Student Freedom in American Higher Education [antikvár]

Foreword An almost identical incident brought the majority of delegates to the 1968 national political conventions to their feet. In each case, a "representative" of the political establishment at the podium had just delivered a blistering condemnation of the licentious, long-haired, bearded, dirty, obscene, anarchistic, barefooted, hippie, "pseudo-intellectuals" causing chaos on our streets and on our campuses. We have come to expect that kind of personal harangue at the podium. We can even, in our better moments, point to it as a good example of the freedom of speech and public assembly that are deep in the guts of the American system. Yet, the instantaneous and tumultuous assent of the crowds—assembled to nominate a candidate who must lead an America torn by racial, social, economic, and generational strife—was, for me, a really frightening phenomenon acted out in Miami, and repeated in Chicago. Your reaction, as a reader, may reflect the concern of the delegates about the young which must have motivated their support of the podium diatribe. On the other hand, you may share my concern about the simplistic attitudes of the delegates who accepted the diatribe against youthful dissenters with no apparent ability or desire to sort out the differences, even the mutually exclusive motivations and styles among them. This collection of essays, edited by Professors Vaccaro and Covert, speaks to the range and complexity of this critical issue. The Editors' Introduction states clearly the essential dilemma which every citizen, every parent, every administrator, every faculty member, and every student must try to keep in focus as we learn to live effectively with a generation which is at the same time activist and "cop-out." The editors ask us to consider that "Today's students are seeking, on the one hand, increased influence in areas of policy formation hitherto controlled by faculty or administration; on the other hand, they are demanding a lessening of the bonds of authority that have traditionally governed their personal lives." In one sense, they are asking that the university extend its "authoritative voice," that it speak responsibly, even morally, to specific urban situations, to specific wars, to specific economic investors. And in holding this position, they demand a part, sometimes seemingly a controlling one, in determining the character of the "authoritative" moral voice. On the other hand, they are demanding that the university drop the in loco parentis role in their personal lives, desist from determining and sanctioning their moral behavior. It is my own conviction that the young activists will remain active and grow daily more responsible as we are prepared to deal with both aspects m