The Cavalier daily. :: Monday, May 12, 1969 :: University of Virginia Library

Whenever anyone uses the word 'federal' a number of
impressions intrude on the mind — none of which are
complimentary. 'Federal is a word most closely
connected with the draft, the military-industrial complex,
bureaucracy and death and taxes. So it is a surprise when
you find some federal project that does not fit the
stereotype. It is a downright shock to discover here in
Charlottesville a government school like the Federal
Executive Institute whose educational techniques are as
advanced as any and more progressive than many of the
most avant-garde' schools and colleges.

Occupying the 90-room quarters of the former
Thomas Jefferson Inn on route 29, the Institute was
created by Presidential Order in May of 1968 to broaden
the effectiveness of Federal executives responsible for
carrying out national programs and policies that affect all
aspects of American life." The executives, all of grade
GS-16 or over (upwards of $20,000 per year) live at the
Institute for an eight week period of discussions, lectures
and individual study. The curriculum has been developed
around several broad goals, the first of which is to
heighten individual responsiveness to national needs and
goals. 'As an important leader, the Federal executive has
a special responsibility to understand society's problems
and obligations of government to them." The Institute
also tries to instill a broad over-view of the governmental
system. This is an attempt to get the executive to think
about the many departments and divisions in government
and their contributions instead of merely the one in
which he happens to be working. The program further
tries to improve each participant's knowledge of
managerial processes on the grounds that the executive
cannot lose sight of his responsibilities as a manager.
Implicit in these managerial duties is the necessity of
group work, the efficient handling of which is a central
principle for the Institute. In line with these general goals
the Institute does not teach specific knowledge, which
naturally would have only limited relevance among the
many governmental departments represented. It tries to
freshen the perhaps slightly jaded minds of the executives
with an inter-disciplinary program for a widening of
individual vistas.

To accomplish these objectives the Institute has
recruited a top-notch faculty, all with doctorates and
major university teaching experience, which represents six
different areas of study. One member, Maurice Dawkins, a
professor of education, spoke at the Student Coalition's
Founders Day rally. To supplement the faculty, the
Institute is in the process of establishing with the
University a type of exchange program where faculty
members and guest lecturers of both institutions speak for
their mutual benefit.

As intelligent and highly qualified as these faculty
members are, their purpose is not to 'teach' but to
facilitate as much as possible the executive's self-learning.
The executives are responsible for their own learning," says
Michael Harmon, a staff member who holds his doctorate
in Public Administration. Mr. Harmon sees this attempt to
eliminate the teacher-student relationship as the basic
difference between the University and the Federal
Executive Institute. In the experience of the Institute, the
distinction between professors and participants creates
tension and resentment against the teachers as symbols of
authority. This certainly is defeating to anyone's learning
and is eliminated by a highly informal atmosphere. Coats
and ties are nonexistent and the whole operation
maintains the appearance, that of a successful motel, that
it held before the Institute was established.

This informal atmosphere is especially helpful in
evaluating the program, since straight-forward appraisals
of the curriculum's effectiveness must come from the
participants. In a leaflet given to all executives, the
Institute maintains that "In designing our program we
have built in this idea of feedback. For all of you who
attend this course, now and in the future runnings, we
regard your views, your reactions to what is going on,
your needs, to be of critical importance in making the
open system at FEI meaningful. For this reason weekly
feedback, or evaluation sessions, are scheduled. A variety
of approaches will be used. In some cases there will be
discussions between assembled faculty and the
participants. Team exercises for critiquing may also be
used." However, no grades or records are kept at FEI.
"The word 'evaluation' has connotations of grading,
reporting back, and so forth. In the Federal Executive
Institute no records will be kept on individual
performance, and there will be no reports sent back to the
agency (from which the executive came). A certificate
will be awarded all those executives who remain in
residence for the eight weeks and demonstrate a
reasonable commitment to the goals of the program."

However, if the Institute did nothing more than help
the executive brush up on new techniques in his
profession, it would only be dong half the job. In setting
up the program, the faculty realized that they had to
reach the whole man — his personal attitudes, morality
and value system — not only his business outlook. They
saw that with a re-evaluation of professional standard
should come a reawakening of interests in
non-professional fields. To this end each participant is
given a set of paperback books, any of which he may
keep. Titles range from Charles Schultze's "National
Income Analysis" to Camus' "The Stranger", Jean
Anouilh's "Five Plays" and McLuhan's "The Medium is
the Massage". The curriculum also contains sessions of
sensitivity training and role-playing exercises designed to
get the executives in emotional touch with each other,
and to constructively examine their most basic attitudes
about their jobs, people they work with, and their whole
modes of perception.

Role playing is a particularly interesting exercise in
group dynamics. In the current session a group of
executives has been 'placed' on an island in the middle of
one of the Great Lakes. Given certain information about
living conditions, the group tries to organize itself to try
and meet the demands of 'living' on the island. The idea
of the exercise is to watch the developing patterns of
authority as the need for it arises in response to the
uncertainty of the situation.

With all of the benefits that cooperation between the
University and the Institute could bring, there still is the
danger of over-involvment with the government. Laurin
Henry, chairman of the University's liaison committee for
FEI says, "It would be foolish not to be sensitive to our
different orientations. While we are cooperating with the
Institute for mutual benefit we are not, by any means,
making this University an appendage of the Federal
establishment."