Homecoming and the Alumni Herbiock
What the Alumnus Sees On His Return to Oregon
“Nothing has really changed. The stu
dents are much the same as they were when
I graduated in 1935. We hear a lot about
Gus Hall, that new discipline code and all
those eastern fuzzy intellectuals on the
faculty, but nothing has really changed.
It’s good to see the old values preserved.
It’s good to be back and see that my uni
versity really hasn’t changed.”
We overheard a tall, balding man make
this remark last November. He was an
Oregon alumnus and he had returned for
Homecoming.
“Homecoming,” he said, “is a time for
fun and I’m damned glad the kids haven’t
outgrown fun. I keep hearing all this talk
about change, but its good to come back
and see that things are pretty well the way
they’ve always been.”
We’re sure that a lot of other alums
would concur with this viewpoint. We've
heard a lot of grumbling lately about higher
education and grassroots communication.
“They don’t understand us out there in
Hermiston. We aren’t communicating,” a
University official remarked recently. There
is no more vivid documentation for this
statement than the overwhelming NO vote
on Ballot Measure No. 1 October 15. Is the
campus really changing? Are there import
ant underlying changes, subtle changes,
changes more important than the new
humanities building?
A lot of alums ask these questions. Ideal
ly, Homecoming ought to be a time when
those questions are answered. Homecoming
should be a time for alums to come back to
the campus, have a good time and go home
with a general assessment about what is
going on. Most alums, we realize, come
down on Saturday morning for the foot
ball game and aren’t really much interested
in anything else. But suppose an alum came
to the campus this year for Homecoming on
Tuesday instead of Saturday. Suppose he’s
interested in student life and the campus
in general. What does he see?
On Tuesday of Homecoming week he
would see the class presidents scrub the
seal, later he’d see the decorating of the
senior bench. Near the end of the week the
activity really picks up. The Kangaroo
Court holds a session in front of the Stu
dent Union. The enlightened freshmen par
ticipate in a keg hunt and a keg hunt ball.
Everybody is chattering hello on Hello
Walk. On Friday there is a rally parade to
the good old bonfire. Afterwards there is
a rock ’n roll dance in McArthur Court.
Things take a little different twist on Sat
urday morning when there is an alumni
faculty coffee hour. We’re told that this is
an interesting session, but not too many
people come. The weekend continues with
a football game, concert, dance and finally
on Sunday the University Singers add the
last note.
Now it seems to us that the alum is get
ting a distorted picture of the University.
We think the University is more than kan
garoo courts and scrubbing the seal. The
student Senate’s action last week re-estab
lishing the court pretty well documents
the case made last year by the Oregon State
University Barometer when it maintained
that Oregon students are just as concerned
with trivia as OSU students. But in spite of
what the alum sees during homecoming
there are important student activities and
programs concerned with migratory labor,
civil rights and other topics. Homecoming
would be an ideal time to impress the
changing state of the University upon the
alumni. Talks or optional programs. Tours
of new areas of the University physical
plant. Live programs involving students
and other proposals are in order. We are
not telling our story to the alumni and
there is no better time than Homecoming.
This opportunity ought to be utilized to re
flect the trends of a changing campus and
a changing student body.
Teaching Appraisal Forms
The Academic and Cultural Committee
of the ASUO Senate will hold an open
meeting today to consider recommenda
tions on the revised teaching appraisal
form. The form to be filled out by students
at the request of their instructor consists
of seven questions on classroom procedure,
three on examinations and six open-end
questions that give an indication of the stu
dent’s reactions to the course and his in
terest in the subject matter.
While trudging through the midterm
mill, students are likely to experience a vin
dictive delight at the chance of being able
to reverse roles with their instructors and
appraise their instructor’s performance. As
a marginal benefit, the vindictive pleasures
are of little significance and could be detri
mental to the purposes of the rating forms.
In the instructions to the student filling
out the form, it is pointed out that “To be of
effective use to the instructor in evaluating
his teaching methods this rating form must
be considered seriously.”
Teaching appraisal forms are not new to
this campus. A form was accepted by the
ASUO Senate last year, but primarily be
cause of a lack of time, was never consid
ered by the Faculty Advisory Council. The
form is still a long way from widespread
classroom use. The ASUO Senate must ac
cept the form, then it must be recommend
ed to the president by his faculty advisors
and finally it must be taken to the heads of
the departments and the instructors to seek
their approval.
Despite the delays that are bound to oc
cur with this drawn out acceptance pro
cedure, the chances of success are good.
The form itself is well constructed, and em
phasizes instructor utility rather than stu
dent complaint.
Some faculty members have objected
that student evaluation of their courses is
an infringement on their authority to run
their classroom as they please. This seems
to be a very short-sighted objection. The
form is not an injunction; it is a source of
additional data which at the discretion of
the instructor’s judgment may or may not
be used. What is important and what the
teaching appraisal facilitates is that the
data at least be considered.
Letters to the Editor
IllllWUlliJJlUUlUillilllliilUJIlliiUUliillllilU
Resents Sen. Pearson
Emerald Editor:
After reading some of Sena
tor Walter Pearson’s views
about teachers in Monday’s Em
erald, I feel inclined to voice my
resentment at such threats to
our faculty members.
If Pearson believes people are
“sick and tired of paying high
salaries in the administration of
higher education,” then in ac
cordance, he must also believe
that good teachers should be
classified along with salaried
positions in less important oc
cupations.
I strongly object. I feel that
we have some excellent profes
sors on this campus, as well as
on other Oregon campuses, who
are contributing to the develop
ment of some good potential
leaders; now among the throng
of education seekers on campus
today. Should strict control of
(Continued on pcuje 3)
. v
“Hold It, Fellows-There’s A Slight Delay”
Letters To the Editor
Coaching Re-evaluation
Emerald Editor:
That’s it!
The Oregon loss to Texas last
year was somewhat excusable.
The Longhorns’ had a superior
football team as well as a super
ior coaching staff. The Wash
ington tie of the same year was
less excusable. Sure Oregon
clobbered Washington in the
fourth quarter. So what? Why
didn’t the Ducks pass sooner
and score more? Did it lake the
Oregon coaching stafT forty-five
minutes of the ball game to rea
lize that the Washington second
ary was susceptible to penetra
tion via the pass?
Then there was Ohio State A
‘determined’ Duck football team
was completely outclassed Sure
Bob Furgeson was great. The
Ducks, however, had two tackles
last year who have both started
as rookies in the N.F.L. this
year. They also had a linebacker
who has played considerably
with still another N.F.L. ball
club and also one of the finest
guards ever to play for Oregon.
Yet these ball players were com
pletely incapable of containing
the fjhio State offense. True,
Woody Hayes is a great coach.
But could it be that our coach
ing staff leaves something to be
desired?
Corvallis, Oregon, 1962, Ore
gon vs. O.S.U. What did the
coaching staff tell their ball club
at half time? Should the second
half and the final score be in
dicative of whether the coach
ing staff told them the right
thing or not? It has been quite
some time since an Oregon team
beat the Beaver Varsity in foot
ball. Of late have the Beavers
that consistently had better ball
clubs? Or just a better coaching
staff?
1963 started just as 1962 end
ed—only a little worse. The
Penn State game was the most
obvious example of the Oregon
ball club being out-coached.
Penn State opened the ball game
with an offensive formation
which almost completely incapa
citated the defenses that the
Oregon coaching staff had de
vised. The staff had to start
from scratch. The final score
showed how well they scratched.
I admit the Ducks scored
points the next four games—lots
of them. But against who? Ida
ho? Why can’t the Ducks win a
Brief Deadline
Students are reminded that the
deadline for placing campus
briefs is 4 p.m. on the day before
they are to appear in the Emer
ald.
big’ ball game? Might it be the
coaching staff?
Does anyone remember the
score of the Frosh-Washington
Pup football game four years
ago? It was 51-6, Oregon. Have
the ball players and the junior
college transfers of the two
clubs changed that much in four
years or was it just the differ
ence in the two schools' varsity
coaching staffs. Oregon had
some unfortunate injuries in the
Washington ball game a week
ago. They still lost. Even before
the ‘key’ injuries they had not
fared too well.
This weeks ball game—well.
THAT’S IT! No, the Ducks
weren't out-coached ‘this’ time.
They just coached themselves
out of a ball game. Yes, San
Jose could hardly gain a yard
from scrimmage. They didn’t
have to. They could score while
on defense Oregon could hard
ly score on offense.
han Jose naa me nan lor
some eight plays from scrim
mage in the first half and, yet,
Oregon with complete ‘hall con
trol’ completely lacked control.
Of course—Oregon had some in
jured ball players. I can see not
using them if the coaching staff
did not have to. But they had to!
Why did the coaching stafT have
to wait until the last possible
chance to win the hall game to
use one of the ‘injured’? Is this
another example of the coaching
staff’s inadequacy?
Oregon’s head coach is one of
the finest men an individual
could meet off the football field.
On the football field if you were
an opposing coach it would be
nice to meet him there too!
John Bassett
2nd Year Law
OREGON DAILY EMERALD
The Oregon Daily Emerald ia 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 an second el*** matter at
the poat office, Eugene, Oregon. Subscrip
tion rates 95 per year; 92 per term.
Opinions expressed on the editorial page
are those of the Emerald and do not pre
tend to reprcuent the opinion of the ASUO
or the University.
EVERETTE DENNIS. Editor
LARRY WILLIAMS, Buaineta Manager
JANET GOETZE, Managing Editor
JIM SPEER, Advertining Manager
RON COWAN, New* Editor
DOUG RAGEN, Editorial Page Editor
CATHY NEVILLE, Academic Affaira Editor
DICK RICHARDSON, Associate Editor
JIM FHAKE, Aihintant Managing Editor
RAY MAST, Sport* Editor
JOE HEKGER, A**iatant New* Editor
GEORGE BIGHAM, Photo Editor
CHUCK BEGGS. PHYLLIS EI.VING,
STEVE GREEN, A»*ociat<; New* Editor*
Editorial Board : Everette Dennis, Ron Cow
an, Janet Goetxe, Doug Ragen, Dick Richard
son, Dave Saml», Jerry Utti, Ray Maul, Pam
PuHhkowaki, Cathy Neville, Pat Holt, Simeon
Crowther, Doug Comb*, Joe Berger, Jim
Frake.