Page 8 - CROSSROADS - March, 1972 Of Courts And Colleges YOU MAY BE LEGALLY LIABLE 1. If you dismiss an instructor without adhering to due process procedures. 2. If you dismiss a student for disciplinary reasons without adhering to due process procedures. 3. If you refuse to admit a student to graduate school because he did not make a certain score on a national examination. 4. If you require scores from a national examination as a determinant for an instructor’s- teacher’s salary. 5. If a student is injured while riding in your personal automobile. 6. If you do not enforce the regulations of your school- college. 7. If you dismiss classes for unjustifiable reasons. 8. If a student is injured in your chemistry shop, physical education, or driver education class, e.g., due to improper supervision. 9. If you, as advisor or chief administrator, allow your student editor to print libelous statements in the school newspaper. 10. If you, as teacher or professor, make inconsistent use of the “I”, “W,” “WP,” and - or “WF” grades. 11. If you post, as public in formation, any grade (test or final) of any student. 12. If a member of your athletic team sustains a significant injury due to your negligence, lack of supervision, or improper instruction. (THE SCHOOL LAW NEWSLETTER, Vol. 2, No. 4, January, 1972) TREND IN EDUCATION HIGHER Indiana University’s College of Arts and Sciences announced it has begun, on a two-year ex perimental basis, an option for students to apply for “academic bankruptcy.” A student in the college who for personal or financial reasons has had a disastrous semester may petition the dean for bankruptcy. If the petition is granted, the semester’s work is eliminated in terms of grades and credit hours. The record of the semester will stand on the of ficial transcript, but none of the courses will count toward graduation credit and the grades will not be computed in the scholastic average. “There are many legitimate difficulties, personal and -or financial, which can adversely affect a semester’s per formance,” said George W. Wilson, dean of the college. “If is unreasonable for the college not to acknowledge these dif ficulties and to continue to penalize a student for the remainder of his undergraduate education.” (HIGHER EDUCATION AND NATIONAL AFFAIRS, Vol. 21, No. 5, February 4, 1972.) FORD, FERTILITY AND THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION Control of human fertility is increasingly recognized as an international problem, requiring the concerted efforts of teams of scientists from both rich and poor nations. Such a worldwide effort is currently being mounted by the World Health Organization (WHO), with the assistance of a new grant of $900,000 from the Ford Foun dation, contributions from In ternational assistance agencies in Norway, Canada, and Den mark, and major support by the Swedish International Development Authority. The program, which will consist of research in human reproduction and the development and testing of contraceptives, will be con ducted under an advisory group of leading scientists from Europe, the United States, and the developing world. The WHO effort, planned with the assistance of an earlier Foundation grant, has five major components: -Research and training cen ters. Four or five of the world’s most important reproductive research institutions will be designated as WHO centers and given funds to expand their research and training. The first named is the Karolinska In stitute in Stockholm. Three others, in Latin America, the U.S.S.R., and India are under consideration. -More than thirty collaborating clinical centers throughout the world, organized into a network for rapid evaluation of fertility-inhibiting agents. -Task forces for collaborative research and development^ to identify priority research and promising methods of con trolling fertility. Task forces studying prostaglandins and male contraceptives have already been established. Through the clinical centers and the task forces the program will emphasize projects likely to lead to the development of contraceptive products. An International Documen tation Center, at the Karolinska Institute, to compile and distribute published material relating to human reproduction, including papers produced by the research and training and clinical centers. -Expansion of other WHO activities, including research grants, workshops in reproductive biology, and the distribution of spare parts for scientific equipment in laboratories in the developing world. Project Director: Dr. Alexander Kessler, Chief of Human Reproduction Unit, World Health Organization, 1211 Geneva 27, Swit zerland. (Ford Foundation Letter, Vol. 3, No. 1, January 15, 1972.) 3-Track System Thomas More College faculty members have voted to im plement a new academic program that allows freshmen to set their own educational objectives, with assistance from advisors, and from special classes. A cluster system will also be instituted by which students may elect to take courses of their own choosing surrounding a particular theme. While Thomas More expects to begin its new academic program in September, North Carolina Weslyan College was expected to begin its three-track system this month. A student may earn a traditional degree; he may, in Track II, pursue a traditional degree with a wider variety of non-traditional studies; he may in Track III, completely design his own program of studies under the supervision and with the approval of faculty associates. Both colleges un dertook the new programs after two-year studies of alternatives. (REGIONAL SPOTLIGHT, Vol. 5, No. 5, January 1972.) Credit-No Credit System ’The students entering Florida International University this September, when the institution first opens its doors, won’t have to worry about grades. A credit- no credit system with one level of recognition above credit— honors-will be used. The goals and objectives of a course will be described in performance terms, and the students’ efforts gauged by those. (REGIONAL SPOTLIGHT, Vol. 5, No. 5, January 1972.) $90,000 TO RAISE TWO CHILDREN A staff study prepared for the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future states that it cpsts an American family about $90,000 to raise two children and put them through college.{OjiTibe r ^tudy, prepared by staff, pcopomista, said the figure is based on current dollar values and represents both the direct costs, or actual monetary outlays of raising and educating two children, plus the “opportunity” costs in lost earning power to the mother were she to work in stead at a full-time job outside the home. The study made no attempt to measure the non monetary costs and pleasures associated with having children. Total costs of raising a first child were estimated to run about $60,000-$20,000 in direct expenses and $40,000 in op portunity costs. The combined cost for each subsequent child was pegged at $29,000. The study said the differences in direct costs are primarily due to the income level of the family. Parents with high incomes are able to spend more on their children than parents with low incomes. Estimated direct costs from birth to college graduation ranged from $13,782 for a low- income family to $20,354 for a child of a moderate income family. Regional differences in costs were not found to be significant nor was there much difference in the cost of raising a child on a farm or in the city. Education emerged as the key variable in opportunity costs, the study said. Assuming a woman would work full time in the ab sence of children, the economists said, the opportunity costs associated with a first child for a highly educated woman are over three times the direct costs. For all educational levels the mother’s opportunity cost was found to be larger than the direct costs for a first child , while the reverse was said to be true for additional children. Opportunity costs decline with additional children since the mother is already at home and another child would only delay her re entry into the labor force, if such are her plans, by a couple of years, the study said. The Commission, headed by John D. Rockefeller 3rd, was established by Congress in response to a proposal by President Nixon to assess the impact of population change upon government services, the economy, the environment and natural resources and to make recommendations later this year. (HIGHER EDUCATION AND NATIONAL AFFAIRS, Voi. 21, No. I, January 7, 1972).

Page Text

This is the computer-generated OCR text representation of this newspaper page. It may be empty, if no text could be automatically recognized. This data is also available in Plain Text and XML formats.

Return to page view