the alumni magazine of washington and lee university MAY 1978

 

 

 

Mh

the alumni magazine of washington and lee
Volume 48, Number 4, May 1973

William C. Washburn 740.000.000.000. cece eee eeeeeeeeees Editor
Romulus T. Weatherman........................ Managing Editor
Robert S. Keefe, ’68...................00ccccccceeeeeees Associate Editor
Mrs. Joyce Carter............0c cece Editorial Assistant
Robert Lockhatt...............0 cee Photographer

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Student Community Involvement ...................... ]
Alumni Public Affairs Lecture ...........0.0.0.00.00. 5
Phi Beta Kappa Convocation ..............0:: ee 6
Conference on Corrections .............00..::ccees 10
The Individuality of W&L .......00. eee 12
A Special Report 2.0.0.0... ccc ett 13
Campus NeWS oo... tte terete 29
Chapter N@WS o........ccccc ccc eects nene tee eeeeeee 35
Class NOtes ..........cccccccccccccceeeceeeeeeeteteeetteesenteeenneeen 36
In Memoriam .............00ccccccccceecceceeeeeeeeeeeeteeccneee 40

Published in January, March, April, May, July, September,
November and December by Washington and Lee University
Alumni, Inc., Lexington, Virginia 24450. All communications
and POD Forms 3579 should be sent to Washington and Lee
Alumni, Inc., Lexington, Virginia 24450. Second class postage
paid at Lexington, Virginia 24450, with additional mailing
privileges at Roanoke, Virginia 24001.

 

Officers and Directors
Washington and Lee Alumni, Inc.

A. CHRISTIAN COMPTON, 750, Richmond, Va.
President

Upton BEALL, 751, Tyler, Texas
Vice President

T. Hat Ciarke, 38, Washington, D.C.
Treasurer

WILLIAM C. WASHBURN, ’40, Lexington, Va.
Secretary

RicHARD D. Haynes, ’58, Dallas, ‘Texas
WiLuiaM H. Hiwuer, ’38, Chicago, IIl.
VERNON W. HOLLEMAN, JR., 758, Washington, D.C.
C. Royce Hoven, III, 59, Winston-Salem, N.C.
Tueopore M. Kerr, ’57, Midland, ‘Texas
J. Perer G. MUHLENBERG, 50, Wyomissing, Pa.
J. ALVIN PHILPOTT, 45, Lexington, N.C.
BEAUREGARD A. REDMOND, ’55, New Orleans, La.
EvERETT TUCKER, JR., ’34, Little Rock, Ark.

iis
vo?

On the cover: Few places are more inviting than the
Washington and Lee campus when winter lifts its frost
from the heart, when the trees adorn themselves in
green, when the dogwoods flower, when the goodness of
life permeates the air—when spring comes. Our cover
shows one of the beauty spots at W&L—the dogwood-
bowered lane between the two faculty houses on the
south campus. In the foreground is Cassandra Joseph,
an exchange student from Hollins College, whose family
lives in Ontario, Canada.

 

 

*y

  
    
    
  
   
     
   
 
    
  

by Kenneth P. Lane

 

 

dent clearinghouse for community § in
of waning in a and en

 

 

ae

ee
ce
se Rr

of $1 200. ina “Winter - Clothing Drive
collection, « a Christmas pated f orn

Ree

We find i it reassuring to noe the
who make the time to be not jus.
boarders—but real people.

hee

Mani

in oF over 9, 000 "programs in m
in — oe In pied past y be eal

     

Community Involvement

 

members of the University Federation, an organizational de-
scendant of the former University Christian Association. The
student president of the University Federation at that time
was Bob Foley, ’72.

One of these new projects was the Big Brother/Big Sister
program. The purpose of the program was to help meet the
needs of local children who lacked adequate adult companion-
ship and attention. It was set up with the Rockbridge Depart-
ments of Social Services, Probation, and Mental Health. The
students worked out with these agencies a procedure for re-
ferring needy children and for matching them with student
volunteers. A board was created, consisting of several agency
representatives and Washington and Lee faculty members, to

help with the screening of volunteer applicants and offer su-

pervision to the program during the year.
Also, students from Southern Seminary agreed to join the
program to provide a source for Big Sisters.

2

   
 

During the pilot stage of the project in 1971-72, some 12
students were selected and matched with children in the com-
munity. The requirement was that the student spend a min1-
mum of three hours a week with his assigned child as a friend
and older companion. The child was usually someone whose
father and/or mother was not in the home, either because of
divorce or death or both parents have employment.

How these three hours a week were spent varied according
to the needs and interests of the child. The volunteer might
engage the child in recreational activities like basketball, touch
football, fishing and outings, either alone or with other volun-
teers and children in the program. He might also help the
child with his school studies or introduce him to a new hobby.
Spectating at W&L sports events and using the W&L swimming
pool are other popular pastimes. The volunteers also plan
once or twice during the year group activities to bring together
everyone in the program.

During this academic year, the project has caught on in
many ways. There are now 32 Big Brothers and Big Sisters.
A waiting list of Little Brother and Sister candidates has been
started, reflecting the degree of acceptance and support which
the project has from the area agencies and residents.

WeL

othe.

~

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 
 

 

 
 

 

 

 

; :
;
;
7 a
; ‘
- .
- t -
7
: - : /
: «

- fr
- — —— ee
ee a“

an a

OO

 

pp 3
1

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alumni Lecture

 

. Mrs. Smith cites benefits
of press-goverment conflict

8

 

 

Mrs. Smith answers questions after her speech.

Margaret Chase Smith, former U. S.
Senator from Maine, told a Washington
and Lee audience on April 23 that the
confrontation between the news media
and the government is beneficial to so-
ciety. She struck a balance between the
two sides in the conflict.

Mrs. Smith delivered the fifth annual
Alumni Lecture on Public Affairs on the
topic “Government and the Press.” The
lecture series is sponsored by an endow-
ment fund established in 1967 by gradu-
ates of the School of Commerce, Econom-
ics, and Politics.

Mrs. Smith, a Republican who was
defeated for a fifth term last November,
first pointed an accusing finger at the
news media which she said is no less in-
sensitive and no more objective than

May, 1973

public officials. She said the television
networks over-reacted to Vice President

Agnew’s criticism of them, adding that
the Vice President really gave them some
of their own medicine. But she said she
was skeptical of a proposed policy to
make local stations answerable for the
content of network programs and she de-
plored such incidents as the FBI inves-
tigation of CBS correspondent Daniel
Schorr.

At the same time, she condemned the
use of composite photographs that create
unfair and distorted images. She cited
such practices as the late Sen. Joe Mc-
Carthy’s attack on Sen. Millard Tydings
in 1950 and the false impressions created
by some of the scenes in the CBS docu-
mentary “The Selling of the Pentagon.”

Her major concluding remarks were
that a confrontation between the Presi-
dent and the press is healthy; that the
First protection of news
sources should not be absolute; and that
the press should establish the proposed
National News Council.

Amendment

In answering questions after her
speech, she said the Watergate scandal
is a tragedy for the American public and
not particularly for any one individual.
She said the scandal was unfortunate for
the Republican party, and asserted that
the investigation was delayed too long
and that the hearings should be open
and even televised.

‘When the public loses confidence in
its government, we’re in serious trouble,”
she said.

Mrs.
speech because of lighting difficulties in
Lee Chapel. After about 20 minutes of
attempts to correct the lighting, she spoke

Smith was unable to read her

for about five minutes and was unable
to continue. She then directed William
C. Lewis, Jr., her administrative assistant,
to read her speech for her. At the end,
she was given tremendous applause.

Mrs. Smith is the only woman ever
to have served in both houses of Con-
gress, as a Representative from 1940 to
1949 and as a Senator from 1949 to 1973.
She holds honorary degrees from 72 col-
leges and universities.

Mrs. Smith said that of her many con-
tributions as a public servant she hoped
that she would be remembered longest
for her stand against McCarthyism.

Previous lecturers in the alumni pub-
lic affairs series have been economist
Walter Heller, former Treasury Secretary
Henry Fowler, Riots Commission chair-
man and now Illinois Gov. Daniel Wal-
ker, and General Motors president James
Roche.

Why a college education:
to learn to do or to think?

“A College Education: What For?” asked Dr. Edgar F.
Shannon, Jr., in delivering the annual Phi Beta Kappa address
at Washington and Lee on March 22. His answer: Not finan-
cial reward, but ‘‘the development of the whole man to par-
ticipate responsibly in a democratic society.”

Dr. Shannon, president of the University of Virginia and
a 1939 graduate of W&L, called for a reordering of values in
American higher education.

“We must disabuse ourselves of the notion of immediate
economic benefits of a college degree either to an individual
or to society,” he said. “As students, teachers, and educators,
we must stop asking the question, “What kind of job can I
get?’ and instead start asking the question, ‘What kind of a
human being do I want to be?’ Instead of the emphasis on
learning to do something, the emphasis must be on learning
to think.”

Thirty-eight Washington and Lee students were inducted
into Gamma of Virginia Chapter of Phi Beta Kappa at the
convocation in Lee Chapel. (The names of the initiates are
listed at the end of this report.)

For Dr. Shannon it was another homecoming to the W&L
campus. He was born in Lexington, a son of a long-time Eng-
lish professor at Washington and Lee. Dr. Shannon was elect-
ed to Phi Beta Kappa at W&L and was named a Rhodes
Scholar in his senior year. He was an associate professor of
English at Virginia when he was named president in 1959.
This past winter, he announced his intention to retire from
the presidency at the end of the 1973-74 academic year and
return to full-time teaching.

Excerpts from his address follow:

_. . Lack of a coherent philosophy underlying American
higher education appears to me to be one of the current fail-
ings of our time. This deficiency affects not only those of us
who are members of colleges and universities as students,
teachers, and administrative officers, but all of society. Some
9,000,000 persons are enrolled in various forms of higher edu-
cation in the United States this year. Yet their understanding
of the values of higher education and of what it is they seek
is quite varied; and their expectations from higher education
are frequently misinformed and often unfulfilled. This lack
of a basic philosophy of higher education reveals itself both
from the point of view of the individual student and of soc-
iety at large....

The primary justification or philosophy for a college or
university education in the United States, either implicit or

 

President Shannon.

6 Wel

 

+
<4

 

 

 

vi

“A
~

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

>

li

to
ublic

Pp

 

 

 

 

we ee tae eee ee ce ai ae tel ED ee ee

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Law School Program

 

 

10

The Governor of Virginia, a former
U.S. Senator from New York, prison ad-
ministrators from several states, and an
inmate at the Virginia State Penitentiary
participated in portions of a state con-
ference on corrections held at Washing-
ton and Lee April 26-28. The three-day
meeting, sponsored by the W&L School
of Law with the cooperation of four
state agencies and a private rehabilita-
tion group focused on existing prison sys-
tems and alternate patterns that might
be adopted in the future.

Gov. Linwood Holton, a graduate of
W&L, was the principal speaker at the
conference banquet. He is a past vice
president of the Virginia Bar Associa-
tion.

orrections conference explores
new methods of rehabilitation

Charles E. Goodell of New York, who
was appointed to the U.S. Senate after
the death of Robert F. Kennedy in 1968,
spoke on “Corrections Today and To-
morrow” during the conference. Other
speakers at the same panel were Martha
Wheeler, president of the American Cor-
rectional Association and superintendent
of the Ohio Reformatory for Women,
John QO. Boone, commissioner of the
Massachusetts Department of Correction,
and James Howard, newly named direc-
tor of the Virginia Division of Correc-
tions.

Commentators at the panel included
a prison inmate who is serving a long-
term sentence for armed robbery in the
Virginia prison, the deputy director of

WeL

 

May, 1973

 

the Institute of Criminal Law at George-
town University, and three state law en-
forcement and prison officials.

The high point of the conference was
the seminars, held the final two days, ac-
cording to its organizers on the W&L
law faculty. Three broad themes were
discussed — incarceration, alternatives to
imprisonment, and community involve-
ment.

Each topic group was broken down
into a number of discussion sections in
fields such as prisoner rights and respon-
sibilities, education in prisons, pre-trial
alcoholism and

7

release, “halfway houses,’
drug addiction among prisoners, ‘‘work-
release” programs, citizen participation
in the rehabilitation process, and use of
community” resources.

‘THE CONFERENCE IN PICTURES

1. Former U.S. Sen. Charles E. Goodell,
chairman of the Committee for the Study
of Incarceration, deplored in his inaugural
address a trend toward “over-punishment”
in the American corrections system.

2. W&L Law Professor Larry D. Gaughan
(right), conference coordinator, confers with
John O. Boone, commissioner of the Massa-
chusetts Department of Correction, who said
he believes the most effective kind of re-
habilitation can occur outside prison walls.

3. Miss Martha E. Wheeler, superintendent
of the Ohio Reformatory for Women, said
many lawmakers are failing to keep up with
changing standards and moral patterns in
society. Prof. Charles H. Whitebread (right)
of the UVa. Law School, was panel modera-
tor. (The paintings were contributed for
sale by inmates of the Virginia penitentiary.)

4. Gov. Holton talks at dinner with W&L
Law Dean Roy Steinheimer. The Governor
said Virginia has the know-how and dedica-
tion to develop a “correctional program sec-
ond to none.”

5. Conference participants take a rainy-day
break outside Lee Chapel.

6. Waymond Nichols, a Virginia penitentiary
inmate, prepares notes for his commentary
on panel speeches.

1]

 

 

 

 

 

A SPECIAL REPORT

 

Can We Save
the Individuality
of Our Colleges?

Or will powerful pressures,
on and off the campuses,
homogenize higher education?

COPYRIGHT 1973 BY EDITORIAL PROJECTS FOR EDUCATION, INC.

  

 

MERICANS have long, prided themselves on the
A individuality of their colleges and. universities.
The special ambiance of each campus. The
combination of people and purpose. Spirit. The sounds
and smells that make it different from all others.

And more: ,

.. . The autonomy of each institution that enables it
to choose freely its own goals—and the programs to at-
tain them.

.. . The peculiarly American genius for promoting
the existence, side by side, of public and private col-
leges and universities.

. A “system” of higher education, in the best

_ Sense of the word: a group of interacting, interrelated,

interdependent elements, existing in a more-or-less har-
monious relationship. But intensely individual, nonethe-
less. Certainly not “‘systematized,” if the word implies a
lockstep, or central control, or dull uniformity.

The result is one of society’s major miracles: more
than 2,600 colleges and universities, each one different
from all the rest. Different, yet committed to the com-

mon idea that through diversity and individuality the
needs of the culture will be met.

the survival of all that. For the first time in a

century, serious questions must be raised about
the ability of our colleges to maintain their individual
distinctiveness—and of the system to maintain its
diversity. . .
~The historic immensity of what is happening is only
' beginning to be clear. After an era of unprecedented
confidence and expansion throughout higher education,
there is now a widespread questioning of higher educa-
tion’s place in our culture, and of its claim on our re-
sources. And growth—which for decades has been the
hallmark of our colleges and _universities—is decelerat-
ing.

With these developments have come crises of size
and money and quality affecting the great diversity of
our system of higher education—and the individuality
of each college and university within it.

BD: NOW we are encountering forces that threaten

\

Individuality
and the Changing
Student Population

/

has been growing at an accelerating rate. Enroll-
ments doubled every 15 years until World War
II; since then, they have doubled every. decade.
_ That is not likely ever to happen again.

2 or the past 100 years, American higher education

The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education pre-_

dicts that enrollments will increase only by one-half be-
tween 1970 and 1980, and not at all between 1980 and
1990. In the last decade of the century, they will go
up by only a third.

Enrollments in private institutions actually will drop,
the federal government estimates, between 1977 and
1980.

By the end of this decade, say statisticians in the
U.S. Office of Education, private education’s share of
all college enrollments will fall from 22.3 per cent in
1972-73 to 17.5 per cent in 1980-81.

These reductions in growth hold profound implica-
tions for all colleges and universities. Notes Princeton’s
President William G. Bowen:

“This battle for survival [private vs. public colleges
and universities] has very serious implications for
American higher education in general, which draws

much of its strength from pluralism; that is, from the
presence of many strong private and many strong pub-
lic institutions working in different ways together.

_ “Tf this diversity were to be eroded, American higher |
education would suffer significantly.”

HERE is more at stake than survival: the serious
question. Survival for what? |
In the. period of expansion, a college or uni-
versity could set its goals and be reasonably assured that
enough students would be attracted by them. It cannot
be so confident in a period when enrollments are stable
and resources scarcer. The tendency in those circum-
stances is to standardize, to avoid setting goals that are
offbeat, to try to be all things to as many men and
women as possible. Under such conditions, mere survival
is not an attractive prospect. |

Decelerating growth and “no-growth” have other
ramifications. If enrollment levels are to be maintained,
some colleges and universities will be forced to accept
students who do not meet the traditional criteria for
college admissions.

“Low academic ability [measured by traditional
means] will be the distinctive characteristic” of many
such students, writes K. Patricia Cross of the Center
for Research and Development in Higher Education at

_ the University of California at Berkeley.

“We have not yet faced the full meaning of this pre-
diction,” Ms. Cross says. Such students will require
major changes in the curriculum, major new sources of
financial support, and faculty members specially trained
to recognize and reward the non-academic skills they
bring to the campus.

Another development—the growing pressure to edu-
cate a far greater percentage of adults than presently
—will change the character of many a college and uni-
versity. Already, a significant number of flexible ar- |
rangements are under way—‘open— universities,”
external-degree programs, “universities without walls”
—to meet the needs of those who cannot leave full-

time employment to earn their college degrees.

Alterations in the traditional picture of higher educa-
tion will be extensive. Says Ernest L. Boyer, chancellor
of the State University of New York:

“The old model of a scattered collection of isolated
enclaves, each jealously guarding its resources and mi-
nutely regulating its students, who must remain in con-
finement for a four-year term, is giving way to a far
more complex, dynamic image—a network of learning,
resembling perhaps. the human nervous system itself:
intricate, continually pulsating, and totally intercon-
nected.”

The individual campus, as Mr. Hover sees it, “is be-

coming less a fortress surrounded by its moat and more

of a supermarket of ideas, a library with easy access, or
a base of operations to coordinate learning, not. con-
trol it.”

Few would quarrel with the aims of such programs.
They offer the possibility of lifelong learning for many


citizens who have not been able to afford a college
education in the past. They permit vast numbers of
persons to earn academic degrees in less time with
more options. |

Yet many observers are concerned.

Supermarkets, they say, are not very friendly places.
While you may meet your material needs there, your
spiritual needs may be unfulfilled.

Without precautions, says Stephen K. Bailey of Syra-
-cuse University, such programs “can lead to a parade
of academic horrors: cram courses organized by fast-
buck proprietary schools, a deadly standardization of
subject-matter, tutoring to the test.”

_ State legislatures, others warn, could use the develop-
ment of the new programs as an excuse for reducing
support for the traditional colleges,and universities. C

Pehaps most serious of all, however, are fears that
such programs might change the whole definition of ed-
ucation in our society. An individual experience, lead-
- to the development of “whole men and women”

r “good citizens,” might become a purely utilitarian
i. of providing the credentials a oe needs to
earn a living. | /

One writer describes the new trends this way:

“We don’t offer extracurricular activities; we elimi-
nate most of the theory courses; we give practical ap-
7 plications; and we get the students through in one-third
i | | 7 ce the time. We get them through fast.”

) | : Another observer deplores the prospect:

“This is the attitude of a new breed of educators, the
big-business organizers, who are moving into education
and turning out graduates on an assemibly-line basis.
Apparently they are being paid by the head count.”

 

MEHERE are ways to broaden our commitment to
educating as many people as possible, without
sacrificing the best qualities of higher education

that we have known in the past. They lie in more indi-
viduality for our colleges and universities, not less; more
diversity in our system of higher education, not less. But,
as we shall see, other forces—in addition to those ac-
companying the new era of no-growth—may be putting
those qualities in serious jeopardy. |

wg

Py

wal i

NESS
\\N nN = S

im i i
’ Vy MW

r
~
—_

 

Se i Na A A et

‘4

A

a

Individuality
. and the Trend Toward
: Central Control

~~

IGHER EDUCATION’S long period of postwar growth |
. coincided with a long period of national afflu-

ence. As the economy boomed, tax dollars were

more numerous than ever before in history—and, nearly

everywhere, public colleges and universities received a
top-priority share of them.

Most states still place higher education well up on
- their priority lists. But urgent new needs have devel-
oped in other areas—e.g., health care, aid for the dis-
advantaged—and the competition for tax dollars has

| grown. | |
The. result: Public colleges and universities have
s been subjected to unprecedented demands for
“efficiency”—some justified, others panicky and unwise.
j And to achieve that efficiency, many states are dramati-
’ cally reorganizing their structures of public higher edu-
cation.
Once-autonomous institutions, each seeking its own
goals, are finding themselves incorporated in larger and
} larger “‘systems” of public colleges and universities,
> often statewide in scope. Decision-making is central-
ized. Duplicate functions are eliminated.
e From an efficiency standpoint, the trend makes
” sense. “It seems to us,” argue Paul L. Dressel and Wil-

liam H. Faricy of Michigan State University, “that
higher education must be regarded as a national re-
source, that the roles of institutions must be deter-

mined by social need, and that resources must be
~ allocated according to a plan and their actual - ‘use

accounted for.”

tw aby

MY Wy \
A E/ 2 if Ki
Me ns .

oh i iY ay,

ny a m7)
i | ‘lis nA

|
i

ye j
Ga it

ANY N

ae ah
.

wr

wal
EWN

°S

= aS
nd

 

They add:

“In moving in this direction, we are Serine the
public and politicians to make decisions about the char-
acter of institutions—and their decisions may not al-
ways accord with the views of those involved with
higher education.”

In 1959, fewer than half the states had formal, legal
mechanisms for statewide coordination of higher educa-
tion. Now 47 states have such mechanisms. “Besides
this dramatic increase in numbers,” writes one ob-
server, “statewide coordinating boards have increased
in power in their areas of influence and in coercive po-
tentiai: )

The trend away from campus autonomy nd toward
central planning is likely to encompass many private
institutions as well, when—as is happening in many
states—they receive increasing support from _ public
funds. :

“Why,” asks one observer, “should the non-public in-
stitutions receive tax dollars and not be subjected to the
same planning and operating constraints and criteria
for accountability as the public institutions? While the
initial small, indirect aids may call for a modicum of
state control, once the amounts become substantial, the
institution can be treated in no other way than as an
integral cog in the coordinated state system.”

It may even be that some national system of higher
education will emerge from the upheavals now occur-
ring. Clark Kerr, chairman of the Carnegie Commis-
sion, says that education is becoming a “quasi-public
utility’—especially since it, like electric power and
other utilities, has become essential in the lives of peo-_
ple. Just as utilities require regulatory agencies to pro-
tect the public interest, say some observers, so the pros-
pect of government regulation of higher education
cannot be ruled out.

HAT happens to the colleges’ individuality and
| diversity, in the wake of such developments?
| The president of one public institution in

Ohio, Miami University, says that as the state system
has developed, “we have witnessed a lockstep pro-

gression, statewide, into a common calendar, into a

 

 

ALY \ \

~ W\YYS \\\3
he AY de
| N “AYN "
aS . L
A Nee ve

a J

= Bg

SX | 4 =x
\ K/-=_ Sy

 

a4

4
y
“|
a of
i
f
Z

A

a
LA

 

 

——_*

‘
-

 

 

common subsidy formula, into a virtually common fee
pattern.” He warns:

“If diversity is coming out of the rniblic system and
is replaced with a pale, insipid sameness, and if there is
a simultaneous withering of the private sector, one can

question what the future holds for the very fiber - our

system of higher education.”

The movement toward more centralized authority,
however, seems inexorable. It is clear that the public
and its elected representatives are no longer willing to
let the colleges and universities, alone, decide what is
educationally best for the society. “Education,” says an
observer, “is too important, and too expensive, to be
left entirely to the educators.”

How, then, can colleges and universities learn to live
in the larger systems, while preserving their diversity

and individuality? They must be ingenious enough to

develop mechanisms to preserve flexibility within a
highly structured whole—and that poses one of the
major challenges for higher education and its support-
ers in the years to come.

Individuality
and the Unionization
of Faculties

NTIL RECENTLY, the prospect of faculty members’
joining unions and engaging in collective bar-
gaining seemed foreign to both the spirit and the

reality of life on most campuses. Colleges and univer-
sities were serene havens far removed from the material-
ism and economic competition of the industrial world,
and faculty members were thought of (and regarded
themselves) not as “employees” but as individual pro-
fessionals. |

Although thousands of faculty members and college

administrators still recoil from the notion of faculties
organizing in collective-bargaining units, unionization
—and all that goes with it—has made major gains on
the campuses in the past five years. Most observers ex-
pect the trend to quicken rather than to slow down.

Already, the faculties at nearly 300 colleges and uni-
versities have won bargaining rights. More than half of
the institutions are two-year colleges, but unionism is
also gaining significant footholds in many four-year
institutions, as well. Faculties at the State Univer-
sity of New York and the City University of New
York are organized collectively, and the California leg-
islature is considering a move to permit public employ-
ees to organize in that state.

The movement toward faculty unionization was
speeded by a recent decision of the National Labor Re-
lations Board that private institutions with annual
budgets of $1-million or more fall under its jurisdic-
tion. In the past, the NLRB excluded such institutions,
so that only the public colleges and universities in
states that had laws permitting their employees to orga-
nize could develop unionized faculties.

HESE occurrences have combined to make the

debate over whether faculty members should join

unions irrelevant. The issue now is, What impact
will collective bargaining have on the character of our
colleges and universities—and on the relationships be-
tween faculty members, administrators, students, and
governing boards?

“Almost certainly,” says one observer, “collective
bargaining in higher education will move to statewide
or system-wide levels and, in the process, destroy much
of the autonomy of the separate campuses.” He adds:

“Collective bargaining in a state system of higher ed-
ucation will ultimately promote centralization of deci-
sion-making. Collective bargaining will contravene the
individual and departmental autonomy for which many
faculty members have battled so long.” :

Collective bargaining’s advocates disagree vigorously.

“In fact,” says one union official, “bargaining is a re-
sponse to that trend. The only way faculty members
can play a role, when policies are established\on a state-

wide basis, is through bargaining and political action.

Otherwise, it will just be done over their heads.”

 

In addition, union leaders point out, they have vigor-

ously opposed such steps as the setting of statewide

work-load standards by some legislatures.

Nonetheless, warns William B. Boyd, president of
Central Michigan University, the administration of a
collective bargaining contract, “with its emphasis on le-

galism, its grievance-laden tendencies, and its use of '

adversary proceedings, will almost inevitably change
the tone of university administration. The last remnants

of colleagueship are apt to disappear. Personal relation- —

ships are almost bound to change when personnel rela-
tions are altered so fundamentally.” /

Can the traditional character of a college or univer-
~ sity survive such strains? Or will the changes wrought
by the unionization of faculties be a further cause of
declining individuality and diversity?

Individuality
and the
Money Crunch

\ if 1 a -

HE FINANCIAL CRISIS in higher education has re-
placed student protest as the “big issue” in the
eyes of the press and public. Where once the
headlines told of 100 students arrested for their roles in
demonstrations, they now tell of 100 colleges and

universities confronting the prospect of financial disaster. |

The money crisis is real and of major proportions.
Some private institutions face the possibility of extinc-
‘tion.

. The existence of other institutions—public and
private—is threatened. The Carnegie Commission pre-
dicts that nearly two-thirds of the nation’s colleges and
universities are in financial trouble or headed for it.

One spectacular case is that of New York University
——the nation’s biggest private institution of higher edu-
cation. After several years of backbreaking deficits,
N.Y.U. announced last fall that it planned to eliminate

more than 200 faculty positions, sell one of its cam-

puses to the public system of higher education, and in-
sist that, henceforth, every academic unit within the
university be able to pay its own way plus its fair share
of university overhead. |

Higher education’s financial crunch came on_ the
heels of several years of student disruptions—and some
observers have attributed the crisis to the loss of faith
in colleges and universities that followed. But the roots
lie deeper—in the end of the era of growth. __

In its simplest terms, higher education’s crisis has de-
veloped because costs kept rising while income did not.

(There is a limit to the amount of tuition a college or
university can charge and still remain competitive.” )
At major universities, large research programs were ini-
tiated with federal funds. Those funds have grown
scarcer as the government’s priorities changed, leav-
ing those universities wae commitments they cannot af-
ford.

The increasing costs hit both public and ‘Private
institutions.

One observer says that the huge growth during the
1960’s was itself one of the main causes of higher edu-
cation’s money troubles. Colleges and universities were
all the more vulnerable, he says, because they were
“undercapitalized, overextended, and moving into in-

- creased areas of responsibility without permanent

financing.”

Yet—while the financial crisis is real, and some insti-
tutions have been forced to close their doors—for the
vast majority of colleges and universities, survival itself
is not in question. \

Even at New York University, with its appalling
problems, President James M. Hester believes that the
draconian steps he has taken will assure the university’s
survival. :

“The disease has been diagnosed, the prescription
has been made. We are taking the medicine,” says
Mr. Hester. “It is very painful, but it is possible.”

Edward D. Eddy, pieeen of Chatham College,
puts it thus:

‘Posting a death notice for all of private higher edu-
cation is like shooting all the horses because some have
the wheeze.” : ;

“The great majority of the institutions will survive,”
Mr. Eddy declares. “Despite the many predictions of
their demise, surprisingly few have closed their doors.
Institutions of higher learning do have a persistence
and tenacity—but not necessarily a guaranteed quality.
And there is.the rub.”

The nation’s colleges, Mr. Eddy says, “by and large
will survive. But the emerging question is clearly one
of spirit, not just life.”

HE economic crisis poses one especially nettling

threat to the diversity of the system of higher

education and the individuality of every institu-
tion: well-meaning but potentially damaging cries for
heightened efficiency and productivity on the campuses.
If taken too literally, such a movement could turn
the nation’s colleges and universities into faceless, Spuit:
less factories.

 

— * A recent study has shown, for instance, that in 1964-65

a group of representative private institutions was charg-
ing $657 more per student than a group of representative

public institutions. By 1971-72, the same private institutions ~

were charging $1,242 more per student than the public
institutions.

 

¥

Rae)
Yee
G Xe
YO SN
Xe
a fe)

 

 

 

4 4

be ff
Zu |

 

v

CS

 

| ge

KLIS

RES
SS od 1

>

7 inh ae

 

 

 

 

 

.
5

\

Most observers agree that many Spiteues and univer-
sities can and must improve their fiscal policies. But,

warns Paul C. Reinert, president of Saint Louis Univer-.

sity, they cannot be run like businesses. “There is,” he
says, “more at stake than Kleenex.” R

“Efficiency in higher education remains a complex
matter,’ warns Howard K. Bowen, chancellor of the

Claremont University Center. “Society may be in dan-

ger of trying to restrict the functions of higher educa-
tion too narrowly, and to convert institutions into mere
assembly lines generating credit hours, rather than al-
lowing them to function as centers of learning and
culture.

“It would be a ‘puistake: harmnfal to both: Bdisacene

and to social welfare, to turn colleges and universities

into créedit-and- -degree manufacturers and to judge them
solely by their productivity in these terms.”

Father Reinert sums it up: “We must keep in mind
that there are substantive differences between a college
and a business. Drive a corporation to the wall and it
may make adjustments in its operations that enable it
to bounce back. Drive a college to the wall and you
can kill it.” /

VEN more controversial than the cries for effici-
ency are issues raised by the variety of solutions

that have been Pre ss for higher education’ S

money. troubles. |

Virtually everyone agrees that major new. fabusiona
of public funds for both private and public institutions
will be needed. But how those funds should be chan-
neled—whether they should come from the federal or

state governments, whether they should be in the form —
of institutional aid or grants and loans to students—

produce deep divisions within the academic community.

The Carnegie Commission has argued against
“lump-sum, across-the-board grants” from the federal
government. They could lead to reduced state support
and to the development of a “nationalized system” with
strict government controls, the commission says. In-

Stead, it favors basing federal support to an institution

on the number of federally supported, needy students
enrolled, with the states poy the bulk of the sup-
port.

Spokesmen for some institutions of J hicher education
disagree. Direct federal grants to the colleges and uni-
versities, they argue, can make the difference between
the survival and collapse of many of them.

Spokesmen for many other institutions have argued
that new government support should’ come in two
forms: outright grants to the most needy students and
“income-contingent loans” to middle-class students.
(Under such loans, how much a student must pay back

would be determined in part by how much he earned’

after graduation.)

With most support going to eae. these educators |
_ argue, both public and private institutions could raise

their tuitions to a point that would more nearly vay for

the actual cost of providing an education.

 

    

a 1 Me
7 PAE i))

4 hp f

         

ee
mA)
aL y iPr ib hy Uy
aii

Re, iK

 

Such a system would best preserve the diversity of

our system of higher education, says an economist a
from the Brookings Institution. We need, he says, “a

shift to public support of students rather than the ex-
cessive reliance on institutionalized support that charac-
terizes current public support programs.” He goes on:
“Such a program of portable aid would free institu-
tions to develop their own conceptions of the

curriculum required to produce better people and,
_ More importantly, would give student-consumers a right

to choose among alternative conceptions. The govern-

ment could and should scrutinize the academic offer-

ings for which it is indirectly paying, but the nature of
such investigations would change.”

Officials at most public institutions oppose any major
shifts of aid from institutional support to ay oak

- students. The necessary increases. in tuition, they say, |

would end\the nation’s long-standing commitment to
low-cost higher education, and would shift the major
burden of paying for education from the society at
large to the individual student. |

That shift, they say, would represent.an end to the
belief that society as a whole—not just the individual
student—benefits from the higher education of its citi-
zens. , Cae ty

A.

 

Switching from institutional support to loans and
grants “constitutes a definite shift away from public de-
cisions and responsibility for the support and control of
higher education and toward a philosophy of private
responsibility and private enterprise, with major conse-
quences,” says Clifton R. Wharton, Jr., president of
Michigan State University.

“The shift would transform the goals, values, and
conduct of the entire higher educational system,” he
says. | ern

Decisions to be made soon in Congress and the state

legislatures probably will determine how much new |

governmental aid will be forthcoming and what form
the aid will take. Alumnae and alumni concerned
about preserving the qualities of higher education could

do higher education no greater service than keeping in- ©

formed about the alternatives, and advising their repre-
sentatives of their preferences. |

HE economic crisis in higher education is, in a
sense, the cause of all the other forces moving
toward the homogenization and standardization

of our colleges and universities. |

Many observers suspect that neither the movement
toward statewide systems of colleges and universities
nor the trend toward collective bargaining among the

faculty members would have gone so far if the era of

great growth had not ended. Suddenly, in the economic
depression that followed, higher education was no
longer society’s favorite place to spend money.

How, under such conditions, can colleges and uni-
/versities provide diversity and individuality? Must they
sacrifice their’ autonomy and individuality? Or can they
find ways to live with the end of growth without giving
way to drab uniformity?

   
   
 

  
     
   

SSE la |
3 oa | }
STP f
Se eS CL PEL, |
Se LA,
Whe
aN

A
ip";
~~
Oe eae

G

y

f :

eee
/
ee

Individuality:
All the Threats
Combine

~

HE end of an era of growth, the scarcity of new
resources, the increased competition for them,
and the public’s changing definition of higher

education’s role in society have all combined to produce
a major challenge for the nation’s colleges and univer-
sities.

The task before them now is to meet the challenges
while preserving the best of the past.

It is easy to be pessimistic about the prospects.
Doom-sayers abound. Here is how some severe critics
have described current conditions on the campuses:

m “Respect for universities [faculties and
administrators] has been replaced by distrust and sur-
veillance.”’

> “Informal procedures and policies based upon
mutual respect and confidence within the university
have been replaced by insistence upon due process and
by formalized codes.” 7 :

> “Collegiality based upon unity in goals has been

replaced by identification and resolution of conflict.”

Such concerns are not limited to severe critics.

Theodore M. Hesburgh, president of the University of
Notre Dame, speculates that “perhaps during that pe-
riod of rapid growth, the institutions—the academic

~community—grew beyond the potential to be personal

and human.”

William C. McInnes, president of the University of
San Francisco, says: “People will spend their money,
contribute their money, pay their money for services
and things in which they believe. What has happened
in many cases is that people don’t believe in education
the way they used to.”

As a result, many institutions feel more threatened
than ever by the challenges before them.

One consequence has been that the conflicts between
public and private higher education have been exacer-
bated. Once the expansion of the entire higher educa-
tional system ceased, the happy state no longer pre-
vailed in which everyone was prospering. Now, one
institution’s gain may well be another’s loss. Public and
private education now often view progress for one as a
possible threat to the other. |

Says a former official of a state system of higher ed-
ucation: P

“The pleadings of the private segment for state finan-
cial aid are gaining ground—not nearly enough to save

e

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

°
i AY

mS Se Se “o
SRS RO NC
= ROS: UO cme
RSC Sa ee
Se ae 208 Or at "eNee

| Fe eee
7] Ag vy Ry | a iy t . a are AS) Ree BY “eray
A ; BRN YOY oe
{/ f a ae " . iu y P Me RONDA SosSse

i ’ ane ; i ; p 3 A ca
Fa PO * eae S
y Ni : t y] | Son C Sane

a , | u
brit

(ie

UT ga
HY 7, fi y é
ep

    

of funding for the public institutions.”

Warns the head of a major educational association:
“I'am firmly convinced that the gravest danger facing
us is the possibility of a serious division between the
public and the independent sectors of higher education.
Relatively dormant for well over a decade, as might be

expected during a period of economic expansion, signs

of divisiveness are again appearing as we move further
into the stringent ’70’s.” |
The situation looks -confused and _ troublesome.
Higher education has reached a state where it enjoys
less public confidence, has less confidence itself about
what its purposes are, and faces unprecedented compe-
tition for a place on America’s priority list.
Yet the need for new curricula, and for new educa-
tional commitments to new kinds. of students, was
never greater. How can colleges respond in innovative
ways, when they must tighten their belts and curtail
their functions? é
Kingman Brewster, preadent af Yale Ghipnedel sees
this paradox:
funds in order to experiment with new techniques of
learning and study that go beyond the library, the labo-
ratory, and the classroom, most of the ideas for mas-

sive central government support threaten to impose a”

dead hand of bureaucracy, central planning, and red
tape on local initiative.”

Colleges and universities thus face major dilémmas:

> How to continue to be effective in a time when
they need major new sources of outside support; and

& How to keep their distinctiveness in an era that
requires con Cay and ingenuity. |

Individuality:
Can We
Save It?

: ¥

o colleges and universities—as we have known
them-——have a future? Or are we headed for
some massive, standardized, nationalized sys-

tem of higher education? Need a new vision of higher
education—as a public utility that everyone can use—
produce an impersonal assembly line?

Put another way: :

Can private colleges and universities survive in a
form worth preserving? Can public institutions avoid
the “pale, insipid sameness” that some see looming on
the horizon? :

them financially, but. sufficient to reduce the direct level »

“Although all universities badly need

narrow margin. ‘

cation,

No one can be blindly optimistic. But many thought- _
ful observers feel that the present critical stage poses
not only problems for higher education, but unparal-
leled opportunities. The long period of expansion, they
argue, put a premium on graduate education and re-
search, and higher education made enormous gains
quantitatively. Qualitatively, however, the improvement
may have been insignificant. On the undergraduate
level, indeed, what a student received from his institu-

tion may not have been much better than what was

provided to his predecessors in earlier generations.

ow that the pressures for growth have eased,
colleges and universities have an opportunity to
be truly individual; to set for themselves spe-

cific, achievable goals, and to pursue them effectively.
In an era of no-growth, it is the institutions that
know what they want to be, and how they are going to
be it, that will survive and prevail. |
Both public and private institutions will be among
them. Steven Muller, president of the (private) Johns

_ Hopkins University, notes:

“Privacy means relative independence. We have at
least the freedom to choose among alternatives, re- °
stricted as that choice may be, rather than to have our
decisions dictated to us by public bodies. :

“Our privacy as a university thus exists only as a.
. Our task is to preserve that narrow
margin and to reals the best possible use of it.”

Phillip R. Shriver of Ohio’s Miami University (state-

supported) speaks from the public-institution standpoint:

“Each university ought to be able to develop its own
personality and uniqueness. Each ought to have its own
strengths. Each ought to Be encouraged to Gey eIne its
own individual programs.”

The first task, then, for every institution of higher |
education—public and private—must be to develop a
firm sense of what it ove to be and how best to
achieve it. |

Each institution must know, and believe in, its own
personality and uniqueness.

A foundation official says:

“The time has come to take a total look at each of
our institutions in some systematic way which relates.
energy and material input to learning output, and re-
lates behavioral objectives to social needs. If we do not
strenuously undertake this task and succeed, then our
present troubles in a variety of areas will become far
worse. Indeed, I see the specter of government or even
industrial control of our colleges and universities.”

Sir Eric Ashby, a distinguished British educator who
has served\as a member of America’s Carnegie Com-
Mission, says:

“The gravest single problem facing American higher
education is the alarming disintegration of consensus
about purpose. It is not just that the academic commu-
nity cannot agree on technicalities of curricula, certifi- .
and governance; it is a fundamental doubt
about the legitimacy of universities as places insulated

 

Wh hen ie

: LW PHM ils

from society to pursue knowledge disengaged from its
social implications.”

Ending that fundamental doubt, says Sir Eric, will
require “a reevaluation of the relation between univer-
sities and American society.”

IN —
De AK

> aia Min

N SHORT, the American people must rebuild their
faith in the colleges and universities—and the
colleges and universities must rebuild faith in’ them-

selves. In doing so, both parties to the contract can
assure the survival of both the vast system’s diversity
and the individuality of its parts.

Many colleges and universities have already begun
the necessary reassessments and redefinitions. Commis-
sions on the future have been established on scores of
campuses. Faculty members, students, administrators,
trustees, alumni, and alumnae have been enlisted to
help define their institutions’ goals for the years to
come.

Those new definitions, now emerging, recognize the
end of the era of expansion and come to terms with it.
Some institutions have chosen to remain small, some

‘large. Others have chosen to focus on specific missions,

é.2., ecology, health services, the arts. Still others are
moving into the preparation of teachers for the two-
year colleges that, in the years ahead, will attract many
new students to higher education. For their part, many
two-year colleges are resisting pressures to expand into
four-year institutions, electing to concentrate on provid-
ing the best possible educational opportunities to their
own non-traditional student constituencies.

Whatever the role they define for themselves, such

colleges and universities are seeking ways to make edu-
cation more individual and more rewarding.

\

OLLEGES and universities still have a long way to
go before they adjust to the financial stresses,
the changing market conditions, the demands

for reform that have beset them. Those that adjust most
effectively will be the ones that survive as distinctive,
individual institutions.

Chatham College’s President Eddy notes that our in-
stitutions, “swinging into the troublesome ’70’s from
the unusually affluent ’60’s, resemble a middle-aged and
slightly portly man who discovers that he is panting
heavily after climbing a quick flight of stairs. He
doesn’t have yesterday’s bounce.” :

4
tee \)
, va ay
¢ BN LR
we AAS Ny “f° Y
me OR INY an
i i d nae eee 2 a Pa :
yf = / 4 a SN Ge aan a
4

   

YY

A Rs
U7" J ly My

“He has a choice. He can become a first-class hypo-
chondriac and, in all probability, bring on the attack
by discouragement and tension. Or he can diet, cut out
smoking, and start some consistent, sensible exercise.
He must convince himself that life is worth living—and
living to the hilt—despite an occasional long flight of
stairs.”

The end_of the era of growth has opened once more
the great debate about the role of higher education (or
any education, for that matter) in the lives of individu-
als and in the health of society. The future, in many
ways, is up for grabs.

Those who care deeply about the diversity and indi- |
viduality of our colleges and universities must assure
that—regardless of what they become—they preserve

‘their distinctive spirit in the changing future.

“There is little profit in licking our wounds or + feel-
ing sorry for ourselves,” says Father Hesburgh of
Notre Dame. “We still represent the best hope for
America’s future, provided we learn from our own mis-
takes and reestablish in the days ahead what has so
often testified to the nobility of our endeavors in times
past. |

“All is not lost. We are simply beginning again, as
many always must, in a world filled with ambiguities,
the greatest of which is man himself.”

 

This report is the product of a cooperative endeavor in which
scores of schools, colleges, and universities are taking part. It
was prepared under. the direction of the persons listed below,
the members of EDITORIAL PROJECTS FOR EDUCATION, INC., a
nonprofit organization informally associated with the American
Alumni Council. The members, it should be noted, act in this
capacity for themselves and not for their institutions, and not
all of them necessarily agree with all the points in this report.
All rights reserved; no part may be reproduced without express
permission. Printed in U.S.A. Members: DENTON BEAL, C. W.
Post Center; DAVID A. BURR, the University of Oklahoma:
MARALYN O. GILLESPIE, Swarthmore College; CORBIN GWALTNEY,
Editorial Projects for Education: CHARLES M. HELMKEN, Ameri-
can Alumni Council; JacK R. MAGUIRE, the University of Texas;
JOHN I. MATTILL, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; KEN
METZLER, the University of Oregon; JOHN W. PATON, Wesleyan
University: ROBERT M. RHODES, Brown University; VERNE A.
STADTMAN, Carnegie Commission on Higher Education; FREDERIC
A. STOTT, Phillips Academy (Andover); FRANK J. TATE, the
Ohio State University; CHARLES E. WIDMAYER, Dartmouth Col-
lege; DOROTHY F. WILLIAMS, Simmons College; RONALD A. WOLK,
Brown University; ELIZABETH BOND woop, Sweet Briar College;
CHESLEY WORTHINGTON (emeritus). Illustrations by GERARD A.
VALERIO. Editors: JOHN A. CROWL, CORBIN GWALTNEY, WILLIAM
A. MILLER, JR., MALCOLM G. SCULLY.

 

 

Campus News

 

Dr. Stevens’ will sets up
endowed scholarship fund

An endowed
Washington and Lee has been created by
the will of Dr. Kenneth P. Stevens, pro-

scholarship fund at

fessor emeritus of biology, who died on
March 26. The fund, which honors
the memory of his parents, E. Clayton and
Elizabeth Stevens, will be used to provide
scholarships to undergraduates with fi-
nancial need. Preference will be given to
students from Connecticut who demon-
strate outstanding academic promise, ac-
cording to terms of Dr. Stevens’ will.

In addition to the major bequest to
Washington and Lee, Stevens also left
sums to Father Flanagan’s Boys Home,
the Rockbridge area Boy Scouts of Ameri-
ca, and Wesleyan University.

Dr. Stevens was born in Danbury,
Conn., and held his B.A. and M.A. de-
grees from Wesleyan. He taught at Wash-
ington and Lee from 1946 until his re-
tirement in 1964. At that time he was
elected professor .emeritus, and he con-
tinued to help manage the University’s
biology laboratories until recently. His
field of professional specialization was
embryology, and he is generally credited
with developing Washington and Lee’s
pre-medical program into one of unusual
strength.

Announcing creation of the new fund,
President Robert E. R. Huntley said,
“Dr. Stevens’ bequest has a special signi-
ficance for Washington and Lee, for it
represents not only an important addi-
tion to our student financial aid capabili-
ties, but also indicates a confident en-
dorsement by a man who was neither
born nor educated here, but who came to
love both Lexington and Washington and
Lee deeply.”

Only the earnings on the principal
amount of an endowed scholarship fund
are awarded to students. The Board of
Trustees has set $25,000 as the minimum

May, 1973

 

Dr. Kenneth P. Stevens.

required for endowed scholarships.

The University is seeking $6 million
in new endowment for student financial
aid as one of the endowment objectives
of its decade-long Development Program.
The overall endowment objective is $24
million.

Students awarded proceeds from en-
dowed scholarship funds are identified by
the name of the donor, and their names
and the scholarships they receive are
listed in
and in the University catalogue.

the commencement program

 

Radio Reporting Award

 

John Paul Woodley, a junior from
Shreveport, La., and a journalism major,
has been named winner of the principal
award for radio journalism in regional
competition sponsored by Sigma Delta
Chi, professional journalism society. He
won the SDX “Mark of Excellence”
award for a 30-minute broadcast of high-
lights from the Republican National

Convention. The program was_broad-
cast last fall over WLUR-FM, the Uni-
versity’s radio station.

Woodley,
science major, attended the Miami con-
vention, recording with
many delegates and observers, princi-
pally those from Virginia. He then edited

who is also a_ political

conversations

the tapes into the 30-minute program. He
won the SDX Region Two award for
radio reporting, and his entry now goes
into national competition.

 

Applications Buck Trend

 

Washington and Lee continues to
buck the national trend in college ap-
plications. Applications for admission to
W&L rose by 7 per cent this spring. It
was the sixth year in which the Univer-
sity has experienced a rise of more than
5 per cent in numbers of applications.
Nationally, applications are down at most
public and private institutions. Especi-
ally hard hit are liberal arts colleges in
general and single-sex colleges in parti-
cular.

James D. Farrar, admissions director,
reported that W&L received 1,411 com-
pleted applications for admission in Sep-
tember. This figure was up by 91 over
last year’s 1,320. Admissions officials are
aiming for a class of 350—one place for
each four applicants.

Farrar said the rise in the numbers of
applications at W&L appears to result
largely from the University’s reputation
for broad academic strength and its em-
phasis on teaching undergraduates. A
survey taken last year among entering
freshmen at W&L showed that 89 per
cent had chosen W&L for those reasons.
Other reasons indicated this year by ap-
plicants as influential in their decision to
apply to W&L are the natural beauty of

29

its location and its many extracurricular
opportunities, especially in wrestling and
lacrosse.

Nationwide, the number of men at-
tending college dropped in 1972 to its
lowest level in eight years, according to
a new population survey by the Census
Bureau. This fall, the number of males
who will begin college is expected to
drop even further. Washington and Lee
is the nation’s sixth oldest university and
is the oldest to retain an all-male under-
graduate student body.

 

Doyon at Conference

 

Gerard M. Doyon, professor of art at
W&L, presented a slide lecture entitled
“The Murals of Theodore Chasseriau”
at the Southeastern College Art Confer-
ence in Atlanta March 28-31. He also
participated on a panel which dealt with
the teaching of art history in colleges.

 

Pate Is Aid Director

Van H. Pate, assistant admissions di-
rector at the University since 1971, has
been named director of financial aid and

 

placement effective July 1.

Danny N. Murphy, a Washington
and Lee senior from Little Rock, Ark.,
will succeed Pate as assistant admissions
director. The post is customarily filled
by a new graduate for one or two years.
Pate was named to the post upon his
graduation two years ago.

In the financial aid post, Pate will
administer a $700,000 budget for student
financial assistance. He will also retain
an active involvement in admissions
work. As aid and placement director, he
succeeds William C. Mules, who has been
named academic dean at McDonogh

School, Baltimore.

30

 

succeeds him as assistant admissions director.

The appointments were announced
by Lewis G. John, dean of students, un-
der whose office the admissions, financial
aid, and placement divisions operate.

Murphy will receive the B.A. degree
next month with majors in English and
sociology. He has worked as a student
assistant in the admissions office two
years. In his new position he will travel
extensively to secondary schools, conduct
on-campus interviews with prospective
W&L students, and serve on the faculty
admissions committee.

 

Creative Work Rewarded

 

TI'wo Washington and Lee professors
have received professional grants for
creative work. Robert Stewart, professor
of music and head of the Department of
Music and Drama, was awarded a $500
commission prize for a composition for
brass, and Philip M. Keith, assistant pro-

ee ——E

Van Pate (right) is new financial aid director; Danny N. Murphy

 

fessor of English, was awarded a $2,000
grant by the National Endowment for
the Humanities.

Stewart’s composition Duos for Brass
Choirs was judged the best of 27 composi-
tions performed at the Symposium for
Contemporary Music for Brass held in
March at Georgia State College in At-
lanta. He will use the commission to
write another work for next year’s sym-
posium.

Stewart has been on the W&L faculty
since 1954; he holds three master’s de-
grees in music. Widely known as a com-
poser, he has received many commissions
and awards, and several of his works have
been recorded by prominent string and
brass ensembles.

Keith was one of 13 scholars in Vir-
ginia to receive a National Endowment
for the Humanities grant. His stipend
will permit him two months of uninter-
rupted summer study. Keith holds the

WeL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

sional journals. He is also consultant to
many leading corporations which are
subject to regulation, and was recently
appointed by President Nixon as one of
eight public members of the White House
Commission to study America’s gambling
laws.

 

Gooch Aids Library

Richard E. Gooch, a 1930 graduate of
W&L, has given the University Library

 

System an expensive Panasonic cassette
player and headphones that has added
an innovative aspect to the library pro-
gram: the opportunity to provide “tape”
referral information resources to the
W&L community.

Leach,

Gooch’s generous gift will enable the

Maurice librarian, said

University Library System to initiate
tapes into its program before the con-
struction of the proposed new undergra-
duate library. Planning for the new

building includes a full range of audio-

 

visual facilities.

Leach said funds derived by the sale
of surplus library books to the W&L
community in 1972 and 1973 will be
used exclusively to purchase cassette ma-
terials. These sales have raised approxi-
mately $1,500.

Leach said Gooch is particularly in-
terested that the facilities be available to
all departments when the new library is
occupied—an interest shared by the li-
brary staff.

Gooch, formerly of Lynchburg and
now a resident of Lexington, is a retired
radio programmer and a generous sup-
porter of W&L radio station WLUR and
the Department of Journalism.

 

Much to Hear and See

 

Washington and Lee students, mem-
bers of the faculty and staff, and residents
of the Lexington area have had ample
opportunities this academic year to hear
visiting speakers and lecturers, listen to

 

Richard E. Gooch demonstrates cassette player for head reference

librarian Barbara Brown.

32

instrumental and vocal musicians, and to
see numerous art and photographic ex-
hibits, sponsored by organizations of the
University.

The speakers have included:

—Dr. Igor H. Ansoff, dean of Van-
derbilt University’s Graduate School of
Management, Sept. 28, speaking on “The
Past, Present, and Future of Corporate
Planning.” His visit was co-sponsored by
W&L’s commerce department and the
University Center in Virginia.

—Dr. Laurence H. Lattman, head of
the geology department at the Univer-
sity of Cincinnati, Oct. 4, speaking on
“Remote Sensing and Geologic Applica-
tions,” sponsored by the geology depart-
ment of W&L and the University Center
in Virginia.

—Seymour Martin Lipset of Harvard
University’s government and _ sociology
departments, Oct. 30, speaking on “Reli-
gion and Politics in America,” sponsored
by W&L’s politics department and the
University Center in Virginia.

—Anna Saw Benjamin, professor of
classics at Douglass College, the coordi-
nate division of Rutgers University, Nov.
6, speaking on “Apuleius and the Tradi-
tion of Satire,’’ sponsored by W&L’s de-
partment of classics and the University
Center in Virginia.

—George S. Welsh, professor of clini-
cal psychology at the University of North
Carolina, Nov. 17, speaking on “Assess-
ments of Creativity and Intelligence,”
sponsored by W&L’s department of psy-
chology and the University Center in
Virginia.

—Istvan Gaal, a young Hungarian film
director, whose most recent film, Dead
Landscape, was selected for the Karlovy
Vary Film Festival, Nov. 27.

—William J. Smith,
poet and professor of English at Hollins

award-winning

WeL

gt pens

a ee
i he LL OL Ee ree

College, reading from his works in the
University Bookstore, Dec. 5.

—Marvin Edwards, editor of Private
Practice, a physicians’ journal, speaking
on “Socialized Medicine,” Feb. 5, jointly
sponsored by Alpha Epsilon Delta, pre-
medical fraternity, the W&L Republican
Club, Young Americans for Freedom, and
the University Debate Club.

—Dr. William R. Walton, geological
and geochemical research director for
American Oil Co. of Tulsa, March 8,
speaking on “Modern and Ancient Hur-
ricane Deposits: Their Geological Signi-
ficance,” sponsored by the American As-
sociation of Petroleum Geologists.

—John Wadlington, professor of Law
at the University of Virginia, March 8,
speaking on “The Changing Shape of
Family Law.”

—Dr. Robert G. Gunderson, director
of the graduate program in American
studies at Indiana University and _ pro-
fessor of speech there, March 19, speak-
ing on “American Demagoguery—Pre-
Civil War Style,” sponsored by the Uni-
versity Center in Virginia.

—Dr. F. Burton Jones, mathematics
professor at the University of California
at Riverside, March 20, speaking on
“Topology, As I Encountered It from
Birth to Age 21,” sponsored by the Uni-
versity Center in Virginia.

—Howard Nemeroyv, poet, novelist, and
critic, on March 28, speaking on “Speak-
ing Silence,” sponsored by the English
department and the University Center
in Virginia.

—Bryce Rea, Jr., of the Washington
law firm of Rea, Cross, and Knekel,
speaking on “The So-Called Energy Cris-
is,” on April 2.

—Dr. William C. Harbaugh, professor
of history at the University of Virginia,
author of a new biography of John W.

May, 1973

 

Howard Nemerov, poet, novelist.

Davis, speaking April 19 in connection
with the centennial of Davis’ birth.

—Alvin M. Weinburg, director of the
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, speak-
ing April 25 on “Nuclear Power and the
Public.”

—Jerome Kagan, professor of develop-
mental psychology at Harvard University,
speaking on “The Meaning of Intelli-
gence” on April 26.

The programs of music have included:

—Les Menestriers, a group of five
young Frenchmen whose passion is for
ancient music, playing such instruments
as the treble viol, vielle, rebec, bass viol,
lute, cittern, pandora, percussion, and
jew’s harp, sponsored by the University
Concert Guild, Nov. 15.

—Aline van Barentzen, a Boston-born
prodigy who has become one of France’s
leading piano virtuosos, playing Beetho-

ven, Chopin, Debussy, Poulenc, and Ra-
vel, sponsored by the University Concert
Guild, Nov. 17.

—Philip Booth, a rising operatic bass,
who graduated from W&L nine years ago
and has sung professionally only since
1970. He has won many awards, includ-
ing a major award in the Metropolitan
Opera Auditions and a grant from the
National Opera Institute. (His appear-
ance in Lexington on Jan. 16 was spon-
sored by the Rockbridge Concert- Theatre
Series.)

—The Stradivari Quartet, one of the
nation’s distinguished string groups, us-
ing Stradivarius instruments on loan
from the Corcoran Gallery playing Schu-
bert, Bartok, and Beethoven, Jan. 18,
sponsored by
Guild.

—Jerold Frederic,
known pianist, playing Bach, Paganini,
Chopin, Rachmaninoff, Prokofieff, and
Schelling, Feb. 7, sponsored by the Uni-
versity Concert Guild.

The Festival Winds,
quartet of flute, oboe, clarinet, and bas-

the University Concert

internationally

a woodwind

soon, March 5, playing Vivaldi, Stravin-
sky, Varese, Villa-Lobos, Francaix, Mo-
zart, and Elliott Carter, sponsored by the
University Concert Guild.

Art and_ photographic
have included:

exhibitions

—Paintings by three artists from the
North Carolina mountains, Leon Stacks,
Ward Nichols, and Philip Moose, in du-
Pont Gallery, through the second half of
October.

—An exhibition of “sculpture and
other things” in duPont by Joseph E.
Blouin, Jr., who joined W&L’s faculty
last September as an instructor in art.
The display in early November included
sculptures, etchings, examples of jewelry
and metalwork, and ceramic pieces.

33

Campus News

 

Art student sketches a child from the duPont Gallery exhibit of
photographs on the theme “Woman.”

34

 

—Watercolors by Maxine Foster of
Rockbridge County during December in
the University Bookstore.

—Art in almost every form by 17
women artists living in Rockbridge
County in duPont, in early December.
The works included oil and acrylic paint-
ings, watercolors, sculpture, needlepoint,
and other crafts. Artists whose works were
shown are Gillie Campbell, Libby Car-
son, Maria Colvin, Maxine Foster, Char-
lotte Gunn, Poebi Hefelfinger, Hope
Laughlin, Betty Letcher, Susie Neikirk,
Marguerite Pusey, Mary Hape Pusey,
Jane Riegel, Ann Roberts, Betty Spen-
cer, Elise Sprunt, Virginia Trudell, and
Clara Weaver.

—Photographs by M. Wayne Dyer of
Roanoke, a member of the photography
department at Virginia Western Com-
munity College, during January in du-
Pont.

—Prints by Leroy U. Rudasill, Jr., art
instructor at Southern Seminary Junior
College, during January in the University
Bookstore.

—Paintings of wildlife in a unique
medium—oil on acrylic—by George So-
lonevich, in duPont during the last of
January. Solonevich also gave a demon-
stration of his technique.

—Paintings and sculpture by two art
teachers, Paul K. Kline, sculptor and head
of the Bridgewater College art depart-
ment, and Robert E. Purvis, painter and
assistant art professor at Bridgewater, in
duPont during February.

—An exhibit of photographs on the
theme “Woman,” during March. The
show was organized by the German maga-
zine Stern, with the assistance of more
than 400 art museums in 51 nations. In
all, 522 photographs are included and
were shown at W&L in duPont in four
segments over a period of four weeks.

WeL

 

83

a
vs

Ea

 

&§

 

_

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

ne

7 7 - 7 - -

 

 

 

 

 

 

ia

ye

vaste ge

at

eg

- a —
2 -

ae

Sie. tye

 

 

—_
ae

a
“

° _
ee
> ea
ee

a ses

a

Me

PPE Rane oe

A

-
.

>

 

 

in English at Tulane University is now pro-
fessor of English at Eastern Kentucky Uni-
versity in Richmond, Ky.

SAMUEL 'T. PATTERSON, JR., an attorney in
Petersburg, Va., has been elected secretary-
treasurer of the Petersburg Bar Assn. He
has been in private practice in Petersburg
since 1968.

ARTHUR E. Broapus completes his residency
in internal medicine at Massachusetts Gen-
eral Hospital in June 1973. He expects to
move to Chevy Chase, Md., for several years
work in endocrinology at the National
Heart Institute in Bethesda.

Dr. Bruce ‘TT’. CHOSNEY received his medical
degree from the University of Virginia in
1968. After internship at Emory University
and first year residency in internal medicine
at Los Angeles County, University of South-
ern California Medical Center, he was sta-
tioned at U.S. Air Force Base, Hickam Field,
in Hawaii. He expects to return to Los An-
geles County for the second year of residency
in August, 1973. He and his wife, Michele,
have one daughter.

ALONZO ATKINS, JR., is employed as project
manager of Key Processing Software by Com-
puter Machinery Corp. in Santa Monica,
Calif. He and his wife, Kathy, have two
children.

Dr. ROBERT W. HENLEY, JR. completed his
service in the U. S. Navy as a flight surgeon
aboard the U.S.S. America in the Gulf of
‘Tonkin in December, 1972. He has recently
resumed his training in internal medicine as
a second year resident at the University of
California in San Francisco.

BRITAIN H. BRYANT was elected Nov. 7, 1972,
as a senator in the 10th legislature of the
U. S. Virgin Islands from the district of St.
Croix. He is one of 15 men in the Virgin
Island legislature. Bryant practices law in
St. Croix and is on the board of directors of
the St. Croix chapter of the American Red
Cross. He is past secretary and vice presi-
dent of the Virgin Island Bar Assn. and a
past secretary of St. Croix Chamber of Com-

1965

BORN: Mr. and Mrs. Daviy H. ADAMS, a
son, David Huntington, Jr., on Feb. 9, 1973.
Adams is a practicing attorney in Norfolk,

Va.
BORN: Mr. and Mrs. NORMAN YOERG, JR, a

May, 1973

son, Peter Norman, in Dec., 1972. After two
years in the U. S. Army, Yoerg graduated in
1970 from Fordham Law School, where he
was on the Law Review. He is married to
the former Donna Dorogoff, and he is cur-
rently practicing law with the New York
firm of White and Case.

Douctas D. Hacesrap has been appointed
director, bulk materials marketing, for the
Illinois Central Gulf Railroad. He and _ his
wife, Dorothy, have one son and they live
in Homewood, III.

Bruce H. JACKSON has become associated
with the Washington, D.C., law firm of
Baker & McKenzie.

After receiving his law degree from Emory
University, LARKIN M. FOWLER is practicing
in Moultrie, Ga.

1966

BORN: Mr. and Mrs. S. BIRNIE HARPER, a
son, S. Birnie, IV, on Jan. 5, 1973. Harper
is assistant vice president of the wholesale
firm, Mid-America Industries, Inc., in Ft.
Smith, Ark.

BORN: Mr. and Mrs. CHARLES W. REESE,
jR., a daughter, Clarissa Jane, on Sept. 6,
1972. The family lives in Orinda, Calif.

Harry DENNERY, formerly in New Orleans,
La., has been moved to Atlanta, where he is
in the sales division of the Charles Dennery
Co. He and his wife Linda have one son.

JEFFREY N. SHEEHAN has become a partner in
the law firm of Rogers, Lea, Woodbury &
Sheehan with offices in Las Vegas, Nev.

CHARLES E. HAMILTON, III, formerly a trial
attorney in the Cleveland, Ohio, field office
of the Antitrust Division, is moving to
Louisville, Ky., in June, where he will enter
private practice specializing in antitrust

work.

MARRIED: Davin W. OciLvy to Mary Dun-
lap on Jan. 20, 1973. They live in San Fran-
cisco, where David is with Bank of America
International.

Effective in April, EDWARD B. ROBERTSON
became associated with the finance depart-
ment, Ford Motor Co. in Germany. He holds
an M.B.A. from the University of Utah.

WitLtiAM N. McGEHEE is marketing repre-
sentative with Honeywell Information Sys-
tems, Inc., in Greensboro, N.C.

1968

JOHN R. Prosser, released from active Army
duty, is now practicing law in Winchester,
Va., with the firm of Hall, Monahan, Engle,
Mahan and Mitchell.

HAROLD E. CLARK is currently assistant gen-
eral manager, office supply division of Boise-
Cascade Corp.

ROANE M. Lacy, president of the James Bar
Turkey Ranch, was recently selected Man
of The Year by the Northeast Waco Wo-
men’s Civic Improvement League for his
efforts to improve the protein content of
low income diets. The resulting “Lacy Tur-
key Burger” is scheduled for market intro-
duction early in the summer.

1969

BORN: Mr. and Mrs. THEODORE JUDSON
Duncan, III, a daughter, Sarah Katherine,
on Nov. 21, 1972. The family lives in Okla-
homa City.

BORN: Mr. and Mrs. GAyLorp C. HALL,
III, a daughter, Emily Lynn, on March 16,
1973. The young lady joins an older sister,
and the family lives in Mesquite, Tex.

JEFFREY WEXLER has been named managing
editor of the South Shore Record in Hew-
lett, L. I. Before his promotion, Wexler had
been associate editor of the Long Island
newspaper. Wexler, a graduate of the School
of Law of Columbia University, had prev-
iously been editor of two weekly newspapers
and a columnist for a third. He is a member
of numerous professional and civic groups,
including the South Shore Historical Society
and the New York City Mounted Police
Auxiliary.

BRANDON C. MARTIN, formerly of Haverford,
Pa., has moved to Richmond, Va., where he
is employed by the Travelers Insurance Co.

RONALD G. KINZLER is law clerk to Judge
Theodore S. Gutowicz, Philadelphia Court
of Common Pleas, and is associated with the
firm of Hamilton, Darmopray, Malloy, and
Milner.

CHRISTOPHER H. MiILLs, after completing
Yale Law School under the Navy JAG pro-
gram, is currently assigned to the Navy
Court of Appeals at the Navy Yard in
Washington, D.C.

1970

MARRIED: JAMES MarTIN Bass to Sarah
39

 

  
 
 
   
  
  
  

1922

ABRAM he “LUBLINER,. an att tort oe in ‘Blue-
field, W.Va., and a former ‘member of the
West Virginia Legislature, died April 8,
1972. Mr. Lubliner | spent “many years as a

peice government appeal agent.

 

   

 

 

HERRY to “Anne -
fi Rowlé ‘ote 1 Dec. a1, 1972 ‘The = couple
lives. in Richmond, Va.

 
      
 
  

MARRIED: ‘SAMUEL Fr. Paiste to

anville, Ky., died
: oene to Dan-

    
  
  
   

Feb. 28, 1973. |
ville in 1933 and _ pr: ‘medici
years until es retirement in 19% 5
commander in the U.S. Navy 3 Medica
Ss “dun ir ng World ‘War iH. oe ceeheat |

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Washington and Lee Ice Buckets and Trays

 

The Rockbridge Chapter of the Washington
and Lee Alumni Association, by authority of the
Alumni Board of Directors, is offering these
handsome ice buckets and trays for sale to raise
funds for the University. Manufactured by the
Bacova Guild, they are made of durable fiber glass
and bear the Washington and Lee crest in full
color. The ice buckets have hand-rubbed maho-
gany tops. All profit from sale of these items goes
to the scholarship fund in memory of John Gra-
ham, ’14. Income from the fund helps worthy
students attend Washington and Lee.

THE PRICES:

Large ice bucket (three gallons) $45.00 plus $2
handling and postage.

Small ice bucket (five quarts) $37.50 plus $2 handling
and postage.

Big tray, (16x21) $15.00 plus $1 handling and postage.
Small snack tray (12x17) $10 plus $1 handling and
postage.

Use Order Form Below:

ROCKBRIDGE CHAPTER—W&L
P.O. Box 948.
Lexington, Virginia 24450
Please send me the items checked below. Make
checks payable to Rockbridge Chapter—WeL.
[ ] Large ice bucket, $45.00 each plus $2 handling
and postage.

[ ] Small ice bucket, $37.50 each plus $2 handling
and postage.

[ ] Big tray, $15.00 each plus $1 handling and postage.
[ ] Snack tray, $10.00 each plus $1 handling and postage.

City and States... BI oe
Virginia residents add 4% sales tax.

Payment of $cc. is enclosed.

 

 

WASHINGTON AND LEE UNIVERSITY
Lexington, Virginia 24450

 

Available Again

 

WASHINGTON AND LEE

(Wedgwood)

Sold only in sets of four different scenes
Price $32.00 for set of four
including shipping charges

Available in blue color only

‘The four scenes are:

LEE CHAPEL
WASHINGTON COLLEGE, 1857
LEE-JACKSON HOUSE
WASHINGTON COLLEGE (contemporary)

Send order and check to

WASHINGTON AND LEE ALUMNI, INC.
Lexington, Virginia 24450