University of Virginia Library

Donn Kessler

A Shared
Partnership

By Donn Kessler
Cavalier Daily Staff Writer

Last spring the University
reaped what it had sowed for so
long in the past-bitter disillusionment
and violence by students
disgusted not only by the war
in Indochina, but also by the lackluster
quality of leadership in our
academic community. Obviously
the University was not responsible
for national events, but it was
responsible for the lack of
communication that caused student
distrust and dissatisfaction with the
University.

In retrospect, we can now see
that the strike accomplished little
in constructive means except to
make the community more aware
of this student distrust. Now that
we have realized this fact, we must
turn from blind protest in the
streets and confused leadership to
inspired partnership among students,
faculty, administrators, and
alumni to make this institution a
truly free and rational community.

The natural radical rebut to
the idea of shared work and responsibility
is unshared goals. "How can
you expect administrators, faculty,
students, liberals, conservatives,
reactionaries, and revolutionaries to
work together when they have no
common goal for the University?",
the radical line often goes.

Common goals, however, are not
necessary for debate and decision
making. For too long in many
places people of similar backgrounds
and opinions have been
placed on decision making bodies
and have made important decisions
without really considering the
desires of others.

The Board of Visitors is one case
in point. Although the Board has
often heard student opinion before
making decisions, it has rarely ever
really listened to this opinion, and
has never allowed representative
students to have a vital say during
the discussions that lead to final
decisions. Although the Board does
have a student on it, the presence
of a moderately conservative student
does not seem to be too
representative of the whole student
body. Indeed, one would not place
Mark Rudd as the only student
representative on a commission to
study campus

Another case in point is the
Student Council. How often do
administrators faculty or students
really know or care what Council
does? Only rarely does Council
invite alumni, faculty, or administrators
to their meetings to
discuss their problems with them.
Only rarely does Council attempt
to find out student opinion. And
Council-nominated appointees to
University committees have never
reported what goes on in those
committees to either students or to
Council. In effect, Council has contributed
to the marrow outlook and
factionalization of decision making
bodies at this University.

To reach intelligent decisions,
then, we should not have common
goals. Both sides must be heard in
the making of decisions if we are to
achieve a rational society. The first
step towards this goal is the junking
of all the useless rhetoric of administrators
and the senseless talk of
violently destroying what we have
now. Neither side accomplishes
communication through this
rhetoric, but only alienates the
other side to more radical or more
oppressive stands.

Once we rid ourselves of this
destructive rhetoric we must begin
to attempt constructive communication.
The administration and
faculty must end their advertant
and inadvertent isolation from the
mass of the student body and from
each other. For too long certain
administrators and faculty members
have stayed as far away from the
students as possible. And for too
long each faction of the University
has criticized or ignored the view of
the other factions without ever
really listening. Mountain Lake,
where students, faculty, and administrators
meet and discuss our
problems, is a good start at communication
but not enough. It is time
for a continuous Mountain Lake on
the Lawn, in the dormitories, and
in our homes and offices.

But even communication is not
enough. For too long this University
has been factionalized. The
faculty has all faculty committees,
the administration has committees
with only token student representation,
and the students have
their sometimes radical, sometimes
do-nothing Council. For too long
we have heard talk and seen little
accomplished improving the University.

The administration, the faculty,
the students, and the alumni must
work together. The committee procedure
of decision making and the
factionalization by all four groups
have helped to divide the University
and have caused many decisions to
be made in an uncoordinated
fashion. Perhaps the Council, the
faculty, the alum, and the administrative
committees should all
be combined into a general University
governing body, such as the
University Senate; a body that
could include the wished of all
three groups in debate and decision
making.

Tumultuous debate and disagreement
in decision making prove
the strength of a society and a
community. In the past, the University
has ignored this fact and has
been run through a factionalized
system where diversified opinion
has only had a token hearing. The
only way we can save our university
from complete polarization and
oppression and turn it into a free
and rational institution is through
total communication and partnership
in decision making.