Y
V
: J
FREE
university:
. .jL
by Chris Harper
Oiro Harper is a junior from Boise, Idaho, majoring in
English and journalism. He coordinates Nebraska Free
University and is a member of the University Curriculum
Committee.
A question is a central element of the educational process.
The ability to question and conceptualize an answer
precipitates reflection, experimentation and decision. The
question is too often isolated to the factual material presented
in the University classroom
Process, method of instruction and the purposes of
education should be frequently questioned and evaluated by
the individual student. Education as a dynamic encounter
must naturally involve active participation and questioning by
the student and can not deteriorate into the passive acceptance
of authoritative decisions.
However, students are infrequently active participants in
the educational process at the University of Nebraska. We are
becoming merely observers and accommodators of educational
stimuli. In too many instances students allow administrators
and faculty members to determine the tone and substance of
the classroom experience. More importantly, many students
placidly accept these decisions.
This evolving dependence of the students upon other
individuals damages the framework of any university. Where
there is no input there is no change and while bureaucracy
may be static, a person and his thought process should not be.
Dependence intensifies student boredom and minimizes
natural curiosity, thus creating an atmosphere of frustration
for the concerned educator.
The University of Nebraska provides several opportunities
for self-determined study. The integrated studies program in
the College of Arts and Sciences, independent study courses
(199 and 299), and the Centennial Education Program are
some examples of excellent means for active participation in
education.
Nebraska Free University offers another opportunity in its
coordination of group independent study courses this
semester. These programs offer significant freedom and
flexibility to demonstrate a person's education need not occur
only within a lecture format.
However, an amazingly small percentage of the student
body take advantage of these opportunities. Perhaps most
people are content with their education at this institution.
More probably, many students view their education as a means
toward future expectations, a ritual to be performed and
overlook the quality of their daily classroom situation. Other
students have become complacent in the approach to their
education.
It is our position that each student must assess a personal
definition of education and determine whether the University
of Nebraska facilitates or stifles growth within the range of
that conception of education.
Also the student should seriously ask himself if any
intellectual frustration isn't due to his failure to make use of
those opportunities available.
A learning person must create a deliberate and conscious
environment conducive to inquiry. He must firmly believe that
to be drained of his self-awareness and self-determination is an
insult to his integrity and necessitates his living in a world
constructed by another person s answers.
Dear editor
"It was hoped that the World in
Revolution Conference would be
rescheduled by the Union Program
Council or the Nebraska Union Board to
a later, more politically favorable date."
The editor of the Daily Nebraskan
said that in an editorial Monday, January
24. How tan the editor justify delaying a
discussion of important controversial
matters until a "more politically
favorable date? The freedom to discuss
controversial subjects is not dependent on
"a more politically favorable date."
Freedom is a past, present and future
phenomenon. The promise of freedom in
the future is not freedom in the present.
Being politically expedient in hopes of
keeping financial support is not free. It is
an act of intellectual prostitution.
Freedom is non-negotiable. It is not to be
bargained with for the survival of the
University newspaper or even the
University itself.
Ironically, to compromise away
freedom to preserve the University is to
destroy the University. Freedom is sacred
to this community. The editor's
willingness to delay free expression is
reprehensible and heinous. The editor's
willingness to let freedom Lv come a
rationalization for the university budget
is unjust and deserving of censure. The
expediency that the editorial is about will
kill the freedom which is sacred to the
University community's existence.
To compromise away the freedom of
others leads to the end of the freedom of
the compromisers. To negotiate away the
n o n-ne go t i a b 1 e is agonized
self-destruction. Sucide is not painless.
I'm sorry for the editor's honest
pathetic qualities. I am also angry about
his lack of courage to resist coercion and
intemidation. The editor may be
successful, but for what?
Ron Kurtenbach
Dear editor:
As a concerned student and a member
of the AS UN Senate for two years I
found the lead editorial of Monday's
Daily Nebraskan absurd. The editorial
dealt with the World in Revolution
Conference and its effect on LB 1271,
slated for committee hearing that
afternoon.
The thrust of the editorial, signed by
editor Barry Pilger, was that
"controversial topics certainly deserve
discussion anywhere, especially in the
academic community. But at a time when
the University of Nebraska is under fire
by members of the Nebraska Legislature,
the desirability of the proposed
conference is questionable." I disagree
completely with that statement.
The first question that occured to me
was, "Does the editor really thing that
postponing the conference to a "later,
more politically favorable date" would
change the fate of LB 1271?" It seems to
me that' if a senator wanted to shaft the
University t wouldn't make any
difference to him when the conference
ended up being held.
The only thing we've got going for us
at the Legislature is honesty and reliance
on the good sense of the state senators.
As a result of Terry Carpenter's
kill-the-Rag bill last spring, all state
senators now receive the Nebraskan at
their offices. Presumably all have by now
read the editorial in question. I wonder
how they feel about us now. I wonder if
they appreciate the editor's attitude. I
wonder if they look forward to being
dickered by some fast-talking college
editor.
I think that if we tell the Legislature
exactly what we have planned, they will
consider us much more highly.
This brings me to another point of the
editorial, the question of whether the
conference should go on at all. 1 voted for
appropriations for the conference in
AS UN Senate last fall. I was one of
several senators, in fact, that managed to
save most of the Conference's budget
after it had been slashed by the AS UN
executives. The conference budget was
cut for many of the same politically
expedient reasons that the editor set
forth in the editoriaL I opposed
expediency then and I am compelled to
do so now. It is my firm position, and I
believe Wednesday's Senate meeting will
confirm, that the World in Revolution
Conference will go on, exactly as its
committee planned it.
There's more here at stake than the
continuation of student fees or what the
Legislature will do. There are basic
freedoms involved here. The real issue is
not expediency, it is whether the
democratically elected senate of the
students will be allowed to invite
whatever speakers it sees fit to come to
this campus, after fulfilling all existing
University requirements.
I see World in Revolution as a symbol.
If we support that conference, we will
have salvaged a scrap of our freedoms. If
we back down now, a disappointing year
in student government will have been
capped with a final, killing humiliation.
Fortunately there are many people in
AS UN who are ready to defend the
students interests. Fortunately there are
good, fair-minded state senators, most
likely a majority of them, who realize
that State Senator Gerald Stromer's LB
1271 is a monstrosity and will laugh it
out of the chamber. Fortunately there are
enough people in and out of student
government that put the interest of the
student body ahead of their own personal
interests to counterbalance the effect of
Monday's depressing editoriaL
We should resolve today that the
World in Revolution Conference will go
on, and communicate that reality in a
respectful, honest way to the legislature.
Even if the worst happens, we can at least
say that for once this year, when the
chips were down, student leaders thought
about the students first and about
themselves second.
Roy Baldwin
J
WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 26, 1971
THE DAILY NEBRASKAN
PAGE 5
