Page four
GUILFORDIAN, April 14, 1981
Faculty to help recruitment
Concern over the quantity
and quality of student enroll
ment is always a concern of a
small college, and Guilford is no
exception. As a first step in a
long range policy aimed at
improving enrollment at Guil
ford, the Faculty Admissions
Committee is calling on the
faculty and perhaps students to
play a larger part in the
recruiting effort.
The recommended policy
takes into consideration the
fact that normally 50% or more
of the students accepted by
colleges, including Guilford, opt
58 of 298 students who enrolled in
the fall of 1979 did not return in the
fall of 1980
tor another school. In hopes ot
coaxing some of these students
away from Duke, Wake Forest,
Davidson, and the University fo
Virginia (Guilford's perennial
competitors) this policy has
been accepted. Upon accept
ance of a student who has
expressed interest in a particu
lar field of study, a professor in
that department will be notified
and asked to contact this stu
dent concerning the require
ments and options that he/she
would encounter at Guilford.
This type of interaction,
which will be used this spring,
attacks the enrollement pro
blem from two directions. First
of all, it is hoped that having
Guilford confronts
David Stewart
Part 1
Certainly one of the busiest
places on campus this semester
has been in the financial aid
office, which is directed by
Anthony Curley and Dianne
Harrison. Ordinarily, the rou
tine workload they and work
study students share would not
be news.
However, business ceased on
the morning of November 5,
1980. Finacial aid offices in
almost every educational insti
tution nationwide would soon
begin to feel the aftershocks of a
proposed federal cutback in
funding. Since a considerable
number of Cuilford students are
on financial aid, federal pro
gram changes suddenly assume
greater significance for many
students and parents, as well as
schools.
Many will be relieved to know
that students here may not
experience the trauma of those
who enroll in other schools in
North Carolina. In the Past,
Guilford has been able to keep
annual increases in educational
costs near the 10% mark. The
Film Series continues
The Guilford PIRG/Energy
Awareness Film Series con
tinues with three short Depart
ment of Energy films. "Energy
Proffing Your Home," a 10
minute short explores the prin
ciples and techniques of saving
energy and money around the
house. It will be shown on
Friday, April 17 following the
faculty members personally call
or write accepted students will
prove to be a successful met
hod of differentiating Guilford
from the competitors. Studies of
population trends indicate that
the pool of college age students
in the U.S. will be declining
until approximately 1990. This
will result in tougher compe
tition among colleges for a
decreasing supply of good stu
dents. Receiving a phone call or
a personal letter from a faculty
member will provide the stu
dent with a special glimpse into
the community atmosphere and
personal approach that the com
mittee thinks represents Guil
ford College. This will make a
stronger impression on a stu
dent than the commonly used
"Dear Student" letter from
other schools.
It is indeed possible that the
additional knowledge of Guil
ford gained by the student
through this interaction could
lead him/her away from rather
than towards Guilford. How
ever, those students who, after
receiving more information, de
cide not to come to Guilford,
might well have ended up as
transfers after their first year.
According to Registrar Floyd
Reynolds, 58 to 298 students
1981-82 jump will be around
11.5%, which is below the
approximately 15% increase of
several institutions statewide.
In addition, Cuilford will prob
ably slip from being ranked as
the third most expensive private
school in the Tarheel state to
sixth or seventh.
How will Cuilford College
confront the tight money situ
ation and still provide assist
ance to needy students? Given
the tenuous federal outlay for
education, a plan for immediate
financial aid packaging can at
best seek to minimize the
impact of the almost certain
reductions.
One recent proposal sent by
the Financial Aid Committee to
the Retention Committee is: 1)
students must maintain a CPA
of 1.30 as a freshman and 1.90
thereafter, 2) failure to keep
levels of acceptable academic
work would make funds avail
able to others.
It is hoped that removal ot
students who fail to maintain
main feature "Girl Friends."
On Friday, April 24 following
"Agatha," a 12 minute -DOE
film, "Wind: An Alternative
Energy," will be shown. The
film deals with the historical use
of wind for power as well as its
modern day applications.
The final film in the series,
"Up the Power Curve," will be
who enrolled in the fall of 79 did
not return in the fall of 1980
This mark of 20% has been the
normal percentage at Guilford
in receni years. It is the hope of
the committee that the extra
communication between the
school and prospective students
will improve the quality of
enrolled students by reducing
the percentage of mismatched
students and increasing the
number of that would be most
inclined to remain here for four
years.
In addition to the faculty's
increased involvement, stu
dents may also be called upon
the future to take part in this
effort. At present, ideas con
cerning the role students can
play in the recruiting process
are being discussed by the
Admissions committee. Ac
cording to Ellen O'Brien, a
committee member, the Un
ion and campus organizations
contact accepted students who
have expressed interest in these
activities. This could serve the
dual purpose of providing the
prospective student with a cur
rent, active students' view of
Guilford while possibly helping
to increase the participation of
the freshman class in campus
organizations.
At present, student involve
ment in recruiting is limited to a
small group of students, vol
unteering as tour guides.
adequate academic work would
make their funds available to
those who have.
Consideration about other
changes in awarding aid are not
final. One proposal is that, in
the future, minimum summer
savings requirements computed
by the needs analysis formula
may not be waived as a matter
of policy. Also, following the
trend established by other insti
tutfons, Cuilford may choose to
begin assessing automobiles of
residential students as an addi
tional asset. This means that a
student's demonstrated need
would be reduced by an amount
equal to 10% of the mean Blue
Book value of the car. Both
policies would not prevent a
student from appealing a spe
cial circumstance to the Finan
cial Aid Committe.
Be reminded, these are only
tentative changes. A bulletin
from Washington tomorrow
could portend fluctuations in
policy for good or ill. Yet such
are the exigencies inherent in
providing money to meet edu
cational costs for all who want to
attend college.
shown on Thursday, April 30.
This 10 minute film discusses
the praticality of energy conser
vation.
All of the films will be shown
at no charge and members of
the College Community are
invited to attend.
Fikes response from page 3
practice a covert nepotism
Decision making and the solu
tion of problems tends to be
indirect and covert." The rea
der will note that Professor
Malino has left out the qualifi
cation I attached to the first
sentence: "at least to some
extent." This deceitful omission
makes it nepotistic. Then Pro
fessor Malino "constructs"
(and I mean just that) the
following syllogism:
1) All decisions making at
Guilford is covert decision mak
ing.
2) Covert nepotism is covert
decision making.
3) Therefore, covert nepotism
is a kind of decision making at
Guilford.
First, under the guise of
"eliminating the frills," Profes
sor Malino has further muti
lated by alleged remarks by
dropping the qualification of
"tends" from the second sen
tence. This, of course, results in
an even further oversimplifi
cation of my position. Then he
proceeds to set up his syllogism
by trying to logically relate two
statements which were not in
tended to be logically related.
Even here his intention is
suspect. Rather then develop
the various syllogistic possibili
ties existing between the two
statements, he arbitrarily con
fines himself to one-one that
would have the desired effect of
panning me. For the record, I
will not deny that I made both
statements in substantially the
form in which they were quoted
by Mr. Gurley; but I made them
in two separate contexts.
Professor Malino pulls basi
cally the same stunt in this
second syllogistic fabrication.
Once more, logically unrelated
statements are wrenched out of
context and interpreted selec
tively to prepetrate a fraud.
This time my words are manipu
lated to suggest that I fail to
distinguish between nepotism
and the hiring of qualified
relatives of persons already
employed. Is it plausible to
assume that because I did not
mention the hiring of qualified
relatives, I do not distinguish
between that practice and nepo
tism? Isn't it possible to speak
of cows without mentioning
pigs? It is not unfair at this
point to suggest that Professor
Malino is rebelling against com
mon sense.
I am also criticized by Profes
sor Malino for failing to support
my allegation with evidence.
Mr. Gurley and I discussed this
matter during the interview,
and he left me under the
impression that he did not want
to mention names and hirings.
This is as it should be-not only
to prevent needless embar
rassment, but more importantly
because nothing would come of
the nepotism allegations any
way. Credibility at Guilford has
little if anything to do with
evidence or anything else which
smacks of objective rationality.
At Guilford, credibility is as
sociated with what Professor
Malino has called "collegia
lity is associated service, and
smiling," and most assuredly
not in that order. That is to say,
credibility is withheld from
whomever or whatever denies
the fundamental soundness of
the status quo, no matter what
the supporting evidence.
Toward the end of his "Open
Letter," Professor Malino takes
a parting shot:
"But how about the question
whether the college should sub
sidize twin beds for faculty
spouses in order to diminish
collusion, power politics, and
the reproduction of the tenden
cy to spouse hiring, while
guaranteeing the right of
spouses (only when best quali
fied, of course) to a job? (I take
it this must have been the
alchemy of which Professor Fike
spoke.)"
I won't hazard a complete
interpretation of this passage.
Suffice it to say that Professor
Malino makes one last sorry
attempt to discredit me, this
time by trivializing my comment
about Guilford subsidizing em
ployee families and by capri
ciously associating me with the
"pillow talk" comments. I note
once more the liberties, if not
license, Professor Malino allows
himself with other persons'
words.
I must confess I find it curious
that this self-styled champion of
impeccable logic and discourse
restricts his abuse largely to
Professors Fike and McDowell,
with secondary jabs at Mr.
Shields and the unidentified
sources in Mr. Curley's article.
The remarks of President Ro
gers, Mr. Place, and Professors
Burris, Keiser, O'Brien, and
Williams are allowed to pass
without comment, despite the
anomalous character of many of
their claims. I will limit myself
to two. According to Mr. Place,
"there is no policy of hiring
spouses currently in effect."
(One can only wonder why any
of them, let alone so many of
them, are employed at Guil
ford.) President Rogers tells us:
"I think that each member of
the Guilford faculty is dedicated
to operating professionally in
such a way that their decisions
would not accrue to the well-be
ing of their spouse." Is it a
professional obligation to act to
the detriment of one another at
the work place?) These are, of
course, cheap shots, and I want
to emphasize that I am not
making them in earnest; but
they are very much in keeping
with Professor Malino's ill
treatment of Professor McDo
well and myself.
My question, again, is, why
doesn't Professor Malino ex
tend his abuse to these men, not
to mention the others? I offer
this explanation: he is afraid to
attack them, for they are in a
position to inflict severe depri
vations. For reasons I won't go
into, an attack on the other
persons would be equally trou
blesome. On the other hand,
Professor McDowell and my
self, as pariahs, can be assailed
without fear of community re
prisals; indeed, most of the
Guilford community would ap
plaud such an undertaking, as
undoubtedly they did. What
ever his motives for limiting the
attack, the decision to limit it to
two persons certainly casts
doubt on the disinterestedness
of Professor Malino's intention.
To what can we attribute
Professor Malino's bizarre and
malevolent actions? Ms. Irving
continued on page 7