The Chicago Maroon Volume 79Number 41Tuesday,March 2, 1971AN INTERVIEWWITH EDWARD LEVIPhotographs by Steve Aokl In his State of the University address last week, Presi¬dent Edward Levi predicted a $6.5 million budget deficit,but expressed optimism that the University’s academic ex¬cellence would be maintained through careful manage¬ment.On Thursday, he met with three representatives of thecampus media to discuss his remarks. In the course of the90 minute interview, the first he has granted since his No¬vember 1968 inauguration, Levi assessed the effects of thedeficit, the student mood on campus, his thoughts abouthigher education, and the nature of the University of Chi¬cago.A former provost, and dean and professor of the lawschool, Levi, 59, talked about a tuition deferment plan asproposed by Yale University. The Yale plan allows thestudent to borrow money to pay tuition, and pay back thisloan as a percentage of his gross income over a 35 yearperiod.Levi was interviewed in an administration building con¬ference room near his office by Maroon Managing EditorCon Hitchcock and WHPK’s Station Manager Philip Hessand News Director Andrew Segal.Major excerpts of the interview appear below.President Levi, in the State of the University addressWednesday you said that the University would experiencea $6.5 million deficit, there would be a $150 tuition in¬crease next year, and earlier this year it was recommend¬ed that the budget of the University be cut back by at leastfive percent.My question is how will people feel the effects of this badfinancial situation directly on their lives and daily activi¬ties?I don’t think that I reported that it was recommendedthat the budget be cut back by five percent. I don’t thinkin the message that I gave any figure. *You ask me how people will feel as they see the Univer¬sity’s situation. Well, in the first place, this University’ssituation as a private university is comparable to the situ¬ation in other top private universities so that I think wehave to realize that these are not particularly unique prob¬lems.And so I assume that one of the feelings people will haveis that there are general problems as well as specific ones,and that if one is concerned about the well-being of theuniversities and their long-term well-being, one had betterlook directly and try to approach these long-term prob¬lems.If you’re asking me how students will feel about a $150tuition increase, or how their families will feel, I’m surethey would rather not have the increase. I’m sure thatthey understand the reason for it.I think the faculty will understand the general financialsituation. As I’ve said, it’s not a unique one. That may notmake it much more pleasant.It’s not a catastrophic financial situation at all. It is areal one, there is a curtailment, and I tried in the speechto try to give some perspective on how you would measurethe slowdown that the curtailment implies.One thing you have to keep in mind is that the budgethas ndt yet been adoped for 1971-72. I was talking on abudget that is being worked on and so one can’t be reallysure what its final form will be like.As I tried to point out in the speech anyway, these bud¬gets involve so many predictions that in a time of change agreat many things can happen to them during the year ashappened during this year.In your speech, you mentioned the fact that the student-faculty ratio at the University, which in 1965-66 was con¬siderably lower than it is today (1 to 8.3 then versus 1 to6.7 now) is a quantity which can have an effect on the bud¬get and that it can put strain on the limits of the budget.Do you feel that the student-faculty ratio is going tochange in the next few years, either because of the policiesnow going into effect or because of a deliberate policy thatwill be applied to it?I think the outer limits of the budget to some extent aredetermined by faculty-student ratios in some areas, and soit really isn’t necessarily a question of conscious choice.If the ratio is completely out of balance, and if the finan¬cial resources are not there, the obvious effect will be areduction of the size of the faculty, and if not. in that area,at least then, overall.I would like to go back to the first question, because I’mnot sure my answer is clear as to what the effect of theEDWARD LEVI. \financial problem will have on the view that people hadabout the University and its arrangements.The kind of thing I meant was that I’ve been doing agreat deal of talking about the costs imposed by the sys¬tem of higher education because of the length of time re¬quired.So I suppose that I could feel that this indication of thecost is a kind of confirmation of the remarks I’ve beenmaking. And in fact I suggested that the effect of not hav¬ing tuition reflect the real costs of education had someeffect on making education grants more costly that itought to be.So in a sense, each one of us is probably going to look atthe situation and say “Well, this proves I was right allalong.”Is there going to be any sort of an attempt to change thestudent-facidty ratio at the University through a policy ofdeliberate attrition in faculty hirings and/or faculty depar¬tures, as has been announced already by a number of uni¬versities which are in more serious trouble than this one?I don’t believe this University is going to adopt a for¬mula of that kind. This University operates mainly bythinking about ideas and looking at situations and trying toreact in a thoughtful way.I’m sure the effect of seeing what the present situation iswill cause some changes in perhaps some departments,that is to say, departments that decided they would takefewer students for whatever reason may re-think why theymade that decision.I’m sure that some other departments decide that thereisn’t any way for them to have more students except byhaving students they don’t feel are qualified, in whichcase, I’m sure they won’t do anything.And a very natural kind of reaction is that there ought tobe more students at the University, but not in our depart¬ment.In one of your recent speeches, you stated, “We havegiven most emphasis to faculty salaries, scholarships, andneeds of the library.” In view of the budget situation, will think one comes to the quick realization that it will not.For example, it won’t come near to paying the full costsfor the education of a medical student, or in many of thegraduate areas.One has to ask oneself and you’re maybe in a betterposition than I am to answer this, how does it look to astudent when he takes on an obligation of this kind.The Yale plan talks about borrowing $5000, but I’m say.ing that the projections of it, if one were really talkingabout the real costs and not just at the undergraduatelevel, but through the graduate years, would be much high¬er.How does it feel to take on an obligation to pay back,say, $20,000 for over a 35 year period, paying so much of apercentage of one’s gross income per year and on the basisthat if one is very successful financially, the payment willbe much higher and it would be lower if one isn’t.I think if one is fairly sure that he’s not going to haveany money at all, obviously it’s a good deal, and if one’ssure that one’s going to have an enormous amount of mon¬ey, it’s probably a good deal.But what about the person who is going to be in betweenand who very likely is going to turn out to be a college oruniversity professor and finds that this amount of moneythat he has to pay every year is just the amount that hewanted for the education of his children or fortification orwhatever? &So the fact that it makes it easy to borrow money and«that those who do well pay more than those who don’thas a lot of seductiveness in it and appropriatnessin it, but I don’t think we should forget that is still is alot of money.So that’s one problem, and that’s one reason that I’msomewhat doubtful that we can get along with that kind ofa program unless it’s clearly regarded as an additionalincrement.The danger is that someone might think that this is agreat way to pay for private higher education and there- 5fore you don’t have to have other programs of support. giThe second kind of problem is the enforcement problem,One shudders to think of the problems, both of disclosure!and collection.The Yale program requires the recipient to file once orjtwice a year a copy of his income tax return, and it as¬sumes all kinds of enforcement mechanisms.As I said in my talk, there’s a little bit of the Yaleprogram which has the characteristics of a commitment tothese things continue to receive the top priority and atten¬tion you feel they deserve?I think so, and I hope so. I’m hesitating for a momentbecause of the inclusion of the needs of the library. Wehave given a great deal of attention to the needs of thelibrary.I don’t know whether in terms of the difficulties of thebudget the library will be able to have the kind of supportthat I would wish it to have.I think one of the problems is with the wonderful newRegenstein facility. The library is more expensive to oper¬ate and therefore, even if one maintains the budget, one isfalling somewhat behind the requirements of the library.But I would think that certainly the student aid and fac¬ulty salaries come first and while I would not put the li¬brary as a priority below other things, I think there aresome other things that probably would have to come alongwith us.How will the new budget affect the development of SouthCampus?I don’t think the new budget has any effect on that oneway or the other. There really is no relationship to it. Inthe first place, the budget that we’re talking about is not abudget which in most instances includes capital amounts.It’s perfectly true that sometimes funds come into theUniversity which it can choose to either use for the de¬mands of the ongoing budget or can use for certain capitalamounts.Our present position is that we really cannot put up abuilding, new structures, unless we find the money to fullyfund them. I don’t know whether that’s involved in yourquestion, but that is our position, has been our position,and the consequence of that position is that we have beenunable to go ahead with certain buildings.In your speech, you referred to the Yale tuition plan.What reservations would you have about applying such aplan to the University of Chicago, relating to the specificnature of this University?One has to be sure one understands what the Yale planis. The Yale plan has in it a substantial increase in tuitioncosts, an increase of $350 for next year and then $300 eachyear for the next four years.If one is to assume that that is going to pay the full costof instruction in the graduate and professional areas, IVERDI• HAYDN• HINDEMITHSaturday March 6Mandet Hail8:30 p.m.ADMISSION FREEContemporary European Films Lion in Winter Mar. 6Black Orpheus Mar. 7THE LION IN WINTER/ BLACK ORPHEUSCobb Hall 7 & 9:15university (OrchestraUniversity ChorusNa^jour, Conductor V^/Ihe Chicago Maroon/March 2, 1971 BUCK ROGERSReturns Again This Wednesday andThursday in AnotherEpisodeThe Jack Mulhall Fan Clubmeets and eats Pizzaduring the showing.Ida NoyesFREE 9 pmNASON SERVICE STATION61st & Ellis100 Gallons of Gas $2.00 Refund Straight Talk:Your diamond is at..¥FINE JEWELERS FOR 60 YEARS |» 119 N. Wabash at Washington| ^ ENGLEWOOD EVERGREEN PLAZA^ |WITH THIS COUPONAll size 32 straight leg dress slacksare reduced to $4.99.Offer expires 3/7/71JOHN'S MENS WEAR1459 E. 53rdcontribute funds when one can when one becomes analumnus.I’m sure many students who do get scholarships now andthen think that when they do become alumni they will insome sense pay this back and many of us have done that.I think that’s a very natural feeling. But that doesn’trequire all these enforcement measures.You said in the speech that mechanisms such as theYale plan may further “compartmentalize the Universityand make interdisciplinary arrangements more difficult.”Could you elaborate on this statement?This is a matter of great concern to me. I think there isa great difference of opinion about this and I’m on one sideand some other people are on the other.What I had in mind was this: if you say that the Yaleplan is going to have the real costs of education fixed andthe tuition set at those real costs, then you have to firstdetermine what are the costs of instruction as opposed tothe costs of research.That’s very hard to figure out anyway because the facul¬ty member who does not engage in any research or doesn’tengage in the preparation of his classes — it is very hardto know sometimes why there’s a difference between thepreparation for the classes and research — isn’t going tobe a very good teacher.So not only does it assume that you have that kind ofallocation of cost, but then it certainly would probablyhave to take into account the fact that, as I’ve indicatedbefore, there are some areas of the University where prob¬ably the true cost is $17,000 a year and others where it’s$15,000 and others where it’s $10,000 and so on.Well now, this University is proud of its inter-disciplinaryarrangements, it wants to make it easy for students totake courses and do work in different departments, differ¬ent divisions.FIRMLY ENSCONSEDIN HARPER LIBRARYThe Burning ShameCoffee ShopHarper 32,.9 am - 4 pm,Monday-FridayJoin us for free coffeeafter 1 pm today,and gorilla coffee tomorrow As soon as you start having tuition barriers and differ¬ences of this kind you make it much more complicated forthe students to flow.I know there are difficulties now, but there would bemuch more difficulties if tuition charges are different indifferent areas.Then I went on to say that I knew the suggestion wasbeing made around the country that in addition, the planshould be tied to an incentive system so that the kind ofgrowth and the number of students or whatever it inducedwould go to the benefit of that particular area.That theory is verv much referred to as “each tub on itsown bottom.” The University then becomes a kind of col¬lection of individual enterprises, each going in its ownway. Some universisites have been more or less like that,as I suggested.I think if you get a very big university, such as what iscalled a “multi-university”, some of the big state univer¬sities, probably if you don’t segment them, they’re so largeand so frightening that it would be hard to see how youcould work in them, so that some compartmentalization isalmost necessary for them.But that’s very different from this University. This Uni¬versity has its great strength because of the inter-relation¬ships among the parts, and you can see that for example ifyou look at the professional schools which reflect this in anamazing way.The inter-disciplinary nature of the University is reflect¬ed on those faculties so that the business school will haveeconomists and sociologists, the law school will have econ¬omists, the social service administration for years had aneconomist as its dean and so on.This kind of inter-relationship has been extraordinarilyimportant for this University, and the relationship assumesthat the parts are going to operate so as to share theirstrength and not operate so that they become stronger atthe expense of some other part.Once you start this entrepreneurial business, I don’tknow where it ends.For example, some universities charge various partsrent for the use of the buildings. You can make a goodargument for that. You can say this is the only way youhold down the amount of space that people will use, sincepeople are insatiable — if they’re not to pay for it, theywill use more space than they require.If you along that line, we’re all going to turn out to beprized separatists.I can tell a story which you may not find quite so amus¬ing as I do, but I was dean of the law school at the time wewere trying to get a new building.The building that we’re in is now called business east.That building was financed for the University of Chicagoby John D Rockefeller who gave the money f<jr a lawschool building.As dean, when I had to go out an draise the money forthe new law school building, and I realized that I wasleaving this building, and that this building was being giv¬en, so to speak, to the business school, it occurred to methat it would be very nice if the business school paid thelaw school for it because then I wouldn’t have to raiseas much money.I accepted the argument that we’re all part of one Uni¬versity, but if we are all going to go our separate ways,why I suppose we should have sold the building, and thebusiness school should have paid for it.It has been suggested that with the crunch of shrinkingemployment opportunities, rising costs in almost every-THE BANDI R SNATCH NIGHTCLUBpresentsSteve GoodmanFolk Stylist From the Quiet KnightOne Night Only—Sat March 69pm-lamTry our pizza!0NF0F THE YEAR’S 10 BEST—Judith Crist New York Magazine . —Stewart Klein Metromedia TVUNFORGETTABLE!“A beautiful movie, a brilliant and haunting drama.”—Stewart Klein, WNEW-TV 1Donald Shebib sstarrinq Douq McGrath • Released by****.. .Ebert; "STUNNING" CARPET CITY6740 STONY ISLAND324-7998Hot what you need from o $10used 9 i 12 Rug, to a custom'carpet. Specializing in Remnants^Mill returns at a fraction of the i^original cost. <J Decorot ton Colors and Qualities. *f Additional 10% Discount with thisDaily News; "WORK OF ART .. .Today iCOOT DOWN 1HE ROMjisi /A Division ol Cinecom Corporationslews; "WORK OF ART".. Today k3 PENNY CINEMA t free OEuyjERY jNOW FLAYINGtrM Parking ?«?4 lineoMt STS St2t PREGNANT?Need Help?For assistance in obtaining alegal abortion immediately inNew York City at minimal cost24 hours a day, seven days aweek for confidential and per¬sonal service.Call:(215) 878-5800ABORTION REFERRALSERVICE (ARS), INC.March 2, 1971/The Chicago Maroon/3EDWARD LEVIthing, and rising tuition that there will be some studentswho might be caught in a bind such that they simply can¬not continue to go to school here.Do you feel the University can afford with its currentbudget problems to insure that each student can continuehis education?Well certainly the University is going to do as much asit can on that, and that’s what it’s always tried to do. Isuspect that isn’t going to be the problem.I’m sure that the University will try to arrange to man¬age its loan fund and scholarship fund to help in everyway it can.I do think that it is somewhat meaningless for a privateuniversity to say, as we have sometimes said and it hasbothered me, that no student will be prevented from com¬ing here if he could otherwise come and where otherwiseadmissible because he didn’t have the money.I don’t think at this point in time that any private univer¬sity really can say that. I think we all operate under bud¬get limitations that are not of our making, but of the na¬ture of the world.But so far as assuming as much of a responsibility as wecan to help out students who are here and who work outthe kinds of arrangements which I think can be made, Iam sure that we will probably do very well.That doesn’t mean that people will be satisfied, becausepeople tend not to be satisfied on such matters.It’s a little bit like asking if the rates of dormitories aretoo high or too low or other facilities or whether facultysalaries are high enough and all of those things.My hope is, my belief is, that all of us have a sufficientappreciation not only of the problems but of the value ofthere would be a good deal of cooperation on this.And I would think the answer to your question as to stu¬dent aid is that there’s going to be a lot of student aidfor the particular kinds of things you’re talking about.You advocated very strongly that faculty within their respective departments make the decisions that controlthat department. What type of overview or centralizationof authority to keep the horses pulling together and pre¬serve this cohesion?We try very hard to do that, and I think we’ve beenfairly successful. I don’t know how it will be down theroad.One reason for setting up this overall educational reviewcommission and making sure, by the way, that it had nodeans on it, was so that we could get a faculty group thatwould look at the whole University.The reason for not having deans on it is not because Idon’t think they would have a great deal to contribute,they would, but they might be under the pressures andresponsibilities of their own areas.I would much rather have the educational review com¬mission get their advice and respond to it, or have thedeans respond to the ideas of the commission.I think in many ways we continually try to pull the Uni¬versity together. The fact that there are these inter-rela¬tionships among faculty is the thing which does by andlarge keep the University together.But there will be decisions made by departments whichother departments won’t like.And over the years there has been a general decline inpresidential powers, and in the powers to centralize. Sogenerally speaking, the President’s power, other than hisobvious persuasiveness, is to at times say no. He’s notallowed to say yes very often, because that’s interferenceBut other times he can say no.Won’t the financial crisis, which will mean that not eachdepartment will be able to get what it wants or what itthinks it should have, threaten the cohesion of the Univer¬sity?I don’t think so, but of course you must realize that nodepartment has ever had what it wanted anyway. And inthat sense, the financial crisis — and I’m not sure weshould call it a crisis, what ever the situation is and I triedto be clear about it in the talk — is a good thing, only inthe sense that it tells people, it reminds them what is al¬ways true.No one can have everything he wants. We’ve alwaysknown that, I guess, but choices have to be made.In your speech: you referred to a levelling-off period inthe time of the University’s growth. How long do you thinkthis l elling-off period will continue, and are you consid¬ering gradual resumption of expansion?I’m really not opposed to the levelling-off period, andwhen I said we had planned that there would be a level¬ing-off period, I suppose that incorporated the notion thatthe University can’t do everything.Now when I use that phrase — and that phrase is oftenmeant to mean that it can’t do things other than intellectualthings or academic things — I mean that it can’tdevelop every discipline, every speciality.It just can’t, and therefore we have improved variousareas which we thought we could have accomplished.We thought there would be what we called a level¬ling-off period. I think that was partly in recognition of thefact that improvement isn’t always a quantity growth any¬way, I would say, in fact, and again I’m not going to name the areas for you, that some departments in the Universitywould be better if they were smaller, so that stockpilingfaculty, for example, is not the quality road.One of the worrisome things about a University is thatwhen it thinks about getting better, it thinks “well if all ofus were here, plus the five greatest scholars that you couldthink of, wouldn’t we be a wonderful department.”What they forget is that if it took those five wonderfulscholars and didn’t have anybody else, it would be a won¬derful department and it might be a preferable depart¬ment.A rather dramatic change in the tenor of student lifeseems to have taken place on the campus this year. Thereseems to be a real diminished level of political activityThere seems to be a much more almost complacent airamong the students, perhaps even contented. Certainly theLascivious Costume Ball is an example of the change thathas taken place. Do you have any comment as to studentlife now?There’s a lot about student life I don’t know anythingabout, including what you referred to as the LasciviousCostume Ball. I had heard that perhaps it was a lasciviousun-oostumed ball. I really don’t know.I don’t think the students I talk to are complacent. Idon’t think he students at the University of Chicago everreally have been complacent.I think the question is how do they manifest their inter¬est, and is the manifestation different this year than it waslast year or the year before.And I suppose that students today who look back and say“It isn’t the same this year as it was last, or the yearbefore,” are witnessing a generation gap, but this timethey’re on the older side of the generation gapAnd those of us who’ve been around for some time real¬ize that there’s a new generation every two or thre years,expect those surface kind of manifestations to change.But I don’t think, basically, in terms of things that arecalled apathy, there has been a particular change. TheUniversity of Chicago, so far as I have known it for manyyears, has never had an apathetic student body, and anyparticular student at any existing time has always thoughtthat the rest of the students were apathetic. This is theenduring characteristic of our student body.One of the mistakes we make in higher education, andstudents at this University really shouldn’t make it, is toassume that the University of Chicago at some point intime is like all the other universities. It never was. It nev¬er was.The people who talk about the apathetic students whocould only get interested in big-time football, etc, etc., for¬get that that was just exactly at the time when the Univer¬sity of Chicago gave up football.And why did it give it up? It gave it up in part because itdidn’t have very many people who were really interestedin and up to the level of University of Chicago students tobe on the football team. That was one reason.One could immediately see even in that decision that thiswas a different kind of student body and a different kind ofUniversity The notion that there was that long periodwhich the sociologists write about, a David Riesman who4/The Chicago Maroon/March 2, 1971 March 10 Cobb Hall 7-9:15The State of the UniversityBY EDWARD H. LEVIIn the report to this Senate on November 4,1969,1 feltcompelled to emphasize economic problems whichour university and similar private universities faced.Academic budgets at our institution over the priorten years showed a planned, considerable increase.Total budgets had gone up 168 percent; student feeincome, 189 percent; student aid, 394 percent; totalfaculty compensation, 174 percent; and averagefaculty compensation, 91 percent, with the greatestpercentage increase at the instructorship level.The increases in expenditures were less than wethought could have been used to good effect. In part,the increases only mirrored changes in the measuresof the economy. Yet in total the budgets reflected thestrong attempt of the University to enhance itsacademic excellence — an effort, I believe, we canjudge to have been generally successful. The flow ofincome making these budgets possible was depend¬ent, in part, upon the support of the FederalGovernment, in the main, for individual facultyresearch and student support. But because we are aprivate university, the flow depended, to a largeextent, upon private funds in the form of gifts,endowment, and endowment-like revenue, and ontuition receipts, against which student aid of variouskinds has to be offset. Moreover, the viability of theenterprise was contingent upon the successful oper¬ation in certain segments of the University’s life ofintricate arrangements intended to achieve self¬balancing, or at least manageable and limitedsubsidies.An overview of the sources of income which madepossible the University’s total budget was as follows:Government and overhead, 33.45 percent; gifts,endowment and sundry, mainly endowment-likeincome, 29.19 percent; tuition, 18.70 percent; andpatient fees, 18.66 percent.The University had been greatly assisted, andstill is, by the successful completion of its effort toraise $160 million for current operations, endowment,and capital expenditures. This search for specialfunds was the first leg of a plan to raise $360 millionover a ten-year period, a result which it is un¬thinkable we will not achieve or surpass.Nevertheless, there were obvious causes forconcern. One was the University’s budget relianceThis supplement was prepared and paid for bytho University's Office of Public Information upon what was left of the Ford Foundation challengegrant. At the level of its then current use, substitutefunds would have to be found to replace approximate¬ly $5,690,000 annually — an amount then equal to 20percent of the combined regular budgets of theCollege, the Divisions, the Schools, and the Library.There were other reasons for anxiety. Costs werecontinuing to rise. Some major sources of hoped-forincome were, at best, uncertain. In general theprivate institutions of higher learning have been thehardest hit by changes in Federal funding patterns.We were then in the midst of what has turned out tobe a continuing precipitous decline in Federalsupport for graduate students. Approximately 1,030of our graduate students in 1968-69 were supportedthrough Federally-financed fellowships, traineeshipsand assistantships. This number declined to between850 and 900 in 1969-70 and to 680 this year.The Deans1 RecommendationsA special Deans’ Committee, appointed in July,1969, to review our situation and to make recommen¬dations for the 1970-71 budget, suggested that theregular University budgets be held to a 3 percentincrease, and the faculty be limited in size to notmore and perhaps less than the number of faculty in1969-70. The Deans’ Committee concluded it wasessential there be a tuition increase of $225 for allstudents in the 1970-71 academic year, and $150 peryear in each year until further notice. When the 1970-71 budget was adopted, it contained an increase of 3.1percent for the academic areas, and relied upon therecommended change for that year for tuitioncharges. But the overall increase for general fundswas 6.7 percent, in part because of the greater cost ofexpanding physical plant operations.Faculty size, limited by this budget, declined byfourteen positions as of this January. The budget,when adopted, did make possible a 4.3 percentincrease in average faculty salaries, plus fringebenefits. Underlining our concern to maintain theUniversity’s quality, and to respond as wisely as wecould to a changing situation, Provost John T. Wilson(following a special report on the University’s budgetpublished in the University Record in December,1969) in July, 1970 sent a memorandum to eachmember of the faculty explaining the course we werefollowing.Because the uncertainties were greater thanusual in planning this 1970-71 budget, our recommen¬dation to the Trustees took the unusual form of disclosing a pessimistic and an optimistic version,with a spread of approximately $10,500,000 for theyear-end result of deficit or surplus. Lest you decidethis exercise in candor stamps us as even moreincompetent than usual, let me remind you of thevariable factors of endowment income, gifts whichmay or may not be restricted for particular pur¬poses, enrollment figures and Federal funding,among others, which had to be taken into account, aswell as contingencies in cost, in a consolidated budgetof more than $151 million. Our pessimistic thought —the harrowing nature of which was relieved onlyslightly by the pressure of other distractions — wasthat the deficit might be as high as $9,535,000. Ourstated conclusion was that we believed the deficitwould amount to $4,195,000. This figure representedan opportunity for friends of the University for addedhelp in fund-raising, and a commitment somehow tofind this sum properly within the resources of theUniversity if this should be necessary. In terms of itsrelationship to total regular expenditures, the onlydeficit to which I can compare this figure in the not sorecent University history is the deficit of $917,000 of1947-48. The willingness of the Trustees to accept abudget with this kind of stated deficit and uncer¬tainties speaks eloquently of their determination notonly to see the University through this difficultperiod, but in such a way as to help the Universitymaintain its academic strength.At the beginning of the autumn quarter wediscovered that one justification for the 1970-71budget was incorrect. The budget had been con¬structed on the basis of an estimated studentenrollment of 8,240. The actual enrollment turned outto be 614 less. The drop from the estimate was largelyin the four graduate divisions, and somewhat in threeof the professional schools. This decline resulted byitself in an upward revision of the deficit by$1,200,000. As the year progressed, it became increas¬ingly apparent that the Division of the BiologicalSciences and the Pritzker School of Medicine prob¬ably would fail to meet the budget requirements, andwould increase the deficit gap by another milliondollars. Capital expenditures not mormally carriedon the current budget, but which had to be made, forthe rehousing of the Bookstore in what had been thePress Building, and the consequent rehousing of thePress, were added factors contributing to a moredismal picture. The stated deficit was revised toapproximately $6,500,000. This deficit, whatever itturns out to be, will have to be met. In addition, tomeet both the deficit foi this yecu dim the needs forContinuedThe State of the Universitythe budget next year, the University has changed itsinvestment policy to place greater emphasis oncurrent income, and also to pay out a higherpercentage, where permitted, of capital gains. Theresult can be read as using as current incomebetween 6.3 percent and 6.5 percent of the averagemarket value of the endowment.Further, steps have been taken to phase the useof the remaining amounts of the Ford challenge grantover this year and next. The program has beenarrived at after a good deal of thought and soul-searching. It seems to us the best possible response toour present problem. It does take somewhat from thefuture to pay for the present, and perhaps more sobecause of the conditions under which this shift hadto be made. But it is not careless about the future.The curtailment of academic budgets is alwayspainful — and I do not welcome this curtailment,although this is one of the things one says on suchoccasions, as bringing us closer to the reality ofchoice. But the increased amounts of usable incomemade available for next year should help us main¬tain. if we are wise, the academic excellence which isour main asset.The Five Year PlansIn the face of this changing economic situation, it isimportant we have as much perspective as possibleon our present condition. One can look at the growthin terms of five-year periods. If one takes the totalsfor the academic areas, but does not include studentaid (because this changes in terms of the levels oftuition charges), the increase in these area budgets— regular, restricted and Governmentally funded —was 84 percent for the five years starting with 1956-57. It was 70 percent starting with 1961.In making our plan in 1965, we estimated that thefive years between 1966 and 1971 would show anincrease of 26.5 percent. But it is now expected to beonly between 16.4 percent and 19.9 percent. Obvious¬ly, we have not made our goal. We estimated that forthe ten-year period from 1961, the growth would be115 percent. It now appears that this increase, in fact,"The overall increase for generalfunds was 6.7 percent, in partbecause of the greater cost ofexpanding physical plant operations." will be slightly less than 104 percent. It is apparentthat in planning the University’s pace, we realizedthat there would be a leveling-off during this period.The leveling-off has had to be considerably moredrastic than we predicted. But we must remindourselves that in this we are not alone. And, ofcourse, while there is a relationship, we must notassume that the greater the expenditure, the greaterthe academic strength.I am sure I need not remind you that faculty-student ratios have an economic significance. Over¬all the University moved from a faculty-student ratioof 1 to 7.1 in 1961-62, to a ratio of 1 to 8.3 in 1965-66, to aratio of 1 to 6.7 for 1970-71. A change from ourpresent situation to the 1965-66 level, without in¬cluding the clinical area, could result either in thereduction of faculty by the number of 169, or anincrease in students by the number of 1,774.1 am surethat you and I cannot help but be interested in theobservation that such a decrease in the number offaculty on an average salary basis would amount to$3,235,336. The larger number of students wouldincrease net tuition by only $2,845,161.The enrollment in the College is about 1,000 lessthan was predicted in the ten-year plan. In 1969, inpart because of the effort to upgrade living conditionsin the residence halls, there was an intentionalreduction in the number of entering first-yearstudents in the College from 730 to 500 students. Thisyear the faculty recommended a slight increase to560; the number actually went to 608. But we arebelow the ten-year planned enrollments in the fourDivisions as well, and all of these Divisions aresignificantly down from 1967 levels. These declinesreflect a variety of factors ranging from simpledecisions by Departments to admit fewer students, tothe inability of students to afford the costs and tochanges in career plans.It is well known that faculty-student ratioscannot be used to characterize the operations of someof the areas of the University. A small ratio ofstudents to faculty has a good deal to be said for it. Ithas been, in many ways, an enormous advantage tothe student. Unless, however, there are counter¬vailing circumstances — and there may be —eventually it has an effect on the limits of thebudgets. We have tested those limits.This description of financing would be mostincomplete if reference were not made to thecontinuing, and on the whole, successful efforts ofTrustees, alumni, friends, and other public-spiritedcitizens to find and to give the funds necessary tosupport the operations of the University. In 1969-70,the University received in current gifts and newpledges $31,192,994. This was $259,000 more than wasreceived in the prior year. Excluding bequests,$12,975,128 of the amount received last year came tothe University in the period from July throughDecember. The comparable figure for the first half ofthis year is $14,855,600. It does not lessen in any waythe importance of these funds to point out that they donot, by themselves, directly solve the particularbudget problems we have been discussing; much of the funds are for special purposes or off-the-budgetcapital expenditures. The support is most encour¬aging, most needed. Alumni giving is slightly higherthan a year ago. There appears to be a generalrecognition of the importance of this university andits role, and a growing awareness of the difficultiesfaced during this period by private institutions ofhigher learning.In addition to the gifts which have already beenannounced, I should mention the bequest of $2 millionfor medical research purposes exclusively from theestate of Miss Muriel Forsland. Miss Forsland, agraduate of the University of the class of 1922, was aretired school teacher who had taught at Senn HighSchool for 46 years. I should mention also, because ofits continuing importance and its insatiable appetitethe special President’s Fund, created some years agoby the Trustees when Mr. Beadle was appointed, toenable the University to make faculty appointmentsof exceptional merit. This fund continues to besuccessful in achieving its purpose.I have spent this much time on our budgetproblems, contrary to the advice which I havereceived from some faculty colleagues I greatlyadmire. They perhaps feared the recital would be toogloomy, and that the emphasis, in any event, wouldgive a distorted picture of what this university is allabout. But I believe it is important we understand, asbest we can, the changing conditions which affectprivate education generally, and this university inparticular.The Search for EnlightenmentThis is a time of opportunity; at least it is a timefor choices as well as a period of pressures. With thisin mind, I suggested last year the creation of anEconomics Study Commission, composed of an equalnumber of Trustees, faculty and outside experts, toinitiate a series of studies on various economicaspects of the University. The staff director of theCommission is William B. Cannon, Vice President forPrograms and Projects. The studies have begun, andin one form or another, they should become availableto enlighten us. The aim of the Commission is to helpus identify the economic factors and the possiblearrangements we can make with respect to them sothat the economics will work better for the academicwell-being of the enterprise.This fall the Educational Review Commissionwas appointed with twenty-four faculty membersand Chauncy Harris as chairman. Its mandate is tolook at the University as a whole, and the inter¬relationship among its parts, to suggest the newdirections which might be taken, and the accustomedways which might be better abandoned.If these commissions are effective, they will be sobecause of their insights and persuasiveness. Theyare protected by having no legislative, adminis¬trative, or ruling body authority. The work of thesecommissions is difficult, perhaps impossible, butimportant.This kind of recurring inquiry is much in thetradition of our university. I am reminded of theSupplement, page 2elaborate University of Chicago survey which re¬ceived funds in 1923, began its work in earnest in1929, and published its reports in 1933. There is, infact, much of interest in those reports for us today,but I hope we will not have to wait a similar time spanfor the on-going critical essays which these commis¬sions will spawn. In the meantime, the existence ofthese commissions is, of course, no substitute for thekinds of discussions, inquiries, and decisions whichmust go on within the University . There are a greatmany problems requiring immediate attention.Relating Tuition to CostsAs I have indicated, we followed the recommen¬dations of the Deans’ Committee that tuition in theCollege be raised for this year from $2,100 to $2,325,and in the graduate and professional schools from$2,250 to $2,475. For next year, the tuition goes up anadditional $150. I am sure we find some comfort thatthis upward movement is slightly less than thatwhich appears to be taking place at most comparableprivate institutions. Nevertheless, low tuition is oneof the principal reasons why private institutions arein serious financial difficulty and, not paradoxically,it is also one of the reasons why the actual costs ofeducation, both public and private, are so high. Thetuition charges are substantially below the cost to theinstitution of the student’s education; this is particu¬larly true for the graduate and professional schools.The levels set give deceptive signals as to the costsand, therefore, to the distribution of the costs, andthey confer hidden and unknown scholarships uponthe rich and the poor alike, and upon the less talentedand the talented. There are, of course, obviousdesires, which we all share, to keep tuition low.For many years there have been discussionsconcerning a variety of programs, private andgovernmental, which might result in a more ade¬quate coverage of the costs of the student’s educa¬tion. A recurring proposal has urged the efficacy ofloan programs tied to the student’s future earnings.The plan has been in considerable controversy, and Imust confess I share the concern of those who do notbelieve the value of the pursuit of knowledge,understanding and appreciation is to be set solely bythe economic benefits this brings to those who engagein it.A pioneering step has now been taken by YaleUniversity to try out a loan-earnings program. Yalehas announced a $350 tuition increase for next year,together with a $150 increase in board and roomcharges. It has stated it intends to raise tuitioncharges an additional $300 each year for the followingfour years. The student will be permitted to borrow topay for these increases, and up to an additional $300Der year ; the amount is to be repaid on the basis of4 10 of 1 percent of his adjusted gross income foreach $1,000 borrowed for each year for 35 years,commencing after he has ceased to be a full-timecandidate for a degree. This is not a full statement ofthe plan, but it gives the direction of the effort. Yalehas announced it will not make available any form oftraditional aid to cover these increases in universitycharges."A small ratio of students tofaculty has a good deal to be saidfor it . . . Unless, however, thereare countervailing circumstances —and there may be — eventually ithas an effect on the limits ofthe budgets. We have testedthose limits." The Yale plan is an interesting and importantexperiment; it is a creative venture, long due, whichmay turn out to be most important for private highereducation. It has features which make it somewhatcomparable to a binding commitment by students tobe alumni contributors. Indeed, if a sufficientnumber of contributors gave sufficient scholarshipaid, tuition charges could be advanced to morerealistic levels without all the enforcement mecha¬nism which the loan-income plan requires. Anargument for the plan is that students who achieve agreater earning power will assist in paying for theeducation of those whose income, for whateverreason, turns out to be low. The surgeon in privatepractice will pay for the classicist in the library.Thus, the plan is based upon and contains a kind ofunifying view of the joint responsibilities of inter¬related, but different, segments of the educationalenterprise. The great danger is that the Yale planmight be regarded as a substitute for other essentialforms of financial aid and support to the student andto the institution. But in its present form it is anadded increment. Perhaps I should mention thatamong the well-known authors of the idea behind theincome-loan plan is a professor of economics at TheUniversity of Chicago.Having stated my admiration and interest in theYale program, as an added increment which maymake possible, at the least, more adequate knowl¬edge of the costs of education and instruction, let mestate a cautionary concern. There is a deceptiveentrepreneurial quality about such arrangementswhich, in further or future developments, may lead tounintended or, in my view, harmful results. Themechanism of these programs may further com¬partmentalize the universities, making inter¬disciplinary arrangements more difficult. This is notinevitable, but if it happens, the economics will beworking against and not for the intellectual purposesof the institution. And the unifying view of thecombined strength of joint responsibilities will dis¬appear into a struggle for separate advantage. Theprogram is necessarily based on an idea of costallocations, and this may lead, and perhaps it should,to a proliferation of separate tuition charges through¬out the institution. Some current discussions in¬volving one of the schools of our university haveincluded the suggestion that along with the increasedtuition and loan income features, the increasedrevenues should be allocated to the particularteaching area involved. Thus the income-loan planbecomes an incentive program to induce or rewardparticular areas of the University for taking on morestudents. As we all know, all kinds of incentives couldbecome important to faculty and to units within theUniversity.Comparable arguments for goals and advan¬tages for other areas of the University might be built,for example, upon the Federal financing of contractsand grants through individual professors, or upon thespecial demands of service functions made uponsome of the faculty, as in the clinical areas. Thesestrains and arguments are not unknown. This kind ofcompartmentalization may make less difference in a uThe budget had been constructedon the basis of an estimated studentenrollment of 8,240. The actualenrollment turned out to be 614 less."ContinuedSupplement, page 3The State of the Universitymulti-university where there is little alternative. Forour kind of institution, each separate arrangement ofthis kind requires the invention of other devices, aswell as a strong spirit, to keep us together becausethis is important to us. We should remember, if I maymisquote a recent faculty report, that when auniversity flies apart, the whole will no longeramount to more than the sum of its parts, and theparts will diminish. This should be a matter ofparticular significance to our university, becausemore than any other in the United States, we havegained strength from cohesion.Finding and Sharing TruthThe University of Chicago is a research univer¬sity. For some, these may be fighting words. I believethe antagonism is misplaced. We are interested innew knowledge. We wish to be able to state what istrue and to share this recognition. More than that, wewant to give training to others in the means of findingout so that this process will be kept going, our errorscorrected, our ignorance diminished. The researchranges across the fields of inquiry: from thetreatment of arteriosclerosis to studies on insulin, thedevelopment of the scanning electron microscope,the analysis of molecular and atomic structures, thefurther comprehension of the physics and chemistryof the deep universe, the discovery of effects in theconditions of learning, the invention of the cadresystem for the preparation of teachers, the analysisof the economic productivity of education, a betterawareness of the nature and meaning of stories —imaginative, mythical, religious — a greater under¬standing of the history of the Far East and the natureof the revolution in China and, of course, the alwayscontinuing work on the great Chicago AssyrianDictionary, begun in 1921 and now in the hands of itsthird generation of scholars.I have kept this list short to make the point that itis only suggestive. The research not only follows thedisciplines; it creates them. In a sense the researchis highly professional. It involves the ability to find aproblem and to work with that problem with anappropriate accuracy and craftsmanship. Becausewe are interested in research, in problem finding andsolving, in craftsmanship and the ability to do, in thepersonal act of the recognition of knowledge, which isin itself a creation and a discovery, this environmentshould have special advantages, if properly orga¬nized, for the instruction of students, includingundergraduates.I do not suggest for a moment that if weconcentrate on research, the teaching at all levelswill take care of itself. I do not believe that if eachfaculty member does what he prefers to do, this makes a good curriculum. I am suggesting thatresearch and undergraduate instruction are notnatural enemies, that the attempt to explain can be ahelpful contribution to the scholar’s own under¬standing and, itself, be a contribution to knowledge,and that this university, in part because of its sizeand balance, provides a favorable setting in which toshare with graduates and undergraduates the crafts¬manship of discovery and recognition.Some time during the last summer, the threemillionth book was added to the collection of theUniversity Library. On October 31 the JosephRegenstein Library was dedicated. It has 253 facultystudies, 19 seminar rooms, 3,700 sets of lockingshelves for student books, and over 1,000 carrels. Ithas an ultimate capacity for shelving between3,800,000 and 4,200,000 volumes. At the time it wasbuilt, it was probably the largest single libraryfacility, taking all factors into account, in the UnitedStates. There is no doubt that in size it will besurpassed, if it has not already been. But it isprobably the greatest library of its kind in the world.Such greatness is perhaps always an accident, acoming together of fortunate events, the con¬summation of plans and designs which turn out to fitperfectly with the needs to be met.But the accident could not have occurred, andsuch good fortune could not have been ours, withoutthe perceptive and informed planning by HermanFussier, the Director of the University Libraries, thecreative responsiveness of Walter Netsch, the archi¬tect, the munificent and understanding generosity ofthe Joseph Regenstein family, and the help of theHarriett Pullman Schermerhorn Charitable Trustwhich made the initial grant. Those who worked tomake this library possible — and there are many —have the satisfaction of knowing that they havecreated a working facility which, in the perspectiveof time, will be recognized as having assured theenduring quality of this university. The opening ofthe Joseph Regenstein Library has permitted theremodeling of the Harper-Wieboldt area for thepurposes of an undergraduate reading room andbook collection, and eventually as a College centerwith study areas, lounges, seminar and class roomsand faculty studies.The Albert Pick Hall for International Studies,the Cummings Life Science Center, and the Ben MayCancer Research Laboratory are all nearing com¬pletion. Each of these structures, made possible byextra-ordinary gifts, is an expression of confidence inthe work of our faculty.This is, of course, a time when many doubts arebeing expressed about the general system of highereducation in the United States. We must askourselves whether these doubts apply to what we are"Approximately 1,030 of our graduatestudents in 1968-69 were supportedthrough Federally financed fellow¬ships, traineeships and assistant-ships. This number declined tobetween 850 and 900 in 1969-70 andto 680 this year." doing. The criticisms concern many aspects ofeducation. There are doubts about the time require¬ments for degree programs, the lack of coordinationamong undergraduate and graduate programs, andconcerning the purposefulness of general education.These questions probably would not have arisen if thestudent population was not so large a proportion oftheir age group. The prestige rewards of mereattendance have declined. We should welcome thischange, for it produces more questions as to whateducation is about. Many of us would insist thesequestions always have been asked at The Universityof Chicago. The frequent changes in the College, andpossibly somewhat less frequent revisions in theDivisions and Schools, are some evidence of this. Inour view, a critical student body is a mark of oursuccess. In this we seem to have succeeded most orall of the time.The Role of Undergraduate WorkIt was not true 25 or 30 years ago that 75 percentof the College students at The University of Chicagoassumed they would go on to graduate or profession¬al schools. Not so long ago, the number was around 20percent or 30 percent. At a prior time the Doctor’sdegree was not nearly the requirement for collegeteaching it has become. The University of Chicagohas always been proud of its tradition that particulardegrees were not pre-requisites for faculty appoint¬ments, but I doubt whether our position is wellknown, and whether it is really honored in many ofthe Departments. The University of Chicago, at anearlier period, placed great emphasis on the Mas¬ter’s degree. It had coordinated work with under¬graduate programs with the Master’s degree, andnot only with our College, but other undergraduateinstitutions as well. It also sought, as we know, toprovide greater freedom to the students by shorten¬ing the period for baccalaureate. At an earlier timethe professional schools played more of a role inundergraduate education. The Graduate School ofBusiness, for example, was first known as the Collegeof Commerce and Politics. Its withdrawal from theundergraduate curriculum began in 1942. As late as1922, I tremble to report, it was still “theoreticallypossible” to enter the Law School with only a highschool certificate. When the Flexner Report urgedthe academization of medical schools, it would havebeen hard to imagine that eventually the course fromthe beginning of college to the end of an averageresidency would take eleven years, and that furtherand customary specialization would take muchlonger.The consequences of the lengthening of time arenumerous. We must ask ourselves whether thewithdrawal of the disciplines from the under¬graduate curriculum and their emergence andproliferation as primarily graduate departmentshave removed much of the challenge of mastery fromthe undergraduate work. It is one thing to deny thatthe undergraduate curriculum must find its rele¬vance as a running commentary on recent events. Itis much more difficult to say that it can be onlypreparatory and one stage removed from the in¬tellectual disciplines as they are now practiced. Ifour strength lies in the posing of problems and thedisciplined search for solutions and new knowledge,do we adequately share this intensity and purposeful¬ness as part of the educational process? It is too easyto say this sharing must come after scholars areenlightened and trained. How does this separationcause enlightenment or training? One can challengealso whether the proliferation of Departments withinour Divisional structure is now appropriate for thesedisciplines.These matters have been central in the attentionof many of the faculties, and I know that considerableprogress has been made in particular programs. Thisuniversity is a symbol and custodian of a longtradition. That tradition includes a willingness toexperiment as well as a refusal to bow to the tastes ofthe moment. There is no reason to hide from ourshortcomings. Recognizing them, we still must knowthis is one of the preeminent universities of the world.It is a university’s university. The accomplishmentsof the Departments, Divisions, Schools and Collegeshave been many. There is every reason not to becareless about them. Because this is a time oftransition, it is a time of opportunity and choice. Thecourse which you set should be in terms of the uniquevalues which are here. I know all of us will do whatwe can to accomplish this result.Edward H. Levi, President of the University ofChicago, presented “The State of the University” tothe Faculty Senate of the University on February 24,1971. This reprint of the speech has been preparedand paid for by the Office of Public Information of theUniversity.Supplement, page 4was going around the country saying that students shouldnot be apathetic — now he’s going around the country say¬ing in effect that he wishes they were more apathetic —I’m sure this is not a fair rendition of him, but it’s some¬what fair.Well, when he went around the country saying the stu¬dents were so apathetic, they were not apathetic at theUniversity of Chicago. They might have been apatheticwhere he was, but he was no longer here.When he was here, he certainly knew the students werenot apathetic. Students here have always been excitedand interested in a variety of intellectual and political mat¬ters. The manifestations of it, I think, are diffeiVnt at dif¬ferent times, and I would expect that.What I’m doing is defending the students from thecharge that they are apathetic. I don’t mean to say that Idon’t say there are changes. And I never know what thechange is going to be. Do you?No, I don’t.In one of your recent speeches, you put forth the in¬triguing idea of atoarding a BA degree after two years ofgeneral study and establishing national examinations after know this irritates many College people — and start withthe College work around what are now called various pro¬fessional or problem-solving areas and develop the educa¬tion from that.Now that’s not a new model. While I’m sure the historyisn’t quite right on it, one can say that the medieval uni¬versity built a great deal of its work around three profes¬sions and doing that poses an area of concern which helpsto organize the disciplines and really, in a sense, as I wassaying, creates the disciplines.I don’t think that we’re going to have a College programthat says, “All right, we’re going to start out with theo¬logy” anymore.We could start out with health care problems, we couldstart out with legal problems, not legal problems in thesense of an accident case, but basic problems of the orga¬nization of the state, the rights of individuals, and so on.The problems of choice in the society involving econom¬ics — and so one could organize a program around the kindof problem posing, big problem solving areas that wehave, as well as a kind of instruction in being able to workon them so it has a built-in-kind of craft to it, and peoplewho get involved in that and are really working at it feelthe need for more general education and develop it thatway.If I could do what I wanted, I would try it both ways, Iwould try to let students begin right off in the first year ofthe College with a program which really led them in termsof the nature of their aptitude into this kind.One could call it research or one could call it problemsolving or one could just say it is a rearrangement of thebasic disciplines, but done more in terms of the kinds ofproblems which people have to talk about, and think aboutand which then lead them to the theory.One might try that at the same time as one preservesthe more traditional form.I want to say that this illustration that I’ve given of thefirst kind of program, which is one I’m sure we won’t try,probably, sometimes is characterized as a “gung-ho” pro¬gram because students come in and are told they can doall these things, and I don’t mean that kind of thing at all.I really mean that one would have to try and get backin some ways to the kind of atmosphere of the Socraticdialogue.The Socratic dialogue starts with the common talk, thecommon problem, the things that people say, and you leadfrom that into the discipline.We could start with the kinds of problems that areworrying all of us, very real problems, such as healthcare, for example, which involves all kinds of relationshipsbetween government and economics and what not, andlead from that into the structure of the disciplines.I think we would be preserving the disciplines, really,we would be sharpening them up in terms of problems andwe would be teaching people how to think about them andwhat the craft of thinking about them is like.But I would try it both ways. One of the problems isthat it is so very difficult to experiment. Every experiment“There has never been an apathetic student body, and anyparticular student at any existing time has always thoughtthat the rest of the students were apathetic. This is the en¬during characteristic of our student body.”this period before going on to more specialized work. Couldyou elaborate a bit on these theories?I would like to see us try to experiment once again with^some kind of a degree after two years. I don’t think Iwould call it the bachelor’s degree unless enough otherschools in the country moved to that because otherwise itmight appear to be a kind of deception.V It was thought that perhaps it shouldn’t have been calledthat before. At the time the University did it before, it wasassumed that other schools would do it and they didn’t.But certainly we can be bright enough to get a classicistL to invent a degree which sounds right, which would in-j dicate that the student had had a general preparation andI give that after two years so that the student could leave ifhe wished to, with honor, and after three or four years, ifl he wanted to return and go on with his education, he couldf do it.The study that was made of the University in 1932-33I showed that students who had left the University afterI their bachelor’s degree and had been away for four or fiveI years and then came back to do graduate work did betterI than the others who just stayed on.Now I think one can be suspicious of those studies andJit may be well that times have changed, but the only pointI’m trying to make is that for many people there are valuesi in being able to get out of what is called “the system”— into another system unfortunately — and then back inat a later time, and I think this would help on that.I Furthermore, I think it would keep reminding us that ifI we want to shorten the period of education, and I reallyi think we must try to do this, that a good deal of profession-I al and graduate work in a coordinated way could start atphe third year.We might then, and I think some of (he areas are nowi working on this, go to much more coordinated program ofthree year master’s degrees.• And that degree might be so good, in fact, that it wouldhave somewhat the effect of making it clear that not ev¬erybody has to have a PhD or post-doctoral work.As a matter of fact, I’m not at all sure and I don’t knowiyiuw adventuresome or pioneering one wants to be, that oneI shouldn’t really turn the whole thing around and start — I is greeted as though it were the world shaking changewhich it is not and as though if it went badly all thingswould be disaster.Most experiments don’t work well. Most academic ex¬periments don’t work well. I think we know that. But youhave to continually make them. In part because if youdon’t make them, you really don’t know what you’re doing.You have to rethink through these questions in order toget a direction of what you’re doing and to get a kind ofunderstood commitment to it by the students and by thefaculty so that they have some feeling as to why it is thatthis program is being pursued.Would you assess the effect of the strike last springand the sit-in the year before that on the University’s cur¬rent financial situation?It is very difficult to assess, and I’m not sure I shouldbe the one to assess it anyway.I think the problem is more a problem of distractionrather than anything else, that is, our competing timepressures: there are just so many hours in the day andwhen the faculty is involved in one kind of thing, that takesthem away from other things, and the same thing is trueof what you call administrators.So that I’ve always thought that incidents of that kind,in their own way — I know a lot of people who disagreewith me — were delaying changes in the curriculum andthey certainly were delaying other efforts for the Univer-sity.I think that in some ways they’re kind of cushioningyou. You will notice a reference in my talk to the Univer¬sity senate that when we thought the deficit might be ashigh as $9.5 million and this was a rather harrowing no¬tion, I said it as only, I think, I don’t remember the exactwords, “slightly mitigated” by the pressure of otherevents.And I think it is true that it’s much easier to deal withthese other matters than this kind of a harrowing matterand that since everyone knows that you’re supposed to bedistraught and overworked and feeling sorry for yourself.You’re not to be doing a very good job any¬way because you have all these built-in excuses. I supposethat may be comforting. . , -.-,v<vrvr r r r ». i » .I really think it’s just a question more of a distractionthan that, and I want to be careful in saying that because Idon’t want people to say that I’m “belittling” these effortsbecause I’m not.I do not think those events had any particular relation¬ship to the specific financial problem of this University.I do think events around the country have produced forsome reason, although I didn’t believe this for a long time,an antagonism against universities — in general.And that the lack of financial support through govern¬mental programs and so on to some extent is a result ofthat. I do not think that is specific as to this institutionat all.I’m sure that there are many alumni and donorswho are irritated with this University for one reason oranother, but I really see no heightening of that kind ofreaction to this University.I do find around the country a kind of mean satisfac¬tion that some people who should know better have inseeing the universities going through a hard time and itshows their annoyance at what they think the universitieshave been doing and have permitted and so on.I think that’s a shocking matter and I think it’s true. Ididn’t used to believe it, but I have met it now sufficientlyoften so that I think I do understand itWith a view towards getting students more informedwith realities and the difficulties of running a Universityand making the decisions which will have to be made, doyou see any place for students in the higher councils of theUniversity administration or perhaps even on the board oftrustees, either as observers or part-time participants orperhaps even full-time participants?The answer is no.You have referred to the University of Chicago as a“university’s university” and as a “teacher of teachers ”How would a person who doesn’t become a teacher benefitfrom the type of education he recives here?The best thing for a teacher to know is what a goodeducation is like. The best thing for a teacher to have is agood education himself.What I was asking is what benefits would a person whodid not want to become a teacher obtain from an educationat the University of Chicago?I think I would really give the same answer. I thinkit’s important to have an education in the modem world,it’s important to have a discipline. It seems to me the kindof appropriate preparation, and one has to remember theprofessional schools are quite directed towards work in thecommunity, and more and more areas of the University inthat sense are becoming professional.March 2, 1971/The Chicago Maroon/5Fowler warns of student rage, alienationBy KEITH PYLEStudent Government president Mike Fow¬ler, 71, is one of a group of college studentbody presidents currently meeting with fed¬eral officials in Washington to voice their“suppressed rage and discontent” with theIndochina war.According to United Press International,By USA CAPELLThe problems of commerical televisionand the possibilities of cable TV were themajor topics at this year’s Beardsley Rumlcolloquium.Tony Brown, executive producer of“Black Journal”, told of the psychologicalimplications of mass media in his keynotespeech at Kent 107 Friday night. “Tele¬vision is an extremely, extremely impact¬ful medium,” he said.“The actual power, the way in which ev¬eryone is controlled, is not by policemenbut by ideas put in your head. These areput there by the electro-magnetic medi¬um.”Brown called this medium an “environ¬mental perpetuator.” Both Brown and Wil¬liam Wright, national coordinator of BlackEfforts for Soul on Television who spoke atthe panel on “Media and the Public Inter¬est” Saturday morning, feel that TV is amajor contributor to racism. They believeit projects false, if any, images of blacks.“You are ignorant of how TV operatesand your involvement and you rights,” saidBrown. He noted that TV uses public airspace and the public makes a direct capitalinvestment in television when they pur¬chase TV sets.Brown added, “It’s rather amazing that a the student leaders spoke with presidentialadviser Henry Kissinger Monday, and hopeto see President Nixon today.Fowler, who left for Washington Sunday,said he was going in order to take an anti¬war message to the President from StudentGovernment and from the student body.He also plans to talk with Nixon aboutcollege as prestigious as Chicago doesn’thave a communications school. You will betotally in the hands of those who practicemedia. If that doesn’t scare you, I hope itdoes.”There are people in this country whohave certain needs and the rights to haveTuesday, March 2REHEARSAL: University orchestra and chorus, Mandelhall, 7 pm.CHAPEL MUSIC: Backstage with the organist, EdwardMondeilo will demonstrate the organ and play a briefrecital. Rockefeller chapel, 12:15 pm.GEOPHYSICAL SCIENCES SEMINAR: Dr Victor Barcl-Ion, department of mathematics, and Institute forGeophysics and Planetary Physics, University of Cali¬fornia, Los Angeles, "Source-Sink Flows," room 101,Hinds Laboratory, 4 pm.SOUTH ASIA SEMINAR: James Fisher, "Trans-Himala-yan Traders " Foster Hall Lounge, 4:10 pm.CAMPAIGN AGAINST POLLUTION: Rally tonight InSouth Shore against steel mill pollution, 8 pm, forrides call 752-5296.BIOCHEMISTRY OF CANCER LECTURE SERIES: Pa¬pers by students, Billings, PU7, 3 pm.MEETING OF THE COLLEGE COUNCIL: Swift HallCommons, 3:40 pm.COLLOQUIUM (JAMES FRANCK INSTITUTE): Law¬ the proposed People’s Peace Treaty.The student presidents issued a state¬ment last Wednesday warning the Adminis¬tration that the nation’s campuses are notas calm as they appear to be light of therecent Laotian intervention.The statement was signed by studentbody and student government presidentspossibilitiesthese needs met, Brown said.Cable television is one way to meet theseneeds. “The economy of scarcity uponwhich our broadcasting is based will end,”said Ralph Smith of the Sloan Commissionat the panel on “Cable and the Commu¬nications Revolution.”the CPA," Research Institutes 480, 4:15 pm.FLICK: Decision at Sundown, 7:15 pm and Brain¬washed, 9 pm, Quantrell.Wednesday, March 3REHEARSAL: Univeristy orchestra and chorus, Mandelhall, 6:30 pm.MOTHERHOOD AND APPLE PIE: Jenny Nadelsky, "Awoman's role and her alternatives," sponsored byHyde Park-UC chapter of Chicago Women's liberationUnion and Southside Women's Center, Universitychurch, 57th and University, 7:30 pm.RETHINKING URBAN EDUCATION: John Ginther, as¬sociate professor of education, the University, MauriceEash, professor of education and director of office ofevaluation research and Robert Rippey, associate pro¬fessor of education. University of Illinois, ChicagoCircle "Evaluation of Urban Education," room 126,Judd Hall, 7:30 pm.SCIENCE FOR THE PEOPLE: Mary Brumder, CarlosDabezies, Dave Moberg. and Terry Turner, "Anthro¬pology," Soc Scl 122, 8 pm.INVITATION LECTURE SERIES (GRADUATESCHOOL OF BUSINESS): Robert Ingersoll, Borg-Warner Corporation, Business East 1 pm.FLICK: Bachelor Flat and Soldier Man, Quantrell, 8pm.Thursday, March 4LECTURE: Bill Zimmerman, "Science for the People," from Stanford, New York universityTemple, Berkeley, Harvard, Georgetown’University of New Hampshire, Pennsylva¬nia State, University of Minnesota, Rut¬gers, Vassar college, and the University ofChicago.The meeting between the students andthe government officials was organized bya member of Associated Student Govern¬ments at Stanford University.While they have no formal appointmentwith the President, they anticipate seeinghim today.In addition to Kissinger, the studentshave also conferred with presidential ad¬viser Robert Finch; William Sullivan, dep¬uty assistant secretary of state for EastAsian affairs; and Stanley Thomas, deputyassistant secretary for youth and studentaffairs in the department of health, educa¬tion and welfare.CAREER CONFERENCES FOR WOMEN: GwendolynRobinson, assistant director, Mid-South Side HealthPlanning Organization and Margaret Chaplan associ¬ate lebrarlan at the Industrial Relations Center, Man-dala Coffee shop, 4 pm.SPEECH: Carl Gershman, national vice-chairmanYPSL, research director A Philip Randolph Institute,"A Sane Radicalism for the Seventies," Ida NoyesTheatre, 7:30 pm.CHAPEL MUSIC: Backstage with the carlllonneur, Rob¬ert Lodine will demonstrate and play the carillon, 12noon.STAMP-PASTE-TAPE-IN: Eco-Sex sponsored, prepara¬tion of 10,000 copies of The Birth Control Handbook fordistribution to the University community. Blue Gar¬goyle, 1:30 pm.OPEN NIGHT FOR WOMEN: Volleyball, badminton,basketball, Ida Noyes, every Thursday 7-9 pm.BIOCHEMISTRY OF CANCER LECTURE SERIES: Pa¬pers by students, Dora De Lee Hall, 3 pm.ARMS CONTROL AND FOREIGN POLICY LECTURESERIES (CENTER FOR POLICY STUDY): RichardG a r w I n , Watson Laboratories, IBM Corporation,"SALT-Topic 3," Breasted Hall, 3:30 pm.COLLOQUIUM (DEPARTMENT OF PHYSICS): Wil¬liam Willis, professor of physics, Yale University,"Leptonic Decays of Strange Particles," Eckhart 1334:30 pm.rence Schwartz, Harvard University, "ElectronicStructure in Alloys and Liquid Metals — extensions ofFounded in 1892. Published by University of Chicago students on Tuesdays and Fridays throughout the regularschool year, except during examination periods, and bi-weekly on Thursdays during the summer. Offices inrooms 301, 303 and 304 in Ida Noyes Hall, 1212 E 59th St, Chicago, III 60637. Phone 753-3263. Distributed oncampus and in the Hyde Park neighborhood free of charge. Subscriptions by mail $8 per year in the U.S.Non-profit postage paid at Chiacgo, III.Colloquium explores TV'sBULLETIN OF EVENTSCobb 209, 11:30 am.LECTURE: Samuel Bowles, Harvard University,cation and Inequality In a Capitalist Economy,"209, 1:30 pm. 'Edu-Cobb•LUNG-HING:♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ a new Chinese-American Restaurant in fHyde Park ▲1435 E. 51st St. +667-1316 ♦Special Chinese Brunch Service every Saturday & tSunday from 11 to 2 pm. 50c per plate, items on this ^list ar.e. Also special Flower Tea 25* /person t1. Egg Kow 2/plate . ▼2. Salted-Water Crispv 4 Tarro Root deep fried cake ^CaLf. (Woo Kwock) ▲5. Beef Roll ▼3. Shui Mai(Won Ton skinned PorkMeet Ball) 6. Beef Shui Mai ♦♦[As a special for Maroon readers, to give an opportunity to*♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦ sample our unique dishes, we make the following offer:Bring in this ad and receive:Dragon Pheonix Kew Reg. $6.00/now $4.00Snow Flakes of July Reg. $3.00/now $2.50Fried Milk ... Reg. $7.00/now $6.50Order 1 day ahead the followingPekin Roast Duck (half) Reg. $4.50/now $4.00(whole) Reg. $8.OO/now $7.50Pekin Roast Chicken (half) Reg. $3.75/now $3.25(whole) Reg. $7.50/now $7.00West lake duck (whole) Reg. $lO.OO/now $8.50^ Thousand stories chicken (half) Reg. $4.00/now $3.50 ▲^Thousand stories chicken (whole) Reg. $7.00/now $6.50^♦ Cocktail Hour ▲♦ 5-7 4♦ All Regular drinks 50c 4T Reader Discount Dinner 10% 4▼ Banquet Room Available for 30-50 people ♦offer Mod ’till J/l» 4444444444444 “The makers of ‘BOB 4 CAROL 4 TED 4 ALICE:have done it again!....A picture that can be highly praised.”— Archer WinO.n, NY POSTDONALD SUTHERLAND as‘ALEX IN WONDERLAND'Metro Goldwyn-Mayer presents DONALD SUTHERLAND and JEANNE MOREAU n‘ALEX IN WONOERLAND 'Mitten by Paul Mazursky and Larry ix*<rOrectedbyRaJ Mazursky. Produced by Larry Tucker- Metrocokx r—,abc GREAT STATESROOSEVELTSTATE NR WASHINGTONVALUABLE COUPONSPECIAL STUDENT PRICESUPON PRESENTATION OF THIS ADLIBERAL TRADE IN ALLOWANCESAT THE WORLD'S LARGEST GUITAR STOREALSO FEATURING OURTRUMPET CENTERHA 7-5327hot h oi visions orPRAliER & RITTPR, INC.GIBSON’S, FENDER’S - REWIRED FOR REPAIRS AND“FUNKY” OLD SOUND. REFRETTING AbortionInformation(212) 271-4401We believe that if you think you arepregnant, you should be able to findout what to doWe believe that if you have con¬firmed your pregnancy, you shouldbe able to call someone to he/p youdecide what to doWe believe that if you want an abor¬tion, only the most qualified boardapproved gynecologists should per¬form It.We believe that you should have theright to decide whether your abor¬tion will be performed in a hospitalor outpatient facilityWe believe that in all cases, thefacility used should be perfectlyequipped and staffed.We believe that you should under¬stand exactly what an abortion pro¬cedure isWe believe that transportation ar¬rangements to New York should bemade for you. as well as accommo¬dations if they are neededWe believe that all of these thingsshould be done at the lowest pos¬sible cost to you.We believe you feel the same wayWe know we can help you, even ifit's just to talk to someone.Medref Inc58-03 Calloway StreetRego Park, New York 11368(212) 271-4401IV^DNOW PLAYINGHEADdirected byBob RafelsonplusHAPPYALEXANDERTHE BIOGRAPH THEATRE2433 N. Lincoln Dl 8-4123Plan to visit us soon. Admissionat all times is only $1.25. Bringyour Friend:.6/The Chicago Maroon/March 2, 1971THE MAROON CLASSIFIED ADSHYDE PARKFIREWOODOak - Ash - BirchS45/TON DELIVEREDFOR IMMEDIATEDELIVERYCALL 955-2480ANY TIMESpecial Student RotesFOR SALE1970 Chev Nova 2 dr 6 cyl stick Willtake older VW bug or bus In trade.Call H15-7921GET THE OUNCE YOU PAY FORPrecision pocket postage scaleweighs letters and small packagesup to 4 oz. Satisfaction Guaranteed$1.98 HAMPCO/ RD NO. 2, Ithaca,NY, 14850Water Beds, King Size WxT) $45Call Bee — Evenings, 327-9043.Save $$ on Dual KLH, Scott, AR,Dyna, at MUSICRAFT. On CampusBob Tabor. 363-4555. Waterbeds. King-size $50. Fullyguaranteed for 20 years. Must See.528-8798.RECORD SALEDAVID CROSBY LPand everything else, is ON SALE atCoop Records Reynolds Club base¬ment. 2.96 3.59 4.04WANTEDWANTED: One token woman towork for a new all-male campusnewspaper. 363-2178Single straight female looking forapartment to share In Hyde Park.643-3440Rides for two needed to Denverleave around March 19, come backMarch 27. Will share expenses 8<driving. Call Nancy, 753-3753. LeaveMessage.SPACEApt. for rent 3 Ig rms, modern bathnewly painted $95 mo. stm. heatincl. W. 55th. 925-3662Take over my dorm contract —Now or spr. qtr. Call Will 753-3773CHICAGO BEACH HOTEL5100 S. Cornell DO 3-2400Beautiful Furnished ApartmentsNear beach-park-I.C. trains U of Cbuses at door Modest daily, weekly,monthly rates.Call Miss Smith PEOPLE WANTEDFemale Rmmte Own Room 684-7275.Sitter wanted for baby girl 4 mos.Blk student pref. Weekdays to fityour schedule. Call 955-3611.Any S. Sd. students Interes. In mak¬ing field study this summer In S.American call Anne Lonigro at 539-9569 aft. 6:00.Male Gr S wntd to share Ig cln SShore apt w-2 same. Own roomcampus bus at corner 1C near $60-mo Start Apr 1 Call 947-5068 —Days, 374-7864 after 6 pmTYPE? Hell, No! Careers for Wom¬en. Thursday, March 4, Cobb CoffeeShop 4:00 pm.Fern. Grad, wanted to room withsame-own room and bath-5557 S.University 324-5704 after 5 on week¬days.BLUES BAND FORMINGYoung Musician wishes to meet oth¬er experienced musicians to formnew Blues Band. Call RABOVSKY.752-3800.PEOPLE FOR SALETYPING SERVICE HY 3-3755SCENESUniversity Pro 120 watt receiver$160 or offer. 752-3230.'68 VOLVO, 142S, Radio, Mich.Tires, transistor Ign. $1800. 753-8192Days, 363-7127 After 6pm.Water Beds from $70, old furs, andother discoveries at PRESENCE,2926 N. Broadway. 248-1761. Free room and board spring quarterlarge room and private bath in ex¬change for light mother's helper|ob. Hours flexible.Call after 6. 538-0990MOVING?Licensed mover t, hauler. Call ArtMlchener. 955-2480FREE INFORMATION ECOLOGY info. 8i action centerforming. To help call 288-7485GREECE: Summer study travellive on Skopelos Island 2-Grk fami¬ly, study class. Greek civ. 8> art,mod Grk, folk dance Trips to Ae¬gean Islands June 23 — Aug. 4 $370for tuition, rm & bd. Write Prof.Christides Class. Dept. U. of Minn,Minneapolis or 9551094# Cornet! ^7tori it # ,# 164S E. S5H» STREET { I# CHICAGO, ILL 60615 * |£ PHona M 4-1651 ? | SAFE. LEGAL£ Phon«: FA 4-1651 =<l**l*M ”1 I j 1V ^ CUp4JL r^» ^merSedsKings - QueensDoubles -Twins4425 SHIPPINGPREPAIDSend check* money olderWATER BED CORR• of AMERICA •soys lak* ctry wav N.efurra, PHIS, wa<h.Orders Shipped u»iUin*>d$ysWholaialc. retail mfg.>roiuo vno* lAitt * Olf r«M»vTt0NVdhr «|uArant«• SS ABORTIONIN NEW YORKSCHEDULED IMMEDIATELY[ (212) TR 7-8562MRS. SAUL■CERTIFIED ABORTION REFERRALAll Inquiries Confidentiol■aaaaes, mam PIZZAr-iSplatterI Pizza, Fried ChickenItalian FoodsJ Compare the Price! {| 1460 E. 53rd 643-2800 }L WE DELIVERLemm mm ajDR. AARON ZIMBLEROptometristeye examinationscontact lensesin theNew Hyde ParkShopping Center1510 E. 55«h St.363-6363 PREGNANCYPROBLEM?THERE IS NO CHARGEFOR OURABORTIONREFERRAL. WHY SPENDMONEY NEEDLESSLY?OUR PROFESSIONALSERVICES ARE FREE.CALL (215) 722-53607 DAYS 24 HRS.'COOP RECORDiSells the Cheapest Records Aroundand we gottaSALE!Records in stock and anything orderedfrom the Schwann Catalogue10% OFFUsual SalePrice Price3.29 2.963.99 3.594.49 4.04From Now to the End of the QuarterSTUDENT COOPReynolds Club Basement» & SLOWNESS ROAD at the Gar- $K| MEETING HY.P.P.O. Brings you WILDER¬NESS ROAD, Fri at the GargoyleCUMMINGTON COMMUNITY OFNTHE ARTS In Cummington, Mass.,Is a small summer community ofindividuals pursuing creative work.For brochure and application write:Mr. Christopher Horton71 Lovely StreetUnionville, Conn. 06085(203) 673-5019Yoga Poses Concentr. Meditatn.Beg-Adv. Single-Group Classes SRINERODE OF INDIA DO3-0155.GESTALT ENCOUNTER GROUPfor women. Focus will be: "Whoare you?". March 5, 6, 7. Limitedto ten. $25. Lorrie Peterson, ex¬perienced leader. 288-3541.RUGBYThe UC Rugby Club will have abrief but important meeting on Sun¬day Mar 7 at 7 PM 5611 Blackstone.Spring Schedule, Tnmnt plans andother impt business make up theagenda. Former players and anyoneinterested in participating should at¬tend.CEF SPECIALOne of the most acclaimed films ofthe '60s — The Lion In Winter atCobb Sat. at 7 8. 9:15 and one of themost beautiful films of the last Dec¬ade "Black Orpheus" at Cobb Sun.at 7 8. 9:15.ALEXANDRE DJOKICViolin Recital at Mendel, 8:30 Sun,Mar 7 Handel, Bartok, more.PEOPLE WHO KNOWCALL ONJAMESSCHULTECLEANERSCUSTOM QUALITYCLEANING10% student discount1363 E. 53rd St.752-6933 Film, trip Info 8. refreshments IdaNoyes East Lounge, Tues. Mar. 2 at7:30. Final MeetinglTHE MASQUEOF WINTERMar 12, 8:30 Ida Noyes ChicagoMasquers benefit Mus Soc $1.00PERSONALSPACK YOUR KNAPSACK FOR AD¬VENTURE. Bicycle and camp inEngland. 30 day tours $566 fromBoston. Competently equipped.Write: Bicycle-Campers Inter¬national, Box 13927, Gainesville,Fla., 32601.RIDE BOARD — Need a ride? Needa rider to share expenses? Call 334-7668. Donation $1.Like a eunuch longing to seduce agirl is the man who tries to do rightby violence.Ecclesiasticus 20:4DON'T MISS SUPER RECORDSALEGet Hyde Park's best buy thruquarter ends. STILLS, HENDRIX,JOPLIN and ANYTHING ELSE2.96-3.59-4.04LOST: Sm. B8,W M. dog, part cock¬er. Chain choke collar, red collar,rabies tag. 53rd 8< Lake Pk. 2-22.Reward. 753-2492 or 363-4716.To all Students planning to takeSoc. Sci. 272 ( Pol. Sd. 282) TheAmerican Legal System in theSpring Quarter 1971: Please call753-4142 or 753-2772 as soon as pos¬sible.StudentDiscountModelCamera1342 E. 55th493-6700Most complete photo shopon South sideUNWANTEDPREGNANCY No fob for BA? Come to Careers forWomen Thursday March 4 CobbCoffee Shop, 4:00 pmLOST: Lady's Watch. 955-2739.Writers' Workshop. (Plaza 2-8377)Blow your mind with good music.Lowest prices on all stereos at MU¬SICRAFT. On campus. Bob Tabor,363-4555.FREE WINE GUIDEFree Wholesale CatalogHundreds Brand Name ProductsAt 30% — 50%OffWrite — UNIVERSITY INVESTORSBox 50022-Dallas, Texas 75250ACAPULCO$197MARCH 20-27Round Trip AirDouble OccupancyYacht CruiseWater Skiing(tax included)Escape International869-0322FREEPORT$183MARCH 20-27Round Trip Air7 Nights - Freeport Inn2 Hour FreeHappy Hour Daily(tax included)Escape InternationalMembership Required$12.50call:Escape International869-0322Have A Legal AbortionPerformed in New YorkCOSTS FROM $125Immediate AppointmentsLeave A.M. - Return P.M.Call (312) 334-58439 A.M. to 8 P.M. DAYTONABeachApt's & RoomsCall:Escape International869-0322The Ida Noyes Program Board presents —THE PHANTOM CREEPSor,Bela Lugosi Night at Ida NoyesSix episodes of the dusty creepies, starring lovely Dorothy Arnold,and the less lovely Robert Kent and Edward Van Sloan, allcaught in the lunatic machinations of the fiendish Bela Lugosi.Further episodes in April.In chilling black and white.Monday, March 8th, 8 p.m. Ida Noyes HallAnother Iced-over eventMarch 2,. 1971/The Chicago Maroon/7ARMS CONTROLLECTURE"SUPERPOWER POSTURES IN SALT"Richard L. GarwinIBM Fellow, Consultant to the President's ScienceAdvisory Committee and the Institute of Defense AnalysesTHURSDAY, MARCH 4, 19713:30 P.M.Breasted Hall Oriental Institute1155 East Fifty-eighth StreetMr. Garwin, a University of Chicago alumnus and a prominentphysicist, will deliver the fifth in a series of public lectures inconnection with the Arms Control and Foreign Policy Seminarsponsored by the Center for Policy Study of The University ofChicago.No Admission Charge Tickets not required8/The Chicago Maroon/March 2, 1971 MALE OR FEMALEIF YOU HAVE A DRIVER'S LICENSEAPPLY NOWDRIVE A YELLOWJust telephone CA 5-6692 orApply in person ot 120 E. 18th St.EARN UP TO $50 OR MORE DAILYWORK DURING SEMESTER BREAKSORDAY, NIGHT or WEEKENDSWork from garage near home or school.COME LIGHTOUR FIREFree coffee todayafter 1 p.m.The Burning ShameCoffee ShopHarper 329 a.m.-4 p.m.,Monday-FridayGorilla Coffeeon WednesdayLUri€y’$ ALL-NIGHT SHCW |PERFORMANCE FRIDAY t SATURDAY FOLLOWING LAST RFGULAR FEATURE 1MAR. 5MORE MAR 6BATTLE OF ALGIERSMar. 12WEST SIDE STORYNatalie Wood12 & 2:30 Mar. 13AROUND THE WORLDIN 80 DAYSDavid Niven12 & 2Mar. 19THE LANDLORD12 & 2 Mar. 20MAD, MAD, MAD, MADWORLDBeau Bridges12 & 2:30March 26SOLDIER BLUECANDICE BERGEN12 & 2 Mar. 27THE GRASSHOPPERJACQUELINE BISSET12 & 2Apr. 2THE PEOPLE NEXTEli Wallacb12, 1:45 a.m. DOOR Apr. 3GETTING STRAIGHTElliott Gould12, 2:30 a.m.CUT OUT THIS COUPON2 Long sleeve never-iron dress shirts . .Bel I bottom jeans . . $7.49. . $4.50JOHN'S MENS WEAR1459 E 53rd. JEWELERS • SINCE 1095presentsDianaCatch a sparkleIron) the morning sun.Hold the magicot a sudden breeze.Keep those moments alive.They're yours tor a lifetimewith a diamondengagement ring fromOrange Bloaeom.JEWELERS • SINCE 1895EVKRGREI N PLAZA YORKTOWNDatsundelivers extrasthat otherscharge extrafor or don’thave.Price $1990 p.o.e.Drive a Datsun... than decide at:SCHMIDT MDTnRS3527 N. WESTERNCHICAGO. ILLINOIS