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.

October 16, 1983 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1983-10-16

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

4

OPINION
Sunday, October 16, 1983

Page 4

The Michigan Daily

4

Brother can you spare $160.

million?

W HEN YOU need money, it's always nice to
have friends in high places. But when you're
short $160 million, you need lots of friends, in
the highest places.
Well if this week in any indication, the
university certainly has the right ingredients.
This week former U.S. President Gerald Ford,
one of the University's superstar graduates,
rolled into town to help administrators loosen
the wallets of 300,000 other alumni.
And then, cleverly disguised as a big party,
the hard sell began. There were awards, and

Student service shakeup
Henry Johnson, University vice president for
student services, has not had a good year so
far. He's had more than his share of problems,
and they must be making him more than a bit
nervous.
So far this year, two employees in the com-
munity services branch of student services
have been suspended in connnection with an
audit of their department. Both subsequently
resigned.
On top of that, another community services
employee who was fired over the summer has
filed appeal of his dismissal with the Univer-
sity. He has also formally complained to the
Civil Rights Commission that the firing was
discriminatory.
Problems stretch even back to last year

speeches, and presentations, and hand shakes.
And everybody agreed that the University of
Michigan is a great place-well worth a hefty
-gift. And what does the University consider a
hefty gift? Well, about $50,000.
But not everyone has to give that much. In
fact, the. real pitch was aimed at University
graduates in less-than-high- places.
Ford, the campaign's head salesman, was in
top form: "I hope I can go around the country
and... convince people that what they give in
dollars is a great investment in this coun-
try... The University of Michigan is one of the
few great universities equipped to help
generate the creative resurgence of our culture
and our economy."
For a gift of only $50 dollars you're helping
out your alma mater. But wait, you're also
helping out your country. But don't decide yet,
because for that same $50 your also promoting
a national cultural and economic resurgence.
Ford, however, did stop short of offering Ginsu
knives to those who donated before midnight
Saturday.

when the director and head booking agent for
the Major Events Office, another Johnson
department, were fired in connection with
another audit.
To make matters worse, the firing this sum-
mer and both resignations this term involved
blacks, which has stirred concern up among
campus minorities.
In spite of the pressure, or perhaps because
of it, Johnson has kept quiet about the
problems. This week at Campus Meet the
Press, a weekly question and answer session
with leading University officials, Johnson
declined to discuss any details of the problems.
The two faces of 'U'
While administrators publicly kicked off a
new fund raising drive with a steady stream of
superlatives about University quality, they
spent their less-public hours trying to convince
state officials that University research
facilities are dangerously outdated.
University alumni and friends gathered this
week to kick off a $160 million fundraising
campaign last Friday. All sorts of positive
possibilities were discussed: If all our rich and
famous alumni gave the University more bucks
then tuition would dive down. The state's
priority for higher education might get rosier,
and maybe the state's economy might get bet-
ter. Then we can really celebrate.
The positive possibilities are endless, state
officials and University administrators said
during the "Campaign for Michigan" kickoff
luncheon. But behind closed doors, ad-
ministrators pleaded their case using a dif-
ferent tactic - pessimism.
The University joined with
Michigan State University and Wayne
State University to convince state officials that
the universities' research labs are frightfully
outdated and run down.

Daily Photo by DEBUKAM LE
Former president Gerald Ford and University President Harold Shapiro go begging.

University President Harold Shapiro finds
himself in a strange position. Privately, he has
to convince state government officials that the
University is becoming a technological
wasteland. Pubicly, however, he has to per-
suade 300,000 University alumni that the
University's unlimited potential is worth an in-
vestment.
Last week, Shapiro's administration made
its poverty plea. Richard Kennedy, University
vice president for state relations, told state of-
ficials that University labs have not been able
to purchase necessary equipment. $90 million
spread between the three schools would ease
the pain just fine, he told the state.

review of the University's policy of social inac-
tivism on corporate shareholder resolutions.
This year alone, the University-as an in-
vestor in dozens of major corporations-voted
to encourage one company's continued in-
volvement in the MX missile program and
another's practice of selling supplies in South
Africa that wind up in the hands of the nation's
oppressive military and police force.
A Daily story and editorial in September 1982
raised the issue for the first time in years, and
this paper again detailed the University's
policy this fall. SACUA is asking its investmen-
ts subcommittees to evaluate the policy and
look for possible recommendations to the
regents.
The regents have long stood by their policy of
not interfering in corporate decisions-a
position that leaves the University practically
alone amongst schools with large investment
pools. But a well-planned student and faculty
assault on the regents' apathy just may stir the
sleepy University governing board into action.
The Week in Review was compiled by
Daily staff writers Cheryl Baacke- and
Jackie Young and Daily editors Bill Spindle
and Barry Witt.

A

Proxy pains

Assuming the administration follows through
on the regents' directive last April to sell most
of the University's stocks in companies in-
volved in South Africa, one sticky issue still
remains concerning the University's invest-
ment policies.
Monday, the faculty's top governing com-
mittee, the Senate Advisory. Committee on
University Affairs, decided to initiate a

Henry Johnson: heading some trou
ments.

antgantMan
Edified and managed by students at The University of Mcia

Coaches don't cry foul;

they

teach

fouling

Vol. XCI V-No. 35

420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109

iflstead

;.
.,, ,
k j
' ..
R ' ..
N
. .k >

Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board

Elbow room 101

SN'T IT SOMEWHAT odd that
.students pay thousands of dollars a
year to attend the University so they
can fight their way into crowded cour-
ses? Maybe it's even stranger that
students sometimes have to worry
,about graduating on time because they
'don't have enough credits or high
;enough grade point averages, but
because they haven't been able to
fulfill prerequisites.
The situation is sad, but true.
Students in several of the popular
departments-communication, elec-
trical and computer engineering,
economics, and communications and
computer science-are having 'tough
times enrolling in classes they both
want and need to complete. Worse,
when students do get into the classes,
they find them overcrowded.
Several students were turned away
from communications and computer
science 573 because only one section
Was offered. The department apparen-
tly underestimated demand for the
course. But the students who were tur-
ned away may have been luckier than
4 - ii

those who got in - 80 students share
seven computer terminals.
More than 200 students are enrolled
in economics 400 this term, packed into
a room designed for considerably
fewer people. Many students cannot
find seats. In addition, only one
teaching assistant is responsible for
the three discussion sections for the
course.
These are only two classes with
serious enrollment problems. Many
students face similar problems in
other courses.
Administrators need to find a better
way to predict demand for courses.
They should channel professors' and
TAs' instruction efforts toward courses
students want to take.
Students, after all, ahould be able to
plan out patterns of studies without
worrying if they will be able to enroll in
a course or get adequate attention
because of class size.
It's the very least the University can
do in return for all those tuition dollars
students fork over each term.

By Barbara
Rosenbloom
SAN FhANCISCO - In the
world of college athletics, "good
sportsmanship" is worn as a
badge of honor. Coaches - who
are teachers as well - are expec-
ted to behave as examples,
upholding the values of fair play.
But college sports today
frequently are characterized by
fierce competition - and intense
pressure on coaches from alum-
ni, staff, and students. To main-
tain their reputations and keep
their jobs, coaches must win
games. Upholding good spor-
tsmanship is seldom enough.
INDEED, IN a recent study of
sports instructors, I found that
most operate with attitudes far
from the simple rules of fair play.
My study focused on 27 West
Coast coaches, representing a
"supersport" - basketball -
and another regarded as less
competitive - water polo. In
lengthy interviews, all 27 con-
ceded that they bend, ignore, or
openly violate rules in the in-
terest of winning.
Perhaps more interesting,
coaches on both poles of the
college sports spectrum had
erected complicated defense
mechanisms to defuse any sense
of personal guilt over these
violations.
THE LIST OF deliberate in-
fractions was sizeable. Basket-
ball coaches admitted that they
routinely teach their players how
to foul as part of their strategy.
Water polo coaches said they look
the other way when players kick
underwater, throw elbows, or
pinch. They suggested that the
need to gain an advantage at any
moment, and at any price,
justified such practices.
New coaches often are upset at
this process - but not
necessarily willing to fight it. One
told me, "It took me five years to
realize that certain things are

14

a '
Daily Photo by BRIAN MASCK
Although society expects coaches to be teachers and to teach fair rules, a recent survey of college
coaches did not even turn up one coach who believed that rule-breaking is always wrong.

4

done in this game, and they are
not dirty. You haveto take it as
part of the game. Yet it's strange
to think that in this game if you
make an illegal move and then
score, you will be applauded."
Another said, "Something that
used to upset me a great deal is
how do I deal with the fact that
we are essentially trying to teach
our players to cheat effectively?"
YET AS TIME passes, these
men and women learn routine
ways of handling the moral
dilemmas that arise in their oc-
cupation, without experiencing
personal discomfort.
Several rationalizing
techniques were common among
the coaches interviewed:
" They often blame others -
such as the referee - for the
prevalence of rule-breaking. Said
one interviewee: "See, coaches
have control over the players un-
til the game starts; then the
referees tape over. Most officials
will overlook a lot unless it's a
flagrant violation they saw,
they'd stop the flow of the game.
Therefore, we tell our players
that an official won't let you do
this, but you can go up to a cer-
tain point with it."

" They blame the other
team. As one water-polo coach
said, "Certain teams are
notorious for playing in a way
that I consider unethical. But not
to teach my players to hold, grab,
or hook with their legs when other
teams are doing it would be
ridiculous.'?
" They avoid-ethical issues by
using ambiguous language. All of
the coaches agreed it is wrong to
hurt another player intentionally.
They also agree there are many
gray areas prior to that point, but
they never committed them-
selves on these issues. They skir-
ted them and never gave
straightforward answers. "It
only gets dirty when one player is
trying to hurt another," said one
water polo coach. "But just
breaking the rules, holding suits,
pushing, turning, hooking, these
are part of the game and are ac-
cepted as something you have to
do to survive."
" They tend to deal only with
specific circumstances, not
general rules. For coaches, a rule
is applied on a play-by-play basis.
No one interviewed agreed that
rule violation in itself was flat
wrong, "I talk about the game in

terms of situations," explained a
basketball coach. "If you get to
this situation, then you give up a
foul. At the end of every practice
session, we talk about the
situations. I'll tell them how to
handle it, how to bend the rules so
they can win."
" The coaches frequently insist
that it's much worse elsewhere.
They were inclined to rank
various sports with respect to
their violence - with their own
sport, not surprisingly, at the bot-
tom of the list.
"Breaking the rules in basket-
ball isn't like breaking the rules
in football," one told me.
"Basketball players don't play 4
with the intention of hurting op-
posing players."
In the end, what makes these
observations compelling is that
they speak of more profound
issues. Sports is not just an event
consumed by spectators, but a
mirror that often reflects the
principles - and moral defenses
- which govern the larger
society.around them.
Rosen bloom wrote this ar-
ticle for the Pacific News Ser-
vice.

Utopia
C# 51117-, -T 607-A
AT N/NAI1
1 rr 7

..
-
.

-T 60r2607-70 cSĀ£7 i;
WHATAT14 E... TOMAI60AAJPR B

I

TEST ? Gv
SU/A4 4Y?

SUN'PAY ? NC, Z Y
.AAJ$' .77 GTA 66.

f.Ftax VA~7.r7.zor G6c.'i AIs4
1?)CA JAT 77 T~/j-- AW Z45
7?tvESZaK ,'cfG'7.'

i --_ /

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan