Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (April 24, 1963)
Watson’s Discipline Report Donald Watson, associate professor of finance, who has been chairman of the stu dent-faculty discipline committee for some time, makes some good points in his report on the student discipline code. Much of his report, however, seems muddled and self contradictory. It is typical of Watson’ report that in one particular area, administration, he is both strongest and weakest. His feeling that the appeal of discipline decisions to a student faculty committee should not be automatic in all instances is well taken. His statement that, “If the aim of the majority recommen dations is to induce student responsibility, then he must be assumed to be capable of appealing his case,” makes good sense. However, he neglects the fact that the majority did not recommend that all cases be automatically appealed, only those which result in the individual leaving school. Although he sees the individual student as responsible enough to appeal his own case, at a later point in his report he says, “The Office of Student Affairs could in effect act as a filter to advise students on whether it would be advisable or reasonable to appeal and could also suggest someone to help the student with his appeal.” He tries hard to make the point that, “to reverse or over-ride decisions leads only to friction, indecision, and eventually com plete failure of administration. Review is desirable, but reversal of decisions is im practical in this instance.” Then at a later point, talking about the single disciplinary officer he would like to see appointed, he says, “but he should know7 that he can be reversed.” Perhaps the weakest part of his state ments relative to administration of a dis cipline code is his statement, “To make all cases automatically appealable would bring to a committee composed of non-specialist students and faculty some cases not suited to its disposition.” We wonder exactly whose disposition they would be suitable to. Does not a jury of peers make the de cisions in modern-day courts? Students and faculty who are well-grounded in the Uni versitv discipline code would be just as effective in administering that discipline code as any administrator, even if they were relatively inexperienced. They would certainly be more consistent that the ad ministrators who are currently judge, jury, and court of appeals in the Office of Student Affairs. As for whether or not students and faculty would be more just, this depends upon the definition of justice one accepts. We think that Watson’s report is just as hazy when he talks about whether or not a University should be involved in character development. His main point of argumen tation is that the majority report is based on the premise that education and moral growth are mutually exclusive, while he feels that the two are not mutually ex clusive. To back up his feeling he makes three different statements: 1) that educa tion “has always involved moral standards’’ 2) that, “One of the basic purposes of edu cation is to orient the individual to society with an understanding of its rules and prac tices" and 3) that moral growth, “is not only consistent with, but is a desirable accom paniment of education.” The majority report does not have as a basic premise that education and moral growth are mutually exclusive. It recog nizes that although education may “involve moral standards,” this is quite different from imposing these standards upon indi viduals in their life outside the classroom. It also recognizes that education “may ori ent the individual to society with an under standing of its rules and practices,” but that is quite different from forcing him to accept these rules as being correct. As for the statement that moral growth is a “consistent and desirable accompani ment of education,” here Watson admits what he is arguing against—that the two are different and mutually exclusive. If they are, his whole argument is wasted. There are several other places where Watson’s report is similarly confused. Basically then, in attempting to adhere to a somewhat middle-of-the-road position, Watson ended up with a confused and con fusing report that is acceptable in some areas and self-defeating in others. Letters to the Editor Worthy Technique Emerald Editor: Your editorial entitled “Con stitutional Confusion” utilizes an interesting technique of per suasion which is worthy of con sideration. The editorial takes a negative approach by attempt ing to undermine the motives of the law students as well as the intelligence of the Senate mem bers. It would have been re freshing to read a more objec tive analysis of a controversy rather than a shotgun attack on the opposition. The editorial might have been more effective if evidence had been cited sup porting the editor’s position rather than merely questioning the opposition. Our concern is not with the pros and cons of NSA but that evidence can be substituted for assumptions. Judy Barnhart Judy Drummond Dianne Coy Graduates in Speech * * * Chopsticks Emerald Editor: Charles Porter, the man who has run for everything else in the State of Oregon, is now run ning for the position of “Mis sionary Representative of the State of Oregon to Communist China.” His platform again, as in the past, consists primarily of recognizing Red China. He seems to feel that we should throw away a policy which has served us for 13 years. A policy by the way which has yet to be proven out moded by Mr. Porter and cer tainly a policy felt beneficial by our State Department. Mr. Por ter believes that instead we should follow the other nations who have recognized Red China. But has he ever shown any practical benefits that have come their way? No! The only possible advantage expoused by Porter is trade in non-strategic good with the Chinese. The goods the Chinese need from us consist of capital goods which are definitely strategic. Arid what can they give us in ex change. Mr. Porter, when in Congress long ago, told us, “Tung oil, chestnuts, edible ap ricot kernels, tea, carpet, wool and hooked rugs, furs, soya beans, hog bristles, egg pro ducts and silk.” A very impres sive list to those among us who care for edible apricot ker nels. The Chinese aren’t going to trade with us if there isn’t, an enormous gain for them. A fact Mr. Porter won’t face up to. Mr. Porter wants to help open the windows to Red China. I would suggest he take along a welder to cut the Red chains of nationalism which keep them closed. I would further suggest, that once he sticks his head in that window, he beware of fall ing chopsticks. Wiley Wright Junior in Rhetoric and Public Address Monopoly of Liberalism Emerald Editor: We were very encouraged by the large conservative-minded vote on the recent HCUA-NSA referendum. Probably if more of those who did not vote had done so, the "issues” would have been decided the other way. The fact that these non voters were not "moved” by the heavily weighted propaganda barrage from the liberal ele ment is evidence for this belief. The results of the voting seem to indicate that the “issues” were, as we have contended, stirred up by a small but highly vociferous group. Wc are hope ful that before long, leadership will arise within the silent but strong majority of this student body. Then, finally, this Univer sity will be one in which there is truly freedom of expression —with all sides given a fair and equal hearing. A step in the right direction was taken when the ASUO Senated voted to in clude the “yes” and “no” votes, along with the University en rollment, in the letters sent to government officials. This was the only fair procedure to fol low and will show that it was, after all, a shallow “victory” in the HCUA “issue”. It is interesting to note that protests are already coming forth regarding NSA member ship—less than a week after the election. It is unfortunate that they were not raised before, since this could very easily have resulted in a reversal of the out come. The ASUO Senate would be well-advised to contact sev eral of the schools that have disaffiliated from NSA recently, to learn of their reasons. Indi ana University is the latest— (Continued on paye 3) Recent NS A Opposition Illustrates Practical Politics The following column was submitted to the Emerald by Tom Mongar, former ASl’O Senator and a graduate student in political science. Columns printed on this page do not necessarily represent the views of the Emerald or the Emerald editorial board. The recent opposition to NSA by a group of law students headed by Walter Grebe pro vides some interesting data which demonstrates the utility of several time honored princi ples of practical politics. First, always shift the issue to a decision-making arena which you control. If you can control the arena of conflict, you can also control the out come of the game. Neil Gold schmidt first introduced NSA in the Senate after defeating Bill Vertrees for the ASL'O presi dency. Mr. Vertrees retaliated by organizing and leading the assault which defeated NSA. It was then shifted to a more democratic, public arena when Raul Soto-Seelig circulated pe titions to place it on the ballot. The student body passed the measure by majority vote, but, as everyone should know, poli tics never ends when the voting stops. Because the proponents of NSA very foolishly neglect ed to include an "enabling” clause in the proposition, it is now up to the Senate to recom ment a budget and decide how many delegates there will be. how they will be chosen, etc. The opponents of NSA must now transfer their activity to the more private, autocratic arena of the Senate, whei'e they will try to disable and destroy NSA. Second, if you lose a fight, never renew the conflict your self—get an uninvolved, “elder statesman” to do it for you. Mr. Vertrees is not renewing his dispute. No, Mr. Grebe, who is also a budding attorney, is pre senting the case for twenty or so righteously indignant bud ding attornies, who, apparently, don’t get excited enough to act until after elections. Mr. Grebe is an ex-ASUO President. Third, shift the issue to an area where you have particular expertise. If those making the decision are dependent upon your particular knowledge, you have effectively supplied one of the premises for the deci sion. Until now, NSA has been a political issue; now, Mr. Grebe is attempting to make it a legal one. And who is most fitted to give advice on legal question? Lawyers, who else? Fourth, when opposing, al ways attempt to look humble but at the same time hold oul the possibility of protracted, ex pensive sanctions. According tc Mr. Grebe We are just asking for a chance to make our view* known to the ASUO Senate, bul if necessary we could resort tc court action ” Fifth, if you lose, always tr> to minimize the winner's vic tory. Quothc Grebe: “In view ol the close vote, I feel that wc should overturn it. I am im pressed with the closeness ol the vote considering that the student body president candi dates, Neil, and the Emerald support NSA." To say nothing of the $70 00, full page Kmerald ad purchased by the opponent* of NSA Opponents of the Hl'AC vote, at the last Senate meeting, managed to have in eluded in the letters to various people and agencies, the fact that "only" a small percent of the student body voted All of which neglects the fact that a decision not to vote is still a vote, and simply says "I dont care either way " Strategms, no matter how cleverly conceived, cannot de stroy the existence of fact What are the facts? Mr. Grebe’s opposition centers around three complaints: 1) a majority should not be allowed to sane tion the use of a minority's money in an organization (NSA) which has political (Continued on page 3) OREGON DAILY EMERALD The Oregon Daily Emerald is published •even times in September and five days a week during the school year, except dur ing examination and vacation period* by the Student Publications Board of the University of Oregon. Entered as second class mater at the post office, Eugene, Oregon. Subscription rates: $5 per year; $2 per term. Opinions expressed on the editorial page are those of The Emerald and do not pre tend -o represent the opinions of the ASUO or the University. RON BUEL, Editor MARTY KETELS, Businesi Manager TED MAJfAR, Managing Editor EVERICTTE DENNIS. News Edfcjr PHIL COGSWELL. Editorial Page Editor LARRY WILLIAMS, Advertising Manager JOHN BUCHNER, Sports Editor DULCY MORAN, Assistant Managing Editor RON COWAN, JIM CRAKE, JANET GOETZE, Assistant News Editors GEORGE HICHAM, Photo Editoi LINDA BROWN, Entertainment Editor CATHY NEVILLE, Associate News Editor DICK RICHARDSON, Feature Editor EDITORIAL BOARD: Ron Buel, Phil Cogswell Ted Mahar Everette Dennis, Dulcy Moran, Lind; Brown Bob Foriyth, Hal Snow, Grant Ledgerwood, Dt ug Ragen Janet Goetj.e, and Bill iutchison
