The quality of most of the available contributions to the Oho could be considered
as 
being "good to excellent". Such contributions contained few or
no misspelled words; used 
20th century concepts of punctuation; and employed appropriate vocabulary.
Yet, some 
contributions must be graded as being "shoddy", for they contained
many misspelled 
words; utilized a limited vocabulary; repeatedly employed "ands' to
link related phrases 
and sentences; and either avoided the use of commas or inserted them inconsistently.

Because misspelled words were sporadically included in many of the contributions
to 
the Oho, dictionaries may not have been readily available. Very likely, the
paucity of 
library resources at the Academy was extended to the lack of ready access
of dictionaries for 
students-at the Academy and in the residences of students. A retention of
the use of 
misspelled words in the reproduction of the students'contributions will be
indicated by 
(sic). 
Some of the inclusions of "shoddy" contributions may have resulted
from "dead-line" 
occasions when sufficient number of contributions had not been submitted,
and the editors 
felt compelled to issue an edition of the Olio. 
In the selection of the Olo contributions to be reproduced, only those contributions

which could be considered as being of "good to excellent" quality
will be reproduced. The 
few examples of "shoddy writing" will be omitted. Such examples
of 'shoddy" 
contributions are available for review as cataloged in the Wisconsin Room
of the U. W.- 
Platteville Library. 
As expected, many of the student concerns involved "boy-girl' relationships,
but 
many contributions expressed students' concern on contemporary problems and
moral 
concepts. Although some of the contemporary problems were pertinent to only
the tension 
caused by the Civil War, the views of the Academy students on moral concepts
could have 
been written by 20th century students. The tensions prevalent in the Civil
War era were 
obvious in many of the student contributions. 
Of the contributions contained in the available six editions of the Oho,
only two 
could be considered as being obviously racist. Both of these contributions
were included in 
the Olio edition of October 7, 1862-during the height of Union-Confederacy
controversy. 
One racist contributor wrote shoddily and entitled her or his presentation
as, "Some of the 
fruits of Old Abe's Proclimation (sic)", and the other racist contributor
exhibited creative 
skills in a poem entitled, "The Banks of the James", which contained
repetitions of, "Don't 
meddle with Slavery". 
Perhaps racist expressions during the Civil War era were not as abhorrent
as would 
be currently interpreted. As indicated previously, three and perhaps five
Academy 
students chose to enlist on the side of the Confederacy. Such diversity in
allegiances and 
identifications were conducive to creation of heated discussions concerning
the 
Spreservation of the Union'; the role of Slavery in the economy of the Southern
States; and 
concepts of Civil Rights. Since such controversies must have been prevalent
in discussion 
that occurred in both the Academy classrooms and in the home residences of
the students, 
such contention should have been expected to appear in the students' contributions
for the 
Olio.