The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 56, No. 4, Ed. 1 Thursday, September 26, 1968 Page: 2 of 8
eight 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:
Rice not consumer factory
Concerned SCEP looks for advanced educational policy
(following^ are the opening remarks of Tom
Hylden, chairman of the Student Committee on
Educational Policy, at the informal discussion of
Rice's educational policy at the Senate meeting
Tuesday night.—Ed.)
The Student Committee on Educa-
tional Policy has, for the last few years,
concerned itself with a number of tasks
which were at least peripherally related
to educational policy at Rice. Each year
a review of the courses taught at Rice
has been prepared, with varying degrees
of success. Each year a number of stud-
ies has been prepared and subsequent
proposals have been submitted to the
university authorities, also with varying
degrees of success.
Changes in university policy have
been accomplished through various in-
stitutional channels open at Rice, in-
cluding SCEP, the residential colleges,
various university faculty committees,
and the different departments of the
Univi rsity. But what has been the result
oi the various new proposals adopted by
the University in recent years, and what
is their relationship to educational policy
at Rice?
Some of the changes, like self-sched-
uled final examinations in most upper-
level courses, have merely made some
aspects of Rice education less painful, or,
if you prefer to use liberal terminology,
more convenient. Others, like the pass-
tail option, have involved a concession
to student requests while skirting the
real issue of, in this example, should
there be any grades at all? (This is
called "decision-making by procrastina-
tion," i.e., "maybe if ignored, the prob-
lem will disappear.") Too few have re-
sulted in a real change of university
policy or a willingness to try new inno-
vation—the student-initiated, college-
sponsored courses being an exception.
No substantial change
I think, then, that most of the discus-
sion of "educational policy" in the past
lias resulted in what should be termed
minimal change; it has not resulted in
substantive change, and it has not really
concerned itself with educational policy.
The discussion has not concerned itself
with educational policy because, when
one investigates educational policy, he
should concern himself with the sub-
stance of that policy, not the rubrics.
Even more basically, we can't say we
have concerned ourselves with educa-
tional policy at Rice because educational
po]j<-y at Rice is undefinable. It is unde-
finable because the tie jure and tie facto
policies at Rice are so different as to be
almost comical.
If you weren't aware that there does
exist a general de jure educational policy
at Rice, 1 can perhaps enlighten you in
that regard. All.of the following quota-
tions are taken from "A Ten-Year Plan
for Rice University . . . 1965—1975":
"Rice University's goal and aspira-
tion is, to be a university of the highest
quality, serving not only as an educa-
tional center of excellence for selected
•^t^jjh'nts of high intellectual ability, but
also as a center of creativity where new
knowledge and new ideas result from
research and other scholarly-creative ac-
tivities."
In order to implement this "highest
quality, ' the following are thought to be
the modes of action*
@ Increase the number of people on
the faculty and the number of students
in the University.
9 Increase the budget of the Uni-
versity.
• Increase the number of colleges
("to accommodate all undergraduates
who desire to live on campus." We must
conclude that no more women under-
graduates desire to live on campus.)
® Strengthen programs- in the social
sciences and fine arts (provided "ade-
quate financial support is forthcoming.")
O Increase the quality of each incom-
ing freshman class.
® Increase the income from student
fees and tuition.
O Get hold of $21,000,000 for capital
purposes.
This, apparently, is what is meant by
educational excellence.
The policy of the past, then, seems to
be one of quite desirable goals for
achieving a truly fine university, but
one that believes the quality of such a
university is measured in terms of vari-
ous quantitative factors, such as finan-
cial resuorces, number of top-ranking
graduates, and the breadth of certain
departments. Such things are, of
course, often found in the "great uni-
versities"; some of them are no doubt
necessary to have a great university;
but none of them is sufficient.
Two areas
Reading further in search of Rice's
educational policy, we find "Rice Uni-
versity aspires to a level of excellence
which clearly transcends a regional
frame of reference. The realization of
this aspiration will require the assump-
tion of a role of international leader-
ship."
This is indeed interesting, coming
from a school thirty-three per cent of
whose students come from the immedi-
ate region, Houston, and sixty-seven per
cent of whose students come from the
more broad region called the State of
Texas.
Along the lines of a more specific edu-
cational policy, the report states, "The
essential unity of knowledge and the re-
lationships among disciplines will be
emphasized, rather than diversity and
extreme specialization. The Rice objec-
tive is a university rather than a multi-
versity."
The contrast between this statement
of policy and the actual situation at Rice
should be quite evident to any student at
Rice, whether his discipline be in the
liberal arts or the sciences.
Although this entertaining reading
could be pursued at length, I hope that
the point is clear by now: the de jure
and de facto aspects of educational pol-
icy at Rice are not one.
What then will be the role assumed
by SCEP this year, and what will be the
students' part in that role? The answer
is that both roles better be the same.
SCEP this year should work in two
general areas:
• It should provide a decent course
evaluation procedure in response to the
desires of both students and faculty for
such and in the hopes of providing some
quantitative basis for an investigation of
educational policy at Rice. In a similar
vein, I would hope that leaders of SCEP,
as well as of other university and col-
lege groups, will be invited to partici-
pate in the "General Rc-evaluation of
Undergraduate Education at Rice," to
which I understand the University has
committed itself this year.
"® SCEP should help mobilize student-
faculty thought, as well as action,
around educational policy at Rice.
It is this last point that 1 would like
to dwell upon now. In the past SCEP has
been a rather elitist group that made
studies and submitted proposals. Unfor-
tunately, not much ever came of these
proposals; although I think we can say
that at the present time there is more of
an awareness on the part of both stu-
dents and faculty alike that Rice must
seriously consider its role as a univer-
sity—both in the context of what it can
do for the students at Rice and "in the
larger context of the world we live in.
Departmental pow-wows
Therefore SCEP must now take steps
to see that student opinion on educa-
tional matters at Rice is sought and that
consequent action is taken.
By this I mean that it is not my posi-
tion, or within my capability, to lead any
evaluation of," for example, the history
department at Rice. Rather, I would like
to see a number of "SCEP Study Ses-
sions" or "SCEP Inquiries" initiated,
which woul'd consist of open meetings of
all students and interested- faculty in
that department.
Such sessions might investigate the
nature of the courses taught in the par-
ticular department, any assumptions
made by the department in its teaching
(e.g., the question a few years ago of
whether the Economics Department
preaches Keynesian economics as dog-
ma). They might investigate the author-
itarian (political) structure of the de-
partment, the relationship between re-
search and teaching, etc.
The idea, then, is to open up dialogue
in the University regarding educational
policy at Rice and anything else people
want to talk about. There are a number
of areas with which open discussion
followed by action should concern itself.
I offer the following as examples and in
the hope that they might encourage your
thought on these matters, so that we
can get something done as a student
body.
• The academic requirement for sci-
ence-engineering students.
The question here, in my opinion, is
"Should the engineer be as well versed
in the writings of Marshall McLuhan as
he is in applied mathematics?" The
point is that, while we can educate and
train students to be experts on mass
technology, it is these same students who
should be most concerned about the pos-
sible consequences of their work. Unfor-
tunately, technology develops faster
than man's ability to cope morally and
sociologically with it.
® The science-math requirement for
academs.
A goodly amount of work was done in
this area last year by SCEP and other
interested parties. Questionnaires were
sent to all the deans, department heads,
other faculty and students. One could
generally categbrize the content of the
responses received into those from the
students, the liberal arts professors, and
the science-engineering faculty.
An attempt was made by SCEP to
formulate a proposal, which was sub-
mitted, and we understand various fac-
ulty groups are now studying the pro-
posal as well as alternate schemes.
• The language requirement for all
students.
The broader view
The reasoning behind the language re-
quirements seems to be that it is felt
that such is an integral part of a liberal
education, a proposition to which, in
theory at least, Rice is dedicated. It is
felt by others, notably students, that the
language requirement is a hindrance to
a liberal education. Do the language re-
quirements serve the University as a
whole, or do they serve special interest
groups within the university structure
at the expense of those outside the spe-
cial interest groups?
This question has been debated ever
since I have been at Rice with no result.
We can do something about it this year
if we want to.
# Should the University (or does Rice
University) serve the role of training
people to staff the various pigeon holes
that the U. S. politico-economic system
must fill?
"Although professional instruction is
certainly not the primary ingredient of
undergraduate education, the Univer-
sity's role in preparing students for their
future life work cannot be ignored. The
University must contribute to society
graduates able to think and to question,
educated to cope with a rapidly chang-
ing world." (From "A Ten-Year Plan
for Rice University.")
The question here is the liberal view
(most articulately stated by Clark Kerr)
of the university as an integral arm of
an already defined national purpose.
(Hylden then expressed the view that Rice
University's educational policy cannot be divorced
from its larger national context. Educators, he
said, need to recognize that the results of their
teaching and research have an impact on the
society at large as well as on the academic
community. He concluded by quoting Mark Rudd,
head of the Students for a Democratic Society at
Columbia University.)
"Young people feel more strongly, too,
the gap between the possibilities and the
realizations of this society. The richest
economy the world has ever known de-
pends on waste-production—production
to satisfy created needs, not real needs—
for a great part of its national income,
while it leaves unbearable and degrading
slums in every city. Our factories pro-
duce at a fraction of their potential ca-
pacities yet thousands of people starve
to death in the world every day. The po-
tential for liberation from toil and want,
leaving people free to create, is enor-
mous, yet men must still work in mean-
ingless, wasteful jobs to keep themselves
and this economic system going. How
meaningful, in terms of real human
needs, is the work of a market research
analyst developing an advertising pro-
gram for a new brand of toothpaste?
Or that of a worker making a part for
a car he knows is designed to become ob-
solete in two years? We students see
the huge gap between potential and
realization in our^lives. We see that the
unversity prepares us for meaningless
work and we see that so much remains
to be done."
editorial
the rice thresher
., , rfM t&e &6«ta'd 6<ttde4.,,
Onc-e upon a time, during the 19G(i Senatorial election campaign. Thresher read-
ers were advised in these pages that "even true liberals" should vote for Democrat
Waggoner Carr, a man with a singular lack of appeal to any but the most rabidly
conservative. This year, it seems, that invitation to political expediency has been
amended to read "even true liberals" should vote for Hubert Humphrey, a man
whose appeal to those of a liberal bent has virtually evaporated during his tenure
as Vice-President.
Humphrey, to be sure, needs all the votes he can muster. The combined threat
of Nixon and Wallace, with its appeal to those who long for a sort of "Return to
Normalcy," and a solution, of America's dilemmas, without knowing or caring to
know what this would cost, has hurt the Vice-President so deeply that some observ-
ers already accept his defeat as an inevitability. The proceedings at the Democratic
convention, up to and including the actual nomination, so repulsed a significant
percentage of potential Humphrey supporters that they have left the fold entirely,
and vowed never to return. The Humphrey camp, understandably upset, apparently
feels that pronounced and highly visible measures are in order to entice these vot-
ers—many of them young, many of them McCarthy supporters—back into the
Democratic party. They need, you might say, a good talking to.
The man doing the talking Tuesday night, Berkeley political scientist Nelson
Polsby, drew on the twin points of "record" and "faith" to explain why liberals
should stop pouting and unite behind his man. Humphrey, once the mftst powerful
and outspoken liberal in the Senate, was the driving force behind every piece of
progressive legislation passed since 1954, Polsby said. That is probably true. Richard
Nixon's major political accomplishment, Polsby continued, was the persecution of
Alger Hiss during the early days of th% McCarthy bloodletting'. Also true.
It is when turning from the past to the present that Polsby, and all other
Humphrey supporters, slip up. Polsby defends Humphrey's record as Vice-President
by saying that it has been Humphrey's duty to support the Johnson administration,
and that there is simply no other possibility for a modern Vice-President. There-
fore, one must have "faith" in the "decency" of the man, and trust him to carry
on his liberal record after its four-year interruption when he gets in the White
House. That, to say the least, is a risky proposition.
The American people this year demand a choice between the policies of the
Johnson administration—and ones that ape it, like the Connally regime in Texas
and the Daley machine in Chicago—and a new approach, one more human, less
devious and expedient. It is precisely because of his own intolerable political posi-
tion that Hubert Humphrey is in no position to advance or articulate that choice.
—drb
the rice thresher, September 26, 1968—page 2
0
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.
Bahler, Dennis. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 56, No. 4, Ed. 1 Thursday, September 26, 1968, newspaper, September 26, 1968; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth245036/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.