The University's current "equality within each tier" system is an effective way to allow students to sign up for classes. It gives groups of students with more credits precedence over groups of students with less credits. The proposition put forth in the article, "Students could see waitlist for class scheduling," April 19, would not "enhance the ability of students to schedule classes," but merely lead to lethargy among students come each respective scheduling day, and confusion come arbitration day.

With a campus of about 40,000 students, one would hope that the Department of Undergraduate Education and the University Faculty Senate would have more important and pressing matters than determining whether Sally needs a class more than John. This would also require the word "need" defined in this situation. Meaning whether "I want to graduate early" has precedence over "I want to double major and graduate on time." Also, this could open up the university itself to a plethora of discrimination complaints.

There is obviously a needed middle ground between "free-for-all" scheduling and going person by person, in a determined order, signing each up individually for classes. This middle ground, I feel, is the "equality within each tier" system which is currently had and functioning.