University of Virginia Library

Mountain Lake Retreat

Students And Administrators Discuss Common Goals

News Commentary

By PETER H. SHEA

Mountain Lake, the University's
biological center planted 4,000 feet up a
southwestern Virginia mountain, served
last weekend as the site of a summit
conference for some 90 administrators,
faculty members and students, gathered
to discuss the current problems and the
uncharted future which the University
faces.

Mountain Lake, an impressively rustic
nature center, has been the scene of three
previous conferences. Its chilling winds and
dampening rains were perfectly suited to the
atmosphere which prevailed at the earlier
sessions. Distrust, especially on the side of the
students, marred the conferences. Heated
exchanged, sometimes centering around policies
but often the result of personality clashes,
destroyed the minuscule chance that anything
positive could be gained by the two-day
encounters.

In regards to the weather, conditions at this
year's conference were the worst yet. Friday
night the rains set in, driving most of the
conferees inside from the nearly all-night
"happy hour." The hearty participants
disregarded the cloud shrouded setting however,
and, taking their cue from the law school duo of
Dean Monrad Paulsen and his self-proclaimed
lackey Charlie Whitebread, combined to make
the conference a unique encounter for the
usually isolated factions.

The goals of Mountain Lake are indefinable:
the results are intangible. Individuals often
travel to the conference hoping to push their
pet projects, but they soon realize that no
concrete policies or proposals will be adopted.

Such disappointments may have led to the
strained atmosphere which surrounded previous
conferences. Two years ago, the students
caucused after each discussion to plot strategy,
to plan later attacks against the administration.
They apparently felt, and possibly rightly so,
the administrators were less than honest
during the sessions, that the conference was a
waste of time.

But last weekend the atmosphere was
different. As voiced by Student Council
President Tom Collier, student organizer of the
conference, Mountain Lake 1971 aimed not at
pitting students against the administration and
faculty but rather at developing a degree of
trust between the often opposing factions. The
student conferees realized that no decisions
would be reached, no policies set. Yet it
appeared Sunday that every student participant
came home feeling that something positive had
been accomplished.

Nothing was decided at Mountain Lake, so
what was gained?

Most importantly, all involved got to meet
and better understand the officials with whom
they must work very closely during the coming
months. Each participant now realizes that,
while individual methods may vary, everyone
shares a common love for the University. Their
goal is making this school one of the best in
the nation.

A second accomplishment was the spread of
information. Discussions were held concerning
14 critical subjects, ranging from the master
plan and the future of the University to the
security department and cross-cultural
relations. Administrators discovered sometimes
surprising student viewpoints on various topics
while students and faculty learned to appreciate
the complexities involved in making plans for a
growing institution. While not all the questions
wore answered, a dialogue was begun which
could ease growing pains.

Success of a two-day conference does not
mean the University will solve easily the many
problems ahead. Close attention must be
focused on the plan for residential colleges at
Birdwood, continuing race problems, and the
physical and numerical expansion which the
school anticipates, to mention a few.

At the close of last year's conference,
President Shannon reminded the participants
that all members of the University community
must take an active role in the discussions and
decisions which will shape the school's Future.
Although not surprising, it is unfortunate that
none of the members of the Board of Visitors
chose to attend this year's conference.

As President Shannon said last year, if the
University is to progress by developing open
lines of communication, all members of this
community must play an active role in
formulating the policies for the future.

It is not enough for administrators, deans,
department chairmen, and so-called student
leaders to spend one weekend exchanging ideas
up on a mountain. Administrators must
frequently leave their sanctuaries at Pavilion 8,
the Student Affairs Office, the Housing Office,
and Cabell Hall if they are to check accurately
the pulse of faculty and student opinion. The
dissemination of information begun at
Mountain Lake must continue on the Grounds.

Any recurrence of the deceit and mutual
isolation that marked student-administrative
ratio is in previous years could shatter the
budding trust and involvement nurtured at
Mountain Lake. If this is allowed to occur,
Mountain Lake 1971, like those before it, will
have been a wasted effort.