OCR Text |
Show Editorial Hill Of Right The University Board of Regents endorsement and adoption of the "Statement on Academic Freedom"is unquestionably un-questionably a great step forward in University student affairs. af-fairs. It is sincerely hoped that any conflicts between the Statement and present University policies will be worked out in the very near future. In pursuit of that end, the following fol-lowing admittedly incomplete list of suggestions is made. The Statement calls for concrete protection against improper teacher evaluation of student performance in the classroom. As of yet a rigid codification of student classroom class-room rights and teacher responsibilities in evaluating student performance does not exist. In effect, the individual student stu-dent is at the "mercy" of his teachers. The Statement insists that student organizations not be required to submit membership lists for organizational recognition in order to prevent accidental or intentional institutional in-stitutional disclosure of names to off-campus interests, such as the draft board. Present University policy does require submission of membership lists for recognition, putatively to insure the exclusion of non-students. The policy represents an evident and important conflict between intent and fact. Perhaps the most important aspect of bringing University Uni-versity policy in line with its avowed intentions as set forth in the Statement on Academic Freedom is that all such policies poli-cies be published in some such form as a handbook that could be easily and inexpensively made available to all students. stu-dents. Then and only then can student academic freedom become be-come more than a mere collection of words and good intentions inten-tions words and intentions praiseworthy in themselves, but, unimplemented, a hollow mockery of student rights and freedoms. |