Universities differ in presidential search policies
Opinions vary on need for confidentiality
By Bob Conti
Assistant Articles Editor
Late in October, Robert Benedict, liaison to J. Robert Fluor, chairman of the presidential search committee and Board of Trustees, released information about Thornton Bradshaw, president of the Atlantic Richfield Co., as a candidate for replacing President John R. Hubbard who is retiring.
In addition, Richard Atkinson, director of the National Science Foundation, was confirmed as a candidate for the job.
When the presidential search committee was formed last February, all indicators showed that the information the committee obtained and subsequent decisions would be kept secret until the final choice for Hubbard's successor had been made.
The disclosure last month, however, broke through that secrecy.
Some of the procedures followed by this year's committee contrast sharply with those of the 1970 presidential search committee that chose Hubbard to replace Norman Topping. Topping resigned because of health problems.
The university’ went through a closed search in the spring of 1970. The names
of the candidates were never made public — neither through public disclosure nor internal leaks, said Robert Mannes, dean of Student Life who served as a faculty member on that committee.
In addition, the basic structures of the two search procedures differed.
This year's search consists of three phases. Phase I identified and developed the pool of applicants, screening out applicants through background checks.
Phase II had the nominees come to the campus and meet with the members of the search committee and the Board of Trustees executive committee. The nominees had dinner with the board members, affording the members a chance to meet them on an informal basis. At this time, the nominees were not introduced to any other members of the university constituency.
If those nominees did well in Phase II, they were invited to return for Phase III. At this point the nominee becomes a candidate for the position of president.
During Phase III, the candidate again meets with trustee and search committee members, plus conferring with student and faculty leaders.
If the candidates are willing, their names and backgrounds will then be made public.
The 1970 search had two phases: The initial screening of the applicants and then meeting with the committee and trustees. Mannes said they never met with the campus constituencies.
The Daily Trojan conducted a national survey among colleges and universities that are undergoing or have recently completed a presidential search.
The major fear expressed by the universities operating under a closed system was that a candidate will withdraw to avoid embarrassment if his name is disclosed.
"The best candidates do not want to face the public embarrassment if they lose or the tensions at their previous employment because of their willingness to leave," said Gerald Mager, secretary to the search committee at Amherst College. "You face a terrible risk of losing the best candidates if you mention the name publicly."
Amherst conducts closed presidential search meetings.
Gloria Copeland, special assistant for academic affair and search committee
coordinator for the University of California system, said the committee believed better candidates would consider applying for the position if they were promised confidentiality.
The UC system is currently conducting a closed search for presidents at Berkeley and San Diego.
At the University of Minnesota, the Board of Trustees as well as the search committee proceedings are open to the (Continued on page 8)
Next candidate to visit campus
The next university presidential candidate to visit campus will be Richard Atkinson, director of the National Science Foundation, on Nov. 27 and 28.
Sources originally indicated the visit would be held Monday (Daily Trojan, Thursday, Nov. 15), but J. Robert Fluor, chairman of the search committee and the Board of Trustees, confirmed the later dates.
_(Continued on page 22)
RULING EXPECTED TODAY
Visa check legality researched
By Roger Wedberg
Staff Writer
The administration will announce by press release this morning the results of research into the legality of allowing Immigration and Naturalization Service agents on campus to interview and photograph Iranian students.
Vance Peterson, vice president of Academic Relations, said a decision would be made early this morning.
"It's been a matter under study and consideration and we're concerned that the university could be violating federal law and the rights of Iranian students," Peterson said.
Legal questions involve several privacy laws — the Buckley Amendment to the Freedom of Information Act, and the body of case law that developed in the 1960s concerning the gathering of information on college campuses by federal agencies, he said.
Immigration officials were recalled last Friday when university officials contacted the INS to challenge the legality of photographing the students.
President Carter, Nov. 11, ordered the INS to review the status of student visas and deport
those students whose papers were unsatisfactory-
Carl Franklin, vice president of Legal Affairs, said he studied Carter's directive last night.
The INS was given authority to photograph Iranian students by Carter's directive, said Joe Howerton, district INS director.
The Office of International Students and Scholars since last Friday has urged students to sign up for interviews to be held at the Federal Building, Room 8417, at 300 North Figueroa in Los Angeles.
Over 600 of the university's approximately 800 Iranian students have signed up for appointments, which are booked up to Dec 6.
The INS is seeing 100 university students a day until the deadline of Dec. 14, and appointments are booked until Dec. 6, said Berthe Von Allmen, assistant director of the OISS.
Students must bring valid passports, evidence that they are enrolled in the university and two immigration forms. Students who miss the deadline will be considered out of status, Von Allmen said.
A two-sided coin; Iranian students express concern
By Pam Samuels
Staff Writer
In the wake of the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, most of the focus surrounding the siege has been centered on the apparent stalemate between the Iranian students and President Carter, who has refused demands that the shah be returned to Iran. But just as the families of the Americans held hostage are concerned about their safety, the families of Iranian students here in the United States are worried too.
All Iranian students interviewed wished to remain anonymous for fear of reprisal."My mother called because she had heard that we were being treated badly, or that we might be hurt," said one female Iranian student.
She reassured her mother, but things are not as safe as they once were, she said. Though she admits that nothing has happened to her, she has heard "horrible things" about Iranian students being turned away at restaurants and harassed by Americans.
Still, she says, her relationship with American friends "hasn't really changed."
Like many Iranian students, she feels that Immigration and Naturalization Service interviews of Iranian students to insure that their visas are valid, are discriminatory and unfair.
"They should check all the students, not just Iranians," she said. "There are other international students whose status is not
trojan
Volume LXXXVIl Number 46 University of Southern California Tuesday, November 20, 1979
Staff photo by Mart Sticht
ON A CLEAR DAY — Chilly winds have brought a temperature change to the Los	residents that this is about as close to winter as the basin is going to get. The
Angeles area, resulting in clear, crisp clean air, and reminding the Southern California	surrounding mountains peaks cut through to sharply define the Los Angeles skyline.