THE UNIVERSITY OFCHICAGO 5 RECORDAN OFFICIAL PUBLICATION ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF FACULTIES VOLUME II, NUMBER 3PREFACE TO REPORT OF COMMITTEEON CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS INGOVERNMENT STUDENT FELLOWSHIPS, SCHOLARSHIPS AND LOANSFebruary 2, 1968The Committee on Certain Restrictions in Government Student Fellowships, Scholarships and Loanswas appointed by the Provost at my direction inJuly 1966. Professor T. W. Schultz accepted thechairmanship of the Committee. The Committee ofthe Council transmitted the report of the SchultzCommittee to the Council on January 16, alongwith a comment of its own. The Council recommended that the report and comment be published;that they be considered at a later meeting of theCouncil ; and that I be requested to make two briefcomments, which I am happy to do, in connectionwith their publication at this time. The first suggested comment is that publication does not commit the Council or the University to particularrecommendations. The second comment is to callattention to the present background legal situationwhich must be understood in connection with therestriction which makes it unlawful for a studentto apply for certain fellowships, scholarships orloans if the student was a member of an organization which was registered or required to be registered under the Subversive Activities Control Actof 1950. This restriction appeared in fact to be inoperative, because under Supreme Court decisionsinterpreting the Fifth Amendment, no organizationcould be compelled to register, and none had doneso. Now, as of January 2, 1968, the registrationprovision has been eliminated from the SubversiveActivities Control Act. The substitution under theJanuary 2 amendment of a procedure for a determination by the Board that an organization is a "Communist-action" or "Communist-front" organization,while not reinstating the restriction, might give risein the future to other questions within the scope ofthe Schultz Committee report. I should like to addas a third comment my expression of gratitude tothe Committee for its clarification of issues and forproviding the basis for more informed discussion.George W. Beadle CONTENTS /March 18, 19681 Preface to Report of Committee on Certain Restrictions in Government StudentFellowships, Scholarships and Loansby George W. Beadle1 Statement by Committee of the Council2 Report of the Committee on Certain Restrictions in Government Student Fellowships, Scholarships and Loans1 1 New Biology Department11 Faculty Committee To Review Disciplinary Procedures1 1 Report of the Faculty-Student Committeeon the Bookstore13 Report to the President on Student Involvement19 Calendar of EventsSTATEMENT BY COMMITTEE OF THECOUNCILThe Committee of the Council presents the report of the Committee on Certain Restrictions inGovernment Student Fellowships, Scholarships andLoans. This report is a valuable contribution to thediscussion of the restrictions upon students, andmuch of it receives our complete approval. The restrictions covered by the report fall into three distinct categories and for us raise distinctive issuesof policy :1. Certain restrictions are imposed upon the beliefs of students (the Disclaimer and SubversiveOrganization conditions). We endorse the Committee's opposition to these conditions as incompatiblewith our dedication to unrestricted belief and discussion. We do not share the Committee's desire tosee the University engage in test cases or providelegal services to individual students.2. The requirement that a student's encounterswith the criminal law be reported is a matter ofinformation rather than of belief. We agree that1great restraint and forgiveness be exercised in thisarea, but do not believe that the University (letalone the federal government) should be forbiddento request information which may be necessary toprotect the community from crime.3. The oath of allegiance is not to be confusedwith a test oath. It is more interesting for the restriction it puts upon the eligibility of citizens ofother countries to receive fellowships than becauseof any invasion of the dignity of the individual. Weare not prepared to assert that fellowships of thefederal government must be available to non-citizens.Since the two deeply objectionable conditions(Disclaimer and Subversive Organization membership) are, as the Committee states, not operativein any form at the present, we recommend thatthe Council take no action other than to requestpublication of the Report.REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ONCERTAIN RESTRICTIONS IN GOVERNMENT STUDENT FELLOWSHIPS,SCHOLARSHIPS AND LOANSMarch 16, 1967IThis Committee was appointed by Edward H. Levion July 26, 1966 to make policy recommendationswith respect to certain restrictions on federal loansto students and on federal fellowships and scholarships. At Mr. Levi's request, the policy recommendations are made to the President of The University of Chicago.We have interpreted our terms of reference aslimiting our assignment with respect to these restrictions to specific policies for The University ofChicago, policies to guide University decisions inachieving the academic objectives of this University. We have not endeavored to formulate policyrecommendations that would be equally relevantand applicable to all universities, private or public.Our policy recommendations are not intended toserve as guides to students in their decisions eitherto apply or not to apply for federally financedloans, fellowships or scholarships. These decisionsby students are private and personal acts that falloutside the province of our policy recommendations. But whether or not The University of Chicago should act as an agent of the federal government in awarding and administering such loans,fellowships and scholarships is a matter of University policy.The provisions of United States public laws which authorize the appropriation of funds to beadministered by particular federal agencies for student loans, fellowships and scholarships containa number of restrictions that fall outside our assignment. The amount of funds that are authorizedfor these purposes, the fields of study that areincluded, and the distribution of federally financedstudent loans, fellowships and scholarships amonguniversities and between newly established andlong-established fields of studies at particular universities are among the provisions of these publiclaws that are not a part of our terms of reference.We have interpreted our terms of reference aslimiting our policy recommendations to that classof restrictions which pertains to the beliefs of students, to the self-incrimination of students, to thelisting of crimes and of pending charges, and toother closely related restrictions. This class of restrictions consists of the disclaimer affidavit, whichappears to have been virtually lifted; the subversive organization restriction, which appears to beon the way out, as a consequence of court decisions; the restriction imposed by the requiredstatement of crimes ; the ambiguous and potentiallydangerous "in the best interests of the UnitedStates" clause, and the oath of allegiance.The foundation of our policy recommendationsis the experience of this University over manydecades and the tradition growing out of that experience in awarding and administering studentloans, fellowships and scholarships. The restrictions to which the Committee addresses itself areinconsistent with this experience and the successfulpolicies that have become traditional in administering our affairs pertaining to these matters. To treatstudents as if they were federal employees is whollycontrary to the academic objectives of The University of Chicago. To require students to take aloyalty oath is contrary to established policy of thetrustees and the faculty of The University of Chicago. To require self-incrimination of the studentapplicant and to require the listing of pendingcharges of crimes regardless of guilt violates bothestablished principles of law and the academic tradition of The University of Chicago. It is invidiousand discriminatory to single out one group of citizens (students) in administering governmentalgrants and aids.We endeavor in this report to draw what mayappear to be too sharp a distinction between policyrecommendations and the choice of means to implement these recommendations. In general, wehave not attempted to determine what would hefor The University of Chicago the best strategiesor ways of implementing our policy recommenda-2tions, although a few rather obvious choices haveemerged from our deliberations, and we call yourattention to them. But we cannot claim any specialcompetence with respect to choice of strategy.Moreover, there is a fog of uncertainty with respectto future legal, legislative and executive developments pertaining to restrictions on federally financed student loans, fellowships and scholarships.These uncertainties will require flexibility in thechoice of strategy and implementation.IIThus, in accordance with our terms of reference,the Committee has limited its investigation to thefollowing restrictions :1. The Disclaimer Affidavit,2. The Subversive Organization Restriction,3. The Statement of Crimes,4. The Administrative Clause, "in the best interests of the United States,"5. The Oath of Allegiance.nIThe policy recommendations of the Committeewith regard to these restrictions are as follows :Recommendation It should be the policy of The#1 University of Chicago to continue to oppose the DisclaimerAffidavit.This restriction makes it unlawful for any student who is a member of the organizations whichare registered or which are required to be registeredunder the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950"with knowledge or notice that such organizationis so registered or that such order has become final(i) to make application" for any scholarship orfellowship (NSF), or for any payment or loan(NDEA), "or (ii) to use or attempt to use anysuch award" (NSF) or any such payment or loan(NDEA).Whoever violates this restriction "shall be finednot more than $10,000, or imprisoned not morethan five years, or both."This restriction was added to the NSF Act andto the NDEA Act by Public Law 87-835 approvedOctober 16, 1962.The University of Chicago is presently involvedin administering some federally financed fellowshipsand scholarships that are subject to this restriction.Although this restriction is presently inoperative,the Court having decided that in effect there is noconstitutional way of enforcing the requirement that such organizations register, this particular restriction may be made operative by amending theSubversive Activities Control Act of 1950. Thus themajor reasons in opposition to this restriction pertaining to federally financed fellowships and scholarships are :1. Students who apply for and who receive anduse such awards may become liable.2. There is genuine doubt that this restrictionis compatible with the First Amendment of theConstitution. The courts have declared similar restrictions unconstitutional where they have beenimposed in other federal programs; these court decisions strongly imply that this restriction where itis imposed upon students is also unconstitutional.(We append to this report an eight-page statementprepared for us by Julian H. Levi, dated July 29,1966, pertaining to this and closely related issues,along with an addendum dated March 6, 1967.)The Disclaimer Affidavit (also referred to as theAffidavit of Disbelief) in the National ScienceFoundation Act of 1950, before it was amended in1962, required the student applicant to execute andfile "with the Foundation an affidavit that he doesnot believe in, and is not a member of and doesnot support any organization that believes in orteaches, the overthrow of the United States Government by force or violence or by any illegal orunconstitutional methods." (The italics are ours.)The National Defense Education Act of 1958, before it was amended in 1962, required essentiallythe same Disclaimer Affidavit of the student applying for a loan or scholarship or fellowship.The Board of Trustees of The University ofChicago on January 14, 1960 voted to oppose theDisclaimer Affidavit, which students at that timewere required to sign when seeking loans under theNational Defense Education Act of 1958. TheNDEA legislation was amended in 1962 to drop theDisclaimer Affidavit.The Committee knows of no federal funds forfellowships, scholarships or loans to students thatare presently administered by The University ofChicago which require the Disclaimer Affidavit. TheCommittee has been unable to determine whetheror not students who apply directly for particularfellowships or scholarships which may be awardedby the Atomic Energy Commission, by the SpaceAgency, or by some other federal agency are stillsubject to a Disclaimer Affidavit.Major reasons for opposing the Disclaimer Affidavit were advanced by the Board of Trustees ofThe University of Chicago on January 14, 1960.These reasons are clear and and cogent. We append the nine major reasons cited by the Board3of Trustees in opposition to the Disclaimer Affidavit.Recommendation It should be the policy of The# 2 University of Chicago to oppose the restrictions imposedupon students by the Subversive Activities Control Act of1950.3. This restriction is wholly contrary to the academic objectives and to the long-standing requirements of The University of Chicago in awardingand administering fellowships and scholarships andloans to students that are financed by its own funds.Recommendation It should be the policy of The#3 University of Chicago to oppose the Statement of Crimes.The Statement of Crimes must be completed bythe student applicant, and it must be certified bythe applicant's signature. It requires "a full statement regarding any crimes of which he has everbeen convicted (other than crimes committed before attaining sixteen years of age and minor trafficviolations for which a fine of $25 or less was imposed) and regarding any criminal charges punishable by confinement of thirty days or more whichmay be pending against him at the time of his application. (The italics are ours.)Whoever "knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals or covers up by any trick, scheme, or devicea material fact, or makes any false, fictitious orfraudulent statements or representations, or makesor uses any false writing or document knowing thesame to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulentstatement or entry, shall be fined not more than$10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, orboth."This Statement of Crimes was added to the NSFAct and to the NDEA Act by Public Law 87-835approved October 16, 1962.The University of Chicago is presently involvedin administering some federally financed fellowships and scholarships that require of the studentapplicant this Statement of Crimes.Major reasons in opposition to the Statement ofCrimes are:1. It treats the student as if he were a federalemployee. It is an inquiry into criminal recordpatterned after that used with respect to government employment. To treat students as federal employees is wholly inconsistent with the academicfreedom of students at The University of Chicago.2. It is an arbitrary invasion of privacy with little or no relevance to a student's academic qualifications.3. It violates the fundamental precept that aperson is deemed to be innocent until he has beenproven guilty. It makes pending criminal chargesregardless of guilt, material to the application.4. It is morally degrading. The stigma of anypast crime must be revealed even though the student has paid the fine or has served the sentence.It is contrary to the basic moral precept that anyindividual who has "paid" the legal penalty for acrime that he committed should be given an opportunity unencumbered by the stigma of thatcrime to prove his worth.5. A Statement of Crimes is inconsistent with theexperience and tradition of The University of Chicago in awarding and administering fellowships andscholarships financed by its own funds.Recommendation It should be the policy of The#4 University of Chicago to oppose the legislative provisionwhich delegates to the Boardof the NSF and to the Commissioner of the NDEA theauthority to refuse or revoke afellowship or loan if in theiropinion it "is not in the bestinterests of the United States."This unwarranted delegation of governmentalauthority was enacted as part of Public Law 87-835, approved October 16, 1962.This provision of PL. 87-835, which makes it amatter of administrative opinion in determiningwhat "is not in the best interests of the UnitedStates," is bad law. It delegates unlimited administrative discretion to the Board of NSF and to theCommissioner of NDEA. It fails to provide fornotice and hearings. It is contrary to basic constitutional principles, both substantive and procedural, in providing for due process of law.Recommendation#5The Committee does not believe that it is withinour terms of reference to make a general evaluationof the Oath of Allegiance. We agree with the viewexpressed by our Board of Trustees that "the clearand simple Oath of Allegiance lies within theAmerican Tradition." But the Committee in considering the use of the oath in academic matterspertaining to the awarding of fellowships andscholarships believes that it is a misuse of the oath.4Thus our fifth policy recommendation is:It should be the policy of TheUniversity of Chicago to oppose the use of the Oath ofAllegiance in the awarding offellowships and scholarships.Major reasons in opposition to the use of theOath of Allegiance for this purpose are :1. The Oath of Allegiance, designed for use onsignificant ceremonial occasions, tends to lose itsforce and meaning when it is widely used for non-ceremonial and generally routine occasions as theawarding of fellowships and scholarships.2. The Oath of Allegiance, however appropriateon any occasion when a person assumes a positionof trust involving a special responsibility to theUnited States, is not relevant to the situation ofany student who receives a fellowship or a scholarship — awards or grants that bestow no comparableposition of trust and that call for no comparablespecial responsibility to the country.3. The use of the Oath of Allegiance, by placingemphasis on the student's devotion to his country,tends to distort his role as a scholar with devotionto truth which admits no national boundaries.4. As in other similar governmental transactionswith other segments of the population, it may beassumed without the administering of an oath thatstudents, as citizens of the United States, accord tothe country the allegiance common to all citizens.It is invidious and discriminatory to single out onegroup of citizens (students) and not only requireof them the Oath of Allegiance but also make itsubject to the law of perjury.IVWe have drawn a sharp distinction betweenpolicy recommendations and the choice of meansto implement these recommendations. This distinction, we believe, is useful in identifying andclarifying the issues that pertain on the one handto our academic objectives, taking the long view,and on the other to the means for achieving theseobjectives. As already noted in this report, we cannot claim any special competence with respect tothe means at the disposal of The University ofChicago, the choice of strategy in the use of thesemeans and the timing of their use. Moreover,there is a fog of uncertainty with respect tofuture legal, legislative and executive developments pertaining to the restrictions to which weWe addressed this report.Our proposals for implementing these recom mendations are tentative and limited in scope. Wemention them believing that they may be helpfulin clarifying some of the choices that are availableto us. We assume that additional and possibly moreeffective proposals will be advanced by faculty andstudents.1. The allocation of University effort. The University of Chicago should allocate, in our judgment, more effort and resources to the removal ornullification of the Statement of Crimes and of theSubversive Activities Control Act of 1950 than itshould to the other three restrictions which wehave identified.2. On the Disclaimer Affidavit. The legal staff ofThe University of Chicago should investigatewhether or not there still are any vestiges of thisDisclaimer Affidavit in the awarding of federalfellowships and scholarships to students. We knowthat the Disclaimer Affidavit is no longer requiredby NSF and NDEA. But we have been unable toascertain whether all other federal agencies havealso dropped the Disclaimer Affidavit. If any suchvestiges are discovered, they should be revealed tostudents and faculty and steps taken to protesttheir use.3. Legal services for students. The Universityshould provide legal consultation services for anystudent of this University in matters pertaining tothese restrictions. The model we have in mindwould be comparable to the excellent arrangementsfor such services provided for members of thefaculty during the McCarthy period.4. A test case. A decision by the United StatesSupreme Court, striking down the provisions ofthe Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950 thatimpose restrictions upon students, would be in facta permanent determination. A series of recent decisions by the Court favor strongly the litigationrather than the legislative route in removing onceand for all this restriction. Should a student ofThe University of Chicago be qualified and willingto challenge and enter into litigation, a test casewould be at hand and the University should provide the necessary legal counsel and pay all of thecosts of such litigation.5. Substituting training grants for federally financed fellowships and scholarships. Federal fundsare available in the form of training grants forPh.D. instruction and research which carry thesame stipend levels and the same dependency allowances as the federal fellowships and scholarships but are subject to none of the restrictions.Until the restrictions on federal fellowships andscholarships are removed, the faculty of The University of Chicago should expand wherever possi-5ble the training grants and thus reduce the dependency of students upon the fellowships andscholarships that are subject to the undesirablerestrictions.6. Research and action. It is patently true thatneither faculty nor students have access to reliable, up-to-date information with respect to thelegislative provisions, administrative rules andprocedures, and court decisions pertaining to therestrictions under consideration. The Universityshould undertake the necessary research to provide such information, and it should use this information in developing public statements in opposition to these restrictions and in drafting legalprotests to be placed before the administrators offederally financed fellowships and scholarships.It is our expectation that this report will be distributed to the faculty and the students of TheUniversity of Chicago. If our recommendations arereceived favorably by them, we believe that a number of additional and useful proposals will be advanced by them on how best to implement ourpolicy recommendations.Appendix IFrom a statement of the Board of Trustees of TheUniversity of Chicago, dated January 14, 1960,citing major reasons in opposition to the Affidavitof Disbelief.1. It is superfluous. The oath of allegiance adequately serves the national interest.2. It is philosophically dangerous. The controversial affidavit constitutes an affront to, if not anactual governmental invasion of, freedom of private and individual belief and conscience. As a kindof test-oath substituting an implied threat of coercion for persuasion in the realm of ideas, it seemscounter to the philosophical principles on whichour national strength was built.3. As a security measure, it is useless. Historyhas shown that persons who might damage thenational interest in utilizing the act would havelittle hesitation in signing the controversial affidavit. In addition, enemies of the state can evadethe provision easily — by obtaining economic support from other organizations.4. It is legally unworkable. The controversialaffidavit makes it difficult for students to knowwhat the disclaimer covers or to defend themselves against possible prosecutions for perjury.The language is so vague and the intent so hazythat the affidavit is impossible to enforce withoutdiscarding American principles of law. 5. It is undemocratic. The controversial affidavitmust be signed only by students — among all Americans. And among students, it singles out only thefinancially poorest for special distrust. In contrast,wealthy students would not need sacrifice anyprinciples for their educations.6. It is academically unwise. The controversialaffidavit with its implied threat of coercion disturbs the basic assumptions on which Americaneducation must rest.7. It is morally degrading. The affidavit cheapens the concept of national loyalty by associatingit with a financial transaction and displays a lackof confidence in the positive strengths of Americantradition and life.8. It jeopardizes traditional academic freedom.The affidavit requirement may be used as a precedent for imposing federal, state and local controls on research and education as a condition offinancial aid.9. It injures America's stature abroad. TheUnited States today is the world leader in military,political and economic affairs, but millions of persons throughout the world look to this nation forintellectual and moral leadership as well. An affidavit of disbelief is something associated primarilywith totalitarian states.Appendix IIJuly 29, 1966To : Theodore W. SchultzFrom : Julian H. LeviIYou will find enclosed copies of:A. Report of the United States Senate Committeeon Labor and Public Welfare of May 12, 1960,No. 1347 (Calendar No. 1411).B. Report of the United States Senate Committeeon Labor and Public Welfare of September 21,1962, No. 2117 (Calendar No. 2083).C. Administrative regulations issued by the Commissioner of Education covering procedures andcriteria for resolving questions involving moralcharacter or loyalty of applicants for and holders of NDEA Fellowships (45 CFR Part 147;College and University Reporter, Vol. 2, Par.8807).all concerning the Disclaimer Affidavit problem inFederal Aid to Education legislation.6IISections 16(d) of the National Science FoundationAct and 1001 (f) of the National Defense Education Act required an applicant for fellowship orloan support to execute an affidavit disclaimingmembership, belief, or support of any organizationseeking the overthrow of the Government of theUnited States by force or other illegal or unconstitutional means.Strenuous efforts to eliminate the Disclaimer Affidavit were undertaken by the American educationalcommunity prior to 1959 and the campaign continued in following years.In 1959 during the first session of the 86th Congress a number of bills seeking repeal of the Disclaimer Affidavit provisions were introduced in theHouse of Representatives. Due to the oppositionof the then Chairman of the House Committee onEducation and Labor, Graham Barden, the billswere unreported.At the same session in the Senate the Committee onLabor and Public Welfare reported favorably on abill introduced by the then Senator John F. Kennedy of Massachusetts and Senator Joseph Clarkof Pennsylvania seeking repeal of both the loyaltyoath and the Disclaimer Affidavit. On July 23, 1959,the Senate, after considerable debate, adopted anamendment proposed by Senator Javits of NewYork which would have repealed the DisclaimerAffidavit but not the loyalty oath. However, afterfurther debate, the Senate voted to recommit thebill for further study.In the second session of the 86th Congress in 1960,Senators Kennedy and Clark introduced a bill toremove only the Disclaimer Affidavit requirement.The Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare reported this bill favorably, as indicated bythe enclosed Report (No. 1347, Calendar No.1411). Your attention is particularly directed topages 4 et seq. of this Report enumerating thepositions of the American educational community,as well as the refusal of certain named institutionsto participate in the program. Nevertheless, afterlengthy debate on the floor, while the Senate approved legislation repealing the Disclaimer Affidavit, the Prouty Amendment was added providing disqualification of members of the CommunistParty or any other organization having for one ofJts purposes the overthrow of the Government ofthe United States, as well as a five year disclosureof prior membership affiliations. Upon passage, as amended by the Senate on June15, 1960, the bill was referred to a Subcommitteeof the House Committee on Education and LaborAfter a hearing, in which President Pusey of Harvard testified, no action was taken.Throughout this period the elimination of the Disclaimer Affidavit had been supported by PresidentEisenhower in two Budget Messages, by the Secretary of the Department of Health, Education andWelfare and the Office of Education.IllThe approach adopted in 1961 was predicated uponcertain assumptions :A. The vote of the Senate on the Prouty-MundtAmendment in 1960 made clear that on a rollcall vote bald elimination of the Disclaimer Affidavit was impossible. Discussions with leadership of both the House and the Senate confirmed that on any roll call on the issue, Senators and Representatives were concerned thata vote in favor of elimination of the DisclaimerAffidavit without provision of some substitutewould be viewed as softness towards Communism. Despite vigorous support of the Presidentand the Departments concerned, the Congressional attitude remained unchanged.B. Refusal of certain universities and colleges, toparticipate in the program, rather than impressing the Congress, irritated the membership. Discussions of academic freedom by PresidentGriswold of Yale, statements of faculty, particularly in Ivy League and Quaker schools,were without effect.C. The United States Supreme Court in Communist Party v The United States, 367 U.S.I;81 S. Ct. 1357 (1961) had upheld provisions inthe Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950requiring the registration of the CommunistParty as a foreign subversive group.D. In Cramp v Board of Public Instruction, 82S.Ct. 2 75 (1961) the United States SupremeCourt had unanimously held unconstitutional aFlorida statute requiring execution by state employees of a written oath somewhat similar tothe Disclaimer Affidavit.IVHence, as shown by the 1962 Senate CommitteeReport (Calendar No. 2083) previously referredto in I above, it was possible to argue:A. To the conservative members of the Congress7that the Disclaimer Affidavit as enacted wouldin all likelihood not be sustained by the courts,andB. To the liberal members of the Congress that thesubstitution of a criminal penalty based upon astatute theretofore sustained by the SupremeCourt removed uncertainties as well as problems about belief or other vague tests.VSince 1962 further decisions of the courts are relevant :A. Elfbrandt v Russell, U.S.16 Led 2d 321, 86 S.Ct. . (1966) holding unconstitutional an Arizona statute providing for prosecutions and discharge of any publicemployee who "knowingly and wilfully becomes or remains a member of the CommunistParty" or "any other organization" having for"one of its purposes" the overthrow of theGovernment of Arizona, reinforced the conclusion that the Disclaimer Affidavit in all likelihood would have been struck down.B. While the registration requirements of theSubversive Activities Control Act were sustained in Communist Party v United States,367 U.S.I, 81 S.Ct. 1357, 6 L ed 2d 625 (1961)[see III-C above], the force of this decision isaffected by Communist Party of the UnitedStates v United States, 351 Fed 2d 807 (CCA.Dist. Columbia, 1963) cert, denied 377 U.S.968, 84 S.Ct. 1646 (1964) holding that sincethe privilege against self-incrimination is available to officers of the Communist Party, theParty could not be convicted for failure toregister despite the valid order of the Subversive Activities Control Board requiring suchregistration. Also see Albertson v SubversiveActivities Control Board, U.S. , 15 L ed 2d 165, 86 S.Ct. (1965) holding that on default of registrationof the Communist Party as such, orders requiring individual members to register violatedtheir privilege against self-incrimination.C. Section VI of the Subversive Activities Control Act prohibiting the issuance of a passportto a member of an organization against whicha final order of registration as subversive hadbeen entered was held unconstitutional in Ap-theker v Secretary of State, 378 U.S. 500; 84S.Ct. 500 (1964).D. Provisions of the Labor Management Report ing Disclosure Act of 1959 prohibiting a member of the Communist Party from acting as anofficer of a labor union were held unconstitu-tional in United States v Brown, 381 U.S. 437(1965).VIAt this juncture legal, political and policy issuesare present:A. Criminal prosecutions under the National Science Foundation Act and the National DefenseEducation Act are limited by the factors ofregistration and knowledge or notice.Section 16 of the National Science FoundationAct provides:"(2) (A) When any Communist organization, as defined in paragraph (5) of section3 of the Subversive Activities Control Act of1950, is registered or there is in effect a finalorder of the Subversive Activities ControlBoard requiring such organization to register,it shall be unlawful for any member of suchorganization with knowledge or notice thatsuch organization is so registered or that suchorder has become final (i) to make application for any scholarship or fellowship whichis to be awarded from funds part or all ofwhich are appropriated or otherwise madeavailable for expenditure under the authorityof section 10 of this Act, or (ii) to use orattempt to use any such award."(B) Whoever violates subparagraph (A) ofthis paragraph shall be fined not more than$10,000, or imprisoned not more than fiveyears, or both." (42 U.S.C. 1874; College andUniversity Reporter, Vol. 2, Par. 9016.)The identical language appears in Section 1001(4) A and B of the National Defense EducationAct (College and University Reporter, Vol. 2,Par. 8651).*While the Supreme Court has sustained the registration requirement as proper in compellingdisclosure of a foreign subversive conspiracy(Communist Party v United States, 367 U.S.1 (1961), subsequent decisions holding thatneither officers or members of the CommunistParty on pleas of self-incrimination could becompelled to execute the registration forms (seecases cited in V above) have severely bluntedapplication of the Subversive Activities Control* Statement of Norman Malcolm, 5/27/66, that National Science Foundation Fellowships are not subject tocriminal penalty is in total error.Act. At this time the only registration order ineffect is against the Communist Party (seeFourteenth Annual Report, Subversive Activities Control Board, 1965). Moreover, Apthekerand Brown, cited above, cast serious doubt upon validity of criminal penalty provisions of theNational Defense Education Act and the National Science Foundation Act. While it may beargued that the Congress has the right to prohibit the use of public funds in support of scholarships, fellowships or loans to students whoknowingly remain members of organizationsfound to be engaged in foreign dominated subversive conspiracies against the United States,the Supreme Court has, in Aptheker and Brown,held passport and labor union officer rights beyond the power of the Congress to regulate inthese circumstances.Thus, defects in Subversive Activities ControlAct procedures, as well as substance of criminalpenalty provisions themselves, render effectiveprosecutions remote — so much so that at thistime it is difficult to assume that a prosecutionwill ever be instituted.Requirement of disclosure of criminal recordsof applicants is, of course, another matter. Buthere such disclosure does not result in automatic disqualification, and certainly some disclosures such as a conviction on forgery charges,for example, would appear material.The Commissioner of Education has establishedprocedures and criteria for resolving questionsinvolving moral character or loyalty of applicants for and holders of NDEA fellowships (seedocument enclosed and described in I-C).[Document is not included in this report.] Youwill note :1. Crimes considered material are those "involving moral turpitude" (College andUniversity Reporter, Vol. 2, Par. 8811).2. That a special review committee is established.3. That if such committee determines theissue adversely to the applicant, he mustbe provided with written notice.4. Upon request he is then entitled to a hearing (College and University Reporter, Vol.2, Par. 8812).In the event of an adverse finding at such hearing, the applicant can obtain judicial review.Politically the same problems as in 1962 andprior years exist, now perhaps heightened by Viet Nam. Senators Russell, Dirksen, Proutyand Mundt are still present. While ChairmanBarden of the House Committee on Educationand Labor has departed, some member, eithera super patriot or an opponent of Federal Aidto Education, can be relied upon to seize theissue and force a roll call, at which point allthe old difficulties will appear.Prior experience concerning this identical issue,moreover, indicates that refusal of some colleges and universities to participate in the program will be utterly without effect. Even aftersome years of campaigning, in 1962 the vastmajority of colleges and universities continuedto participate in the loan program under theNational Defense Education Act. Institutionswhich declined to participate were the subjectof Congressional irritation, ridicule and amusement.Moreover, the political issues are clouded bythe doubtful legal situation. It cannot now becontended that an inquiry into beliefs is contemplated — the Act is limited to registration;or that freedom of association is jeopardized —the Act deals with continuing membership afterknowledge or notice of registration on finalorders determining a conspiracy; or even thatreal jeopardy exists — recent Supreme Courtcases blunt this contention.Issuance of a preliminary injunction in theUnited States District Court at Los Angeles restraining the Federal Government from requiring Medicare applicants to state whether theybelong to Communist-dominated organizationsreinforces the point.VIIAlternate approaches might thus be explored:A. A declaratory and injunction action might bemaintained by an aggrieved party. This is theprecise remedy adopted in Aptheker and in theLos Angeles District Court. Since the Communist Party is the only organization against whicha final order of registration exists (see Fourteenth Annual Report, Subversive ActivitiesControl Board, 1965) it would be necessary forsuch an aggrieved party to allege affiliation withthe Communist Party.B. The Commissioner of Education could requestan opinion of the Attorney General of theUnited States as to the validity of the criminalpenalty provisions in the two educational statutes in light of recent Supreme Court decisions.9C. Senator Sam Ervin of North Carolina is presently pressing for enactment of a specific declaratory judgment statute in order to permitchurch and state issues arising from the HigherEducation Facilities Act of 1963, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, andthe Higher Education Act of 1965 to be courtadjudicated. While Senator Ervin's bill has notproceeded to date, a decision by the UnitedStates Supreme Court relative to Marylandstate aid to church related institutions of highereducation in that state may well move this legislation. The Maryland Supreme Court, in passing upon state grants to four institutions, determined that as to three, church affiliation wasso pervasive as to violate the constitutional inhibition, but not so as to Hood College. Denialof certiorari by the United States SupremeCourt or affirmance of the Maryland decisionwill add to Senator Ervin's position that theissue must be opened as to Federal funds. Slightchanges in Senator Ervin's proposals might facilitate court tests of the criminal penalty.D. The Subversive Activities Control Act, as aresult of Supreme Court decisions, is now filledwith ineffective provisions. If a rewrite of thatstatute, together with parallel provisions in other statutes, including the Labor ManagementReporting Disclosure Act, the Medicare Act,and the penalty provisions of the EducationActs, were undertaken, arguments similar tothose advanced in 1962 might be developed. Itis questionable, however, whether in today'sViet Nam climate the tactic is possible or thatthe results would be appealing.E. Direct elimination of the criminal penalty provisions from education legislation could be undertaken. However, I suspect most friends ofaid to education in the Congress will react thatin light of the remote nature of the problem(see preceding sections) the effort is not worththe political risk. Some opponents of federal aid,with tongue in cheek, might undertake the effortin order to embarrass the entire program.On reflection, therefore, the litigation route appearsmost promising. A decision by the United StatesSupreme Court, striking down the criminal penaltyprovisions as violating constitutional limitations, isin fact a permanent determination. Continuing legislative tinkering does not put the issue to rest permanently. Judging by past experience, the threator fact of academic boycott will not be followed by the vast majority of colleges and universities, willbe without effect upon the Congress, and will intruth only disadvantage institutions and studentsconcerned. It would appear that legal research andaction directed at litigation would be far moreeffective.JHLMarch 6, 1967To: Theodore W. SchultzFrom: Julian H. LeviI, of course, have no objection to your using theJuly 29, 1966 memorandum. For purposes of completeness, if you were to do so, you might want toadd an addendum to the effect that the conclusionssuggested in Section V, page 3 of that memorandumare now reinforced:1. The concession made by the Solicitor Generaland the Department of Health, Education andWelfare in a memorandum filed in the UnitedStates Supreme Court that the disclaimer required under the Medicare Act could not beconstitutionally enforced.2. The decision of the United States SupremeCourt holding the loyalty oath requirements ofthe New York Teachers Act (Feinberg Law)unconstitutional.I am enclosing two articles from the New YorkTimes bearing on this. [Articles are not includedin this report.]JHLMembers of the CommitteeFaculty MembersMark G. Inghram, PhysicsDonald F. Lach, HistoryJames E. Miller, EnglishNorman H. Nachtrieb, ChemistryTheodore W. Schultz {Chairman) , EconomicsHewson H. Swift, ZoologyVictor H. Yngve, Information Sciences, LibrarySchool, and LinguisticsStudent Members (Graduate Students)Joseph M. Cobb, BusinessWayne D. Fields, EnglishWilliam B. Shew, EconomicsStephen Sternheimer, Political ScienceIrving Wladawsky, PhysicsMichael J. Zigmond, Biopsychology10NEW BIOLOGY DEPARTMENTEffective January 15, 1968, the Departmentsof Botany and Zoology gave up their individual departmental identities and joined together to form a new department, the Department of Biology. The Chairman of thenew Department of Biology is William K.Baker.FACULTY COMMITTEE TO REVIEWDISCIPLINARY PROCEDURESThis group was appointed by the Dean of Students to review current disciplinary procedures atthe University. They will advise the Dean of Students.Members of the CommitteeHarry Kalven Jr., ChairmanBenson E. GinsburgRobert L. PlatzmanHarry V. RobertsReuben W. Smith IIIJanice B. SpoffordJames W. ViceCharles W. WegenerKarl J. WeintraubREPORT OF THE FACULTY-STUDENTCOMMITTEE ON THE BOOKSTOREThe following is a Report to the President from theFaculty -Student Committee on the Bookstore appointed by the President. In presenting the Reportto the Committee of the Council for its information, the President stated that he had asked theFaculty -Student Committee to continue its study incollaboration with the Bookstore management andthat in view of the Committee's continuing studyand uncertainties as to the idtimate organization ofthe Bookstore, he had determ.ned not to act uponthe recommendation for a facidty governing boardat this time.The Committee believes that the Bookstore is anextremely important educational enterprise andthat the University has a responsibility to provide,attractively and conveniently displayed, a stock ofbooks large and diversified enough to serve thevaried needs of the academic community. Thoseneeds are not being adequately met at present andcannot be adequately met in the existing building.-The greatest need now is for more space, because the present building is far too small to provide roomfor the storage and display of the number of titlesneeded by the students and faculty of the many anddiversified academic units of the University. Therefore, the construction of a new building of amplesize is of urgent importance.Though the service currently provided by theBookstore is inadequate, even in the present building improvements can be made. The Committee'srecommendations are discussed below under theheadings of Merchandise, Pricing, Service and Organization.Merchandise1. It is of prime importance to devote as muchof the presently available space as possible to theselling of books. The Committee is pleased that itsrecommendation to eliminate the clothing sectionin order to provide more space for the display ofbooks has been accepted. It further recommendsthat gifts and sundries, except University of Chicago items, also be eliminated. The record sectionhas increased, is increasing and ought to be diminished in the present facility.2. The Committee recommends that serious consideration be given to the removal to other premises of the section devoted to the sale of photographic supplies, typewriters and related services.Most of the sales of these items are to departmentsof the University, and the departments might bejust as well served from another location as fromthe present one.3. It is important that ingenuity and effort beexpended to insure that the space devoted to thesale of books is devoted to books of interest to theUniversity community. We do not recommend concentration on best selling current works which arereadily available elsewhere; we do recommend thatthe interests of the academic community determinewhat books will be carried. The Committee ispleased that a major step of a new system of cardcontrol, to keep inventory and ordering up to date,is being taken.4. The Committee recommends that systematicefforts be made by the management of the Bookstore to ascertain from all academic units of theUniversity what current books are considered ofgreatest importance and interest. Efforts have beenmade in the past to collect this information, butfaculty members have displayed massive indifference (last fall requests for recommendations oftitles were sent to over 1,000 faculty members, andonly 68 replied). The Committee recommends thateach department and academic unit establish a stu-11dent-faculty committee that will be responsible forproviding the Bookstore with suggestions for titlesto be stocked. It is also important that there bebetter liaison between the textbook and generalbook sections. When a particular course is endedfor the quarter, titles ordered for the course thatare of continuing interest should be moved to thegeneral book section.5. Books should be displayed in categories familiar to the customers of the Bookstore (an adaptation of the Library of Congress classification system, which all users of the Library are familiarwith, might be used). Display categories shouldalso be small enough so that their titles can bereadily scanned (the present sections of "Literature" and "Criticism," for example, are far toolarge for titles to be found readily by customers —they should be divided according to language oforigin and further divided into large chronologicalunits).An author catalogue of all books in stock shouldbe conveniently available to customers.When space is available, at least one or two copies of each title in stock should be on display. Thepresent space could be more efficiently used if excessive numbers of single titles were removed fromdisplay shelves to storage.A suggestion box should be provided with appropriate forms so that students and faculty memberscan indicate titles they wish to have stocked.PricingThe Bookstore at present sells books at list pricesestablished by publishers and does not offer discounts to members of the University. It is likelythat a discount policy would reduce profits ; but thevalue to the academic community of having booksavailable at lower prices might be sufficient to offsetthis loss.However, it is important not only that the University have a Bookstore to serve the special needsof its members, but also that the private bookstoresin the community be kept in a thriving condition.The more and better bookstores there are in thecommunity, the greater will be the intellectualbenefits to all. Therefore, the University shouldnot institute any policy of subsidized sales thatwould provide unfair competition to the privately-run bookstores in the neighborhood (though itshould be observed that one privately-run bookstore in the community currently does offer a 10per cent discount to students and faculty membersand appears to be operating profitably) .6. The Committee therefore recommends that, after more space has been provided to take care ofan increased volume of sales, consideration be givento instituting a 10 per cent discount on certaintrade books (but not textbooks or paperbacks). Ifexperimentation should indicate that discounts donot drastically reduce profits, and do not adverselyaffect the local bookstores, they should be continued.Services7. The Committee recommends that serious consideration be given to keeping the Bookstore openone or two evenings a week at least. Having theBookstore open evenings would be a particular convenience at the beginning of each quarter whensales are especially heavy during the normal daytime hours. The Committee does not know howmuch it would cost to keep the Bookstore openevenings, but suggests that, because the presentspace is so inadequate, some extra costs might bejustified for diminishing the inconvenience to students and faculty during the overcrowded rushhours by extending the time during which the Bookstore is kept open.8. The Committee also recommends that consideration be given to having one person on the stafffamiliar with foreign publishing and wholesale bookmarkets, and that a foreign book section be established that will stock standard works in all important modern foreign languages. This foreign bookstaff member should also work with the textbooksection so that foreign textbooks can be ordereddirectly rather than through jobbers. (This wouldprobably provide the academic community withforeign books at reduced prices.)Organization9. The Committee recommends the establishment of an academic governing board for the Bookstore, perhaps modeled on the Board of UniversityPublications that serves the Press. The purpose ofthis board would be to see that the general policiesof the Bookstore, primarily with respect to themerchandise stocked, are appropriate for the University, and to see that those policies are carriedout.10. The Committee also recommends that a student-faculty committee on the Bookstore be established to act as a continuous liaison between theBookstore, the departmental subcommittees and theacademic community.The Committee is pleased that the present management has made and is making many changes to12improve the services of the Bookstore; but thepresent facilities of the Bookstore are inadequatefor the needs of the academic community — thestore cannot stock the number of titles it shouldwithout considerably more space. The building ofa new store with ample space would make it possirble for The University of Chicago to have thefinest academic bookstore in the United States.REPORT TO THE PRESIDENTON STUDENT INVOLVEMENTMarch 1, 1968TO: George W. Beadle, PresidentFROM : Charles D. O'Connell, Dean of StudentsIn response to your inquiry, the deans of the College, the Divisions and the Schools have preparedsummaries of student involvement in the variousacademic areas. I hereby transmit these to youalong with a report on some activities which areUniversity-wide.Two committees draw students from the entireUniversity and consider all aspects of student lifeat the University. The President's Informal Student Advisory Committee is made up of two students each from the College, the Divisions and theSchools, appointed in each case by the dean of theirarea. This Committee, as you know, meets periodically with the President and with such other academic or administrative officers as are appropriateto the agenda. The Faculty-Student Advisory Committee on Campus Student Life serves in an advisory capacity to the Dean of Students. A temporary faculty-student committee met several timesduring the autumn and winter and worked out aproposal, which you just accepted, for electing thestudent members of the committee.Several faculty-student committees have servedin the past two years to report on special matters.One of these is the Blum Committee, with its subcommittees on dormitory housing and HutchinsonCommons. A summary of their work to date was carried in the January 23, 1968 issue of The Universityof Chicago Record. Another is the Faculty-StudentCommittee on the Bookstore, whose report has already resulted in a number of changes in Bookstorelayout and service. A third is the Faculty-StudentCommittee on the South Campus which has beenmeeting regularly and which will soon be issuing an interim report. A special Faculty-Student Committee on Meetings and another on Selective Serviceand Class Rank have already reported. One additional organization should be mentioned in this connection — the Inter-House Council, which meetsregularly with administrative officers from the offices of the Dean of Students and the Manager ofCampus Business Operations to discuss ways ofimproving the physical life of the residence halls.Two publications were created this year to keepstudents informed — The University of ChicagoRecord and The College Chronicle.Several regular but less formal opportunities forstudent-faculty discussion have come into being inthe last year. I join Deans Booth and Isenberg forcoffee with students each Thursday morning inHutchinson Commons to talk about any matterwhich students choose to raise. A group of deanshave also been meeting groups of 12 to 15 freshmentwice weekly over lunch in Swift Commons. TheCollege has conducted a series of dinners in Hutchinson Commons for students in the various Collegiate Divisions. Finally, in most of the residencehalls students have developed very active programsbringing faculty members for lunch or dinner anddiscussion.Following below are the reports from the deans.The CollegeEach Collegiate Division now has a student advisory council to consult with the Masters and insome cases with the governing committees and tohelp implement various parts of the programs. TheCouncils have planned a variety of luncheon anddinner meetings with speakers in order to discussvarious matters of concern to students in the Collegiate Divisions. These activities have been reported in The College Chronicle.For the past several years a student-faculty. committee has planned freshman Orientation Week,with the help of the Director of Orientation.The Dean of the College has organized a studentadvisory council with representatives from each ofthe following groups: each class, fraternity men,dormitory residents, apartment dwellers, athletes,musicians, GRTS, SPLIBS, political activists andclub women. The expectation is that this councilwill meet regularly with the Dean and occasionallywith the Executive Committee and the Committeeof the College Council to express opinion on matters of concern.In addition, there are many undergraduate student clubs which encourage contact with faculty.These clubs have been increasing in the last two13years and have been encouraged by small grantsfrom the Dean for entertainment and for specialprojects.Wayne C. BoothDean of the CollegeDivision of the Biological SciencesThe Division of the Biological Sciences has bothmedical students and graduate students. In theMedical School, the following has taken place.1. Elected class representatives meet periodicallywith the Divisional Dean of Students to discussproblems and questions of mutual concern.2. Three students this past quarter were invitedby the faculty Curricular Review Committee toparticipate in the Committee's discussions as consultants and have been attending the Committee'smeetings regularly.In the basic science departments, there seems tobe no need to establish additional channels of communication. Each graduate student does his research either in the laboratory of his faculty sponsor or in a student laboratory nearby. Thus thegraduate student has virtually daily close contactwith at least one faculty member. In addition, eachdepartment has its own student counselor to whomthe entering graduate student is assigned.Finally, individual departments have weekly coffee hours for their faculty and students or arrangeto have student-faculty lunches once a week todiscuss matters of general interest.Joseph Ceithaml, Dean of StudentsDivision of the Biological SciencesDivision of the HumanitiesBecause the Division of the Humanities has somany departments and committees directing graduate programs, and because these subunits vary sogreatly in the nature of their scholarly concerns,the degree of professional involvement which theirstudents feel and the size of their student population, the chairmen and the Divisional Policy Committee have counseled me to place primary emphasis on developing communication with students atthe department-committee level.The most productive development here has beena powerful tendency to associate students directlyin joint scholarly professional enterprises. In Linguistics, for example, graduate students participatefully in the regular meetings of the Chicago Lin guistics Society, which includes participants fromother universities in the city. At these meetings,Eric P. Hamp, Chairman of the Department, notesstudents usually give the papers. With assistancefrom the Department of Linguistics, graduate students have initiated a local journal produced byXerox through an arrangement with UniversityMicrofilms in Ann Arbor; the first issue containedpapers exclusively by Chicago students. Similarly,the graduate students in Linguistics will bring outthis spring a volume of essays on linguistic topics.In Philosophy also, the Department has consulted an organized student group on such mattersas the reorganization of office facilities to providebetter service for students, the selection of researchmaterials to be made available in the departmentaloffice, the provision of a Philosophy common room(which we hope to establish in Classics 16 nextquarter) and the selection of outside speakers invited to appear at the Department's weekly seminaron Friday afternoon. The student group in Philosophy also organizes informal discussion groups onphilosophic questions; these are supported depart-mentally by participation of faculty members andprovision of discussion materials.In English, students are working with Gwin J.Kolb, Chairman of the Department, on the choiceof speakers for series such as the Morton D. ZabelLectures and on scheduling informal dinner meetings with faculty members for the discussion ofspecific scholarly or critical problems. Students alsoplanned with the Department a large social affairat the Quadrangle Club in mid-February.In virtually all areas there is a special-interestclub or group which encourages student-faculty interchange on intellectual questions: the HistoryClub, the Archeological Club, the Near EasternClub, the Germanics Club, and so on. Three departments — Romance Languages, Classics and Linguistics — schedule weekly teas to bring their students together. In a department such as Music, thenature of regular activities, especially in the performance of music, brings faculty and students together so frequently and so informally that organization seems redundant.I should also mention one student-operated facility that has done a great deal to permit social contacts among students and faculty. This was theconversion, three years ago, of the fourth-floorWieboldt Common Room to the Nonesuch CoffeeHouse, for which a dozen graduate students, mostlyfrom the Department of English, are responsible.This is open from 9 a.m. to around 4:30 p.m. andis very heavily used.On curricular matters, consultation with students14has been sporadic and, where it has occurred, ex-licitly advisory. When the Committee on GeneralStudies reviewed its requirements two years ago,Norman Maclean (then Chairman) asked the students to select an advisory committee to work withthe faculty, and they did so. In Philosophy, thestudent society has been invited to proffer suggestions on curriculum to the Department. In mostother areas, comments on curriculum are collectedmore informally by the chairmen.Robert E. Streeter, DeanDivision of the HumanitiesDivision of the Physical SciencesThe several departments have reported a rangeof organizations and activities. The Department ofAstronomy and Astrophysics has participated in theAstronomy Club through rebuilding the Ryersontelescope and by supplying speakers. Student-faculty contact in the Department of Chemistry is primarily informal. Professor Nien-Chu Yang servesas undergraduate research director and departmental counselor and keeps close contact with studentsin Chemistry. He has supervised a special programof undergraduate research which has been veryhelpful in cultivating contact between students andsenior members of the faculty.The Enrico Fermi Institute provides still anotherkind of activity through its "coffee room" in theInstitute building.Victor H. Yngve, Chairman of the Committeeon Information Sciences, reports that he has appointed a joint student-faculty committee to advisethe Chairman on the reading room library. A separate student committee has been appointed to advise the chairman on student environment. TheChairman and other faculty members plan to meetregularly with groups of students.In the Department of Mathematics regular teasfour times a week encourage informal contact between graduate students and faculty. There is alsoan annual beer party and skit planned by the graduate students. The Undergraduate MathematicsClub is being revived and is sponsoring programsopen to the public.The Department of Physics has two functioningclubs. The first, The Undergraduate Journal Club,has been meeting once a week throughout the academic year since October 1963. Attendees are juniors and seniors majoring in physics, a sprinklingof graduate students and sophomores, and twomembers of the Physics Department faculty andthe departmental adviser, who serve as faculty advisers. (Faculty advising to The UndergraduateJournal Club is a regular teaching assignment. Twofaculty members are given this assignment eachquarter.) Each week, one of the students gives atalk on some topic in physics which is of interestto him. The talks are usually based on articles inthe American Journal of Physics.The second club, primarily for graduate students,is The Gastro-fizzical Society. This group evolvedfrom the Fizzics Club, which was started in 1963.At that time the Club met about once a month witha member of the faculty at a fraternity house forbeer. The guest faculty member spoke informallyabout his research or anything else he wanted totalk about. Two years ago the scope of the Clubwas enlarged to include dinners — thus the namechange. Presently the group has dinner at IdaNoyes Hall, cooked by some volunteer studentsand wives of students. Unfortunately, because ofthe location, the beer or wine has been abandoned.The Department of Statistics is currently discussing the formation of a student group. On the otherhand, the Chairman reports, a decentralized advisory system and a variety of informal conversations already offer ample opportunity for studentsto raise questions with faculty members. The Department has three faculty-student get-togetherseach year — an orientation meeting and a party inthe autumn, and a picnic in the spring. The firsttwo are well-established traditions, while the third,which was successfully started last year, is likelyto become a fixture.A. Adrian Albert, DeanDivision of the Physical SciencesDivision of the Social SciencesThere does not now exist a general student organization for the Division. The graduate students inseveral of the departments and committees, however, have active student groups. Some of the organizations are largely social; others take an activepart in the conduct of seminars and in discussionswith faculty members.Student groups in Economics, Political Scienceand Sociology are quite active. They have formedthe Political Economy Club, the Political ScienceAssociation, and the Society for Social Research.There are three important student groups in theDepartment of Education — Pi Lambda Theta, PhiDelta Kappa and a student-faculty committee.There is also a History Club in the Department ofHistory that has been active in the past two years.ISFinally, a student journal is published in the Committee on Human Development.The other departments do not have formal student organizations. During Winter Quarter, 1968, aCouncil of Graduate Students was formed in theDivision of the Social Sciences. This Council, whichincludes three students from each of the major departments and committees, is advisory to the twodeans of the Division. The Council serves as ameans through which information can be exchanged.In addition, and most important, the members ofthe Council are currently studying a number ofproblems that are of general concern to studentsin the Division of the Social Sciences.D. Gale Johnson, DeanDivision of the Social SciencesGraduate School of BusinessThe Business Club is the official organization ofthe student body at the Graduate School of Business. Students automatically become members uponmatriculation. At present no dues or fees are required, since the Club is financed from a specialDean's fund and from miscellaneous school revenues. Officers of the Club are elected quarterly bythe student body, and each set of officers meets atleast once each quarter with the Dean.The functions of the Business Club have variedin recent years with student needs and the initiativeof the officers. For the 1967-68 academic year theprincipal activities are:a) the Newsletter, printed weekly, serving as aforum for student opinion and a vehicle for information within the Graduate School of Business (arecent Newsletter editorial prompted an open meeting in January on the grading system) ;b) the Invitation Lecture Series, drawing prominent local and national business leaders, of the students' choice, to the Graduate School of Businesseach week ;c) faculty-student social activities including beerparties and at least one major semi-formal partyeach quarter ;d) participation in the University's committee tooversee and select directors for the Charter FlightProgram;e) the Book Exchange, primarily for the exchange of course books ;f ) maintaining records of past examinations ;g) the Course Evaluation Questionnaire, andh) providing reduced rate magazine subscriptions.The Graduate School of Business also has a large and active chapter of the Association Internationaledes Etudiants en Sciences Economiques et Com-merciales (AIESEC), an organization with chaptersat more than 250 universities throughout the world.Its principal activity is a program for the reciprocalexchange of United States and foreign students forshort-term assignments with business firms in othercountries, usually during the summer months. Itsbasic objective is to provide practical work experience to complement academic programs. Much ofthe time of AIESEC members is spent meeting withlocal businessmen to arrange work opportunities forstudents from abroad. To support its programs theAIESEC chapter engages in a variety of serviceactivities, including a coffee and doughnut counterand a photographic service.Among some additional activities are faculty-student softball games, Dean Schultz's reception eachquarter for students on the Dean's Honor List andtheir spouses, and student- faculty participation onan informal basis in noontime basketball in Bart-lett Gymnasium.Students in the Graduate School of Business havein recent years served as consultants to the recipients of loans from the Small Business OpportunityCorporation (SBOC) which has been organized bythe Office of Economic Opportunity. Working closely with the directors of SBOC in the Hyde Park-Kenwood area, each interested student arranges tomeet with one recipient of an SBOC loan, who isusually in a ghetto area. Students and loan recipients are then free to establish whatever relationship they want. In recent years the activities ofstudents, who work without compensation, haveranged from organizing the accounting records of aTV repair shop to presenting a house painter withan analysis of his sources of profit.Over the years, clubs in areas of specific academicinterest have met the needs of students by providing additional lectures, seminars, field trips, etc.Currently, the Finance Club, the Marketing Cluband the Accounting Club serve this function.Finally, we believe it has been a strong and continuing tradition in the School that relationshipsbetween students and faculty and among the students themselves have been characterized by informality, cordiality and mutual respect.George P. Schultz, DeanGraduate School of BusinessDivinity SchoolThe Divinity School student body has its ownStudent Association with elected representatives16nd officers. It seeks a representation based uponthe proportion of professional students and researchstudents enrolled in the Divinity degree programs.In addition, the professional students have organized themselves and elected their own steering committee.The Dean meets several times each quarter, at alunch, with the Divinity School Student Association's officers and representatives. At this meetingall matters of mutual interest are thoroughly discussed. At any time of crisis additional meetingsare held between the Dean and the officers of theStudent Association. Prior to the Dow Chemicalprotest, for instance, there were long discussionsbetween the Dean and the student representatives.In addition, the Dean held a school-wide generalmeeting with the student body the day before theDow visit.In the summer of 1967 an ad hoc committee met,composed of Divinity School Student Associationrepresentatives and faculty members present in thecity at the time. This group undertook a study onthe dynamics and consequences of the StudentsAgainst the Rank sit-ins. This material was prepared by a research student in the Ethics and Society field and was distributed among the studentrepresentatives, the faculty and the administration.A special faculty-student committee exists whoseaim it is to consider at what point student involvement in Divinity School decision-making is bothlegitimate and possible for expansion. In addition,the steering committee of the professional studentgroup meets on a regular basis with the Doctor ofMinistry Faculty Committee to discuss the contentand make-up of the Doctor of Ministry curriculum.This professional curriculum is highly experimentalin nature, and the students are eager to participatein the experiment and to share their own conclusions and findings with the faculty.Student-faculty contact has always been excellent. All students have faculty advisers. Numerousstudent-faculty activities are held throughout theyear. Every Wednesday noon there is a DivinitySchool luncheon in Swift Commons with a briefaddress and full discussion. The luncheon is operated by the Divinity School Student Associationand is attended by 80 to 100 students and facultymembers. The Divinity School had the first student-operated coffee shop in the University. Located inthe basement of Swift Hall, it is one of the finestinformal meeting places for students and faculty ofthe Divinity School and of other parts of the University. Several times a quarter papers are read bystudents and a "coffee shop discussion" results.The students carry out many projects of their own, financed by income from the coffee shop.Twice a year they hold a day-long conference ona key theological-educational problem. Distinguished lecturers are brought in, discussions areheld, and sometimes publication results. These conferences draw large audiences of students and faculty.The students participate widely in various University activities — social, political and athletic. TheDivinity School student wives are organized andhold regular meetings and a series of lectures. TheStudent and Faculty Wives' Association arrangesseveral school-wide activities each year.One of the most fruitful and active informal activities is the "sack lunch." The Divinity School isdiyided into seven academic fields for research. Thestudents have organized themselves in each of theseven fields, and they hold biweekly or monthly"sack lunches," where students and faculty hearbrief papers or dialogues on key academic problems. An informal and very fruitful discussion follows. This has become a remarkable technique fordeepening student-faculty understanding and building high morale in each field. Students operate theentire program.Numerous projects are carried on by the DivinitySchool Student Association, some temporary andothers ongoing. They have a student publication,book projects, tutorial projects, etc.Jerald C. Brauer, DeanDivinity SchoolEducationWithin the Education complex of the University,there are both a Department of Education Student-Faculty Committee and a School of Education Student Representative Committee.School of Education. The MAT program has twostudent representative committees, both with sixrepresentatives elected by the students. The first-year MAT representative committee meets everytwo weeks; the second-year committee meets oncea month.Department of Education. The Student-FacultyCommittee was organized in spring 1967 and consists of ten members — five from the faculty andfive from the student body. Faculty are appointedby the Chairman of the Department and serve forfour quarters; membership is rotated. Studentmembers are elected at-large by students in residence in the Department. To be eligible, a studentmust be registered for two or more courses.17The Committee has two co-chairmen, one a stu-•dent, the other a faculty member. The Committeeordinarily meets every two weeks but is subject tocall whenever business is pending.Students have participated most enthusiasticallyin the election of student members and there seemsto be continuing and strong interest in the activitiesof the organization. The Committee first concerneditself with a variety of housekeeping problems,notably the question of lockers which have beeninstalled in Judd Hall, increasing the availability ofpublic and campus telephones in Judd Hall, foodand drink service, and problems relating to the circulation of books in the Judd Hall library. But theCommittee has also been concerned with substantive issues, most of which are related to opportunities for research training and the function of thegeneral and special field examinations. With respectto the first of these, Committee discussions culminated in a recommendation that a faculty committee be appointed to study the problem and recommend appropriate action. Such a committee hasbeen appointed and will report at a future meetingof the faculty. The Student-Faculty Committee isnow considering the question of the general andspecial field examinations.The Student-Faculty Committee was also responsible for the Orientation Session for new studentsin the Department in autumn 1967. The event waswell planned and turned out well. Student membersof the Committee assumed primary responsibility.The Committee has no shortage of items for itsagenda. Many of the problems do not lend themselves to easy solution, but both students and faculty have apparently found their discussions extraordinarily valuable.Kenneth J. Rehage, Dean of StudentsSchool of EducationSecretary, Department of EducationLaw SchoolStudents in the Law School have for many yearshad a Law School Association. Membership in theAssociation includes all students in the Law School.Officers and a board of class representatives areelected by the student body. The Association has anoffice in the Law School. It conducts various activities that contribute to the social and extracurricular life of the student body, including management of the marathon "coffee hour" in the loungeof the Law School ; sponsorship of a dance or othermajor social event each quarter; running of athletic events such as the annual faculty-student Softballgame; arrangement of a program of informal talksby outside guests that are held approximately eachweek in the lounge of the School, and arrangementof small weekly luncheons attended by a facultymember and six to eight students.The Law School Association also serves as achannel of communication between the studentbody and the Dean's office. The Dean and membersof the board of the Association have lunch togetherperiodically to discuss questions of common concernand to exchange suggestions.The tradition and atmosphere of the Law Schoolencourage a great deal of informal contact and freeinterchange between the students and the faculty.In addition to the activities mentioned above, thevarious extracurricular organizations (such as theMoot Court Committee, the Law Review and theLegal Aid Association) draw upon faculty membersfor assistance in their programs (such as acting asjudges in the moot courts) and hold dinners andsimilar events that are attended by mmbers of thefaculty. Each member of the faculty has a groupof seven or eight advisees in each entering class inthe School and faculty members normally see thesegroups several times a year, often by entertainingthem in their homes. The majority of the facultyspend some part of each day, usually after class,in the Law School Lounge where conversation between faculty and students is constant and lively.A number of the faculty are in the habit of eatinglunch in the Burton- Judson dining hall, where theymore often than not mingle with law students.There is also a law wives' organization, whichregularly invites members of the faculty to speakat its meetings.It is the belief of the faculty of the Law School(one apparently shared by the students generally)that the informal arrangements for understandingstudent problems and receiving student views arevery satisfactory. The School places a high valueon the sense of community and the rapport betweenfaculty and students that have long been characteristic at the School.George E. Fee Jr., Dean of StudentsLaw SchoolGraduate Library SchoolThe extent of my effort thus far to set up channels of faculty-student communication has beenonly to suggest to a large group of students (about50) that it would be in their interest if they would18. me way get organized so that they would be School is relatively small and it is possible that they• a position to make their wishes and opinions feel there is already good communication.known. Thus far there has been no specific responseto the suggestion. I would guess that the students Don R. Swanson, Deanee no great need for such formality since the Graduate Library SchoolCALENDAR OF EVENTSMARCHMarch 19— COMMITTEE OF THE COUNCIL: Quadrangle Club, noon.March 20-22— VARSITY SWIMMING: National Intercollegiate Championship, College Division,Emory University at Atlanta.March 21— BOARD OF PRECOLLEGIATE EDUCATION: Hutchinson Commons, noon.ALUMNI MEETING: Yale Brozen, Speaker, Dallas, Texas.March 22— GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS: Convocation Reception, Garfield CoxLounge, 4:30 p.m.March 23-24— VARSITY GYMNASTICS: NCAA College Division National Championships atSpringfield, Massachusetts.MUSICAL FOR CHILDREN: "The Clue of the Circus Clowns," Mandel Hall,Saturday at 10:30 a.m. and 2:30 p.m., Sunday at 1:30 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. Ticketsrequired — phone Neighborhood Club.March 23— CLASSES END FOR SENIOR MEDICAL STUDENTS.VARSITY TRACK: Western Michigan Open at Kalamazoo.ALUMNI MEETING: Contemporary Chamber Players, Wolpe Concert, conducted by Ralph Shapey, New York City.RADIO SERIES: Conversations at Chicago, "The Contemporary Art Museum'sResponsibility to the Public," Jiri Setlik, Director of Museum of Modern Art,Prague; Jan van der Marck, Director of Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago,and Harold Haydon, Moderator, Director of Midway Studios.MUSICAL FOR CHILDREN: "The Clue of the Circus Clowns," Mandel Hall,10:30 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. Tickets required — phone Neighborhood Club.March 24— RADIO SERIES: From the Midway, "The Negro's Role in U.S. Politics," ahistorical review by Lerone Bennett, Senior Editor of Ebony Magazine.MUSICAL FOR CHILDREN: "The Clue of the Circus Clowns," Mandel Hall,1:30 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. Tickets required — phone Neighborhood Club.FILM: "The Rivers of Time," Oriental Institute, 2:30 p.m. Open to public — noadmission charge.TV SERIES: University of Chicago Round Table, Channel 11, 5:30 p.m.March 25-26— REGISTRATION FOR SPRING QUARTER.March 25— CLASSES FOR SPRING QUARTER BEGIN.ALUMNI MEETING: Roderick Childers, Speaker, Portland, Oregon.19March 2d— GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS: 190/MBA Orientation Reception.March 27— LECTURE: "The Families of Galaxies," William W. Morgan, Astronomy Department, sponsored by the Astronomical Society, Undergraduate Club; Ryerson251,8:00 p.m.ALUMNI MEETING: George Beadle, Speaker, Houston, Texas.March 28-30— VARSITY FENCING: NCAA Championships at Wayne State University.March 30— SATURDAY SEMINAR: Breakfast followed by seminar, Oriental Institute,10:30 a.m.VARSITY TRACK: CAUU Indoor Championships, Field House, 2 :00 and 7 :00 p.m.RADIO SERIES: Conversations at Chicago, "European Unity and the UnitedStates," Sir Geoffrey de Freitas, Member of British Parliament and President ofthe Consultative Assembly of the Council of Europe, Strasbourg, France ; EtienneHirsch, International President of the European Federalist Movement and FormerPresident of Eratom, Paris, and Kenneth J. Northcott, Moderator, HumanitiesDivision.ALUMNI MEETING: Trustee Scholarship Interviews for Cook County, Chicago.March 31— RADIO SERIES: From the Midway, "The Role of the Elected Negro PublicOfficial in the Changing American Scene," Kenneth Clark, Psychology Department, City College of New York, and President of the Metropolitan Applied Research Center, New York.UNIVERSITY SERVICES: Dr. Colin Williams, Director of the Doctor ofMinistry Program, Divinity School, Rockefeller Chapel, 11:00 a.m.TV SERIES: University of Chicago Round Table, Channel 11, 5:30 p.m.CONVENTIONS IN CHICAGOMarch 20-2 3— American Orthopsychiatric Association, Conrad Hilton Hotel.March 23-24 — Chicago Psychoanalytic Society, Center for Continuing Education.March 23-25 — Commercial Law League of America — Regional Meeting, Ambassador Hotel.March 24-30 — Cognitive Studies, Center for Continuing Education.March 24-28 — North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools, Palmer House.March 25-26 — Midwest Conference on Graduate Study and Research, La Salle Hotel.American Management Association Seminar, La Salle Hotel.March 28-29 — Chicago Heart Association, La Salle Hotel.March 29-30 — Illinois Supreme Court, Center for Continuing Education.March 30-April 3 — American Society of Abdominal Surgeons — Clinical Congress, Sherman House.EXHIBITSFebruary 15-March 31— JERUSALEM, AUGUST 1967: A set of photographs taken by Richard Gordon,University of Chicago graduate. All photographs are for sale. Hillel House, Monday-Friday 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.; evenings and Saturday and Sunday when buildingis open.March 18- April 18— ART NOUVEAU: The Renaissance Gallery, 108 Goodspeed Hall, Monday-Friday10:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.; Saturday 1:00-5:00 p.m.20RELIGIOUS SERVICESCHRISTIAN SCIENCE: Tuesday, 7:15 p.m., Thorndike Hilton Chapel.EPISCOPAL: Sunday, 9:00 a.m., Eucharist, Bond Chapel. Wednesday, Holy Communion, breakfast following, Brent House. Thursday, noon, Holy Communion, Bond Chapel.JEWISH: At Hillel House. Friday, sundown, orthodox; 7:30 p.m., reform; 7:30 p.m., conservative. Saturday, 9:15 a.m., orthodox; 9:15 a.m. weekly discussion, conservative-liberal. Saturday afternoon, Minchaand Seudah Shlishit, Yavneh of Hillel.LUTHERAN: Sunday, Holy Communion, Graham Taylor Chapel, 10:00 a.m.; Service, Bond Chapel,11:00 a.m. Wednesday, Communion in the Upper Room," Chapel House, breakfast following, Friday,Service, Bond Chapel, noon.ROCKEFELLER MEMORIAL CHAPEL: Sunday, Service, 11:00 a.m.ROMAN CATHOLIC: Sunday, Mass, Calvert House, 8:30 a.m.; Breasted Hall, 10:30 a.m. and noon;Bond Chapel, 5 :00 p.m. Weekday Mass, Calvert House, 7 :30 a.m., noon, and 5 : 10 p.m.UNITARIAN: Tuesday-Friday, Hull Chapel, First Unitarian Church, 5:15 p.m.; Sunday, 10:30 a.m.RECREATIONAL FACILITIESIda Noyes HallGYM: Available when classes not in session; for reservations phone 3574.BADMINTON: Available when gym not in use; open hours are Sunday, 3:00-7:00 p.m.; for reservations phone 3574.BADMINTON DOUBLES: Tournment games (one man and one woman) are scheduled for Monday,7:00-9:00 p.m.BILLIARDS: Available Monday-Friday, 9:00 a.m.-4:15 p.m.; for reservations phone 3574. Nominal fee.BOWLING: Available when no bowling classes; open hours with pin setters are Wednesday and Friday,7 :00-9 :00 p.m. ; for reservations phone 3574.GOLF PRACTICE CAGES: For reservations phone 3574.MODERN DANCE ROOM: For reservations phone 3574.SLIMNASTICS FOR WOMEN: Monday and Thursday, 5:15-6:15 p.m.SWIMMING: Women only, Monday, Tuesday and Thursday, 4 :30-6 :00 p.m. (suits and towels provided).Men and women, Wednesday and Friday, 7:30-9:00 p.m.; Sunday, 3:30-5:00 p.m. (suits and towels notprovided). Families with children, Sunday, 5:00-6:00 p.m. (suits and towels not provided).TABLE TENNIS: Open from 9 :00 a.m.-IO :00 p.m., no reservations necessary.TABLE TENNIS DOUBLES: Tournament games (one man and one woman) are scheduled for Wednesday, 7:00-9:00 p.m.TENNIS: A practice beatboard available on reservation. Phone 3574.TRAMPOLINE: Available Monday-Friday, 4:30-6:00 p.m.; Monday-Thursday, 7:00-9:00 p.m. For reservations phone 3574.VOLLEYBALL: Courts available on reservation. Phone 3574.21Bartlett GymGYM: Available when classes not in session, noon hours and evenings after 3:00 p.m.SWIMMING: Men, Monday-Friday, 12:30-1:30 p.m. and 5:00-6:00 p.m.; men and women, Mondayand Thursday, 7:30-9:00 p.m.INDOOR TENNIS: Field House; for reservations phone 4680.SQUASH: Daily except Sunday; for reservations phone 4680.HANDBALL: Daily except Sunday; for reservations phone 4680.SOFTBALL: Intramural league play to be arranged, Room 102 A. Phone 4691.HOLIDAYSPassover Saturday, April 13Easter Sunday Sunday, April 14Mother's Day Sunday, May 12Memorial Day Thursday, May 30Father's Day Sunday, June 18Independence Day Thursday, July 4Labor Day Monday, September 2Rosh Hashana Monday, September 23Yom Kippur Wednesday, October 2Columbus Day Saturday, October 12Halloween Thursday, October 31Election Day Tuesday, November 5Thanksgiving Day Thursday, November 28Hanukka . Monday, December 16Christmas Wednesday, December 25IMPORTANT UNIVERSITY DATESSpring Quarter Registration Monday, March 25and Tuesday, March 26Spring Quarter Classes Meet Monday, March 25Memorial Day Thursday, May 30Spring Convocation Sunday Sunday, June 2Spring Convocation (1) Friday, June 7Spring Convocation (2) Saturday, June 8Alumni Day Saturday, June 8Spring Quarter Ends Saturday, June 822THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO RECORDOFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE FACULTIES1i8>owo0%0njlrcbxves 90om ± C Z03^3 CO 1zP> O 0o - — °5 2I3 z •Hi>22 mgCO 3