Recent comments that Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole made about the nation’s universities are drawing mixed reactions around campus.

Dole called for an end to multilingual education and condemned history courses that emphasized national shortcomings.

Dole accused elitist liberals of trying to undermine American values in the nation’s schools and other cultural institutions.

“Insisting that all our citizens are fluent in English is a welcoming act of inclusion, and insist we must,” he said.

Dole, the GOP front runner, added that multilingual education was established out of a “low self esteem or out of elitist guilt over a culture built on the traditions of the West.”

More generally, Dole said most American educational institutions are “ripe for infection.”

History professor David Wilson, disagreed with Dole’s statement about condemning history courses that emphasize national shortcomings.

He said that history should be told like it is. If there are shortcomings, historians shouldn’t buff over negative aspects of history simply because of political influence.

Assistant Professor Diane Duffy, of the political science department, said Dole is just now bringing out issues that should have been brought out last spring when this was really in the media’s spotlight. Duffy said she thinks Dole is using these issues as a political slant.

Government of the Student Body President Dan Mangan said Dole’s statements may seem harsh, but his intentions, Mangan said, were meant to be positive.

“Immigrants in this country should be taught English so they can contribute their ideas and views to our society,” he said.

Associate Political Science Professor Jim Hutter, who is also adviser to the ISU Democrats, said he opposes Dole’s plan to end multilingualism. Hutter said Doles words were “sadly pandering to our lowest instincts.”

He said ending multilingualism is catering to the prejudices of those who have a low opinion of people who speak a different native language.

Hutter said it is true that people function and communicate better if they fluently speak English, but prohibiting an immigrant’s native language is a bad idea.

Marty Kelchen, a sophomore in mechanical engineering, said he agrees with Dole — to a certain extent. He said a “broad English-speaking base will improve communication and improve the learning process.” But in a larger sense, “Multilingualism will make us more competitive in the world market,” he said