Western Washington University - Klipsun Yearbook (Bellingham, WA)

Page 23 text:

s E Their highlight of the year was obtaining voting student positions on the adj no znoiiiaoq 1 powerful Academic Council. i 1969 was definitely the year of the liberal and radical and less so for roi oz zeal bns I the moderate. Conservative ideas were not vogue, particularly because azusood vlisluoil a liberal slate of officers was elected starting with the executive offices aaoillo SVTIIJOSXS in Spring '68 and continuing each quarter with legislature elections. .anoiioala 311111 The Free University became the center and experimental location for 'iol noiisool Ismf educational reform. Starting as an outgrowth of the executive campaign ngisqmso 1'-Jviwo: in summer, 1968, it had more than 500 students by spring, ,69 and had bsrl bus QB' ,gui a full-time co-ordinator. Students hired for their co-ordinator a professor 'ioaaoloiq s ioisrtl who had been both chosen teacher of the year by students and not re- -91 Jon bns amal hired by Western in Spring '68. The Free University also became a meeting ground for interested citi- -iiio boiafnami it zens from Bellingham, the county, the college and local institutions. .anoiiuiiiani Isoo. Through people-to-people forums which started in winter, 1969, the srl! ,QBQI ,iamiv Free U. introduced many people to educational reform and ways for a s iol zvsw bus n real community of people to solve problems. Probably the most significant thing about 1969 was the rejection by stu- -me vd noiioaiar 1 dents of the bandaid effect of reforms. In other words, this meant that Jsrli Jnsom aid! , I9

Page 22 text:

long, Nqtp sqnnuiatistoia sruq rscrqtk' lpcic M32 sr wsqzeq ciioit pk 1595 M92 9120 sr AGSL in Mpicp atnqeut ujcsqctan agobbcq blskiui unucjc biowotiou' cntucn nw sn co Q30 sr UJIUIZLLSUAG bisrcticca' . . I 9 ll 9 . . . . in Ntpicp tpcl. conlq ingncuce piLiU3 sruq mini or biotceaoral Lennie suq Wore Lqcztsrut to cqncstiou More sttcwbta pk atnqcuta to Esriu bozitiouz csulbnz' tot ppcispscq qtiulqui Lcgnjstiouz suq ckcumsl pdnor onqcta ou pk jrdnoi' 20 ztnqcuta atobbcq piqiug Lpia t-set suq obculk psriisiucq ieicucca suq otpct Estpc-:Ling blsccz rot atnqcuta MQLQ sqmska Uicnomcq EAQLAOUG Icucm LOL A6912 tpst psuq tubes Ln3pk Eswca' Iesrqcrapib cou- Vu cxswbyc M32 one or ppc psaic iutcieatz or wslc concic atnqcutaz pdnot' An example was one of the basic interests of male college students: liquor. Everyone knew for years that band trips, rugby games, leadership con- ferences and other gathering places for students were always mellowed by liquor. So students stopped hiding this fact and openly bargained for liberalized drinking regulations and eventual liquor outlets on campus. More relevant to education were attempts by students to gain positions in which they could influence hiring and firing of professors, tenure and promotion, curriculum and college administrative practices. 1969 was also a year in which student uleadersn stopped playing Uncle Tomn with administrators and faculty. There was a marked effort by all students concerned to honestly present their cases to outside groups without frills and without acting as lackeys for those in administrative positions. It was also the first year in which a wide spectrum of activity was noted in groups outside the student government. Groups from very conserva- tive to radical presented programs, lobbied for and against the college at the state legislature, demanded recognition and rights and gained thousands of signatures on petitions. There was also a healthy rejection of apathy by small groups of people who wanted to form service, academic, political, recreational or other clubs. They came out of their shells in reaction to centralization of money and programming in student government and in response to the offer of financial subsidization by student government. After a hectic year of extreme centralization and an unexpected surge of club activity, the Activities Commission, under Mike Botkin, became more workable and more people planned, participated in and promoted events. The woman on Westernis campus also bloomed in 1969. Many relevant and important official and unofficial jobs and offices were filled by women. The Dean of Women resigned and many women students ques- tioned if the position should continue. The clubs specifically for men and women were de-emphasized as such, although the women continued to have many more activities especially relevant to them, than did the men. The Student Academic Advisory Board made its mark in 1969 as the board of qualified, imaginative and knowledgeable students who could research, plan and execute curricular and generally academic reform.

Page 24 text:

moiirioa oi barrilarii zeal rlaum aiaw airrabmz nm aiaw varlT .rrraldorq s rio bil s qaayl io aasaaib .aaiuoz arli buJZ bms amabuJ8 lo rrsafl arli ai Jasl ni mari HA arqai bris mammavog mabma ,arsav aairlj 1071 iisriailis ni babaaaaua bsd aquoig awaaarq mab rioqU .a1rrabuJ8 io rnsaCl adi rliiw arroijslar avi! q airl vrlw rroasar arlj ariirmaiab or babiaab amab HJ bavorms Io baggud aaaiviaa amabujz lo rioijui Jiisaofl riailj Js maldoiq arlj Plasma oi asw airlj .9691 vxsurdafl m lo aiaaqas aaaliriuoa baiolqxa varli .zvsb aairli rrI isa varlT .vllsaiiiaaqa cnoiisauba fri Jisq 'amabuja ioqaai aroisnairrimbs oi bajsairrumrrroa rrarlj araw rsrabiaiioa lsimsiadua rravig aiaw arroiaularioa arlT fa rlJod lo viluasl bus amabuia lo Holla aviiaalloa .raiasrsrla Iaivijas-fron bus Jaivijas 20 students were much less inclined to confront just the symptoms of a disease or keep a lid on a problem. They were more inclined to confront the source. An item in fact is the Dean of Students and Student Services in general. For three years, student government and representatives of other stu- dent pressure groups had succeeded in ailienating and blocking effec- tive relations with the Dean of Students. Upon his resignation, the stu- dents decided to determine the reason why his position in the sub-insti- tution of students services bugged or annoyed them. One way they did this was to attack the problem at their Rosario Merge Conference in February 1969. In three days, they explored countless aspects of communication and the students, part in education, specifically. They came to conclusions which were then communicated to administrators responsible for these services. The conclusions were given substantial consideration since they were the collective effort of students and faculty of both conservative and liberal, activist and non-activist character. Gne of the most important results of the Conference was the feeling of community which wrapped everyone into a delicate cocoon for three days. They firmly rejected mass-movement answers to problems in favor of small-group action. Examples of ideas which were presented to the campus were optional curriculum for those who did not want to major in a particular subject, experimental living conditions, abolition of the lecture system for those who could not learn from it, a union of untenured faculty and students, and methods for retaining untenured professors who students especially liked. The biggest failure of student government in 1969 was the continuing schism between Bellingham and the college. Two methods were employed to solve this problem: public relations and community work, and speak- ing frankly to local clubs and organizations. The former worked better but was not an effective enough catalyst for friendship. The latter an- noyed audiences even when they expressly invited speakers to explain educational reform. Generally it was a comfortable, refreshing and invigorating year for those of an activist nature. It was a year of paranoia and reaction for those who fear activists. Unlike President Nixon, there was no one in a position of student leadership who really cared to or succeeded in bring- ing us together?