An Encouraging Trend
Stiffer Probation Policy
Will Aid Academic Excellence
Twenty-five hundred students is a siz
able number to be on probation. As one ad
ministrator said, “The professors know how
to cut enrollment figures."
More than the professors, the University
itself seems to be taking a welcome move
toward stiffening requirements to stay in
school. For some time, upper-class students
who are below a 2.0 GPA have been placed
ou probation. Now, the records of all fresh
men below a 2.0 are automatically review
ed at the end of Winter term, and again
at the end of the year.
If the freshman is between a 1.5 and a
2.00, previously his record was not re
viewed to see if he should be flunked out.
Now, everyone below a 2.0 is reviewed.
This means that several more freshmen
will now’ have their records closely scrutin
ized. In this process, those persons below
a 2.0 and already on probation will have
their grade slips referred to the Dean of
Men and tbe Dean of Women, who are both
members o fthe Scholastic Deficiency Com
mittee. The deans go through the non-aca
demic information on the student to see
if there is a possible explanation for the
low grades (such as finances, illness in the
family, or living conditions). If there seems
to be a good explanation, the dean will re
fer these cases to the Scholastic committee
who will then examine the reports and de
cide whether the student will be allowed
to stay. Where no good explanation is avail
able. disqualification is automatic.
If the significant improvement in GPA
from one term to the next is accomplished,
however, the student may continue while
he is a freshman, even though he is below
a 2.0.
We are pleased to see the University of
Oregon become a little more difficult as far
as staying in school goes. Other such at
tempts to limit the size of this student body
on the basis of academic ability, rather than
the abilitv-to-pay, would be equally wel
come.
— Footnotes —
Grades last term were pretty low, and
the Emerald women's page editor thinks
she knows why. She pointed out that along
with the low grades was an unprecedented
number of pinnings and engagements. Be
ing rather shrewd land engaged) she thinks
this is more than a coincidence.
Letters to the Editor
Anti-Bridges
Dear Chairman Teasdale:
Via Emerald Editor.
We the Young Republicans of
the University of Oregon would
like to congratulate you on re
cently being elected Chairman
of the Young Democrats. Since
history has shown that a two
party system is the key Repub
lican success in America, we
enjoy having the Opposition rep
resented on this campus and we
extend to you WITH GREAT
VIGOR our heartiest congratu
lations on your recent election.
In reference to the lead edi
torial in Wednesday’s Oregon
Daily Emerald, we would like
to remind you that in addition
to the objective of increasing
and stimulating political acti
vity and thought on this campus,
one of the major responsibili
ties of University political clubs
is to uphold the reputation of
the University of Oregon.
Last year the Young demo
crats asked the Young Republi
cans if they were interested in
jointly sponsoring the appear
ance of Gus Hall on this cam
pus. Our answer then was that
we were not interested in in
viting Gus Hall as a speaker,
but that we did not object to
his appearance on the campus.
Even though your potential
guest speaker, Harry Bridges,
is probably more closely allied
with the Democratic party than
was Gus Hall, we call upon you
to urge your club to reconsider
this invitation. Whereas, we rec
ognize that hotly debated top
ics and controversial speakers
have provided the impetus for
much of the political activity
and thought on this campus, we
fail to recognize the merit in
inviting a controversial speaker
simply for controversy’s sake.
In a year when all of us are
concerned with the amount of
money the Democratically con
trolled legislature will appro
priate to Higher Education, we
suggest that it would be less
than responsible for your club
to invite Harry Bridges on the
University of Oregon campus.
Tom Hoyt,
University of Oregon
Young Republicans.
Over Generalization
Emerald Editor:
From all evidence, I would
say that Mr. Davis (letter Jan.
23) seems to be suffering from
a malady which. I'm ashamed to
admit, seems to strike with un
usual force among the young
Freuds (or young Jungs) on
campus: that of over generaliza
tion.
Psychology, you see. some
times has a rather difficult time
defending itself as a true sci
ence. and perhaps it is because
of this lack of science orienta
tion that some undergraduate
psychology majors have a diffi
cult time using reason or logic.
I certainly am not above irra
tionality at times, but, even at
my modest level, it was an easy
task to see where Mr. Davis used
those two devices so character
istic of many amateur psycholo
gists: overgeneralization and am
biguity.
First: Mr. Davis assumes that
lack of participation in religi
ous forum week means that
“many students do not want...
or need religion.” This is like
saying that a short line at the
S.U. cafeteria means that many
students do not want . . or
need food. There are other cafe
terias, Mr. Davis.
Consider those who attend one
or more religious meetings a
week and prefer to use their re
maining time for different activi
ties. (Not everybody’s interest
is limited to one field.) Consid
er also those that weren’t inter
ested in the specific topics be
ing discussed A lack of interest
in Beowulf would not preclude
an interest in English literature.
These are but a few of the pos
sibilities overlooked.
Second: after Mr. Davis states
that many have “no need for re
ligion,” he immediately pro
ceeds to a tirade against Chris
tianity. What do you consider
Judaism, Buddhism, etc, Mr.
Davis, if not religions?
As for Mr. Davis’ views on
Christianity, he is entitled to
them. Contrary to his belief, not
all Christians try to force their
views on others. (And, from the
evidence of his letter, it ap
pears Christians are not the only
ones guilty of this practice.)
There is, however, one point that
I just can’t pass by without a
written comment: Mr. Davis
states that Christianity “curses
all forms of earthly pleasure.”
Well, my libido is smiling from
ear to ear, Mr. Davis. But tell
me . . . how’s yours?
Leanne Stallman,
Sen. in Psy. also.
Clarification
Emerald Editor:
I would like to say. in reply
to Mr Stone, that his strained
analogy between military basic
training and fraternity hazing
begs critical reexamination
Having seen both ends of the
"stick.” the fraternity and the
military, the incomparability of
the two is obvious. It is need
less to go into the functions of
the military, but one must at
first note that the function of
the college fraternity is primar
ily social in nature, having lost
its historical military signifi
cance. Perhaps the hazing tra
dition is a carryover, a cultural
lag, from this former military
tradition.
If Mr. Stone, the accounting
student, will grant the frater
nity’s social function as today
being primary, then the unify
ing basic training program of
the fraternity should be social
ly oriented as well, not an em
bodiment of the anachronistic
militarism.
mere is much to he said for
fraternity hazing as being a
parallel to the “bush schools"
of many sodalities in some areas
of the nonliterate world. The
parallel breaks down, however,
when one finds that the non
literate “bush schools” serve
an overall integrative function
to the society of which they are
a part, usually a society which
requires that its male members
be able to endure the harsh
conditions of their day to day
existence.
I therefore submit that haz
ing in a soladity of a modern
culture is representative of a
test of devotion which was re
quired during the incipient
stage of the sodality’s growth.
When the primary function of
the sodality changes so must
its corresponding test of its
member’s devotion.
The problem exists, as Mr.
Stone points out, when hazing
provides an expressive outlet
lor persons who are not prop
erly devoted to an ethical so
cial cause which would be bene
ficial to their fraternity’s and
the university’s continued exis
tence; and for persons who get
their “kicks” out of being a
power figure for perhaps the
first and only time in their lives.
Hazing, possibly a universal
characteristic of human social
interaction, requires controls
over its forms which may be
r. rsfv KjNi* »
THE COMt^A^K K't>
Letters to the Editor
Reply to Stone
Emerald Editor:
In reference to Mr Stone',
rather emotional letter of the
twenty-third, 1 should like to
compliment him on using some
of the one-sided publicity that
he so eloquently derided. There
are, however, some minor points
with which I disagree
His argument that the Artny
uses some of the same methods
of hazing as the fraterniu-s
with the same goals in mind
makes one examine the purpos
es of the fraternities Certainly
young Clyde Bubhlegummer,
fresh from high-school, does not
need the espirit de corp» of
the Army He is not being tram
ed to have discipline under fire,
not initiated with the idea that
he will be trained to kill. The
need for such hazing in the
Greek system is beyond rea
son, unless fraternities fear
something of which I am not
aware There is also the fact
that Army conditioning is done
under the direction of fairly
mature, experienced officers,
rather than fresh faced college
boys with a touch of perver
sity. Granted, such an initia
non aoes produce a teeting ot
unique accomplishment lr turns
my stomach to imagine the
sense of accomplishment feit
by those initiates that had to
engage in those activities Hack
ing may be physically painful,
but it has none of the moral
psychological or emotional im
plications stemming from some
initiation practices. The fact
that no one was too sure ju>t
what constitutes hazing is no
excuse for suspension of mor
als or good judgment.
Mr. Stone also felt that the
President’s Council did quite
well by themselves to conde
scend to public opinion He
permanently injurious to the
hazed and to the society of the
hazed Even the military pro
vides such controls.
Another problem exists when
jealous dissident factions jump
upon a moral bandwagon to
banish the likes of fraternities.
Fraternities, now suffering the
brunt of attacks against discrim
ination and hazing, are often
prejudiciously categorized as
moral abominations by the ever
present reductionists. Fraternal
organizations can and very often
do provide a social education
to their members, something
which is badly needed in this all
black or white academic sub
culture.
There is no “fence straddling”
intended herein, only a plea for
clarification of the position of
the moralists on each side of
this issue.
T. C. Hogg,
Grad, in Anthrop.,
1st Lt. USAK.
might do well to reflect on
the validity of the public opm
ion in a democracy as well a.-i
its power
As faf as giving the frater
nity system a chance, he for
gets that it has already been
given chance after chance, with
the result that conditions kept
worsening until the present
condition has been reached.
Asking to let the system ad
just to having "the beliefs of
others forced upon it" makes
one ask just why the establish
ed morals, beliefs and customs
of American society are so alien
to fraternity men Surely, as
Mr. Stone states, fraternity men
cannot 1m- so wicked now ’
What exempts the flreek system
from standards of good taste,
physical and mental comfort,
and personal freedom’’
Mr Stone might do well to
concern himself with one aspect
of the problem which might in
volve an injustice. That is, the
fact that some fraternities which
limit their initiation to an im
pressive formal initiation, with
little in the way of informal ac
tivities, are going to he ranked
in the public eyes right along
side those who have used some
of the worst judgment possible.
A fraternity which uses an oc
casional hack paddle will be lia
ble to the same penalty as that
house which uses the basest of
initiation methods. He might
also contemplate the overall
publicity, both good and bad (or
true or untrue) given to (he
whole fraternity system
Mike Powell,
Soph, Speech.
OREGON DAILY EMERALD
The Oregon Daily Emerald is published
•even times in September and five day* a
wreck during thr school year, except dur
ing examination and vacation periods by
the Student Publications Hoard of the
University of Oregon Entered .** second
class matter at the post office, Kngetie,
Oregon. Subscription rate*: $5 per year;
$2 per term.
Opinions expirssrd on the editorial page
a nr those of The Emerald and do not pre
tend to represent the opinions of the
ASL’O or the University.
HON BUEL. Editor
MAHTY KI ’THUS, Business Manager
TED MAH AH, Managing Editor
EVKRETTE DENNIS, News Editor
HIDE COGSWELL,
Editorial Page Editor
LARKY WILLIAMS,
Advertising Manager
LA It K Y (I H A V ES, Sports Editor
Dl LCY MORAN,
Assistant Managing Ed tor
DAVE SANDS, JIM FRAKE.
JANET GOKTZF,
Assistant News Editors
GEORGE BIGHAM, Photo Editor
LI NIL* BRC WN, Entertainn ent Editor
HON COWAN, CATHY NE /ILLK,
THORA WILLIAM:1.,
Associate News Editoi 4
EDITORIAL BOARD:
Hon Duel, Phil Cogswell, Ted Mahar
E oette Dennis, Davt Samis
I ulcy Moran, Linda frown
I al Carpenter, Boh F jrayth
Gra t Ledgerwood, Dot ( Hagen
Jan i Ccetze, and f ill H itehison