page 4
daily nebraskan
Wednesday, icptcmber 12, 1979
n
1
ed increase in NU budget nice, hut no dice
Budgeting is about as exciting as a
rainy holiday.
However, because budget time is
when many elected officials flex
their political muscles, and because
the NU budget is set every year by
politicians, this newspaper would be
amiss in its duties if it did not take a
stand on the proposed budget for the
1980-81 fiscal yean
The NU budget is huge and,
according to State Sen. Frank Lewis
of BellevUe, "is buried in a maze of
complexity.
Chancellors, vice presidents, the
president, faculty members and vice
chancellors meet and discuss pro
grams and priorities. Priority
requests are converted into dollar
figures representing the estimated
cost of programs.
The NU Board of Regents then
reviews the request, makes its recom
mendations and approves a final
request that is sent to the Legisla
ture. This year. NU is requesting "not
more than 15 percent more state
tax dollars than it got last year.
Already, Regent Robert Simmons of
Scottsbluff has apologized to sena
tors in his district for "our fantasy
request."
Simmons, and anyone else with
any sense, is quick to realize that the
Legislature, during an election year,
is not going to give the NU system a
15 percent increase.
If, by some twist of fate contrary
to the established pattern of legis
lative behavior, the Legislature
would grant a 15 percent increase,
Gov. Charles Thone would not.
Thone has sent a letter to the
regents, saying he would like to meet
with them about the request, which
he considers "to high.
If NU administrators are realists,
obviously the request is too high. If
they are operating under the philo
sophy that says, "if you ask for 15
percent, you might get seven," they
are playing dangerous games with a
Legislature that does not appreciate
"fantasy requests."
The Legislature and each of its
members-particularly those up for
re-election next year-are faced with
the reality that voters want them to
spend as little as possible.
It seems likely that the 15 percent
request will anger senators who have
sought greater control of the univer
sity since 1977, when the State Sup
reme Court ruled that the regents are
the ultimate policy-making board for
NU.
Yes, it would be nice if the univer
sity couTd get a 15 percent increase.
It would be nice if NU could get a
big enough Increase to bring faculty
salaries up to par and bring tuition
"down v.to ? par" : with comparable
schools
It would be nice, but it won't
happen. It is past time for NU
administrators-and all of the regents
-to realize this, and begin cooperat
ing with the state, the governor and
the Legislature to spend money
efficiently.
Administrators will contend -with
a certain amount of validity that
the quality of education and pro
grams would suffer if the 1 5 percent
Increase is not granted.
That may be the case, but it is
clear that administrators should plan
on less than that, and should begin
to make cuts now, to keep quality as
high as possible with the money
available.
-Randy Essex
nn
UUd
Social status decides
education for child
BOSTON-Now they've gone, carrying school lunches
and school jitters. Soon they'll have settled into class, and
memorized the hours and the corridors, the teachers
names and foibles.
But the children carry something else with them past
the crossing guards and playgrounds today: a loaded
bookbag of expectations. Their own, their parents, their
society's.
M
If there's a single message passed down from each
generation of American parents to their children, it is a
two-word line: Better Yourself. And if there's a temple of
self-betterment in each town, it is the school. We have
worshipped there for some time.
Most of our ancestors left countries where poverty,
caste and class were inherited. They came to a country
founded on the notion that they were born equal. So they
lived, and we still live, not with the reality of an equal
society but with the ideal of equal opportunity -especially
for the children.
Americans have, in a sense, always laid their dreams on
their children.
OUR CHILDREN'S chances have been invested in the
schools since Horace Mann, denouncing visions of redist
rubuting wealth, instead advocated free and universal edu
cation. That notion has been behind reformist public pOlicy
from the schools to the Head Start program to parent edu
cation. But to a certain extent, the text has now been revised.
IT IS STILL true, according to Harvard's Christopher
Jencks in "Who Gets Ahead?, that the best indicator of
economic success-among men at least-is how much edu
cation a man has had. A college degree of any kind still
makes a great difference.
It appears that, to a large extent, the status of the
family determines the education of the child, which in
turn determines his status.
"Most people, when they speak of school as an equaliz
er, mean that advantages obtained through schooling will
cancel our socially inherited disadvantages as children be
come adults, writes another "revolutionist, Richard
deLont, for the Carnegie Council on Children. But he
notes that (1) education hasn't closed the gap between the
rich and the poor and (2) only one man in five will
a:
ft Ut-OM ISN'T
AST UT C NECb VO
FOR fcATUfcOW 6AMff
SO LET &C? WHMVOU
CAN DO.
HUTCNE!
HUT "TWO
HIKE !
5AY.COM we
WANVGW
&00KS UWf?
ft J"'
Mil JL
Am. :
IF 'tv lL Tv
MMninnx AMI t 1 1111 mil m v iiv p mi ill
" 1 ' .1 r f 1 ' riii 111 n f - 1 h.
... V I Ilia 1.11-1 ,J
: In I.
succeed in surpassing his father.
WHILE EDUCATION may be the best, or only, route
out of poverty for the individual, on the whole status is
inherited today in America not through the genes but
through the class structure.
. . Schooling by itself cannot produce interclass or
interracial equality, writes deLone. Even among the
immigrant fables, the reality was. that most families
achieved some economic stability first and then insisted
on their children's education.
The point isnt to denigrate school, but to gain pert
spective on the idea that each child starts with an equal
chance and that education itself can solve inequality by
lifting the next-always the next-generation out of
poverty.
If we truly want to reduce poverty or inequality, we
may have to start with parents-not kids and economics,
not education.
T dont think there has ever been any question that a
society.can narrow its social extremes if it wants to, says
Jencks. ntie question is one of political wUl.
Instead, we have thrown the issue of equal opportunity
onto the backs of our children, and that's a heavy burden
to carry off in a school bag.
(c) 1979, The Boston Glob towqsaper Company
Washington Post Writars Group
Truth-in-testing bills
are political hot air
WASHINGTON-There are a lot of things wrong with
standardized testing as it is practiced in America.
But don't look to the so-called 'truth-in-testing legis
lation now pending in the House of Representatives to set
any of it right.
onnci
UUMm)
'VOU'CEGETTC
twr HANG; it
1
vu-6r
iHT EXAttiX
WWW t ttAb 1H
One bill, introduced by. Rep. Sam Gibbons P-fla.) is
legislative cotton candy. It looks good and tastes good,
but it is mostly air. Its provisions fall into two main cate
gories; the unnecessary and the impossible, y-
la the first category are requirements that test admini
strators do what they already do: Inform applicants of the
general areas to be covered and, after testing, tell them
how they did in each specific subject of aptitude area.
The second category Inctu&s a requirement that test
takers be told the score which is generally required tor
idmission to institutions of higher education.!- There
really is no such animal, since most schools treat test
scores as only one clement to be weighed in admissions
decisions, v v . -... - , . . '
Admissions officers at most reputable schools want to
know a lot of things about applicants besides their test
scores. How did they, rank in their graduating classes?
CcstisacdtoPageS
3H