Let’s Get Together
Dual Committees on Fees Sidestep the Issue
The recent action of the University fac
ulty denying student participation in the
committee which will probe the question
of compulsory student fees with a partic
ular concern for athletics was disillusioning.
We were disappointed when the same
faculty that told students they are indepen
dent and mature individuals excluded stu
dents from the influential ad hoc commit
tee. President Flemming‘s proposal for a
student committee on compulsory fees is
encouraging. Establishment of the student
committee which will parallel the faculty
committee was a diplomatic approach to
the problem and will probably meet with
favor in both student and faculty groups.
A realistic analysis of the situation illus
trates that the establishment of the student
committee really sidesteps the basic issue
involved. Theoretically the student and fac
ulty committees serve the same function:
to study the matter and make recommen
dations. The student committee will report
to the ASUO Senate, which will in turn
make a recommendation to President Flem
ming. The faculty committee brings its
recommendation to the full faculty which
in turn also goes to President Flemming
and on to the State Board of Higher Edu
cation. The basic issue is whether students
should participate in the decision-making
process in regard to the use of student
fees. We believe that students do have the
right to be involved in this probe of the
student fee question. The student fees do
not provide academic programs, but stu
dent services.
Although President Flemming is sympa
thetic to student views, the fundamental
University power structure puts a faculty
committee in a position of political one-up
manship. We recognize that joint meetings
of the two committees will be held. We
are hopeful that this will eliminate dupli
cation of functions of the two committees.
We still believe that students have a right
to participate in the decision-making pro
cess. We hope that the voice of the exclu
sive student committee will be heard and
that student opinion will be fully consider
ed before any decisions are made. There
seems to be a little logical explanation for
denial of student participation on the fac
ulty committee. Students were on the fac
ulty committee which studied discipline
last year. It is encouraging to see students
enthusiasm in gathering material for the
committee even before it is formed. It
is regrettable that they cannot work with
the faculty on the matter. It seems to
us that in a true University community the
faculty would want to work with the stu
dents in seeking common objectives.
Budget Cuts By Priority
An argument expressed in the Eugene
Register-Guard’s Tuesday editorial columns
“Taking Lumps’’ is somewhat questionable.
“Taking Lumps” maintained that since
the voters of Oregon have shown they
want spending cutbacks, these cutbacks
should be distributed more or less propor
tionately among all the state agencies. As
the Register-Guard phrases its stand on
legislative budgeting—in podiatrist’s terms
—“Far better that they step on many toes
lightly than they chop off some feet.”
The implication of this proposal is that
no effort should be made to arrange a pri
ority list for state agencies; rather all
agencies will continue to exist, lopping off
marginal services and economizing on all
operations. Obviously, they accept the as
sumption that there are expenditure priori
ties among activities within a given state
agency. It seems only logical and consistent
that there are also expenditure priorities
among agencies. It is the total state budg
et that was turned down. This rejection
does not imply either proportionate state
agency budget cuts. Rather it is a directive
to examine all state spending programs on
their own merits, to make relative com
parisons and then make cuts with minimum
loss of public need.
The Register-Guard is concerned that “If
budget cuts were to be centered only upon
certain agencies . . . those agencies could
be ruined.” It very well may be that some
agencies deserve this treatment. Certain
ly, an agency such as the State Board of
Higher Education, which has a large capi
tal investment, deserves a higher priority
than agencies where loss of previous capi
tal investment won’t be incurred because
of budget cuts.
Herblock
“It’s Peaccmongering And Creeping Private
Enterprise, That’s What It Is!”
Letters To the Editor
Disagrees With Policy
Emerald Editor:
For some strange reason The
Emerald ran a Herblock cartoon
in a recent issue, a good car
toon commenting on the cur
rent visit of Mme. Nhu of South
Viet Nam I can only guess
that you printed it because you
needed something to fill in some
space on your otherwise barren
editorial page.
I wonder how many of your
readers had even the faintest
notion of the implications of
the political comment — how
many have any idea of what's
going on in the world outside
the boundaries of the campus.
This letter is not so much a
comment on the indifference of
the student as it is on the os
trieh-like indifference of the
editorial policy-makers of The
Emerald
I hope it is indifference and
not ignorance or just plain stu
pidity. I havfe searched each is
sue of The Emerald this term
hoping for just some slight ref
erence to things like revolutions
in Central America, hurricanes
in the Caribbean, test-ban trea
ties, wheat deals, etc. There may
have been some mention of
these events, but I don’t use a
microscope to read the paper.
The point I am trying to
make is simple: I don’t think
you people have a notion of
your responsibility to your read
ers. We are not located in a
large metropolitan area where
most students live at home and
have opportunities to read local
newspapers.
The University is a largely
isolated community and for most
of the students the main con
tact they have with the rest of
the world is through the pages
of The Emerald. Anti what does
that contact consist of? As far
as I can tell, a front page filled
exclusively with the not-so-shat
tering doings of campus per
sonalities; two pages of sports;
a panel and unimaginative edi
torial page and occasional angry
letters to the editor.
Your whining rejoinder to
such criticism will probably be
along the lines of: "Well, what
do you expect? If the students
are really interested in world
events they'll buy other papers
or listen to the TV or radio.
Our job is to cover the cam
pus.” At least this is the general
idea I got late last term when I
spoke to the editor about this sit
uation. I was told also that there
would be some small attempt to
include a few words on world
coverage in each issue.
This has not happened; in
fact, just the opposite has oc
curred. Last year there were
(Continued on patje 3)
[iiimirmininiBnnmnirnimrinnuiniiiRniuinHrnTinnHn H ayne Morse and Higher Educatton iiijiiiiiijijiiimutiuiiiitiiiuiutiitijuiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiuiiuiiun
Opportunities for Average Students
Opportunities for average stu
dents in institutions of higher
education was on Wayne Morse’s
mind when he addressed a Char
ter Day convocation last week.
Although Morse’s speech ex
pressed a genuine concern for
the future of the American edu
cational process it is doubtful
that even the senator was aware
of the timeliness of his thesis
and its application to the state’s
current education debate. The
senior senator, a former teacher
and dean at the University,
could not have selected a more
appropriate topic for his audi
ence.
The flamboyant political lead
er warned that the United States
may deprive itself of the vast
resources of the human mind
if it closes its doors to the aver
age student. Morse went on to
say “the C student must be giv
en equal educational opportun
ity.”
Morse spoke to the large stu
dent-faculty audience a day aft
er the people of Oregon turn
ed down the legislature’s tax
increase program. One of the
far-reaching effects which the
defeat of the tax program may
provide is increased academic
standards which will deprive
many students now attending
the University of educational
opportunity.
The State Board of Higher
Education has warned that it
may increase both resident
and non-resident academic stan
dards for admission, thus cut
ting down enrollments. This
will allow the University budg
et to be distributed for pro
grams that will serve a smaller
number of University students.
The University has used a
selective retention program ra
ther than a selective admission
system. It has been the intention
of the University administra
tors to maintain a utilitarian ap
proach in offering education to
most Oregon high school gradu
ates.
University President Arthur
S. Flemming has also expressed
interest in the “C” student. He
reinforced his campus state
ments on the matter with an ar
ticle which he wrote for Good
Housekeeping more than a year
ago.
It has been necessary for the
University to step beyond most
other state institutions in pro
viding a place for the average
students because of Oregon’s
lack of adequate community
colleges. Education leaders have
been hopeful that increased aca
demic standards would not be
instituted until after the estab
lishment of an adequate junior
college system.
Not only has the University
maintained concern for the
average student which Sen.
fc»en. Wayne Iviorse
Morse calls “the backbone” of
American civilization, but has
also provided special programs
for exceptional and marginal
students. The Honors College is
a program for above-average
students who seek the small
college atmosphere within a
large state university.
Last summer a special pro
gram aided marginal students.
The program provided special
counseling for students who
were predicted academic casual
ties according to their college
board scores The University
Counseling Center and Office of
Student Affairs provided more
than 400 marginals with special
guidance regarding courses, in
structors, student life and the
problems which they would be
likely to encounter at the Uni
versity.
Sen. Morse’s thesis has mer
it. The state does have a res
ponsibility to make education
al opportunities available to the
average student. But it is not
the state’s responsibility to pam
per and provide easy avenues
for the academically underde
veloped. The state’s only respon
sibility is to provide them with
programs which will allow devel
opment of their abilities to the
highest possible degree.
The University has had many
students who did not develop
an interest in academics in
their freshman year yet later
went on to become productive
members of society. The inten
tions of the State Board to in
crease standards prior to the
development of a junior college
system sets a dangerous prece
dent. Statements by men like
Sen. Morse and President Flem
ming should be reinforced by
student organizations if the Uni
versity’s average student popu
lation plans to remain here
after this term.
OREGON DAILY EMERALD
The Oregon Daily Emerald in published
twice in September and five day* a week
during the academic year, except during ex
amination and vacation period* by the Stu
dent Publication* Hoard of the University of
Oregon. Entered a* second class matter at
the poat office, Eugene, Oregon. Subserip*
tion rute* $5 per year; $2 per term.
Opinion* expressed on the editorial page
are thoic of the Emerald and do not pre
tend to rcpre*unt the opinion of the ASIJO
or the University.
KVERETTE DENNIS. Editor
LARRY WILLIAMS, Business Manager