University of Maine - Prism Yearbook (Orono, ME)

Page 8 text:

each academic department, apparently because of student pressure. However, some Student Senate members were still not satisfied. They continued to push a civil suit against the faculty which they had approved December 1. They said that faculty meetings were public proceedings and students had a right to at- tend. A small group of students stood in the lobby during each faculty meeting of the year threat- ening to disrupt the proceedings. They finally did, on March 15, when the faculty voted requirement changes for the college. The next day the Student Senate voted to drop its suit against the faculty. The eighteen students who had disrupted the meeting and who later came to be known as the “Orono 18. were put on office probation on May 4. a punishment which lasted less than a month for most of them. Some students felt that the political duel with the faculty served only to prolong the passage of reform measures. Others, however, said that it was a matter of principle and that students should not sit back and let the faculty plan their education. In either event, most students were somewhat less than satisfied with the approved requirement changes. Students were now required to take a minimum of one year’s work in each of the follow- ing categories: 1. fine arts (art and music, speech and drama): 2. foreign language: 3. social scien- ces: 4. natural science and mathematics: and 5. humanities. A second reform measure to become effective in the fall of 1971 would allow any student to com- plete up to 60 credit hours by passing exam- inations covering introductory course matter. But many students said that more reform was still needed. As did his predecessor in 1970-71. newly-elected Senate President Bill Eames said that academic reform would be his first priority for the 1971-72 year. 'We have got to get rid of this notion that only the faculty can impart great knowledge to the stu- dents. We can learn from each other, too. Eames said. STUDENT SENATE Throughout the year the Student Senate’s effec- tiveness was severely hampered by internal dis- putes. resignations and criticisms. At the beginning of the year, the Senate's exec- utive assistant, administrative assistant and secre- tary resigned. Towards the end of the year, four members of the Executive Committee also resigned. The Senate was split three ways on most ques- tions of major political importance since there seemed to be three types of Senators: liberals, conservatives and those who voted along the lines supported by their constituents. Many of the liberals had taken an active part in the previous year’s political activity and wished to continue that activity during 1970-71. They pushed for open faculty meetings and on March 15. some of them found themselves members of the Orono 18. It was also the liberals who in- itiated the idea of a suit against the faculty and convinced enough senators to approve it as a mo- tion on the Senate floor. At the time it was passed, many senators called it the most significant move since the previous year. But the suit was repeatedly delayed. The at- torney came to two Senate meetings to see if the Senate still wanted to sue. And finally, when the Senate was told that the attorney had not begun litigation, the request for the suit was withdrawn. Indecisiveness and internal disorder caused the image of the Senate to suffer greatly. Not only did people resign (the three administrators resigned for mostly personal reasons, those on the Execu- tive Committee because they were dissatisfied with the policies of President George Chalmers), but there were two moves for the impeachment of the president. The first attempt failed by a wide margin, the second by a narrower margin. If abstentions and nay votes were added together after the second vote, then those voting in favor cast one more vote than the other two combined. 8

Page 7 text:

key ingredients, were non-existent at UMO. But why did everyone feel so helpless? Was it that they were giving up? Had they resigned themselves to the theory that we must work through the system? Was it because more forceful and charismatic leaders were needed? Students seemed to agree on one thing. They weren’t apathetic in the total sense of the word; they were just physically apathetic. They simply did not feel like going out and protesting against the political ills of the times. Demonstrating was nothing new. the novelty had worn off. and be- sides. nothing ever seemed to come of it. Unfor- tunately. this is probably the most serious weak- ness inherent in “student power. Students have the power to make changes, especially since the lowering of the voting age. but they lack the tena- city to make it effective. Politically, the year can best be described as a nine-month period of expectancy-with no result- ing birth of feeling or activism. At the beginning of March, the Maine Campus asked students what they expected to happen in the spring. Reporters said that most students were just waiting for some- thing to happen One student said: “There’s a lot of suppressed anger and I'm afraid that it's going to break nation-wide into a revolution. Another student: ‘This campus has just been so quiet all year and now that spring is coming students arc getting restless. They’re going to go out and raise hell this spring. They’re not going to sit back and wait the rest of the year for someone else to get something done. But he was wrong. Apparently, everyone was quite prepared to “sit back and wait”— indefinitely. There were still legitimate areas for protest in 1970-71. There was still the war and all its attend- ant political maladies, there was the question of whether or not the draft would be eliminated, the SST. My Lai. and closer to home, there was still the lack of any overwhelming academic reform which had been approved in referendum the year before. But the only thing to produce vehement student protest throughout the winter was sub- zero temperatures and copius amounts of snow. On the national issues, it seemed people were waiting for a national political disaster to occur as a catalyst for student protest. There was none. And on the local issues, apparantly students tired of reading about academic reform, or the lack of it just as they tired of reading about the Justice Department visit and its implications. A newspaper often provides the stimulous for public concern, but the Maine Campus was covering top- ics the student body refused to concern itself with. Dan Rather. White House correspondent for CBS News, spoke of Richard Nixon’s repetition of the slogan the lift of a driving dream : If I hear that comment once more. I think I'll jump off the Tallahatchee Bridge. This appears to be the way students fell about academic reform. They were sick of hearing about what sparked student unrest the year before. And there seemed to be no new issues for the student body as a whole to protest against, or perhaps they did not want to look for any. ACADEMIC REFORM The student senate administration in September decided that academic reform would be the first priority of the year. Students had already ex- pressed their dissatisfaction with curriculum re- quirements and the grading system. Change had to come about. “If nothing comes through, it will be the stu- dents’ fault. Senate President Chic Chalmers said. But the academic reform movement was pla- gued with obstacles. It wasn’t until the end of Oc- tober that the Council of Colleges approved a stu- dent motion calling for the initiation of a Task Force on Academic Review. On November 19. the faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences rejected a proposed amendment to their by-laws which would have set aside fifty seats for student observers during faculty meet- ings. Less than a month later, the faculty opened up its meetings to eighteen students, one from 7

Page 9 text:

The liberals blamed the Senate's ineffectiveness on the conservative Senate administration. They criticised the Senate president for being too much of a politician, wary of displeasing anybody, espe- cially those in the University administration. The conservatives retorted that the failings of the Senate should be blamed on the senators themselves, not on Chic Chalmers and his staff. Not only couldn't the Senate members agree on politics, but they also couldn't agree on who was to blame for their own internal problems. But in spite of all the problems and bickering, the Senate did also make some positive advance- ments. One of the most significant and undoubt- edly the most publicized was the establishment of the first population control fund in the nation. The $5,000 fund is available to University women who wish to have an abortion. Hopefully, in the future this fund will be expanded to provide all methods of birth control. Because of mostly outside opposition to the fund, the County Attorney said he would conduct an investigation of the abortion loan fund. As a result, student leaders were cautious in discussing the matter. When a well-known student senator was asked how many students had taken advan- tage of the fund, he said: Abortion loan fund? What's that?” Nothing more was heard of the County At- torney’s investigation. Quite a few students were opposed to the fund. Some called abortion murder, others said preg- nancy is the price you have to pay —” and still others complained that student funds shouldn't be used for this purpose. The majority of students seemed to approve of the fund, although some said privately that they experienced too much pressure from peers to voice their disapproval. But just how many felt this way is hard to say. Only about fifty students took their 73 cents (the amount of each student’s activity fee that went into the fund) out of the fund. In other areas, the Senate’s Student Services committee convinced the University of the need for a child day care center (although the Univer- sity later decided that the old Newman Center should be renovated for a faculty club rather than the day care center) and established the concept of a drug help center and bail bonding for students. ECONOMY A late-spring issue of Time magazine pictured on its front cover a college senior, wearing cap and gown, pumping gasoline at a service station. Ac- cording to national statistics, as well as UMO fig- ures. 1971 was one of the worst years for obtaining employment in years. At the end of May. 213 of the 1.050 seniors reg- istered with the Career Planning and Placement Office had been placed in jobs. This included those who had found jobs, those accepted into graduate school and those about to enter military service. The prospects for summer employment were not much brighter. The Maine Campus reported May 20. that not one of the 91 students who had applied for a job with the Maine Employment Security Commission had been offered a job. Other agencies were also unable to provide sum- mer employment for students, although many stu- dents had indicated on their applications that they would take any kind of work at all. In addition to the critical job shortage, the trustees, because of cuts in the University’s budget by the legislature, increased the room and board rates by S70 effective in September of 1971. The admissions office reported that well over 7.000 applications were received for admission to the class of 1975. but only 1.800 places were open—200 less than the previous year. In February, after reporting that upwards of one out of three January graduates was still look- ing for a job. Placement Director Philip J. Brockway said: I’ve been in this type of work since 1935, but I've never seen a year when an 9