Inscape_1967-11-10_005 |
Previous | 5 of 7 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
|
This page
All
|
Inscape— Nov. 10, 1967— Page 6 Educators Discuss Issues At ACE Conference, CSR There Educators and administrators congregated in Washington, D.C. last month to discuss problems and development in higher education at the 50th annual meeting ot the American Council on Education. Sister Clarence Paul, Sister Therese, and Mr. Robert O’Neill, reprepresented CSR at the assembly, estimated at some 1,700 persons. Dr. Samuel B. Gould, chancellor at the State University of New York, gave the keynote address. He stated that the “power of student activism cannot be minimized nor can its potential for creating and maintaining unrest be taken lightly. Unrest and tension on a campus can and should be dynamic factors for university good, but there are certain elements of the current student movement which openly advocate such unrest as means toward total disruption and destruction." Here is an assessment of the meeting by a CPS correspondent. BY PHIL SEMAS WASHINGTON (CPS) - Most students, many faculty members, and even some administrators have never heard of the American Council on Education. Yet the ACE is the most powerful and influential higher education organization in the United States. It is a super-association, counting among its membership 189 national and regional education associations and 1,261 colleges and univer- ^Most of its power is wielded by a staff of 100 people, working out of a staid-looking building on Massachusetts Avenue in Washington. Most significant federal legislation about higher education originates or is influenced by the ACE staff. And they deal with a number of o ther broad p ro b lem s , of importance to the nation's college administra to r s . When ACE holds its national conference, as it did for the 50th time la s t month, it is indeed a meeting of the American Educational Establishment, Tall, gray-haired presidents of big uni-, v e rs itie s, pipe-puffing deans, shuffling presidents of small colleges, and even a good complement, of nuns and p rie sts moved about the spacious halls ^ and numerous meeting rooms of Washington’s plush Shoreham Hotel, listening to panels discuss everything from the university as c ritic of society to the university as servant of society. Yet what was said—either on the panels or in the co rrid o rs—was perhaps le ss important than who was saying it and the way the administrators listened. It was obvious that the demands for student power and student rights have gotten through to the men who run the nation's colleges. They a re aware of students as more than numbers in an enrollment list, another source of funds, and one group involved in the almost secondary university function of teaching and learning. At la s t y e a r 's ACE meeting there was one student on an entire program that dealt with teacher evaluation and improvement. Two years ago, when students themselves were the topic of the ACE conference, four out of nine panels lacked a student representative. But this year there were students or «student-types” on every panel. And the administrators clearly enjoyed the whole thing. They all grinned as Paul Danish, student body vice president at the University of Colorado, skillfully cut them down, telling them that they were the cause of students’ troubles, no matter how they tried to shift the focus of student anger to the faculty. He also cut apart the nation with which they confront themselves in the face of student upheaval; that student unrest Is caused mostly by 's tu den t s t r e s s ” and can be solved by more personal •Student revolts a re usually caused by what is purported to cause them,” he said, "and too much of what you attribute to Oedipus and Elec tra is actually caused by LBJ and the dean of men," As for more personal attention, Danish opinioned that he would ra th e r administrators left him alone. Only one administrator became angry of what the students said. John Millett, chancellor of the Ohio board of regents, attacked as “outrageous” a paper by former University of Michigan student body president Ed Robinson which said that the products of American education who now run the United States a re failures. This, Robinson added, demonstrates the failure of higher education. Yet, while increased p re s su re from students is apparently making college administrators listen to them and talk about teaching and learning as important functions, one had the feeling that the people a t the ACE meeting would have p re fe rred to get back to things closer to th e ir hearts, like the slowing of the federal flow of re s e ra c h flinds described by ACE staffer John Morse Wednesday night or the question of how to get more money out of the public, the government, and the alumni, which Ford Foundation President McGeorge Bundy discussed In his closing speech Friday morning. That was never stated, but it came out subtly in several ways: —T h o u ^ a panel on teaching and learning Thursday drew the la rg e st turnover of any of the three that morning, 90 per cent of the people present were from colleges of le ss than 4,000 stu- ■ dents, according to a show of hands taken by Wer- • dell.— The most significant contribution to the central theme of the conference, goals for higher education, ■ was probably made by Yale Professor Kenneth Kennlston. He argued that critic ism of the society ought to join teaching, re sea rch , and serv ice s as one of the major functions of a university. He said ' that“this meant that the university should make su re that its students and faculty members were free to . ex ercise their c ritic a l roles. Yet few people were a t the panel that discussed his paper (it had competed with a session on who ought to run colleges, in which students were relegated to a footnote in the background paper) and the next morning the wrap-up panel on p rio ritie s was back to talking about the oldtrlumverate. That bore out one of Kennlston’s main points: teaching, research, and service a re pretty easy to explain to tru ste e s, legislators, and the public, but students demonstrating against the war a re not. Thiis administrators prefer to keep that s o rt of thing In the background. __Though he acknowledged ‘ that student ro le s will change,” ACE President Logan Wilson In his ■ re p o rt to the conference expressed concern over “widespread attempts to deride authority in a ll fields* and the Idea that problems of higher education can be solved «by assuming that everybody concerned has equal competence to grapple with them o r by trying to conduct these institutions like perpetual debating socie tie s.” He emphasized leadership by administrators and hardly mentioned students at all in a five point lis t of “c riticual problems” facing higher education. Nor did he mention the c ritic a l role of the university o r making education relevant to societal problems, two major problems articulated by students at the conference. Instead, he talked about “support and control, educational organization, institutional patterns, educational planning, and administration and leadership. When McGeorge Bundy talked about the “imminent bankruptcy” and consequent destruction facing higher education, he added that administrators will find It hard to convince people of the c r is is they face because of higher education's great successes. The delegates to the ACE conference knew he spoke the truth. Many will find It hard to believe that financial and administrative problems a re the key ones fiiclng higher education today. Marine Returns i in k l« ’g In v i ta t io n Central Avenue would not be the same If you didn’t have “Your Jeweler,” HAROLD FINKLB,217 Central Avenue, with his complete line of diamonds, watches, charms, hollow ware, and many more gift items. Special ra te s to all students. Service cannot be beat at HAROLD FINKLE JEWELERS. Free gift wrapping and free engraving on all purchases, and never a charge tor c r e d i t . Come in and browse around. Open every evening to 9 p,m. Mr. Flnkle gladly gives discounts to students. HO 3-8220. AGAINST THE TIDES - An Infantryman pushes his combat gear-loaded a ir m attress before him as he swims a cro ss a monsoon-flooded s tre am in a Vietnam mission. _______________ STUDENT DISCOUNT KNIT ’N* TIME YARN SHOP 212 Western Ave, ot Quail Mention St. Rose Get discount and Free Lessons OPEN DAILY 10 to 5:30 Wed. t il o Phone 434-«339 GARDEN F 1 1 ^ Uftahingtfln A\/ L Al b a t i q 0 V _ m , l - 5 S 6 ^ R 1 S (cont. from p. 5) people,” Joe claims that the r e p orts of apathy a re false. “There is no draft, the whole army is volunteer. Iliey definitely care. They’r e in there because they want to be th e re .” In his personal experience, there were no incidents of desertion. The civilians in South Viet Nam a re “very suspicious of the United States. They have been under foreign rule for so long . . . They .don’t really re a lize what’s going on. There’s poor communication. They don'tknow what communism is. They want us to be there. I can’t say why. They want the American buck. They're becoming accustomed to the Western way. They’re s tarting to wear Western clothing and Western ha irs tyle s.” Do they like their own government? “They must like It—they elected It.” Joe Is 100% In favor of the war In Viet Nam. “The people In South Viet Nam a re helpless . . . The Communists a re trying to take over. If they succeed, they probably won’t stop there. If we settle for a compromise, we’ll have another Korea . . . If the United States did pull out, the financial status of the free world would be In a bind. Prosperity would come to a halt In the United States. The U.S. gives financial support to the free world.” Joe continued on a personal leveL “/ was homesick as hell. I wanted to come home, but I wanted to stay too. It was wierd. It was something I bad to do-a sense of accomplishment, things like that." He also approves of bombing North Viet Nam. “The sooner the war’s over, the sooner the 465,000 men over there can come home to their wives and feimll-le s .” The effect of the protestors on the men fighting in Viet Nam Is “very, very, very demoralizing. The guys get ticked off. They’d like these p rotestors to come over and see what’s really going on . . . There’s not a hell of a lot you can do about it though . . . You just take it in s tr id e ,” He feels that the American public is very gullible. Newspaper and TV coverage do not give a true picture. “They don’t really know what’s going on over there and don’t have enough information to criticize . . . There a re more Americans killed in Viet Nam than a re reported to the public in the United States.” Why don’t they tell us the truth? It would be “demoralizing to a lot of parents. They’d wonder if it’s th e ir son.” Joe felt ‘'no remorse whatsoever in killing. You watch a marine die and you want to kill . . . Besides, if you don't kill him (the enemy), he'U kill you." VN Poll (cont. from p. 4) It doesn't do any gooa to educate a person to be a doctor or a teacher and then have him a s s a s - inated by the Viet Cong. This Is what was happening before we committed ourselves there and that is why we must stay there until this threat to the educated people of South Viet Nam is destroyed. CALLIE GARGIULO: When the future of the South Vietnamese becomes more Important than the lives and future of our people. It Is time to withdraw. Although our original position may have been honorable, the prospect of continual economic and political exploitation of our men, the domino theory, the cry of “save face”, and the image of the U.S. as the saviour of the democratic world disintegrate. ROBERT KLEIN (Siena): I am for the war In Viet Nam. The fact that these people In South Viet Nam need hospitals and schools is very evident However th a t's all we can do about i t To Withdraw now would be suicide and to escalate would be murder. However, there is a cause, and a good cause—FREEDOM—being fought for and the price of freedom is dear, very dear. SUE SHIELDS: I am opposed to the war in Viet Nam. I think it is time we seriously re-evaluate our “commitment” there and decided just why we are involved in -th e war. Are we putting wholehearted effort into attempts for a negotiated peace? The demons tra to rs , draft card b urners, etc. have a message but it’s falling on closed minds. The Insanity and inhumanity represented by the war a re not the only courses of action. LORRAINE DOWLING: I am against the war in Viet Nam— with reservations. While Ib^lieve we should halt bombing and press harder for negotiations, I think an unconditional pull-out is completely impractical and unrealistic. The war has been dragged out, and I do mean dragged, for too long, the re sult being that the purpose of our presence in Viet Nam has been obscured.
Object Description
Title | Inscape, Vol. XXXI, Issue 5 |
Date, Original | 1967-11-10 |
Type | Text |
Format, Original | Monograph: 7 pages, b&w, 17.5 x 11.5 in. |
Format, Digital | application/pdf |
Identifier | Inscape_1967-11-10 |
Source | Student Newspaper Collection |
Language | eng |
Rights | This digital file may be used for educational purposes only. Prior written permission is required for any other use. |
Description
Title | Inscape_1967-11-10_005 |
Transcript | Inscape— Nov. 10, 1967— Page 6 Educators Discuss Issues At ACE Conference, CSR There Educators and administrators congregated in Washington, D.C. last month to discuss problems and development in higher education at the 50th annual meeting ot the American Council on Education. Sister Clarence Paul, Sister Therese, and Mr. Robert O’Neill, reprepresented CSR at the assembly, estimated at some 1,700 persons. Dr. Samuel B. Gould, chancellor at the State University of New York, gave the keynote address. He stated that the “power of student activism cannot be minimized nor can its potential for creating and maintaining unrest be taken lightly. Unrest and tension on a campus can and should be dynamic factors for university good, but there are certain elements of the current student movement which openly advocate such unrest as means toward total disruption and destruction." Here is an assessment of the meeting by a CPS correspondent. BY PHIL SEMAS WASHINGTON (CPS) - Most students, many faculty members, and even some administrators have never heard of the American Council on Education. Yet the ACE is the most powerful and influential higher education organization in the United States. It is a super-association, counting among its membership 189 national and regional education associations and 1,261 colleges and univer- ^Most of its power is wielded by a staff of 100 people, working out of a staid-looking building on Massachusetts Avenue in Washington. Most significant federal legislation about higher education originates or is influenced by the ACE staff. And they deal with a number of o ther broad p ro b lem s , of importance to the nation's college administra to r s . When ACE holds its national conference, as it did for the 50th time la s t month, it is indeed a meeting of the American Educational Establishment, Tall, gray-haired presidents of big uni-, v e rs itie s, pipe-puffing deans, shuffling presidents of small colleges, and even a good complement, of nuns and p rie sts moved about the spacious halls ^ and numerous meeting rooms of Washington’s plush Shoreham Hotel, listening to panels discuss everything from the university as c ritic of society to the university as servant of society. Yet what was said—either on the panels or in the co rrid o rs—was perhaps le ss important than who was saying it and the way the administrators listened. It was obvious that the demands for student power and student rights have gotten through to the men who run the nation's colleges. They a re aware of students as more than numbers in an enrollment list, another source of funds, and one group involved in the almost secondary university function of teaching and learning. At la s t y e a r 's ACE meeting there was one student on an entire program that dealt with teacher evaluation and improvement. Two years ago, when students themselves were the topic of the ACE conference, four out of nine panels lacked a student representative. But this year there were students or «student-types” on every panel. And the administrators clearly enjoyed the whole thing. They all grinned as Paul Danish, student body vice president at the University of Colorado, skillfully cut them down, telling them that they were the cause of students’ troubles, no matter how they tried to shift the focus of student anger to the faculty. He also cut apart the nation with which they confront themselves in the face of student upheaval; that student unrest Is caused mostly by 's tu den t s t r e s s ” and can be solved by more personal •Student revolts a re usually caused by what is purported to cause them,” he said, "and too much of what you attribute to Oedipus and Elec tra is actually caused by LBJ and the dean of men," As for more personal attention, Danish opinioned that he would ra th e r administrators left him alone. Only one administrator became angry of what the students said. John Millett, chancellor of the Ohio board of regents, attacked as “outrageous” a paper by former University of Michigan student body president Ed Robinson which said that the products of American education who now run the United States a re failures. This, Robinson added, demonstrates the failure of higher education. Yet, while increased p re s su re from students is apparently making college administrators listen to them and talk about teaching and learning as important functions, one had the feeling that the people a t the ACE meeting would have p re fe rred to get back to things closer to th e ir hearts, like the slowing of the federal flow of re s e ra c h flinds described by ACE staffer John Morse Wednesday night or the question of how to get more money out of the public, the government, and the alumni, which Ford Foundation President McGeorge Bundy discussed In his closing speech Friday morning. That was never stated, but it came out subtly in several ways: —T h o u ^ a panel on teaching and learning Thursday drew the la rg e st turnover of any of the three that morning, 90 per cent of the people present were from colleges of le ss than 4,000 stu- ■ dents, according to a show of hands taken by Wer- • dell.— The most significant contribution to the central theme of the conference, goals for higher education, ■ was probably made by Yale Professor Kenneth Kennlston. He argued that critic ism of the society ought to join teaching, re sea rch , and serv ice s as one of the major functions of a university. He said ' that“this meant that the university should make su re that its students and faculty members were free to . ex ercise their c ritic a l roles. Yet few people were a t the panel that discussed his paper (it had competed with a session on who ought to run colleges, in which students were relegated to a footnote in the background paper) and the next morning the wrap-up panel on p rio ritie s was back to talking about the oldtrlumverate. That bore out one of Kennlston’s main points: teaching, research, and service a re pretty easy to explain to tru ste e s, legislators, and the public, but students demonstrating against the war a re not. Thiis administrators prefer to keep that s o rt of thing In the background. __Though he acknowledged ‘ that student ro le s will change,” ACE President Logan Wilson In his ■ re p o rt to the conference expressed concern over “widespread attempts to deride authority in a ll fields* and the Idea that problems of higher education can be solved «by assuming that everybody concerned has equal competence to grapple with them o r by trying to conduct these institutions like perpetual debating socie tie s.” He emphasized leadership by administrators and hardly mentioned students at all in a five point lis t of “c riticual problems” facing higher education. Nor did he mention the c ritic a l role of the university o r making education relevant to societal problems, two major problems articulated by students at the conference. Instead, he talked about “support and control, educational organization, institutional patterns, educational planning, and administration and leadership. When McGeorge Bundy talked about the “imminent bankruptcy” and consequent destruction facing higher education, he added that administrators will find It hard to convince people of the c r is is they face because of higher education's great successes. The delegates to the ACE conference knew he spoke the truth. Many will find It hard to believe that financial and administrative problems a re the key ones fiiclng higher education today. Marine Returns i in k l« ’g In v i ta t io n Central Avenue would not be the same If you didn’t have “Your Jeweler,” HAROLD FINKLB,217 Central Avenue, with his complete line of diamonds, watches, charms, hollow ware, and many more gift items. Special ra te s to all students. Service cannot be beat at HAROLD FINKLE JEWELERS. Free gift wrapping and free engraving on all purchases, and never a charge tor c r e d i t . Come in and browse around. Open every evening to 9 p,m. Mr. Flnkle gladly gives discounts to students. HO 3-8220. AGAINST THE TIDES - An Infantryman pushes his combat gear-loaded a ir m attress before him as he swims a cro ss a monsoon-flooded s tre am in a Vietnam mission. _______________ STUDENT DISCOUNT KNIT ’N* TIME YARN SHOP 212 Western Ave, ot Quail Mention St. Rose Get discount and Free Lessons OPEN DAILY 10 to 5:30 Wed. t il o Phone 434-«339 GARDEN F 1 1 ^ Uftahingtfln A\/ L Al b a t i q 0 V _ m , l - 5 S 6 ^ R 1 S (cont. from p. 5) people,” Joe claims that the r e p orts of apathy a re false. “There is no draft, the whole army is volunteer. Iliey definitely care. They’r e in there because they want to be th e re .” In his personal experience, there were no incidents of desertion. The civilians in South Viet Nam a re “very suspicious of the United States. They have been under foreign rule for so long . . . They .don’t really re a lize what’s going on. There’s poor communication. They don'tknow what communism is. They want us to be there. I can’t say why. They want the American buck. They're becoming accustomed to the Western way. They’re s tarting to wear Western clothing and Western ha irs tyle s.” Do they like their own government? “They must like It—they elected It.” Joe Is 100% In favor of the war In Viet Nam. “The people In South Viet Nam a re helpless . . . The Communists a re trying to take over. If they succeed, they probably won’t stop there. If we settle for a compromise, we’ll have another Korea . . . If the United States did pull out, the financial status of the free world would be In a bind. Prosperity would come to a halt In the United States. The U.S. gives financial support to the free world.” Joe continued on a personal leveL “/ was homesick as hell. I wanted to come home, but I wanted to stay too. It was wierd. It was something I bad to do-a sense of accomplishment, things like that." He also approves of bombing North Viet Nam. “The sooner the war’s over, the sooner the 465,000 men over there can come home to their wives and feimll-le s .” The effect of the protestors on the men fighting in Viet Nam Is “very, very, very demoralizing. The guys get ticked off. They’d like these p rotestors to come over and see what’s really going on . . . There’s not a hell of a lot you can do about it though . . . You just take it in s tr id e ,” He feels that the American public is very gullible. Newspaper and TV coverage do not give a true picture. “They don’t really know what’s going on over there and don’t have enough information to criticize . . . There a re more Americans killed in Viet Nam than a re reported to the public in the United States.” Why don’t they tell us the truth? It would be “demoralizing to a lot of parents. They’d wonder if it’s th e ir son.” Joe felt ‘'no remorse whatsoever in killing. You watch a marine die and you want to kill . . . Besides, if you don't kill him (the enemy), he'U kill you." VN Poll (cont. from p. 4) It doesn't do any gooa to educate a person to be a doctor or a teacher and then have him a s s a s - inated by the Viet Cong. This Is what was happening before we committed ourselves there and that is why we must stay there until this threat to the educated people of South Viet Nam is destroyed. CALLIE GARGIULO: When the future of the South Vietnamese becomes more Important than the lives and future of our people. It Is time to withdraw. Although our original position may have been honorable, the prospect of continual economic and political exploitation of our men, the domino theory, the cry of “save face”, and the image of the U.S. as the saviour of the democratic world disintegrate. ROBERT KLEIN (Siena): I am for the war In Viet Nam. The fact that these people In South Viet Nam need hospitals and schools is very evident However th a t's all we can do about i t To Withdraw now would be suicide and to escalate would be murder. However, there is a cause, and a good cause—FREEDOM—being fought for and the price of freedom is dear, very dear. SUE SHIELDS: I am opposed to the war in Viet Nam. I think it is time we seriously re-evaluate our “commitment” there and decided just why we are involved in -th e war. Are we putting wholehearted effort into attempts for a negotiated peace? The demons tra to rs , draft card b urners, etc. have a message but it’s falling on closed minds. The Insanity and inhumanity represented by the war a re not the only courses of action. LORRAINE DOWLING: I am against the war in Viet Nam— with reservations. While Ib^lieve we should halt bombing and press harder for negotiations, I think an unconditional pull-out is completely impractical and unrealistic. The war has been dragged out, and I do mean dragged, for too long, the re sult being that the purpose of our presence in Viet Nam has been obscured. |