Unrest made governance national issue
By PETER WONG Staff Writer
(Editor’s note: This is the sixth in a series on university governance. The series will continue next semester with articles on students and their role in university governance, as viewed bv the experts.)
Another major national commission was appointed by President Nixon in June. 1970. to study the causes of unrest in the nation's universities and to come up with recommendations for solving the troubles.
While this commission did not give specific solutions in its final report, it did stress two points about governance that the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence also stressed in November. 1969—the need for a more effective governance system that will unite the elements of a university, and the need for increased student participation in such a system.
However, like the 1969 report, the report of the President's Commission on Campus Unrest was quietly shelved.
For its main emphasis that presidential leadership will help solve the troubles in the nation's universities.
The report was severlv criticized, first by Vice President Spiro T. Agnew and then by President Nixon
President Nixon appointed the commission after one of the most turbulent springs in the nation's history—the U.S. military incursion into Cambodia, subsequent protests on the campuses, and the shootings at Kent State University in Ohio and Jackson State College in Mississippi.
On Sept. 26. 1970, the commission, headed by William W. Scranton, former governor of Pennsylvania, issued its report. Later the commission issued its investigative reports on the shootings at Kent State and Jackson State.
Among the chapters of the main report was one titled “University Governance.-' in which governance was one of four major areas that universities failed to give needed attention to during the 1960s.
“Most institutions assumed—largely correctly—that controversies about campus matters could be readily resolved because of the prevailing sense of community among the interested parties," the report said.
“Unfortunately, the importance of
this sense of community to the process of university governance was little appreciated until it had seriously eroded. And few institutions have yet developed more effective means to compensate for its loss."
The commission said most universities failed to include students in the decision-making process until the 1960s. generally leaving governance to the faculty, administrators and trustees.
“There is too little experience to date with participatory university government to permit conclusive judgments about the merits of any of the particular models being tried, or of the idea of participation in general." the report said.
Furthermore, the commission refrained from any specific solutions to the problem of university governance: “In keeping with their individual purposes and traditions, universities will and should continue to differ in their internal organization and administration.”
However, the commission did endorse the idea of student participation in university decision-making, if only somewhat cautiously, and it offered seven guidelines for improvement in pre-
sent systems:
•	Increased participation of students, faculty and staff in the formulation of university policies is desirable.
•	However, universities are not institutions that can be run on a one man. one vote basis or with the participation of all members on all issues.
•	Competence should be a major criterion in determining involvement in the university decision-making process.
•	Another criterion for involvement in decision-making should be the degree to which decisions affect any given group. Changes in regulations concerning student life should be made with the involvement of students: changes in faculty policies should obviously be made with faculty involvement.
•	Procedures for electing representatives of university constituencies should be carefully designed to guarantee true representativeness, perhaps by having representatives elected by small departmental or residential units, or by establishing quorum requirements to encourage participation and to enhance the legitimacy of the election result.
(Continued on page 6)
University of Southern California	Refugee benefit ShOW
T\ \ TT y	A T A M will be presented tonight
^	-L	A AX*	1	Ruster and the Penetrators and the Aman Dance Comnanv will
VOL. LXIV NO 57
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 5, 1972
Law Center cuts budget, faces financial squeeze
By BARBARA WEGHER
Although the general financial situation at the university is gloomy, the monetary problems of the Law Center are even worse, said Dorothy Nelson, dean, and John Wiley, associate dean.
The law school was asked by the university to cut $25,000 from its budget in order to help balance the university budget after plans had been made for its use. said Wiley.
“This is equivalent to cutting one major faculty member which would be impossible in the middle of the year,” he added.
The law center's budget for this year was $1,217,000 before they iost the $25,000. Next year's budget is expected to be over $1 million once again. Wiley estimated that it will steadily increase.
The Law Center faces budgetary problems which are not faced by the university as a whole. Wiley said.
“Just to keep even. $50,000 a year is needed for the library. This means purchasing nothing new. The money is needed for the yearly, monthly or weekly supplements added to the law books,” Wiley said.
The law school has other problems. According to Wiley the Law Center was considered a good regional law school but in the last five years it has grown to be considered a good national law school. This means it is competing with such universities as Harvard. Stanford and Yale for both faculty and students.
Approximately 10 of the 21 full-time professors at the center have received offers of positions at other universities.
Wiley said that the Law Center is 21st in the nation in relation to salaries. The average law professor receives $20,000 yearly at the center.
Another situation that exists only in the USC Law Center is that five to eight years ago nearly an entire new set of professors were recruited directly
from law school for the school. Now. all are young, yet all have become accomplished professors as well as scholars. The Law Center can only hope to hold them as their salaries become less comparable to their abilities. Wiley said.
It is for these reasons, which Wiley cited, that in the area of salaries the budget cannot be cut.
Another area of severe financial difficulty is concerned with loans and scholarships. Last year the Law Center received 3.000 applications for 170 positions. Wiley expects 4.000 in the next year. “In many cases we will not be getting the top students from that 4.000 because other top schools will be giving them (the top students) better scholarships."
In additiion to this some students after attending the Law Center and after doing extremely well are offered better scholarships by other universities.
A case in point was Karen Kirksey. a participant in the minority student program, last year. She was in the top 10% of her first year law class. Ms. Kirksey did receive from the center a scholarship: however this year she is at Yale, because Yale offered a better scholarship.
Wiley states that students usually do not decide whether they should change schools or not solely because of financial reasons, but he did say that four to five percent of each class is lost in the same way that Ms. Kirksay was lost.
“Every school wants to have the best students because such students stimulate discussion in the classroom which is very important in the situationwhich exists in a law school.
where there is a great deal of discussion. Students will learn from other students.' he said.
At present 80% of students do have some sort of financial aid. In order to supply the scholarships there must be a solid, broad economic base upon
which the funding must rest.
The Legion Lex. an organization where each member gives $100 a year, helps support the scholarships. Dean Nelson said.
Another organization named the Appellate Circle, which started last year, has members paying $1,000 and law firms $2,500 in order to join. According to Dean Nelson it is the only one of its kind in the nation.
Dean Nelson hopes that this group will bail out the ailing “USC Law Review.” The “Review" is faced with a $19,000 deficit this year and will cease publication unless funds can be found, she added.
Ruster and the Penetrators and the Aman Dance Company will be featured in tonight's UNICEF Refugee Renefit Show in Hancock Auditorium for the refugees of both South Vietnam and the Indo-Pakistani War.
UNICEF (United Nations Children's Emergency Fund) will channel the money from this ASSC-sponsored show to the refugees of those troubled areas.
Two shows will be given this evening at 8:15 and 10:15 with tickets available from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. in front of Tommy Trojan, the Student Activities Center, and the Faculty Center or at the door. Donations are $1.50 for students and $2.50 for non-students.
In addition to the two groups mentioned above. The Voices, a popular USC group, the California Folk Ensemble, and several skits from the Drama and English Departments will be seen in the show.
Ruster and the Penetrators. winners of last year's Songfest. will again give their rendition of pre-1960 rock and roll and the Aman Dance Company, which has been acclaimed by both the Los Angeles Times and the Los Angeles Examiner, will display interesting dance routines.
Concert to rock at noon
Rrownstone, a rock and roll group, will play at a free noon concert today at the Student Activities Center patio.
The six member group provides a new concept in entertainment in that their music varies from hard rock to jazz rock and country rock.
Members of the group include Dave Hoffman, rhythm guitar.
and vocal: Steve Selberg. bass, oboe, and vocal: Denny Morell.
drums: Doug Welbaum. lead guitar and vocal: Rarbara Lopez, lead vocalist: and Mike Frass. organist and lead singer.
It is better to light one candle
The lights went out at USC yesterday morning due to a campus-wide power failure, which began approximately at 10:15 a.m. Power was restored at 11:30 a.m., according to Arnold Shafer, director of the Physical Plant Department.
Apparently, he said, a main fuse blew in the university transformer, which is in a vault operated by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power.
“We take every precaution to prevent these things from happening. There is a routine inspection yearly. However, after heavy rains and dampness, a shortage is bound to occur. But, oceas-sionally, a fuse blows and there’s nothing that we can do about it,” said Shafer.
Carlyn M. Bridges (at left), assistant director of the News Bureau, finds that it is better to light one chandle than to curse the darkness in her Administration Building office. DT photo by Tony Korodv.