Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Jan. 13, 1965)
Keep Talking Opportunities for Discussion ore Necessary A new concept in informal University discussion will be attempted this weekend when the Oregon Assembly holds its first meeting. The assembly, composed of stu dents, faculty members and administrators, will meet to discuss student responsibility and the University’s role in giving students the opportunity to exercise mature and re sponsible ideas. Coming on the heels of the Berkeley demonstrations, this discussion has perhaps taken on added meaning. The assembly is new this year. It has ap parently replaced the academic retreats, held several times a term for the past two years. While the assembly provides some of the same opportunities for discussion and reflection that was provided by the retreats, we are sorry to see the latter program ap parently abandoned. The retreats were held apart from the campus and usually extended overnight. Participating students were given a list of books or publications to read before the retreat. The discussion was then on some general topic for which the books provided background. Faculty members and admin istrators participated in each discussion. Topics for discussion ranged over a broad area, from specific problems to broad, philo sophic questions. The retreats were small, with only a limited number of students al lowed to sign up for any given weekend. Admittedly, the Oregon Assembly does serve very much the same purpose as the retreats did. However, because of the size of the group participating in the first as sembly (and hopefully in succeeding eve ning sessions) assembly programs must be carefully scheduled at times when the greatest number of interested individuals can attend. One advantage of the retreats was that because of their limited size they could be held frequently, involving varied groups of students and faculty members. Since both programs have merit, there is no reason to assume that one must replace the other. Both could be held at different times throughout the year, involving an in creasing number of students and faculty members in the type of discussion which gives meaning to a university. The academic retreats have not been held so far this year. We hope this does not mean that a good program which has proved itself in the past has been abandoned. Choronology of Events On Berkeley Campus Some of the complexities of the Berkeley situation may be clarified by presenting the events in a brief chronology. The following is developed from a record of events prepared by two faculty members at the Uni versity of California and anoth er by the Public Information office. June—During the Republican National Convention, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that charges had been made that Scranton supporters were ille gally recruiting student volun teers on campus. Sept. -I — Picketing of t h e Oakland Tribune by a group which recruited support on the Berkeley Campus. Sept. 14—Dean of Students Katherine Towle issued state ment banning posters, easels, and tables at the Bancroft-Telegraph gate to the campus and remind ed students of “rules prohibit ing the collection of funds and use of University facilities for planning and implementing o(T campus political and social ac tion." Sept. 17-18—United Front is formed among 20 student organ izations. The group asks Dean Towle to reconsider decision. Sept. 21—Bancroft Telegraph area restored for distributing UUlUliilUiiilUUUailUUtUUliUiliUUUiUUlUUiilUiUHiiliJHtl Berkeley; Part II u!i;iiiji;uii;:uiiiiuiiuuiuiiuuijiuuuauiuai«uiiuiuuiii The Faculty Role at UC By CATHY NEVILLE Emerald Editor One encouraging sidelight of the semester-long disturbances at the University of California has been a resurgance of faculty interest in student life and teaching at that University. “For the first time, the fac ulty genuinely understood some of the undergraduate frustra tion at the situation,” one Uni versity staff member observed. The frustration he refered to is the size of the University, in many cases the lack of personal contact with faculty members, and the unfortunate situation in which many professors find themselves devoting a great deal of time to preparing research papers for publication rather than teaching. As a result of the Free Speech Movement, faculty members found themselves asking to be given some responsibility for student discipline, a function which the faculty had gladly given up several decades ago. Legislature Ruled When UC was founded by the State Legislature, disciplinary powers were vested in the fac ulty. In 1921, at the request of the faculty, the situation was revised and power over disci pline was given to administra tors with the Board of Regents retaining final authority in all disciplinary matters. In the now famous Dec. 8 motion passed by the Academic Senate, the faculty asked by a vote of 824 to 115: “That future disciplinary mea sures in the area of political ac tivity shall be determined by a committee appointed by and re sponsible to the Berkeley Divi sion of the Academic Senate.” Although the Board of Re gents subsequently declared that they will not delegate disciplin ary authority to the faculty, giv in the faculty only advisory power over student discipline, the fact remains that in reasses sing its role the faculty was willing to accept a greater re sponsibility for the student com munity. Loss of Contact But the question of faculty involvement in student disci pline is not the major one at Berkeley. As the dispute devel oped throughout the fall months, some faculty members were gen uinely surprised to see the in tensity of student desires. To many, it brought home the real ization that contact with under graduate students had been only limited and that the desires and nature of the undergraduate student body were unknown to many faculty members. Faculty dedication to teaching had un fortunately been weakened by the pressure to do scholarly re search. “At the last faculty meeting there was a marvelous feeling of resolve and of a new commit ment to action and to teaching.” one faculty member observed. Faculty participation in the dispute came slowly. Some teaching assistants had been in volved early in the dispute but all action had been on a per sonal basis. The first formal fac ulty participation came when the tri-part committee was formed Oct. 2 to discuss stu dent demands. Faculty Role From this point on, the fac ulty role became increasingly important in the discussions. Feelings ran high within the faculty, as they did within every other segment of the University during the days of agitation, but the faculty continued to act as a mediator in the action One major point of friction came when the Heyman commit tee, appointed by the Senate to advise President Clark Kerr on disciplining the eight students, indefinitely suspended in the first days of the dispute. The committee recommended that the students be reinstated pend ing a hearing and further study of the situation. The request was denied by Chancellor Edward Strong. At the time the request was denied, the tri-part committee was still meeting to discuss the student demands. Negotiations in this committee had broken down when student leaders, im patient with an appartmt im passe concerning the right of students to advocate action which might result in illegal acts (civil disobedience). Adminis trative representatives on the committee contended that the University should reserve the right to discipline students for illegal acts advocated on the campus. The student position, in op 99&2L ■ • ■ ex** Tl{e. f*>S? “This Is The Great Society?” position to this, was that only courts could determine whether advocated actions were legal or illegal and that any punish ments for advocating action should rest with the law instead of the University. Students, impatient with the impasse reached within the com mittee, set up tables again Chancellor Strong then dissolved the tri-part committee, stating that students had violated the provisions of the Oct 2 agree ment by beginning new demon strations. Regents Meet At this point the Board of Regents met again, accepting recommendations for suspend ing the eight students and modi fying their policy to allow "law ful ofTcampus action” to take place on University property. Since the faculty could not get the Regents to accept their informal policy of not limiting the content of speech on campus through the administration, it would become an official faculty position. On December 8 the Academic Senate recommended 1) no dis ciplinary measures against mem bers organizations for activities prior to Dec. 8; 2) that time, place and manner be the only regulations and that these reg ulations be made only to pre vent interference with the nor mal functions of the University; 3) that the content of speech not be restricted; 4) that a faculty committee be made responsible for future disciplinary measures in the area of political activity; and that peace be restored. With some modification, the faculty’s position has been the final course followed by discus sions. Students Wanut Role One generalization drawn about the situation by a stafT member is “students are de manding a role in the educa tional community, not the solu tion to a specific problem. “We now have a different breed of student than we have in the past. Intellectually they are more mature; emotionally— probably not. “There was a time when stu dent pranks or disorders were tolerated to a great degree. As students have become more so phisticated, the community has become more intolerant. Before, there was always the suspicion that nothing really had would happen.” Racoon coats were funny, beards aren’t. informational literature but pro hibition of advocacy or organi ziition of political and social ac tion remains. Students hold first rally on steps of administration building, Sprout Hall. Sept. 28—Chancellor of t h e Berkeley campus Kdward Strong allows distribution of campaign literature and similar material at designated locations. Stu dents picket the meeting at which Strong announces this policy change and set up ta bles advocating political and so cial action in an effort to make a test case concerning the Uni versity’s rule prohibiting advo cacy. Sept. 30—Five students cited by dean for illegally manning tables. 400 students sign state ment declaring joint guilt. Fight students indefinitely suspended, students stage sit in until 3 am. in Sproul hall. Oct. 1—Tables set up in front of Sproul hall. Jack Wineberg, a former student, arrested. Stu dents surround police car, re main for 36 hours. Oct. 2—Police assemble on campus, car still surrounded. Administrators, faculty mem bers and students agree to a six point truce. Demonstrations end. Oct. 3, 4—Free Speech Move ment organized under that name. Oct. 13 — Academic Senate (faculty) passes motion favoring "maximum freedom for student political activity.” Oct. 15—President Clark Kerr asks Academic Senate to estab lish ad hoc committee to ad vise on disciplining the eight suspended students. (Heyman Committee) Oct. 21—Heyman Committee requests Chancellor temporar ily reinstate suspended students pending hearing and report. Be quest denied Nov. 5—Picketing resumes Nov. U—FSM rally on Sproul steps. Tables set up again Uni versity officials take names of some students, 800 sign joint guilt statements. Nov. 10—Chancellor Strong dissolves administrative faculty student committee because FSM has resumed demonstrations. Nov. 20—Regents accept rec ommendation for suspension of eight students and placing Savio and Art Goldberg on probation. Regents also agree to modify policy on political activity, stat ing that lawful off-campus in volvement may be organized in designated areas on campus. Students advocating unlawful action will be subject to Univer sity discipline. Nov. 22—FSM sit-in for three hours in Sproul over issue of University discipline for off cam pus activity. Nov. 25-30—Disciplinary ac tion proposed against students who have participated in demon strations. Teaching assistants threate n strike. Dec. 1—FSM demands Univer sity drop charges, asserting only courts have the right to regulate (C ontinued on pane 3) OREGON DAIRY EMERALD Thr Oregon Daily Emerald i* pub lished five time* in September and five day* a week during thr academic year, ex cepf during examination period*, by the Student Publications |<«,ard of thr Univer sity of Oregon. Entered .in second class matter .it the post of)ice, I'.ugenc, Oregon. Subscription rate* $5 per year; $2 per term. Opinions expressed on the editorial pa^e arc tho 1 of the Emerald and do not rep:e ent the opinions of the ASl’O or the University. Cathy Neville, Editor J. Craig Mathiesen, Business Manager Chuck Urge , Managing Editor Kenneth K. Kappel, Advertising Manager Stephen Green, News Editor Dave Jordan, Associate Editor Phil Sernas, Sports Editor Phvllis Hiving and Rich Pi how, Associate New » Editors Irma Dawn Moar, Associate Managing Editor Boh ( arl, A i taut Managing Editor Steve Dimco, Entertainment Editor Btd> Di nniston, Photo Editor Mary Stamp, Feature Editor Editorial Board Pam Bkuliiic, Clifford Kaufman, Pat Holt, Stephen Gt.-.n, Irma Dawn Moar, Steve Goldschmidt, Chuck lirggs, Dave Jordan, Phil Simas, Karen Winn, Bob Carl.
