Oregon
daily
EMERALD
Opinions expressed on the editorial page are those of the Emerald and
do not necessarily represent the opinions of the ASUO or the University.
However, the Emerald does present on this page columnists and letter
writers whose opinions reflect those of our diverse readership and not
those of the Emerald itself.
RON EACHUS, Editor
ASSOCIATE EDITORS
John Anderson
Rick Fitch
Gil Johnson
Linda Meierjurgen
Doug Onyon
Mike Russelle
Ron Saylor
Salty Schippers
D. L. Sonnichsen
Jaqi Thompson
RICH JERNSTEDT
Advertising Director
DOUG CRICHTON BARBARA STONE
Advertising Manager National Advertising Manager
University of Oregon, Eugene, Monday, May 6,1968
Faculty Postpones
Participation Issue
The University faculty has postponed for at least a month
any joint effort by the ASUO and the faculty to develop stu
dent participation policies.
In the May faculty meeting last Wednesday the faculty
was confronted with two motions concerning the make-up
of the Presidential Search Committee and the Johnson Hall
sleep-in.
One motion, made by James Tattersall, associate profes
sor of economics, was a three part resolution endorsing a
statement issued earlier by the Faculty Senate opposing the
application of the equal student-faculty-administration for
mula of the Search Committee as to future academic deci
sion making.
The other motion, a substitute for Tattersall’s motion,
was made by Edwin Beal, professor of management. He
moved acceptance of a statement of opinion which com
mended Chancellor of the State System of Higher Educa
tion. Roy Lieuallen, and accepted the Search Committee
formula proposed by him.
Faced with the prospect of a lengthy discussion on a con
troversial matter at a time when there was other major
business to act upon, the faculty voted to refer both of the
motions to the Faculty Senate for further investigation.
We can understand the faculty’s reasons for referring
the motions to their Senate.
But we do not approve of the faculty’s failure to separate
the need for a body to develop student participation guide
lines from statements of opinion on the Search Committee
and the Johnson Hall sleep-in.
Only Tattersall’s motion provided for such a body. It rec
ommended that the Faculty Senate and the ASUO Senate
meet to discuss the question of student participation in edu
cational policy decisions.
However, the recommendation was the third part of his
motion and thus was also referred to the Faculty Senate.
As the situation stands now the earliest date the Faculty
can act on the question of student participation is in June
at the next faculty meeting.
This is not to say that joint discussions cannot continue.
It simply means that the faculty has not recognized any
body to represent them in such discussions.
In effect the faculty’s action Wednesday has slowed the
effort for student participation. The coming of summer can
slow the effort even more.
There is a great need for a joint student-faculty body to
develop guidelines for student participation that is recog
nized by the ASUO and the faculty.
The establishment of such a body must be above and
separate from any consideration of stated opinion on the
Search Committee or the Johnson Hall sleep-in.
The faculty apparently has not recognized this. We hope
they are able to do so at their next meeting, for student
participation will be a major issue on this campus in the
coming year. Many students are tired of having things post
poned and are becoming impatient.
Footnote
The share of the nation’s resources now allocated to pro
grams for the disadvantaged is insufficient to arrest the de
terioration of life in central city ghettos Under such condi
tions. a rising proportion of Negroes may come to see in
the deprivation and segregation they experience, a justifi
cation for violent protest, or for extending support to now
isolated extremists who advocate civil disruption. Large
scale and continuing violence could result, followed by
White retaliation, and ultimately, the separation of the two
communities in a garrison state.
—From the Report of the National Advisory Commission on
Civil Disorders.
KmCTSfYl LjOJTIfflIttee J\~£I)OrT iiiiiimreimi!!mn!ii!itiniii!imiim!i!iimii,i!:;;iHtiin!iiiiim
IIW»ili!iiinillii;iii!i!ii:;ii!,ii!ililliiiinii!il!i'i!: r jf
University Athletics Not Free
From Racism, Change Needed
Editor’s Note: The following is the com
plete text of the Subcommittee on Intercol
legiate Athletics for the President’s Com
mittee on Racism. The Emerald will contine
to print the complete text of subsequent
reports from the Committee on Racism’s sub
committee’s.
INTRODUCTION
The subcommittee on Intercollegiate Athletics
commends you, Mr. President, for establishing
this Committee on Racism to look immediately
into the grievances of the Black Students’ Union
and into the general problem of racism at the
University of Oregon. We welcome the opportu
nity and challenge to help make the University
of Oregon Department of Athletics free of dis
crimination, either overt or unintended.
During its short existence, this subcommittee
has found Mr. Casanova and other members of
his staff completely cooperative and eager to
work with us in developing policies td ensure
equal treatment of Black athletes. We thank them
for that cooperation and hope it will continue.
We also commend Mr. Casanova for responding
to the recent statements in the Emerald with
his own statements, which we regard as an im
portant affirmation of the Athletic Department’s
desire to make the University of Oregon a leader
in this country in its elimination and prevention
of all forms and traces of racism.
Unfortunately, our own preliminary investiga
tions strongly suggest that University of Oregon
athletics have not been and are not now as
entirely free of racial problems as his statement
implies, although such problems appear to be
considerably less serious here than at many other
universities. We would like, then, to recommend
to you the following set of policies and programs
for implementation by the University and the
Department of Athletics. We believe that should
these become the official public policy of the
University, a major stride toward diminishing the
structure and practice of racism within the Uni
versity will have been taken.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. We are encouraged by the recently an
nounced policy of the Athletic Department that
its coaches and staff will not interfere with the
social and political activities of student athletes
except as such activities fall within the specified
rules of athletic conduct and training. We recom
mend that in specifying such conduct and train
ing rules, each coach restrict these to behavior
directly related to athletic training and perfor
mance. Coaches and the Athletic Department
should avoid unnecessary intrusion into the pri
vate lives of all student athletes and especially
to recognize the right of Black athletes to con
form to the life styles of Black culture. We concur
with the Athletic Department’s announced intent
to draft such regulations in writing for each of
the sports.
We further recommend that an appeal and
review procedure be established to ensure a fair
hearing on any grievance which a student athlete
may have with regard to any coach or staff mem
ber who has made an adverse judgment concern
ing the student athlete on matters outside the
specified rules of athletic conduct or training
or any grievance which a student athlete may
have with regard to the consistency of any rule
of athletic conduct or training with the guide
lines specified in the preceeding paragraph. Any
student athlete may initiate such appellate action
by himself or through a duly authorized repre
sentative acting in his behalf. We recommend
that this review procedure be assigned to the
Faculty Committee on Intercollegiate Athletics.
To insure broader representation of this com
mittee we recommend that three students be
appointed voting members of the committee, with
the understanding that if at all possible their
term is to be one year. One student should be a
designated, elected ASUO office holder, the sec
ond an elected officer of the Black Student’s
Union and the third a student athlete.
2. We recommend that it become the public
policy of the Athletic Department to base corn
tinuation of grant-in-aid scholarship support for
student athletes during the entire eligibility
period only upon academic and athletic perfor
...
mance and adherence to training rules. To in
sure that this continuation is thus based, we
recommend that an automatic review be made
by the Faculty Committee on Intercollegiate
Athletics, constituted as described above, in every
case in which a decision to discontinue scholar
ship support during the eligibility period is made.
Such scholarship support shall continue pending
review by the Faculty Committee on Intercollegi
ate Athletics.
If the findings of such a review show that the
decision for non-continuation was made on the
basis of race, religion, creed or unrelated social
and political activities, sanctions against the
coach for making such a decision will be recom
mended by the Committee for implementation by
the President. The sanctions must be suspension
or dismissal.
3. We recommend that you urge the Athletic
Department to take every step necessary to in
vestigate and eliminate discrimination against
Black athletes in the University, the community
and the state in housing and employment. It is
urgently important that redoubled efforts be
made to find summer and also permanent em
ployment for Black Athletes.
4. In order to improve communication between
Black athletes and the Athletic Department and
to attract more Black athletes, we urge immedi
ate and intensive efforts to add Black coaches,
Black trainers, and other Black staff to the Ath
letic Department staff. We recommend that this
is as critical as the search for a new president
and therefore propose that a search committee(s)
be appointed by the President to recruit for
these appointment, such committee(s) to consist
of the Athletic Department, the students and the
faculty.
5. We urge that the Athletic Department make
every effort to assure that coaches give advice
relating to course selection first on the basis of
educational considerations and second on the
basis of athletic considerations. As a means for
ensuring better advising of athletes, we recom
mend the immediate hiring by the Office of Aca
demic Advising of a professional adviser who
is either Black or especially conversant with the
problems of Black athletes, whose major respon
sibility is the academic advising of athletes. This
will especially benefit Black athletes, who often
need special guidance because of deficient educa
tional backgrounds.
6. We commend the Athletic Department for
recognizing the financial barriers facing many
athletes, especially those who are Black, in their
effort to graduate when part or all of the fifth
year is required. We also applaud the willingness
to attempt to effect a change in the NCAA rule
now prohibiting the University from providing
continuing financial support in cases of need.
We recommend that you make every effort to
support the Athletic Department in these efforts
and that the rule change be widened so financial
aid can be given for up to the full fifth year if
needed. In the interim, every effort should be
made to provide such fifth year support to ath
letes in their capacity as students which would
not violate national or conference athletic rules.
7. We recommend that the University take a
more active part in seeing that athletes com
plete their education. The adviser referred to
above should be assigned the responsibility of
overseeing academic progress, even after athletic
eligibility has been completed.
8. We urge Mr. Casanova and his coaches to
intensify their efforts to recruit Black athletes.
If there are or ever have been racial quotas, such
practice must not be tolerated.
9. We urge coaches to avoid any actions or
attitudes toward Black athletes that give any
hint of discrimination. White coaches, as Whites
generally, are often unaware of the subtle ways
they discriminate toward Black students, on
and off the field. Greater understanding of Black
culture and athletes and greater sensitivity in
coaching them must be developed.
10. We urge the Athletic Department to re
main alert to any form of discrimination in its
policies or practices and to be open in its rela
tions with Black athletes.
11. Finally, we recommend that the sub-com
mitttee continue to work with the Athletic De
partment and other relevant individuals and
groups on campus to implement these proposals
and to develop others.
iimiiiiiiiMiiiuiiiMiiimiiiiiiimiiiiiiHiutuiiiiiiiniiiiiiiiiiuuiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiimMM.iMiimM.............
Emerald Editor:
s =3
Non Sequiter
Emerald Editor:
In response to Mr. Berdahl's
historical critique of my editor
ial. let me see if I understand
his point properly:
Hitler was in favor of commu
nity or participative government
and Hitler was an evil man.
Therefore, community or par
ticipative government is evil.
Hitler had a girlfriend and
Hitler was an evil man. There
fore. having a girlfriend is evil.
Hitler was against Commu
nism and Hitler was an evil
man. Therefore. Communism is
good.
Or do I misunderstand the im
plications of Mr. Berdahl’s anal
ogy?
(Mrs.) Paula Brown
Graduate,
Creative Writing
* * *
‘Educated Men’
Emerald Editor:
We would like to take our
hats off to Mike O’Brien. He
has shown a truly mature and
intellectual approach to our
present University crisis. When
university presidents are in
such demand it is indeed the
best policy to present the Uni
versity as a stable, orderly and
a
upright institution of higher
education. We, the students,
must understand that the Uni
versity image must appear fa
vorable to prospective presiden
tial candidates or we will find
ourselves without a capable
president next year. This dis
sention between the students,
faculty and administration
should be stopped.
The faculty, consisting of
qualified educated men with
degrees, is far more capable
of choosing a president than
the young student starting
down the road of life. The
(' Continued on page 1)