The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 51, No. 4, Ed. 1 Wednesday, October 2, 1963 Page: 2 of 12
twelve pages : ill. ; page 21 x 14 in.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
^ <■
'SetafavUHfy *76e
In six years of life, the colleges have undergone
an almost constant reshaping of their activities,
invariably in the direction of more breadth and
scope. Things have come to the point that the
colleges are expected to provide, in some way or
another, a host of special facilities usually headed
by a demand for libraries or study—this in
addition to the usual offerings of cultural, social
and athletic programs.
It has been argued that the University should
shoulder most of the really expensive projects.
Perhaps so. But such aid does not seem forth-
coming.
In lieu of University support, the various col-
lege governments have taken to building up "hope
chests" earmarked for various uses. For they have
found that although their short-term resources are
very adequate, their finances for large-scale
capital expenditures are definitely shaky.
But the "hope chest" method is a maze of
inadequacies. 1 he burden of payment falls on
the "generations ' of college members who do not
"live" to enjoy their sacrifice. 1 he improve-
ment and its concomitant benefits are delayed
in direct proportion to its cost. If several items
aie needed, they must be taken up one-by-one
or almost indefinitely put off. And there is always
the danger that an impatient Cabinet somewhere
along the line will convert the funds to some
oilier use or else spend the money on the project
i>elore there is enough to do a full-scale job.
1 he logical way for the colleges to finance long-
term permanent improvements is by borrowing.
1 hat way the delay would be avoided, and those
who use and enjoy the improvements would also
loot the bill. 1 he resources of the colleges are
mote than adequate tor paying off notes, cer-
t.ur.ly more than they are able to scare up
thousands of dollars out of current income in a
few years.
But the colleges cannot borrow from banks
or other commercial sources by reason of official
University policy, besides the very good reason
that, without visible assets or even legal existence,
nobody would lend to them anyway. This leaves
but one possible source: the University.
The cost of setting up an FHA-type fund from
which the colleges could borrow would be min-
iscule; the benefit to the colleges, immense.
H* H*
Six years ago, rooms stood empty in every
college. This year, occupancy stands at more than
1 00 % and there are long waiting lists.
It would be absurd to suppose that there has
been a sudden surge of interest in un-aircondition-
ed, cramped and often gloomy, old-fashioned
rooms. Or that Rice students have suddenly taken
a shine to commons food or room rates which are
all out of line with reality and the local rent
market.
The relatively small outlays by the University
for the colleges over the cost of dorms have paid
off. The colleges may not be an oil well, but it
should not take a Jay Gould to see that a strong
committment, financial and otherwise, to the Col-
lege System, pays off in high occupancy rates.
Add to this the benefits of the College System
to the education and overall intellectual growth cf
the student. This, after all, is the business and
raison d'etre of this and any University. Even
if the Colleges were a dead loss financially, the
University would do well to commit itself whole-
heartedly to them.
At present, the Colleges are a dormitory plus
a little; what they need to be is a lot plus a dor-
mitory. The difference is made up in things that
a dormitory does not have. Some of these cost
money, money the colleges presently cannot reach.
1 he University should see to it that at least the
blocks to independent college financing are le-
moved.
HRK
76e Tfott - T^e&ccCettt "Pwrftteett
■The major part of the following editorial appeared in
!.•!>( year's Thresher. With ihe reservations noted at the
end. it continues to he relevant, anil we run it as the
'.hint in a series of editorials on student government at
Hire.—I'.d.)
When a freshman enters Rice, be is assigned
bv a process never made clear to him to one of
live residential colleges, ii he is a non-resident and
a I all perceptive, he quickly leali/es two important
facts of student life: that his position is ambiguous
at best in a system designed primarily for resi-
dents and that the colleges are at the center of
campus social and organizational life.
It is difficult if not impossible for the non-
resident to find a place in such a system, and his
position is. hardly helped by the college's seeming
mdiference to it.
i In? is. in fact, the center of the Non-Resident
Pioblcin, since the non-resident has no real reason
to develop an interest in or a Royalty to a college
which he did not choose and which does not
seem to want him.
It is obvious, for example, that the non-resident
interested in participating in student government
finds it next to impossible to secure a meaningful
position in his college. Normally, the best he can
hope for is a frustrating term as off-campus repre-
sentative. It is symptomatic of the problem that
the colleges regard these officers as their repre-
sentative to the non-resident, not the non-resident's
representative to them. Ideally, the college cabinet
serves all of its members; in practice, the cabinets
principal concern is with the resident, and the non-
resident representative is left to deal with his con-
stituents as best he can.
1 he specific answer to the problems may well
he in the hazy field of college personality. The
non-resident is interested in the college to which
lie is loyal; he is loyal to the college of which he
is proud; he is proud of the college which merits
his pride. And yet this is by no means clear to
many college officers; their inability to recognize
it might account as well for the large number of
upperclassmen who choose to leave the campus.
The problem, by its very nature, offers no pat
solution, but the primary requirement is the proper
altitude. It is unreasonable for the colleges to
demand loyalty from their non-residents if they
offer him no reason to be loyal, lo expect the
non-resident to feel obligated to eat regularly in
the college commons, even at reduced rates, is a
mistake. Poor food and strained silence are high
prices to pay for a college membership that is
otherwise meaningless. Yet this is as far as most
of the colleges have seemed willing to go.
Each college needs to establish a set of service
for all its members, in addition to those which cater
to the special interests of its various groups. 1 hese
activities — not elaborate social functions or
poorly-publicized meal subsidies—will draw the
non-resident to the college. What is needed, in
short, is some continuing activity that will sustain
permanent interest.
•v. •?. -v-
We do not begin to have the full answer to the
non-resident problem, and we do not pretend to,
but we do think we see the problem. The non-
resident will make the extra efforts necessary for
him to participate in his college's activities only
when he feels that effort is justified by the value
of the activities and the sincerity of the college's
interest in him. For him, loyalty and participation
are matters of choice, not obligation or necessity.
1 o attract him, college programming must in-
dicate every reason why that choice is a wise one.
As so many college officers are ready to admit,
the failure to provide for the non-resident is
equivalent to admitting a basic failure in the
college system itself. If the problem is anything
more than a lack of publicity—and we think it
is—then the failure of the non-resident to choose
the colleges is an indication that the college's pro-
grams are not sufficient to justify the effort.
There are some notable exceptions to what we
have said, and we do not include them in our
criticism, but this reservation constitutes no waiver
of responsibility for those colleges whose total con-
tribution to the non-residents is obvious by their
presence, its failure by their absence.
EJK
Seen In Passing
(The following excerpts are taken from "The All-Star College
Primer," ($1.50) and reprinted by permission of the publisher, The
Grooves of Academe Press, Exaxston, Illinois. Any similarity between
these characters and campus figures is surely coincidental.—Ed.)
Meet the Dean of Students. He is posting- some more
regulations. He is the official who welcomes freshmen to the
clolege family. Guess who dad is.
His job is to help mold students into mature adults who
are ready to assume responsibility and leadership in modern
society. That line is from his annual orientation speech on
College: "A Preparation for Life."
HERE'S HOW THE dean helps prepare students to fit
the modern mold:
By providing advice to the student publications commit-
tee in order to save the editors from themselves.
By dropping in on political rallies to give students the
benefit of his views.
By joining in student council meetings to guard the
council from conflicting with college policies.
Garland the dean's bulletin board \\<i<th moldy ivy.
* * *
This is an Assistant Professor. He knows almost every-
thing.
HE TEACHES modern American literature. There are
two hundred students in his course. His specialty is Eliza-
bethan literature. Elizabethan literature is also the specialty
of the chairman of the English department. There are ten
students in his course.
Give at least one reason why the assistant professor is
not teaching his specialty.
The assistant professor lectures at 8:30 am and conducts
a quiz section at 9:30. He corrects quiz papers from 10:30 to
12:30. Then he eats lunch at the office desk he shares with
five other assistant professors. He advises students between
1:30 and 3:30. At 3:30 he has another quiz session.
BECAUSE OF his attention to the students, the assist-
ant professor will be (check the most likely result): 1) Pro-
moted; 2) Paid a higher salary; 3) Provided with a graduate
assistant; 4) Pooped.
Assistant professors sit up half the night preparing the
next day's lecture, correcting more quiz papers, and talking
with other assistant professors about the deadwood in their
departments.
Deadwood is academese for full professors.
Here is a Full Professor. He knows everything.
A proessor spends most of his time at interdepartmental
committee meetings and in writing proposals for research
grants. These activities are hygienic because they help im-
munize him from underclassmen. He views too close a con-
tact with them as a threat to his mental health.
IF A PROFESSOR obtains a grant he takes a leave of
absence. This is one reason why some of the college's courses
exist only in the college bulletin. Another reason is that if
he doesn't get a grant he goes away anyhow to be a con-
sultant on something somewhere.
When full professors are on the campus they sit up half
the night talking with other full professors about the hare-
brained malcontents in their departments.
Harebrained malcontents is academese for assistant pro-
fessors.
* * *
Do you know why all these faculty members are gath-
ered in a hotel lobby?
THEY ARE AT a slave market. Slave market is aca-
demese for a National Meeting of a learned society. It is
where deadwood and harebrained malcontents assemble to
bargain about switching jobs and trading graduate students.*
Everyone knows everything. But everyone doesn't know
that everyone else already knows everything. That is why
the association's members read research reports to one an-
other.
WHEN A REPORT confirms the beliefs of the directors
of the associationTt is printed in the society's professional
house organ. The author receives prints to give to his family
and friends and the college's dean of faculties.
Reprints are like green stamps. When an assistant pro-
fessor's file in the dean's office is filled with the proper
number of reprints, he is promoted.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Keilin, Eugene. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 51, No. 4, Ed. 1 Wednesday, October 2, 1963, newspaper, October 2, 1963; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth244893/m1/2/: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.