The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 53, No. 16, Ed. 1 Thursday, February 10, 1966 Page: 2 of 8
eight pages : ill. ; page 22 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:
The Rice Thresher
John Durham, Editor
Terry O'Rourke, News Editor
Phil Garon, Managing Editor
Morag Fullilove, Copy Editor
TfCecuUttyfrtt 'Dialogue
Rice's faculty, administration, and stu-
dents often seem to be working- cross-
purposes. The struggle is particularly
evident when students are not involved
in decision-making in any capacity other
than to obey, and as a result can air their
suggestions only as criticism after the
fact—criticism which must be all the
louder and all the stronger because it is
so seldom and so dimly heard.
The discord belies an important fact,
however: that Rice students, faculty and
administrators all are motivated by the
desire for excellence. All pursue excellence
for Rice.
The creation of the Undergraduate Af-
fairs Committee last summer was a sig-
nificant step toward co-operation. A stu-
dent-faculty-administration committee was -
created which had real powers and re-
sponsibilities. The group which judges
and recommends changes in University
policy represents students as well as ad-
ministrators. In the debate over policy,
both views can be heard. Dialogue occurs.
Real communication is an elusive thing.
Merely placing students and administra-
tors in the same room for a period of time,
or allowing them to write letters to each
other, achieves nothing. But in a commit-
tee which must reach a decision, which
must achieve a compromise, which must
therefore heed the varying viewpoints and
aims of its members, real communication
must take place. Apparently it does.
The value of this dialogue is great. It
allows the voice of students to be heard.
Their resources, their ideas, their contri-
butions to the future excellence of the
Uniwr-ily are thus utilized. Reciprocally,
(tiai-also opens the ears of the stu-
dent<did very often their supportive re-
source.- for proposed policies can be
obtained by enlisting their aid in drawing
them up.
This communication between faculty,
students and administration leads to a
sympathetic understanding of each by
each; co-operation is facilitated.
Perhaps insurmountable human factors
preclude perfect communication, but or-
ganizational obstacles prevent it now. The
organizational obstacles can be removed.
Thg proposal made by Student Association
President Bill Broyles to the Student Sen-
ate Tuesday night would begin to remove
them. Adding- student representatives to
these nine University committees would
add student voices in places where deci-
sions must be made.
Some of these committees are faculty
committees rather than administration
committees; some are administrative
rather than policy-making. But student
resources, student ideas and co-operation,
would be of value in each of these areas.
Student members added to the committees
could in no way dominate the committees,
but they would permit communication
and dialogue.
PERSPECTIVE
Student Voices Could Help
As the college system develops, and Uni-
versity policy is clarified, we are hopefully
approaching a definition of the student's
role in the University. Students exist in
symboisis with other interests in the Uni-
versity; whereas administration and fac-
ulty are interested in achieving excellence
in the education offered, we are interested
that excellent education is offered. Surely
students, faculty and administration exist
as some sort of partnership, which will
function best when the partners co-operate
and communicate with each other.
Faculty and administrators must rea-
lize that students have valuable contribu-
tions for the future of the University;
their ideas and perspectives are signifi-
cant. Their co-operation in the pursuit of
excellence i§ vital. The resource and op-
portunity should not be wasted.
SANDY COYNER
*pittat€ci<zC
Behold! Students no longer need fear
only academic probation from grades or
disciplinary probation from hostile deans
or special probation from various judicial
bodies around campus.
The Cashier's Office, that impartial
arbiter of any dispute between supply and
demand, has evolved a new kind of pun-
ishment—one that best be termed finan-
cial probation.
" The notice that you are on financial
probation—a notice which no small num-
ber of students received this week—takes
the form of a financial statement which
lists the amount owed to the University
for various items ranging from course
changes to two semesters worth of room
and board. It says at the bottom of the
statement, "The above items are now due.
Please be advised that you will not be
issued any certificate of attendance or
transcript of credit until your account is
paid."
The Student Senate has fairly liberal
funds budgeted for Rice delegates to vari-
ous conventions, symposia, and confer-
ences around the state and country. Any
student is eligible to represent Rice at
most of these gatherings.
There are two things wrong with the
delegate situation at present. First, many
opportunities go begging: nobody wants
to attend. Second, many of those who do
attend make a superficial report of the
proceedings at their conference.
We do not think the Student Senate
should discontinue its support of these
conferences. Rice has much to offer them
and gain from them. But the Senate should
set to work to encourage a more active
participation in and reporting of the con-
ferences to which it sponsors delegates.
Following is the complete text of the proposal preesnted by
j3A President Bill Broyles to the Student Senate Tuesday night.—Ed.
The role of the student in university affairs has until
recently been extremely vague. This vagueness bred
ambivalence. What, after all, was the student's place in
the university? Was he a novice, a member of a slightly
organized sub-culture that appeals to the authorities of
the university for benificence and redress? Or was he a
full member of a university community, a necessary part
of the whole with a recognized place in the affairs of the
university ?
In July, 1965, a committee was established which
defined the student in the latter role, and which implicitly
regarded him as a partner in a joint venture—Rice Uni-
versity. In that month President Pitzer authorized the
creation of the Undergraduate Affairs Committee, a com-
mittee which has as one of its purposes the recommenda-
tion of policy in undergraduate affairs. Included on this
committee are two student members. The establishment
of this committee and its subsequent role in such matters
as open house and liquor regulations was also the estab-
lishment of a principle. The student, in so far as policy
affected him, was to have a role in formulating this
policy, subject to the approval of the President of the
University.
Toward Institutionalized Dialogue
The existence of such a committee in effect guaran-
tees an institutionalized dialogue between the various
members of the university as a means of arriving at policy
recommendations. It affirms the position of the student
as a partner in the university, a partner taking part in
discussions and being consulted when the university's
operations concern him. The committee has worked, and
hopefully will continue to work as an example of an
experiment in student representation on a high level com-
mittee. In principle, its operation is a success. The dia-
logue is real. The student does not have, as he too often
had in the past, the role of supplicant. He does not
exhaust himself with independent proposals which as
often as not are unread and unheeded. Rather he is a
member of a community which recognizes his citizenship.
The time has now come to extend this principle of repre-
sentation and recognition of the student's role to areas
outside the social affairs of this community.
It has worked in these social areas; it can work
elsewhere where the student hdi a vital interest in policy
matters and administrative decisions. Student representa-
tives on the university committees mentioned below would
be a logical extension of the principle established by
President Pitzer when he created the Undergraduate Af-
fairs Committee. There is no mention of membership on
such committees as the Faculty Council and the Committee
on Interdepartmental Research Giants and Contracts.
These committees fall almost exclusively into the faculty's
areas of interest. Such committees as the Committee on
Undergraduate Curriculum, the Committee on Examina-
tions and Standing, and the Committee on Student Health,
however, are by definition concerned with the affairs of
students. On these committees student participation would
add perspective and would serve to initiate an institution-
alized dialogue in which the student would be assured a
continuing voice on the decision-making level. The creation
of positions for students on these committees would be
another large step toward the realization of the student's
responsible place in the university community. As Iiice
continues to grow under the goals of the ten-year plan,
it is vital that it undergoes this growth in a spirit of
cooperation and common interest shared by students,
faculty and administration. The adoption of this proposal
would be one way to unite these groups in the effort. I
therefore urge its most serious consideration by the uni-
versity as a whole on the basis of its merits and its impli-
cations for the future of the university.
Proposed Student Representation
1. Committee on Examinations and Standing—two
members.
2. Committee on Student Financial Aid—two members.
3. Graduate Council—two members of the graduate
student body.
4. Committee oil Outdoor Sports—one member.
5. Committee on Religious Activities—two members.
6. Committee on Student Health—two members.
7. Committee on Undergraduate Curriculum—three
members.
8. Committee on University Welfare—two members.
9. Committee on Admissions—two members.
These students shall be appointed in the Spring by
the Student Senate and shall be subject to recall by that
body in the event they fail to'Wscharge their responsibili-
ties.
THE RICE THRESHER, FEBRUARY 1 0, 196 6—P AGE 2
<v
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.
Durham, John. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 53, No. 16, Ed. 1 Thursday, February 10, 1966, newspaper, February 10, 1966; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth244963/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.