University of Massachusetts Amherst - Index Yearbook (Amherst, MA)

Page 25 text:

Student Senate Speaker Brian DeLima was made a scapegoat I when he was found guilty by the Student judiciary on two charges fggff from his abuse of the senate phones to make seventy-three long- , T distance phone calls worth 5313 to his home state Hawaii. The charges were: misrepresenting the senate without prior consent of that group, and fradulently obtaining telephone ser- vice through unauthorized charging tothe account of another. On the witness stand DeLima was asked if he had prior con- sent for use of the phones for personal calls. At no time was the use of phones frowned upon, DeLima stated. ln fact it was sanctioned. Delima arranged to pay for the calls from his intersession salary as Senate Speaker. ooo DQIDim?QlOO0i?.EQlmSi,iEl-i OOOEEQESOOO UKAK re if .xx Q 'u N . REWEVWISEQ Protests were prevalent on campus this past spring. On the left students are shown prior to their April 8th occupation of Chancellor Bromery's office in Whit- more. ln all seventy-five students were in- volved with the seventeen hour takeover in protest of University housing policies. One of the other major groups of pro- testers was the faculty, shown here before their May 3rd picket of Whitmore. The faculty was protesting that they had not yet received the two and a half percent pay increase granted by the state to all state employees. The faculty protests did not end with the march on campus, how- ever, but continued into the month of june, when they did not release student's grades till the administration met their demands. - S W ll MOP Ufvltiss 4 M me ADMmH5TFlif Q' JN A ibrtrtgtlgfrixii If 1 Tami F l-My S li tbl? l f. Q aol'-axle lllfmul 23

Page 24 text:

Dissent: Kent Sitaiteooo The summer news of l l iifli litillilgs 1 5 that Kent State has not 1977 flashed back to 1970 iflg 55. been for otten or for- as Kent State University 255 13: iiigigv iiijiiiii i given. Tae spirit of Kent once again becameahead- l' l5 .iifs,- fi State lives on. lt is the line grabber. Tent City at 'T spirit of rebellion, the Kent State captured the - r 'A ui' L M n 1 spirit of strength and uni- irlriaginagon argd energy of i L - ty and the spirit ofileter- t ousan s, an UMass was i Q , ,f-t mination to stan o - no exception. The Revolu- . T is POSed to the injustice bf tionary Student Brigade be- 'til 'Q E G A war. gan the fall semester with a ,Q ' H V Over 2,000 students campaign to popularize the F ww Alll signed petitions which struggle there. More than lie' E l' -' demonstrated enough 125 UMals1s stugents took gil 4 ' g p' -G ' support foruthe Student part in t ree emonstra- 1' 7 A Senate to a ocate a most tions at that university, sac- ii 54,000 for traveling ex- rificing weekends and par- Z 0 I penses to the site. ties to spend twenty- our file ' Q In 1970 National grueling hours of traveling it 1 -- A Guardsmen used brute to take a stand at Kent AM, -f I,,.-M,-15 ' force with the consent State. s' .,.' 1 iifs ' 'i T ' and encouragement of Many of the students , nan' -U j . .Q-..q,,V,jV :fig Ai., 1' gjdnfenvi .'7fs-:':f:..VV:x:-fffjig . were Only In elementary J' A emi, 1 ,.7f.:e?:L'1-fr :,1u'fw1:.1-e-- '--iw'-Liviwfz-.c ..,- -.LA-it school when the four stu- dents were killed by National Guards- men at an anti-war rally at Kent in 1970. Yet over 1700 students at UMass wore armbands as art of the National Arm- band Day calTed by the Revolutionary Brigade in support of the struggle at Kent State to put an end to injustice. They joined the thousands across the country who opposed the construction of a gymnasium on the site were the students had been killed seven years before. UMass students joined the thousands who proclaimed to the powers to be then Governor Rhodes of Ohio to suppress the peo- ple's demands for an end to the war in Indochina. ln 1977, police used the same methods again to try to scauash the spirit of strugg e, that spirit 0 unity at Kent State and campuses across the country, which will one day provide the strength to insure that Kent State will never happen again. - Ellie Gitelman and Charles Bagli X

Page 26 text:

Lance Didn't Balance When President jimmy Carter chose his close friend Bert Lance to act as the Director of the Office of Management and Budget KOMBJ in Washington last january, most Americans believed that they had just another good ole boy to add to their list of officials with southern accents in the Capital. Well, as it turned out, this ole boy wasn't so good and innocent after all. Reports by the news media and official investiga- tions suggested possible wrong-doings in Lance's freewheeling financial affairs. The controversy was sparked by the May 23rd issue of Time Magazine con- taining the first public accounting of Lance's debts. More reports followed in the Washington Post, The New York Times, and Newsweek Magazine. The media claimed that Lance was abusing his position as part owner of the Na- tional Bank of Georgia CNBGD. They ac- cused him of unethical conduct in ob- taining personal loans in his financial interests. These discoveries lead to offi- cial inquiries by the Senate Govern- mental Affairs Committee headed by Senator Abraham Ribicoff on july 15. The committee concluded that it was satisfied with Lance's testimony, saying that he had done nothing improper . A report by the Comptroller of the Currency and Lance's close friend, john G. Hieman, also endorsed Lance, Turmoil: Tifiaiaeem An Act Of Perfidy On the basis of a near unanimous recommendation of a faculty search committee, I was offered the position of Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and Provost in late August of 1976. Al- though a group of dissident faculty sought to overturn this recommenda- tion the University Board of Trustees approved my appointment, and I as- sumed my duties on October 15, 1976. Fourteen months later, on january 10, 1978,the Chancellor, for political rea- sons, asked for my resignation. The fol- lowing day, when, as a matter of princi- ple, I refused to step aside voluntarily, I was summarily dismissed. This ended the shortest tenure of any academic of- ficer on this or any other campus. For whatever lessons it holds for the future, it may be useful to examine, in sum- mary form, the web of factors that led to my demise. I came to the Provosts Office at a time when the University was adrift. Because the political elements in the faculty were in constant internecene warfare with the President's Office over jurisdictional matters, little sustained attention had been given to the task of modernizing the University at a time when societal changes were beginning to have a profound influence on the future of higher education throughout the nation. Few faculty understood that the phenomenal growth in enrollment and University budgets during the 19605 and early 1970s had come to an end, and would not return again during the remainder of this century. More- over, despite studies by the Carnegie Commission and others, few faculty were prepared to face the reality that permanent secular shifts in the eco- nomic system, from a predominately goods producing to a service economy, presented a challenge to the University to meet the emerging societal demand for more specialized career education, particularly at the undergraduate and the Masters levels, While vociferously denying that these charges were inevi- table, some faculty failed to recognize the need to revitalize a moribund liber- al arts which, through lack of clarity and definition, had not only given up its traditional claims at the center of the educational process, but was increas- ingly at odds with changing academic values. The faculty also remained blind I to the imaginative ways in which cur- ricular and degree requirements at all levels could be tailored to appeal to the students broad intellectual interests as well as to their quest for specialized career education. Knowledge for its own sake may be an admirable goal, but it is one which few individuals practice exclusively, including those faculty who urged such views on their stu- dents. I accepted the Provost's position with the clear understanding that my primary tasks would be to improve aca- demic organization and management fin a University notorious for poor managementj, and to provide the ad- ministrative leadership necessary to modernize the University and equip it to meet the new societal conditions which would affect its operation for the remainder of this century. The first step was to begin a process of long-range planning which would guide the alloca- tion of fiscal resources in the future, determine the relative importance of academic programs and, in general, provide for the maintenance and en- hancement of scholarly excellence de- spite diminished budgets. My initial analysis ofthe academic budget led me to the inescapable conclusion that the budget was not rationally distributed among academic programs, that there were no clear empirical guidelines for the allocation of academic resources, and that there was considerable mis- mangement of budgets at the School and Department levels. All this was compounded by data management and accounting systems appallingly inad-