UNIVERSITY SHOULD OPEN ITSELF TO PUBLIC VIEWS

Among the institutions in our society, a university should be given the most latitude as a place for the free exchange of ideas. At Southeast Missouri State University, that attitude prevails, for the most part. Last Saturday, a university facility hosted a group espousing the legalization of marijuana, an idea counter to drug education efforts on campus. Student activity funds are provided to an organization promoting gay rights, something that goes against the grain of many who provide those funds. Intellectual freedom appears alive and well on the hill. But discourse seems less welcome at the school's policy-making level, as evidenced by last week's board of regents meeting.

Opposing views seemed particularly unwanted last week during a regents meeting where the elevation of Southeast admissions policies was discussed. The university and the regents are leaning toward a raised designation of "moderately selective" in admitting students. We support them in this effort, believing the school and its service area will realize a long-term gain from the strengthened standards after a period of rejecting some students as being unprepared for college classes.

However, we recognize, as those in the academic community should, that there are legitimate, intellectually sound arguments to be made for retaining a more open policy of admissions. When one person tried to express these arguments before the regents, she was cut off in short order by the presiding regent and not allowed to continue. No other regent spoke up with a desire to hear the woman's presentation. Consider this as context: The woman who rose with the opposing view did not just wander in off the street with a viewpoint; she is a former assistant director of admissions at the University of Colorado and runs a literacy program in the Bootheel, where the tighter academic standards may have the most adverse impact. In contrast to her willingness to discuss the policy, the regents themselves spent only minutes with the topic, some of them not contributing a comment.

The regents might contend their meetings are ill-designed to accept public comment, either from interested people from the service area or from faculty and staff with concerns to express. Obviously, the regents and administration can conduct their business as they deem best and within the bounds of the Missouri open meetings law. However, as a management model, the regents' closure to disparate perspective, viewpoints and discussion doesn't strike us as ideal.

Rudeness was alleged in this encounter at the regents meeting, but the more serious consequence of this may be the chilling effect it has on people offering constructive ideas on the operation of the university. Few university employees below the administrative level attend the regents meetings. The university, hopefully, takes great pains to hire talented people. Management should corral these talents for the good of the institution, rather than discouraging input. The regents don't seem to embrace this universe of ideas and haven't nurtured a participatory mood with the recent episode.

Maybe what you end up with in this sustained atmosphere is a listless and fragmented group of employees. View some symptoms:

Last March, a faculty group conducted a survey on the job performance of university President Kala Stroup. Of 400 faculty members who received a survey to judge their boss anonymously, 280 did not bother to complete and return the form.

On Jan. 21, President Stroup delivered a late-afternoon address on the admissions policy and other topics that affect the future of the university. The 946 employees at the university were invited to attend. Only about 300 did.

Does a lassitude project itself from the university? Cape Girardeau County stood to benefit more than most areas in the state with the November 1991 passage of Proposition B, a tax measure to provide more funding for education. Statewide, the proposition failed 67 percent to 33 percent. In Southeast's home county, the measure took a worse beating, 70 percent to 30 percent.

Regents at Southeast Missouri State are appointed to serve the interests of the region, the university and the taxpayers. Nothing in their job description says they must be open to ideas other than their own or those planted for them by university administrators. And these administrators aren't obliged to encourage or accept the resourcefulness of their employees. Still, as a public concern, the university might open itself more readily to the views of the public.