Seventy-Fifth Yeor
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
i
LAST GLANCES
The Search
for
Valid Standards
Where Opinions Are Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MWH.
Truth Will Prevail,
NEws PHONE: 764-05352
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints..
TUESDAY, 13 APRIL 1965 NIGHT EDITOR: SCOTT BLECH
University-Tuskeoee Program:*
A Challenge and a Promise
A VISIT' to the Tuskegee Institute is
an exhilarating experience, as the
members of the University Symphony who
performed on the Tuskegee campus last
week found. Most of them asked why
they couldn't have stayed in Tuskegee
longer, and nearly everyone who has vis-
ited Tuskegee shares the musicians' en-
thusiasm.
One is inclined to think of Alabama as
another country, populated by roving
bands of assassins and bandits who are
intermittently and reluctantly controlled
by state troopers; one imagines Tuskegee
as an embattled garrison of Negroes sur-
rounded by the mass misery of their
sharecropper friends, the massive resist-
ance of the white community and the
choking tentacles of segregated, racist
government.
The experience, however, has been
somewhat more encouraging than the
image, for after years of careful prepara-
tion, struggle and setback, Tuskegee's
Negro community has won its political
rights and has established the first gen-
uine bi-racial government in any county
in the South. Tuskegee stands as a shin-
ing symbol of hope for the Negro-and
the outstanding example of the folly of
the dolorous and disgusting predictions
and imprecations of white supremacists.
CERTAINLY, what has happened at Tus-
kegee might be difficult to achieve
elsewhere; Tuskegee's leaders have plac-
ed their hopes in the political process
because they outnumber whites three to
one in the city and four to one in the
county. In other areas, such as Birm-
ingham, where Negroes are in the minor-
ity, demonstrations and boycotts may
be far more effective.
The high level of educational attain-
ment and employment of Tuskegee's Ne-
groes is another factor which makes the
city's experience somewhat atypical; and
the nature of their employment-large-
ly with the Tuskegee Institute, the U.S.
Veterans' Administration hospital and the
school system-have given the area's Ne-
groes a higher average income and a
greater degree of economic security than
is normal. But while the tactics used in
Tuskegee may not be universally applic-
able, its example should become univer-
sally known.
Yet bi-racial government, itself an in-
valuable advance, must be accompanied
by educational, economic and social ad-
vances or it is meaningless. Here, in a
commendable decision, the University has
taken an interest and has, with Tuskegee,
developed an admirable program of fac-
ulty and student exchanges, departmen-
tal consultations and joint studies and
surveys on the problems of race and edu-
cation.
TIS "TRADITIONAL" exchange rela-.
tionship is essential as a solid first
step toward effecting educational ad-
vances in Tuskegee. There are, of course,
still more proposals that are now under
study. They should be put into action as
soon as possible. In particular, the Uni-
versity should complete plans for fur-
ther and more numerous musical ex-
changes such as a joint University Or-
chestra-Tuskegee Choir performance and
for other cultural activities, such as a
concert featuring the University's fast-
developing dance groups.
It should also complete its deliberations
and establish a definite, regularized pro-
gram of student and faculty exchanges
such as the program Tuskegee has with
St. Olaf's College, under which several
students from each school trade cam-
puses for a semester's study in their
major field.
These areas are both under serious
discussion now but, evidently owing to
the large number of complications, noth-
ing has yet resulted. No one is culpable
but, on the other hand, one hopes a
sense of urgency will guide administra-
tors and produce results shortly.
T HIS IS, TO REPEAT, a traditional sort
of exchange relationship, and clearly
it must be developed to its fullest before
Tuskegee and the University establish
additional areas of joint activity. As Mu-
sic School Dean James B. Wallace said to
the orchestra prior to its departure for
Tuskegee, "You won't be going down to
participate in civil rights demonstrations
-although I wish Alabama's governor
would change his name. Your visit is,
however, important because the educa-
tional and cultural opportunities we take
for granted are intolerably scarce for
both races in the Deep South. You will
be playing before an audience some of
whom have neverseen a violin before."
On the other hand, this concept of the
program need not last forever. This Uni-
versity is a social institution as well as
an educational institution and, to the
extent that the social problems in this
nation involve educational solutions, this
University has a responsibility to deal
with them. By working in this. area to
develop the Tuskegee program further,
the University could become a vital and
essential force for the kind of quiet edu-
cational improvement that could con-
tribute greatly to social change.
The University is already participating
in Michigan in the War on Poverty in
efforts quite similar to the education
and community-action programs which
it and Tuskegee should begin to plan
now. Since the problems of discrimina-
tion, poverty and unemployment are na-
tional problems, it would be foolish to
work only on their Northern half. And
in working on the full problem, the Uni-
versity will find that it is triumphantly
reaffirming its dual purpose in a demo-
cratic society.
PRESIDENT HATCHER and other Uni-
versity administrators, who must tire
of hearing students lecture them on the
University's responsibility somehow to
promote change in South Africa or some
other area equally beyond a university's
scope or purpose, should be commended
for establishing the exchange program
with Tuskegee. It is useful and it is ad-
mirable. But the University should cer-
tainly expand this traditional approach
and later develop new avenues involv-
ing adult education and re-education,
community development and similar
areas in the Tuskegee program-as it
will soon begin doing in Detroit.
For here rests the true value and the
true relevance of a university in a demo-
cratic society: When educational matters
are involved, it is not only wise for a
university to work with social problems,
but necessary. And such is the challenge
and the promise of the University-Tuske-
gee program.
One might say, however, that this sort
of endeavor, however commendable,
would be of value to the University it-
self only in the sense that it offers sat-
isfaction and, perhaps, prestige. Such a
view seems to imply that exertion and
expenditure should be directed towards
solving problems not because the solver
will gain anything, but simply because
his humanitarian and social instincts re-
fuse to let them go unsolved any longer.
BUT THIS VIEW is incomplete. A uni-
versity is not only a social institution;
its other function is education. And the
crucial part of the Tuskegee program is
its exchange nature-an exchange in the
most complete sense of the word, as valu-
able to the University as to Tuskegee.
There should be little pride involved
on the University's part, and the Uni-
versity should not feel like a patron, mes-
siah or missionary. Tuskegee's, example
should indeed be more widely known-
and not the least in Ann Arbor, for the
professors and students at the Tuskegee
Institute are an extremely sophisticated
and capable group. Challenged yet vic-
torious, denied yet successful, proud of
their citizenship but determined to give
it meaning, they are a reminder that a
hard land does not breed soft people.
As the Peace Corps volunteers have
found, so the University will find that,
in fostering such social, educational and
economic progress as is entirely within
the nature and scope of a university and
entirely relevant to its stature as a social
institution, it will not simply have ef-
fected social change or thereby have be-
eomA is, indrecot heneficiarv.
By KENNETH WINTER
Managing Editor, 1964-65
EARLY IN the morning when
they should be going to bed,
early in the afternoon when they
should be going to class and early
* in the evening when they should
be writing news stories, Daily staff
members often sit around instead
and play a little game. The game,
which they pursue more earnestly
than most of their "serious" acti-
vities, is called "What's Wrong
with the University?"
The playing pieces are all the
specific things that are wrong:
the parking problems, the silly
Srules, the full classrooms and the
empty classes, the lost souls and
the soulless, the vacillating or
dogmatic administrators, the ir-
relevance and all the other tar-
gets editorials on this page have
blasted for almost 75 years.
The idea of the game is to find
the common denominator: the rot-
ten core of the University, the
thing that's basically wrong, from
which all the other evils proceed.
F ire that one administrator, abolish
that one list of regulations, im-
plement that one idea or embrace
that one ideology and the Uni-
versity will become academic
Utopia.
The climax of the game comes
in the senior editor's "last glance"
editorial. Here, lest he be eternal-
ly convinced that he has grappled
with this institution in vain, the
departing editor must reveal the
location of that one button which,
once pushed, will transform this
into the best of all possible worlds.
I GUESS I LOSE. Many of my
predecessors have claimed that
various buttons were the button,
but pushing each of them has
yielded, or would yield, only par-
tial solutions to a few problems.
Drive out the dean of women?
We did, and things brightened a
little, but there still are plenty of
problems even in the office she
vacated. A b o1i s h paternalism?
We're doing it, and now we en-
counter the question of whether
or not students can find anything ,
worthwhile to do with their free-
dom. More money? Sometimes we
get it, and students still stare out
of classroom windows in utter
boredom. Student-faculty contact?
It happens now and often turns
out to be tiring, not exciting.
Higher academic standards? We've
got 'em, and they drive as many
students to hate learning as to
love it. Free speech? It's almost
free here; now we have to find
something worth saying. Better
public relations? We sell our soul
for the very money we were going
to use to enrich it. A democratized
University? Faculty already be-
moan the plethora of committees
which demand their attention. A
stronger President? OK, only so
long as you agree with the way he
exercises his strength. A winning
football team?
Many-perhaps all-of these are
the key to solving certain specific
problems. My pet peeve is that
their proponents seldom stop
there; soon they are reflexively
yelling "free speech!" or "more
money!" in every crisis.
My own search for a concrete,
accessible panacea has been no
more fruitful than these. So my
answer to "What's Wrong with
the University?" is on a distress-
ingly abstract level. It can be
summed up in the phrase false
standards.
ONE OF THE ideas that almost
every undergraduate encount-
ers somewhere is that the quality
which sets man apart from other
animals is his ability to symbolize.
Faced with a concept which is im-
portant but too complex, too
ethereal, too elusive to handle,
man gives it a name, a number or
some other simple label, and-
eureka!-suddenly finds he can
think about it, compare it, mani-
pulate it and communicate it.
But the blessing is also a curse.
Precisely because the important
concept is so hazy, a symbol can't
match it perfectly. And precisely
because the symbol is so neat and
simple, man relies more and more
on it. Gradually the original,
worthwhile concept is forgotten,
and the symbol replaces it as an
end in itself. Then the symbol
and the reality are free to evolve
Iin separate directions, so that the
symbol loses its correspondence
with, and often even contradicts,
the reality.
It becomes, in short, a false
standard,
MY CONTENTION is that this
is what has happened here: that
the true functions of the Univer-
sity, and the true needs of the
people who comprise it, lie buried
beneath layers and layers of cor-
rupted symbols. And most of us,
most of the time, seem content to
live our lives, and shape others'
lives, by these false standards.
I'd like to stop here. If the
reader would simply start apply-
ing this abstraction to his own
false standards, if he would just
resolve to discover (or rediscover)
some true standards, I could stop
* BEGIN WITH an obvious, if
tired, example: the grading sys-
tem. The University's basic func-
tion is to educate people, but it
has also accepted the job of evalu-
ating them, of telling the world
whether it should accept or reject
them. And it seems neither will-
ing nor able to renounce this func-
tion.
But the dimensions of human
excellence are too numerous and
obscure to specify directly. So each
professor takes those which in-
terest him and reduces them to a
number by some formula which
appeals to him (or to his depart-
ment chairman). Then, ignoring
the elementary-school principle
that you can't add apples, min-
utes and inches together and
come up with anything meaning-
frl, the University lumps the num-
bers together and crams them onto
an eight-by-eleven-inch sheet of
paper.
Thus we can see that John,
with 3.56 units of excellence, leads
Jane, who is worth only 2.41, and
is twice as good as Joe, that
parasite of society, with a miser-
able 1.78. Indeed, the remarkable
feature of this false-standards
system is not that it is false but
that its symbols bear any relation
to reality at all.
A bad evaluation system is bad
enough; worse is that it doubles
back and threatens the more im-
portant goal: education itself. For
as soon as you set up a false-
standards system, people will be
able to beat the system. And when
that system is an end in itself,
they'd be foolish not to try.
Thus we practice the infinitely
subtle art of grade-grubbing. And
we adopt the facory worker's at-
titude: our job is to produce-
whether the product be a term
paper, a good attendance record
or a flash of artificial enthusiasm
-and the teacher's job is to pay us
grade-wages for our work. We
even espouse the factory worker's
values: we -love learning about as
much as he loves the fender he
welds onto a Chevrolet.
THUS THE TRAGIC transfor-
mation takes place: while we
should be eager to learn as much
as possible, we seek instead ways
to learn as little as. possible while
still producing acceptable grades.
The grading system brings out
one more important characteristic
of the false standard: it seldom
has the decency to be entirely
false. Though it has driven me to
jump through some worthless
hoops and generated a strong
aversion for some subjects, pur-
suit of the four-point has also
forced me to learn some facts and
encounter some ideas which, much
as I resented them at the time,
have proven valuable. It has even
shoved me into contact with some
subjects which I discovered were
interesting in their own right.
Human laziness is prevalent
enough that I feel safe in assert-
ing that such academic pressures,
however spurious their nature, also
have compelled a lot of other
people to make better use of a
lot of their time.
This is, in a way, very unfor-
tunate. If the grading standard
were entirely false, it probably
couldn't last. But the few grains
of truth it contains give us a
golden opportunity to justify it
and forget the whole problem-
even though the balance of the
educational evidence is strongly
against the system. Thus, false
standards not merely endure, they
prevail.
" ASK ANY University ad-
ministrator what he is, and he'll
probably tell you he's an educator.
This, though maybe a little un-
defined, is a comforting response.
It implies that his commitment is
to see to it that man's knowledge
is transmitted and expanded, that
younger generations are prepared
for life at least as well as the
generations they succeed, and so
on. And you'd expect his stan-
dards would follow from this com-
mitment.
Now go to a Regents' meeting
and listen to what our top officials
really revere. Likely as not, they'll
be crowing about a victory over
some other educator-"We got the
biggest grant!" "We were the first
university to do this!" "We lured
another professor from Berkeley!"
-bemoaning a defeat-"We lost
the NASA center!" "Michigan
State has more Merit Scholars!"
-or savoring the sheer size of
their empire-"$40 million worth
of research!" "Three million
books!" "Six campuses!" "7000
degrees a year!"
Seldom is it mentioned that we
might do better with a few less
campuses or that because there are
so many graduates some of them
aren't what they ought to be.
And once, just once, I'd like to
hear an administrator volunteer
the thought that maybe that grant
would have done more good some-
place else.
BUT THE PUBLIC rewards edu-
cators more for empire-building
than for educating. It's no coin-
cidence that Clark Kerr, presi-
dent of the nation's biggest uni-
rules of empire-building. Your
score depends simply on how good
the students you graduate are--
and never mind whether you made
them that way or they were simply
good to start with.
In fact, you even get a few extra
points if you can brag about how
brilliant your entering freshman
class already is. Hence the con-
stant pressure (which this univer-
sity has so far resisted better
than most) to waste more money
on image-building, propagandiz-
ing, recruiting and (to put it
bluntly) bribing top freshmen to
come here and make our job
easier.
The false standards of empire-s
building underlie other maladies,
too. Zealous administrators want
to collect nationally prominent
professors for their institutional
trophy case ("More than 50 per
cent of the permanent faculty is
listed in Who's Who in America,"
a University PR booklet pro-
claims), and the road to national
prominence is publication. Thus a
publication list becomes the nego-
tiable currency of the faculty mar-
ket, and even professors who'd
rather teach and officials who'd
rather reward teaching find them-
selves drawn into the "publish or
perish game."
The Saginaw Bay Area needs a
new college, and someone sug-
gests the University might build a
branch there. But other state edu-
cators see their empires threaten-
ed. The battle ends up in a draw,
and the bay area ends up with no
college.
THE RULES of the game some-
times stretch a bit. A few years
ago, University officials vowed to
legislators that the out-of-state
student ratio was going down the
following fall, while they knew
full well it was going up because
they'd already admitted the stu-
dents. Back in Ann Arbor, where
out-of-state students are more
popular, an administrator private-
ly admitted that the University
would gradually cut the portion
to 25 per cent, while his colleagues
issued angry public denials. It's
now declining every year, and will
soon hit 25 per cent.
And we spend the Legislature's
money to lobby in the Legislature
for more of its money against the
other state schools, who are
spending the Legislature's money
for the same purpose.
With this sort of game being
played at the top, is it any wonder
that at the bottom the students
care more about how many other
schools the football team humili-
ates than about how much it con-
tributes to this school?
0 FALSE STANDARDS are per-
sonal as well as institutional.
Stroll out to Hill Street and drop
in at a sorority, where the best-
organized version of the find-the-
seniors - a - husband - so - they -don't
have-to-become-secretaries race is
in full swing.
Please don't be too quick to
sneer. The person who cannot find
mutual purpose, intimacy, com-
passion and commitment in an-
other human being is, to a certain
extent a hollow man, and prob-
ably to a greater extent an un-
happy man, his other achieve-
ments notwithstanding. It would
be a far better world if everyone
succeeded in this quest; those who
reject it all with quips about "the
Mrs. Degree" and demand a re-
turn to undiluted study or work,
are displaying some rather callous
false standards of their own.
But the way we go about it! The
women make commodities of
themselves: they doll themselves
up, suppress whatever "un-
feminine" abilities or ambitions
they may have and seek a sorority
which contains enough other at-
tractive commodities to lure cus-
tomers.
And the customers come. Per-
haps they come to gratify their Ids
or their Egos with sex; perhaps
they seek a maid and mistress for
life; perhaps they need some-
think to display at the house
party; or perhaps it's just that
this is one commodity that No
Young Man Should Be Without.
(Doubt it? Pick up a copy of
the voice of popular ideals, Play-
boy magazine, and see the image
of ideal modern man: he owns a
penthouse, a sports car, a hand-
tailored wardrobe, a stereo system
and' at least one Playmate; all
of them are sleek, beautiful, and
exist solely to satisfy his every
whim.)
BUT PERHAPS either the com-
modity or the customer wants
something more: to relate, as a
human being, to another human
being. This is a terribly complex
and undefined goal; it's so much
easier just to display one another,
to bargain with your sex and to
save your confidences for people
of your own gender. If you do it
well enough, the world (which is
inside of you as well as outside)
will tell you-perhaps convince
you-that this is love. And if the
reality still evades you, don't face
it; grab instead for a concrete
symbol of what you desire. Get
married.
HER SHELTERED security
gradually becomes commonplace
and then boring; gradually the
commodity realizes that she can't
stop being a human being. She
yearns to join her husband in the
challenges and achievements of
the real world. So he, who was
coming to take her for granted as
a docile maid and mistress, sud-
denly finds this convenient pos-
session making demands of him.
"We never talk any more." "Why
don't we do things together?" But
she has renounced personal de-
velopment at the altar (if not
before); to the world she now
seeks to re-enter, she has little to
offer. If he acceeds to her new
ambitions,hshe becomes a burden;
if not, she becomes miserable.
Thus the vision of a life of mu-
tual experience and discovery be-
comes, at best, a life of mutual
tolerationand, at worst, a life of
mutual torture.
This brief description can't do
justice to either the process I de-
scribe or the numerous variations
and exceptions to it. But what-
ever the exceptions, the rules of
the mating game must rank among
the most vicious of our false stan-
dards.
The comedian whose routine be-
gins with "Take my wife-please",
always finds a large and appre-
ciative audience.
* FINALLY, it should be noted
that the critics of the Establish-
ment (present company included,
no doubt) are no more immune
from false standards than is the
Establishment itself.
Far too many valid protests have
disintegrated as radicals have in-
sisted staunchly on direct action
and civil disobedience, while mod-
erates declared that they'd use
"proper channels" or nothing at
all. As a result, both factions end
up with nothing at all. And the
tactical vested interests pale in
comparison to the even pettier
quibbles over which person or
group will be the messiah for this
particular crusade.
Worse than the abortive protest
is the protest intoxicated by suc-
cess. Defiance, rebellion and rad-
icalism, even when originally gen-
erated by perceptive insights of
legitimate grievances, yield the
intrinsic pleasures of self-
righteousness and dramatic ac-
tion. Hence they become ends in
themselves, often to the point of
shattering hopes of ever resolving
the grievances.
The keen insights themselves be-
come rallying cries which get ap-
plied indiscriminately all over the
place. Berkeley's Free Speech
Movement, for example, laid bare
some ugly cracks in the facade of
the big, over-organized univer-
sities. But the insight became a
rallying cry: today, if you flunk a
test, get homesick, receive a park-
ing ticket or feel confused about
your personal goals, it's obviously
because the assembly-line multi-
versity knowledge factory has re-
duced you to an IBM card (two
years ago, oppressive middle-class,
Puritanical paternalism was at
the root of these problems).
THE STUDENT surrenders the
personal and societal benefits of
education for the false standard of
grades; the educator builds em-
pires instead of people; the young
couple gains a marriage and loses
a relationship; the dissenter lets
his ideology obscure his ideals.
And the hardest, most easily
evaded task for each of us is to
realize that the false standards are
not the other guy's but our own.
If the shoe fits ...
"ALLRIGHT, wise guy," you
interject, "so all of us are
crawling with false standards. So
before we can do anything about
them, we need some true stan-
dards. I suppose you're going to
tell us what they are."
Yep.
The basically true standard,
it seems to me, is people: the
values, the desires, the aspira-
tions, the needs-in short, the
happiness-of present and future
generations of human beings.
Other standards are true only if
and when they contribute to
this standard.
(The term "people," it might be
noted, includes Communists, Ann
Arbor merchants, Ku Klux Klan
wizards, quaddies, individuals with
beards, Vietnamese peasants, bour-
geoisie and quite a few others.
The term "happiness" includes
short- and long-term, physical,
intellectual, emotional and all
other satisfactions; those whicli
occur in 2965 as wellas those
which occur in 1965. And the
term "other standards" includes
tradition, efficiency, individualism,
authority, involvement, democracy
and whatever else people might
proclaim as the ultimate criterion.)
The standard can, in principle,
be applied to all our normative
judgments. And in fact, by keep-
ing it in mind, we find it applies
directly to our most grossly false
standards-such as those I've
mentioned. It at least tells us in
such cases that something is ser-
iously wrong and often points the
way to better standards.
BUT WITH what we know to-
day, it isn't possible to apply the
standard with any accuracy to
most of our most difficult dilem-
mas. The nature and causes of
human happiness, and the con-
sequences of living by whatever
standards we may have, are too
complex and subtle to yield clear-
cut answers very often.
At this point, I can't confidently
declare what standards will do the
most for even my own happiness.
Does it lie in hard work or idle
play? Should I seek personal re-
lationships or personal achieve-
ment-or can one have both?-
Should I follow the counsel of
those older and hopefully wiser
than me, even when it contradicts
my own perceptions? When should
suspended judgment give way to
commitment? And I'm even more
wary of imposing whatever stan-
dards I adopt on three billion
other human beings.
So we must live with worling
approximations to the ideal, and
at the same time seek standards
which bring us closer to it. In-
deed, this should be the ultimate
purpose of the University: to dis-
cover the conditions that produce
human happiness and to find
ways to bring them to reality. And
the most important institutions
within it are those which lead us
in this quest, by pointing out
false standards and suggesting
truer ones to replace them.
THERE'S THE formula. But it
indicates that there are many
buttons, not just one, which we
must push; and we don't yet know
where they all are or how to push
them.
And this is why, we must con-
tinue playing "What's Wrong with
the University?"-for we aren't
about to find true standards for
the world until we've penetrated
the fog of our own false stan-
dards. That job, in itself, should
keep us busy for quite a while.
t
!'
I
4i
4
4
i
MIS-EDUCATION:
Freedom to Learn and
The Overtight System
r
G ENERALLY SPEAKING, stu-
dent efforts, to get an educa-
tion befitting free men rather
than slaves can succeed only with
strong faculty backing, for the
students are transient, they do
not definitely know what they
want, they do not know the score
behind the scenes and thus they
can be abashed by administrative
double-talk.
On the other hand, given the
supine history of American facul-
ties in our sectarian and trustee-
ridden colleges, and given the
present extra-mural careerism of
the important professors, the stu-
dents must lead if there is to be
any change.
The extension of Academic
Freedom to the claim to Freedom-
to-Learn implies a revoluntionary
change in the status of American
college-going. Up to now, Ameri-
can collegians have been regard-
ed, and have regarded themselves,
as late-adolescents; but the claim
to Lernfreiheit (freedom of stu-
dents to ask for what they need
to be taught, and if necessary to
invite teachers, including advo-
cates of causes) means that they
are young adults who are capable
(YET) . . . there are strong
American influences to prevent
student maturation and indepen-
dence. First, the frantic career-
drive, spurred by the anxiety of
middle-class parents, leading 'to
conformism and willingness to
submit to scheduled miseducation,
credits and grading, in order to get
a diploma quick.
Secondly, the 'students are not
financially independent; tuition is
exceedingly high, so that it is im-
possible to opt for independent
poverty . .
Probably most important the
universal compulsory school-going
without alternative choices is in
fantile. In 1900, only six per cent
graduated from high school. We
thus have conflict: the direct and
evident heed for the students as
a working class of the economy
would tend to make the students
more mature; but the conditions
of their collegiate exploitation tend
to make them insecure and im-
mature
IN MY OPINION, the chief
political action of students would,
at present, be intra-mural--hu-
m n,n*. a n d ma n lri'nor n'i'l4',',,.l -ha
#I
V