University of Wisconsin Oshkosh - Quiver Yearbook (Oshkosh, WI)

Page 24 text:

Dr. Roger Guiles, Chancellor A University needs to be Sensitive . . . I graduated from Platteville (which at that time was a State Teacher’s College) after having had some work in pre-engineering at another school. Following that I taught math and science very briefly. Prior to going to Platteville in 1924 as a Dean I was involved in public school administration inSuper-ior. After having been at Platteville for 17 years, I was invited to accept the presidency of this university. Both my masters and doctorate are from the University of Wisconsin where my emphasis was on higher education. During my 17 years at Platteville I was given a special assignment which involved a study of higher education in Wisconsin for the Board of Regents, and which ultimately became a report to the legislature focusing on the role of state teacher colleges, and the direction in which they should be developing. When I started putting all the facts together I realized that Oshkosh was particularly well situated to develop into a strong university. This was true because of its population base, its location, and its strong liberal arts tradition. Also as a part of that report we made a number of rather important recommendations which were later implemented by acts of legislature in the sessions which followed. We recommended, for example, that these institutions become multipurpose institutions rather than single purpose institutions. We also recommended they become involved in student service programs like counseling, and provide housing and food services for students. I think an idea has to be inherently sound or it will never be brought to fruition. I don’t think an individual or a small group of individuals can create a strong institution until certain 20 elements are present. One of the important factors to keep in mind is that a strong multipurpose institution tends to add strength to each segment of that institution. In other words, our School of ’Education, which has been a strong institution in terms of Teacher Education over a period of many years, is today stronger because we have a strong School of Letters and Science. If you’re going to have a multi-purpose institution, this type of strength, you need to be able to offer students a great many different fields of study. This becomes practical only in a situation where you have a large enrollment. So one of the concerns I’ve had from the beginning, and one of the concerns that has been shared by many others on campus, is the desire to make this university responsive to the needs of the university’s growing population. There is one other very important factor in the building of a multi-purpose complex. An institution is no stronger than its faculty. But if you’re seeking strong, well-qualified people , especially in a time of strong competition as existed back in the fifties, it becomes necessary to offer such persons an opportunity to work in the field where they are well qualified. A strong faculty member has no desire to become a jack-of-all-trades, to teach subjects in which he or she has had little preparation. At Oshkosh we have been able to attract faculty members because we have been able to provide them with an opportunity to work in area specialization. All of this accrues to the benefit of the student because he in turn is able to have at his disposal persons who are well qualified. It’s been especially gratifying to me and many others to note that even the new schools, the School of Nursing and School of Business Administration, have won so much recognition. For example, the School of Business Administration, is only 7 years old. At the end of five years it was accredited by the National Collegiate School of Business. Normally a five year period is the very minimum amount of time required for consideration by the accrediting agency. This is rather good evidence that this university has genuine strength. Similarly, the School of Nursing, which is about the same age, has been accredited nationally and locally, and has won much recognition. I cite this because I believe it’s important for students to be assured they’re spending their time in a university program which has recognition in the marketplace. I believe very strongly that the university needs to be sensitive to the needs of students, and that all of us need to be concerned with the relevancy of the program we're offering. I also believe the university ought to be a place where students of limited economic ability may be able to advance themselves, and prepare for the demanding situations they’re almost certain to confront. My own experience with students has been very pleasant. This may seem a little strange to some people, but it’s true. As I look at students today I sense a very serious concern about life. This is not a result of a change in students, but a growing awareness of the world in which they live, and the kind of competition they are going to face. We’re bringing to the university a much broader spectrum of student abilities, interests, and career goals. continued on page 25

Page 23 text:

Dave Crusius, Councilman War, Peace, and Crusius My Interest In politics came about because of my experience in Viet Nam. A lot of veterans and myself went over there putting a lot of trust in the government. I enlisted in the Marine Corps because I thought those “slanteyed bastards” ( I use the phrase in quotes. That was where I was at a couple of years back, sorrowfully enough) ought to be taught a lesson for playing games with the United States. I got over there and served with the third division up on the DMZ, and saw a lot of things that didn’t agree with me. I saw the indiscriminate bombing, the little Mai Lais, and it opened up my eyes. A civil war is going on over in Viet Nam, nothing more and nothing less. It ought to be determined by the Vietnamese. I felt that I was used by the country. Then I came back and saw a lot of things that I didn’t see before: the many inequities of our system. The ghettos, police brutality, and starvation; and I decided a lot of these things have to be changed. The way to change them is through either education, the slower method, or law and politics. Politics is the quickest way to facilitate change. Internationally I see the United States running around as a big, spoiled giant. It tries to protect its interests by following a lot of outmoded theories including the domino, the trip-wire, and containment theory. These all originated with the red scare back in the early fifties with Joe McCarthy. I can’t see Communism as the number one enemy. I wouldn’t want to see Communism in the U.S., but if it works in other countries, I think those countries ought to decide which way they are going. I don’t buy the idea that the two major powers have been following: a form of detante, a show -down competition with one another. I’d like to see countries live together, and throw out everything that has to do with war. I don’t think war is necessary. You cannot bring about change through war. There are things wrong with the Communistic system. The most obvious is its limitations on individual freedoms. Everything is for the whole. Everything is for the nation. That is a completely screwed up idea. Dike the idea of complete freedom of expression as guaranteed in the Constitution. Sometimes in the U.S. limitations are too drastic. There are a lot of limitations that are fascist in nature. Among them is the recent Supreme Court decision which allows radicals or the people in organized crime to be convicted with a simple majority of jurors instead of the full Iy twelve. That is a breakdown in our system The way the U.S. approaches many of its internal problems is completely wrong. The general attitude around the U.S. where people do not accept opinions that are contrary to the status quo is something that people ought to be concerned about. The U.S. is not an out and out fascist country in the sense that Germany or Italy was. Its fascism is more subtle. This society by its very nature represses anything, be it ideas or people, that is outside or not acceptable to the group norm— Middle America. It doesn’t have to use military and government. We don’t have to limit a person’s freedom. I should have the right to do what I want to do when I want to do it so long as I am not imposing on you. If I want to walk around the house in the nude, I should have the right to walk in the nude. I have the right to swing my hand at you as long as I stop right before your face. I have not really harmed you. This is where the only limitation ought to be: if I harmed you. There is a higher truth that has to be followed by the President, Senators, and Congressmen. The truth may be relative, but I feel there are universal truths. Among them is the love of mankind and the truth of justice--not just law and order, but justice. We should respect another person whether he is black or yellow or red or white. We’re all brothers and sisters. We’re human beings first, men or women second, and citizens of the United States or Russia third. We have to remember that we’re all the same. We’re really just one. In the Presidential race, the way it stands now, I think McGovern will be better than Nixon. At least he has a sense of humanity. I just hope he doesn’t do a lot of word-eating. I hope he remembers who got him the nomination, and doesn’t all of a sudden start playing politics. Deciding that we’ve got to have labor, industry, and party boss support is insane. McGovern can’t realistically discount these people, but I don’t think he has to draw them with compromises. Making concessions in order to get this group or that is something that ought to be gotten away from. If McGovern appeals to people on an individual basis, a small group basis, fine, but I can’t see anybody selling his soul. Politics on the whole is one hell of a struggle. There are so many groups that want to be represented that it is impossible to represent them all. What it comes down to on key issues is following your own conscience. In the final analysis you have to define what is right and wrong, which stands to take, and which ones not to. One thing that pretty much irritates me is that I see a lot of people sit on the fence, continued on page 58

Page 25 text:

1959. Roger Guiles has been President and Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin- Oshkosh since His term of office has; been both exciting and controversial. Enrollments have skyrocketed, and new educational philosophies have gained popular acceptance. Usually Dr. Guiles is pictured as a dark and sinister conservative by students. No one would dare think of him in liberal terms. Still, this interview, while picturing a man who believes in the importance of details, reveals a side to Dr. Guiles that few people realize exists. A few of his ideas are certainly liberal, and some sound as if they could have come from either Mark Mitchell or Dave Crusius.