Arizona State University - Sun Devil Spark / Sahuaro Yearbook (Tempe, AZ)

Page 31 text:

vault for their art collections! t'Art and Architecture was built in 45 A.K.-After Kafka. tilt looks like it was built in some nameless society. f'The whole complex would be great if there were vines crawling up the walls and spilling off the roof. But they insist on those stupid palm trees. The library, sitting aloofly in its moat of space, looks like the high temple of some questionable ancient faith. Really, it's pompous. Oh, I like the library. It's so grandiose. If the library were in the Middle East, someone would be buried in it. It makes a great pigeon roost. Why did they add that pile of ce- ment to Business? It has zero to do with the rest of the building? Wow, they must be teaching courses in prison administration in there. What is this? Fort Apache? I thought the Indians had quit attacking a long time ago. HWhat an abortion. At first, looking around this cam- pus you can't see the university for the buildings. But the more you look, the more trees you see. There still aren't enough, but there are more than it seems like there are. Is this con- fusing? There are a lot of things about this campus that confuse me. Buildings- 29

Page 30 text:

Hmm. That addition to business looks like the

Page 32 text:

regents give arizona universities In the next to last Arizona legislative session last year, the state Senate adopted a bill which hopefully would prevent outside agitators from dis- rupting the academic process at all state schools from kindergartens on up to the three big state universities. The legislation was prodded through the channels of government by the remembrance of past cases of student and non-student disruptions, the cli- max of which was last year's Kent State tragedy. In essence, SB 174 required that all Arizona schools establish rules regu- lating student conduct in order to qualify for those ever-vital state funds. The task had to be completed and approved by November 11. Im- mediately, leaders of all elementary and high school districts gathered around and pounded out new rewritten versions of the usual school rules. For the universities, the duty fell upon Regent James Dunseath. The fifty-eight page result of Dunseath's labors soon became the most cussed and discussed piece of literature in Arizona history, nearly qualifying it for the honor of becoming the great Arizonan novel. With amazing speed, faster than the sound of light, the Board of Re- gents adopted the Dunseath Code be- fore enough copies could be published and distributed for the general public's reading pleasure. The code was adopted September 26 by a slim 6 to 4 vote. Two of those able to read the code before its adoption, ASU President H.K. Newburn and Richard A. Harvill, President of the Univer- sity of Arizona, called it a mistake? The presidents protested its adoption vigorously before the Board for two reasons: its content, and the fact that students and faculty at the universities were not given the opportunity to read it. Nevertheless, the Board of Regents carried out its assigned duty well ahead of schedule. Just in case the charges of mistaken had any justi- fication, the Board scheduled a hear- ing on possible revisions October 23. When the code was made available to students and faculty, a large num- ber of legal and emotional nerves were hit. Most of these gripes were expressed at the October hearing. The Regents, seated in the Great Hall of the College of Law, listened to com- 30 - Code of Conduct plaints ranging from criticisms of the grammar used in the document to denunciations of the very attempt to limit student conduct in any form. The critics included a representative from the Civil Liberties Union, a priest from the Newman Center on campus, faculty representatives, student pres- idents from the three campuses and many students from the College of Law. The barrage of complaints lasted until midday, stalled during lunch and picked up again for a few hours in the afternoon. Despite the number and authority of those who lodged complaints against the Code, the Regents left the meeting seemingly untouched, for the code was officially approved with minor changes at the next meeting of the board, January 31. During the suspenseful interim be- fore the final approval, the three stu- dent presidents published a statement saying that they would all resign if the code was accepted as it existed. The minor changes in the Code ap- parently appeased the officers, how- ever, since nothing was heard from them later and they finished their terms of office undisturbed. After the Code's adoption, some student protest continued. An 'fOff the Code rally held on the Mall in March led to one of the more ironic movements in the series. A group of students descended on the student affairs office after the rally accusing ROTC on campus of violating section C, page 15, regulating faculty and stu- dent organizations under the revised Code. ROTC, the group stated, was in violation because it supposedly seeks to accomplish its local or national objectives, goals, purposes or activities by the use of violence. The affair was turned over to Dr. Dannenfeldtis office and it was decided that the charges were non-applicable since ROTC is an academic depart- ment rather than a campus organiza- tion. The rallies and monstrous negative public opinion eventually faded away, however, and the Arizona univer- sities' Code of Conduct survived. The most basic piece of advice to the faculty and student body of ASU now reads: Speak softly, especially in the direction of the Regents, and carry a big ID card.