University of Virginia Library

Colloquium

Open Board Group Shows Lack Of Enthusiasm

—ed.

We are writing in reference to the
activities of the committee President Shannon
appointed some time ago to study the
problems of an open forum with the Board
of Visitors. This committee has been in
existence for exactly one half year at the
time of writing.

A brief description of its history and its
deliberations should illustrate, not only the
disappointment we feel regarding this
committee, but also the need for further
action on the problems to which the
committee should have been able to suggest
some solutions.

October, 1968

In October of 1968, a group of students
circulated petitions endorsing an open
forum with the Board of Visitors. This move
arose out of a widespread feeling that there
was a need for improved communications
among the elements constituting the University
community and between them, particularly
the students, and the Board of Visitors.
The extent to which this feeling was shared
by the student body was indicated by the
three thousand signatures on the petitions.

A group of students including the
President of Student Council, two other
Council members, the President of the
Inter-Fraternity Council and the Editor of
the Cavalier Daily along with the co-chairmen
of the Ad Hoc Committee met with
Mr. Shannon on October 28 to discuss their
concern with bettering the system of
communications at the University, and the
petitions with unanimous endorsement of
the Student Council were presented to the
President's office on October 29.

Following a recommendation from Student
Council that a student-administration
committee be created to forward proposals
on this matter, and following your discussions
with then President of Student
Council, Mr. Evans, (during which he
stressed, quoting from his letter of 1
November, "it is essential that some
concrete proposal, at the very least, be
presented to the Board in December so that
some sort of answer to the problem may be
effected at the next Board meeting"), Mr.
Shannon appointed on November 12, 1968
a committee to fulfill the above-stated
purposes.

Mr. Harris, Chairman

This committee, under the vigorous
chairmanship of Mr. Harris, has since that
date shown a singular lack of enthusiasm in
fulfilling its charge. The meeting of the
Board of Visitors to which Mr. Evans
alluded took place on the Thursday, Friday
and Saturday of December 12, 13, and 14.
Mr. Harris scheduled the first committee
meeting for Monday, December 16, one
month and four days after the appointment
of that committee, and hardly a propitious
time to produce a concrete proposal for the
December meeting of the Board.

However, it was made clear that this first
meeting of the committee was not designed
to produce a proposal or even to discuss the
issues involved, but rather only to enlighten
the committee members on the history of
the Board of Visitors. The next meeting of
the Board was in February (13, 14, and 15).
As of this date, we had received no
communication from the committee chairman
and found it necessary to write a letter
inquiring as to the continued health of the
committee and requesting a meeting at some
time in the near future. Subsequently, the
committee held meetings on 21 and 2
February and 7 March.

Demonstrate The Faults

At these meetings, the only substantive
meetings the committee held, the discussion
was directed in such a manner that those of
us desiring change were required to
demonstrate the specific faults of the
system now existent and defend each
suggested improvement to show how it
would then make the system flawless. The
orientation of the chairman molded the
work of the committee, as is the case with
any strong chairman.

That this committee was chaired by one
so intransigent and opposed to change on
the grounds that the present structure must
be visibly decayed before improvements
commenced is unfortunate. There is a
definite need for inclusion of students in the
decision-making processes to avoid legitimate
student unrest both before and after
a decision has been made.

There is a definite need for improved
communications so that the "misunderstandings"
between the policy-makers and
those affected which have occurred so often
here can be avoided. There is no proposal
directed toward either of these needs which
the committee has been willing to recommend.
Three thousand people felt that a
problem existed for which some solution
was needed.

After deliberation, the committee concluded
there is no problem. What the
members of the committee more advanced
in years and knowledge failed to grasp was
the most significant point discussed: there is
no "objective" standard for determining if a
difficulty exists in communications; if three
thousand people feel that a difficulty does
exist, then that is the problem; steps must
be taken to lessen or eliminate that feeling.

The committee in being directed to look
for a mechanistic answer to what is not
primarily a question of mechanics has failed
completely.

There were several suggestions forwarded
to improve the set-up here. These included