100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

March 17, 1964 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1964-03-17

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

r..,._ __ . ..,. .

Seveuly-Third Yer
- EDrTED AxD MANAG 3Y STuDNTS OF THE Ux swrr ior MxCmoAN
- UNa AUTHORTY o BOARD R COTMOL OF STONT PUBLICATIONS
WbeTe Opws Ar Ue STUNT PUBLICATIONS kDG., A x . AMiA Mii., Pioi ioN 2-3241
Tryt~ Wi roevl"
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in al; reprints.

FEIFFER

'MO
c401
RM .
Mc~
fCC
t

5U~ T MCAusM
q'-C WV

4 3 MYt
PMO~!

MEAD} (40tH
00' YouOUwOk)

;7?
4
}1 ,

ok:
1M '
"L'

I'NJStA1 .rz

SAY, MARCH 17, 1964

NIGHT EDITOR: GERALD STORCH

Student-Faculty Experiment:
Its Failure Due to Students

5"R$T HIM40 f 4. K
91CCP AKV T PUT TW
FOUR MOTELS' A019?A Dice.
TV STATiomM !H IM~.j
'TM&E P6W5AP6RRU~~E FOUNJD
OUT ABOUT $O() ACID THE S AR
bogm,8u iUWlU SU F6 ROM
eGOVERWWT MFP, O E'O?.S Of'
ILL. MEA TA.6 0ACk'
1a TAFAMAMI."1f
/t /t /
ilZ1N

5-THE COfvP05 O)-M~,
GRSO0AI T!O BU A WHIM-
QEELATIO!.J WAq tIMTH tM?
FROM N%6t MT W)~

'1

A CONTINUING TRUISM at any large
university is that of the student-fac-
ulty dichotomy. Repeated attempts to
bring these two segments into closer con-
tact have never been sufficiently success-
ful so that the dichotomy could be allev-
iated.
Faced with this realization, Student
Government Council last spring decided
to seek representation on subcommittees
of the University Senate's working body,
the Senate Advisory Committee on Uni-
versity Affairs. Yet this potential means
,of increasing student-faculty inter-
change has been defeated by student in-
eptitude in carrying out the proposal.
WHILE REQUESTING permission of
nine SACUA subcommittees for stu-
dent representation, SGC also created
its own University affairs committee with
a parallel subcommittee structure. The
students named to sit on the SGC com-
mittee were to be delegates to those fac-
ulty subcommittees which agreed to seat
students.
Although eight subcommittees extend-
ed invitations to SGC to send represen-
tatives, student response was negligible
and actual participation has been limit-
ed.
Those chairmen whose groups had de-
cided to seat students were pleased with
the decision. Yet, many cited infrequent
attendance on the part of the students
as disturbing.
THE FAILURE to respond to faculty
invitations, the inertia displayed by,
erratic attendance and the poor commu-
nication with SGC are not entirely attrib-
utable to first-year organizational diffi-
culties.
These problems could easily have been
avoided if SGC had ridden closer herd
on the University affairs committee
chairman and if Council had been more
selective in committee members. Several
of the students selected to sit on the com-
mittee lacked the basic initiative to con-
tact faculty chairmen or to attend more
than one meeting.
Many of those who were conscientious
enough to attend subcommittee meetings
did so because they had a concern with a
particular area of University policy.
THIS NARROWNESS of interest un-
doubtedly affected considerably the
disclosure of topics discussed by the fac-
ulty groups.
Since the faculty requested confiden-
tiality from the student representatives,

many of those with a specialized interest
chose to interpret the request in its strict-
est sense-thus deriving personal benefit
from their experience but hampering the
flow of information back to other Uni-
versity affairs members and SGC.
In agreeing to seat students, the fac-
ulty committees were aware that the rep-
resentatives were in fact under the guid-
ance of SGC; the faculty also knew that
the intent of Council was to further stu-
dent-faculty communication. In light of
these facts, it is difficult to imagine
SACUA chairmen requiring that nothing
from their meetings be disclosed.
THE LACK of communication between
Council and the student representa-
tives was pointed up last October when
Chairman Stephen Grossbard of the Uni-
versity affairs committee reported that
some. of the committee members felt
that their work should be independent of
SGC.
Only thereafter did Council decide to
communicate to the committee an explicit
"reminder" of the responsibility and re-
lation of SGC committees to SGC.
The reaction of several of the commit-
tee members to the communique was fur-
ther to ignore SGC. Many expressed their
intention to attempt to "independently"
represent the campus. At the same time,
however, they admitted their inability
thus to relate back to the campus any-
thing which they might learn.
WITH THE PERSONNEL involved on
StheUniversity affairs committee as
well as SGC's poor organization, it is not
surprising that the experiment this year
has done little to further student-faculty
contact.
If SGC is ever to contribute to prog-
ress in this respect, it must first evaluate
the potential of student participation on
the faculty subcommittees. It must real-
ize that any mutual understanding which
can be promoted through the experiment
is a means of improving the educational
atmosphere of the classroom. SGC should
also realize that it is a means of pro-
moting a willingness on the part of both
segments to participate in informal ex-
changes about the University's policies
and problems.
With these ends in mind, Council must
accept the burden of responsibility for
the mistakes made thus far and approach
the second year of the experiment with a
more carefully defined direction.
-MARY LOU BUTCHER

'MfATS OF T6N! TooswJAm .
CASH TFIA 1' FROM Ofl'AIHO0tA!IL -
HAc £1.1.TAKE 'HIM AKP -R.b 8th
ON41.i ' ON A -RWoRADIO STAT"5l
P9Q6PAM AL.UWAICE TO (30

I - COMMi1TW6!
PI'CK ACARS2

Or
w ptAq
O fVmq?

N4AVE' 'AO-
OTHeR 6W
_1'cl~~

I .5'.'

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
East Quad Explains Boycott

AT U. OF ILLINOIS:
Is Academic Freedom
At Stake in Oliver Case?

To the Editor:
THE BASIC issue in the present
boycott of Inter-Quadrangle
Council is that the East Quad-
rangle Council wants IQC to rec-
ognize the right of each house and
quadrangle government to com-
municate its views directly, with-
out delay and without censorship,
to the voting members and policy-
makers of all other councils.
Without this minimal amount of
communication, IQC can operate
in a vacuum, insulated from con-
stituent opinion and protected
from the possibility of effective
criticism of its policies.
The chief obstacle to free, un-
censored communication is IQC
President John Eadie. Why does
Mr. Eadie put himself in opposi-
tion to basic ideals of free speech?
Could it be that if there were free
communication in the quads, the
residents, houses and quadrangles
would insist that IQC adopt poli-
cies differing from those Mr.
Eadie would prefer?
Could it be that if the houses
knew of President Eadie's ex-
pressed view that there is no
grassroots support for a liberalized
women's visiting policy in quad
rooms, the grassroots might in-
form Mr. Eadie otherwise?
Could it be that the house and
quad councils might differ with
IQC on what constitutes fairness
in Student Government Council
endorsing procedures? Perhaps
the constituency would not ap-
prove of the executive promises
of endorsements made before IQC
ever interviewed the candidates.
* * *
COULD IT be that an informed
constituency would question IQC's
reluctance to investigate room and
board rates, its failure to express
student opinion on them, its ex-
treme gradualism on the laundry
issue, and its hostility to even a
study of consumer protection ac-
tivities with respect to the mer-
chants who deal with quad resi-
dents? '
Might not the various houses
question the record of IQC i they
knew that not a single motion,
much less any action, has eman-
ated from IQC this year on the
special problems of the pilot proj-
ect, the proposed residential col-
lege, graduate housing, transfer
housing and the co-educational
experiment, which involves one-
third of IQC's constituents?
Could it be that informed house
councils would not share IQ's
starry-eyed preoccupation with
the Big Ten Residence Hall Asso-
ciation, its banquets and junkets,
which, over the years, have served
only to inform and reinform IQC
of the platitude that there are
problems in the Residence Halls?
Perhaps an informed constitu-
ency would insist on a reorienta-
tion of effort into projects direct-
ly relevant to the residents?
COULD IT be that the houses
resent the ever-increasing IQC
dues, and the ever-decreasing IQC
accomplishments? Could it be that
IQC programs are less than ade-
quate? Perhaps if the houses con-
sidered the IQC presidency as
something more than a stage for
building campus-level political ca-
reers, IQC might get more cooper-
ation from all the houses and
quads.
Could it be that if the activities
of the various IQC presidents on
SGC were better known to the
constituents, the residence hall
vote on SGC might better repre-
sent residence halls opinion?
BUT MR. EADIE is an honor-
able person. In view of the pre-
cious little communication that
there is about IQC, Mr. Eadie's
reasons for wanting to censor it
are undoubtedly noble and com-
pelling. Surely it would be unfair
to suggest that he opposes free

should depend only on whether
IQC's constituency is convinced of
the need for change and not on
whether the existing IQC majority
wishes to let its constituents know
the facts that may cause them to
insist on change.
The voting members of the 25
house councils and the four quad-
rangle councils are infinitely clos-
er to resident opinion than the
cloister council of six can ever
hope to be. As such, the members
of these so-called "lower bodies"
are entitled to dischss, praise, crit-
icize and change IQC policies as
they see fit. Until this truth pene-
trates the conscience of the pres-
ent In.ter-Quadrangle Council, IQC
has no just claim on the allegiance
or respect of any resident, house
or quadrangle.
-George Steinitz, '66
--John Koza, '64
East Quadrangle
IQC Members
Air Flight...
To the Editor:
REGARDING ,the Union char-
tered flight to Europe: first, we
are all very sorry that the plane
was not large enough to accom-
modate all the people who turned
out Thursday to buy their tickets.
As all must have known, procur-
ing a chartered plane has become
increasingly difficult; indeed, to
obtain a plane of this size was for-
tunate at this date.
As Mr. Laidlaw stated in his let-
ter to The Daily, the notice to all
contract holders was that the con-
tracts and money would be col-
lected beginning at 3 p.m. March
12. Inianticipation of the over-
whelming demand for £the flight
(and with knowledge of the usual
pre-dawn line-ups on this campus
for tickets at Hill, for Homecom-
ing booths, etc.), the Union post-
ed a sign Wednesday evening at
the Student Office which very
carefully stated that no one would
be allowed to line up before 8 a.m.
the next morning.
THURSDAY morning the hall-
way filled up very quickly, so that

by 9:30 it was difficult for one
at one end of the line to know
what was happening at the other.
In order to prevent confusion and
the opportunity for dishonesty
(cutting in line), a list was circu-,
lated, which all agreed to abide by.
Each person simply signed his
name in the order he was stand-
ing. As new peopleharrived their
names were added.
By 11 a.m. more than enough
people had arrived to fill the plane
and the Union committee in
charge, which had been handling
the situation since 9:30 or so, took
the list as it was at that time,
checked it to everyone's satisfac-
tion, and began a waiting list for
the new arrivals.
Those already in line asked if
there were any need to stay until
3 p.m. since the situation for
them wouldn't change - their
places were secure since they had
arrived earliest. It was decided at
11:45 a.m. (not 8:30) to let them
all leave for lunch and classes and
return at 2:30. At that time they
were to re-form the line and wait
until the contracts and money
could be collected-3:00.
Anyone who arrived between
12:00 and 2:30 p.m. was informed
by a notice of the situation, which
was, simply, that "first come, first
served" had operated so that the
plane was already filled and he
could hold a place in line by sign-
ing the waiting list.
THUS, it was never a matter of
letting people come at 8:30, sign
up and then leave. Those who ar-
rived early fully expected to stay
until 3 p.m. and were willing to
suffer the consequences of this
seven-hour wait (classes cut,
missed lunches, stiff backs).
As is the custom with any
scheduled "opening", those who
come first partake first. The only
change the Union made was to
prohibit lining up before 8:00 a.m.
I honestly can't see how this was
unfair to anyone.
-Paul Bernstein, '66

By NAN LUNDBERG
of The Daily Illini
URBANA - The status of Prof.
Revilo P. Oliver after his attack
on the late President Kennedy has
again raised the question of aca-
demic freedom andresponsibility
at the University of Illinois.
Prof. Oliver charged, in the
John Birch Society Magazine
American Opinion, that President
Kennedy was assassinated because
he had not been able to turn the
United States over to the Kremlin
by the 1963 deadline.
While admitting that Prof. Oli-
ver spoke for himself and not in
his university connection, Illinois
President David D. Henry asked
the Faculty Senate "to review the
matter and advise him on it."
President Henry stated that
"Mr. Oliver's expression raises
questions as to whether he has
complied with expectations for
professional responsibility."
Observance of pr o f e s s i o n a 1
standards is expected, but by cus-
tom this is a matter. for profes-
sionals to consider, President Hen-
ry said when he referred the prob-
lem to the Faculty Senate Com-
mittee on Academic Freedom.
* *, *
PRESIDENT Henry's action was
opposed by the Faculty of the Col-
lege of Law in a statement that.
said in part, "If the encourage-
ment of expression of ideas and
individual views is to remain a
meaningful principle, such expres-
sions must not be subject to re-
view and judgment by any univer-
sity body nor cause for any dis-
ciplinary action."
The law faculty was in agree-
ment with President Henry's ear-
lier position that Prof. Oliver's
statement of his views was - not
the basis for action by any official
organ of the university, no mat-
ter how deplorable or irrespon-
sible such views were
Citizens around the country
have demanded that O~iver be re-
moved uom his official status as
a professor of classics, whie oth-

ers have strongly cunported his
right to say anything he wished
no matter. how they might dis-
agree.
* * *
THERE SEEMS little chance
that Oliver will be fired as Prof.
Leo, Koch was in 1961. Prof. Koch
condoned sexual intercourse be-
tween mature students"in a letter
to the student newspaper, The
Daily Illini.
Prof. Koch was fired by Presi-
dent Henry within three weeks of
the appearance of his letter. Offi-
cially he was dismissed because
of his inadequacy as an instructor.
'The action brought a censure of
the university administration by
The American Association of Uni-
versity Professors.
University administrators have
pointed out that Prof. Koch used
his position to direct his views to
university students, while Prof.
Oliver spoke as a private citizen
and directed his statements to na-
tional attention.
President Henry addressed a
memo to Prof. Koch after the let-
ter was published and charged
him with "grave breach of aca-
demic responsibility." He also said
that Prof. Koch's views were "of-
fensive and repugnant to common-
ly accepted standards of morality
and their public espousal may be
interpreted as encouragement of
immoral behavior."
Speaking on Prof. Oliver's
opinions, President Henry 'said,
"That his views are not shared by
this academic community is cer-
tain. I believe my colleagues agree
that his unsupported accusations,
and his unreasoned and vitriolic
attack on the character and pat-
riotism of President Kennedy are
beyond the bounds of good taste in
public comment and the normal
proprieties of public debate."
* * *
WHILE Prof. Oliver's academic
responsibility has been challenged,
his reputation as a classroom in-
structor seems perfect. Acting de-
partment head John J. Bateman
said that Prof. Oliver "has never,
to my knowledge, introduced his
political opinions in his classes."
His students have described
Prof. Oliver as "brilliant and
"very intelligent."
In what was perhaps an effort to
take the university off the hook,
the president of the alumni' asso-
ciation recently asked Prof. Oliver
to resign.
Roger B. Pogue said in a letter
to Prof. Oliver that "this would
leave you free to express yourself
as you desire and would give your
opinions such acclaim as they de-
serve on their own merits.
Pogue said that he was speaking
for himself, but had "considerable
confidence that the vast majority.
of those who loved the University
of Illinois agree with me." His
uncle serves on the university's
board of trustees.
Prof. Oliver himself seemed un-
concerned about the reactions he
evoked. In the second article he
wrote for American Opinion, Prof.
Oliver detailed a lengthy explana-
tion of the Communist conspiracy
at work in the United States today
as he saw it.

,,z

THE LIAISON:

j ~~A FieMnt
. Gerald Storeh, City Ed
E OFFICE of Student Affairs and the
office of the dean of the literary col-
lege are less than five minutes away from
the office of Harold Dorr in the Admin-
istration Bldg., and OSA and LSA people
should try walking over there sometime.

. Walk
litor

For it seems that,
own concept of what
dent and what is not a

each unit has its
is a full-time stu-
full-time student.

ON A TUITION BASIS, Dorr's Univer-
sity Committee ,on Fees makes you pay
full-time tuition if you take eight hours
or more of class. (These and following
figures are for undergraduates only.)
Over in LSA, underclassmen are full-
time if they have 11 or more hours, upper-
classmen if they have 12 or more. But
Acting Editorial Staff
H. NEIL BERKSON ....................... Editor
KENNETH WINTER .............Managing Editor
EDWARD HERSTEIN ................Editorial Director
ANN GWIRTZMAN...............Personnel Director
MICAEL SATTINER .:.. Associate Managing Editor
JOHN KENNY........... Assistant Managing Editor
DEBORAH BEATTIE ...... Associate Editorial"Director
LOUISE LIND........ Assistant Editorial Director in
Charge of the Magazine
Acting Sports Staff
BILL BULLARD ...................Sports Editor
TOM ROWLAND ......... . .. Associate Sports Editor
GARY WINER..........Associate Sports Editor
CHARLES TOWLE .......Contributing Sports Editor
Acting Business Staff

for anything less than 12 hours, students
have to snare the special approval of
their counselor-which is not always easy.
The OSA will not let people become a
member or an officer of a recognized stu-
dent organization unless they've got 12
hours or more.
AND SO WE HAVE the interesting sit-
uation where a student can be paying
full-time tuition but be only a part-time
student in LSA; pay full-time tuition but
still be ineligible for extra-curricular ac-
tivities.
Worse yet, no one seems quite to un-
derstand the whole mess. A very unscien-
tific poll of counselors in freshman-soph-
omore and junior-senior offices in LSA
elicited a colorful array of uneducated
guesses and wild stabs, all of which were
wrong, as to who's a full-time student and
who isn't. Even Dorr didn't grasp the sit-
uation: at first he thought the minimum
load for a full-time tuition basis was ten
hours, not eight.
JT IS PRETTY MUCH apparent that
this jungle should be cleared up a
little bit. A student paying full-time fees
to the University should have the same
rights as any other student forking over
the same amount. Probably the easiest
way out is to set the standard for full-
time and part-time anything at 12 hours.
Most students take 12 hours or more'any-
wmna a +huhe. taiinv 1pcf* +han that

ilk
t y l T 5 a + .4. .t
1 l'i
.ra' 4Y' if .. { y i 3.."
! m !x' ( r . ty { ,a J 'xt x{, X,,y "'" iiY'iT
11 t V 't - to I k i ,! I +'. f p yyp t t { D. j ,/
y.. *+Rw.n N
r t"st ?;
T Ci r
A lK R j9{
,
. ; ej/j # , xD r r
> rl .. .1 I 41i
tr YA v 3 <i}I; '4iA" t.1'"C ..

x:;.
':,,

F
'r
i

In' Vain

V q
- a4
{ V .Y
, "yi f r 'y . _ W } ",9 + ' . ( , rA
hhi " . , , f

HE PHILOSOPHIC absurdity
that often marks general be-
liefs has never been an obstacle
to their triumph.
In consequence, the evident
weakness of the socialist beliefs of
today will not prevent them tri-
umphing among the masses. Their
real inferiority to all religious be-
liefs is solely the result of this

i'

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan