set ifur i an eug Seventy-eight years of editorial freedom Edited and managed by students of the University of Michigan Con frontations in the 'Harvard style' a. 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich. News Phone: 764-0552 Editorials printed in The Michigan Doily express the individual opinions of staff writers or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints. TUESDAY, APRIL 15, 1969 NIGHT EDITOR: DAVID SPURR National editorial. ROTC must not get credit By STEVE ANZALONE Editorial Page Editor CAMBRIDGE H ARVARD ALWAYS insists on doing things in its own in- imitable way, even staging con- frontations. Last week's student strike turn- ed out to be no strike at all. Stu- dents did stay away from classes in rare unanimity, but the boycott of classes was not a tactical show of strength to warn President Nathan Pusey's administration of student solidarity behind a lis# of demands. The "strike" turned out to be an all-campus intellectual exercise where students engaged, one another in political discussion -in the best tradition of Harvard gentlemen. The "Harvard way" of settling disputes places absolute faith in the sanctity of rational dialogue. Most students display a deep re- spect for the wisdom and author- ity of the faculty. When moderate students became concerned with Pusey's decision to call in police to arrest those anti-ROTC stu- dents who had seized an admin- istration building, students turned to the faculty to settle the matter. And so the student "strike" be- came a three-day period where students and faculty took time out from classes to take an introspec- tive look at their Fair Harvard. Unlike other confrontations, the Harvard dispute is between SDS and the administration with stu- depts choosing sides. It is simply a matter to be settled between students and faculty. THE SITUATION at Harvard developed from an SDS takeover of University Hall to seek support for demands that Harvard abolish ROTC and discontinue its plan for tearing down low-income apart- ments in the community for the new Kennedy library and expand- ed medical school facilities. The administration became alarmed when the anti-ROTC students ejected Harvard deans from the building and released some confi- dential documents in the admin- istration's files to an underground newspaper. Pusey foolishly summoned the police in the early hours of Thurs- day morning. Witnesses say that the club-swinging police entered the building without warning. Ad- ministration officials claim that a warning was given but admit it was possible that the warning' was inaudible inside. One professor testified that he did not hear a warning and was standing twenty feet from the building. In any case, the violent clash resulted in the arrest of 184 Harvard stu- dents. Various moderate student groups met together in Harvard's Memo- rial Church in response to the morning "bust." They cautiously expressed their disapproval of the use of police on campus. But the students refused to take any posi- tion on SDS's ROTC demands, and instead issued moderate demands of their own asking that the Uni- versity structure be made more democratic. The Mem Church Group, as the moderates call themseleves, seem- ed content just to have an organ- ization for the sake of having one. They were quick to emphasize its allegiance to the faculty and launched out on a course of gen -crating discussion among the various housing units on campus. THE MODERATES WERE not completely pleased about the out- come of a closed faculty meeting held Friday afternoon but re- mained virtually silent. The fac- ulty of aits and science adopted a resolution deploring' both the use of police on campus and the -Daily-Larry Robbins ONE OF THE unintended domestic consequences of the war in Viet- nam has been the growing awarness of dangers of intimate connections be-. tween the military and academia. Perhaps the most blantant example of colleges a n d universities willingly perfor ing functions that are rightly the exclusive concern of the military is the Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC). After many years of relatively tran- quil existence on the nation's campus- e ROTC has come under fire of late from those who belive that philoso- phically and pedagogically, military training has no place in an academic institution. In recent months such leading insti- tutions as Yale, Princeton, Dartmouth, Harvard and Stanford have all taken steps toward revoking academic credit from their ROTC programs. Currently, many other colleges and universities are a 1 s o re-evaluating the status of their own ROTC programs. THE STANFORD decision is especially significant because it was premised on philosophic rather than pragmatic grounds. As a member of the commit- tee which prepared the report explain- ed, "We began with a definition of the university and found an essential con- flict between this and the concept of ROTC." Academia's traditional function is to inspire critical thinking about m a n .'and his society aloof from partisan or superficial considerations. But it is im- possible for colleges and universities even to pretend to perform this unique role if they are also subsidizing t h e brutal militarism of the outside world. Some have argued that academic in- stitutions, especially those which are publicly sponsored have an obligation to be politically neutral and that this neutrality requires the continued sup- port of ROTC programs on campus. At a time when the military is an in- tregal element in an expansionist for- eign policy opposed by a sizeable seg- ment of the population both inside and outside academia, it is clear that the ROTC program is as partisan in its own way as Students for a Democratic So- ciety. Thus, in a. modern context colleges and -universities are o n 1 y politically neutral when they as institutions stand between the government and its critics. Xlearly, continued academic support for ROTC would be the height of po- litical partisanship. HANS MORGANTHAU wrote recent- ly that one of the key lessons of the Vietnam War was the danger of too intimate a relationship between t h e campus and the government. For al- ready, he rioted, large segments of the academic community have been trans- formed "into a mere extension of the government bureaucracy, defending and implementing policies regardless of their objective merits." ROTC is not only antithetical to the ultimate purposes of higher education, but contrary to basic pedagogical prin- ciples as well. While t h e development of critical thinking is an integral part of a lib- eral education, the teaching methods employed in ROTC programs tend to emphasize rote learning and deference to authority. This is far from surpris- ingas critical thinking has never been a highly prized militarfy* virtue. Con- sequenty, the ROTC program is gear- ed to produce intellectually stunted mnarinets.; An example of the type of education- al thinking behind the ROTC program at many universities is provided by a solemn pronouncement made last year by an ROTC officer at the University of Minnesota. In a frightening serious echo of Catch-22 he declared, "March- ing is the basic leadership program for every officer." Equally alien to the ends of a liberal education is the unquestioning submis- siveness endemic in the rigidly hier- archical structure of military educa- tion. It is hard to develop any spon- taneity - much less dialogue - within the classroom when the professor is not just a teacher, but a superior officer as well. FOR THOSE congenitally unimpressed by philosophical arguments pre- dicted on the goals of higher education, there are some equally potent prag- matic reasons why ROTC is in no way a valid academic offering. A faculty curriculum committee at the University of Michigan stated the case clearly when it charged that ROTC course materials used in An n Arbor were "conjectural, non-analyti- cal, cheaply, moralistic and often blat- antly propagandistic." The bulk of the ROTC program con- sists of technical courses often 1 e s s rigorous than similar courses offered in the math, science and engineering programs of most colleges and univer- sities. Typical of those ROTC programs not duplicated elsewhereis an Air Force ROTC course entitled, "The history of the role of the Air Force in U.S. mili- tary history." Designed primarily to in- culcate institutional loyalty, rather than to develop critical thinking, courses like this are clearly not history. They are not even valid military his- tory since inter-service rivalry results in an inflation of the role of the Air Force. The intellectual vacuity of m a n y ROTC courses is directly related to the rather limited educational b a c k- grounds of the preponderance of ROTC faculty. Despite education which normally does n o t exceed a bachelor's degree, ROTC instructors are accorded a status comparable to professors in more rig- orous disciplines. And due to the high degree of autonomy of the ROTC pro- gram, colleges and universities h a v e little direct control over t h e hiring, firing or promotion of these ROTC in- structors. BUT OBECTIONS such as these spring primarily from the form ra- ther than the underlying substance of ROTC. On a substantive level, it is dif- ficult to avoid the blunt assertion that training soldiers whose ultimate aim is to kill is totally hostile to the principles of academia. It w a s the simplistic "my country right or wrong" patriotism of the First World War which spawned the original ROTC program. But one of the clearest lessons of the Vietnam tragedy is that such unquestioning support of govern- ment policy is not only morally bank- rupt, but counter to the long-range interests of the nation as well as the campus. In order to reassert the sanctity of academia as a morally and education- ally autonomous institution, it is nec- essary to end the universities' role as the unquestioning servant of govern- ment and military. T h e abolition of ROTC as a sanctioned course offering would be a major step in this direction. building takeover. The faculty agreed to establish a committee to handle all disciplinary action against students-no civil charges would be filed. They also indicated that they would consult other Harvard faculties and students about possible changes in 'Har- vard's authority structure. As often is the case, the original demand's that iginited the conflict will probably go unconsidered. The Mem Church Group refuses to recognize itself as a collective body of students and cannot be counted on to force either the administra- tion or the faculty to consider ROTC or Harvard expansion into the community. The moderate stu- dents actually pose no threat to the faculty or administration. In fact, they are probably the ad- ministration's best bulwark against SDS. The Harvard Corporation, the school's governing body, an- nounced on Sunday that it would close the university if another building were taken. It does not take many people to occupy a building, and SDS could easily force the Corporation to make good its silly threat. Under these conditions, any further alliance between SDS and the moderate students becomes tenuous. But the ROTC issue and the seiz- ure of University Hall will probably lead to nothing more than one of the biggest identity crises in Harvard history. The flurry of discussion sparged by the moderate student coalition should convince most people that Harvard is not ripe for radical action. It is very unlikely that radical students could ever muster enough support to close down the uni- versity. Harvard students, as a rule, do not feel oppressed by the university. Students claim that they have a great deal of freedom in their academic and personal lives. The Harvard student is gen- erally content with the situation there and feels little threat by the presence of such things as ROTC. ANOTHER REASON why mili- tant action is unlikely to win sup- port at Harvard is because of the close ties between students and faculty. The faculty of Harvard exercises far more authority than the administration, and students generally endorse the faculty's au- thority. One leader of the Mem Church Group said that he did not even believe that faculty meet- ings should be open to public view. Most moderate students profess loyalty to Harvard and feel that SDS poses a threat to Harvard's quality. One member of the Mem Church Group said, "We really love Harvard' and do not want to do anything that will destroy it." The hesitancy to take any kind of action was reflected in a Mem Church Group press conference where leaders of the group refused to speak in any other capacity than as individuals. While moderate students gener- ally agree that the structure of the Harvard Corporation is un- democratically constituted and too business-oriented, they are not likely to sanction any meaningful action-other than discussion-to force a' change. There is little reason to believe that the student "strike" at Har- vard will lead to any radical change at the university. Dis- traught parents can rest assured that Junior will continue to be safe at Harvard. *1 4 -Daily-Larry Robbins Redistributing the departmental power (EDITOR'S NOTE: The author is an associate professor of psychology.) By RICHARD D. MANN ONE OF the most urgent tasks facing this University is to redistribute the power now ledg- ed in departments, especially the power to hire, "discontinue," pro- mote, and appoint with tenure. ,M~ore of this power needs to be placed (1) in the hands of the faculty as a whole, in the form of more equitable and human pro- cedures which the faculty can and should enact, (2) in the hands of a man's colleagues outside his department, in recognition of such college-wide contributions as in- terdisciplinary activities, teaching, and service, and (3) in the hands df students, whose needs and views regarding teaching ,excel- lence and creativity, service, and relevant scholarship are slighted by the current system. In order to accomplish some of these ends I and my colleagues have created an ad hoc faculty- student committee on tenure and we have reviewed two specific cas- ?s of assistant professors not re- commended for reappointment and tenure. After concluding that the literary college as a whole was poorl yserved by the two depart- mental decisions we began ef- forts to (1) have the specific cases reviewed and (2) efforts to alter the procedures and criteria which; could generate such decisions. It was with regard to the more gen- eral issues which affect many junior faculty, and indirectly the entire faculty-student commun- ity, that I introduced four mo- tions before the faculty meeting of April 7. THE FIRST THREE MOTIONS are largely procedural. Number one would place the faculty on re- cord as expecting a departmental chairman and executive commit- tee to explain why a man was not recommended for reappoint- ment, stating clearly the grounds for their decision. This term some faculty members whose appoint- ments are not being renewed have had to guess why. The chairmen either said nothing or dismissed queries with a few ambigious words, spoken with the under- standable embarassment and dis- comfort of such moments. The literary college procedure for ap- pealing in one's own behalf is therefore a procedure where one must state one's grievance with- out knowing the basis of the de- used. If, however, the man can carry his appeal to his college directly, then he has a chance for a review that will be more than a rationalization of the decision al- ready made. THE THIRD MOTION w o u 1 d make possible a review of a de- partment decision if at least five of the man's colleagues intervene in his behalf. So much of what we have learned as "good form" constrains us from self-seeking that it is no wonder individual faculty members refrain from us- ing grievance procedures in order not tocompound their plight by being tagged as a trouble maker or a cry-baby. The current griev- ance procedures imply that the only aggrieved parties this year are specific faculty members. But that is not the case. Many of the colleagues of the men denied ten- ure are thereby losing contact with the competence and creativ- ity of these irreplaceable men. It is only right, therefore that, un- less the man in question will not consent to this, appeal in his be- half, we who are his aggrieved col- leagues should have the right to appeal directly to the dean. FINALLY, IN the fourth motion the issue shifts from procedures to criteria. This motion would es- tablish a second channel of in- formation coming in to the dean each year, one to supplant but not replace the existing channel of recommendations from depart- ments. This second channel would originate in a student-faculty committee specifically instructed to review each junior faculty man up for tenure. These student-fac- ulty panels would consider the man's scholarship, teaching, and service with special reference to the interests of the college. Implicit in this motion is our conviction that the cur'rent ai'- rangement relies far too heavily on 1 the department. The several departments, given their inevita- ble preoccupations with their na- tional ranking and prestige, are often in a poor position to recall and respond to the legitimate neds of students, other faculty, and the taxpayers. BY GIVING STUDENTS and colleagues outside his department a chance to evaluate a man's per- formance and promise, the dean and executive committee will pos- sess new and vital information. the concerns of departments and the concerns of studentsand the wider academic community. When these interests diverge, and a man's livelihood and career are at stake, the need for a new way of making decisions becomes painful- ly clear. THE ULTIMATE GOALS of these efforts are diverse and elu- sive. We would seek to break through the orthodoxies which can, unchecked, gain control over a particular department, thereby depriving the University of new approaches and dissident views. We would seek an end to thewdays where whether a man "fits in" controls his future in the college. Only with difficulty did the fair housing movement persuade residents that their insistance upon compatable neighbors need- ed to be restrained. It is time now to restrain the club-like atmos- phere of some departments which value a man's capacity to be "part of the team" over his ability to be effective with students, other colleagues, and the community at large. THE OLD DEPARTMENTAL divisions often fail to correspond to the emerging areas of promising research and theory, and thus we would hope to find ways to reward the trail-blazer who cuts across old boundaries. We would, most of all, seek to apply fairly and universally the publicly stated, but privately ne- glected, criteria of excellence: scholarship,rteaching, and service. Letters to the Editor I I Language demands To the Editor: THE LITERARY college faculty has once again refused to acknowledge the existence of a student voice. Despite an over- whelming mandate from the stu- dents to abolish language and dis- tribution requirements, the faculty virtually took no action along these lines. By choosing to ignore student opinion the faculty has proven themselves to be entirely unresponsive to students. Students must now realize that to obtain change through administrative channels is impossible. In February at a mass meeting sponsored by SGC and Radical Cau.cus the problem of what action to take was discussed. Radical Caucus appealed to the students to stage a disruptive sit-in in sup- port of abolishing the language requirements. Both a mass peti- tion (drive in which 3700 students demanded the end of language and distribution requirements) and a non-disruptive sit-in failed to phase the faculty, and supporters of the disruptive sit-in realized there was no alternative available. Opponents of the sit-in argued that it would "alienate" the fac- ulty just when they were about to abolish the requirement. Mark Levin, the editor of The Daily and major opponent of the sit-in at that time, argued that "it is obvious the faculty will abolish the requirement in March" because of the strong student sup- port. Unfortunately, many people at the mass meeting also put faith in the faculty and the sit-in pro- posal was voted down. It is only Y .: a ~ v. cyv +_-no+"'Onn~at.a the faculty. This is the key issue -not whether language is good or bad but whether the faculty (or other students for that matter) have the right to impose their values on students in terms of a requirement. SGC will aquaint incoming Freshmen with the issue during summer orientation and provide them with salient information concerning the student non-role in decision-making. In the fall; stu- dents must apply mass pressure. It is obvious that trying to per- suade the faculty through admin- istrative channels is impossible and that students must now assert themselves outside these channels to see that their demands are met. -Carol Hollenshead, SGC Member -Marc Van Der Hout, Executi-e Vice President -Mary Livingston, SGC Member -Mike Farrell, SGC Member April 14 Dorm succession To the Editor: - THE PRINCIPLES underlying our secession from house gov- ernment need clarification. We hope, in this letter, to express the reasons behind our present dis- satisfaction with the dormitory government and to present a pos- sible alternative. An analysis of the situation re- veals that the established system is not in the interest of students. Trhp innriiidil Rnripn+ i l+ftn+t The student's voice has been sacrificed for the sustentation of an inadequate governing struc- ture. Clearly, direct democracy can work on the level of the dorm. The issues there are neither com- plex or immediate. A STRENGTHENED student government guided by the prin- ciples of a participatory democracy. is all that we ask. It was stipulated in the housing contract that all students must fall under the jurisdiction of these governments that were not created and continued by their consent. Thus, students obviously did not willfully acquiesce and this is a contradictione ofparticipatory democracy. That is the heart of the issue- participatory democracy. This de- gree of student decision-making power is not in effect today. Only when students are guaranteed a share in that policy-making pow- er, can we create a more mean- ingful and expedient student gov- einment. -John Werbe, '72 -Bob Levi, '72 -Steve Schear, '72 April 9 Daily deletion To the Editor: TrHE RESPONSIBILITY of a campus newspaper is to report campus activities, regardless of the staff's feelings toward the groups involved. For the second consecu- tive year, The Daily has failed to cover the biggest activities of the -THE MICHIGAN DAILY DAILY CALIFORNIAN University of California, Berkeley THE DAILY, BRUIN UCLA, Los Angeles EL GAUCHO University of California, Santa Barbara THE AGGIE University of California, Davis THE COLORADO DAILY University of Colorado, Boulder DAILY ILLINI STUDENT LIFE Washington University, St. Louis, Mo. GATEWAY University of Nebraska, Omaha THE DUKE CHRONICLE Duke University, Durham, N.C. THE TARGUM Rutgers University, NewBrunswick, N.J. THE NEW MEXICO LOBO University of New Mexico, Albuquerque THE COLONIAL NEWS Han. Crnn1lie State University of New York. I