|
THIS WEEK IN UMASSD HISTORY
SMU’s future: high tech and computer literacy?
Original article by Deborah Hanna
Friday, April 2, 1982
SMU President Donald Walker met with faculty members last week to discuss and re-examine SMU’s responsibility to students and the southeastern Massachusetts region.
“This region wants and is ready for high technology development,” Walker said in a speech last week outlining SMU’s academic agenda for the eighties. “We must respond to this challenge. We must change.”
While Walker enthusiastically encourages the development of high technology at SMU, he also credits humanities and social sciences as being the backbone to any good university.
“To remain true to our mission as a university and as a catalyst for this region of the commonwealth, we must encourage the development of high technology, while we continue to insist upon the importance of the arts and humanities for anyone within any major offered by this university,” said Walker.
For students, Walker is aiming for more integration between technical and non-technical majors, starting with a proposed computer literacy requirement.
A computer literacy requirement will consist of a two-semester course. The first semester will deal with the basic operation and language of the computer, while the second semester will deal with the social implications of the computer.
Political science professor and chairperson of women’s studies, Rita Moniz, agrees that a computer literacy requirement can only help students.
“Every working person in our society is faced with a computer at one time or another. The English literature major will probably be dealing with a word processor, while a political science major will need basic knowledge of a computer for dealing with statistics.”
Moniz, too, noted the importance of humanities. “Our society is getting more and more technical and computerized and that’s going to create new problems that we will need to deal with, with humanistic reasoning.”
Moniz sees Walker’s proposal as preparing SMU for the 21st century, so that the university will be a leader and not a follower.
She also sees the computer literacy requirement as just one part of a whole re-evaluation that will take place within the undergraduate curriculum at SMU.
“I hope we’re not just engaging in a game of rhetoric. It’s time to do some real stuff,” Moniz said.
Moniz is supportive of Walker’s proposals, and believes most faculty members feel the same. There are some who object, but Moniz and Walker both feel those objections are based on uneccessary fear and misunderstanding.
Multiple bomb scares disrupt campus activity
Original article by Ana M. Leal
Thursday, April 10, 1986
A series of bomb threats prompted the evacuation of several campus buildings during the past two weeks.
Students were forced to evacuate after anonymous callers claimed to have planted the bombs on campus.
The Massachusetts Fire Marshall, the telephone company, the State Police and SMU officials (campus police administration) are conducting an investigation. According to Chief McKearney of the SMU Campus Police, this investigation has generated several bits of information that may lead to the capture of the person, or persons, who are responsible for the nine recent bomb threats.
Chief McKearney emphasized that these threats are not a “joke. When we catch them, (the party or parties responsible), it’s going to be the letter of the law. We’re going to recommend the maximum sentence and expulsion (if it turns out to be a student),” said McKearney.
McKearney also referred to a Massachusetts general law. This law states:
“Whoever, knowing the same to be false, transmits or causes to be transmitted to any person by telephone or other means of communication falsely reporting the location of any explosive or other dangerous substance or contrivance, thereby causing anxiety, unrest, fear, or personal discomfort to any person or group of persons, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than twenty years, or by imprisonment in jail or house of correction for not more than two and one half years or by a fine of not more than ten thousand dollars or by both such fine and imprisonment in a jail or house of correction.”
McKearney encourages anyone who knows anything about the bomb threats to contact the campus police.
The Student Senate voted to allocate $400 towards capturing and bringing to justice the individual or individuals who have been plaguing the campus with the bomb threats. The money will be held in an escro account until someone is convicted.
“It’s our education that we’re losing,” said Robin Blackstone, a Student Senator.
When a bomb threat is received, Campus Police contact Vice President Wilde, who then contacts President Brazil.
“The Campus Police, along with people from Physical Plant are dispatched to the location the bomb is reported to be at. They then proceed to pull the fire alarm and the buildings are evacuated. We then lock the building and conduct a cursory search,” explained Chief McKearney.
UMass conversion may begin as soon as July 1
Original article by Kenneth J. Souza
Friday, April 5, 1991
Plans to “create a brand new five-campus University of Massachusetts” are well under way this week, according to SMU President John Brazil.
Legislation was introduced early yesterday (April 4) to abolish the existing campuses of SMU and ULowell and restructure them into the new centralized UMass system. The submitted bill, which stipulates the requirements for merger as agreed by each respective Board of Trustees, is expected to be acted upon within the month and could result in SMU’s conversion to UMass Dartmouth as early as July 1.
President Brazil was confident that the bill will be acted upon swiftly and said the odds are “10 to 1” that the UMass name change will take effect by the beginning of the fiscal year, noting the plan’s overall support from various Trustees during a first-time reception dinner held Tuesday evening.
“EVerybody’s committed to the idea,” Brazil said, “and to the notion that we’ve got to have a strong five-campus system that represents (both) tremendous political and economic advantages.”
One of the biggest concerns for each campus involved has been maintaining some degree of autonomy and having an equal voice in the newly-established “Super-Board” of Trustees. Brazil is optimistic that SMU and ULowell will have equity with the UMass delegation.
“(The) legislation is going to recommend an 18-person (UMass) Board of Trustees,” Brazil said, “eight members from the (existing) UMass board, four from SMU and four from Lowell, so SMU and Lowell will have the same representation on the initial board...including two student representatives.”
Though SMU and ULowell were cautious of the initial UMass proposal, both campuses have now agreed that the legislation being submitted guarantees long-term prosperity for the strengthened UMass system. “Everybody going into this had some reservations,” Brazil said, “we were concerned about the future of our university...we were concerned that we would be at the mercy of a board that would decide the only thing that really mattered were the Medical School (UMass-Worcester) and Amherst.”
“But what we tried to do was structure a system to build in as many reasonable protections that assured each campus and their respective boards that the system will be equitable, fair, and centrally managed to make sure that all five campuses grow together,” Brazil said. “I think we’ve done that. In any of these things you can’t always get what you want, but there are some break points- if you don’t get this, you’re not in.”
During a question and answer period with the Faculty Senate Wednesday afternoon, President Brazil furthered his hopes for the passage of the UMass legislation, citing the support of area representatives, senators and even the governor as positive indicators. Despite many ill-advised proposals for higher education- not least among them being the recent two-week furlough proposal- Governor Weld has been supportive of the UMass merger in concept, Brazil told members of the faculty.
Each UMass campus may also potentially gain some independence if the new Board of Trustees is given the authority to set tuition levels and retain 100 percent tuition monies within the system, Brazil said. “That’s part of the proposal,” Brazil said, stressing that though legislators have been supportive of the UMass concept, “they haven’t bought into the final package yet.”
Though the actual tuition levels of each campus were not written into the legislation, Brazil explained that outside accountants will be brought in to decide costs for each campus and the development of a formula to set tuition levels as specified in the proposed bill.
“I think it is likely that tuition levels will sort of get close to one another,” said Brazil, depending upon course load and level- seminar versus lab, graduate versus undergraduate, Ph. D. versus Master’s. “The (tuition) formula is going to be fair and neutral and not based on political considerations,” Brazil said.
Though there was initially some concern that SMU’s jumpting onto the university bandwagon would cause hard feelings between its closest neighbors- Bristol Community College (BCC) and Bridgewater State College (BSC)- representatives from both colleges seem to disagree.
“I think what needs to be remembered is that state colleges have a distinct mission that is different from other institutions in the commonwealth,” said Dr. Susan Holton, Assistant to the President at BSC. “That mission is different from both community colleges and universities.”
BCC President Eileen Farley was even supportive of the UMass Dartmouth proposal. “I think we have nothing but gain from that arrangement,” Farley said, “because SMU is a strong institution and it will offer a stronger place for our gradiates to go to... I see no negative effects on either BCC or Bridgewater.”
The change to UMass will also guarantee SMU’s continued existence as a university and eliminates the threat of becoming North Dartmouth State College- which was being proposed prior to the UMass discussions.
|
