University of Virginia Library

Stuart Pape

A Timely Potpourri

If Monday's Washington Post is
any indication, the controversy
over the expansion of the
University is spreading far afield.
The Post contains a second letter
from a Mr. Coghill, a resident of
Waynesboro, Pennsylvania, who
proceeds to reiterate a point made
in an earlier letter. The point is a
simple one as a few quotations
from the Coghill letter will
indicate:

I cannot begin to speak for the
student who wrote a response to
Mr. Coghill's first letter, but he is
absolutely correct in predicting the
unacceptability of his position.

Small Voice

I have that sinking feeling that
Mr. Coghill, presumably an
intelligent and informed man,
would be reluctant to question the
decisions and reasoning of our
elected leaders on the grounds that
they have "unique" characteristics
and superior grasps of the facts. At
least in that situation we get to
elect the leaders. When you bring it
down to the University level,
students have little if any say in the
selection of those individuals who
have so much to do with their lives.

Limited Definition

The most strenuous objection to
Mr. Coghill's premise though is
based on his conception of student.
It is obviously a very narrow
one—limited to book learning and
reflective thought. I daresay that
students who limit themselves to
obtaining knowledge from these
sources alone will never be able to
take their places as the country's
leaders.

Shut Out

How can you expect someone
to suddenly blossom as a leader, an
involved citizen, an informed voter
when he has attempted to shut
himself out from participating in
life for four or possibly more years;
students have the franchise now,
should we forsake participation in
the political process until we have
finished contemplating and reading?

Is it at all reasonable or more
importantly desirable to have large
numbers of persons sit idly by
while wrongs go uncorrected, bad
situations become worse, and the
opportunities for improvement are
lessened; apparently Mr. Coghill
would like students to return to the
days of the 1950's when
uninvolvement was as high a virtue
as virginity. Fortunately, students
today are involved in the affairs of
their country and their universities.

* * *

It has been contended by many,
particularly those in the
administration that activities of the
"University Tuesday" sort are bad
from a public relations standpoint.
A letter recently received from a
gentleman in Virginia Beach whose
son graduated from the University
last June would seem to indicate
that such is not the case. The letter
said in part: "Each successive year
we visited the campus it appeared
to be more and more of a rat hole.
Keep plugging—you've got a lot of
people on your side."

Many Fallacies

A letter of this sort points out
one of the many fallacies in the
administration arguments about
funding from the state legislature.
The administration argument
appears to assume that the
legislators are immune from public
pressure, not susceptible to reason,
particularly that which inmates
from the mouths of their
constituents, and totally
autonomous.

Untapped Resources

Granted that Virginia is not
especially well known for
widespread citizen participation in
government, but the University
would appear to be ignoring a large,
heretofore untapped resource.
There are many alumni and parents
of alumni who retain an interest in
the University. There is every
reason to believe that they could be
marshaled into an effective lobby,
along with interested citizens and
alumni of other state schools in an
attempt to persuade the legislature
that more funds are needed and
that overcrowding is a really bad
way to run state universities.

How about it President
Shannon?

* * *

A few weeks ago, this column
cited the ROTC affairs committee
as a particularly egregious example
of an administrative committee that
failed to perform its designated
function. The committee has not
met in the past two years and as of
yet no meeting has been scheduled,
although the chairman, Professor
Hamilton of the Biology
Department has given assurances
that the committee will meet soon.
This column inadvertently implied
that Professor Hamilton has chaired
the committee during that entire
period of inactivity. To set the
record straight, Professor Hamilton
has been the chairman during the
1969-1970 session and is chairman
during the current academic
session. As stated, during that time,
no meeting of the committee has
occurred.