BOOKS
481
Establishment Men." The markets for the product were "the corpora–
tions, government agencies, foundations, military services
and universities ."
He deplores the "craziness" and arbitrariness of admissions procedure. As
for claims to authority, they have "no place whatsoever in any of the
characteristic relationships of a university." In a chapter entitled "Why
Should a University Be Governed at All?" his answer is that it should not
be governed at all - save in areas of students' living arrangements, en–
dowment administration, degree certification, and personnel employment
and student fees and subsidies.
Apart from these elemental controls, Wolff demands "All Power to
the Faculty and Students" as "the fundamental principle of governance in
American colleges and universities." Later on he is tempted to "endorse
the principle of student participation in all academic decisions save their
own certification." Random admission would replace aptitude tests, pro–
fessional schools would be kicked out and with them grades and degrees.
But how are faculty and students to take authority away from administra–
tors and trustees "and vest it in themselves, where it belongs"? The an–
swer, he says, is quite traditional and simple:
"Solidarity!"
And here he
visualizes faculty and students meeting "in a body near a tennis court"
(1789 and all that?) to vow that "henceforth they will be governed only
by
men of their own choosing and laws of their own enacting." He
thinks that once a "a great
Ivy
League university" took such a step, the
movement would "sweep all before it and usher in a new era of univer–
sity
governance in America."
I suppose it is of some importance to learn that such fantasies still exist
and that there are still those around who entertain them. Apart from that
sobering information, a few of his ideas would seem to be worth further
thought. Those of us with long experience in teaching graduate students
will
have reason to deplore the ever-lengthening period required to earn
the Ph.D., now averaging more than seven years - as compared with only
three years required for a law degree. Yet both degrees serve essentially as
professional certification. A few gifted graduate students do prove capable
of combining the professional training with demonstration of real creative
scholarship and making the combination an exciting apprenticeship. I
have been privileged to see that happen repeatedly. But for most students
the dissertation is a frustrating, sometimes stultifying waste of precious
years.
It
would make sense to debate seriously Wolff's proposal to limit
college teaching certification to three years, eliminate the dissertation, and
leave demonstration of genuine creative scholarship to those capable of it
until later, with the support of research grants and the guidance of senior
scholars.
It
remains difficult, however, to know how to take the proposals of
