THE UNIVERSITY OFCHICAGO 8 RECOEDNovember 18, 1975 An Official Publication Volume IX, Number 5CONTENTS147 THE STATE OF THE UNIVERSITYJohn T. Wilson, Provost and Acting PresidentTHE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGOFOUNDED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER©Copyright 1975 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO RECORDTHE STATE OF THE UNIVERSITYBY JOHN T. WILSON, PROVOST AND ACTING PRESIDENTNovember 11, 1975It has been about eighteen months since Mr.Levi's last State of the University message. Itseemed to me that although we continue in aninterim state insofar as the Presidency is concerned, it would be desirable and in keeping withStatutory requirements to report on some of themore important happenings in the University during this period.Among these none is more important than Mr.Levi's departure from the University to assumehis present post as Attorney General of theUnited States. As most of you know, he returnedfor last June's Convocation, at which time,in an exercise in reciprocal honors, the Universitybestowed and he accepted the Honorary Degreeof Doctor of Humane Letters. I regret that thereis nothing to report regarding an equally importantand related event, the appointment of Mr. Levi'ssuccessor. I am told that the Committee of Trustees and the advisory faculty group elected by theCouncil are working diligently.Under the circumstances, I do not have a personal academic agenda to propose, nor oneagainst which progress might be assessed. Thatmust await the new President. At the same time, Ihave not assumed that a simple caretaker role waswhat the Trustees had in mind when they askedme to serve as Acting President. In any event, 1have not been behaving within that mode.The BudgetLet me begin by summarizing very briefly thestate of affairs regarding the University's budget.The budget has been a matter of primary concernsince June of 1970 and continues to be so. I shallnot go into any detail in this report, since youwere sent in September the annual memorandumon the subject. As we then pointed out, the essence of the problem of the budget is the persis tent difference between available annual incomeand he amount of expenditures necessary to coverthe program needs of the academic areas, especially those that are met by unrestricted funds.Since the 1970-71 academic year, the Universityhas been functioning under budgetary restraints.Beginning last year, there has been an intensifiedeffort to bring the budget into balance by continuing controls on expenditures, continuing efforts toenhance income, and, in this year's budget andnext, the introduction of a special income contribution from expendable funds generated byPhase Two of the Campaign for Chicago.We are now in the second of a three-year program to reduce the difference between unrestricted income and unrestricted expenditures tozero. Next year is the zero-year. Then the problem becomes one of maintaining such a happystate of budgetary affairs. This will depend on thesuccess of our budget strategy and upon the success of the Campaign, particularly in the creationof a structure that will insure continued highlevels of giving beyond the period of the Campaign.In September the Campaign reached a majormilestone when total gifts, pledges, and intentionspassed the $100 million level. Events during theperiod on which I report had an understandabletemporary decelerating influence on theCampaign's momentum. In addition, there hasbeen some necessary regrouping in the Development Office and in the Campaign Staff. These organizational problems were successfully resolvedduring the past Summer Quarter and, in my judgment, the Campaign is again on course and underfull power.The challenge to alumni by Robert O. and Barbara Anderson promises to have a major and lasting impact on alumni giving. The Andersons havepledged to match all new and increased gifts fromalumni, over those of last year, up to a maximum147of $25,000 from any individual and up to a total of$1 million. Their pledge and the matching giftsshould prvide the University with urgentlyneeded additional unrestricted support and alsohelp to develop an expanded national organizationof alumni volunteers who will assist in maintaining this support in future years. We are making amajor effort to have the Anderson's pledge fullymatched by December 31, 1975.The obvious importance of the success of theCampaign to the budget and to the future of theUniversity means that it must engage the best efforts of all of us: Trustees, Officers, and Facultybecause, very simply, the future of this University is the responsibility of all of us. In making thispoint, I should emphasize that it has not been thepurpose of the series of memoranda on the budgetthat you have been sent over the past seven yearsto convey a preoccupation with budgetary mattersover academic matters in the University. I do notbelieve for a moment that the history of the University during this period will be embellished because we achieve a balanced budget, if we do. Abudget is merely a means to an end, and our concern has been to» insure that the means will beadequate to enable the continued existence of aUniversity with ends that have characterized TheUniversity of Chicago from its beginning. I believe the budgetary practices of Mr. Harper, thatalways pressed the limits of the University's resources in the interest of achieving academic distinction, will probably always characterize thisUniversity. The key in this fiscal drama is theattainment and maintenance of academic distinction, which is the criterion against which historyshould and will measure us.The FacultyThe essential component of this criterion is thefaculty. By any measure, it has been, from thebeginning, the University's primary resource andthe basis for its distinction. Harper, in his firstannual report, stated that it was essential ". . .torecognize . . . that whatever might be the outlayfor buildings and for equipment, the character ofthe University depended wholly upon the character of the men chosen to fill the chairs of instruction." There appears from time to time, both inHarper's writings and in those of successive chiefexecutive officers, a corollary expression emphasizing the smallness of the University, and thesmallness of the faculty. Smallness is a relativeconcept, and an important question before theUniversity is what size faculty, which will meetthe highest possible academic standards, can be sustained with the potential resources available.With this question in mind, we have been acutelyconcerned from time to time during the period ofour budgetary deficits that we not suffer a potentially more serious concomitant — that of anacademic deficit.Starting in the academic year 1970-71, the University has functioned under a policy of no growthin the overall size of the faculty. There has been,in fact, an attempt to reduce the number of facultyin order to bring it to a size congruent withfirst-order intellectual standards and available resources. As a result of this policy, we haveachieved a net reduction in the size of the facultyof 54 positions as of June 30 this year, to a level of1 ,062, from the June 1970 base of 1 ,116 not counting those faculty engaged in full-time administration. In its report of 1974, the Deans' BudgetCommittee recommended that there be continuedreduction in the faculty until it reached approximately 1,000 in overall size. This recommendation assumed a Quadrangles student body of approximately 8,000.As a result of the policy regarding faculty size,serious variations are developing throughout theUniversity with reference to faculty-studentratios and other pertinent criteria such as comparative teaching loads. There are special problems in certain areas, for example, in some Clinical Departments of The Pritzker School ofMedicine, which reflect the needs of specialtymedical training. At the same time, there areneeds related to teaching in the College and incertain of the Professional Schools. We are concerned that needs in one area not override validneeds in other academic areas.Because of the importance of the problem, Ihave asked the Dean of Faculties to chair aUniversity-wide committee to review and to makelong-term recommendations regarding faculty sizeand composition. I have also asked the Dean of theBiological Sciences and The Pritzker School ofMedicine to establish a related committee tostudy the special faculty needs of that area. Ihope, as a result of the work of these two committees, the University can take a rational, long-range approach to the question. Related to thegeneral problem of faculty size and compositionare several issues, for example:1. A further examination of the point on theacademic ladder at which tenure is granted. Lastyear, the Graduate School of Business adoited apolicy of deferring tenure until the rank of fullProfessor. Whether this practice might advantageously be adopted in other areas seems to me148to be an open question.2. A review of the strictly full-time faculty concept in The Pritzker School of Medicine, especially in the Clinical Departments. Related to thisquestion is the possibility of additional types ofappointments that would entail some acceptablesubstitute for tenure.3. The possibility of introducing somewhatmore imaginative approaches to impending retirement. Alternatives to simply deferring retirement strike me as a profitable area of examination. One can imagine a number of variations onthe all or none practice now in effect that wouldbe advantageous both to the individual and to theUniversity.These are merely illustrative of what I have inmind, and it is the Committee's intention to lookinto other issues that may arise during its deliberations.In our concern with overall faculty size we havebeen especially aware of the reduced influx ofyoung faculty into the various academic units. Wehave considered with the Deans over the past fiveyears how this problem might be alleviated.About three years ago one plan was devised inwhich restricted funds were to be used to supplement the regular academic budget in a way thatwould initiate a flow of young faculty into theareas relating human behavior and education. Thebasic idea was to recruit junior faculty at a ratedetermined by the anticipated outflow of seniorfaculty. The proposal was accepted by theSpencer Foundation and, following a grant madeby that Foundation, the plan is functioning successfully. Last year the Andrew W. MellonFoundation made a significant grant to the University which has allowed the Humanities Division to initiate a similar program for the recruitment of young scholars. During the SummerQuarter we received a gift from the InternationalBusiness Machines Corporation for an analogousprogram in the Physical Sciences Division. Wecontinue to pursue with other prospective donorsthe same idea, to provide for a flow of young faculty in all academic areas.There remains the question of faculty quality.It is my impression that as we have experiencedrestraints on faculty size, we have been achievinghigher standards both in new recruitment and inpromotions. It has been and continues to be ourpractice to apply standards that will move themedian quality level upward in all academic units.In so doing, we have attempted to adhere to apolicy that will preserve our preeminence in thoseareas which seem most probable of success, especially those in which the University has historically been among the leaders. Our aspirationhas been for a high level of respectability in otherareas. Whether we currently meet GeorgeStigler's standard of "preeminence in a dozen ofthe most desirable and basic disciplines," each ofyou may judge for yourself. I am reasonablyhappy with our progress thus far, though I recognize the ambiguity of criteria of excellence insome academic areas. With reference to the lowend of the academic quality scale, there has been,during this period, a willingness on the part ofDeans to face, without undue reticence, problemsof debilitated academic areas and to initiate actions appropriate to solving them.In the past eighteen months the University haslost several faculty members whose equal will behard to match. During this same period therehave been distinguished faculty recruitments, andwe have successfully retained faculty who hadhighly attractive offers from other leading universities. Among the recruitments are RichardRosett, formerly of Rochester, now Dean of theGraduate School of Business, and Dr. DanielTosteson, who has come to the University fromDuke, as Dean of the Biological Sciences Division and The Pritzker School of Medicine. Fromour own faculty, William Kruskal was persuadedto accept the Deanship of the Social Sciences Division and Norval Morris, the Deanship of theLaw School. The University is greatly indebtedto Sidney Davidson, to Dr. Leon Jacobson, toRobert McCormick Adams, and to Phil Neal fortheir services in these Deanships, and I wouldadd my personal thanks for their leadership duringa most difficult period in the University's history.We also succeeded in persuading Mrs. Nel Nod-dings to leave the sunshine of Stanford to acceptthe Directorship of the Laboratory Schools, thusrelieving Philip Jackson of one of his several administrative responsibilities. We are grateful tohim for several years of yeoman service as Director of the Laboratory Schools during a particularly tumultuous period in their existence.We have been successful, especially in theHumanities Division, in recruiting young facultyfrom among the very best in the country. Thiswas in part made possible by corrections in salarylevels to make the University competitive withsalary standards elsewhere. We have made salaryadjustments in other academic areas, as well, andit is our intention to have this University competitive in this regard in all academic areas. Toachieve this goal, an essential component is a faculty of smaller size than is now the case.149StudentsWe cautiously believe that the trend of decreasingstudent enrollment experienced by the Universitysince 1969 has been reversed. You will recall thatin order to confront this problem a faculty committee on student enrollment was appointed inAutumn 1973 and issued a report the followingSpring. The report recommended a series of stepsto be taken to increase enrollment from a base ofless than 7,500 students on the Quadrangles in1973-74 to 7,800 students on the Quadrangles thisAutumn Quarter, and 8,000 students in Autumn1976.We are pleased to report that the efforts of thevarious academic units have enabled us to meet,and in some instances surpass, the levels set bythe Committee. As of the end of the first week ofAutumn Quarter, there were over 8,100 studentson the Quadrangles as compared with thebudgeted target of 7,950. This marks the first timesince 1969-70 that more than 8,000 students havebeen registered on the Quadrangles. College enrollment was 2,482 at the end of the first week ofthe Quarter, an increase of some 228 from a levelof 2,254 at the same time in Autumn of 1974. Ascompared to a planned entering class of 600 to620, there are 658 freshmen.We have also been successful in efforts to enroll students through transfer. Following the recommendations of the Committee, the Collegelast year began accepting transfer students at thebeginning of each quarter. For the Autumn Quarter the College enrolled 129 transfer students andanother 26 students entered the College as transfer students in the preceding Winter, Spring, andSummer Quarters, for a total of 155. Enrollingstudents in each of the four quarters is a return toa practice highly recommended by Mr. Harper,who, in his Decennial Report of 1902, pointed outwith some pride that the invention of the fourquarter system permitted "... students to enterthe University four times a year instead of once,the adjustment of courses to this end having beenfound entirely feasible." The "entirely feasible"aspect of the matter at present is largely an adjustment in offerings in the Core Sequences.We commented in the budget memorandum onthe imaginative recruitment and thoughtful combination of scholarships and loans which hashelped to offset the decline in student enrollmentin the Graduate Divisions. We called particularattention to the McCormick Fellowships in theDivision of the Physical Sciences, which helpedthat Division to arrest and reverse a declining enrollment which started in the late 1960s. It is a pleasure to report also the splendid effort of theHumanities Visiting Committee, which this pastyear raised significant funds for graduate studentsupport in the Division. It is our hope that fundscan be obtained which will allow analogous Fellowship programs throughout the University. Ishould again note the extraordinary help to theUniversity by the Professional Schools in maintaining student enrollment in this difficult period.The University has also increased substantiallyits ability to house its students by adapting theShoreland Hotel to residential use for some 150undergraduates and 200 graduate students. Although the conversion was not without itsdifficulties, it has been remarkably successful andthe Shoreland promises to become one of theUniversity's more attractive residence halls. Including the Shoreland, the University now houseswithin the University House System some 2,200single students, with another 500 in InternationalHouse. In addition, the University maintainsmore than 1,100 apartments for its married students, most of whom, of course, are in thegraduate divisions and professional schools.The quality of student life outside the classroom has been substantially enhanced in recentyears by the expansion and improvement of theHouse System. The Residential Masters and thefaculty and advanced graduate students who haveserved as Resident Heads have been immenselyhelpful in this respect. In addition, a $20,000 giftto the University this past year has been directedto the Student Activities Office in an effort to seeif a few major campus entertainments could notadd to the variety of campus life that already exists. But it is a generally accepted fact of life at theUniversity, attested to by students and facultyalike, that nothing would add more to the generalmorale of the University community than expanded and improved athletic and recreationalfacilities. I am especially pleased to say that,thanks to the generosity of the Crown family andits charitable entities, work will begin next summer on a redecked and remodeled UniversityField House, which will add some 57,000 squarefeet of inside playing space to the University'ssports facilities — and at least seven new squashcourts!In connection with support for graduate students, we have commented in the past on thedevastating effect of the drop in support ofgraduate students from federal government programs. It is encouraging to report that the Biological Sciences Division this year has had remarkably good success with the new National Re-150search Service Awards in the National Institutesof Health. These awards, which are mainly interdisciplinary in character and provide both pre-doctoral and post-doctoral support, replace theolder training grants. There had been much uncertainty about whether the new program wouldbe funded in the face of Executive Branch objections, and it is not clear that the opposition willentirely disappear. But, the Biological SciencesDivision is in a somewhat more favorable position regarding graduate student support over thenext few years than appeared likely a year ago.We have alerted you that the University hasbeen wrestling with the problem of retaining itsprivilege as a "direct lender" under the FederallyInsured Student Loan program. Since July 1,1973, the University, acting as a direct lenderunder the Federally Insured Student Loan program, but using its own funds, has lent in theneighborhood of $6 million to its students. It lentthem another $5 million under other federal loanprograms but in this instance the money camefrom federal allocations. Last Spring the University was notified that its status as a direct lenderunder the Federally Insured program was in question. The law under which the program operatedhad been reinterpreted in Washington to excludeeducational institutions in states where a stateguarantee agency was willing to guarantee loansfor out-of-state students. This is the case in Illinois. Unfortunately, the State's willingness toguarantee student loans does not in itself makeloan funds available through banks and commercial agencies in the State. The University unsuccessfully sought authority to lend funds under theState's guarantee agency. When that authoritywas not granted, we appealed the federal decisionand I am happy to report, the University has beengranted continued direct lender authority by thefederal government.In 1967, Mr. Levi, then Provost, urged theDeans to appoint student-faculty committees inall of the academic areas of the University. TheCommittee of the Council and the Council endorsed this proposal. The purpose of these committees was to furnish a mechanism throughwhich there could be a constructive and rationalexchange of views regarding the various programswithin the academic areas. Obviously thesemechanisms will not work in the absence of acommitment on the part of both faculty and students. It is my impression that with few exceptions, the committees are functioning at a verylow level throughout the University. I urge that astrong effort be made either to revive the concept or to create some adequate substitute for it withinthe academic areas.Undergraduate InstructionThe success of the College in its student recruitment efforts has resulted in some difficulties inmeeting requirements for undergraduate instruction, especially in the Core Sequences. This problem was the central issue in a series of discussionsthroughout the second half of last academic year.The discussions opened up related problems having to do, on the one hand, with the concept of theCore Sequences and, on the other hand, with theresponsibilities of the Graduate Divisions for undergraduate teaching. Needless to say, all participants in the discussions did not view the several issues the same way.My observation is that there is room for improved perception of the problem on both sides.There is some rigidity in the conception of theCore Sequences, both as to substance and as toscheduling, that could profitably be re-examined.There is also a tendency to assume a benefit thatthe College derives from its association with agreat University, meaning of course the GraduateDivisions, with too little appreciation of the substantial benefits that derive in the other direction.Some resolution of the undergraduate teachingproblem is necessary in the immediate future, ifwe are to meet our own standards of undergraduate education at The University of Chicago.From several annual reports, I note that there isevidence that some Departments are indeed concerned and are taking actions to improve undergraduate offerings both in the Summer Quarterand throughout the year. I commend these effortsand suggest that such a critical examination ofdepartmental policies and practices be extendedto include all Departments and Committeeswithin the University.The discussions between the College and theDivisions to which I refer spilled over into conversations in a series of afternoon coffee hoursthat I had with College students during Winterand Spring Quarters of last academic year. Theseconversations touched upon many things — butespecially on Core Courses and the matter ofclass size. Stimulated by these exposures, I askedthe Office of Economic Analysis to look at thedata on class size, and I now report a summary ofa study done by that Office.An analysis of last year's classes shows thatundergraduate classes had a median size of 18students. A fourth of all undergraduate classes151had nine or fewer students, but 11 percent hadmore than 35 students. There is substantial variation among collegiate divisions, with the largestclasses being in Biological Sciences and thesmallest in Humanities. Classes in the Divisionswere much smaller than undergraduate classes,with the median size being less than half of thatfor collegiate divisions. In the ProfessionalSchools classes were generally substantiallylarger, with a median size for all professionalschools of 19 but with the Law School having amedian size of 78.There were also wide differences in course registrations per faculty member in the various areasof the University. As of the period covered by thestudy, course registration per faculty member inthe Law School was 253, in the Business School193, and in SSA 145. Registration per facultymember in the Divisions was much smaller, ranging from 53 in the Biological Sciences to 86 in theSocial Sciences. The average for the Universitywas 86.I do not wish to discuss the arguments for andagainst small or large classes, nor am I suggestingthat the University is moving in the direction ofcost-effectiveness procedures or fixed class sizesor rigid faculty-student ratios. What I do wish tosuggest is that the data indicate a need to examinethe proliferation of course offerings and the deployment of faculty resources within the variousacademic units. I make this suggestion with thehope that each academic area, within the traditional responsibilities inherent in the rulingbodies, will act on it.Selected Academic ActivitiesIn reading the annual reports from the variousacademic units, one cannot help but be struck bythe intellectual richness of this University. And itis a richness that is to be found throughout theacademic areas and of which we all can be justlyproud.One event last year which illustrates this richness was the international Celebration of theMedieval Heritage, organized and sponsored bythe Divinity School (in cooperation with theHumanities Division, the Center for PolicyStudy, the Rockefeller Chapel, within the University, and the Jesuit School of Theology and theCatholic Theological Union without). Thestimulus for the Celebration was the commemoration of the 700th anniversary of the deaths ofSaints Thomas Aquinas and Bonaventure, twingiants of thirteenth-century thought. A series oflectures revolving around medieval religious themes formed the core of the Celebration, supported by lectures from two of the foremostRoman Catholic church leaders of the presentday. There also were liturgies, musical offerings,medieval drama, and a special library exhibit. Astriking aspect of the event was the participationby all of the theological schools who are neighborsof the University, as well as by many of theacademic areas of the University.We have previously characterized last year ashaving been something of a "Humanities Year"in the University. In addition to the great impetusgiven by the grant from the Mellon Foundation,the Division was awarded a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities to establisha National Humanities Institute conceivedaround the theme, Technology and theHumanities. This is the second such award madeby the Endowment — the first having been madetwo years ago to Yale University— and the grantis testimony to the inherent strength of the University in this area. The ease wih which theacademic areas interact in this place also washighly instrumental in the decision to locate theInstitute at The University of Chicago. Followinga planning year that is now underway, 20 InstituteFellows will come to the University in each ofthree successive years to participate in the program. The consequent heightened activities in theform of seminars and individual scholarly effortsnot only will enrich our own Humanities area, butwill strengthen the teaching of humanities in colleges throughout the country and especially in theMidwest.Another important development last year inthe Humanities Division was the creation of theposition of University Director of Fine Arts. Thisaction is intended to meet a need for overseeingand coordinating, on a campus-wide basis, activities in the visual arts, including the Department of Art and its semi-autonomous Committeeon Art and Design, the Smart Gallery, the Midway Studio, the Bergman Gallery, and other functions. In consultation with the appropriate Deans,the Director will make recommendations on appointments and promotions, service personnel,physical facilities, and budgetary requirements.The University's efforts in Art, especially at theundergraduate level, have been uncoordinatedand sometimes inadequate. This action is intended to provide a greater degree of unity to themany and varied art facilities and activities oncampus.In the area of teaching and recruitment of students, the Department of Mathematics has taken152an initiative which goes far beyond the ethos ofthe very distinguished research department whichit is. The Department has adopted and sponsoredthe Student Science Training Program, a ventureof great importance to the future prospects ofmathematics and science in this country. The effect of this program had been observed over anumber of years in the remarkable developmentand mathematical power of some of our own undergraduates. As an example, The University ofChicago over the past six years has entered ateam in the William Lowell Putnam nationalmathematical competition which embraces all theuniversities and undergraduate colleges of theUnited States and is taken very seriously by all ofthem. The University of Chicago team has beenin the first three places in five out of six of thoseyears, ahead of Harvard, MIT, Princeton, andsometimes even Cal Tech. Each of our teams hashad on it at least one graduate of the Student Science Training Program and in most cases, two. Intaking over the responsibility for the program, theDepartment is making a very explicit commitmentto the principle that the major centers of scientificresearch must adopt as their own responsibilitythe development of the cadre of truly talentedscientific youth in this country. This initiativeseems to me to be particularly appropriate and inkeeping with the traditions of this University.After a period of some turmoil, the Librarymade significant strides last year in providing services to the University community, despite thenegative influences of inflation and constrainedbudgets. Improvements were made in internaladministration and an ambitious fund-raisingprogram was initiated. To meet the problem ofdeterioration in the ambience of Regenstein as aresearch library, in contrast to its growing popularity as a social center, a faculty-student committee was appointed to examine and to make recommendations regarding the quality of life in Regenstein. The Committee has avoided inquiringinto areas that are the responsibility of the Library Board and has concentrated its efforts onhow to modify behavior of both users and staff,ranging from general boorishness and incivility tooutright vandalism. The Committee has made anumber of recommendations (its full report willappear in the University Record), some of whichhave been carried out and others of which are inthe process of being carried out. The Committeeis being continued and it is our intention to give itthe necessary support to achieve its end. Onlythen will it be reasonable to expend funds for themaintenance of Regenstein which have gener ously been made available to the University bythe Joseph R. Regenstein Foundation.In the budget memorandum, I discussed theplanned merger of the Graduate School of Education and the Department of Education. I can nowreport that the necessary discussions have proceeded to a point where the final steps will probably be consummated as of December 31 of thisyear. I report this development not only for thesake of the information itself, but as an exampleof how, with faculty insight and self-discipline,University problems can be resolved in a rationalmanner and even with reasonable speed.A second and most important development inthe Social Sciences area was the establishmentthis Autumn Quarter of the Adlai E. StevensonCenter as an integral part of the University. TheCenter is the successor to the Adlai StevensonInstitute of International Affairs, which for anumber of years maintained an independent existence in the Robie House. The University is indebted to William H. McNeill for his work duringthe last year in bringing order to the affairs of theold Adlai Stevenson Institute thus making possible the complex transfer of its remaining assets toprovide a small endowment fund for the newCenter, which will be attached to the Center forInternational Studies. The Center hopes to bringinto contact international leaders in the world ofpublic affairs, informed and concerned citizensfrom the Chicago community, and scholars andstudents from The University of Chicago for discussion of major international issues and problems.Bio-Medical AreaOver the past several years Mr. Levi and I havereported on a variety of problems that have beenexperienced in the Biological Sciences Divisionand The Pritzker School of Medicine. Theseproblems have been developing over a period oftime since World War II and are a function ofvarious forces, many of which operate outside theUniversity, in the political, the social, and theeconomic spheres. In combination with the extraordinary advances in the understanding ofbiological phenomena, from which physicianshave derived great power to intervene decisivelyin the control of disease, these developmentshave introduced revolutionary changes in theform of medical practice. These changes haveboth solved and created problems. Emphasis hasshifted from the management of infectious diseases toward preventive medicine and health153maintenance. The pathology confronted bytoday's physicians is often as much a manifestation of the life-style of the patient as it is the effectof a specific microbe or toxin. In yet anothersense, man's increasing power has altered medicine. The incidence of disease resulting fromman-created changes in the environment has become increasingly significant. Contamination ofair, food, and water guarantee an important futurerole for environmental and industrial medicine.The power of modern medicine has generatedan accompanying complexity. Complexity requires specialization. Specialists must integratetheir activities in order to function effectively.Superspecialization, characteristic of Americanmedicine during the past 30 or 40 years, has produced increasing concern in legislative halls (fromwhich the support of the medical enterpriselargely flows) about the accessibility of primaryhealth care for the citizenry. Schools of medicineare being influenced to participate in the education of more physicians and para-medical personnel who will deliver primary medical care.Another aspect of this complexity is sharply(some would say exorbitantly) increased costs.Nowhere is this more evident than in academicmedical centers which are the loci of research,training, and tertiary care. Increasingly, we haveturned to the use of insurance of one form oranother to meet these increasing costs. Since private insurance seems unable to meet the needs ofall persons, much effort is now being exertedwithin the federal government to develop a planfor government-subsidized national health insurance. The entry of these large organized third parties into the medical enterprise introduces notonly a new element in the relation between doctorand patient, but produces fiscal and legal complications of unimagined magnitude, well beyondthe experience and the traditional capability ofuniversities to handle.There are obvious consequences of thesechanging conditions for the Division of BiologicalSciences and The Pritzker School of Medicine.First, the evolution of new relationships betweenbiological and physical sciences in the pursuit ofnew insights into human biology has producedand will continue to produce a dynamic state inthe organization and execution of research. Second, the variety of careers open to physicians willcontinue to broaden and it will become increasingly desirable to provide pre-medical studentswith a broad range of educational opportunities.These two developments seem to me to require a serious reassessment of the educational prerequisites for clinical medicine with a review of therelationship between what has traditionally beenregarded as the collegiate and basic medical science curricula. Third, the School of Medicine willbe pushed to participate in the national effort toincrease the availability of primary care physicians. This has an influence on the programs ofundergraduate, graduate, and continuing medicaleducation. Fourth, Medical Centers, includingthe Pritzker School, will be required to participate in the organization of medical care systemsfor their region. In this respect, there will necessarily be integration of the activities of our Medical Center with affiliated tertiary care centers,such as Michael Reese Hospital, as well as withprimary and secondary care facilities in community hospitals within the immediate geographicarea. These developments will require the involvement and skills of a variety of professionalswho are not now formally associated with theSchool of Medicine, including economists,sociologists, and, inevitably, lawyers.I have gone to this length to report my perception of the state of affairs in the bio-medical areabecause I believe it represents for the next decade, the most difficult segment of our collectiveenterprise. My concern over it led me to reviewduring the Summer Quarter the original conceptof the Medical School and the history of its development. Harper's conception was unmistakably clear: "I do not have in mind," he said, "aninstitution of charity, or an institution which shalldevote itself merely to the education of a manwho shall be an ordinary physician; but rather aninstitution which shall occupy a place beside thetwo or three institutions that already exist in ourcountry . . . one in which honor and distinctionwill be found for those only who make contributions to the cause of medical science." The in-situation would be concerned with basic knowledge and thus would study the prevention of disease as well as its cure. It would push forward theboundaries of medical science to the extent thatfrom it announcements might "be sent from timeto time so potent in their meaning as to stir thewhole civilized world."Harper was not indifferent to human suffering.On the contrary. He thought that through his approach, "The poor throughout the crowded districts of our city would be more directly benefitedin this way than in any other. Our childrenthrough all the generations would enjoy thebenefits." An institution so conceived would154draw from all parts of the world men and womenwho would find incentive and opportunity to dosomething for the mitigation of human suffering,for the amelioration of human life."Clocks cannot be turned back and we areoperating in a world that is vastly different fromthat of Harper's University. But that is not thepoint. The point is that Harper had a concept inmind— and there is now such a need — a need forsome concept, clearly focused, in our bio-medicalarea against which planning can be done, againstwhich programs may be assessed, and towardwhich we may bend our collective efforts. Greatstrains are being placed upon private, elite,academically oriented medical schools, includingours, as resource allocation and definition of educational goals and responsibilities become concerns not only of professional scholars but also ofagencies of federal and state governments. I havesaid elsewhere that it is my perception that themedical enterprise is taking on many of thecharacteristics of a public utility. Our problem isto examine its probable future course most carefully and to determine how this University and itsSchool of Medicine can contribute most effectively and creatively in the evolution of medicineand medical education.The NeighborhoodSeveral of the Chairman, in their reports, haveremarked on the neighborhood and its impact onfaculty and student recruitment. During the pastquarter of a century, fhe University has investedmore than $30 million in the neighborhood, exclusive of security, lighting, bus service, and otherinstitutional expenses. Today, this is a neighborhood in which some 75 percent of the faculty andmore than 95 percent of the student body live.Without this presence, there would be, if therewere to be at all, a different kind of academicenterprise. To preserve the stability of East HydePark, the University purchased the WindermereHotel in 1973 and the Shoreland Hotel in 1974.The Shoreland is being used as we described tomeet the demand for student housing, caused bysurpassing our enrollment goals. The Windermere will be renovated for continued use as aresidential and transient hotel.In my judgment, this neighborhood, like allother urban areas, will continue to have problems.We shall continue to confront them, and no oneshould be misled into thinking that they will yieldto simplistic solutions. Their roots are deep. At the symptomatic level, no small part of thedifficulty is the continuing failure of the legal system to cope with the problem of the habitual offender. These issues must be faced by society as awhole and by the legal enterprise in particular before there will be significant success in dealingeffectively with crime in urban areas. In themeantime, through the efforts of the South EastChicago Commission, steps have been and arebeing taken to remedy the more flagrant defectsthat we have encountered in local judicial procedures.Because of our continuing efforts, we are lessalone in our commitment to Hyde Park-Kenwoodthan ever before. There is around us an increasingfulfillment of President Harper's plan of neighboring schools of theology which interact with theUniversity and its Divinity School, while preserving their independence. Nothing makes this moreapparent than the opening in Hyde Park this September of McCormick Theological Seminary aftermore than a century on the northside of Chicago.We welcome McCormick and our relationshipswith it and with our other sister institutions inHyde Park-Kenwood. In the months ahead, inkeeping with a plan nearly as old as the Universityitself, we will complete the acquisition of theSouth Campus as a land bank for academic, andrelated institutional uses.The Physical PlantAs for physical plant developments, constructionbegan in August of 1974 on the Surgery-Brain Research Pavilion. Completion date is estimated tobe Autumn 1977. The cornerstone was placed forthe Marjorie B. Kovler Viral OncologyLaboratories at 58th and Drexel this AutumnQuarter. We are painfully aware of the continuingneed for funds for new and renovated physicalfacilities for other distinguished academic departments including Music, Anthropology, a largeportion of the Physical Sciences, Opthalmologyand other clinical departments of the MedicalSchool, and for a new theatre. I am reminded of acomment once made to me by Gerty Cori who,along with her husband Karl, won the Nobel Prizein Biochemistry. Gerty insisted that their bestwork was done in space which she described as abroom closet; that when they were rewarded witha spanking new building everyone became obsessed with keeping it so clean that the work suffered. But I suppose I had best not push this pointtoo far.155SummaryThe University is made up of many parts and ofmany individuals. In assessing and reporting myobservations, I have been necessarily selective.Instead of the items I have mentioned, I couldhave chosen to describe the achievements of anyone of a number of strong departments, or thehonors bestowed this year on so many of ourscholars and scientists, and, more importantly,the work to which these awards pay tribute. Icould have mentioned: the successful adaptationof the Extension Division to its decentralizedprograms; the College's initiation of the HarperPost-Doctoral Teaching Fellow Program, whichappears to be off to a successful start; the currentdevelopments in the area of astronometry and therebuilding of the dome of the Yerkes Observatory, made possible in large part through a giftfrom the University's Women's Board and amatching gift from an anonymous donor.Achievements are everywhere in the University,not only in the College and in the Divisions andSchools. We could have recognized the work ofthe Oriental Institute or that of the nation's leading University Press; or the Sonia Shankman Orthogenic School, which has successfully passedfrom one outstanding administration to one thatpromises continued distinction; or the variety ofprograms, including musical and dramatic eventsas well as spiritual, that are engaged in by theRockefeller Chapel; or the extraordinarily successful University Theatre program, especiallyCourt Theatre this summer; or the concerts of theContemporary Chamber Players and other musical events.I also could have discussed the Argonne National Laboratory, which has successfully managed a changeover from sponsorship by theAtomic Energy Commission, which on October11, 1974, was supplanted by the Energy Researchand Development Administration and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Not only was thisdifficult task carried off with skill, but during thesame period the Laboratory achieved much closerrelationships with the University than have been historically the case. On the other side of the governmental coin, the whole hour could have beenused discussing the frustrations and irritations relating to the University's interactions with theOffice of Civil Rights and the Department ofHealth, Education and Welfare.As I have tried to assess the State of the University through the annual reports of Deans andChairmen, through conversations with facultyand students, and through my own observations,the most noteworthy characteristic that makes itself felt is a strong positive feeling. Deans,Chairmen, faculty, and students are not unawareof our problems or of our weaknesses, of whichwe have our fair share. But the prevailing toneseems to me to reflect pride in being a part of aUniversity with a strength of purpose, a history ofintellectual achievement, and a will to survive as aUniversity in the true meaning of that term.I must, in bringing this report to a close, conveymy gratitude for the support I have been given inthe period we have talked about. This Universityis recognized far and wide as a "faculty University," and I am grateful for the efforts andachievements of the policy Boards and thenumerous committees, made up of faculty, thathave contributed significantly to the academic lifeof the University. I am also especially indebted tothose who have temporarily set aside scholarlypursuits to accept administrative responsibilitiesas Chairmen or Deans and even as Vice-Presidents. I am particularly in the debt of GaleJohnson and Chauncy Harris, who have takenwhat I am sure they hope is temporary residenceon the fifth floor of the Administration Building.Edward Levi, at the close of his last State of theUniversity message, said that the state of theUniversity in 1974 was that ". . . it is still committed to intellectual excellence, and it is performingits task." We are doing our best to maintain and tofurther that state.John T. Wilson is Provost and Acting President ofthe University and Professor in the Departmentof Education.156THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO RECORDOFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRSRoom 200, Administration BuildingHXw53oSB88§o z"0 1 _ om £ c 330 P TJ2 > -*i w §,POSTAGAIDiO,ILLINTNO.31 5?o(38-». o m %^ — OCO 3