Faculty Approves Parietal Extensions, Rejects Proposal for Typing in Exams

A long-term struggle to permit typing on mid-year and final examinations suffered another setback yesterday when the Faculty rejected a proposal by the Committee on Educational Policy to allow typing. There was, however, some discrepancy in the wording of the original recommendation by the Committee and the actual plan on which the Faculty voted.

Dean Bundy, in announcing the CEP decision last month, said the measure would provide for typing exams on an experimental basis and, if passed by the Faculty, would probably go into effect in time for a trial run during this month's mid-year exams.

But the Faculty voted yesterday on a motion that made no mention of a trial run, or of the essentially experimental nature of the CEP recommendation. One of the reasons given for the rejection of the plan at yesterday's meeting was that there was no clause which would classify the measure as "experimental."

Cost Also Cited

Another objection to the proposal, which was defeated only after considerable discussion, was the cost involved in providing additional proctors and rooms for typists. Administrative difficulties, such as administering many different exams in one room, were also held to be responsible for the plan's rejection.

Traditional opposition to the proposal has centered around the argument that the system would give typists an unfair advantage over slower non-typists. Proponents of the plan, however, feel that providing a choice between typing or writing would be more fair than the present system.

Other Faculty members felt that the "fine art of penmanship" might be seriously imperiled if typing were allowed