To the Editor:
This letter is in response the Feb. 27 Our View, “GPA requirement would be appropriate.” In this article it stated, “wouldn’t the individuals GPA be reflective of his/her ability to manage … workload?”
To this I can only say, no. No, a persons GPA is not reflective of one’s ability to manage a workload. What a GPA is reflective of is a persons collective grades on tests, papers, lab assignments, etc… What a GPA does not reflect is a person’s intelligence, it does not represent any personal issues (i.e. the death of a loved one), which may contribute to a poor semester or year grades wise.
But more importantly, it most certainly does not reflect the type of leader a person may be. I know several people whom I, and others, consider to be very intelligent, but who at the same time have a low GPA.
Some people just do not test well, some people just do not have the motivation to work themselves to the bone, all so they can get an “B” in a university required subject in which the person in question has absolutely no interest. What I am trying to say, is that to prevent a person who may be a perfect fit to lead our student body here at CSU from even running for office, just because of a number, is in my mind absurd.
If grades really are an issue, let the students raise the issue during a candidates campaign. Let the students choose to not elect a person, because they feel the person is unqualified.
Apathy is one of CSU’s biggest problems, and there are normally a very small number of qualified candidates who run for the most important student body position. By passing this resolution, all ASCSU is making it harder for those who might be interested in being president or vice president, from running.
All this does is limit the number of potential choices we students may have for our future leaders. Why only have two candidates for president, and therefore only two points of view on how our campus should be run, when we can have five or 10?
Senior Political Science