xt7n028pcz1v https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7n028pcz1v/data/mets.xml Lexington, Kentucky (Fayette County) University of Kentucky Alumni Association 1979 v. : ill. ; 28 cm. Quarterly, Publication suspended 1922 and resumed with v. 1, no. 1 (May 1929); v. 5, no. 9 (May 1933) not published; issues for v. 37, no. 2-v. 40, no. 1 (spring 1966-spring 1969) incorrectly numbered as v. 38, no. 2-v. 43, no. 1; v. 40 (1969) complete in 3 no. journals  English [Lexington, Ky. : University of Kentucky Alumni Association, Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Kentucky alumnus University of Kentucky. Kentucky alumni 2002- Kentucky alumnus monthly Kentucky alumnus, vol. 02, no. 49, 1979 text Kentucky alumnus, vol. 02, no. 49, 1979 1979 2012 true xt7n028pcz1v section xt7n028pcz1v · V V V V VV V ’   ' ’ W Q" ,,- L, ,1i1111 ..,, ,. ,. ,,,, ,, , ,,,., , ,,,,, ,, ,-., ..   ,,,_,,,..i, i, jjj; _,_,,_;jj;;;,i;i
V - ¤ ' NZ ,
K Y ,, , f ,
I , , ` W
` * V J V V ‘ ` E ` '
` w 1 ` V — `
5 , · 1 *
1 . ‘ ` ‘ w , .
\ ,’ 3 i ~
w"‘ \ z
`
” . . . , ‘ __`
` ~, j
, ·,j ‘ *,2*; —» ·     ·
. { ""— V V-V " 7 "\1g—;— \_ · `»,"·;,,,:i`fjl fr “
,   { K ` ' ' _   UL ’   xw 1 _j,` `
\ _,4 `¥ V ,         *1  
' ffw ( 7- _`f~._} _ ’ ' .  _;   ‘\ .,_ ,< `   ·   ` __
. ` ` `   _ 1}* __f,’/j, ,  —·r¢—._  g ia _,-V` _
4 ._ J ‘~ V;\;,; y; — ig; ~/L   J ,     \_ / f
K `; F V`    \   V' `;// V 7. "·’,‘ ,,{' . ,
-1- -   _ V; v_ · __ _ \`, .\ / '.·,',w _ ·.
M ", " ‘ { ‘\,_ —   ' ·`»~   : V ?‘}`i`V—,    V' ' ·
—, R   ~ _ if VV’· ;V___ j   r., ,-/’ ’ ` 7   YY,-V;`·j`r\g; ._ _ _ <-·— ~ _ _ _ _   _  
  · ‘ Q · __; .-·V   ·‘ 'V *V `V       ,· ,  V°~V
` K , V · ~ ` r /-_ VV \ rf V N ,, K in `     ‘ V » \ I V » '_ ' , `
, ‘     , \ , V 3 ff, , V —,~—· ‘~ I   ,,i=L‘”VV’ 7 V V'     QT  
{ ___ V VV L V _ __ 1_ r>}4;V,
` ” N i V ` QQ
`
l I1 .-~ ,`_.» A      
`
3 · ~~` ~ - # — ·   · - ,
;| x / K /
`
\` // /   _
1 / 7 ,,
. N -~V , " '
¤ » ~   - ` Y1
Er 7 V   V , ;v\  --.—` \,—— ,» ·¤/_~—
` ` / , `, , ` · · »,v
» ¤   , N
. » i _·? = · V _ , . V . , , ` .
` . J ` ` I r`

 7 .
HOLLAND
•Nijmegen
' '11~¤m¤·¤¤i¤h GERMANY j
•Dusse1dorf I
n  SS€1$‘ • Cologne
· BELGIUM ,° “°“" {
  Coblence • Bnjmbach I
( Wiesbaden , Ff¤1'1kf01't `
LUXEMB G . · ' *?“‘é?"?“" ,
· Mainz • Gernsheim  
Speyer • Mannheim
  • Heidelberg .
FRANCE Km ° I
I
PIIISE   I
C ° “
I
M ° h and I
· I
Brussels ~
EXCLUSIVE, DELUXE TOUR FOR ALUMNI  
I
AUGUST 13"23 I
I
O O O
Depart Cmcmnatn I  
I
  I
I
For further information and reservations coupon, write to: Tours  
UK Alumni Association {
Lexington, KY 40506 I
Name(s) V I
ILASTI IFIRSTI ISPOUSEI
Home Address
 
City State Zip
 

 /_
in
this
T issue
i  
the kentucky alumnus spring 1979 vol. 49, no. 2
   
* 1979 Officers
P'°°*d°¤* features:
John C. Owens ’50
Lexington, Kentucky
President·EIect 5 the entanghng web
John C. Nichols II ’53 - federal regulations continue to encroach upon higher
Ll5uisvil|e,Ke¤tucky education, mostly to the detriment of colleges and univer- _
Treasurer sities. this special report, prepared by a nationwide non-profit
j gifs; J<;€ F-}l;’l0¤¤$ k38 organization of alumni editors, explores the many facets of this
exmg on, entuc y Situation.
i Secretary 21
i Jay Binmiiald *48 vice presidential perspectives
i Lexington, Kgntugky the kentucky alumnus magazine asked several vice presidents
l Aooooiatlon stag how extensively federal regulation is felt here on the uk
I Associate Director CampuS·
  Bob C. Whitaker ’58
l Editor
Liz Howard Demoran ’68 ..
Julia Brothers Ruby Gilpin d€p8l’tl’Il€lltS
Linda Brumfield Ruby Hardin
Ruth Elliott Roger Hickman ’74
Roy Fugitt Ennis Johnson 2 8l’0UHd CBHIPUS
Amelia Gano Ada Refb¤rd’39 more mone for student aid . . . alumni invited to student
l _ y
J€““‘f°’W°9“°' awards night . . . coal gasification project utilizes laser tech-
  nique . . . university investments in south africa . . . faculty,
The Kentucky Alumnus (USPS 292- Staff activities · · · €tC·
84Ol is Published ¤¤b*`*€'lSf bv th? blbk 4 football ticket order information
Vmlty Of Kentucky Ahlmm ASs°°'°¤°n’ no change in demand for football tickets virtually eliminates
» 400 Rose Street, Lexington, Kentucky d , ,t t, f i _ b t t, k t b
i 40506, lm its duwpaying members. secon priony op ion or aummn u some IC es may e
g lndividiial dads aia $15 annually with available. Read and follow directions carefully to take ad-
l $2.00 bf that amount used in publication vantage Of this offer for the 1979 Season.
of the magazine. Second class postage
paid at Lexington, Kentucky, and ad- 24 class n_0t€S i d
diticnal mailing Offices.   €V€l’yllllTlQ yOU a ways Wal'll€ to l(TlOW about yOLll`
, Send changes Of addyggg [O The Ken- classmates, but l'l€V€l` wrote them to ask.
tucky Alumnus, UK Alumni Association,
Lexington, KY 40506. ·· —
Opinions expressed in The Kentucky
Alumnus are not necessarily those of the U _ A h
Universitylof Kentucky orthe AlumniAs- nlvemty rc wu
sociation. A member ofthe Joint Alumni ` n Margaret   King Library . Nqrlh
Council of Kentucky and CASE, Council .
forthe Advancementand Support of Ed- University of Kentucky
ucation. Lexington, Kentucky 40506

 The center will offer training activities  
for Harlan County residents serving on
  public boards and will attempt to pro-
vide residents access to information
needed for public discussion of impor- t _
tant issues. The award was one of six  
i given community colleges to participate  
  m u in a national demonstration project l
sponsored by the Kellogg Foundation.
•  
Br      University Investments j
t And South Africa b Vt?
    e
The UK Board of Trustees adopted a iein
three-point policy regarding its invest- l’·t;‘·
ments in companies with holdings in °°°
  South Africa: first, the University sup-
  Some students have continued col- d ll ·
Ben t b Care _ _ ports an encourages a companies E
"D a Qt"' · lege Steely fellewlns their release and doing business in South Africa to adopt F
llzd\lC;l)H0n Aim of new dileletions given tc? tge lives of the ttsulllvan prt,-rctpleS" as a means Of  
ew !0g¥am manyo QWOmQ“mVO VQ · helping black workers acquire better
  training, better jobs and an improved qq
QttQt Qat QQYQ Ot t Q appmxt   standard of living; second, rather than tlen
llnlatelv Z2?000 diabetlesingentnellws New Laser Technique immediately divesting of those stocks Um,
Q atm O Q “QW QatQ all Q uca lon the Universit currentl owns in com a- ·
M Aid Coal V V ta i i>en·
r>r<>srarn launched last rnentn tlneusn ev nies which have not adopted the Srriii- rent
the Medical Center and the Rural Gasifieation Pl’0CeSSeS van Principles, the Unlversttu takes the teac
Health Services Administration (HEW). U position that tt een exert greater m_ Cha
ThQ PY0Ql'el'Tl Pl'0VldQ$ fer tlle dQVQl‘ egqizegtflh Whtch xii tttset tzltiains hi? fluence on those companies to take ter C
opment of diabetes care services in 1- t tt t a ttQW_ _Q mquQ a QOU action te insure equal employment
dentified rural areas and has received tQad te a mote Qtttctettt Wat} ef pt°dtt°‘ Opportunity and better Standards Of liv-
igggoggr tttgéditjt   fe;/ltlgle first mg;tgutgtggiggotglgggtéal Engineering ing for its minority workers from within, ;
. . v enc er, e icine, · · i lr n ld ,tn ·t ld · l
wilnieaanie presram. and *’*·v5*¤$» and =’· M Seneel Pest Zsjaiailiaa jarsiait-`aZ°aurnSatts?a;Z t
doctoral research associate, are using . ’ ’
_ _ _ will be taken to phase out of the [
  an experimental technique which U . . , . ru l. h _
··-_‘—‘_{‘ permitsabetterunderstanding of chem- “‘”‘ata‘t’a ‘““aat‘“a“t t’° °‘° t aaa J
JCC Prison Program _ , stocks in companies which have not
ical bonding and molecular structure ado ted the Sullivan Pri ci l b t h part
Gaining In SIIPPOIL during the catalytic processes of coal phage Out will be dogg Pais nt;€St;;_ Opn
Publie Aeelaim gastttcattott propriate time so as not to seriously Stttt
"—‘—;_‘"`_“ Ttta laatt “°ta‘t· ttawavati that the jeopardize the University’s endowment l ter
Jefferson Community College is tak- enormous 10b of lmPl’0Vl¤Q catalysts {GY Value l the
ing college courses to the residents of Qasltlcatlon has t’atQtV t’Q9tttt· Bredlev ln adopting the polic ' t anc
_ _ _ y, the board said  
ttxle Kentuckg Corrrxtirrnal Ingtitutel for ?§Vie;h;itQ°tl;r;qui else has a uaetuttttasa "We hope the above states clearly our t tettt
ernen ln ewee a ev an ent ue- th ’ Pe t eu l;’°°e$;e$ ‘“"° $99 opposition to apanheid, and the steps r mlll
asm tat the ptlfgtata amfag ‘“t“ata$ fh at Cgagaai fm is t aaa ttaa ta we have taken regarding our invest- · Vee
ttaa Qt°t;’tt tl? tl; lltttttt O _ tteett °°m` Q pm uc ton O gasa me` ment policy to demonstrate this stance. i ttm
petition ort fe jotssvailable for the We have chosen to speak out and take Q t
WO °°utSeS° gte (tac aemea €t‘ concrete action against a social wrong t Sat'
Ftttttted tlyvsltte Rtttet Sat? Business 8* Grant to Southeast which is antithetical to every freedom dot
Ptléesslene temelihseu aagtyadul l_lVill $etU1> upon wnian American democracy is Be
catotta gtatt S· Wt ransne atm O raining Center founded Yet at the same time we as tt
the professors provided by the State   -l-mSr€€S` ha;/Q Safe ` t. {Or.
_ , -guarded and in-
Buteau el Cottectttmsi the ptogtam has A $40,000 ¤W¤l’·Ve¤Y passed by Congress last October. award, the highest award presented
— p€I`lOd. Tl`llS IS Lll'lLlSU21l, Sll'lC€ the CUT" “The new law affects two fnajoy Stu- annually   the National  
I`€l`l1 trend of   aCCI`€dl1B1lOI‘l of dent  prograrnsill Said Jaynes lnglei Academy Of Romania, for   Con-
leaching lllslllullolls Such as the   director of the UK Olllce of Sh-ldehl tributions to the study of linear electric
Chahdlel l`/ledlcal Cehlel Qehelally l$ Financial Aid. These are the Basic machines
lOl Ohly Ohe Vealalalllhe- Opportunity Grant Program and the
Guaranteed Student Loan Program. i
  The I`€VlS€d   for families `     ' _.  
HUD Loan To Ease under the Basic Opportunity Grant Pro- ll   , Mi .`   W " l I
Housin & Din". gram makes it possible for a student in a i ___,           ·’ · .  
B d dg!) bt 9 family of four with up to $25,000 in F " , { ·_ . - ." 1 ~
OD B 8 . . .   t is t   -’ »
yearly income to receive a grant which  ger. i =._ ·y—   i .,,. a ll _   ii;
Just in the knick of time, the U.S. De- does hel have to be lePald· al O J A .     A ..     l’
Th I. .b.l. . l· · · h- h *5 4% A ir._ h    ini 's
partment of Housing and Urban Devel- Q elgl llllt lllcome llhll la lg el  erm ’ j`  L  f i   ·
opment (HUD) inooio available loans for ima larseriamilv eratmllv with mere     i   i<  
student housing and accepted UK’s oid than ¤¤€_9l¤·ld ¤¤ wllese lnsle S¤_¤<=l·  .       r   — _
  for $4,300,000 to be used to increase ln addlhehi lhahy 5ell‘$UPP0YhhQ $t¤· i   »   _i   ·   ii    _.i
i the supply or campus housing here and dents now qualify for larger allowances to f ·      you yr  is   i_'·   T o _ _
i anoiher $284Y0()O lor energy main- and 40 per centr more students in   I. l  {     or
i tenancei Additionally, another $19 K€l'itUCl\`     \`   V
Z   _ i\   __ 1  __ "‘ 4 7...;  
? \`*»i.__ J, `  A  ¥;{i” i`   " I — ¤z*§ . .~---    by  / 
li §` \.   T       Y'}
‘     .. e ,»   ..   ;4·~—` a&\ r " “¤>·  =<   
  -     ‘ an   e   it" ~-»   their
yi? ·     ·· ` It sr s   , »»   ` €= 
` /   J!   ·\» . "\» _/      \:;g\
/  K    `%—-   z  ,   `  ’ ~\    ..  i    
  ¤ T \   . ~» ·'   ,   ’ - i ~ ’ ***5. \  
   · `\ »   ‘     \ t rs. \
. . . wl >   ¤ ws  fly _. _ e ~ \.
l     i ‘ ii »·—  "* -* A       . A    `_ ti e e A A oe-.
i  ' ; ;¢ =`  X \\<`~— »\_ i \ `\i5°`     [\` »/’ I \§\ ;\\  
; -`   ·-__  xy ***5 ‘ ` \_ \` _<’¤L-`_____"§ _ .     j  \j- .   .
i  “ l  “ .. `   ‘ ‘\.;"“"   ···‘    \ »  ‘— s ·  = "
2 xg-,    5. .;e1j`°` ~•l;;;.y—_;V-/’.. iooe   , " ;. ». .   - ,   x
> \\    :G.·     \\¤;§  `~ Ae r'; ,  ox- Jf ,    
g   ’/$ji\__       {  »;    ,r___ ~\_
F ` ~$" »¥“    M `A   ~   ""`;**=*+ -  T { t     
.   .. sk . at [ ` - - s ~   i-   ef.  J  g 
  `»\ gk  _   _\` _ [ ', »\ / 0//\ i__ ` r     U  A? . ] I 4 7 ;
  sk \.  gk  éfa  4  t _
l` °i”~\ `   " " `j\ Y"- , 12 Yiigg`.  2;- _   i?i;;;e,2?A/'_; ` 'T li
{    ~lglv{< ik'_ i, 3" ~ >_g ”  4,-;”' 
{ \i; `\ - ·   _ g -     { Y / »v`  ¥_ .- V if; f‘· -··"T · ' /
l `*\\   -»# =-·=/ ·’   ,_-·‘ ’ ""`  
E   /  ' i
  Esckimwo THE kind of despotism that demo-
  cratic societies like ours could be most
  6 vulnerable to, Alexis de Tocqueville fore-
; saw a government that "covers the whole of
_ ° social life with a network of petty, complicated rules
T I   I   I that are both minute and uniform"——a situation, he
  i warned, that does not break the human will so much
    as it "softens, bends, and guides it."
Q `     b l; There are those in this nation-and their number
  6 ` appears to be growing——who fear that Tocqueville’s
  ji vision is rapidly becoming our reality. They point to
    the enormous and proliferating body of laws and
  F€d€I~al R€glllatiOn government regulations now control-ling virtually ev-
Q ery aspect of human life and behavior. They protest
  ` * the dollar cost of "over—regulation" (estimated at
if Of (“()ll€g€S j more than $100 billion annually), the stifling impact it
  , · _ _· · has on the economy, the bureaucracy and waste
  (Ind UIIIVGI 5lU€$ fi which it spawns, and its "basic incompatibility with
I the democratic processes."
  i Once. such complaints came almost exclusively
  ; from the business community—the first and most
1 __  V   heavily regulated segment of society. No longer.
i   Excessive government regulation is an issue for
  yet  everyone. And it is by no means a simple issue. Most
; as -· ,...   . . . .
I   ‘‘’‘ A  regulationsseek to accomplish worthy objectives-
» ‘I . . .
A , M  { objectives that society has largely agreed upon and
i l ,  ~ . .
  j l     s   expects government to attain. The rub is that as our
  { T. r   {7 '   society has become larger and more complex. so have
    if ‘’i`’   * '  “;.·;_’ _` j   ~l"  its aspirations and its problems. Rights come into
  ,   it         conflict. Interests clash. Choices must be made, not
    V   ·¢ ""” ·<     ‘?. A'  just between, "good" and "bad" but between "good"
r ;~' ,_   f  M  jg;     .__.. .   _  jj     and "good. It IS through law and regulation that gov-
E il      `Y ,     f E   i $ .34) "  emment attempts to solve these problems and reconcile
    A   ```'V    , i/   i     jjj; ’  3     J if   these conflicts.
  » lj?      .   iii        Aj"   Following is a special report on federal regulation
 ",  n f; j If         " — ` A j   of American higher education and the impact it has
.- .__ f' o f ` i  A j ‘“   Q?-gi . A   on colleges and universities which now find that they,
? -—e ;  cj  .-if T `  "*- Yi  too, are caught in the entangling web.
  s

   V/lf   C ,,i.._., Cav Emmgka  
           A   A g
1 Q?     1  P   1 1%..f   g   C
es   ·.;· r   —e lf.   1   . J -- .... tt   ~~ ll · Y
. . t .   ~ -P! 1//· `»»,,    if  -»,t-, ;¤s—e.»->»--—‘»:¢$c¤‘%f.`*5ii¥?’°®g:» wi A {
»   " ' }i..,....j_,, _   ..;·  1. i §g,;$.·;§;_ts\»,1;;I¢mg=%>.14:.<»;,\:,\‘ `
    A  A/;·2P,sr4,7m   .,..,  ,, _ _  1  5 tf
VC    i ,   ""’”””    ;:= . <;». 1   ` t
i   .er"Q____ __    J      a~».:i;;a........,gg,‘,.,%   ¤?’%2g¤F1+f&li .,..,, $1;.{;¤r5=.;&i;, t
To .   r·*‘ za  L    A   B , Zim!  T`T?1i;f__;;,;/ ,1    
t. 0,};;    `  i M. ` ‘ ,?i-’    {L2'?  »   # S
t.-..»      iizéfs;  .1  Fig F . ‘
  -,         "·W;             *
· { · A +·-»   fee V1    »‘;2·   j     A   ‘ ez. ¥ (
  ·_ Z ·   I — _ .- MET "' "“  ff}?  · V ii,  
- V1    .;A                   ·=4.       »   `C Y '
          —-~ ·        A.       i “ 1 ‘
;;   “ rs   t} ·`‘‘         ' »~ - t 4;%: ‘=? -1* j   $ ·
.. A IL     ( ‘     ;4=·" '   ’ Q {
~ ·J · · . .     - 1 ¤» .,= 1
` l
I
N THE sUMMER of 1977, Nelda Bames, a 53 year-  
old school teacher, enrolled in two courses at  
Converse College in Spartansburg, S.C. She  
  needed the courses to meet state requirements  
CCN and keep her teaching job.  
() €dl1C2l[l()I`l21.l 21ClITllHlSU`Z1[()l` Il€€(lS Mrs. Barnes is deaf. When she had difficulty  
to be reminded Of tht? Sad fact following the lectures, she asked the college to  
tl , {   d [ I , _ . provide her with .a sign-language interpretera Con-  
ld C mid m()nCy medns pervdslvc verse declined, pointing out that the cost of doing so E
i)l1l`C2lUCI`Z1[lC COD[l`()l.” would far exceed the $210 that Mrs. Barnes paid in  
  tuition. 1
So Mrs. Barnes sued in federal court under new  
1-i.E.w. regulations implementing Section 504 of the S
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended. The regu1a— 1
tions ban discrimination against handicapped persons
and stipulate that students shall not be denied the g
benefits of education "because of the absence of 1
educational auxiliary aids."  
Federal district court judge Robert W. Hemphill 1
ruled in favor of Mrs. Barnes and ordered Converse ‘
to provide her with an interpreter. He also expressed 1
considerable sympathy for the college and said: "N0 ·
educational administrator needs to be reminded of the g
sad fact that federal money means pervasive bureau-  
cratic control."  
Judge Hemphill was right. No such reminder is ll
A necessary these days. The threat of federal control is [
very real on the nation’s campuses. Indeed, it may  
not be much of an exaggeration to suggest that  
increasing government regulation, with all of its i.
complicating side effects, is the most serious problem 'i
facing American higher education. Q
6 .

 _ Harold Enarson, president of Ohio State Universi- interference. He says: "The careful respect by gov-
ty, obviously a man accustomed to dealing with emment for the independence of the educational
I government, claims "the federal presence is felt world is long gone. Non-involvement has changed to
I everywhere in higher education, and federal laws and intrusion, respect to financial and regulatory control.
, regulations are changing the academic world in ways The extent is frightening."
{ that justify our alarm.”
Stanford vice president Robert Rosenzweig feels HE EXTENT is indeed frightening. Today
` that higher education has lost its "immunity to the there are 34 Congressional committees and
burdens" of an increasingly regulated society and at least 70 subcommittees with jurisdiction
says: "Virtually the whole range of public regulatory over 439 separate laws affecting postsecond-
. activity now bears on the university." ary education. The number of pages of federal laws
g The problem is not limited to large universities concerning higher education rose from 90 in 1964 to
? which receive the lion’s share of federal dollars. 360 in 1976.
“ Every institution of higher leaming is affected—large And those laws have generated millions of words of
, and small, private and public, liberal arts and techni- regulations. The number of pages in the Federal
  cal, community colleges and professional schools. Register devoted to regulations affecting higher edu-
l Until 1975, colleges and universities which did not cation grew from 92 in 1965 to nearly 1,000 in l977—a
{ receive direct federal grants were exempt from much 1,000 percent increase in the quantity of federal
` of the regulation. Then 1-r.E.w. adopted regulations to regulations with which colleges and universities must `
  enforce Title IX against sex discrimination and de- comply.
‘ clared that a recipient institution was an institution Duke University president Terry Sanford under-
_ that received federal funds indirectly as well as standably refers to "the avalanche of recent govem-
I directly. In other words, if one student received one ment regulations [that] threatens to dominate campus
_ dollar in federal student aid, the entire institution and management."
Q all of its activities would be subject to regulation. It was not long ago that colleges and universities
i This prompted Nobel prize-winning economist Mil- were exempt from almost all federally mandated
  ton Friedman to observe that the "corner grocer and  
l the A&P are recipient institutions because some of “
  their customers receive social security checks. He   the Old Catalog Still promises
i added, "No argument rs too silly to serve as a pretext ‘ ,
  for extending still further the widening control over to educate thc whole person, thc
  all of our lives that is being exercised by govern- lIl5[l[L1[l()[1 had l)€{[€I` be pI`€p;1I`(·]d
  ment." · ”
i Several institutions have now challenged H.E.W.’S to prove IL
  all-inclusive definition of "recipient. "  
  The more than 800 church-related colleges in the social programs, even including social security and
  United States—many of which have not sought or workmen’s unemployment insurance.
* accepted federal aid—are especially concerned. They Things began to change in the mid—l960’s with the
  fear that "as the state moves in, the church must adoption of civil rights legislation and regulations,
  move out." And recent federal regulations dealing which at first banned discrimination on the basis of
i with such sensitive issues as abortion, marital status, race, color, religion. and national origin. Then they
J integration of the sexes, and religious preference went furfher: non—discrimination alone was not
l clash directly with the religious beliefs and practices enough—an organization was required to take affirm-
l of many of these schools. ative action to develop hiring goals for minorities and
I Father Ernie Bartell, head of the Fund for the plans to achieve those goals. Sex was subsequently
l Improvement of Postsecondary Education, notes that added to the list, followed by age, and, more recent-
{ "some of the nation’s oldest and most fiercely inde- ly, by physical and mental handicaps.
‘ pendent colleges and universities were founded as In 1969, the National Labor Relations Board rather
f diverse religious institutions." And he worries that impulsively extended coverage of federal collective
ia "the further erosion of such diversity under additional bargaining laws to college and university faculties,
  pressures of governmental regulation might thus be thus clearing the way for the faculty unionization
  most symbolically disturbing among already belea- movement. (A recent lower court ruling that the
guered smaller institutions, many of them church- faculty at Yeshiva University are supervisors and
E related and lacking the expensive and specialized thus not entitled to collective bargaining rights is now
  expertise to respond and to adapt creatively to the on its way to the Supreme Court.)
  changes implied in federally mandated programs." Most of these laws and regulations affecting higher
  The president of Asbury College in Wilmore, Ky., education were not aimed specifically at campuses
j has been outspoken in his criticism of govemment but rather at broad social problems; colleges and
Q 7

 universities were either caught in the backwash or vided a standard of living for American workers =
subsequently included by specific Congressional or unequaled elsewhere in the world." A
regulatory action. . It has also been pointed out by some observers that
In 1974, with the passage of the Buckley Amend- colleges and universities were not as assertive as they ,
ment to the Family Rights and Privacy Act, a new might have been in providing access to disadvantaged I
stage of regulation began which was aimed directly at students and assuring equal rights to minorities and g
postsecondary education. The Buckley Amendment women. Most of the progress made in these areas was
granted students access to their educational records, the result of federal funding and federal regulation. i
limited access by others (including parents), and Says one government official, formerly a college _}
required institutions to inform all members of the president: “Unjustified discrimination in hiring and  
campus community of their rights and obligations admission, exaggerationrof performance claims for ,  
under the act. the sake of institutional development, defensive fail-  
After Buckley came a new version of the Health ure of accountability in return for social privilege, and  
Professions Educational Assistance Amendments other social sins mark and mar the history of Ameri-  
which attempted to coerce U.S. medical schools into can higher education. Nor has the record of voluntary F
admitting students from a register established by the self-regulation been much more distinguished in high- yi  
Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare. Then er education than elsewhere."   i
came regulations implementing Section 504 of the Could higher education have avoided government    
Rehabilitation Act _of l973, requiring institutions to regulation if it had been more vigorous in regulating    
make changes in their physical facilities in order to itself? Perhaps in some limited areas, replies one col- {  
accommodate the handicapped. lege official. But he adds, "I don’t think we would  
The Education Amendment Act of 1976 struckta have taken major steps at our institution, for exam- ,   "W
blow for consumer protection in education. It re- ple, to accommodate the handicapped. The cost “ l
quires colleges and universities to make known their would have been too high, the available dollars too L  
policies and practices in numerous areas such as few, and the number who would benefit too mini-   gl
financial aid, refunds, and descriptions of facilities, mal." i  
faculties, and educational programs. Institutions may G. William Miller, chairman of the Federal Re-  
have their various written and spoken statements serve Board, says: "Generational regulation iis funda— Q,
assessed by the government according to “truth in mental to any system. It is designed to regulate E
advertising" standards. ln other words, if the old human behavior and to set certain necessary stan- g
college catalog still promises to "educate the whole dards. Without regulations, the free enterprise system  
person," the institution had better be prepared to would not move on its own to correct social inequal-   "
prove it—to a federal agency or maybe in court. ities. Sel