(,14 firtigat Date
Seventy-Sixth Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
.":.....,.r......::."..:. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . .... ...... . . . . . . . . ..:. . . . . . . . ....
POWER Need More Funds for Residential College
POETRY by MARK R. KILLINGSWORTH
::.ggggggggiigggggg::!N2iN%4g 2igAMgaNWE3 MME M
- 77--W
Where Opinions Are Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MICH.
Truth Will Prevail
NEws PHONE: 764-0552
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 1967
NIGHT EDITOR:
COPI
National Student Association:
Time ,for Some Changes
THEY'RE GOING above and be-
yond the call of duty over
there," says one literary college ad-
ministrator with a nod towards
the Administration Building of
plans for the residential college.
Almost everyone has gone above
and beyond the call of duty here
--faculty, administration and stu-
dents--to help get the residential
college started.
Students have been involved in
working out a grading system and
a student-faculty governmental
system. Student influence, accord-
ing to those who have been tak-
ing part, has ranged from rather
minimal (on curriculum) to sub-
stantial (on grading) to nearly to-
tal ("the faculty let us work out
the student-faculty government
plan almost by ourselves," one stu-
dent says).
Faculty participation in plan-
ning has also been heroic. The
faculty planning committees,
chaired by the idealistic Burton
Thuma, associate dean of the lit-
erary college, put in nearly four
years of work on everything from
courses to blueprints. It fought
hard to retain several architectur-
al features which were about to
be deleted due to their costs.
Finally, the administration here
has been unusually sensitive. Pres-
ident Hatcher and Thuma's com-
mittee didn't reach agreement on
a residential college concept until
fall of 1965.
BY THAT TIME things had be-
gun to bog down, the plan for the
college seemed to have gone into
the deep freeze and Hatcher re-
mained unaware of a faculty com-'
mittee memo spelling out its rea-
sons for wanting its particular res-
idential college concept.
But as fall faded into winter
the wheels began to move again.
Vice-President and Chief Finan-
cial Officer Wilbur K. Pierpont
and his assistant, John McKevitt,
started work on buildings for the
college. Pierpont almost literally
moved heaven and earth to find
money for it-a quest which dis-
played Pierpont's financial genius
at its acme.
What finally emerged before the
Regents in April, May and June
of last year was a bold, costly and
complex educational gamble of the
first order: a 1200-student college-
within-a-university, designed to
maximize the advantages of a cos-
mopolitan, large university and
minimize the drawbacks inherent
in its size, costing a total of $11.85
million.
AS REGENT-EMERITUS Irene
Murphy commented last year, the
University's bold "new" program
is essentially an attempt to recap-
ture Oxford University's famous
700-year-old college system-over
two dozen colleges of less than 400
students each, living in close con-
tact with their teachers in an
environment where learning is ex-
citing and inescapable because it
is inextricably bound up with one's
friends and one's residence.
Size is a problem to a 35,000-
student university with a budget
of nearly $175 million, and the
University community-students,
faculty, administration and Re-
gents-have all recognized it. Size
means inflexibility-an inability to
introduce reforms or merely to
try something new. Size means
anonymity - the classic student
IBM syndrome. Size means mech-
anization-a grinding bureaucratic
mentality which infects everyone,
from the loftiest professor to the
lowliest student.
By introducing a small 1200-
student unit the University hopes
to end all three diseases which size
produces. By ensuring that it will
not be an honors college-but in-
stead have the same student "mix"
-the University hopes to use the
residential college as an index of
what any other University unit can
achieve. By building dormitories
which have office and classroom
space the University hopes to pro-
vide for the kind of continuous
faculty-student interaction which
is simply unavailable at a sprawl-
ing university campus.
BUT ALL THIS costs money:
$7.5 million in self-liquidating dor-
mitory bonds, paid off by residen-
tial college room and board fees;
$2.5 million in operating revenue or
bond refinancing from existing res-
idence hall units, and, last but not
least, $1.85 million in "$55 Million
Program gifts or University funds,
1966-69."
The last item puts the danger
quite clearly. If the University
can't get $1.85 million from the
$55 Million Program for the resi-
dential college, it will have to dip
into University funds instead -
pressing against other commit-
ments in the process.
In a sense, then, this is not an
appeal to the University commu-
nity. Students, faculty, adminis-
trators and Regents have shown
repeatedly that they believe in the
residential college as an exciting
experiment, a thing of great edu-
cational beauty.
There are few causes here-or
anywhere-which have elicited the
care, the concern and the hope
which the residential college has
received. It is something of value
for allo f us, something which will
transcend the daily squabbles
about this year's psychology cur-
riculum or that year's student pro-
test, and, indeed, something which
will make those daily squabbles
far more bearable and perhaps
much less frequent.
BUT THE RESIDENTIAL col-
lege still remains largely a vision.
Of the $1.85 million needed from
donors only a small fraction has
yet been received. If the money
isn't there by 1969, when the col-
lege is scheduled to open, then oth-
er University needs are going to
be only partially fulfilled or the
college's development might be ser-
iously retarded.
In a sense, then, this is not an
appeal to the University commu-
nity-which knows the value of
its new idea-but to prospective
donors.
The University is aiming for a
new college which--if it gets start-
ed with enough money-will be
the envy of every other school in
the country and an educational
dream come true.
It must come true. And if mon-
ey doesn't make the world go
round, it will certainly make the
residential college go. Your money.
Thank you.
4
REVELATIONS of the financial connec-
tions between the Central Intelligence
Agency and the National Student Asso-
ciation raise some grave questions about
the funding of the student organization's
activities. Equally important, the purpose
and efficacy of the NSA demand detailed
and determined scrutiny.
The NSA's relationship with the CIA
began in the early fifties. The NSA was
a young struggling federation of college
student governments, trying to build up,
its membership and financial bases. Mon-
ey for international activities, however,
was not forthcoming from private sourc-
es. When the CIA approached the asso-
ciation with offers to support it through
"front" foundations, the arrangement ap-
peared to be a lucrative solution.
As the relationship developed over a
decade, the NSA received a large propor-
tion of its budget for international af-
fairs activities through the Independence
Foundation of Boston and other organi-
zations fronting for the CIA. According
to one NSA vice-president the subsidies
were as high as $200,000 in some years,
but declined to around $50,000 in the last
few years.
One particularly knotty obstacle was
the annual change in the executive staff
of the NSA and the problems in bringing
the new officers into confidence about
the arrangements. According to one in-
side source, NSA officials elected at the
annual summer congress were informed
of the situation only after taking office.
But for at least 10 consecutive adminis-
rations, the two senior officers privy to
the NSA's biggest secret decided to con-
tinue the covert relationship.
WHEN RAMPARTS Magazine broke the
story and forced admissions of collu-
sion from the State Department and the
NSA, the relationship with the CIA had
already been ended. So the question arises,
why didn't NSA announce the situation
before Ramparts did, especially when the
officers were aware that reporters were
investigating their arrangements?
Plans to phase out the CIA's aid were
made by last year's president, Philip
Sherburne, and were finalized this year
by current President Euene Groves.
Thus the claim that revealing the re-
lationship would have resulted in a sud-
den withdrawal of funds and bankruptcy
.cannot be used to excuse NSA's breach of
trust with the one-and-a-half million
students whose interests it seeks to repre-
sent.
The March issue of Ramparts, accord-
ing to one of its authors, will show that
the CIA screened and selected some of
the delegates who represented NSA in
international programs. The financing of
NSA's programs by the espionage orga-
nization, regardless of whether or not the
CIA influenced policy, effectively destroys
the NSA's credibility among students of
foreign countries.
The State Department rationalized the
original decision not to reveal the finan-
cial relationship, because it would have
left the organization open to Communist
attacks as an instrument of the United
States government. Ironically, over the
years NSA has been vigorously opposed
in campus referendums by conservative
and right wing groups for its libertarian
and international emphasis in its politi-
cal statements.
CAUGHT IN A DEFENSIVE position and
faced with the likely destruction of its
international reputation, NSA will have
a# difficult job salvaging the good work it
has done in the past.
The taint of its involvement with the
CIA will make NSA cooperation with the
student organizations of other countries
virtually impossible. The radical and lib-
eral groups on many domestic campuses
are likely to demand changes in NSA's
structural relationships with governmen-
tal agencies.
Liberal support in campus referendums
to continue affiliation has often, as at
the University, provided the slim mar-
gin of victory. A withdrawal of liberal
support in referendums spurred by the
covert relation with the CIA could mean
the withdrawal of many member cam-
puses in the following months.
The CIA used the NSA in the most
Machiavellian way to promote interests
and attitudes consonant with United
States foreign policy, and to influence
leaders of students in other countries.
The national student organization of
this country should not be placed in a
position accessible to manipulations from
any outside source. Students alone should
have the voice and vote in deciding pol-
icy for a national student organization.
THE NATIONAL Student Organiza-
tion should be disbanded and a new
organization built in its place. A student
union should be formed incorporating the
same activities as thehNSA, with the
power base resting in the student bodies
of the member colleges and universities.
Any government loans and all agency
subsidies should be expressly forbidden.
Financial sources should be made pub-
lic and any money funneled through non-
profit foundations should not be accept-
ed unless the donor publicly reveals his
identity.
The NSA performed a vital function in
the communication and coordination of
college student activities in domestic and
overseas activities. The NSA's conceptual
basis and many of its actual operations
are worthwhile; but its structure and ori-
entation with the government must be
changed.
-DAVID KNOKE
I
Letters: SQ Rules Should Benefit Students
To the Editor:
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, at-
test to the fact that the
rights of the residents of South
Quadrangle are being ignored. The
specific issue to which we refer is
dress regulations.
There have long been complaints
about the arbitrary regulations,
especially from girls who wear
slacks to class and must change
into skirts for dinner. The problem
was brought to the attention of
the South Quad Council. The
council decided to investigate the
situation to find out if a signifi-
cant number of residents wanted
a revision of the regulations. Peti-
tions advocating changes in the
existing rules were circulated and
350 signatures were obtained by
the next council meeting. In addi-
tion, questionnaires were distri-
buted and, of the people that re-
sponded, 83 per cent favored
changes.
At the council meeting of Janu-
ary 24, a motion to liberalize dress
regulations was passed by a vote
of 10 to 6. The proposed changes
were then presented to the Direc-
tor of South Quad, Thomas G.
Fox, for final approval. Mr. Fox
rejected the changes.
A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER of
residents expressed the desire for
changes in dress regulations, but
their desires were ignored. Mr.
Fox supported his rejection, and
stated: "I believe that the recom-
mendation was based on a matter
of convenience and I don't view
convenience as a valid criteria in
establishing standards."
The residence hall is the stu-
dents' home for eight months of
the year. Is he to be inconven-
ienced in his own home? The pri-
mary consideration in forming the
regulations of the Quad should be
the comfort and convenience of its
residents.
"The South Quadrangle is the
focal point for meals for many of
the visitors to the University and
the minimum dress regulations
which exist do the University a
great deal of good."
ARE THE REGULATIONS de-
vised for the benefit of occasional
visitors or for the benefit of- the
residents?
The regulations states: "The
existence of dress regulations is
one of. the rules which a student
accept in choosing to live in South
Quadrangle. If the student finds
the dress regulation overly bur-
densome he should elect another
housing facility."
When unjust regulations, such
as these, are being enforced,
should the victims simply remove
themselves from the situation, or
should the injustices be righted?
This question of dress regula-
tions in South Quad reflects the
profound problem of lack of co-
operation between students and
administrators. If difficulties can-
not be justly resolved at this level,
what hope exists for the solution
of crucial issues?
-Sue Simon
-Bronwyn E. Jones
--Lorraine King
Reality?
To the Editor:
QUNDAY'S "Editorial P a g e
Dreaming-Why Not?" brought
thoughts of "How beautiful that
would be" to my nind when I
first read it. I asked myself why,
at least in part, this couldn't be-
come, sometime soon, a regular
news page.
It so happened that I had ob-
tained Sunday's Daily late that
evening from a friend, and none
of my four apartmentmates had
seen it. But I wanted them to see
it, and I wanted them to be stir-
red inside to the kinds of actions
and motivations for actions which
would help make this page not
one of editorials but of news. I
wanted a dramatic impact to be
made on them, just as one had
been made on me.
Upon coming down the stairs
the next morning, I found the
following note attached to the
page: "Whoever put this up, please
take it down. I live in a real world,
not a dream world, and I don't
like to be staring at a dream
every time I go up and down the,
steps. Since you live in a dream
world, why don't you put it up
where it will only affect you."
I'm sorry:
-John Herman, '68
4
I1
I
144, Tri< Re ia:<r
and Tribnnt nd:+an
.... .... .. .. a . . ... . ... .... ... .... .. . ... .l. ... ..r. ... .... .. . ... ... ...., 1. .
Alternative Means ofDrafsClassificaton
I1
A Child's Life: Community's Needs
"The function of the child is to
live his own life-not the life that his
anxious parents think he should live,
nor a life according to the purpose of
the educator who thinks he knows
what is best. All this interference and
guidance on the part of adults only
produces a generation of robots."
-A. S. Neill
NEILL WAS WRITING about the chil-
dren's school he founded in Summer-
hill, England, over 30 years ago, but he
expresses succinctly the educational phi-
losophy of The Children's Community
here in Ann Arbor.
The Children's Community is now well
into its second year, adding one more
grade each time. But like many daring
educational ventures of its kind, it is con-
tinually close to financial crisis.
Bucket drives have become a semest-
erly fixture on the University campus
and the students have generously support-
ed the fund raisers each time in the past.
today marks another bucket drive on
the part of community teachers, assist-
ants, volunteers and friends.
The money will go to cover teachers'
salaries, rent and scholarships for needy
Dupils in the cross-cultural, Interracial
school. What the University community
receives for its generosity may not be
evident immediately. Certainly the chil-
dren as well as their mentors are dis-
covering new ways of teaching and en-
joying the learning experience and in
the process are discovering themselves.
ALL THIS GOES into making happier,
healthier human beings unspoiled by
fear and hatred. A small donation to-
morrow is worth the difference it will
make in some child's life.
-D.K.
No Comment
"STUDENT SENTIMENT on the suggest-
ed abolition of the Student Council
and the Faculty Senate indicates that the
change would be welcomed, but that any
new plan must be well thought out and
initiated ... (a suggested replacement of-
fered was) the establishment of a 'Col-
lege Community Council' based on a triad
of students, faculty and administrators.. .
"Stu Berman, '69 .. . agreed that there
is a 'definite lack of communications' be-
tween students and faculty. Berman went
This is the second part of a
three part series by Prof. E.
Lowell Kelly, Department of
Psychology. In Part I, which
appeared in yesterday's Daily,
Prof. Kelly reviewed the his-
torical background of the pres-
ent guidelines for student de-
ferment. In Part II he discusses
the implications of the guide-
lines for University students, and
differentiates among three dif-
ferent categories of information
which might be made available
to local draft boards.
Part II
THE ORIGINAL recommenda-
tions of the advisory committee
provided for student deferments
based on tested aptitude and dem-
onstrated achievement, whereas
the present guidelines to selective
service boards permit deferment
on the basis of tested aptitude
or demonstrated achievement. This
important modification of our
original recommendation resulted
from two considerations:
® The reduced needs for mili-
tary manpower made it possible
for most local draft boards to
meet their quotas without draft-
ing many college students; there-
fore it was decided to permit de-
ferment of college students who
met either of the two criteria.
* Because of the marked dif-
ferences in the ability of students
attending different colleges in the
U.S., the utilization of a uniform
qualifying score on the SSCQT
would have resulted in extreme
differences in the proportions of
students deferable in different in-
stitutions. Available evidence indi-
cates that at least 90 to 95 per
cent of students at highly selec-
tive institutions can meet the
present qualifying score of 70
whereas the proportion is as low
as fiveper cent in some colleges
with a student body coming pri-
marily from impoverished educa-
tional backgrounds.
Also important is the fact that
the proportion of students able to
exceed a score of 70 varies mark-
edly from one geographical area
evant. Each student may choose
whether or not to request defer-
ment and, if so, what kinds of
information he wishes his local
board to consider in support of
his request. He may elect to sup-
port his request on the basis of
his SSCQT score or his academic
standing or both. His board is not
in the least interested in his exact
rank in class, but merely a state-
ment as to whether or not he
stood in the upper one-half of
male freshmen, the upper two-
thirds of male sophomores, the up-
per three-fourths of male jun-
iors, and, for graduate students,
the upper one-fourth of senior
males in his class in his college.
(These are the present cutting
points, subject to change with
changing manpower needs.)
It is important to remember
that the National Selective Serv-
ice Act is most emphatic in pro-
viding for the autonomy of local
boards, each of which may follow
or modify these guidelines. For ex-
ample, I understand that all lo-
cal boards in Michigan are now
requiring (or will soon require)
evidence regarding college per-
formance from all students who
wish their II-S status continued.
Frankly, if I were a member of a
local draft board, confronted with
the difficult task of deciding
which registrants are deserving of
deferment and which are not,. I
would want all relevant informa-
tion. Although local boards enjoy
great autonomy, any registrant
who feels that his local board
has not followed the guidelines
has a right to appeal its decision,
first to the state and then to a
national review board. These ap-
peal procedures encourage reason-
ably uniform practice among lo-
cal boards.
On the basis of all available
evidence, an extremely high pro-
portion (ca 90 per cent) of the
University's male students are able
to meet the present cutting score
of 70 on the SSCQT. However,
for the approximately 200 men
in each entering University class
continued deferment of Universi-
ty students, this is definitely not
true for students in many other
institutions, especially in those
where only a small proportion of
the students can achieve an SSC-
QT qualifying score of 70. If the
University and other. prestigeful
and highly selective institutions
should decide not to comply with
students' requests top rovide lo-
cal draft boards with reports of
scholastic standing, it is probable
that selective service guidelines
will be modified to advise all lo-
cal boards to rely primarily, or
perhaps exclusively, on SSCQT
scores for deferment. The result
would be that only a very small
proportion of students (e.g., five
per cent) in some institutions
would be deferable. In my judg-
ment, this would be a tragic con-
sequence for the individuals in-
volved and clearly not in the na-
tional interest.
Unfortunately, the debate on
"ranking" has been badly con-
fused by the language in which
the question is often framed:
"Shall the University comply with
the demands of Selective Service
that it compile ranks and report
them to local draft boards?" By
this formulation of the question,
it is implied thatthe University
is an active accomplice of the
selective service system in decid-
ing who gets sent to Viet Nam
and who does not. In fact, since
the University responds only to
the written request of a student
that the University transmit a re-
port of his scholastic status to
his local board, the policy ques-
tion should more properlyube
phrased: "Shall the University
comply with the requests of its
male students that their local
draft boards be provided with a
report onthe scholastic status in
support of their requests that their
student deferment be extended?"
While this simple re-statement of
the issue does much to reduce its
emotional overtones, there is still
room for honest differences of
opinion about appropriate Univer-
sity practice.
registered? Should we add that
his academic standing is satisfac-
tory-or that it is not? Should we
state that he is (or is not) earning
credits at a rate which will permit
him to complete his degree in four
years? Shall we, at the request of
a student, supply his draft board
with a transcript of credits?
Should this transcript include
course grades and honor points
earned to date? Should it include
an overall grade point ratio? If we
go this far, should we at the re-
quest of a student (or of a con-
scientious draft board trying to
interpret the transcript) also pro-
vide a statement showing the aver-
age GPA-or the distribution of
GPA's for the college in which the
student is registered? Finally,
should the University provide a
brief summary statement of a stu-
dent's scholastic standing in his
class?
On the basis of many discus-
sions withbcolleaguesnandstu-
dents with widely varying posi-
tions on the overall matter of
"ranking," I have found it useful
to distinguish three clearly sep-
arate and relatively independent
issues:
-Shall the University, under
any conditions and in any man-
ner, make any information about
its students available to their lo-
cal draft boards?
-If so, how much and what
kinds of information shall be
made available?
-If any information about stu-
dents is to be transmitted to local
boards, what channel of commu-
nication shall be used?
-Should any information about
students be released?
Information regarding students
falls into three broad categories:
First, there is public informa-
tion. This includes the names of
registered students, those students
who receive degrees at each com-
mencement, and recipients of spe-
cial awards and honors.
Scondly, we have private infor-
mation. This includes all informa-
tion recorded on a student's tran-
sition, of health conditions and
their treatment, and personal or
emotionalp roblems for which the
student sought professional help.
Such records do not become a part
of the student's transcript, but are
typically retained in the files of
the University unit responsible for
the action or service.
The traditional stance of the
University with respect to the re-
lease of each of these categories
of information is relevant. (a) In-
quiries which can be answered on
the basis of public information are
responded to routinely, e.g. "Is
John Doe a student?"B Did games
Smith receive an A.B. degree In
1949?" These are questions which
could be answered by reference
to published documents and news-
paper releases. (b) Private infor-
mation is generally regarded as
available only (1) to members of
.he University staff with a "need
to know," this includes counselors,
members of certain committees,
and persons on the staff of each
dean, (2) to the student himself
(after all, these are his records!),
and (3) to such other persons,
agencies or institutions as the
student may elect to show them
or to whom the student requests
that a copy of his transcript be
sent. Confidential information is
available only to a very limited
number of University staff mem-
bers, those immediately involved
in the handling of specificp rob-
lems. It is not available to the
casual inquirer, to staff members
without a bona fide "need to
know," to the student, to-prospec-
tive employers, or to other uni-
versities. (Such information may,
however, at the student's request,
be forwarded to another profes-
sional person in or outside the Uni-
versity from whom the student
'seeks professional help.)
On the basis of this' analysis,
I conclude that there is no room
for any major differences of opin-
ion regarding the proper stance of
the University with respect to Is-
sue I. Since the University, pub-
I