Series V. Subject Files: Sales Tax to York University,, 1952-1972

Summary: Boxes in this series include a variety of documents on issues that Clifford faced during his time as Dean of Student Affairs at Rutgers. Topics range from administrative decisions, budget information, papers produced while teaching sociology courses, planning boards, and copies of speeches presented at conferences.

The series contains many drafts of a handbook describing the regulations and procedures of the Selective Service, draft deferment, and ROTC. This handbook outlines the Selective Service Act and details the steps required for applying for a deferment. Because it appears in many drafts, the handbook tracks changes that were made to the Selective Service laws. For instance, in 1967 deferments for graduate students were discontinued, except for medical and dental students. Additionally, it is noted that the university should maintain distance and fill a role of information provider regarding the Selective Service. One of the requirements for deferment is completion of the selective service tests, which were held at Rutgers.

An interesting part of this collection is the packet of information sent to all voting delegates of National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA), which included brochures and pamphlets describing military options and obligations, right to dissent, and conscientious objection. NASPA was not endorsing these publications but providing them to their members to give them more information to pass along to their fellow administrators and to the students.

As a member of the University Senate, Clifford's papers include minutes from those meetings. Some of the topics discussed and voted on were the grading system, admissions for women, housing, faculty lines, and tenure.

In 1968, Rutgers applied for a grant to host a series of seminars regarding many aspects of sexuality, from physiology to population control, homosexuality and health concerns.

Clifford was asked to give speeches at many events including the New York World's Fair, 1965, the Sigma Epsilon Leadership Conference, 1966, NASPA Drug Education Workshop, and Conference on Guidance and Personnel Work. His topics ranged from the future of fraternities, academic freedom, drug use, institutional authority and student activity. Another interesting portion of this collection are the copies of the minutes Clifford received from the Student Council. These documents provide insight to the student's perception of the events occurring during this time. In response to the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr., in April 1968, the Student Council enacted motions in attempt to achieve racial harmony on campus. Among these were supporting the rally to be held in King's honor, a motion that campus organizations that practice racial discrimination be suspended, and that racial equality be practiced at all times on campus.

Some other issues addressed by the Student Council include self-policing to eliminate drug trafficking on the "Ledge." The Student Council objected to this plan and pointed out that self-policing is not a viable option due to unwillingness of students to accuse their peers of drug violations, students' lack of knowledge about drugs, and the unenforceable nature of student action. The Student Council was also concerned with the proposed extension of Route 18. The students felt that there was no study as to the effects of the highway on students, and resolved to form the Student Council Committee on the Proposed Extension of Route 18.

The issue of coeducation was also a heated one for the Student Council. They originally urged the University Senate to delay its final decision on the whether to make Rutgers coeducational due to lack of complete exploration of the effects of coeducation and the fact that no effort was made to gather student opinions. Later, they declared non-support of Board of Governors because they felt that body was not representative of the students as the Board disregarded faculty votes and student opinion of coeducation. However, once the decision to go coeducational was final, a task force was formed to ensure that women's rights were protected.

Of course, the Student Council was also concerned with general day-to-day issues, such as concerts, shuttle services, bookstore inadequacies, student center hours, and student fees.

Two folders are dedicated to the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) and an incident that occurred in December, 1969. Members of the SDS requested to participate in a meeting in the Board of Governors, and were told to wait until their turn to speak came. The documents report that the group burst into the meeting shouting slogans and epithets. They were informed they were in violation of the university's policy on disruptions, and were given ten minutes to leave. They were warned several more times, until the police arrived and asked the demonstrators to leave. Those who did not leave were placed under arrest.

In 1972, faced with a tuition increase, the Tuition Increase Study Group provided a report analyzing current methods of tuition assistance and loan payback plans in place of other colleges and universities. The report focuses on three types of plans: loans repaid from future earnings, graduated charge based on family's ability to pay, and state plans providing assistance to all qualified students. The report includes exhibits showing examples of other schools' payment plans. The eventual recommendations of a $250 increase per academic year was rejected by the Board of Governors. They recommended a smaller increase (amount not stated). A proposal was later made for a $185 increase, 29 percent of which was to be returned to students in the form of financial aid.

In 1969, the Urban University Program was set up to aid educationally and economically disadvantaged students, mainly in the Newark, New Brunswick, and Camden areas. In addition to financial aid, the program provided assistance in assessing areas of academic difficulties, tutorial programs, academic advisement, counseling, facilitating social interactions. A report issued after the first year of the program indicated that it was a success.

In addition, there are a few topics that are surprising in their similarity to current issues. One of these is the review of the 1963 conference regarding the use of computers for scheduling. Implications for implementing such a program, time lines, and advantages and disadvantages are discusses. For examples, the material discussed that although computers could produce "ideal" schedules, but faculty are used to then-current practices and that change could be met with resistance.

Another file documents the collaboration on a survey to be used to compile data for equal opportunity education compliance. Materials in this file include memos and correspondence detailing the actual steps taken to gather and process the surveys.