xt7cfx73z13s https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7cfx73z13s/data/mets.xml University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate Kentucky University of Kentucky. University Senate University of Kentucky. Faculty Senate 1979-09-10  minutes 2004ua061 English   Property rights reside with the University of Kentucky. The University of Kentucky holds the copyright for materials created in the course of business by University of Kentucky employees. Copyright for all other materials has not been assigned to the University of Kentucky. For information about permission to reproduce or publish, please contact the Special Collections Research Center. University of Kentucky. University Senate (Faculty Senate) records Minutes (Records) Universities and colleges -- Faculty University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, September 10, 1979 text University of Kentucky University Senate (Faculty Senate) meeting minutes, September 10, 1979 1979 1979-09-10 2020 true xt7cfx73z13s section xt7cfx73z13s UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY


August 2.7, 1979

Members, University Senate

The University Senate will meet in regular session on Monday, September 10,
1979 at 3:00 PM in the Classroom Building, Room 106.
Minutes: April 30, 1979.
Memorial Resolutions.
Chairman's Resolution.
Chairman‘s Remarks:
a) Fostering departmental contacts with Community College units.
b) Faculty representation on Search Committees.
c) Senate procedures.

Action Items:

a) Withdrawal Policy (circulated under date of August 24, 1979).

b) Preposed Rule change: Section%, 1.1 and 1. 2 (circulated under
date of August 24, 1979).

c) Proposed Rule change: Section I, 4. l. 12 (circulated under date
of August 27, 1979).

Pr0posalto establish definitions for the terms "Center” and
"Graduate Center" to be recommended to the Administration
for inclusion in the Governing Regulations (circulated under
date of August 27, 1979).

Elbe rt W. O ckerman


' 3



The University Senate met in regular session at 3:00 p.m., Monday, September 10,
1979, in Room 106 of the Classroom Building.

Joseph Krislov, Chairman, presiding

Members absent: Rusty Ashcraft, Charles E. Barnhart, Leslie Bingham, Brack A.
Bivins, Jack C. Blanton, Peter P. Bosomworth*, Robert N. Bostrom*, Mike Breen, Thomas
W. Brehm, Barbara Bryant*, Joseph T. Burch, Joe B. Buttram*, Michael D. Carpenter*, Pat
Cegelka, S. K. Chan, Linda Chen*, Donald B. Clapp, Charlotte Clark, Glenn B. Collins*,
Frank Colton, Ken Cornn, Emmett R. Costrich, James E. Criswell, Lynne Crutcher, Paul
Davis, Scott Davis, Guy Davenport*, Joseph M. Dougherty, Herbert Drennon, Phillip
Duncan, Anthony Eardley, W. W. Ecton*, William D. Ehmann, Dave Elder, Kevin Ellis, Jane
Emanuel, Edward G. Foree, Tom Francis, John H. Garvey*, Robert D. Guthrie*, Joseph
Hamburg, Curtis E. Harvey, S. Zafar Hasan*, Clyde L. lrwin*, Donald W. lvey*, Freddie
James, H. Douglas Jameson, Keith H. Johnson*, Wesley H. Jones*, Elizabeth A. Kirlin,
James R. Lang*, Thomas P. Lewis*, William J. Marshall*, Mark Metcalf, Elbert W. Ockerman*,
Alan R. Perreiah, Deborah E. Powell*, E. Douglas Rees, David H. Richardson, Charles
Rowell, Wimberly C. Royster, Robert W. Rudd*, John S. Scarborough*, Gary Shenton,
Randall B. Smith, Tim Smith*, Wade C. Smith, Charles S. Spiegel*, Lynn Spruill*, Terry
Squires, Ralph E. Steuer, Anne Stiene—Martin, Harold H. Traurig, S. Sidney Ulmer, Kevin
Vaughn, M. Stanley Wall, James H. Wells, Angene Wilson, Louise J. Zegeer, Robert C.

The minutes of the meeting of April 30, 1979, were approved as circulated.

The Chairman introduced the people involved in the Senate and the newcomers. The
members of the Senate Council are: Joseph Bryant, English; Jane Emanuel, Allied Health;

John Lienhard, Engineering; Daniel Reedy, Spanish and Italian; George Schwert, Biochem—
istry; James Kemp, Animal Sciences; Donald lvey, Music; William Wagner, Chemistry;

Ex officio Members, Michael Adelstein and Connie Wilson; Mark Metcalf, Student Government
President; Michael Breen and Vincent Yeh, student members.

The Committee Chairmen are Philip Noffsinger, Library Committee; Bradley Canon,
Rules Committee; Anna Reed, Admissions and Academic Standards; Tony McAdams, Student
Affairs, Kathryn Sallee, Teaching, Learning, and Advising; Glenn Collins, Research;

Joe B. Buttram, Academic Programs; Joseph Engelberg, Academic Planning and Priorities;
Andrew J. Grimes, Academic Organization and Structure; John Thrailkill, General Studies;
Malcolm E. Jewell, Special Teaching Programs; Jane Kotchen, Academic Facilities; John
Garvey, Extended and Continuing Education; and P. S. Sabharwal, Special Teaching
Technologies. The Chairman announced that the first meeting of the Committees would be
Monday, October 1.

Chairman Krislov introduced Martha Ferguson, Recording Secretary, telephone number
7—2958. Ms. Ferguson is the person to call to be excused from Senate meetings. The
parliamentarian for 1979—80 is Professor Stanford Smith; Sergeant-at—arms. James Alcorn
and David Stockham. The Staff Assistant is Ms. Celinda Todd. The Chairman asked the
new members to stand and everyone applauded each other.

The Chairman recognized Dr. Otis A. Singletary who gave a word of welcome. The

Chairman said that the President is now in his second decade, and we look forward to his
being here for many years to come.

*Absence explained



Dr. Singletary spoke to the Senate as follows:

"Good afternoon, members of the Senate. It is my pleasure to be
here for a brief visit with you this afternoon, not only to welcome you
back but also to touch briefly on a series of matters that I hope will
be of interest to you. I appreciate the remark that this is the be-
ginning of the second decade. I remember it was not so long ago that I
faced this group for the first time. I'm always reminded of the conver—
sation I had with the Acting President, Ab Kirwan, at the time we were
talking about the position. I had been invited for an interview, and I
said to Ab that I didn't know why anybody would want to go into a
presidency now. The timing is not right. Ab, with that great, good
humor, said that there had been only eight presidents in the entire his—
tory of the University of Kentucky and nothing like that was going to
happen here. I said to him 'Ab, I'd feel a lot better about that if I
hadn't known five of them personally.'

It is a pleasure to welcome you back for what I hope will be a
good year for all of us and, given the temper of our times, having a
good year is not routine any longer. There are a number of items I want
to touch on and, to begin with, I want to make some tentative comments
on the preliminary data we have on enrollments for the current year.
The final figures are yet to come. This information has to do only with
the Lexington campus, and as you remember, there comes a time, and that
time is September 27, when there will be a number of cancellations for
non—payment of fees. The final enrollments will come on the heels of
that. These figures are based upon the comparison at the same stage last
year. These are tentative and indicate certain things, but there is
nothing final or definitive about these figures. The Community College
figures are not included, although we think the Community College enroll-
ment will be up some over the last year. The enrollment in Lexington
appears to us to be up two and one—half percent, which is interesting
considering what is happening around the country. Female enrollment is
up over five percent, not quite five and one—half percent. The male
enrollment remains percentagewise virtually unchanged. Part—time en—
rollment is up nearly seven percent. Full—time enrollment is up about
one and one—half percent.

You hear so much about the non—traditional student, part—time stu—
dent, the student who is working—-this is happening in many places around
the country, and I think UK is no exception. I might say that there have
been many who felt that this University has not been particularly respon—
sive to that kind of student. While we like to argue that point, we are
pretty well committed to broadening the base of service to those who are
interested in pursuing their education on a part—time basis. The part-time
female enrollment is up nearly ten percent. First year freshmen increased
only slightly; no significant change over last year. Undergraduate en-
rollments in toto up a little better than three percent--graduate
enrollments about one—half a percent. Law, Medicine, Dentistry, as you
know, are fixed admissions so they remain unchanged. Our largest college,
which is Arts and Sciences, increased about 3.3 percent. Our newest
college, Communication, is up about twenty-eight percent. The largest
numerical increase is in Business and Economics with close to a nine per—
cent increase. Architecture, Fine Arts, Pharmacy are up and Education
remains unchanged. We had some decline in enrollment in Nursing,



Agriculture, Allied Health, Engineering, Home Economics and Social
Professions. The division of colleges is up 3.1 percent. Medical
Center enrollments are down about four percent. As you know, Medicine
and Dentistry have fixed admission numbers. That's what the picture
looks like as of now, and I tell you this for your own information.

We are not yet ready to release final figures, but it does look

like we are going to have from 500 to 550 more students than we had
last year.

There are a series of items I want to touch on very briefly that
I think are of particular interest to this group. Last April the
Senate acted upon recommendations from its Research Committee, and I
would like to report to you that within the next thirty days I expect
to have met with the Senate Council and hopefully to have ready for
the Board of Trustees a proposal for a non-tentured research professor
series for this University. Also included in your recommendation was
the establishment of a cabinet level administrative unit headed by a
Vice President for Research. I do not choose to go that route, at
least at this time. I have yet to find any compelling evidence that
the title makes any significant difference. We have studied a number
of other institutions, some do better than we and some do not do as
well. There are examples both ways. What I think you should understand
though is that from the standpoint of the research emphasis within the
institution what I consider to be important is that that person, who
happens to be Dean Royster, does participate in the meetings of the
cabinet and does have the opportunity to make his input when these mat—
ters are discussed. In any event, I hope to have this in front of the
Senate Council in the very near future and will want their reaction
before I make a formal recommendation to the Board of Trustees. I

think there has been pretty general agreement about the desirability
of this institution being able to have some people committed full—time
essentially to research without necessarily being committed to a life-
time appointment in this institution.

I would also like to mention to you a thing or two about some of
our programs. As you recall, we still have three doctoral programs at
the Council on Higher Education: the Ph.D. in Computer Science, Communi—
cation and Philosophy. YOur guess is as good as mine as to when we are
going to hear about this. I am told that they are being considered. It
is not impossible that we are going to get some action on them. We have
several degree programs included in the Five—Year Plan which has been
submitted to the Council on Higher Education. (The Five—Year Plan has
some valuable information about this institution and its prospects and
at least what we would like to do in the next five years if we can get
the support to do it.) We also have several masters degree programs in
the Council and another five or six proposed in the Five—Year Plan.

I have another comment I want to make which has to do with a matter
we talked a good bit about last year. It has to do with the recruitment
of black faculty at this institution. I found myself in the relatively
unhappy position of having to explain why we had not done better when,
in fact, the President does very little hiring of faculty. I am happy to
say to you that we have had what I believe to be the most significant
year and most significant response in this University's history as far



as this problem is concerned. If my figures are correct, I think there
are ten new black faculty members on this campus, one from the Medical
Center and an additional nine from the division of colleges. The reason
I'm pointing this out is that it is more than a doubling in the division
of colleges. The figure was seven the year before. That isn't going

to please a lot of people because the number is small, but it is signi—
cant, to me at any rate, because for the first time the word is seeping
down where it matters in this institution in terms of trying to get some
action in identifying and bringing to this campus black faculty members.
want to thank, not just the Vice Presidents with whom I have dealt pri-
marily, but also the Deans, those of you who are Department Chairmen, and
those of you as individual faculty members, and there are many, who have
worked very steadily on this matter. I think it has been a significant
step forward, and I want to say to you, one, that on behalf of the Univer—
sity I appreciate it and, two, that we must redouble our effort. We have
taken our first significant step, and I don't want it to be our last. I'm
sure you join me in that. I think it indicates that we can move on some
of these things when there is a will to do so.

Another matter which I think is particularly important to the faculty
has to do with the retirement resolution which we hope to put before the
Board of Trustees at its next meeting, or at the one immediately subsequent.
There's been a good bit of delay about this. The Labor Department delayed
forever publishing its guidelines for institutions and others as to what
you could do. Now given the vagaries of the Federal Government we find they
have transferred the authority from the Labor Department to the EEOC (which
is the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission), and they are talking about
issuing yet another set of guidelines which may undo the ones we have just
received from the Labor Department. If that sounds ridiculous, it is. Let
me say this for general information: I think the critical decision has been
made, and I think the faculty ought to be aware of that. The decision as
I saw it was whether or not we were going to exercise the option of not in—
cluding our faculty in the mandatory retirement age of 70. As you know,
there was a grace period in which you did not have to allow your faculty
members to stay on until 70. We have made our basic determinations and
commitments, and we included in what we put before the Board of Trustees the
proposition that the normal retirement age at this University will be 65.
The mandatory retirement age will be 70. All faculty members are included.
The faculty were exempted as a class until 1982. We are not exercising that
option and whatever it's worth to you, we chose not to exercise that option
mainly because of the real disadvantage that faculties, including our own,
have been placed in in recent years in terms of the cost of living. It
seemed to us to be unnecessarily harsh. Given the beating that we are
taking in the market in terms of salaries and that kind of thing, it did
not seem appropriate for us to insist on that also. You can have arguments
on both sides of that question, philosophically and theoretically. Our
basic view is that the market place has determined for us that we will not
go that route. The details will all be spelled out and resolutions will be
adopted by the Board of Trustees but the basic question that affected most
faculty was whether or not the University was going to exercise its option
to continue to make all faculty members retire at age 65 until 1982. The
answer is that we are not going to do that.


 Let me mention very briefly two or three capital construction matters.
The Law School addition has been completed, and I think they have added
some very important, useful space. The dedication of the Fine Arts Build—
ing, about which there is a newspaper story today, is going to be in
November, regardless of what the story says. The building is a wonderful
addition to this campus, because we had been fairly light, in my opinion,
in those things that provide interest in the cultural life. I will feel
better about the building when we get the landscaping done——it's still
looking a little barren. The two hundred new apartment units that we had
constructed were open barely in time for school to start. This is another
one of those hair breadth tales we hear about each year. We had a last
minute surge and the contractor did get them ready. I visited several
apartments last week, and I think the students are going to like them.
They are having the normal problems that go with moving into a new loca—
tion. Once again, I think some landscaping will make the environment
more attractive. The biggest problem, I gather, at this point is the
bussing. If there are any two problems that we have little chance of ever
solving at the University of Kentucky, I would say they are parking cars
and moving people. The problem grows and grows and our ability to deal
with it shrinks and shrinks. Other than that, the capital construction
front is relatively quiet, and I know you will welcome that for a change.

The last item I want to comment on is one that is probably the most
important to you, to me, and to the institution in general. That is to
remind you that this is the year of the biennial budget request to the
Legislature. We have put forward our request for funding for the Univer—
sity for the next two years. Our Board of Trustees has approved the
budget. It is now in Frankfort. As you know, it goes through the
Council on Higher Education, then it goes to the Department of Finance,
and then it goes to the Legislature. If history is any indication in
these matters, it will be altered from its present form. You ought to
know at least what it is we have chosen to emphasize in this particular
biennium. The point I want to make to you is that while the figures are
large, our concern is not on new programs, not expanding existing pro—
grams but on trying to take care of some of the problems inside this
institution and in institutions like it that have been created by the
most inflationary decade in our history. This budget reflects it all
the way through. We have less than one percent of our request for
new programs, less than ten percent for expanding and improving existing
programs. We have asked for a rather substantial amount of money to
try to correct the deficiencies that have been visited upon us for over a
decade as this institution has lost relative position. Let me say first
of all that we begin with certain fixed costs. They come off the top,
no matter what money you get; you have no choice about those things.

If the Federal Government legislates a change in the social security
payments, we have to meet that regardless. There are things like that
that are clear commitments from the institution that I would put in the
fixed cost category. We have some money in the budget for debt service,
for new facilities we hope to build, but we don't know yet what the
outcome will be. There's a good bit of concern in this state about the
status of the capital construction program in higher education, and I
think a lot of clearing of the air is going to have to take place on
that. We have some money in the budget for catch up for the library.
This library is the one really good research library in the state. We
have also put in a request for current expense money. They estimate


 that the cost of utilities will go up twenty percent. What I want to get
to specifically, though, in terms of the faculty situation is that we have
put in a request for salary increases of 9.5 percent for each year of the
biennium. In addition to that 9.5 percent which we have asked for to deal
with the anticipated rise in the cost of living, we have also put in a re—
quest for catch—up dollars in the salary category and the catch up is based
on our survey of our benchmark institutions. It is our best judgment that
we are about $1600 below the median of our benchmark institutions. We are
asking that the State bring us to the median of the benchmarks. These are
the figures we have in the budget. I do want you to understand from the
beginning that we are not unaware of what is happening to faculty salaries.
We are making an effort, and we are going to continue to do that. You
will read your newspapers, as I will read mine, to find out how the budget
makes its way through channels. Basically, what I want you to remember is
that when we come down to the point of being asked for choices and priori-
ties, it is our belief that the internal, inflationary problem of the insti-
tution is the overwhelming problem and we propose to put any dollars we
have into salaries, not into new programs, not into expanding programs, not
into anything else. To the degree they honor our priorities, I want you

to know that is where our priority is going to be. What that dollar turns
out to be remains to be seen. That is the basic theory and logic of the
budget request that is at the Council now. I was in Frankfort all morn—
ing with the staff on the Council of Higher Education going over our

budget request and explaining to them precisely what we had in mind and
what our concerns were and attempting to reconcile any differences they
may have with ours. It is a long and laborious process of getting that
budget worked through the system, but I assure you that we are going to

do the best we can.

Let me tell you again that I am pleased to welcome you back, to see
you here, and I hope you are ready for what is going to be a really fine
year for all of us. Thank you very much.”

The President was given an ovation, and Chairman Krislov thanked him for his remarks.

Professor Joseph Bryant, Department of English, presented the following Memorial
Resolution on the death of William Hugh Jansen.

William Hugh Jansen, 1914—1979

William Hugh Jansen, who died in Lexington on June 13, 1979,
was a native of Stamford, Connecticut. He received his under—
graduate training in that state, studying at both Trinity College
and Wesleyan University and graduating from the latter in 1935;
he taught for two years at the Williston Academy in Massachusetts,
listing as his subjects English, French, mathematics, and sports;
and from 1937 to 1949 was a student, teaching assistant, instruc—
tor, administrator and finally assistant professor at Indiana
University, where he took his Ph.D. in folklore in 1949. Bill
Jansen, as he was known here and throughout the world, thus was
both a student of the great pioneers in his field, among them
the late Stith Thompson, and a junior member of their distinguished
number. His dissertation, Abraham ”Oregon” Smith, published by




Arno Press in 1977, was one of the first in folklore to be
written anywhere in the United States; and even in its unpub—
lished form it brought him attention internationally. Pub—
lishers pestered him continually about the work until he at
last allowed it to be printed, two years before his death.

Aside from his appointments at Indiana (Instructor
1942—48 and Assistant Professor 1948-49), both of which he
received while working on his degree, Bill Jansen's only
academic home was here at the University of Kentucky. He
taught for thirty years on this campus and saw the disci—
pline of folklore grow from an oddity in the eyes of many
academic people to an established part of the academic
curriculum at Kentucky and elsewhere in this country. His
part in establishing folklore as a recognized discipline
consisted, in addition to teaching it brilliantly in his
own classroom, of lecturing at other colleges and univer—
sities in this country (Kentucky State, Berea, Western
Kentucky, Ball State, Ohio State, Purdue, Michigan State,
Indiana, and the University of Michigan), serving as
General Editor of the Bibliographical and Special Series
of the American Folklore Society (some twenty volumes),
writing articles of his own (about fifty), reviewing the
works of others (more than 100 items), and serving editori—
ally in one way or another on five regional and national
folklore publications. Bill's special interest was oral
narrative, and he was widely known among folklorists for
having identified the S—X factor, whereby students are
alerted to the social, political, ethnic and psychological
values of folk tales as well as to their aesthetic values.

In addition, Bill Jansen has represented his discipline
and Kentucky at the University of Ankara, at the Bandung
Institute of Technology, and at meetings and conferences in
Israel, Canada, Germany, Greece, Romania, Finland, and the
British Isles. He was a Fulbright Lecturer, a Ford Foundation
Faculty Fellow, a Senior Fellow of the National Endowment
for the Humanities, a full member of the International
Society for Folk—Narrative Research, a Fellow of the American
Folklore Society, and a Delegate to the American Council of
Learned Societies. In 1965 he was a member of President
Lyndon B. Johnson's White House Conference on the Interna—
tional Cooperation Year. It is no wonder, therefore, that
his colleagues elected him the University's Distinguished
Professor for 1974 and no accident that he delivered in
December of that year one of our more memorable Distinguished
Professor lectures, ”The Rationale of the Dirty Joke.” It
was also no accident that on that occasion he made one of
his most persuasive comments about the importance of folk—

It is popular these days for doom-sayers to wonder
what will happen as energy shortages leave the
pleasure car in the carport, the TV inoperative,
the reading lamps dim, and the drive—ins closed.
As for me, I wonder what will happen if we fail to
cultivate the opportunity presented by our oral



tradition to entertain and to be entertained
within a community of ourselves small enough
to be comprehended by ourselves.

Kentucky Alumnus, p. 15

If we do fail in this effort it will not be because Bill
Jansen failed to point the way. He left us forever, almost one
month to the day after his formal retirement, and is survived
by his wife, the former Violet E. Schraft, two children, two
grandchildren, and a host of friends from Lexington to Bandung
and back, all of whom remember his love of life and his charity
for every human being.

(Prepared by Dr. Joseph A. Bryant, Jr., Chairman, English Department)

Jerry D. Brandenberger, 1932—1979

Jerry D. Brandenberger, Professor of Physics, died suddenly
and unexpectedly while on leave from the University of Kentucky's
Physics and Astronomy Department at Los Alamos Scientific Labora—
tory in New Mexico. He died on Sunday, August 5, 1979 at 47 years
of age. Jerry completed his undergraduate work at the William
Marsh Rice University of Houston, Texas and his graduate work at
the University of Texas in Austin, Texas. He was awarded the
Ph.D. degree in 1962, with dissertation in nuclear physics. He
joined the faculty of the University of Kentucky in the Fall of
1963, just after completing a three—month appointment in the
fast neutron physics program of Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory.
Jerry had been invited to become a member of the nuclear physics
team developing a program of research and education at the then
new 6 MV Van de Graaff accelerator. He accepted the shielding
and detection systems used from 1967 to the present. He became
an internationally respected scientist in instruments and methods,
with outstanding expertise in radiation detection and electronic
systems for fast neutron physics. In 1970 the Wright Patterson
Air Force Laboratories sought Jerry's aid in the development of
their fast neutron physics program, and he and others operated
a successful neutron scattering program at Wright Patterson
from 1971 to 1973. This was in addition to his continued research
in the Kentucky laboratories.

Jerry's major interests were in distinguishing direct
scattering from absorptive processes in neutron induced reactions,
and in an accurate mathematical representation of precision and
accuracy which led to his withholding publication until every
source of ambiguity or error had been carefully examined, and
until he was confident that his results would not need subse—
quent correction. His experiments were published in Nuclear
Instruments and Methods, Nuclear Physics, and the The Physical
Review, as well as other journals. His capacity for work and
zeal for research were inspiring to all who knew him, as well
as the humor he brought to the many unexpected technical
problems always to be encountered in a research laboratory.

He was the first at Kentucky to introduce modern electronic




systems and methods into undergraduate teaching, having reor—
ganized the senior electronics courses. He was completely at
home, and deservedly confident, in any laboratory.

His developing circulatory problems, which culminated
in his first major heart attack in 1975, began a period of
frustration and suffering, for one so passionately dedicated
to research and innovation. In 1976 he seemed to be making
a good and full recovery, and began to turn his attention to
problem areas in applications of nuclear technology. This
led him to seek once again a post at Los Alamos, this time in
the nuclear safeguards program. While on leave there, his
work was recognized anew in his 1977 promotion to Professor.
He was preparing to return to his post in Kentucky at the
time of his death. His quiet nature, his sharp wit and
sense of history, and most of all his confident power in the
laboratory will be missed by those he leaves behind.

Jerry had a strong sense of history and tradition, and
a sharp wit which he turned often to the many contradictions
he saw in the contemporary scene, to the delight of his audi—
tors. During the 1970's he suffered a great deal because his
passion for work had to be blunted by his medical problems,
a Suffering shared by his family. He was married to Ann
Morris Brandenberger in 1960 and was the father of three
children, Jerry Duke, 16; Sarah Morris, 15; and John David, 12.
The family will continue to live at 401 Grand Canyon Avenue,
in White Rock, New Mexico. He is survived also by his parents,
Stanley S. and Evelyn Duke Brandenberger of Houston, Texas,
and by a brother, Stanley George of Dallas, Texas. We join
the family in their sorrow at Jerry's death, and wish them a
speedy and whole recovery from this period of grief.

(Prepared by Marcus T. McEllistrem, Physics and Astronomy)
Rudolph Schrils, 1936—1979

Rudolph Schrils, Associate Professor of Physics at the
University of Kentucky, died unexpectedly on May 28 at age 42.
Born in Curacao, Netherlands Antilles in 1936, Rudy received a
B.S. degree in physics from the University of Florida in 1958
and the Ph.D. from the University of Colorado in 1963. After
serving as an Instructor in the Physics Department of Yale
University in 1963, he joined the Physics Department of the
University of Kentucky in 1964.

Rudy Schrils was bright by anyone's standards and he made
a number of important contributions to the field of theoretical
physics. His primary research interest was in particle or
high energy physics and in nuclear structure. He was a con—
structive critic and kept reminding us of the need to take care
with basic principles.



Rudy's great love and great gift was in his communica—
tion with other people. He was a wonderful companion, a
great lecturer, an outstanding teacher, and a good tennis
player. Rudy loved people; and people loved him in return.
He loved to compete and he relished victory.

Among his greatest cares was his affection and interest
in students of all levels. He cared for students and was
always willing to counsel with them. It was for this reason
that he held such a lasting interest in the undergraduate
program in the Department of Physics and Astronomy and the
driving reason behind his long service as Director of
Undergraduate Studies in that Department.

Since he gave so much to his