Western Washington University - Klipsun Yearbook (Bellingham, WA)

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?

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 25 text:

DEAN HWCHMAN From 1966 to 1969 the student scene at Western has changed. While Western has usually been re- garded as a college hospitable to new ideas, the last three years have witnessed alterations in stu- dent appearance and behavior chiefly character- ized by dissatisfaction with the status quo. For some, this means a renunciation of society, for others, an active attempt to change it. At Western, most students have proceeded to study and earn a degree, but segments of the student body have drawn attention by use of drugs, demonstrations, vulgarity and sensationalism in programs and the student paper. However, the main student thrusts by which the past three years will be remembered at Western are the movement for more active par- ticipation in decision-making, concern for the dis- advantaged at home and desire for peace abroad. The student quest for relevance has added a new vigor to the campus. The faculty reaction has been mixed. Most fac- ulty are silent, a few oppose the student movement, some encourage it and increasing numbers are agreeing with it. The administration has usually been flexible in dealing with students, and in most cases has helped make changes. Since so much that is happening is new, it is not always clear if faculty practice is in the best interests of the institution, it is not always clear when the administration is practicing appeasement or cooperating to improve the college community. Only time can tell. The college itself is changing. Concepts such as account-