Newspapers / University of North Carolina … / Feb. 7, 1972, edition 1 / Page 3
Part of University of North Carolina at Charlotte Student Newspaper / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
february 7, 1972/the iournal/page three 'Dead horse' To the Editor: Mike McCulley, you’re beating a dead horse! The University and students you were talking to in your, "Greening of a Campus-Phase II" died "...with the music" about ten years ago. Where have you been? Your article, although well-written in my opinion, seemed to completely miss the point of what's happening on the campus scene these days. What you seem to be appealing for is action from a "rah-rah" type of student body who should "work together" to improve their "university community." What a bunch of horsedung. Any enlightened person knows that this view of students of the university went out with hula-hoops. The University that has kept up with the times is no longer the ivy-covered hallowed halls of ol' State U., which you seem to long for. It’s no longer a closed bastion of "leaning" where one enters its elite society and then receives its blessings upon "earning" a ticket to the "real world." It seems to me that the American Campus is really opening op. The student "body" isn't really a body at all. It is a collection of very diverse groups pursuing very different goals. They are using the campus, now part of the real World, as a base of operation, tather than their "total environment" as in the past. So, the sooner you pull yourself from the past and recognize what you’re dealing with, the sooner your frustration and bitterness will leave. Perhaps then you can be otore imaginative and creative in Vour efforts to motivate and stimulate. Could the Bell Tower be tolling for thee? George Grubbs Director, Student Information Systems Regeneration? (Editor's reply: What do you do when a mule falls asleep in middle of the road, a Mack Truck is coming down foe road, and it happens to be Your mule? Answer: you hit foe mule up the side of the head with a 2-x-4 in an effort get his attention. Once you’ve got his attention, the oejcf step is to get him to recognize the danger andhelp O'oj get out of the road. f personally don’t believe the 'pule is dead yet. The response to tny article last week has been mixed, but the response bas been greater than to any S'og/e thing I’ve written in the Journal, it has gotten attention, '^hich, by the way, was all it intended to do, I wrote it that, if it was read, it simply could not be ignored; ond I believe that was occomplished. 'Where we go from here is orucial, / realize that. I don’t pretend to have the answers, ‘tf I am certain that the piswers are potentially available from concerted efforts by Concerned and interested studenp and faculty. ft is surprising that George Should suspect I long for 'vy-covered hallowed halls.” I pri the foremost advocate for "rning down such halls, accepting the premise that hot asnes are better for us than ^old stone. ■As long as “diverse groups” Pursue “very different goals.” I an see no possiblity for ation. The very diffusion of their potentially shared-interests makes their changes of any limited success unlikely. It is acceptable and desirable to join forces to work for common goals (which are contained within those “different goals”). Indeed, the campus is a part of the real world. It is not a “total environment,’’ but happens to be the environment closest to the student while he is a student. It happens to be the place where decisions are made which do affect his education and, thereby, his life. While he is so close to this environment, he would be unwise to allow the wash of those actions which he believes are wrong to flow over him while he contemplates action to take in the “real world.” For the student, the “real world” is the campus and it has all the power of the outside environment to warp and mutilate him, push and pull him through life without his active participation. If he choses to stand by while his life and actions are planned and controlled, so be it. If he choses to involve himself in those actions and the life of the campus, for his personal betterment and for the betterment of the lifes of others, so be it. There appear to be two choices and I, individually, opt for the latter. I urge my fellow students to do likewise because I feel it is important to them and all of us to take an active part in our own lives. My frustration and bitterness are against the present, created by the present. It is such that the future I see for us if we continue on passibely living life without ever living life is unbearable. Only a few readers of “The Greening” were able to see how much I love the students: I couldn’t have gotten so angry with them otherwise. Only a few readers were able to see that my efforts were designed to motivate and stimulate their care, their concern, their interest. Unfortunately, George, you were not one of those readers. I must admit now, as always, that I could be wrong. The Bell Tower may be tolling for me; but, I happen to hear its sound much louder than that. It is tolling daily for me, and you, and all of us -and will continue to sound out our doom. I must admit something else, too: I appreciate George’s letter. At least he took the time out to disagree with me. I respect that and wish there were more like him around. It is just too unbearably quite around here....) Promises and people To the Students: On February 9 and 10, the Elections Committee will take nominations for a number of important offices. This year, as in past years, there will be the usual number of candidates that run simply for the hell of it or for personal gratification. There will also be those vacant spots that nobody cares to occupy because they are neither pretigeous nor salaried. As usual, those people aspiring for office will promise the students everything from free scholarships to free sex. The cycle continues, the apathy increases, and not a damn thing is done. The average student curses his student "leaders," his professors, and Administration, unless he is having problems with his steady girlfriend and, in that case, he curses her. Once in a while a controversy occurs and the students look toward their elected officials to lead them through battle and the foolishly concerned student raises hell, looks for support, and then realizes his support is at Herlocker’s drinking beer or asleep in the dorm room. And as usual a letter is written to the students by someone who feels that he must concern himself with events on-campus. The letter is possibly read, possibly reflected upon, and then probably dismissed from thought. However, the author of the letter feels better. He has said what he thought even though it accomplished nothing. Somehow in spite of what he sees and feels he never loses hope that somehow his letter will be inspirational and students will hear....but dammit he knows better. Stan Patterson Student Body President 'Pin-ball' wizard To the Editor: There have been many days when someone has been slapped and shoved by an otherwise immobile bureaucracy. Frequently, one may discover a maze within an administrative complex that is far removed from the somatic structure, housing the bureaucracy. In many instances, the cohesion between the various departments can be equated with the morphology of a brick wall. Morphology may be emphasized, for it simply means a structure. A brick wall is composed of bricks, fitted together in such a fashion as to form a functional structure. Thus far in the analogy it has not been said that a brick wall is non-functional, for it is. It functions as an obstacle to those who must deal with it, but it’s inflexible nature functions as a comfortable edifice for those who fabricate it. In reviewing many past encounters with a bureaucracy, one will visualize truth within a probably ancient, augmented observation about bureaucracy. That being, "as the bureaucracy enlarges and becomes more cumbersome it loses the perspective of its original goal and becomes satisfied only with expanding and perpetuating itself." That is the dilemma. Supposedly, simple procedures become intricate and forbidding. A particular practice is insidiously maintained, because if it is eliminated, replaced or re-fashioned, a segment of the bureaucracy may be dismantled and activity requires innovation and innovation requires motivation; this may justify one to call an inflexible bureaucracy a "lazy bureaucracy." Unfortunately, I have met wall-to-wall with such a bureaucracy here on-campus, concerning trivial circumstances. Though its consequences might have been slight, the manner in which it was handled is maddening. I call it an experience with the "bureaucratic pin-ball machine," only I was the pin ball. On Friday, January 28, I attempted to check out two books at the University Library. It was there that I discovered I had misplaced my student ID.- I courteously allowed the librarian to snatch the books away from my groping hands, in hopes that the ID would turn up at home. This didn't materialize, si I very wisely inquired about forgotten ID’s at the University Bookstore. The reply was negative and my hopes of ever taking references from the library dwindled until my acute innovation and sense of responsibility emerged. It was a brainstorm. I should go over to the Administration building and simply have a duplicate ID made. I was instructed to go to the Security Office by the Registrar’s Office. Then I was told by the Security Office to go to the Registrar’s Office to secure authorization for the duplicate ID. The Registrar’s Office abruptly sent me up to the Business Office, where I was flatly refused and tossed back to the Registrar’s Office. This is where my endurance faltered and I began bitching. For some unknown reason a catalytic metamorphosis was to take place. The Registrar’s Office called the Security Office, and was informed by the operator that no one was there. The a gentleman with new shoes walked in and was informed of the problem. After he took a few thoughtful puffs on his pipe, I knew a catastrophic decision was to be made. He was engulfed with a deterrriined and challenging attitude, so I knew that this was to be the big decision of the day. "Give him a written authorization," he proclaimed. In like manner, I superficially acknowledged my appreciation. When reaching the Security Office again, I saw that the officer was there, in direct contradiction to what the operator had stated. He promptly did a portrait; a very good likeness, too. I left quickly en route to the library, with that valuable ID in my possession. The two books had been checked out by someone else. Randy Williams Jordan's dismissal To the Editor: Many questions have been raised in the recent controversy' concerning the dismissal of the ten UNCC instructors and professors. Apparently no valid reason has been given to many of the professors involved. Dr. McEniry stated that no reasons are given partially because written reasons may damage a young teacher unnecessarily and unfairly. This statement is only partially true because it casts a dubious shadow on a professor’s record when he is applying for a new position. Even if no written reason is given, the dismissal should be explained at least to the professor involved. When Dr. Jordon reapplied for his position, waiving tenure, the Sociology department unanimously approved his application. Why then has the administration refused to reconsider Dr. Jordon’s request? Dr. Jordon has received support by student petitions which presently contain the names of over fifty percent of the Sociology majors. Does this not reflect his ability as * a professor and counselor? Does this not show student acceptance of his maturity? Why was Dr. Jordonurged not to appeal his dismissal? Why have no reasons been given him for his dismissal? Leaving these questions unanswered will injure not only the professors involved, but the university as a whole. Sincerely yours, Rosemary Barlow Doug Barlow cc:Dr. W.H. McEniry The Journal encourages its readers to write in response to items appearing in its pages. The Journal accepts all letters to the editor, provided they are typed or legibly printed and limited to a maximum of 300 words. All letters must be signed and bear the address and phone number of the writer. The Journal reserves the right to edit all letters for libelous statements and good taste. Backwards To the Editor: Why is it that the Administration wants to fire Dr. Leonard Jordan, a sociology professor who continually receives wide popularity and respect from his students? Can it be that a faculty member can, at the whim of the Administration, be fired without even being given a reason? Will the Powers that Be turn their back on the unanimous support given to Dr. Jordan by his own department? It would appear that the supposed channels of communication between the Administration and the Sociology Department have been ignored. Even more importantly, the Administration seems to be ignoring Dr. Jordan's sound qualifications. With 10 years of teaching experience and his PhD, Dr. Jordan is an expert in social theory — this University fan not afford to lose him. Dennis Maloney Aaron Newlander
University of North Carolina at Charlotte Student Newspaper
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Feb. 7, 1972, edition 1
3
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75