. Things may have changed since >the Oates/Carter/Juneau days or maybe not. It's also a possibility that my >friends would view anything other than engineering courses as soft. Juneau was certainly an exception, but then again he would have been an exception at any school. I think your last sentence is the key, though. In my year at RPI, 1985-86, all but one of the players had non-engineering/science majors. And almost every one of the "normal" students I knew had a very low regard for these majors and the players for taking them. Meanwhile, they showed up at the Field House every weekend to cheer on their defending national champs. Figure that one out. I didn't feel bad for them at all for waiting in line for two months to get tickets. This attitude that the engineering/science majors at RPI were the only ones who worked hard really disgusts me. And, it is quite pervasive at RPI - a sort of prejudice in its own right. Although I was an engineering major, I can vouch for the fact that my three freshman (hockey-playing) roommates, all management majors, were certainly well above-average students (I graduated HS with one of them) and worked very hard in school. The students who put down the players didn't see them working in the cafeteria or library till midnight (curfew) every night on the multitude of briefs, papers and reports they had to do for their business classes. Or bringing stacks of books on the road and writing papers on the bus and in the hotel rooms. Want a perfect example of the attitude that existed at RPI towards the hockey team? I came in as a manager/statistician for the team that year, and simply because of my connection to the team and roommates being players, most of the non-players in that dorm automatically looked upon me the same way as they did the players. It actually amused me and still does. So I kept my mouth shut and went about my business...kind of like the players did. There wasn't anything to prove. The "normal" students might have all gotten 800's on their math SATs and been engineering/scientific wizards, but you know what? Give them a writing assignment in English 101 and it's not unusual for the players to outperform them. I have known literally hundreds of people who were technical geniuses but could not get their thoughts across on paper or face-to-face. But they considered themselves superior to the business/social science majors. I could never understand that. It's a different kind of major, requiring a different kind of work from those who choose scientific disciplines. Some programs may be easier at some schools, but in general and at RPI at least, I don't believe it was any less strenuous. And there were those players who were "slackers", but they tended to get weeded out, just as it is with the normal student population. The majority, I can tell you, put in the time and worked hard; at RPI, you have to. Let's put it this way: if you graduate with a degree from RPI, you have earned it. --- --- Mike Machnik [log in to unmask] Cabletron Systems, Inc. *HMM* 11/13/93 <<<<<< Color Voice of the (7-7-1) Merrimack Warriors WCCM 800 AM >>>>>>