Seventy-Third Year
,EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF 1.1ICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
"Where Opnions Are Free STUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG., ANN ARBOR, MIcE., PHONE NO 2-3241
Tmutb Will Prevail"'
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must bp noted in all reprints.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
'U' Must Clarify
Position of HRB

Y, MARCH 1, 1963

NIGHT EDITOR: MALINDA BERRY


NCATE Teaching Debate:
In Pursuit of Medioerity

IN THE FOLKLORE of higher education,
teacher training is regarded as the lowest
of the low. Education school faculties are often
the target of -the jokes and scorn of their
colleagues. Among students, education schools
are often pictured as refuges from the trouble
of using one's mind. in short, there seems to
be tacit agreement with the last third of Shaw's
statement: those who can, do; those who can't
teach; those who can't teach, teach teachers.
Nobody is more acutely aware of these crit-
icisms than education school faculties them-
selves. Here at the University, at least, a
few of the more creative have recognized the
validity of at least some of the criticisms and
have tried to remedy some of the evils. Without
going into the specific proposals, it is enough
to say that improvement will take constant ex-
perimentation.
For this reason, the visit of the National
Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Edu-
cation will hurt the University. NCATE (pro-
nounced en-kate) is a supposedly independent,
voluntary agency whose purpose is to accredit
teacher training institutions. But its inde-
pendence and non-compulsory nature are de-
ceptive in light of its influence over state
teacher certification policies and its close
ties with the National Education Association.
NCATE is attempting to set up a uniform
pattern of teacher education at a time when
no one uniform pattern can be cited as best.
It is closing the door to necessary experimenta-
tion in preparing teachers. Worse, it is ex-
tending its influence throughout the nation,
making it more and amore difficult for the
University or any other institution to disagree
with the association without serious conse-
quences.
NCATE HAS been involved in two prominent
cases. The first of these occurred at the
University of Wisconsin when the organization
decided to grant only temporary accreditation"
to that school. The dean got mad, the faculty
got mad, the administration got mad and Wis-
consin withdrew from the group.
Now it is difficult to assess the merits of
NCATE's complaints against Wisconsin or
Wisconsin's complaints against NCATE. In
many respects it was a childish squabble and
NCATE may well have been right in regard to
the quality of Wisconsin's facilities. But the
really interesting part of the story happened
when Wisconsin was informed by Iowa that
all Wisconsin graduates who wanted to teach
in Iowa would have to take six hours of grad-
uate work in NCATE approved schools in order
to get a certificate.
The total effect of this debacle was to make
NCATE look stupid in academic circles and
to make educators wary of the group's power.
Wisconsin is a very well-known university
generally held in high esteem. To insinuate
that the graduates of some teacher's college in
the middle of Iowa are as well-prepared to
teach as Wisconsin graduates defies common
sense. Among educators-not in the narrow
sense of education school teachers-NCATE's
failure to approve Wisconsin caused alarm
that NCATE might be attempting to set a nar-
row "professional experience" as a higher

value than a good education tempered with
some teaching preparation.
HIS FEAR was intensified by NCATE's
second denial of accreditation. This time,
the group did not approve Carleton College.
Carleton College is a small but highly dis-
tinguished school. It is a liberal arts school but
it does offer a teacher certification program.
NCATE .thought that its method courses were
too theoretical and also objected to the idea
the Carleton did not have a formal program
for screening out individuals who by personality
were unfit to teach.
Carleton appealed the decision to NCATE's
executive board and eventually won. But the
damage was done. NCATE had shown itself
for a narrow organization that can see the
little things but not the overall picture. The
fact that both Carleton and Wisconsin offer
their prospective teachers first-rate liberal arts
educations and backgrounds in their majors
counted for very little.
These two incidents also showed NCATE's
growing influence over teacher training. It is
not just in Iowa that teachers have to have
some NCATE-approved education. In 28 states,
graduation from an NCATE institution is
enough to get a teaching certificate. And
the list of NCATE-approved schools contains a
great number of third-rate institutions offer-
ing next to no training in a future teacher's
major.
To make things worse, NCATE is closely
allied with the National Education Associa-
tion. This group-hardly noted for any em-
phasis of content over form-has used its
influence to promote NCATE's interests.
FOR THESE REASONS, the University ought
to withdraw from NCATE. It is a useless
organization as far as the University is con-
cerned. If the group were to deny accredita-
tion to the University, the University would
most likely politely tell it to go to hell.
But by withdrawing from it, the Univer-
sity can do the cause of teacher education
much godd. For one thing, the University could
band together with Wisconsin and some of the
other influential Midwestern universities, form
its own accrediting agency and destroy the
power of NCATE.
This would be an organization dedicated to
experimentation in teacher education and
working to produce teachers versed in their
majors as well as in methods. It would also
be a group dominated by faculty members
instead of the professional bureaucracy of the
NEA. If the University could convince only
five of the Big Ten universities and perhaps
some others to come with it, the NCATE would
not have a chance.
For NCATE has shown itself to be dedicated
to the pursuit of mediocrity that has so long
plagued teacher education. The question in-
volved is not whether the University will re-
ceive NCATE's seal of approval when it visits
next year. It is whether or not the University
is dedicated to producing superior teachers
and whether the University is willing to fulfill
that commitment.
-DAVID MARCUS

To the Editor:
AS FORMER chairmen of the
Human Relations Board, we
feel that we may be able to clarify
some of the issues involved in the
recent controversy concerning the
picketing of the Administration
Building and the president's resi-
dence.
1) There are many indications
that therUniversity believes its
students, faculty and staff should
not be subject to racial discrimi-
nation. But, unfortunately, these
are merely indications; a clear and
firm program of action is lacking.
After many years of consideration
-chiefly spurred by the HRB-.
the University promulgated bylaw
2.14. The bylaw promisei that the
University would "work toward"
the elimination of discrimination.
This was a fine promise; but the
University has, as yet, failed to
deliver on that promise in many
material respects. The one new
policy of the University in this
area, cited by the president, not
to accept listing of housing units
available only on a discriminatory
basis was achieved only by con-
stant pressure by the HRB and
several other groups, not as the
result of any cogent plan by the
administration.
2) The HRB has traditionally
served as a student group to chan-
nel views and complaints to the
proper body within the University
and within the city and state.
This role has been explicitly rec-
ognized by both Student Govern-
ment Council and Vice-President
Lewis. Implicitly, this role has
been recognized by the faculty, the
administration and the Regents.-
3) The incumbent members of
the HRB had a clear responsibility
to confront the University's de-
cision-making processes with a
problem and urge its view. On

L!

't'..s- . -
"MtORE VI&GA

ri

SECRECY MUST END:
Stuet'Stake in Athletic Board Policy

Survey on Research

T HE NEED for facts to back up student pro-
posals for University reform has been vividly
illustrated in recent weeks, when emotional ap-
peals for change have proved unconvincing.
An example of inadequacy of presentation
was shown with the recommendations from
the Student Government Council Committee
on Student Concerns for changes in women's
hours.
The group recognized the need for a survey
which would serve as the basis for those
recommendations, and proceeded to take a
random sampling of University women. The
survey was far from convincing: it polled only
one sorority, one cooperative, and among
dormitory women, half of those surveyed were
freshmen.
COUNCIL SUBSEQUENTLY passed a series
of recommendations to be submitted to.
the Office of Student Affairs, but acknow-
ledged the inadequacy of the survey. The
majority which supported the motion certainly
did not base its conclusions on the survey, but
rather on personal philosophies of the right
of University women to make fundamental
choices relative to the governing of their own
lives.
Though the majority of Council members.
seemed convinced of an overwhelming campus'
sentiment in favor of the abolition of hours,
there is no basis in established fact to support
the assertions. Administrators who will receive
Council recommendations and make the ulti-
mate decision as to their acceptance are not
at all certain of the interpretation made of
prevailing campus sentiment.
In fact, many men in positions of adminis-
trative power feel that a large number of

bolstered by a comprehensive and reliable sur-
vey; the same is true for proposals from the
Committee on Student Activities which asked
for election of SGC members by districts,
turned down by Council last week. On the
whole, the committee's report was carefully
drafted, but the most important question of
districting was left unanswered: how many
voters would there be to each district? The
committee could make only a rough guess,
and could not begin to predit a possible flux
in population from year to year which might
necessitate frequent reapportionment.
Even if Council had been interested in elec-
tion by districts as a general concept, the body
could never, in good faith, have passed recom-
mendations which left open wide possibilities
for gerrymandering and unfair apportionment.
THERE IS a third, and most important ex-
ample of the need for a definitive survey
which could provide the basis for substantive
action. In 1960, the Human Relations Board of
Student Government Council conducted a ran-
dom sampling to determine discrimination in
Ann Arbor housing. Reports from the group
showed a refusal on the part of 50 per cent
of apartment landlords polled to accept foreign
or non-white students as tenants. But the
widespread acceptance of the validity of the
survey is limited by the spottiness of the
sampling.
In the final analysis, individual student
committees-with the wide range of duties
ascribed to them-have neither the time nor
the experience to conduct comprehensive, re-
liable surveys which would "put meat" into
student proposals which otherwise seem to be
emotionally based. These individual commit-
tees can onnly makehalf-hearted attempts at


By BILL BULLARD
STUDENT representation o n
athletic policy-making bodies
at the University has always been
nominally provided for. However,
the nature of this representation
has varied from time to time.
Student influence has probably
never been so insignificant as in
recent years.
For the two decades prior to
1893. a group of students con-
trolled athletics. The idea of a
college or University sponsoring
teams was just starting to gain
acceptance. Athletic clubs with
no official standing at the Uni-
versity had developed in the mid-
dle of the 19th century, but by
1873 a football association was
formed and a baseball association
was foundedin 1876. These two
groups merged in 1878 to form
the first athletic association.
* * * '
THE NEW group was entirely
student controlled and had two
major aims. One purpose of the
athletic association was to direct
the activities of the University's
athletic teams. Secondly, the stu-
dents wanted to raise funds to
build a gymnasium.
This group was short-lived as
the football and baseball teams
which it tried to manage took
control of their own affairs in
1884. In 1891 another attempt
was made tohform an athletic
association. The payment by a
student of $3 to the association
made him a member of the group
a rd an active participant in the
management of athletics. Accord-
ing to the association 's constitu-
tion five officers and a board of
directors was to be elected an -
nually to formulate athletic
policy.
The passing of student control
of athletics to the faculty came
in 1893 when a scandal developed.
Two members of a University
team were discovered to be sub-
freshmen. Because of this the
athletic association relinquished
its power to a specially created
board of the University Senate.
* * *
THE NEW board to regulate
athletics was composed of five
faculty members and four stu-
dents. President James B. Angell
picked the faculty members from
the University Senate and the
students were selected by the ath-
letic association. Throughout this
period the new Board in Control
of Athletics delegated much of
the direct management of ath-
letics to the athletic association.
In 1907, the board was reor-
ganized. The number of faculty
members remained the same but
student representation was cut
from four to two. One alumni
member made a total of eight on
the board.
A year later the two students
had an opportunity to make an
important decision. Sentiment
was building up to withdraw from
the Western Conference as a re-
sult of several league rule changes
to which the University's board
had violently objected. Three fac-
uly members and the two students
voted tn withdraw from the con-

The faculty members became a
minority on the board in 1910
when the alumni membership was
increased\ to three and the stu-
dent membership also was in-
creased to three. The Regents
were to select the alumni mem-
bers while the students were to
be picked by the Athletic Asso-
ciation. In addition, one of the
faculty member positions was re-
served for the Director of Outdoor
Athletics.
In May, 1915, the Regents
amended the bylaws so that the
four faculty members were elect-
ed by the University Senate
rather than being appointed. All
four faculty members selected in
the next election were favorable
to rejoining the Western Confer-
ence. Since 1913 the elected stu-
dent representatives had been in
favor of rejoining. So in Novem-
ber, 1917, the board voted to be-
come a member of the Western
Conference again.
* * *
SELECTION OF student mem-
bers was altered somewhat in
1923. The three members of the
board were to be elected by the
male members of the Athletic
Association. Candidates for elec-
tion were selected in two differ-
ent ways. The board of directors
of the athletic association picked
six candidates and anyone else
who wished to run was required
to present a petition signed by at
least 300 members of the asso-
ciation.
This innovation in determining
candidates was important since
a variation of this form of nom-
ination still exists today. At the
January, 1942, meeting of the
Regents the bylaws concerning
the Athletic board were altered so
that the student members were
to be elected by the male student
body instead of the athletic asso-
ciation.
A major reorganization of the
board was made in 1926 as the
result of the influential Day Re-
port which has been called the
most significant document ever
prepared in the field of athletics.
At the May, 1926, meeting of the
B o a r d of Regents, sweeping
changes were made in the bylaws
affecting the Board in Control of
Athletics. Faculty membership
was increased to seven members
selected by the President of the
University. The President and the
Director of Intercollegiate Ath-
letics were made permament
members of the board. Alumni
membership remained at three
but student membership was re-
duced to two. Thus the faculty
members gained a majority on
the board.
* * *
IN THE board's 1931 annual
report to the Regents, one of the
strongest statements ever to be
made in favor of student repre-
sentation on the board appeared.
The board wrote:
Our own athletic board has
not been unmindful of or un-
influenced by student points of
view and desires. There are two
student members of the board

en times. The name has been
changed from the Board in Con-
trol of Athletics to the Board in
Control of Physical Education to
the Board in Control of Inter-
collegiate Athletics. Personnel
changes-such as removing the
President's seat on the board-
have been made.
Thus at the present time the
composition of the board is as
follows:
Nine members of the University
Senate, appointed by the Presi-
dent of the University from a
panel chosen by the Senate Ad-
visory Committee on University
Affairs, and subject to the ap-
proval of the Regents. Each mem-
ber holds office for a three-year
term and each member is limited
to two terms except when a mem-
ber fills less than half the unex-
pired term of another member.
The President has the power to
make interim appointments in
the case where a vacancy occurs
on the board. The terms shall be
staggered so that three terms ex-
pire each year.
The director of physical edu-
cation and athletics and a repre-
sentative of the Office of Student
Affairs ex officio members.
The University Faculty Repre-
sentative in the Intercollegiate
Conference of Faculty Represent-
atives a member ex officio except
if he is a member of the board by
appointment of the President.
Two students elected by the
male members of the student
body from two candidates nom-
inated by a board consisting of
the student varsity and intra-
mural managers and any other
candidates who receive 300 sig-
natures of male students endors-
ing his candidacy. One student is
elected every year for a two year
term during the student's junior
and senior years..
Three alumni, one selected by
the Regents every year for a
three-year term with a two-term
limit.
* * *
THE INCREASE of faculty
membership from seven to nine
and the reduction of the terms
from four years to three years
was approved by the Regents at
their January, 1962, meeting. The
transition is still taking place..,
Election of student members to
the board has followed a pattern
since eligibility to vote has been
extended to all male students and
not just members of the Athletic
Association. In the spring of every
year, the varsity and intramural
managers nominate two out-
standing athletes from the sopho-
more class. These two candidates
are placed on the ballot and the
one who is better known by the
student body is elected. The vote
is light and there is nothing of
a campaign by which the voters
can make an intelligent decision
on how to vote.
In the last six elections, the
athletes have been opposed once
by a student who gained the nec-
essary 300 male signatures to be
placed on the ballot. In this case
the interloper didn't disturb the
routine of the election. The ath-

members but no students. This
committee has been studying
ways of financing a new multi-
purpose building to replace Yost
Field House.
The building of a replacement
for Yost Field House is a great
concern of students. It is because
of increased student attendance
at basketball games that the
building of a new field house is so
urgent.
* *'
AT THE April, 1962, Regents
meeting, -the plant expansion
committee presented a plan to
raise student fees to finance the
multi-purpose building. H e r e
again is a subject of great con-
cern to the students. Such an in-
crease in athletic fees would mean
that tuition would either have to
be increased again or else money
would have to be diverted from
an academic area to give the ath-
letic department; more funds.
The request of the board to
raise student athletic fees was
turned down by the Regents with
two Regents in opposition. But
the Regents told the board that it
is within their power to sell stu-
dent coupon books for athletic
contests to raise money.
While such matters of concern
to, students are being debated be--
hind closed doors, it is impossible
to determine the attitudes of the
student representatives. But it is
certain that they are receiving no
suggestions or advice from other
students because very few stu-
dents are aware :of what is tak-
ing place. With all the secrecy
surrounding the board 'and its
actions, the student members of
the board lack a broad base of
support on which to take posi-
tions on various issues
** *
IF THE student members on
the board are not actively repre-
senting the student body. it is
mainly because all communica-
tion between the board and those
who should be interested in its
actions has broken down.
The board faces important
issues such as how to finance a
new multi-purpose building. Since
it appears that the student body
will pay for much of the build-
ing in one way or another, it is
only just that the students have
an independent and objective
voice on the board.
Just as students in the past
made vital decisions on the board
on such issues as whether to
withdraw from the Western Con-
ference or not or which varsity
sports should be started, so should
students make their views known
on the board today. The original
values of student representation
on the board have been subverted
by a privileged group that attains
membership on the board with
little effort and has lost contact
with the student body.
There is just as much opportun-
ity as in the past for students to
express their feelings about ath-
letic policy despite the increasing
complexity of athletics at a large
Uri versity. It's about time that
the board was restructured so
that students could once again

many complex issues involving not
only the University's relationship
with outside groups,only the pres-
idemt can speak for the University..
It has been virtually impossible to
bring many of these matters to
the personal attention of the pres-
ident. Specifically, since early
1962 the HRB has been attempting
to meet with the president to dis-
cuss the steps that the University
could take to help make non-
discriminatory housing available
for all students, faculty and staff.
University Secretary Erich Val-
ter informed the HRB that the
Regents reaffirmed their support
of bylaw 2.14! The request for a
meeting with the president was
ignored. When the president refus-
ed to allow the HRB to present
its position for the University's
consideration, all communication
was blocked-save by the path the
HRB chose: picketing.
4) The president's comment that
the University should not "dic-
tate" to the city council is ob-
viously correct;but-just as ob-
viously-it was irrelevant: he was
merely asked to explain the Uni-
versity's position; not dictate any-
thing.
Regrettably, the HRB's attempt
to get the University to clarify its
policy on a vital matter has failed.
The University must correct this
failure, devise some other means
for coming to grips with the prob-
lem, or give up th attempt to fos-
ter equality of opportunity within
the University.
-James Seder, '64L
--Bart Burkhalter, Grad
-Herb Heidenreich, Grad
Corruption..
To the Editor:
WHENEVER the press or its
agents reveal the truth about
any given situation, those whose
noses have been tweaked invar-
iably cry "scandal" and. "libel."
They do this, of course, while
carefully ignoring the fact that
their own statements enter into
the realm of slander. Such is the
obvious case in reference to Mr.
Baehr's letter of condemnation of
Michael Harrah's editorial.
I attended the convention of
the Michigan Federation of Col-
lege Republicans last week as a
reporter for WCBN, and I am will-
ing to verify Harrah's analysis of
the situation. The convention was
indeed stampeded by a machine
complete with walkie-talkies and
a twist band. I know of my own
personal contact that at least one
candidate attempted to buy votes
with beer. I was present when Al
Howell's campaign manager of-
fered Lou Ferrand the vice-
chairmanship if he would concede.
At least one candidate from
Ferris Institute did sign a state-
ment under the influence of al-
cohol. Mr. Osgood was offered
the votes of an entire delegation
for $50 in my presence. I trust
that it is not necessary to press
my point further. Harrah's asser-
tions were founded in the most
unpleasant of facts.
* * *
AS FOR the proposition that
the federation is lethargic, one
must only look at the record to
realize that the federation, as a
unit, did not do one significant
thing during the entire past year.
It is, therefore, reasonable to pre-
dict that such a record willbe
repeated. There is nothing to in-
dicate the contrary.
Harrah is a devoted Republican.
And the fact that he has served
as special assistant to the speaker
of the House indicates that mem-
bers of the state Legislature have
faith in his integrity. If Baehr is
himself a Republican he would
do well to take heed of the lesson
taught by the last convention. If
he does not take heed thereto
then intelligent people must
classify him in the same category
as those he so arduously defends.
-James P. Starks,'65

Context ,..
To the Editor:
A WORK of art is most always
best viewed in its historical
context, the spirit of the age can-
not but manifest itself in such
works. It has been, on occasion,
enjoyable to view these works in
a new context. The effect is not
the same, but the experience, is
unique.
The APA production of Mer-
chant of' Venice attempted this
sort of shift in context: from
Elizabethan England to a La
Dolce Vita atmosphere of twen-
tieth century Italy. Shakespeare
has been more than once per-
formed successfully in modern
dress, in particular, the Stratford
Conn. company.
Wednesday night, a cast of ex-
cellent performers debased them-
selves by engaging ' in activities
that diffused their otherwise fine
performances into a simulated
Italian Society that was visually
forced by scenic slides that would
best have remained in Tappan
Hall, and by ridiculous music to
a cast of extras who profaned
themselves by giving a thoroughly
obnoxious twisting demonstration
and by trying to create a Holly-

"r1

f'

z