Scarlet & Black. May 6. 1977—page

 

A look back

1976-77 has been an interesting year for Grinnell, A
surprisingly large number of new developments, both good
and bad, have occurred in areas that are crucial to the
college‘s future.

Consider what we believe to be some of the good
developments: the acceptance of the Dober plan to improve
the dorms; the presentation of the White Paper, which, at
least for a little while, stimulated discussion of important
questions: the formation of NOW, OSA, the Student Input
Committee and the Affirmative Action Committee; the
endorsement of the Ad-hoc Affirmative Action Advisory
Committee's set of proposals for affirmative action hiring;
the hiring of six women among the 11 people hired so far as
faculty; members next year; the improved sports
picture, marked by the addition of two new clubs and by
unprecedented interest in athletics by freshmen women; the
acceptance of a ”D” grade, which will cut grade inﬂation;
and the passage of the bond issue for a new junior high
school, which will help attract faculty with children.

Of course, there were some developments we were not
pleased with: the abrupt firing of Grace Davidson, which no
doubt cast some questions on the nature of the relationship
between the college's high and low level administrators; the
tuition raise to over $5,000 for the first time [although it was
inevitable); the lack of vigor by the Energy Committee; the
dwindling of black faculty to the point where there may only
be two black faculty members on campus next year; and the
harsh opposition to the harmless idea of forming a
cheerleading squad,

Although each of these events is important, the ad-
ministrative reorganization of last summer and its aftermath
will have far greater impact on the future of the college than
anything listed above. The decision to reshufﬂe the ad-
ministration is final, and persuasive arguments pro and con
have been discussed extensively. But students cannot afford
to consider the reshufﬂe a closed matter. There are too many
lessons to be learned from it.

Looking beyond the inevitable drop in the quality of some
social events and the loss of female administrators from full-
time positions, there are broader implications of the
reshufﬂe. Perhaps the administration did not give student
opinion enough consideration on the matter or perhaps it had
no obligation to consult students in this area, We claim the
former, but either way, one thing is certain: the ad»
ministration has made, without student input, a decision in
an area very close to those areas in which students have a
right to provide input.

An apathetic student body next year would make it easy
for the administration to take that very short step toward
legislating, without student input, in areas where students
unquestionably have the right to voice an opinion. We do not
think the administration will intentionally step on students’
toes, of course, but increasing economic pressure could easily
lead the administration to make extensive changes that it
has no right making without student contribution.

With about a 30 per cent turnover rate in students each
year, it is difficult for the student body to keep tabs on
administrative behavior over a period of years. But is it
crucial that Grinnell students not forget the lesson of the
reorganization. Students must watch the administration to
be sure it does not begin iron rule in areas that call for

student input.
Another lesson taught by the reshufﬂe is that student

action can be effective. It should be clear now that students
can be aroused by an issue if it affects them directly enough
and that the administration will respond, though perhaps
incrementally, to student pressure. Granted, the possibility
of legal action may have been a key force in causing the
college to rehire Georgia Dentel and Kathy McCluskey, but
we are convinced student protest played a decisive role.

The reorganization also went a long way toward cutting
campus trust of the administration. The reorganization and
the Davidson firing are the main reasons a majority of
students and faculty are not happy with the administration,
and if the reports of two alumni who came on campus this
year are to be believed, low level administrators are not
happy. either.

Whether or not the dissatisfaction is called for is not as
important as the fact that it exists. It is a barrier to healthy
transactions in the formation of future college policy The
administration, expecting nothing but hostility, will not seek
student contributions, and students will blindly assume that
every administrative decision is one in which students
should have had input but did not.

Proposals for NOOFS

At the turn of die decade (it does
seem like a century ago), those of
us who thought the President mad,
the government spying and the
assassination conspiracies of the
sixties all against us, were con
sidered to be insane ourselves and
decidedly paranoid. When our
nightmarish prophecies came to
pass we felt no fringe pride. .

The worries are back, this time
about the environment and the
future of life on earth: ecologyi
that very hip thing, minded back
then before the economy and the
dirty tricks exhausted us all.

In those days I had in mind an
invention that would enable me to
be self-employed and contribute to
the betterment of the world. I had
in mind a bottlecrushing machine
that could be conveniently in»
Stalled near the kitchen sink in
every home in die United States,
Since then, however, my horizons
have broadened to include the
information that we not only have a
litter problem but a dwindling

Don‘t
sacrifice
quality

To the editor: Although we believe
that Affirmative Action is a
necessary policy, we have come to
doubt the wisdom of pursuing this
program in all cases. Grinnell
College deserves no less than the
best profs available. Minority
profs are important to the com-
munity because of the diversity
they bring to the campus and there
are courses that should be taught
by minorities due to their unique
cultural perspective. But there is
no reason why seleclipn of can»
didales should be weighted toward
women when women have the
same educational opportunities as
men, In other words, we don't see
how hiring on the basis of
qualifications Constitutes
discrimination against women,
Although we would like to See more
women on the faculty, we would
regret to see a decline in faculty
quality only to satisfy an arbitrary
quota. Stephen Potter, Susan
Heckman. Julie Cooperrider

Challenges
Grapevine
criticism

To the editor: If the anti-
Grapevine faculty members
cannot handle being evaluated,
perhaps they are in no condition to
give out grades

The complaint that low student
input leads to inconcluSlve and
damaging course evaluations
doesn't impress me If the teachers
really believed lhis, they could
always set aside ten minutes of
class Limerper semester for the
class to complete its question
naires Polly Thacher

New
staff

Today’s issue of the Scarlet and
Black ls lhe lasl eiglitrpage issue of
the year and is the first issue
published by the l977-78 cdiicrial
staff Next week‘s issue will be four
pages and , l'll be lhc final issue of
lhc paper a

By Pat Edniunds

supply of certain energy producing
fuels as well: it takes energy to
crush a,bottle and even much,,
much more to make one.

I’ve revised my plans. What I’d
like to see now is a National Office
of Foresight, or NOOFS. The
acronym could also stand for No
Goofs,

NOOFS would be located near
the back door of the U.S. Patent
Office, Before the potential patent
grantee might be set free to dash
off to make millions, this person
would have to Show a committee
composed of professional land-
fillel‘s, street-sweepers, bandraid
despensers and representatives of
the EPA just how the byproducts

a

of the pending invention would be
disposed of without detriment to
the earth, air, water and collective
senses.

The liability, however, would not
necessarily end there. The in»
ventor of a material object would
also be accountable for the ar-
ticle's final resting place after it
had outlived its apparent
usefulness.

The creator, then, would also
assume the responsibility of
suggesting possible forms for the ..
item to take in reincarnation, '
seems nnly natural that the op‘
portunity for an afterlife should be
granted to all that might follow at
the end of our time on this earth‘

N.O W. questions

new Affi

nnaﬁve

Action Program

To the editor: Has “Symbolic
Politics" struck again? Govem-
merits and institutions contain
numerous “progressive” rules and
regulations, but whether there is
any institutional commitment to
enforcing these is subject to
question. We have several come
ments and questions to raise about
the Affirmative Action Program as
the college embarks on this
“progressive" step.

Since Grinnell is a college
steeped in the social action
tradition and has a student
enrollment of approximately 50 per
cent women, what sense does it
maketo propose an ideal faculty of
only 20 per cent women? 15 even a
25 per cent female faculty a really
“challenging” goal for the next
five years? Do goals in the
program address historic sex
inequities in recruitment? After
several decades in which an unr
written, informal practice of
preference for males has been
consolidated. aren’t more
egalitarian goals necessary?

Again, since program an
forcemenl. depends on committed
and knowledgeable ad-
ministrators, what do We know
about the new Affirmative Action
Officer (AAO)? What are his
qualifications for this aspect of the
job” What evidence do we have

 

that he is committed to Afr
firmative Action? And does he
have only the puwer to harrass and
delay what may be discriminator!
hiring procedures? Who reviews
his work? If it is a committee, who
chooses it? And is the committee's
power restricted merely t .
“publicizing” discriminator-3:,
decisions? We encourage the
college community to exercise a
healthy skepticism toward in~
stitutional decisions regarding
these questions. The Affirmative
Action Program should be
monitored by prople who are
committed to the principle of af-
firmative action to ensure
adequate enforcement.

Most comprehensive Af-
firmative Action plans hav; g
timetables and Schedules fo‘
meeting goals specified in me plan,
Are aspirations ”to do better"
increases “through time", and are
more “challenging” goals in the
next five years merely phraséﬂ
that avoid the specificity of a
schedule? What happens if goals
are not reached?

Although we have raised some
serious questions about the plan,
we tentatively commend the Afr
firmative Action Committee for is
persistence. We only hope this isn’t
one more example of ”Symbolic
Politics," Grinnell Chapter of

 

The Scarlet & Black

second class postage paid a! Grinnell, Is. 5Ull2

now. ..
=«l‘
U?

 

Edilor
Assoclale Editor

News edimr
Feature Editor
anngraphy edilor
capy Ediior

Span; Edlldl-
carlonnlsl

Advert' ing Manager
circ Ia ion Manager
Busi 55 Manager
Faruliy Advisnr
Editor Emeritus

Reporters

Tom Arenberg
Elaine Asnnaugh
app Mulchcll

Kalhy VuPer
curls Lower

John slrauss

sob Meyer

aevh W‘llEy

sue Welicrlko

Jon smiih .

Van Tssgaris
W‘llllam oemlnnu
Janet Pope

Greg Ahmanh, calleen sinus, Dav-u alali, Mary srandi, Phll lPlcul Brown,
Tlm Cal/er, Trans Clelsnd, Tim DeCosler, Susan Duffey, Nancy could,
ocnhls Hansen, Sue Henken. Elia“ Lee, Tom anenburq, Chris aner,
Carolyn Miller, Paul Muller, Chrlsly Munson,‘Renae Reese, Mike salslch,
Dave Schechler, Leah Selulcr, John Strauss, Jlm Slrlckler, Blll WaldnEf,
Dave Wick
culumnlsls

Mark 5. Anderson, Wlll Colllns, Pal Edmunds, Peter Jarou, Ruin Mon
lgomery, Tom palvzcr, Ellyn rosrano

Photographers
sleyc Bolesta, Dave xalhan, Hello Lukk, NlEK Maiden, Dean Mcllvalne
Denny Minaml, Gus Moreno, onyld Rosenbsum, Gregg shilm

 

published wccklv exceol dorlng,holrdavs and yarnilnh periods lyy
GrinnellColleQE,SiodcntPubllrallons and Radlo Comrlllllec, Grinnell, Iowa
snlli

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

