Caption: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1952
This is a reduced-resolution page image for fast online browsing.
EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:
718 BOARD OF TRUSTEES [May 18 He agreed to accept amendments which would make the bill acceptable to University officials. Comptroller Morey stated that he is drafting such amendments. Mr. Fornof requested that copies of them be sent to the members of the Board of Trustees. BUSINESS PRESENTED BY T H E PRESIDENT O F T H E UNIVERSITY The Board resumed consideration of recommendations and reports presented by the President of the University. RECOMMENDATIONS TO T H E BOARD O F TRUSTEES O N T H E BASIS O F A FIRST REPORT O F T H E CLEARY COMMITTEE I N REGARD T O THE COLLEGE O F COMMERCE A N D BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (30) President Stoddard presented and discussed the following recommendations: On December 28th, 1950, the Board of Trustees approved the recommendations in my "Second Report to the Board of Trustees on Conditions in the College of Commerce and Business Administration." The first implementation called for the appointment of a special committee of five to "1. Submit to me nominations for the deanship of the College. I shall also have the advice of the Executive Committee of the College. "2. Assist in planning the reorganization of the College, including a possible transfer of the Department of Economics to the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, and to prepare a report for consideration of the Senate." The following members of the faculty agreed to serve on this Committee: EDWARD W. CLEARY, Chairman, Professor of Law ROYDEN DANGERFIELD, Professor of Political Science and Director of the Institute of Government and Public Affairs CHARLES J. GAA, Professor of Accountancy D. PHILIP LOCKLIN, McKinley Professor of the Economics of Public Utilities GORDON RAY, Professor of English and Head of the Department The effect of this action was to remove the issues from the ordinary channels within the College and to do so for a good reason: the College was unable to get its house in order and was, in fact, embroiling the University and the State. A short time ago the Committee indicated that it would like to submit its report in two parts starting with the second section (on the reorganization of the College). The Committee felt that it could not move forward in regard to the selection of a dean until it was able to indicate to prospective candidates the nature of the administrative assignment. Accordingly, we have before us the unanimous Report of the Cleary Committee on the Organization of the College of Commerce and Business Administration. (A second report on the deanship is to come later.) I am impressed with the careful and objective way in which Professor Cleary's committee has carried on its work. The task was arduous, calling for many conferences. More than forty persons have appeared directly before the Committee and it sat with other groups. The Committee has attempted to reach its conclusions not through a simple show of hands but through a clarification of the issues involved. This is brought out in the first two parts of the report. The third part of the report, beginning on page 724, consists of recommendations. It is to these that I call the attention of the Board. I concur in the conclusion of the Cleary Committee that it is not enough to let matters ride without change. We have had a quiet period — a moratorium — in part because of the feeling that some reorganization would be accomplished as a means of carrying out the purposes of the College. The course of the controversy indicates that the troubles are not to be resolved by a single change already made in administrative personnel. The Cleary Committee holds that the transfer of Economics to Liberal Arts and Sciences "is not an adequate solution." I should say, rather, that it is not a
| 
