'Shouldn't It Be Published?' "No, the best is not good enough. The in stitution itself (Congress) has so many flaws, it is-incapable of mounting the kind of leader ship that is necessary to get on top of this 'environmental crisis.' '' With these words Dr. Richard A. Cooley, associate professor of geography, summarizes. the conclusions of the book "Congress and The Environment.'' Edited by Cooley and grad uate student Geoffrey Wandesforde-Smith, the book is a series of 13 original case studies on environmental issues conducted by stu dents in a graduate seminar at the University. When asked to discuss the significance of the book, Wandesforde-Smith responds em phatically "It makes available to the public the quality of thinking and presentation which many people feel is not possible for students to attain. Graduate students can take on something in constructive terms." Although the bookshelves are filling rapidly with new environmental titles, "Congress and the Environment'' can be considered unique in several ways. First, it is written by students; second, it is the only book in the environmental library to tackle this specific problem area; and third, it represents a posi tive contribution to environmental quality from the University. Nearly two years ago Cooley assembled a group of 20 graduate students to study an aspect of environmental policy. Each student took one significant piece of environmental legislation and prepared four papers for dis c:.ission. These papers included discussions of the background, the legislation itself, the
MONDAY, APRIL 20, 1970
nature of the political process concerning the legislation and a summary-evaluation. Upon receiving the papers Cooley raised a question, "Shouldn't these papers be pub lished?" Although not considering a book, Cooley called the students together and pre. pared a manuscript containing 13 of the studies. Copies were sent to the University of Wash ington Press and a major environmental or ganization for review. Although the organiza tion supplied a small amount of money, it declined to publish because the material was produced by students and the subject was too controversial, Cooley said. In the meantime, the University of Wash ington Press sent the manuscript to four reviewers across the nation. The results, an unusual response, was a unanimous recom mendation to publish the book.
Congress has so many flaws that it_ is incapable of getting on top of this 'environmental crisis � . .'
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON DAILY
Copies will be available for purchase April 23. Both Cooley and Wandesforde-Smith agree that editing a book is a tremendous job. Ac cording to Cooley, the work was in progress for more than fwo years. ''This book is much more than an introduc tion and a conclusion," states Cooley. "We selected papers and designed the book to read from one end to the other. There are no dupli cators and the train of thought is continuous throughout.'' When asked about the accuracy of the book, the editors respond, "There was very little problem. It was good work and many ex perts in the field reviewed the individual articles prior to publication." With relation to the interdisciplinary as pects of the environmental subject area, the editors feel that the book is particularly strong. In the process of preparing the original papers there was a great deal of "give and take'' between the various disciplines involved. As Cooley describes it, "this book is much better than one in _which a series of experts from different disciplines talk about the sub ject matter in isolation. "I think that our feeling is that the environ mental crisis is a serious one. If we are going to do anything, it has to be done through the political process. This is the big bottleneck. We must face up to political and institutional problems. We strongly feel that anyone who is concerned about the environmental- situa tion should be familiar with these political factors." D-FIVE
"It gets at some central questions (from page D-8) most autonomous programs is much less of a problem. At Wash ington, size makes it very hard to even gather and maintain up-to date information about the many different programs.
UW Suffers
The University as a whole suffers from this difficulty. It virtually is impossible to have an overview of the University's actual and potential contribution in environmental studies. Major policy deci sions tend therefore to be made on the basis of partial and in accurate information. But the people who suffer most from the confusing array of existing and for the most part unrelated programs are the very people about whom the University should be most concerned; namely the students. It was in large measure student dissatisfaction that finally prompted the creation of PACES. Public hearings conducted dur ing their work by the Subcommittees on Undergraduate and Grad uate Programs proved once again that many good students find the lack of reliable information to be frustrating. It is simply too ex pensive in time and energy for students themselves to keep track of who is offering what, where, and when. In the long run, the University must look to a permanent source of information for students. Some student complaints have been met by units such as the Division of General and Interdisciplinary Studies. The division tends to be restricted by its location in the · College of Arts and Sciences. The four professional colleges meeting recently at Pack Forest recognized this. They agreed to channel more information about their own programs to the division. Even this would provide only a limited advance, and there is now discussion of making the divi sion a university-wide focus for undergraduate education that seeks to go beyond the confines of a single college. PACES undoubtedly will consider the suitability of a university wide division for handling undergraduate environmental studies programs. At the graduate level a comparable arrangement in volving the cooperation of the Graduate School also will be assessed. Within the timetable set for PACES, each subcommittee has adopted a procedure that will yield enough information to sub stantiate major policy recommendations for the President to con sider. In addition to the public hearing already mentioned, two subcommittees fi.ave sent out questionnaires. These will yield much of the basic data for analyzing graduate programs and public service activities. The Subcommittee on Research has received help from the Office of the Vice-President for Research in cataloguing planned and on going research projects related fo environmental problems. The Subcommittee on Alternatjye Organizational Arrangements has examined in depth the experience of many other colleges and uni versities in designing and operating environmental studies pro grams.
Special Projects
D-TEN
Important questions not foreseen in setting out sub-committee assignments have been handled as special projects. by the PACES staff. These have included composition of student case histories to document the problems students £pee in following a course of study that ranges broadly across departments and disciplines, and a special study of the role of the humanities in environmental studies. A special effort has also been made in Saud Raad's study of regional linkages to solicit the advice of influential community leaders in business, government, and the professions. As the collection of information by the program subcommittees and the staff has been under way, the fifth subcommittee on uni versity organization has had to think about the administrative arrangements for implementing whatever new program is finally recommended. With the experience of some other universities to show the most frequently encountered pitfalls, the subcommittee has found a number of key problems occupying its attention. Two of these problems received detailed treatment in a docu ment published in September, 1969, by the Office of Science and Technology, Executive Office of the President. This report, en titled "The Universities and Environmental Quality," was unusual for a government report. It was well-written and addressed the subject directly. The two principal problems assessed in this report were: (1) the reluctance of universities to make a substantial commitment to problem-focused environmental research; and (2) the difficulty of providing employment security and advancement prospects to faculty who devote most of their time to inter-disciplinary teach ing and research relating to the environment. The OST report concluded that problem-focused research has been restricted in the past by patterns of government research funding, a"nd by the tendency of researchers to be rewarded for contributions to their discipline· rather than to problem-solving. Tne. report suggested that a change in federal funding policies would go a long way encou.raging new types of research aimed at analyzing pressing social issuis. __ PACES probably will go on record as encouraging problem focused research on environmental issues, provided the legitimacy of other types of research within the University is maintained. Endorsement of problem-focused research, and of problem-focused education more generally, will therefore not imply that the mission of the University is largely, or even exclusively, solving public problems. The other problem highlighted by the OST report is more complex. It gets at some central questions about the kinds of faculty and student behavior the University should encourage and reward. Here the report affirms the need for and legitimacy of flexible, inter disciplinary approaches to environmental studies. It recommends a separate center or institute be created around the interdisciplinary
• • •
,,
study of man-environment relationships. This would give the faculty and students involved a primary and largely independent role in determining what kinds of activity are commendable. The danger of this approach is that the new center or institute will become just another of the dozens of paste-on institutes already present on the campus. It is liable to conduct research and graduate training without any real involvement in or influence upon the environment-related activities of other parts of the campus. To meet this problem, PACES probably will recommend a struc ture that allows for a flexible and innovative institute with con siderable autonomy in faculty hiring and promotion and in student recruitment. Along with this would go an arrangement for placing the institute at the center of a university-wide coordination and communication system designed to provide a continuous overview of the university's environmental efforts in teaching, research, and public service. The details of this structure will be developed on the basis of all subcommittee reports prior to May 9. On that day PACES will meet for the second time as a full time committee to discuss and decide upon the content of the final report. After further revision the report will go to President Odegaard. And if PACES can demon strate that its report represents the best judgement of faculty and students, the administration's willingness to implement a bold new program will be tested. By the fall of 1970, the University of Washington could be em barked on a unique, exciting, and potentially first class experiment in environmental education. Assuming that the PACES report calls for some radical new departures from present practice and for a substantial financial com- · mitment, there is the possibility that the administration will reject or shelve the recommendations of PACES. The basic alternative would then be more of the same; a decision, in effect, to endorse the status quo. There is also the option of making a compromise by accepting some, but not all, of the recommendations. It can be argued that a do-nothing or compromise decision will still leave the University in a strong position. The university is already able to offer some of its students an education that is the equal of any available elsewhere in the United States.
Assessments
Individuals differ in their subjective assessments of which de partments and colleges rank among the nation's best. For those able to make a contribution to environmental studies, the Colleges of Fisheries and Forest Resources, the School of Medicine, and the Department of Oceanography would probably figure in many people's list. And the decision not to follow. the advice of PACES would probably have only a small negative impact on the ability of these clusters of excellence to continue their specialized contribu tions. But if the recent outpouring of thoughts about the environmental crisis have taught a fundamental lesson that the universities cannot afford to ignore, surely it is that by seeking to understand himself (to page D-11)
A bulldozer creates a hill near Drumheller Fountain
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON DAILY
(photo
by dick
conrad)_
MONDAY, APRIL 20, 1970