University of Virginia Library

Rod MacDonald

Students Vs.
Faculty

Students and faculty members
have often lined up together against
the war, the draft, and the
University's lack of black students.
But there is one area that the
faculty considers its private
domain, and that is academic
matters, particularly promotions.

This column earlier described
the case of Alan Ritter, an assistant
professor of government and
foreign affairs who was denied
tenure by his department's tenured
members. A sizeable group of
students have since joined efforts to
counter what they consider the
department's neglect of student
sentiment in its affairs. They are
now driving for more say in several
decisions, the most important of
which are the Ritter promotion and
comprehensive examinations.

Petition Presented

Last week the students, sensing
political motives in the decision
(Mr. Ritter has supported some
radical causes), handed David
Jordan, chairman of the GFA
department, a petition protesting
the refusal to grant Mr. Ritter
tenure. They asked for a meeting
with him, which he was unable to
make; he scheduled one for
Tuesday at 5 p.m. Mr. Jordan and
the students then barked on a
curious fight over a technicality:
The Cavalier Daily ran the notice of
the meeting, which said both
graduate students and
undergraduates could attend. Mr.
Jordan then called, changing the
page one box to include only
graduate students. One student
involved in the effort then placed a
University Notice including the
undergraduates again. When the
meeting finally took place, Mr.
Jordan refused to stay if the
undergraduates failed to leave.

Avoid Communication

The 85 students at the meeting
voted to allow the undergraduates
to stay. Mr. Jordan promptly left,
removing his opportunity to
communicate with the students in
his department. The remaining
students then elected an ad hoc
committee to take the issue to
Dean of the Faculty Dean Shannon.
Why Mr. Jordan would not speak to
the graduate and undergraduate
dissidents together is still not
known.

The Government department's
official reaction to the affair has
been largely to avoid direct
communication, at least on the
Ritter case. Rumors were floating
around, unsubstantiated rumors,
that some professors were trying to
intimidate the graduate students
who signed the initial petition by
hinting that fellowship grants might
be difficult to renew. One student
also expressed his concern that
Professor Inis Claude, who he said
is a reader of graduate dissertations,
showed up at Mr. Jordan's meeting.
But the department apparently was
in communication with Dean
Shannon, for the students found
him well informed on the
department's position.

In contrast to the difficulty they
had seeing Mr. Jordan, the ad hoc
committee walked into Dean
Shannon's office Wednesday
without an appointment and
secured a 90 minute meeting with
him the same day. He told them
Mr. Ritter had originally been hired
as a specialist in comparative
government, particularly that of
Western Europe, and since he has
since shifted his emphasis to
political theory, he is less necessary
than before from the department's
point of view. (Mr. Ritter has
maintained that he was also told he
would be phased into the political
theory classes as well). But what
most impressed the student group
was getting a 90 minute audience
to discuss the problem and to be
heard.

Comprehensive Exams

The second issue facing the
students is that of comprehensive
exams, which most of them want
abolished. Here the department has
been far more responsive, despite
an informal decision made earlier to
retain them at least for this year.
After the undergraduate committee
protested, a special committee was
appointed under the direction of
Robert Morgan. The students met
Wednesday with the committee and
presented what one professor called
a "cogent case." They will probably
meet with the department's faculty
next week to review their
arguments once again, and with
more likelihood of success than in
the past. There is now some
possibility that comps will be
dropped, perhaps even for this
year's graduating class.

Complaints Surface

Student complaints, once
provided with the Ritter catalyst,
have surfaced somewhat. Many feel
the department is aloof,
concentrating too much on
graduate students and neglecting
the undergraduates. One student
who has researched the question
said the calibre of the entering
graduate classes is declining, in
terms of previous records and of
fellowships, such as Woodrow
Wilson grants. The department also
has an overabundance of large
lecture classes and no major
seminars; the undergraduate majors,
mostly government students,
frequently attend discussion classes
led by foreign affairs graduate
students who have little interest in
the government subject. Individual
instruction is weak, they add.

Divine Right

The government department's
position is not unique, and is
important for most of the
University as a case study. Like
myself, many of those interested in
the problem are not GFA majors.
But too often faculty members
assume they have some sort of
"divine right" to select what their
students must take, who can teach
it, and what criteria are necessary
for graduation. The government
students may seem obnoxious to
the government professors, some of
whom (but most surely not all) feel
these are not questions that involve
students. The failure in
communication only hurts the
entire department, both students
and professors; but the student
protests may open the way for
some very necessary structural
changes in a department about
which those students care deeply.
Perhaps the concern will spread to
other departments as well.