University of Southern California
DAILY • TROJAN
VOL. LXI, NO. 95	LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA THURS., MARCH 19, 1970
Ch icanos demand free tuition for 150 students
MUDD HALL—A MIDDAY MONUMENT
Dominates courtyard and shadows of philosophy building.
Photo by Don Shearer
Faculty handbook to encounter revisions
By BRIAN HOOPER
Thirty-five USC Chicano students demanded Tuesday that the university admit 150 Chicano students at the undergraduate level by next fall with free tuition and a §200 monthly stipend for the school year for each student.
This was one in a series of demands presented Tuesday to President Norman Topping by members of Mesa Directiva, a coalition of undergraduate, graduate, professional and faculty Mexican-Americans.
They also demanded that, by the spring semester of 1971, USC establish an ongoing admission and financial aid program for Chicanos from low-income families and from greater Los Angeles area schools
such as Roosevelt, Lincoln and Huntington Park high schools.
Further demands were:
—That the university guarantee a m i n m u m of 75 Chicano students will be admitted yearly under the above program.
—That USC hire a Chicano to serve as assistant to the president of the university.
a.	That this administrator be responsible for policy making on all issues or proposals which affect Chicano students.
b.	That two additional Chicano administrators be hired to assist in admissions and financial aid.
—That the university implement the recommendations of Dean Linnell’s Steering Committee for Chicano Studies.
(Committee currently studying the various alternatives for a Chicano Studies program.)
—That a Mesa Directiva (board of directors) composed of Chicano students at USC, Chicano faculty and administrators and Chicano community members be given an equal vote on all issues which concern Chicanos at USC.
a.	That the Mesa Directiva be allowed to vote equally on the selection of the three Chicano administrators.
b.	That the Mesa Directiva also share equally in the selection of Chicano students to be admitted under the program stated in the second demand.
President Topping said he would respond to the list of demands by the time that Mesa Directiva asked, April 2 at 9 a.m., according to Oscar Parra, a graduate student member of Mesa Directiva.
“What we’re saying is that Mexican-American students are getting admitted, but that in the past the university has taken only middle class Mexican-American students who come from middle-class schools and have better grades,” Parra said yesterday.
Parra explained that Chicano applicants have two routes available to apply for admission to USC: 1) The normal procedure through the Admissions Office, and 2) Submitting their application to MECHA (the undergraduate segment of Mesa Directiva, standing for Movi-mento Estudiantil Chicano de Atzlan).
Applications that MECHA receives, often from Chicanos in inner-city, low-income schools, are accumulated until members can go over the applications with Dr. Conrad Wedberg, dean of admissions. “In this manner MECHA serves as a lobbying group,” Parra said.
Parra feels that USC has been slow in admitting Mexican-American students.
“USC has been the last university in California to make any kind of significant effort to recruit and admit Chicano students,” he said. “State colleges and universities and other private universities have already established programs for these high-potential students.
By BERNARD BECK Assistant city editor
A revised faculty handbook, which was first proposed four years ago, came a step closer to reality yesterday.
Richard Hesse, assistant professor of quantitative business analysis, has assumed editorship of the revision, the University Senate announced at a meeting yesterday.
Hesse said he hopes to have a rough draft of the handbook prepared by next month’s senate meeting.
The present faculty handbook was drawn up in 1963 and does not include recent university policy statements and senate actions.
The revision of the faculty handbook was first suggested at a senate meeting in March, 1966. The result of the work of senate studies and committees during the intervening four years, only 27 pages of revisions, was presented to the senate yesterday.
The revised handbook will contain five divisions. The first will deal with the government of the university, explaining the function of the Board of Trustees, the president and
vice-presidents, the university committees, the University Senate, the Deans’ Council and and other administrative positions.
The second division will contain the Faculty Code, explaining procedures that pertain to the faculty, including ranks and titles, tenure status, compensation and income, benefits and retirement.
The third division deals with faculty rights and responsibilities, outlining academic and professional freedom, professional ethics, political activity, conflicts of interest in sponsored research, dissent and student relations.
The fourth division tells of faculty organizations.
The fifth division deals with the various university, student, alumni and faculty publications.
Other sections of the handbook will contain a manual of operations and procedures of university services, and information about how the faculty can use these services.
Hesse said that after the revised handbook is printed, he would like to sec a yearly revision instituted.
In other action the senate endorsed the National Day of Environmental Awareness to be held April 22. In a resolution that had been sponsored by PROBE, the csnate declared its “obligation to maintain and restore levels of environmental quality that will assure the general health, welfare, enjoyment and optimal conditions for all life.”
The senate also discussed the lateness of faculty contracts, the disposition of its resolutions, the establishment of a facility for international students and the means of ensuring that senate meetings would be conducted in a place secure from interruptions.
Law school group hits minority fund
By BARBARA PHILLIPS
Seventy law students and faculty members met yesterday to continue their discussion of inadequate funding for minority scholarships.
Reacting to Wednesday’s announcement of a $600,000 scholarship fund offered by the USC Associates for economically disadvantaged students, the students and faculty of the School of Law termed the proposal totally inadequate.
Eduardo Guzman, a Chicano representative, said of the Associate’s proposal, “It is not an adequate response at all. Whatever efforts have been made, they were not what we wanted. Dr. Topping is a very smart man. The whole intent of yesterday’s news release was to calm students down.”
Some students proposed rejecting the offer completely, one student suggested demonstrating, while others felt that a tuition strike was the only way to pressure Dr. Topping into opening the budget records and alloting more funds.
Dorothy Nelson, dean of the School of Law, reacted by saying, “True, the money is not adequate, but this is a step in the door which I want to pursue. It is my opinion, based upon my 17 years experience, that we will substantially hurt our own budget conditions if we push in the wrong direction.”
One of the major issues at yesterday’s meeting was how the money offered by the Associates will be divided among the four schools cited as needing student support funds.
As the Associates’ proposal reads $600,000 was offered over a three-year period to match private donations on a two-for-one basis. This would mean that each year $200,000 would be available for economically disadvantaged students in the Schools of Dentistry, Business, Law and Pharmacy.
The proposal did not announce how this money would be divided. “We are scrambling for a crack at a contingent sum of money and we don’t know what it is,” commented Michael Levine, law professor.
The Law School figures that it will cost $4,000 for a full-support scholarship, allowing approximately $2,000 for tuition and $2,000 living expenses.
Assuming that the money would be divided evenly between the four schools, the School of Law could expect to receive $40,000 each year if they could match it with $20,000.
This would mean that the Law School would then have (Continued on page 2)
Campus riot reports criticized
By RODGER KEE
A USC graduate, now an editor for the Los Angeles Times, said reporters who cover campus violence arc not digging deeply enough.
Wayne Warga, editor of Calendar, the Times’ entertainment magazine, told a group of journalism students Tuesday that adequate attention is being given to the violence itself, but not enough to the reasons why incidents occur.
“I think reporters went about their accounts of these incidents in a very superficial style, meaning that they looked for the who. what, where and when aspects of the story,”
Warga said. “They did this without reporting the implications or the feelings that had aroused certain individuals.”
Warga asked a student about his reaction to imedia coverage of the recent disorder at the University of California at Santa Barbara.
“Have you read in any newspaper what tlie students’ demands were?” he asked.
Warga claimed the only mention of reasons for the Santa Barbara rioting in California newspapers was in the letters to the editor in the Times.
Warga added that newspapers were duplicating the job done by electronic media in riot coverage. He xeplained that the purpose of radio and television’s approach to event
coverage was to allow viewers and listeners to simply witness events and not to offer any explanations.
Warga said it is the printed media’s responsibility to be more investigative and to fill the gaps left by radio and television.
“It is incumbent upon printed media to rattle people’s cages,” he said. “I think it is this identity that is going to save newspapers.”
Warga was graduated from USC in 1960. He has reported for the Associated Press and Life Magazine. He calls himself more politically than entertainment-oriented, but was selected to head the Calendar staff earlier this year