4
Thursday, November 3, 1977
University Daily Kansan
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Comment
Unsigned editorials represent the opinion of the Kansan editorial staff. Signed columns represent only the views of the writers.
Law library misused
Controversy over the new law library surfaced last week in reports that undergraduates may be tying up the Green Hall facility. Although the extent of the fall semester has been determined, faculty and students in the School of Law have a right to be concerned.
Law students are saying that non-law students take up space in library carrels and refuse to leave them when asked. Almost all law students study spaces, are reserved for law students.
More disturbing, however, is the decreased access to law materials that law students apparently have encountered. Their academic load is heavy enough without the added burden of being unable to do their research.
NON-LAW STUDENTS are stopping on the first floor of Green to socialize in the common area. That misuse of the building is difficult to comprehend; undergraduates surely can find better places to make small talk.
Precisely. And the reason the library may be turning into a general study area is not difficult to discern. New Green Hall is near
Jayhawker Towers and the Daisy Hill residence halls. Undergraduates from those living groups are faced with the temptation having a quiet place to study close at hand.
There unquestionably are legitimate reasons for undergraduate use of the law library. The most evident reason is the practice of some professors in the social sciences to make assignments that require legal research. And students in undergraduate law courses must not be denied continuing use of the Green facility.
PERHAPS AN ARRANGEMENT can be devised in which professors keep lists in Green of undergraduates who need law materials for specified courses. Other nonprofessional legal professionals at the law library is not to be used merely as a place to study or to meet their friends.
Law students and undergraduates alike soon will confront the rigors of final examinations. University libraries inevitably will become more crowded, and students must have exception. Some action needs to be taken to control undergraduate use of the facility.
It is unfortunate that restrictions should have to be placed on any University library. But the law library does merit attention. Reasonable guidelines are in order if law students are to have the greatest possible opportunity to pursue their education.
Tough standards needed to curb terrorist attacks
Fear of flying is becoming more than a catch phrase from one of Erica Jong's books. It's not the fear of crashing that scares people as much as the fear of being hijacked. One never knows where he will end up.
The 86 hostages were rescued by a West German commando group, which stormed the hijacked plane only hours before the terrorists' deadline for their demands to be met.
One of the grimmest skyjackies in recent years occurred last month when four members of the Red Army Faction took over a Lufthansa jet on its way to Mojacar. That led to an incident in September kidding up of West German industrialist Hanns-Martin Schleier. The lives of the 86 passengers aboard and Schleier's fate were at stake. Nevertheless, the West German government refused to accede to the terrorists' demands for the release of 11 of their imprisoned soldiers and $15 million.
The rescue was a courageous attempt, but the incident did not end on an allogather happy note. Violence bats evil violence.
EARLY IN THE WEEK, the plane's pilot was murdered and thrown onto the runway in a crash. The hijackers had landed without permission. Three of the hijackers were killed by commandos in the rescue. Two of them were found in the trunk of a car in eastern France. Three of the four terrorists whose releases were requested died in a West Berlin prison — apparent suicides.
Violence seems to be one way to deal with the demands of fanatics who use the lives of innocent people as a lever to have their demands answered. In 1972, the Israeli government lesson in a painful way. When Black September guerrillas stormed the Israeli dormitory in Munich's Olympic Village in 1972, the results were the deaths of nine of the hostages and five of the prisoners there proved the inability of countries to deal with terrorists. By the time of the
Mary Mitchell
Editorial Writer
Entertebe raid, Israelis had perfected their commanded tactics, and their almost flawless design of the hostages was praised.
WEST GERMANY BEGAN five years ago after the Munich incident — to form its commands squad. The group of commandos carried explosives and weaponry. Leaders of the group studied and analyzed antiterrorist techniques used in the Entebbe raid and in the assault by Dutch troops at the compound to train free hostages held by South Moluccan guerrillas. Even the United States has such a group, but its purpose is to prevent a possible nuclear attack. S. nuclear arsenals from theft.
Less violent methods of dealing with terrorists do not work. Sentences of life imprisonment do not hold up. Many hijackers so sentenced return to society and do not serve their entire terms. Others have been jailed in prison because for other hijacking attempts. A strong deterrent would be the abolition of sanctuary for hijackers. The United Nations has attempted such a proposal. But unfortunately, many of its members condone terrorism because they sympathize with the terrorists' intentions. Between these nations and between these nations and Western nations, the U.N. proposal has been postponed for another year.
Granting the demands of blackjackers does not do much good. The Japanese government recently lost out when it
EVEN SO, A UNION of highly developed industrial countries against air piracy could have a great influence. Such countries have been the most dependent on those countries for food and other manufactured goods. It wouldn't take that much courage. After all, oil carriers carried out an oil embargo against the United States.
followed the wishes of hijackers who captured a Japan Air Lines plane. By paying the ransom to the rebels, Japan only encouraged fly hijackings. The terrorists landed in Algeria and surrendered — ransom money intact. But the Algerian authorities that Japan waive extradition and the return of the $8 million.
The stakes are great in dealing with terrorists; many lives usually are involved. Refusing to give the hijackers what they want would take a lot of time, and a loss of lives, but it certainly would not encourage further hijackings.
Extreme methods are necessary to prevent future acts of violence and terrorism. It is time for responsible governments to take firm action to eliminate these deplorable crimes. Unless some remain alive, humanity will wither into an ever-increasing fear of such madness, fanaticism and bloodshed.
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
KANSAN
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
at the University of Kansas daily August 24th. Admission is by mail through May and June July except Saturday, Sunday and holiday Subscriptions by mail are $60 or $180 a year. Areas outside the county. Student subscriptions are a year away from home. County student subscriptions are a year away from home.
Editor
Jerry Seib
Business Manager Judy Lobb
Managing Editor Iman Cobb Editorial Editor Steve Frader Campus Editor Ben Dewerian Associate Campus Editor Dan Bowerman Assistant Campus Editor Deena Kerbow,
Assistant Business Manager Patricia Thornton
Administrator Denise Green
Promotional Managers Don Green
University and have seniority.
As long as sabbaticals remain an honor of esteem and are not mutually beneficial to consider those who have shown loyalty to the University. It would be sad for a professor with seniority to be saddened by spryness and enthusiasm for going are smothered. Years should account for something. If two men are comparatively strong they should receive the sabbatical.
GRANTED, bias and subjectivity are intrinsic to such choices as scholarships or jobs, but let those in charge of choosing be open-minded and consider all factors mentioned.
News Adviser Rick Musser
Publisher David Dary
Squabbling over sabbatical policies will go another round next Tuesday at a FacEx meeting.
Broad sabbatical guides needed
teachers who have taught for 10 years and feel stagnant, although stagnation is by far not exclusive to education. A teacher can still be purpose if that teacher gained new insights and inspiration needed for an abundant 10 more years. Such a sabbatical in education would worthwhile than giving a young professor a rewarding sabbatical vacation because he is, for example, given the HOPE award.
Sabbaticals cannot be given to every worthy faculty member; no one there can be no restrictions on those who feel themselves worthy of applying, for whatever reason. If these reasons are not contradicted by adherence to the merit stipulation, then the choice may not reflect the true purpose of sabbaticals — to advance the direction of one, and, ideally, many.
The conflict has been, since last spring, one concerning guidelines for choosing sabbatical positions at the Faculty Council proposed a new sabbatical policy that would allow some decisions to be based on factors other than experience. The policy will with the University and length of time without a sabbatical. Under the current Board of Regents sabbatical guidelines, students should be on the basis of merit only.
SIMILARLY, it would be foolish to deny a professor of 20 years the chance to experience a sabbatical. Those not allowed to pursue their own education are more likely to sabbaticals cannot be expected to be fulfilled as educators by their employers. A professor who never experiences a career has not shown enough merit is much like a football player who is a football center—a quiet workhorse behind the team who seldom receives praise, but deserves the credibility that help him move to higher goals.
Although the proposal has been hashed, rehashed and, most recently, compromised into a democratic voting form. In many cases, it still remains unchanged. Squabbling, too, remains unchanged. And it will continue until faculty members are deemed fit to be considered for sabbaticals on broader base than merit.
AS OF NOW, sabatticals seem much like the job market — external achievements and images often outweigh internal
needs and potential; the judging is subjective, and losers often feel judged superficially. A new system, which would make the choosing of sabbatical awards equitable and openminded, might end all that. Under such a policy, sabbaticals would be based on loyalty to the university, length of time without a sabbatical and other factors that could arise.
Rick
Thaemert
Editorial Writer
The same can be said of those who have shown loyalty to the
Under the current policy, sabbatical candidates are filtered through a hierarchy of committees and ministrators that includes members of the University Committee on Sabbatical Leaves, Chancellor Archie Brown, and the Board of Regents.
Unfortunately, such people are not always in touch with sabbatical candidates and consequently judge them, for the most part, on merit — achievements, peer praise and
WHEN a sabatical is awarded on the basis of merit, it becomes a reward, a bonus that might also be expressed in other lines of work by a day off or extra time off. The sabbatical should be however, an educational investment. The purpose of a sabbatical is to allow an administrator or faculty member one or two semesters' leave of absence to pursue advanced study, conduct research or gain experience.
reputation. Other factors exist. There are candidates who may be more worthy of a sabbatical, but who do not show the teaching dynamics needed for choice by merit.
Without question, everyone involved in an educational system could benefit from a sabbatical. It is, in essence, a learning experience, one that can be transferred to others upon return. If everyone has the knowledge of himself, or his selves, or his teaching or administrative skills, it seems foolish to limit applicants to those who garner the most laurels. There are, for example,
By BRUCE L.R. SMITH N.Y. Times Features
There are some sobering questions to be asked about American science beyond those raised in the fresh public debate over the future of D.N.A. research, over LaTeRite and over artificial sweeteners. The outcry over these scientific insights is an important element in this debate is largely missing: What ought to be our national investment in our scientific future?
Support for research slipping away
The federal investment in total research and development stands at $4.7 billion annually, up from $3.8 billion on each side about whether this
Can we afford the sort of benign neglect that now affects so much of our basic research, or should this new erosion be reversed?
total investment, or any aspect of it, is sufficient or excessive. But what is too little realization is that today's scientific triumphs have led to vast investments in talent, facilities and equipment made a decade or more ago. Time — often a long period while a field ripens — remains an essential element of future practical development of fusion energy and the elimination of cancer cannot be guaranteed.
but clearly can only come with time and public tolerance for the unpredictability of basic research findings.
IN MEASUREMENTS of the nation's scientific capabilities, the evidence has often turned out to be ambiguous, and thus carries no immediate or legal weight. This year's remarkable sweep of the Nobel Prizes by America and this year's award would seem
- WHEN WE'RE GOOD AND READY...NOW BEAT IT! *
again to confirm our scientific primacy. But new evidence is beginning to show that we may have passed our scientific highwater mark and are now slipping.
The U.S. share of scientific papers published in the world from 1950 to 1973 has dropped in many fields, for example, from 25.9 per cent to 21.2 per cent in chemistry, 49.9 per cent to 43.7 per cent to 38.4 per cent to 38.4 per cent in physics, 79.3 per cent to 74.4 per cent in psychology, 35.8 per cent to 30.8 per cent in systematic biology
The number of patents awarded to U.S. individuals and corporations rose from 1960 to 1971, and then fell (and, since the end of World War II, countries to United States citizens have declined). Constant dollar expenditures for basic research by the government declined by 18 per cent between 1962 and 1971, and the number of grants awarded to university scientists has declined in many fields (the National Science Foundation's grants in 1970 and 286 in 1975). Significantly, research has appeared to be less speculative and venturesome than in the 1960s, and many researchers seem to relatively safe and present avenues of inquiry.
PERHAPS WORSE, there is a diminished flow of young
blood entering scientific ranks in some fields because of declining research opportunities for young scientists. Between 1970 and 1974, graduate enrollment dropped by almost 18 per cent in the physical sciences. The median age of university scientists has already increased from 41 to 44 years in 1973, and will continue to rise steadily over the next decade.
University science has suffered because of slackened federal support for such vital programs, and consequences resulting to suggest more permanent and worrisome damage.
Federal investment in research and development plant dropped 77 per cent from a peak of $128 million in 1965 to a low of $28 million in 1974 (and increased only slightly in 1975).
And laboratory instrumentation is deteriorating in many universities without much hope of adequate maintenance, modernization or replacement.
THE 1960S WERE characterized by a close relationship between expanding academic science and increasing graduate enrollments and faculty, and academic science flourished. Potential conflicts and multiple objectives were the general expansion, but an eroding science support base has now forced many such problems to the surface.
What is to be done? What is essential is a new national debate about what kind and how
diverse a basic research capability we should sustain. Can we afford the sort of benign neglect that now affects much of our basic research, or should this new erosion be reversed? It is a political, as well as a scientific, question.
How can we attract and sustain young scientific talent when the teaching opportunities in research-intensive universities are in decline? Can the universities successfully develop nonteaching structures or support publicly sustained? Matters are not helped by the current distaste of both federal and state governments for high-cost doctoral and graduate programs in the sciences. State governments should be a part of this important national debate on how to promote national science effort is to be sustained. They are not part of the debate at present.
Basic research is essentially an investment in the future. Public decisions made now in regard to science will have an impact on how one can guarantee, of course, just what major payoffs will result from investments in basic research. The conclusion is that slackening of our basic science effort are, however, more predictable: a loss of momentum and a long-term decrease in scientific capacities and its world leadership in science.
Bruce L.R. Smith, professor of government at Columbia University, author, with Joseph J. Kartesz, State of Academic Science."