Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1959-04-06

Sdtion.
endo that has created a bad
impression. Such a statement
is unwise and unjust because
it invites an untruthful in
ference. 1t is in poor taste
because it is an unjust re-
Election on a previous adj
ministration.
This kind of innuendo has
been coming out of the Uni
verSity rather frequently for
several years. until the eli
max was reached in an arti-
Gle in a national magazine
published November % last.
Apparently certain people
have been propagandizing
this fiction about the Univer-
sity in an effort to build up
the present administration.
The article was written by
the magazine reporter after
a series of interviews with
administration officials and
with two members of the fac
ulty.
1t is unfortunate that the
University's own publicity
has backflred against the
University, having created in
the public mind an idea that
the University was one of
low standards and having
aroused a good deal Of dis
satisfaction among its own
alumni.
The editorial concludes
that the effort to enlarge the
Board Of Regents should be
permanently inferred" The
statement reflects lack Of
knowledge of the origin of
the Board of Regents and the
breadth of its duties. Relative
to enlargement Of the Board
of Regents, I stated ten years
ago to the Chairman Of the
Board that the time had
come to enlarge the member
ship. There were many rea-
sons for this.
The Board Of Regents to-
day is virtually the same
board incorporated IN 1916
to govern a small agricultural
college of 300 students. Its
other duties at that time per-
tanned almost solely to agri-
culture. Other universities
and colleges in this section
Of the country have boards
three times larger than the
University of Maryland
Board, and thereby have
wider representation and
more extended influence. The
present small Board cannot
keep abreast Of all conditions
encountered in the manage
rner1t Of affairs such as those
involved in the University of
Maryland today. Without
strong administrative lead
ership, there is no alterna-
tive except to broaden the
Board itself. Even with
strong leadership it should
still be enlarged, because Of
advantages such enlarge
ment will bring the Univer-
Sity.
Neither the Board repre-
sentatives nor the Admins
tration presented sound rea-
sons in the hearing before
the Education Committee
why the Board membership
should not be increased. In
making what they considered
to be arguments, both made
misleading statements in
that they did not present the
whole truth in what purport-
ed to be facts.
/ hope this letter will cor
rect some bad impressions
recently created. For in
stance. the editorials phrase
stress academic achieve
ment" leads people to infer
that academic achievement,
prior to the present admins
tration, was not emphasized.
Why not compare the stress
sing of academic achieve
ment by the present admin
istration with what was done
by previous administrations?
1t is worthy of note that the
President of the University,
some three months ago. gave
four points on which he
based his claim for academic
achievement. Since then,
three of the four have been
rescinded and the fourth
modified. A question about
what other achievements
could be mentioned went I'M
answered. 1t might be said
that salaries have been
raised but that is true Of all
State employees and the Uni