Western Carolinian Volume 40 Number 18

              VOICE Ol THK STIIUMS
VOL. XL        NO.  18        THURSDAY     OCTOBER    31,   1974
WESTERN  CAROLINA   UNIVERSITY
CULLOWHEE,    NORTH CAROLINA
$600,000 suit being filed
by 3 ex-Englishh professors
against WCU trustees, Dooley
All the problems of being in college showed on the
face of this unidentified student yesterday as she prepared
for   mid-term   exams. (Steve Cook photo)
Hot air bag demo
set at Scott today
This summer Western
Carolina University purchased
a- $5,500 hot air bag. Commercially calleda "LifePack,"
the bag is to serve as a fire
escape for the high-rise dormitories on campus.
The new device will be dem=
onstrated today at Scott Hall
at 4 p.m.
The bag is an inflatable rectangle of nylon measuring 20
feet by 24 feet and standing,
when fully inflated, nine feet
high.
According to the iranufact-
urer, the bag will sustain 350
pounds of tension per inch of
width, which translates into
something like a hefty person
jumping onto it from a 12-story
building.
Easily transportable, the bag
can be set up quickly and once
two small capacity fans are
turned on, it inflates within 40
seconds.
The Life Pack is designed to
save the lives of people who
find themselves trapped by a
fire many floors up and left
with no alternative but to jump.
According to Dr. Glenn Stillion, vice chancellor for student
development, the bag will be demonstrated tomorrow to show
students how the bag works in
case it should be needed.
Currently, there is no fire-
fighting equipment such as ladders that can reach the upper
stories of the high-rises.
A juniper's body is completely
cradled by the air bag so that
the impact is without an abrupt   stop or even a bounce.
by Sager A. Williams
United States Marshals have
begun serving summonses in a
combined $600,000 civil suit
filed by three former WCU English professors against members of the University Board
of Trustees and James E„
Dooley, acting Dean of the
School of Arts and Sciences
here.
Allan D. Grant, James E.
Kasprzak and D. Newton Smith,
plantiffs in the action, charge
that "Defendant trustees,..have
deprived plaintiff of rights,
privileges and immunities se-
cured...by the laws and by the
Constitution of the United
States. The actions of defendant trustees...were arbitrary
and without legal cause."
Filed in United States District Court — Asheville, the
suits askaminimumof$200,000
in special and general damages
for each professor. Attorney
Clyde C. Randolph, Jr. of Winston-Salem is representing the
three professors.
In the suit, Grant, Kasprzak
and Smith allege that they were
denied permanent employment
because of their "active role in
the affairs of the American Association of University Professors and the American Feder
ation of Teachers (AFL-CIO)."
Denying employment for union
activities is against Federal
Law.
Last January, all three professors learned that over the
Christmas holidays their departmental recommendation for
full tenure had been reversed by
Dooley and Vice Chancellor for
Academics J. Stuart Wilson.
They were not allowed to appear
before the executive committee
of the School of Arts and
Sciences to appeal the tenure
denial, nor were they told at
that time how they might appeal.
Then, in a bizarre turn of
events, the trustees termination
notices were delivered to the
waiting professors by a campus
security policeman. Grant and
the others had originally been
given permission to speak on
their own behalf before the
trustees, but this was rescinded
the day of the meeting.
At about the same time, over
2200 students signed a petition
supporting Grant's efforts to
gain a reversal ofthe decisions.
Earlier, the WCU student senate
had unanimously adopted a resolution calling for Grant,
Kasprzak and Smith to recieve
tenure.
Meanwhile.the AFT ended rumors of a possible strike and
boycott, but steadfastly suppor
ted the English department's
original recommendation of
tenure for the three professors.
The AFT statement charged
Vice Chancellor Wilson with
"professional bankruptcy," and
termed the delay in setting up
an appeals procedure "unconscionable."
On February 27, then acting
Chancellor Frank Brown, in a
bombshell announcement, told
the faculty senate the whole
tenure granting procedure in
use at that time was illegal
because the UNC Board of Governors had not approved it.
Brown said the university would
have to revert to the old guidelines used in 1972.
A week later, the AFT
announced it was hiring an
attorney. Calling Brown's
statement a "mind-boggier,"
the union said that instead of
admitting the tenure procedure
was illegal all along, the University hid this fact until all
tenure decisions were final.
Finally, an appeals process
was announced, and at the end
of March a special fact-finding
committee of the Board of
Trustees heard the appeals of
Grant, Kasprzak and Smith
along with those of five other
professors denied tenure.
"All  of the evidence heard
CONTINUED Page 3 . . . .
Students could see private files
Educational organizations
and college administrators are
making an eleventh hour attempt to halt a new federal
law that will force adminis-
trators to allow students to
see their confidential school
records.
The new law, an amendment to the Education Act of
1965 sponsored by U. S. Sen.
James L. Buckley (C/R-N.Y.),
is scheduled to be implemented on November 19.
It will allow college students
to inspect their personal files
including high school and college personal recommendations. For students who ha vent
reached 18, the same rights are
transferred   to their parents.
Students may also request
a hearing to challenge the contents of the records and request deletion of "inaccurate,
misleading, or otherwise inappropriate data."
WCU attorney William Scott
said yesterday the University
had not yet established any
guidelines for allowing students
to see their files.
Scott said he was waiting
for a decision by officials of
the University of North Carolina system, of which WCU is
a member, on the procedure
that would be adopted.
College and university administrators are currently urging Congress to delay implementation for one year while
they establish procedures for
handling student requests.
When Congress reconvenes
on November 18, it will have
one day to amend the law,
which was signed by President Ford.
Many college administrators
fear the "very sweeping lang
uage" of the provision and feel
it "could create serious problems" with the confidential recommendations gathered for
college admissions and job
placement.
Barring a dramatic reversal or delay of the bill on Nov.
19, which seems unlikely, colleges will technically have to
begin processing student requests to examine their files.
Under the current guidelines,
schools have 45 days to comply with the student's request
for information, and there is
a chance that a change in the
law could occur during that
time.
Buckley plans to introduce amendments to the bill
on November 18 or 19 to clarify parts of the bill that are
causing administrators the
most worries.
Buckley's amendments will
seek to exempt from "full dis
closure" confidential materials
that went into the record earlier than 30 days after the enactment of the law (August 21,
1974). The amendment will relieve administrators somewhat
by allowing a student to "waive
his right of access to specific
statements," like letters of
recommendation, according to
a Buckley aide.
Educators are fearing that
without such a clause the privacy of those who write
letters of recommendation
would be violated and that in
the future such letters would
be difficult to obtain.
Under the Buckley amendment, the material that institutions should make available
to the students (failure to comply could be penalized by withdrawal of federal aid) includes
but is not limited to "identifying data, academic work
CONTINUED Page 9 .. . .