"I
i
September 18, 1966
Page 2
THE DAILY TAR HEEL
Im Our Opimiou .
Dr. William J, Bowers
6TT79
Fars And Rumors Of Wars; - Clieatillg J CaMcE.
Grade -1:
By
f ! !
i i
i f
ECC Vs.: The University
. What's to become of East Car
olina College?
There's a question fit for some
really heated debate. In the Aug.
18 issue of the summer Tar Heel,
co-editor Ed Freakley wrote the
following three paragraphs in his
column, Carolina Style: ,
They are becoming rather
f cocky over in Greenville these
days.
For two bucks you can buy a
license plate that reads, "East
Carolina University."
: - For $2.50 you can get a diplo
ma. Well, the ECC Pirates are back
in Greenville now. And apparent
, ly some of them got hold of Freak-
ley's column. For, we received
the following letter yesterday:
; Editor
The Daily Tar Heel
The Chapel Hill Branch of
the Consolidated University
of North Carolina
Dear Sir:
Isn't it wonderful that there are
' still a few students who had rath
er pay $2.50 for a diploma than to
have it given to them by Uncle
Dan.
Happily unconsolidated,
Some ECC Students
(seven signatures)
. This summer, your editor work
ed as editor of the Havelock Prog
ress, a weekly newspaper in east
ern North Carolina a few hours
drive from Greenville. The people
in that neck of the woods think
mighty highly of ECC and its pres
ident. 1 Having taken all the talk of
ECC's greatness we could stom
ach, we wrote the following editor
ial which appeared in the June 9
issue of the Progress.
Since the East Carolina stu
dents have opened the wound
with their letter, we'd like to
share this editorial with you.
D
Jenldri
sr Battle Flag
HAVELOCK PROGRESS
(June 9, 1966)
y Dr. Leo Jenkins, president of
' East Carolina College, has declar-
Jed war on the Consolidated Uni
t versity system in North Carolina,
I determined to see his school gain
university status independent of
: the four existing campuses of the
University of North Carolina,
Arguments in contradicition to
Dr. Jenkins' ambitions are many
and varied, but perhaps they can
C best be approached from two bas
?: ic viewpoints: first, is East Caro
lina College ready to be made a
university; second, what advan
tages or disadvantages would
I fhere be in making ECC a part of
the Consolidated University sys
tern. ,. -V-'?'"
On the first matter, it would be
well to assess the real meaning of
a university. This is a concept
C which is changing drastically from
:J generation to generation. The uni
versity of tomorrow, the universi
J ty that is going to produce the
world's leaders as we approach
;: the year 2000 must not only keep
; up with these changes it must
J initiate these changes.
No longer is the university a
;? Place where Junior spends four
years and $5,000 memorizing facts,
:: then returns to join his father's
business. Students are going back
for the fifth, sixth, seventh and
eighth years of schooling; the cost
c has more than doubled; and young
graduates are launching out into
fields unknown to their fathers
when they started their main
: street businesses.
; The university, must provide a
;; medium for the exchange of ideas,
; outside as well as inside the class
room.. Ideally, the student inter
v acts with . people, whose back
: grounds and , patterns of thought
:; afe different from his own.
: This is not a description of ECC
J; 'Dr. Jenkins has said ECC could
j be a university overnight; If he
I can reveal a means for bringing
: about such a rapid transforma
tion, the whole world would be in
his debt.
: He has said that ECC is already
: a university, capable of granting
; Ph.D.'s but for a name. It is dis
: heartening to see a man with such
I an accomplished background as
; sert that he has so much faith in
I "a name." The words "university"
and; "Ph.!' are meaningless if
! they are nothing more than fancy
wrappings to cover an intellectual
: vacuum.
f Indeed, when Dr. Jenkins came
I to Greenville 20 years ago he
. found a little red-brick teacher's
J college on 100 acres of land. Since
then the college has spread out
over another 200 acres and the en
: rollment has soared over the 8,000
I mark. But size does not make a
: university any more than a name.
- So what he seems to have now, in
; place of the little red-brick teach-
ers college, is a large concrete
and steel teachers college.
: It is probably obvious that we
believe ECC has a way to go be
fore it becdmes a university. But
for the sake of argument, suppose
it were to be given university stat
us. Then what of the premise that
it should hot be a part of the Con
solidated University system?
; A reporter for the Raleigh News
and Observer recently asked Dr.
Jenkins to state his objections to
coming under the wing of the Con
solidated University of North Car
olina. At the time, Dr. Jenkins
said he would rather not answer
the question outright, but he would
"put his answer in writing," Since
7 then, he has tadicajtedhe-doeg jiot,
wish to answer the question at. all.
P -i rayo forrhim. If he can avoid
f ahsAvering thi question; W 'will
have pulled off one of the slickest
maneuvers since the Lindberg kid
napping. It has been suggested that one
of Dr. Jenkins' reasons for prefer
ring ECU as opposed to UNC at
Greenville is the d anger of
"squelching regional pride." If
this is the case, if he considers re
gional pride more important than
the concept of university great
ness, then woe to the institution he
heads.
Even the person who knows
that money is a primary factor in
establishing a university, UNC at
Chapel Hill has had the fortune to
be the recipient of multi-million
r dollar grants from such men as
John Motley Morehead and Wil
liam Rand Kenan, N.C. State has
likewise received bequests from
Kenan and other benefactors. UNC
at Charlotte has been given siez
able grants from DuPont and sev
eral Charlotte industrial and pri
vate concerns. '
Still, these heavily endowed
schools realize the advantage of
joining forces when seeking mon
ey from the State Legislature. But
Dr. Jenkins apparently believes
that universities may profit from
battling in Raleigh for their share
, of the purse. Doesn't he realiz
that every battle has a loser? If
one school gets more than its share
another must suffer. Is this a dem
onstration of genuine interest in
education?
The arguments drag on to in
finity. For now, let us note that
ECC seems to fall short of the
specifications of the modern uni
versity. If there are other "uni
v versities" who also fall short, this
does not justify throwing another
rotten apple in the barrel.
The Consolidated University is
; set up to offer the best education
to the most people possible with
available funds. We seriously
question Dr. Jenkins' challenge.
FRED THOMAS
Second class postage paid at the
Post Office in Chapel Hill, N. C.
Subscription rates: $4.50 per semes
tec; $3 per year. Printed by the
Chapel Hill Publishing Co., Inc., 501
W. Franklin St., Chapel Hill, N.'C. -
Editor's note Dr. Bowers
of Northwestern University
discovered in a recent study
that more than half of college
students cheat at one time or
another. Here is an interview
with him that originally ap
peared in the Christian Sci
ence Monitor and was re
printed in the Iowa State
Daily.)
Q. How do you define cheat
ing? A. The definition used in a
1963 national survey of aca
demic dishonesty among col
lege students which I conduct
ed while at Columbia Univer
sity, is a relatively conserva
tive one. It includes the fol
lowing four major offenses:;
Copying from another stu
dent during an exam.
Plagiarizing on a term pa
per. Using crib notes during an
exam.
Turning in a paper done en
tirely or in part by another.
The study did not include
less prevalent forms of cheat
ing, such as paraphrasing
without footnoting, helping
someone with an assignment
when it was not allowed, put
ting citations on a bibliogra
Dhy when they really haven't
been used in a paper, giving v
answers on an exam, or hear
ing about an exam given in
an earlier class.
Q. Are there any statistics
indicating the number of stu
dents who cheat?
A. About 50 per cent of 5,
422 students sampled on 99
college campuses across the
United States reported having
cheated in one of the four ma
jor areas. An additional 3,600
students failed to respond to
questionnaires. These stu
dents we guessed were likely
to have had a somewhat high
er rate of cheating. Because
we sent the same number of
questionnaires to students at
each college, we over-represented
the small, residential
colleges.
David Rothman
Within the 50 per cent therp
is a group of 10 or 15 per cent
who have cheated in most of
the four major ways several
times over. '
If we included the addition
al items, the cheating rate
would go up another 25 per
cent to a total of 75 per cent.
This borderline group has
toyed around with academic
dishonesty but not done any
of the four major forms of
cheating.
Q. When do students cheat?
A. Students appear not to
use cheating as a regular tech
nique for dealing with aca
demic demands, but as some
thing to resort to when they
can see a clear advantage to
themselves. It is not an al
ternative to studies, but a sup
plement to studies. And it is
not so much premeditated, as
occurring on the spur of the
moment. .
Q. Would releasing academ
ic pressure lower the cheat
ing rate?
A. Pressures, to my mind,
are very largely inherent in
the student life. Students must
be obliged to meet academic
: demands to learn and prepare
themselves. My investigation
indicates that : academic pres
sures play a relatively minor
role in producing cheating.
This is contrary to what oth
er people feel, according to
common sense.
Q. What kind of students
cheat most frequently?
A. There is some clear evi
dence that students who cheat
are those whose grades are
poor, whose study habits are
poor, and who don't care so
much about the intellectual
aspects of college life. These
students care more about so
cial activities and having a
good time. Also students who
cheated in , high school are
more likely to cheat in col
lege. :
Q. Do students condone
; cheating?
A. Students recognize that
Rules For Men
Freshmen women groaned-1 arid moaned during
orientation upon hearing they'll have to stick to clos
ing hours.
And really, I can't blame the girls. The present
system's unfair: While Carolina men are free to roam
the campus at night, the girls must stay in their hot,
muggy dorms.
What's needed, then, is a system whereby the' in
convenience of closing hours could be evenly distrib
uted between the sexes. That is, we need the regu
lations which will go into effect next year, according
to an informed source in South Building.
It's a proven fact," said the source, "that the
girls can't get into trouble without boys. Therefore, I
recently proposed that the men be kept indoors Mon
day, Wednesday and Friday nights so the coeds can
take 3 a.m. walks in the arboretum if they desire
unescorted, of course.
"My superiors at first feared that non-students
would get the girls in trouble after the Carolina men
were safely locked up in their dorms; but a careful
study of the situation quickly changed my bosses'
minds when they learned that nobody but Carolina
men consider UNC coeds worth lusting after.
"This doesn't mean, however, that the coeds are
automatically safe since there will probably be Car
olina men who insist on staying out past closing
hours. I hope the men won't do this, but if so, I as
sure you they'll be serverely punished by their house
mothers." Protecting The State's Blind
As every good Ku Klux Klansman knows, niggers
have black skin, broad noses and thick lips.
That way, you can spot 'em as niggers.
But suppose you're blind. Then what can you do?
How can you tell for sure whether the persons around
you are niggers or white folks?
... You can't, of course.
That's why the Governor Morehead School for
the Blind in Raleigh feels it's so important that the
blind be protected from the niggers. "
Nevertheless, you've got to admit it's awfully ex
pensive to preserve white civilization; for instance,
the Governor Morehead School has lost $127,000 worth
of federal aid because it didn't integrate fast enough
to meet the federal government's total desegregation
deadline.
But really, don't you think the school and State of
North Carolina have done the right thing?
After all, it's far more important that blind per
sons not unknowingly associate with niggers than it
is for the blind to have extra Braille textbooks and
additional Braille typewriters.
Sure, the textbooks and typewriters if purchased
from the federal funds would have made life easier
for the blind. Sure, the federal money would have
made them more useful citizens of this state. But who
cares? Textbooks, typewriters and education don't
matter at all what really matters is protecting the
helpless blind from the niggers.
they are morally obliged not
to cheat. They agree that un
der no circumstances is cheat
ing justified. But they do have
a number of rationalizations
that displace their earlier
learned moral convictions
about it.
Q. How do students ration
alize cheating?
A. Their attitude is that the
teacher is not living up to his
obligations in the course, the
course isn't interesting and
students should not be obliged
to take it, or the exam is un
fair. Any number of things
will provide rationalizations
that students will adopt en
masse to justify in some sense
cheating behavior;
Q. Do grades produce cheat
ing? v
A. The existence and the
importance of grades has
clearly perverted the student's
motivations. I would look per
sonally to some different way
of grading, more subtler, and
more extensive and intensive
system of grading. American
education, in order to process
as many students as teachers
needed to, adopted grades as
a shorthand. I think one of
the consequences of it is cheat
ing. Q. Would moving to a pass
fail grading system reduce
cheating?
A. At schools where grad
ing is very personal to the
student, and often given on the
pass-or-fail basis along with
extensive comments on his
work, my research shows
cheating is quite low.
What really is impressive is
these students regard cheat
ing as an absurd form of be
havior. Ai& the student who
cheats is more a buffoon, than
someone who is "making it"
or "using the system."
Of course, I don't want to
suggest that to remove grades
would be a panacea, because
there are lots of things they
do. Without grades I presume
many people would sit around
for four years mostly enjoy
ing themselves.
Q. Is cheating symptomatic
of basic character weakness?
A. In principle, those who
are willing to violate rules
about academic integrity iare
more . likely - to take . shortcuts
that violate other rules, I am
inclined to say that cheating,
per se, can't have much of a
positive effect for later life.
It's not a very good training
experience for a student, who
will be a responsible citizen.
But I think the negative ef
fect can be exaggerated.
There is an image of the
person with the demon and
the person who has the clear
view of things But cheating
is not a question of moral fib
er so much as social environ
ment. I think there will be
people willing to cheat in a
self-righeous way. At schools
where cheating goes on pret
ty extensively, a student who
cheats is viewed as trying to
eliminate an unfair advantage
he is exposed to otherwise.
Q. What produces a campus
climate of -disapproval of
cheating?
A. High-quality schools find
it easier to maintain such a
climate. By high quality I
mean schools with good facul
ty, low faculty-student ratio,
small schools where the col
lege experience is more inten
sive for the students.
It turns out that larger
schools have a larger portion
of students reporting incidents
of cheating.
Perhaps the intimate social
environment that residential
schools are able to provide al
. lows students to establish rela
tionships where these .values
come to the surface, and in
some sense are reinforced.
Q. How does a student get
. started cheating?
A. We know for instance,
that fraternity people have a
tendency to cheat more than
those outside. I think that
cheating is the appropriate
way to deal with academic
requirements not so much
out of pressure but more be
cause other people define it
as a legitimate way of coming
with a system that is funda
mentally amoral. In other
words, professors aren't treat
ing you with a great deal of
regard. -
It goes along with all
V.arge-ci$y, anonymous prob
lems. The student views the
mechanistic, bureaucra
tic world so he devises
schemes which he knows are
immoral. But he employs them
because he sees others doing
it and because others reflect
these feelings too.
The pressures impinge on
the group, in a way, and. the
group changes its definition of
the situation. Each individual
in turn is that much more re
leased from his informal so
cial control group, which would
otherwise keep him from
doing some of these things.
Then it doesn't take much.
It only takes a little bit of an
opportunity to oversee some
thing. It only takes one bad
grade and the threat of a
failing mark because these
other things have all been
loosened up. Then he suc
cumbs quite easily.
But the last link in the chain
which is the opportunity to
cheat, or the pressure from
home, or something which ap
pears to the person very near
that individual to be the cas
ual factor really is quite min
or in the long sequences of
causes. That's really the way
I think it needs to be viewed.
The final precipitating event
really should not be thought
of as a v fundamental cause,
but part of a large process!
Q. How much of cheating is
an objection to the system, or
a case of outwitting the pro
fessor? A. Some students will feel
, that they are proud of their
ability to use the professor
along with any of their peers
to demonstrate their ability to
outwit people. There's also the
very morally indignant student
who cheats because he is
being cheated in the educa
tional process, as he sees it.
Put both those students in
one school where they are both
cheating for their own rea
sons, and then in another
school with a very different
climate of disapproval. They
will probably both have areas
of outwitting others and moral
indignation. But cheating
won't be one of the areas
where they manifest these in
clinations. Q. What is the most effec
tive deterrent to cheating?
A. The most important de
terrent to cheating seems to
be a climate of disapproval of
cheating among the student
body. As a student's peers
disapprove more he is quite
likely to engage in cheating
if he is passing.
There is a very significant
and substantial difference a
mong colleges and the level of
cheating that goes on. What
destroys school morale is the
visibility of grades.
In other words if the only
person who knew what grades
a student got were the student
himself, and the only use of
the grades were to him alone,
he couldn't transform those
grades into any negotiable
commodity to his advantage.
etters
The Daily Tar Heel welcomes let
ters to the editor on any subject,
particularly on matters of local or
University interest. Letters must be
typed, double-spaced and must In
clude the name and address of the
author or authors. Names will not be
omitted In publication. Letters should
be limited to about 250-300 words. The
DTH reserves the right to edit for
lenrth or libel. Longer letters will be
considered for "The Student Speaks"
if they are of sufficient interest. How
ever, the DTH reserves the right to
use contributed materials as It sees
fit.
4 a a
'How Nice! There Are Only 159 Of Us
With Two Roommate s To Hate!' -
W -it-" i- 1 1
A
"J