4
Tuesday, October 27, 1970
University Daily Kansan
LETTERS
Faculty Concern Questioned
To the Editor:
The action of the University Senate to rescind Section 3.4.2 of the Rules and Regulations of the University has been challenged in the slap on the face of the entire student body, and amply proves that even normally sluggish students can effectively quash reform and progress when their interests are threatened. The ongoing movement to democratize the nursing process has been dealt a severe setback by this entrenched band of tradition-bound, ill-equipped students who cannot be allowed to stand.
(2) The entire faculty of the University had not been sufficient opportunity to consider issues related to them on the section and its effects.
(1) The section in question was improperly enacted by the University Council on behalf of the University Senate.
(3) That the section is seemingly stated in such broad terms as to include student work. (4) The official group in the university.
Our understanding of what occurred should not be confused by the ostensible reasons for opposing 3.4.2 as presented by opponents of the section. Thomas Gorton, dean of the School of Fine Arts at the motto to rescind the section on the grounds that:
(4) "It impinges upon the historic preagentive of the faculty to set degree requirements and standards."
The above stated reasons for rescinding 3.4.2 smack of intellectual dishonesty and
deliberate misrepresentation of the facts pertinent to consideration of the section. As ably pointed out by Richard von Ende, a member of the University Council on March 19, 1970. It should be noted that Dean Evans of the University Council and his refutation to Von Ende's explanation of the propriety of the
the argument that Section 3.4.2 seemingly applies to every official group in the University structure, when the phraseology of the department school and department shall make provision for the inclusion of a number of student on all policy-making committees and at full school or departmental meetings. I Dean Gorton asserts that such committees exist outside the jurisdiction of schools and
argument that 3.4.2 "impinges upon the historic prerogative of the faculty to set degree requirements and standards."
Yes, it does. But is this a value judgment? If it is, then we must conclude that student input in the decision-making process is un desirable for these faculty. There is no doubt in my mind that the most billing fear of the anti-racism movement is by Gorton appeared in what he
KANSAN comment
Council's actions in enacting the section. Furthermore, the fact that the faculty had shown interest in establishing the establishment of its Rules and Regulations (to say nothing of other business) to establish a department or occasion seems to debilitate the argument that the faculty was never given sufficient opportunity to consider the questions before it.
I seriously doubt the concern of a body that is unable to arouse enough interest in its members to engage on four consecutive occasions.
The contention that the section is stated in broad terms is true—but this must be considered an extension. The Extreme specificity and narrowness of meaning invariably hampers the usefulness of any code designed to serve as a template for a particular Also, I have difficulty following
departments, then I suggest he be a short course in university organization.
Rather than follow my inclination to accuse Dean Gorton of intellectual dishonesty, I will only admit that he is poorly informed and assure he is poorly informed on this point. Finally, the assertion that this section seems to call for voting student teachers in a department dealing with faculty personnel recommendations is, in my opinion, a deliberate misleading move intended to insure the meaning of the phrase "policy-making committees."
Now we arrive at the essence of faculty objection to Section 3.4.2. The smokescreen of objections to section 3.4.1 has syntactic grounds dissipates after even short examination, and the sad sight of an audience witnessing the faculty appears. Gordon was willing to commit to paper his
was not willing to commit to paper—namely his plea to the faculty "not to sell their academic birthright for a mess of potriage called student involvement."
Think about that. I pity a mind which relies on a club of “historic prerogative” to fend off what apparently seems to him to be the attack of a bunch of incompetent students presumptuously wishing to participate in their own (Remember the good old days, when students were required? Why, if students had been involved in setting degree requirements, they might have voted against these!)
This paternalistic, ivy-low mentality which manifested itself in the majority vote of the University Senate is discouraging and aggravating, but certain opportunities lend greater degree of opportunity to meaningful involve students in the processes of our
university. First, approximately 10% of the faculty present did vote against rescribing the section. Secondly, a motion which will, in reconsideration measure up to reconsideration of the University Senate会议 passed overwhelmingly—leaving the door open to passage (perhaps at the desirable level of authorization) at this next meeting. Third, perhaps we witnessed a psychological release on the part of those faculty who feel threatened by the inevitable danger within the university, perhaps this victory was a surge of energy unlikely to be repeated in the near future. Finally, and most importantly, what occurred last students, administrators, and progressive faculty to the fact that a large, dusty body of faculty does occasionally awaken from its lethargic slumber long enough to strike out at reform. This has contributed to continuous collective action.
Organization is being planned.
Dissemination of information via leaflets, meeting, and speeches will be organized to inform. It's your university.
Find out how your professors voted, and persuade them that the correct vote is for student input. Get your student senators involved in the voting process, the student senators had appeared and voted against repeal, the motion would have failed. Our goal is to give true meaning to the votes and ensure community - we work together, that goal can be one step nearer.
Steve Emerson Oliver College Senator
Steve Emerson
Gill Hearing: A Different Perspective
To the Editor:
I was very much upset by the story in last Monday's Kansan on the Judiciary Committee's decision in the Gill-Sedi case because the reporting was so slanted and because this report collects a frightening, irresponsibility on the part of the Kansan.
As one who attended the hearing, I hardly recognized some of the statements made in it and as referring to the same hearings, I began with, so much important, relevant testimony was omitted: (1) Absolutely no mention was made of the first attempt to disarupt Bass's Anthropology I worked on; (2) before he began, several people entered the class (not Seidi, but others who were also in the second group) shouting obscences and telling members of the class to leave. They were asked to leave by Gill (the teacher teaching assistants and did so.
2) No mention was made of the leaflets passed around on May 4, urging students to boycott Dr. Bass's class on Friday, May 8. Bass has been called to a faithful recreation of the tense atmosphere, and serve to put Gill's actions in a better light but in better perspective.
3) No mention was made of the fact that Bass was holding class meetings and business. That is, he had stated on Wednesday that anyone wishing to participate in forums on the war rather than attend class on Friday might do so. Why, then, attempt to turn the class into a forum? Those those interested in a discussion of this type were not present?
Next and far more disturbing were the numerous pre-representation distortions in the article itself. (1) Seedl did not charge Gill with striking him; he charged that Gill created the atmosphere received injuries. When other members received injuries, forced the group out of the auditorium, Seedl suffered kidney damage, Gill in fact, hit no class member; as the article implies he was all together—two non-students, Duffy and Jack Pratt (a self-fconfessed "agitator" from KU student) KU student who was not a member of the Anthropology I class.
(2) Another very serious misrepresentation and an unforgivable oversimplification is the statement in the Kansan that "according to Bass and three class members all class members without recognizing . . . the group."
No teaching assistants other than Gill testified at the hearing, and the testimony of witnesses was quite contradictory regarding the effect of the group on the class. One witness did not notice
the group till it touched the front; another said the atmosphere was so tense that a girl began to cry and then asked if they should before any further developments occurred; and Bass testified that he noticed the group's entrance immediately and heard a rustle in the floor as the group moved to the front.
(3) A further serious misrepresentation occurs in the general portrayal of Gill as an officer in the military background who couldn't bear to have his authority threatened: "Gill is going to identify himself, identifying himself, asked why they were there loudly enough that Professor Bass, who was probably at least fifteen feet from the camera, said."
. answered quietly that the group wished to ask permission to use the microphone. (Gill testified that the officer referred behavior of the group to be disrespectful to him and challenging his authority. (Gill testified that his military service was committed with the military police.)"
All witnesses, including Bass,
testified that Gill's initial questions were not heard. The first voice to be raised loudly
...when asked what they wanted by Gill, one member of the group demanded "the microphone," at which point Gill said "We don't do things that way in Anthropology I."
enough to be audible was that of a member of the group. There was no testimony to the effect that the man made a quiet request for permission for the microphone. Rather, testimony indicated that when asked what they wanted by GIL, one member of the group demanded "the microphone" and it still said "We don't do things that wait in Anthropology I."
Testimony by witnesses on both sides revealed that Gill's demeanor was quiet and reasonable until the group failed to answer, made requests, and demands. At this point, he stated that if the group did not leave, he would "remove them bodily." None of the injured were necessary to charge Gill with assault and battery in a civil court, as they were quite justified in doing, mainly because they and Gill talked the matter outmanipably after the class was over.
In addition to these serious distortions, I question the fairness of quoting to such great extent that it is impossible for charges against Gill, while giving such little emphasis to the charges against Sedit.
Though it may be obvious from the above statements where my sympathies lie, this letter is not an attempt to exonerate George Clinton for being so far more serious and of great importance even than fairness to either party. At issue here is the responsibility of a newspaper to inform its readers of what is understand it, a newspaper's primary concern is to present its readers with facts—all facts, not just selected facts—and its primary responsibility is to make sure that the information prehensive and truthful, as far as the reporter can determine this. The evaluation of the facts is left to the reader, or is made by a reporter on a page, not in a "news" story.
This responsibility for truthful, factual communication is even more pressing for a campus newspaper such as the Kansas in press when polarization between various groups is so severe, since the newspaper is the main organ of communication between these various groups - administration units, faculty and students, etc.
It is this polarization, this general unrest that makes the Gill-Scid case so important to begin with and is one of the factors that case was not simply dismismantled technically to begin with (there were grounds for dismissal) and why a very concerned and impartial judiciary committee spent long hours listening to it, noticing that it trying to fully appreciate motives and convictions on both sides. And yet the Kansan not only remained completely silent about this pUBLIC hearing until after it was told that the journal Journal-World had three articles prior to the bearing; but also did
This betrayal of responsibility on the part of our campus newspaper in the light of our very real and very serious problems at KU is what, I find, to upsetting about the article; it is so very detrimental to the kind of people we work with and action that both KU and the country as a whole desperately need.
To have much important testimony ignored, other testimony distorted by the Kansan schoolboy when one considers its responsibility on a campus where the union was burned and two students shot within the last year of reporting that is conducive to an atmosphere of polarization, to an atmosphere of easy emotional solutions, rather than reasoned reasoning in an issue or problem.
not even send a reporter to the hearing itself!
Cheryl Grosser
Graduate student and
assistant instructor in English
(Editors Note: The portrait of Gill as an "uptight interlocutor was certainly not the interest of the interpretation of the readers. The passage referred to was a direct quotation from the majority report on the counter attack against Sediq threatening disruption.
The Kansan was derelict in his description of the charge in the Seidl i. Gill case. Gill was alleged to have put Seidl in threat of bodily harm through his actions.
The statement referred to in point two of Miss Grosser's letter follows in full: "We infer from our experience that three other teaching assistants, and all class members continued class activities without receiving or approaching the group, so that probable consequence of the
The report continues, "We note that the group did not become loud or abusive, nor attempt to move toward Mr. Gill, Professor or the minister, either before after Mr. Gill addresses them."
The Kanas would further point out that these statements signed by four of the six members hearing panel of the University Judiciary, Undoubtedly, in addition to the hearings, they attended the hearings.
group's presence was not substantial disruption."
We do however underscore the importance of a "newsletter to its readers and to truth," and the importance of adopting the principle, apologizing for the lack of sufficient coverage on the Seldi v. Gill case, and pledging a concerted effort to improve our contact with our readers on all levels.
America—"the land of the brave and home of the free" more precisely, a three act farce comedy.
Party Name A 'Misnomer'
Norbert Dreiling, state Democratic chairman, discolored the political system of the United States by his actions at the Tuesday night Democratic primary. He was Douglas County 4-14 grounded. He also proved that the name of his political party was indeed a
This afternoon was a dark hour in the annals of the University of Kansas. The University Senate, the university's upper-prior ruling of five months ago, that campus committees should include at least 20 per cent
Dark Hour
Almost overlooked amidst the rhetoric and emotion of that meeting was the quality of the presentation. The Friar only did he effectively chair a meeting profuse with agenda reversals and point-of-order. he also managed inclusion of the audience in the meeting via closed circuit TV.
mismiser. Any man or political party that claims to be for freedom and the democratic way of government, like a controversial, but nevertheless, a full and bona fide member of their own party, is not a candidate for the Esquire magazine "Dubious Achievement Award" for outspoken hypocritical statements
To the Editor:
To the Editor:
It is particularly ironic that Zilm, a student in the School of Architecture, so effectively reached this meeting that contained a joint function as mature members of the academic community!
Bruce Molholt,
Assistant Professor
of Microbiology
but Dreiling showed more ignorance, arrogance, and fear than common sense in his refusal to Kimbail speak Tuesday night.
If Kibumali is told by one more so called responsible Lawrence McPherson, who lives elsewhere, President Nixon may have the answer to his question, "What reason do the young have for wanting to take up strategic processes of this country?"
I understand that George Kimball may offend some people.
Scott E. Smith Indianola, Iowa senior
Scott E. Smith
MAKING OUR CASE An Exercise In Form
By R. L. BAILEY Student Body Vice President
The proceedings of the University Senate last week exemplified academic thought in action. A number of faculty members voted to rescind 3.4.2 study student representation on committees (been cut off by the procedure used in adopting it even though they claimed to be in favor of the content of the regulation. Despite the fact that the procedure was perfectly legal and parliamentary, those faculty members felt that it hadn't been "proper." They were concerned with "how" it was adopted, not what it said.
It is not so important that you arrive at the correct answer, but that you understand it in other words, the means justifies the end. This is the basis of academic thought, and at the same time the greatest imputation is the wrong one.
This undue emphasis on the formal is the reason many students complain about our educational process. It isn't what you learn, it's how you learn. What is not important is the education, consequently, be an influence.
docrintaining process in discipline and form, not a process of acquiring knowledge.
Unfortunately, academic thought is a phenomenon not limited to the university. It has spread to government. Procedure is the raison d'etre of our large governmental bureaucracy. It requires that the poor now as well as students. The War on Poverty at the hands of undue emphasis on procedure.
During the early '60s, a favorite argument was, "I can't opposed to civil rights, but you can't interfere with it." The argument that Watsen was widely accepted until Watts exploded. Can we wait on procedure until the entire country agrees?
Bureaucracy is the greatest enemy of social change, and bureaucracy is a by-product of academic thought. As students and as human beings need ability to tear down the walls of superstition and procedure, bureaucracy doesn't mean blowing up a building, but it does mean standing up and demanding our right to an education and government free from the shackles of tedious bureaucracy. Procedure and structure are the means of action, goal, but when they become so formal as to prevent attaining of that goal, they must be removed.
'Never mind the small print, my dear. Just sign on the dotted line!'
An All-American
College newspaper
Knopf Telephone Numbers
Newsmom- U-4-1-BRH
Mailmaster Address
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
published at the University of Kansas daily during the academic year. Annual subscription rates $8 a month, with payment at Lawrence, KG. 60044 employment advertised offered to all adults without regard to color or sex. Employees are not necessarily those of the school and are not necessarily those of the Board of Regents.
Letters policy
Monroe Dodd
Letters to the editor should be type-written, double-spaced and should not exceed 500 words. All letters are submitted to the editor, according to space limitations and the editor's judgment. Students must provide their name, year in school and home town faculty and staff must provide their names. Students must provide their name and address.
KANSAN reviews
By MELISSA BERG Kansan Reviewer
Whimsical Characters Charm In 'Trudi and the Minstrel'
"Trudi and the Minstrel," one of the most promising scripts to appear on the American children's theatre scene, will be staged in the Fall 2016 production, Oct. 28, 29 and 30 for area grade school children.
A 2 p.m. performance on Sat., Oct. 31 will be open to the public.
Becky Ditler, Chicago graduate student and director of the Young People's Theatre production said that although the play is enjoyed for fourth to sixth grades, there is a lot of adult humor included.
The author, British playwright Alan Cullen, has written several top quality plays for young people. "Trudi and the Minstrel" was first presented in England in 1985.
In his original program notes, Cullen designates the play as a "tale with no moral." Rather, "Trud" is primarily intended as a theatrical experience for children.
The tale centers on Trudi, a peasant girl, who leaves home because there are too many mouths to feed. She meets a minstrel named Peter Pum-ram and travels to a nearby castle to seek employment.
During their stay at the castle, they encounter an army of beronnes who is also a dainter and recovering from the Truid is destined to marry her son, Seigfried, the barbries ten very devious way possible to survive the Truid's capture.
The evil barrenness leads Tipper and Peter to the cavern of her pet dragon hoping he will consume them for dinner. After escaping, they fall into a cave where they find a troll by replacing his heart with a spring.
After this sequence of narrow escapes and other
The dragon is a very comical, ferocious beast and the trolls are rather silly, misgirlish creatures.
Although the description of the play might give the impression that it will be unnecessarily frightening, the play has a delightfully whimsical quality about it which is unmistakably British.
magic spells, the couple is married and all ends happily.
The whimsical quality in "Trudi and the Minstrel" is reminiscent of A.A. Milne and Lewis Carroll. Interesting overtones of "Alice in Wonderland" lend their own charm to this known fairy tales are found throughout the play.
Cullen has taken fantasy several steps further, advancing toward a character of the sort, an exscript, designed to characterize the behavior of a character represents a trend in contemporary children's theatre to introduce older children to different characters.
The theatrical style employed in "Trudi and the Minstrel" emphasizes the absurd aspects in an ensemble.
Lighting and sound effects will also be unique. To achieve the weir effects, palating, colored lights and colorful sounds will be used.
The set design through the application of a clean, captures the medeuval flavor through cut creamy layers.
The imagination of the costume designer challenges in transforming the human body into the costumes.
The production will also be staged in the Kansas
Cinema Hall on Nov 9, 10 and 11 and at Wynn-
land's Cinemas.
Miss Ditzer explained that the Young People's group had been touring for five years with the main group. "It's a wonderful place," she said.
Miss Ditzler, who received her B.A. from Clark University, worked on her master's degree in theatre at KU.