GRADUATE STUDENTS

To the Editors of The Crimson:

Recent publicity of the Graduate Students and Teaching Fellows Union has stated that the Administration "by-passed" the Commission on Graduate Education in the formulation of the policy of graduate student aid for the coming year. This is not the case.

The Commission has only the power and responsibility to prepare a report for the Faculty, consisting of a proposed policy for discussion by the Faculty. The Commission was not given administrative power and responsibility in this matter, nor could the Faculty have given it that power. It was also made clear by Dean Dunlop at the time of the Faculty action, and was acknowledged by the proponents of the motion, that the timetable for decisions on the budget would require administrative decisions relevant to student aid for the coming year prior to the requested date of report of the Commission, the beginning of Spring Term, 1973.

The members of the Commission, including the graduate student members, were well aware of all these facts from the first. It was upon the invitation of the Commission that Mr. Kraus first formulated and discussed with them the present aid plan. It was clear that the Dean of the Graduate School had operating responsibility to present a budget proposal to meet the budgetary schedule, with a January 15 deadline. Several faculty members of the Commission were also members of the Committee on Fellowships and Other Aids to Graduate Students. This is the standing committee of the Faculty with the power and responsibility to make recommendations to the Dean of the Graduate School on the aid plan. Consultation between the Commission and this Committee was full and frank. Student members were influential in the formulation of the plan. Extensive information was present in each committee about the deliberations of the other, prior to the necessary administrative decisions. The budget proposal based upon the Kraus plan asked for about $450,000 more in graduate student aid than the budget of last year, and the Dean accepted the proposal.

Upon acceptance of the budget proposal the student representatives then asked that the Commission cease meeting until certain data could be compiled from the entering class of graduate students. The Commission is presently in recess, at the request of the students.

The Graduate Students and Teaching Fellows Union has recently voted to call a strike, with a list of "demands" which take a hardline position on many of the main issues remaining for discussion by the Commission. The student representatives on the Commission are all members of the Union, and by their own statement in the Commission are bound to vote as instructed by the panel which elected them. It thus appears that the student representatives are bound to a position which is now politically dictated and publicly declared.

If the Commission were now to continue, the Faculty members would be thrust into the position of trying to negotiate with Union representatives, rather than trying to produce a coherent plan for discussion by the Faculty, which is the charge of the Commission. I have grave doubts about the viability of the Commission under these circumstances. Robert F. Bales   Chairman   Commission on Graduate Education