DePaulia (DePaul University, Chicago, IL), 1971-05-14

              AD HOC COMMITTEE ON ROTC April 14, 1971 Respectfully submitted by: Dr. Edward Stout, Chairman Mr. Gregg Blankenship, Student Representative Mr. John E. Burns Dr. Paul F. Camenisch Mr. Henry Denzler, Student Representative Colonel Ralph Drake, Consultant Dr. Albert E. Erlebacher Dr. Jerry I. Goldman, Alternate Dr. James A. Hart Dr. George Iwanaka Dr. Martin J. Lowery Dr. Margaret Neville Rev. Patrick O'Brien, C.M Mr. Henry Roth, Student Representative Dr. Virginia Rutherford, Alternate Dr. Edwin Schillinger, Consultant Dr. Milton Shulman, Alternate AD HOC COMMITTEE ON R.O.T.C. DePaul University By memorandum dated May 28, 1971, the Executive Vice President of Detee on R.O.T.C. The charge to the Ad Hoc Committee was ". .to study and make recommendations to the future of ROTC at DePaul... to submit a recon mendation through me to the President on whether the ROTC program should continue at DePaul University and if the recommendation is positive, whether changes should be made in the program as it now exists ..." Composition of the Ad Hoc Committee was also established in this memorandum: six faculty members and three alternates selected by the Faculty Advisory Council, three administrators appointed by the Executive Vice President, and three students to be selected by their fellow students. Faculty members appointed to the Committee were Rev. Patrick O'Brien, C.M, S.T.D., Associate Professor, Department of Theology Albert Erlebacher, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of History Paul F. Camenisch, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Theology George Iwanaka, Ph.D., Assistant Professor Department of Finance John E. Burns, Associate Professor, Department of Management Margaret Neville, Ph.D, Professor and Chairman, Department of English. Appointed faculty alternates were Milton D. Shulman, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Department of Accountancy and Management Jerry Goldman, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics and Virginia Rutherford, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Speech. Administrative staff members appointed to the Ad Hoc Committee by the Executive Vice President were Edward Stout, Ph.D., Associate Vice PresidentSponsored Programs, and Assistant Professor, School of Education James A. Hart, LL.B.,Ph.D., Dean, College of Commerce, and Professor, Department of Finance and Martin J. Lowery, Ph.D., Dean, DePaul College, and Professor, Department of History. Students appointed to the Ad Hoc Committee were Gregg Blankenship, Henry A. Denzler, and Henry Roth. Edward Stout, Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee, convened meetings of the Committee on June 3, 1970, July 15, 1970, and October 14, 1970. Events and accomplishments associated with each of these meetings will be discussed separately in this report. Meeting of June 3, 1970 Organizational and policy matters were the primary focus of this initial meeting. The task of the Committee within the guidelines established by the Executive Vice President was reviewed. In accordance with a request contained in the memorandum constituting the Committee, members agreed that the Committee's recommendations would be delivered to the President of the University not later than the end of the Autumn Quarter, 1970 (December 5, 1970). The Committee also agreed that the issue of RO.T.C. at DePaul University, as at other institutions, is an emotionally and intellectually charged problem, complicated by societal and moral issues. The Department of Military Science and Tactics is a de facto credit-granting Department within the framework of DePaul University, and the Committee agreed to view its assignment as that of making recommendations governing the academic future of the Department Among the questions to be considered by the Committee is that of whether, if the ROTC program is to be retained, it should continue as a credit-granting program or whether curricular and credit changes should be required. It was brought to the Committee's attention that in the event termination of the Department and program is recommended, a year's notice must be given to the Department of the Army before contractual agreements between the University and the Department of the Army may be concluded. The Committee agreed to initiate comprehensive investigations upon which to base certain of their recommendations. To this end, three subcommittee were created, as follows: 1. A subcommittee to examine the academic quality of the curriculum as Vol.49, No. 17 text of rote committee report depaulia presently offered through the Department of Military Science and Tactics (henceforth herein, the Academic Subcommittee). Members appointed to this subcommittee were Dr. Erlebacher, Dr. Neville, and Mr. Roth. 2. A subcommittee to examine the aims and objectives of the Department of Military Science and Tactics in relation to the aims and objectives of DePaul University (henceforth herein, the Aims and Objectives Subcommittee). Members appointed to this subcommittee were Dr. Lowery, Mr. Camenish, and Mr. Denzler. 3. A subcommittee to investigate the budgetary framework within which the Department of Military Science and Tactics operates (henceforth herein, the Budget Subcommittee). Members appointed to this subcommittee were Dr. Shulman and Mr. Blankenship. (It should be noted, however, that Mr. Blankenship was not present at this meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee.) These subcommittees were instructed to present reports to the Committee at the time of the next Committee meeting, which was then scheduled for July 15, 1970. To aid the subcommittees in their work, the University, through the Chairman of the Committee, and the Department of Military Science and Tactics, through its Chairman, agreed to make available such reports and other documentation required by the subcommittees. Wfith near-unanimity the Committee also agreed to conduct open meetings upon completition of its initial efforts. Interim On June 3, 1970, the Chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee informed, via memorandum, the Executive Vice President of the University that the Committee's recommendations would be delivered no later than the end of the Autumn Quarter, 1970, and that meetings of the Committee during the Autumn Quarter, 1970, would be publicly conducted. By memorandum dated June 11, 1970, the Chairman of the Committee directed to members of the Academic Subcommittee and Aims and Objectives Subcommittee course outlines, syllabi, and copies of a brochure outlining the Army ROTC Scholarship Program. An undated memorandum was directed to all members of the Committee by the Chairman outlining an agenda for the meeting of July 15, 1970. Meeting of July 15, 1970 Consideration of reports submitted by the three previously established subcommittees was the primary content of the meeting of July 15, 1970. Several letters from alumni concerning the ROTC program at DePaul University were distributed to Committee members. Report of the Aims and Objectives Subcommittee The report of the Aims and Objectives Subcommittee was submitted by Dr. Lowery and Dr. Camenisch. The report suggested categorization of goals as "Intellection goals" and "Affective goals," and then proceeded to compare the University and ROTC in terms of these categories. In the former category the University's goals were cited as the acquisition and advancement of knowledge and the development of scholarly habits of mind the goals of the ROTC program within this category were cited as the acquisition of knowledge. Wthin the second category, the University was cited as having the following affective goals: learning for a moral and aesthetic life a life of service to other persons a life of involvement in communities and other institutions. The goals of the ROTC program within this category were reported as: a program devoted to honor, integrity, service. The report of this Subcommittee acknowledged an inability to accomplish the task set for it by the Committee: "it is our opinion that we have embarked on a non-productive road. Depending on the meaning and intensity the reader wishes to place on various words and phrases, it is possible to argue to compatibility or incompatibility of goals and objectives. "Our incompatibility is observable. The ROTC is related to 'nation' while University goals are mute on this notion. "The subcommittee seeks advice and direction before embarking on further work." In response the Committee suggested that the Subcommittee evaluate whether or not the aims and objectives of ROTC present an academic detraction from the aims and objectives of the University and recommended for the Subcommittee's consideration the following questions: Do DePaul's goals collide with the aims and objectives of ROTC? What are the direct obligations of DePaul to the nation, and what are the indirect obligations to the nation? It was further suggested that the Subcommittee consider as an alternate approach to its task the question of whether there exists between the University and the ROTC program a "goodness of fit" on the basis of operational functions, implying a relatively lesser concern with formal statements of goals. Report of the Academic Subcommittee Dr. Erlebacher presented the report of the Academic Subcommittee. This report was essentially concerned with the establishment of criteria whereby to evaluate the academic worth of the ROTC program. The reported criteria, it should be noted, are extensively commingled with methodological considerations. "1. We will measure Military Science as an academic field in comparison with other professional fields. We wish to discover if the military science discipline gives the student career training. "2. We will review the courses listed in the Military Science Department by May 14, 1971 (Continued from p. 2)