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