University of Virginia Library

Faculty-Student Senate

The principle raised in Wednesday's brief
sit-in at the College Faculty meeting is one
which has been obvious ever since Mr.
Jefferson founded the University: students
should pay an active and influential role in the
operation of University affairs. Implementation
of this rule has been manifested through
organizations which are essentially student
controlled and operated such as the Honor
Committee, the Judiciary Committee, and the
dormitory counseling program. There has also
been a development of partial, although too
often token, student participation in administrative
and faculty controlled areas. Witness
Student Council (which is advisory to the
President of the University), and students on
some Administrative and, more recently,
College faculty committees.

Perhaps the real sense of the proper roles
of students, faculty, and administration in
determining the direction of a University was
best put in a quote cited in Mr. Robert
Rosen's "Prospectus for the University"
which was printed in The Cavalier Daily last
semester. Mr. Rosen quotes from a letter to
the New York Times by Mr. J.P. Jordan, "a
Columbia University graduate student (not in
S.D.S. and over 30) who intellectually at least
supported the rebellion."

As made clear by the incident at the
Faculty meeting, there is a clear Jack of any
formal organization where students can meet
with faculty and mete out grievances.
Students who demonstrated Wednesday called
for an open Faculty meeting. They felt that
the faculty does make decisions which are
important to students and in which the
students have a right to an active role. They
see the University's long tradition of having
administrator's also serve actively as faculty
members as a liability rather than an asset in
that it sets up an Administrative-Faculty
complex which excludes students. Whether
this latter analysis is entirely correct can
certainly be debated. The integration of
administrators and faculty is certainly desirable
in some areas of University government
and is practiced at many other universities
other than this one. The liability stems from
the fact that there is no organization which
integrates a Faculty-student point of view.

Finding the means to set up such a
student-faculty organization presents real
problems. We more than suspect that many if
not most faculty members in the College
would be opposed to opening up their
meetings to students. Some would do so
because they are of the opinion that students
do not really know how to handle such
responsibility, that they are a bunch of
rabble-rousers anyway, and need to be kept in
their places. Others would take the position
that students would not really be interested
what goes on a most of the Faculty meetings
(which are often filled with boring and
mickey-mouse procedures) and that the issue
of an open meeting is just not the important
one to fight for.

At any rate, one obvious solution would be
the establishment of a recognized Student-Faculty
organization would have the authority
to deal with problems common to both
factions, especially in the area of curriculum.
Such an organization would be a desirable
"swing" group which could effectively deal
with any controversy with the Administrative-Faculty
power structure. The problems in
setting up a Student-Faculty Senate, a name
some have suggested for such an organization,
are numerous. Certainly the students would
want to make selections to the "Senate"
through the Student Council in order to avoid
undermining the power Council now possesses.
The process for selection represents still
another problem for both faculty and
students. Perhaps representation could be
based on a certain number of Faculty and
student delegates from each department
within particular schools of the University.

We hesitate to propose prematurely any
definite structure; however, we feel the need
for a Faculty-Student organization is legitimate
and is one which should be carefully
considered if meaningful student participation
is to be realized at the University.

What disturbs us most is the feeling we
sense in many of the members of the faculty
that student participation necessarily leads to
destruction of some sort. Students have a
vested interest, along with the faculty, in
attempting to make this a better University.
Each group has a contribution to make, and
nothing will ever be gained by suspicion and
confrontation.