8/14/2019 Harry Tuyn

1/4

University of WaterlooWaterloo, Ontaridvolume 15, special issuetuesday, november 5, 1974

Students and facul ty at Renison Col lege who are opposing the dec is ion by JohnTowler, princ ipal of Renison, to f i ie Jef frey Forest and Hugh Mi l ler and prohibi t thepresence of Marsha Forest at Renison have formed an academic assoc iat ion in order tofurther their demands. Start ing Monday members of the assoc iation began the boycot iof classes and started picketing in order to further educate the other students ofRenison as wel l as the s tudents of the Univers i ty of Waterloo.

Students boycott classes known and to invite specific re- constitution we will continue to be

S1. Immediate reinstatement . Sincethese firings w ere arbitrary and au-tocratic and since these facultymembers are not guilty of the onlyrecognized. causes for suchdismissals-moral turpitude, grossmiscdnduct, academic misconductor incompetence-we make the

just demand that our teachers bereinstated immediately.2. Resignat ion of John Towler. Wefeel this demand would be approp-riate even independent of the re-cent firings, Towler Has alreadyproved himself intending to actagainst the best interests of the stu-dents. After the Faculty-StudentCouncil had democratically voted a-$lOO donatio n to the Ojibway War-rior Society to support the strug-gles of Native Peoples, Towler at-tempted to act on his own wisdomthat Renison should not donate themoney. When the student-facultycouncil resolutely demand ed thathe honour their wishes, he finallyconceded but took the money fromthe academic support funds of indi-vidual faculty members, fundswhich are supposed to be under thedirect control of each facultymember. He refused to allocatethedonatio n from the academic dis-

cretionary fund and in fact ensuredthat this particular fund be transfer-red to his sole control; the fundconveniently became the prin-cipals discretionary fund.While the physical state of Reni-. son has been deteriorat ing over thepast few years and whil e Reni sonsuffers from a space scarcity,Towler saw fit to spend over $3,000

sponses to specific questions from vulnerable to whatever measuresthe board members particularly the he wishes to take to silence anyExecutive Comm ittee, whose be- further faculty or students whohaviour is unacceptable to, the stu- want to challeng e his modusdents. operandi.5. Democrat ic reorganisat ion. The 6. Exposure of documents. We raiselate student-faculty council (this this issue in the interests ofbody is no longer recognized by the abolish ing secret negotiati ons, aRenison academic students; we practice which we feel Towler hashave reconstituted ourselves the instituted at Renison.Renison academic assembly) has 7. End in-camera sess ions. Like thebeen fighting for a strong constitu- two previous demands, we raise it

to outfit his office in spiffy carpetsand wali panelling. Meantime,part-time faculty share a virtualcupboard ior office space and thestudents have no office space at all.It is also noteworthy that even be-fore the renovatiois, Towlers of-fice was-clearly the most spaciousand attractive of all the offices at,Renison. His view of priorities areentirely unacceptable to the stu-dents.Towler has done his level best toundermi ne the authority and credi-bility of the student representa-tives. Besides publicly defamingthem, he has been reluctant to dealwith them as a group. Instead, hepicks t hem off, one by one, alwaysiss&g individual invitations to hisoffice parlays. In additi on, he nev&rbothered to invite several reps tohis litt le tete-a-tetes; those reps arenow leading members of the protestorgdnization. From the beginning,they challen ged Towlers right tobehave so autocratically; he wasnot about to be challenged and sim-ply ignored them. His actions gen-erally have had the effect of divid-ing the students and casting disper-sions o n *the officia l representa-tives. (see story How it Began)

3. No reprisals. We refuse to havethe academic freedom of the stu-dents and supportive faculty mem -,bers compromised by further dic-tatorial measures. Towler is not tooconcerned with academic freedomas can be evidenced in the way thefirings were handled . Jeff Forestsletter subjects him to immediatedismissal if he participates in any

tion f&r awhile, a constitution as insurance against secret negotia-college body or action other th an which w ould place power over im- tions. H ad it not been for the sec-his classes. In other words, silence portant decisions in the hands of recy and distrust w hich Towle r isis being enforced on him, to make students and faculty. This seems so handy with, we feel that none ofhim ineffective in the college for the more urgent than ever before to this could have happened. Since weduration of his term. protect ourselves from any repeti- want democracy and w,e want these4. An open hearing wi th the hoard. tion of the current situation. If particular teat hers, we wouldThe students want an opportunity Towler is unconcerned with the never have allow ed this process to .to clear theii- demands publicly, to students views abo ut faculty and reach its absurd end if discussionsmake their feelings and intent- course contents, w ithout a strong had been held openly.

Due to the firing of Jeff.Forest and Hugh Mill er a nd the cummary dismissal of Marsha Forest from herposition at Renison, all regarded as totally unfounded by many students, faculty and staff, as well as othermembers of the University of Waterloo academic community, students have begun an organized protest.We no longer recognize the student-faculty council and have reconstituted ourselves the RenisonAcademic Assembly. In a six hour meeting Friday Nov. 1, 1974 the Assembly voted in favor of decisiveaction and demands. A boycott of all Renison classes wi ll begin Monday Nov. 4, 1974 and will be carriedthrough unti l the three faculty members are fully reinstated and satisfactory negotiati ons on all otherdemands are in process with the board of governors. This does not meat i that the education al process wil lcease; after th e first two days of the boycott students and faculty wil l be encouraged to meet outsideRenison.We demand:1. Immed iate reipsfateme nt of Jeffrey Forest, Marsha Forest a nd Hugh Miller to their respective RenisonCollege positions.2. Resignation of John Towler. r3. That no reprisals be taken a gainst any member of our college community. .4. An open public ,hearing with the entire Ren ison board of*governors, all faculty, students and otherconcerned parties:5. A commit ment from the board of governors that an imme diate reorganization of the governing structuresof Renison Coll ege b e undertaken to reflect equal representation from all sections of this academiccommunity as a safeguard against future exercise of arbitrary authority.6. That all pertinent documents relating to the firings and related academic affairs be made available to allinterested parties upon request. This specifically relates to certain defam atory allegat ions made by JohnTowler a bout faculty members, student rkpresentatives and the academic in tegrity of our institut ion.7. An end to all in-camera sessions. The recent firings could only have occured in an atmosphere of secrecyand distrust. _

8/14/2019 Harry Tuyn

2/4

Z the chevron tuesday, november 5, 1974No reasonsfor firings ,*Thursday afternoon a greatshock hPt the students of RenisonColl ege. Two of our professorswere fired without warning andanother banned from our class-rooms. Three of our teachers-amongst the most respected andbest-were dismissed. The ques-tions that students began askingwere, Why?, How could they

fire Jeff and Marsha Fgrest andHugh Miller?, What do we donext? Emotions were high, manywere angry, some began crying,others began organizing. All thestudents that knew of this actiongrouped together. En masse they, entired the meeting room wherethe firings had taken p lace to speak5 to the Executive of the Board ofGovernors. At this time there wasoraly the principa l, John Towler,and the chairperson of the Board,. Reverend Conyard in the room.The two members were asked foran explanation of this brutal action.No explanations were given! Wewere told that reasons would not begiven without the consenit of theprofessors because it would be de-trimental to them. One studentwent directly to Marsha Forest andJeff Forest received two letters1 giving the principal and/or theBoard of Governors their permis-sion to release the reasons for theirdismissals. We have nothin g tohide, they said. Still John Towlerrefused to disclose Ihe reasons.(Perhaps because he has none).After twenty minutes of fruitlessconfrontation, the students de-cided that further rhetoric wassenseless.Approximately fifty people re-grouped in the Moose Room to dis-cuss what further action should betaken to reinstate their professors.

Faculty

Boycott and strike were the mainresponses from the students. Therewas a consensus that a meeti ngshould be held to inform others,who were not then present, of theunjust firings and the feelings of thestudents. Commi ttees were set upto contact students and ask them tocome to the next meeting at 11:00a.m.! On Friday approxima tely 100people met in the Moose Room tobe brought up to date on what hadhappene d t he previous day. Manycame to show their support for theirprofessors. The meeti ng lasted forsix hours with positive reactionsshown in support of the tliree.It was the general consensus,ofthe meeti ng that a boycott of clas-ses should begin as soon as possi-ble. It was agreed by the majority ofthe Renison academi c students atthis meeting that Monday wouldbe the beginning of this boycott.For two days picket lines will be-formed and meetings will be heldto discuss further actions and toallo w the Board of Governors tohave the opporttinity to negotiatewith the students.

The issue is clear. W ho runs Re-nison College? Is it John Towler asthe strong arm of the ExecutiveCommittee of the Board of Gover-nors? Is it the faculty and students?It is not enough for Jeff, Marshaand Hugh to be reinstated becauseon any day three others can befired. What we need and want is acomplet e and democratic restruc-turing of Renison College so thistype of authorita rian rule cannottake place. We are taught that welive in a democratic country. If thisis true then our three professorswill be reinstated and a democraticI%enison w ill be built.

- statementsBalasubramanyam Hyma: I was Board of Governors have actedsurprisedby the firings du e to the completel y unprofessionally andfact that we were not made aware have exercised arbitrary authority_ before-hand of the decision to do so in the firings. Their actions are un-(to fire); it did not in fact pass acceptable. It is encouraging to seethrough the Student-Faculty the strong protest sentiments theCouncil. students are justly expressing inCarole Irrizarry: No statement. their plann ed boycott. As a faculty(Part-Time professor) member I fully endorse th6 decisiveDonald MTimkulu: No statement. protest which the students areMark Nagler: As far as academic launchi ng in defense of stu-integrit y is concerned an explana- dent/faculty interests.tion with regard to what has hap-pened is owed to the faculty and Jeri Wine: What happened is in-credible. The firing proceduresstudents of Renison. were ill-advic ed.Werner Packul l : The people in- Monna Zetner: The situation at Re-volved have my sympathy. I critise nison seems to me difficult for allthe way the firings were handl ed.But at the same time I feel it is a concerned. I certainly feel sym-pathy for my colleagues. Howevermatter between the Administration I do not fe&l that simplistic tate-atid the individuals involved. ments or solutions are pertinent forSandra Sachs: I am very much such- a complex situatio n, which. shocked by what has happened. seems tti me a culmi nation of sev-As far as I *am concerned it is an era1 longstan ding issues and prob-issue of principle of faculty being lms. I shall continue to hold clas-fired arbitrarily withou t adequate ses. I do not feel that a boycott is

? cause and without consultation, in helpful but I certainly do feel thata manner which entirely con- students should feel free to maketravenes establi shed procedure their own choices about the- with in the academic community. boycott. I continue to have someThe underl ined problems have to hopes that the present difficultydo_ with decision-making relation- may be resolved withou t seriousships between administration, fa- harm to anyone.culty and students and nothing Judi th Mi l ler: Many people espe-mwhatever to do with the academic cially a t Renison are seeing this as acompetence of the people dismis- question of personalities, but Ised. I want to see them reinstated think that the issue is one of a clashimmediately and a constitution between ideas of democratic par-worked out for Renison which ticipa tion and autocratic control.would ensure the participa tion of Darryl Bryant: An appallingman-students and faculty in the ifestatio n of arrogance, oppor-decision-makin g process, and pre- tunism and disregard- for faculty,elude the possibility of such a thing students and the college. I supporthappening again. the boycott.Harry Tuyn: No statement. The rest of the faculty membersMarlene Webber: Towler and the could not be contacted.

CAUT- role. If the attempt to settle the mat-ter fails, states the CAUT hand-book, the university shall informthe member in writing of thecharges agains t him/he r in suffi-cient detail to enable himjher toprepare for his/her defense. Theycontinue in saying that A) within 14

days of the receipt by the memberof the written charges. . .the uni-versity and the member shall meetto name jointly an arbitrationcommittee. B) the arbitrationcommit tee shall consist of threeprofessors from outside the univer-sity tiho are acceptable to the uni-versity and the member. C) If theuniversity and the member are un-able to constitute an arbitrationcommittee within 21 days the uni-versity and the faculty associationshall jointly appoint a person of un-questioned integrity and indepen-dence from outside the universityto act as an arbitrator. An arbitra-tion committee shall then conveneand attempt to conclude their pro-ceedings and render their decisi onas expeditiously as possible.

In light of the recent firings atRenison College, of Hugh Millerand Jeffrey Forest, teachers a?many universities may be askingthemselves Can I be called in to-morrow and be advised of my dis-missal and can I have virtually all ofmy rights in that institution bet-ween the time of the announcementand the time of my dismissal, takenaway from me ? Though RenisonAdministration would wish it thateasy, it may not be. Al l universityteachers are protected in this areaby a body called the Canadian As-sociation of University Teachers(CAUT). Canadian utiiversities be-long to this organization and al-though many small university-affil iated colleges, such as Reni-son, are not direct members, theyare expected to follow the policies-and guide-lines laid down byCAUT. \On the question of academicfreedom CAUT states thatAcademic freedom includes theright within the university to decidewho shall teach, who shall betaught, and what shall be studied,taught, or published. Because auniversitys essential concerns areintellectual, academic freedom in-volves the right of appointment ofstaff or admission of students re-gardless of race, sex, religi on, orpolitics. It involves the right toteach, investigate and speculatewithou t deference to prescribeddoctrine. It involves the right tocriticize the university.. . .Academic freedom concerns theuniversity as an institu tion; it con-cerns the students; it concerns thefaculty. Reasons for the dismissal of a fa-culty person are strictly limi ted totwo areas; gross misconduct andpersistent neglect of a professorsduty to his/her students or his/herdiscipli ne. If there is reason to be-lieve that adequate cause exists theCAUT gives definite guidelines asto the procedure that should the nensue.First, the person in questionshould be advised that his/her dis-missal is being recommended.

They should then be invited to ameeting with the dean of the fa-culty. the president of the univer-sity, a disinterested professor whois acceptable to both the dean andthe person in question and the headof the departmen t. The teachershould also be permitted to bringand be assisted by an advisor ofhis/her choice.

The CA UT (also) believes thatthe person alle ging cause for dis-missal should not also be the one tojudge the adequacy Of that cause.Since the president of the univer-sity must belie ve that there is evi-dence on which to bring forward acase on the advice of his/her ad-ministrators, he cannot c laim to beimpartial nor can the men/womenwho advised her/him. The Board ofGovernors is in almost every casethe legal employer. Furthermorethe board is bound to support thejudgem ent of its chief executive of-ficer because refusal to do so wouldbe tantamount to a vote of non-confidence and a request for resig-nation. Nor are the members of theboard of governors likely to havethe academic expertise to judge a nacademic dispute over compe-tence.It is obvious that gross ne glecthas been practiced at Renison Col-lege in the dismissals of Forest andMiller, in that not one of theforeme ntioned procedures hasbeen adhered to. It is evident thatthe onus is on the boa rd of gover-nors to show a dequate cause fordismissal and on Forest and Millerto defend these charges in a democ-ratic hearing before official noticeof dismissal can be given. Clearlythis has not been done. It is be-lieved that Hugh Miller was in-structed not to discuss the reasonsof his dismissal and Jeffrey Foresthas not even been given reasons.The responsibility to a.ct on theseinjustices is encumbent on us, thestudents and the faculty of the Uni-versity of Waterloo. If we are toprevent the recurrance of arbitraryfirings we must protest and we will.The issue is much l arger than theimmediate firings; it is a question ofacademic freedom and the interestswhich this and all universitiesserve.

The .:The Principals* Social Hour washeld at 2:30 p.m. Wednesday, Oc-tober 30t h, 197 4. John Towler,Principal of Renison stated that thiswas to be an open meet ing withstudents to give them the opporiun-ity to openly air their views and/orgrievances concerning affairs at theCollege.As the meeting began, two fa-culty members Jeff Forest and Mar-lene Webber were asked to leave,Towler stating he could.nt andwouldnt conduct the social hour intheir prescence, a8 he felt that thelines of communication would behindered. After a short protest bysome students, the members of thefaculty left. Again it was km-

phasised that students couldopenly voice their concerns, free ofany outside influences.Since the students did not re-spond immediately to the abovesuggestions, Towler proceeded toexpress his concerns with regardsto his responsibilities at Renison,its relation to the Faculty of Arts,faculty qualifications, and the rele-vance of course content and struc-ture. Towler then questioned thequality of teaching at Renison,since he had received complai nt8from some students. He made al-legations against unnamed facultymembers inferring that about 10%of the faculty are unqualified toteach and that their degrees arequestionable. He then suggestedthat he formulate an AdvisoryCommittee from the Faculty ofArts, and his personal friend, anassistant director of social servicesto investigate.He further stated that he hadbeen told that if matters at Rehisonwere not. cleared up immediately,that within the next twelve tionths,negotiations would begin to severthe affiliation between Renison andthe University of Waterloo.Since student enrolment in thefirst year was higher than ever be-fore; since more students fromother universities and programmeson this campus are transferring,toRenison than ever before: sincemore students from Renison wereaccepted into graduate schoolsthan any year previously; and sincestudents who have graduated fromRenison are being offered morejobs, the accusations and state-ments m ade by Dr. Towler can beonly considered contradictory toreality.Bill Townsend a member of theExecutive of the Renison Board ofGovernors said The board hasoperated in-the best.interests of theColle ge. Weve taken the neces-sacy legal steps. We do not have togive cause as to why ProfessorForest &as dismissed. I do not planto attend the Tuesday night meet-ing with the students.Renison Board of Governorsmember, T. T. Ritson told theChevron Sunday that I am veryupset and regretful that this has oc-curred. It is very unfortunate for

Renison and i t is a great pity. I havehigh regard for the people con-cerned and I wish it could be solvedanother way. One positive out-come could be the opening ofcommunications between theBoard and students.Other Board members could notbe reached for comment beforepress time. .

8/14/2019 Harry Tuyn

3/4

tuesday, november 5, 1974 the chevron 3

Students of the Renison academic asspc iation set up an informat iontable in f ront of the Moose room at Renison col lege and urged s tu-dents to s ign a pet i t ion support ing the groups demands. Two of thosedemands are that the f i red professors be reinstated and that princ ipalJohn Towler, who ini t iated the f i r ings, res ign.

Reniiion: *a perspective .Members of the ,I RenisonAcademic Assembly asked me toput together my perspective onwhat has gone wrong at Renison,on the events and process that pre-cipitate d the current state of affairswhere the principal feels it sourgent to purge th ree of my co-workers.Clearly the atmysphere whichdrew me to Renisonjin Sept. 1973has suffered a collapse. What was itlike then -and where are we now?More importa nt, what accounts forthe purge?The attractive, even compel ling,qualities of Renison College even ayear ago centered around theshared commitment of leading fa-culty an d students to struggle to-wards the building of a programmewhich would reflect a co-operativemodel at both administrative andacademic levels; Students and fa-culty wanted control over the de-stiny of their programme . Theywere determ ined to work out a rela-tionshi p to the power structure ofRenison which would guarantee in-ternal control over such criticalmatters as hiring/ firing, cur-riculum, budget priorities, and allthe constituti onal matters whichordinarily constrain academicfreedom and locate unjustifiedpowers in the hands of a top-heavy

authority structure.It would be a gross miscalcula-tion to suggest any radic$ intent;rather, it was a simple matter ofworking out a structure to promotethe decentralization of power andan attempt to administer thatthrough a strong co-operativemodel which would legislate a dis-tributi on of power for students andfaculty.Renison was compelling as wellfbr its academic content. The gutsof the College is the social scienceapplied progrtimme and within itthere seemed serious intent aroundconstructing a curriculum and hir-ing teachers to accomodate an ex-amination of the real forces in theproduction -of social prg?olems aswell as a conscientious applica tionto questions of social change. Myimpression was that Renison didnot want to play out the cbnven-tiona l function prescribed foruniversities-to produce mindlessgraduates who could be trusted tocomplian tly take their pre-ordainedplaces in uphold ing the status quo.So, as universities go, Renisonheld out much more than the nor-

ma1 amount of appeal. And, in fact,my favourable impressions wereborne out. As democratic processdemands, much of last year wasspent in meetings and we gave birthto a process which by its natureinvoked a steady diet of dissent,confrontation, and aroused pas-sions. But the atmosphere wasopen and contained quite easily theexpression of the diverse views an dprograms which students and fa-culty put forth. It seemed we werestruggling qui te successfully to-wards a co-operative manage mentmodel, though it was hardly com-plete when tie realized that stu-dents were n ot given parity in thedecision making bodies. The pointis that the seeds were t here; we hadevery possibility of pursuing andrealizing an unfamiliar situationwhere t he real decisions which af-fect acadkmic life would be concen-trated in the hands of faculty andstudents. _ .But we were nowhere near thelevel of development where mostpeople would be ready to recognizethe absence of need for a chairper-son (principal in our case) and weall went about the business of find-~ ing-a princibal to stabilize the tem-porary position which was being fil-led by one of our faculty members.That process in which we sought

out a principal who would find ac-ceptance amongst all of us and theBoard of Govenrors, was, as any-one could predict, a thorny pi-ob-lem. In the final analysis when wehired John Towler-a decisionwhich did not find universalacceptance, or anything akin touniversal acceptance-many of uswere floating around with the un-comfortable feeling that he mightbring a much more authoritarianview of things than we would beinterested in negotiating.It did not take very lo ng for ourfears to bear fpit. In all conscienceI can say that every conceivableeffort was made by faculty and stu-dents to work in some kind of har-mony with.our new principal, who,with little haste, made it clear that

he did not share our committmentto democratic process. Al l the ap-propriate rhetoric was there whencalled for but as the early dtiys ex-posed, there was virtually no con-cert between whathe said and whathe did.We had worked very hard lastyear towards the formul ation andapproval of an honours program

and had hopes of initiating a co-operative program as well wherestudents would have access to se-quent ial ac ademic and work terms.There was every promise in the airthat our proposals would find ap-proval. Yet this year we have suf-fered enormous setbacks and de-lays around th e fina l passing ofeven the honours programme.Towlers hand is conspicuously inthis stopping process. (see Federa-tion story, page 2).At every turn we encounteredresistance -outright refusal onoccasion-to act on the democra-tic decisions bf our Student-Faculty Couhcil . Towler was to bein control, and thats all there wasto it. Insofar as our governingbodies supported his individualprejudgemen ts on matters, he waswilling to recognize our authority.But wherever we transgressed his- wishes in our votes, sudd enly theword would come down that wesomehow acted beyond ourprivilege and rights. Towlersmost flagrant violati on of our ex-pressed wishes. came around ourdecision to- donate $100 to theOj ibway Warriors Society. Towlerthought i t inappropriate and wouldnot yield. Only because we per-sisted was the check finall y drawnbut it came not from the fund whichshould support such allocatio ns;rather, withou t our consent, heused our meagre academic supportfunds.The examples of his violation s ofour coll&ctive will are many, eachmore disturbing than the last. Hisactions, w hich have extended intoefforts to undermi ne trust in facultymembers and student representa-tives, have culminated in a generalatmosphere of fear-fear that weare being l ed into the noose ofheavy constraints against the exer-cise of any democratic process.The rampant speculation aroundwhat might be going on behind ourbacks erupted this week in the finalexercise of arbitrary authority-the firing of two faculty membersand impossi ble restrictions on athird.

At this point we find ourselves ina situation which is the polarity ofeverything we have worked to es-tablish, and the most offendingirony is the tacit understanding onTowlers part that we have nochoice but to accept his dictum.But the democratic seeds werewe ll rooted before Towler took re-sidence in his newly decorated of-fice, an d those seeds are growinginto a democratic organizati on farbeyond the scope of Towlersworst nightmares.Towler missed t he most impor-tant historical lesson of all-tha twe &nnot possibly go backwards.His presence enforced only atemporary regression, a short set-back. But those of us, faculty andstudents alike, who are outraged bythe preposterous actions of late,wil l carry forward the promises todemocratise Renison, to make it amodel which will continue to drawprogressively minde d people .

Humanrights aColin DeAth on behalf of the K-WHuman Rights Caucus:The secretive nature of how thisdecision was made is unacceptable.This issue has impli cations for therest of the Waterloo universitycommunity and we fully endorsestudent particip ation in this mktter.The Human Rights Caucus urgesthe university faculty and studentbody to become involved so thistype of arbitrary procedure doesnot become the norm. /

Someth-irdifferentOnce again, its that time of termthat all the engineers look forwardto, and the rest of the campusdreads-Engineering Week!This year, tours of the differentdepartments of the Faculty havebeen organized to acquaint the stu-dent body and the public at largewith the different research projectsand facilities that normally remainhidden in some dark corner of E-3.Its amazing just what you can miss

discovering in five years hardlabour here, so treat yourself to afree tour. Monday is tour day forthe Electrical Departmen t; Tues-day, for Mechanica l Department ,and Wednesday, for the Chemic alDept. All tours leave the E-4Lounge starting at 12:30 PM (andcontinuing al2 afternoon). Onceagain, its open to everyone!The Second Annual VolleyTournament will be running allweek in the E-4 Lounge. If youhave a supple wrist and quick re-flexes, sign up on the sheet postedby the Volley Machine. There areprizes galore!Tuesday night, from 7:00 P.M. to,. 1:00 A.M., the Black Bubble Cof-fee House will come out of hibera-tion. With cheap donuts and coffee

and free entertainment, this isgoing to be a good spot to relaxfrom the pressures of mid-terms.Wednesday wil l be occupied bythe Chemical films and cartoonsshywing contipuoysly in the E-4Lounge. Come out, have a svb ordonut and watch Godzilla meetBambi.In an effort to provide, entertain-ment for everyonej Eng. Sot. hasorganized a Scavenger Hunt for allof yoti amateur and professionalkleptomaniacs. Get your team to-gether now (maximum of six peopleper team) and show up in the E-4Lounge at 9:00 P.M. to pick upyour own personal MPission lm-possible.At noon on Friday, the survivorsof the Volley Tournament will meetin the E-4 Lounge to decidk thechampion. Come out and witness

these mam&oth* battles as thegiants bat tle for top honours.Friday night is an event that no-one will want to miss! The lntra-Provincial Boat Races will be heldin the SouthXampus Hall at 8:00P.M. with crews representing allthe other Engin eering univer-sities gatheripg in another fu_tile at-tempt to wrest the ProvincialTrophy from the hands of the U. ofW. Engin eering body (fat chance2, (Remember, this is a gentle.mans _(and ladys) event, so open yourthroat and let the good times pour!Admissi on price is 50 cents andeveryone is welcome., Saturday morning, for thosehardy souls that will be moving,there are two great events beingstaged. Starting at 9:30 A.M. onColumbia Field, the annual MudBowl football championship willtear up the turf in all-out effort towin the coveted trophy. Enter yourclassteam in the Eng. Sot. officeby Thursday, Nov. 7th.At lo:30 A.M., all the JackieStewarts on campus will meet inParking Lot 0 (0 for optometry) /to check in for the Pub Rally. En-tries should be submitted to theEng. So t. o ffice by Thursday,Nov. 7th. Entry fee is $4.00 per car,,driver and navigator. Motio n sick-ness pills, brown paper bags and asupply of aspirin are recommendedsupplementary equipment. Comeout and seeif you can read a map by12:00 Noon.Finally, as a grand finale, Eng.Sot. proudly presents A FALLAFFAIR - this years Engineey-ing Semi-Formal, to be held in theViennese Ballroom of the WaterlooMotor Inn at 9:00 P.M,Entertain-ment will be provided by OPUS 11.A hot and cold buffet will be servedat 11:00 P.M., with drinking anddancing continuing into the weehours of the morning . Tickets are$10.00 per couple and they are av-ailable from the Eng. Sot. andMath So t. offices. Hurry to get

yours thoug h, because they go fast.Hope you enjoy your week!

member: Canadi an university press (CUP.). The chevron istypeset by dumont press graphix and publish ed by thefederatio n of students incorporated, university of water-loo.Content is the sole responsibility of the chevron editor ialstaff. Offices are located in the campus centre; (519) 885-1660, or university local 2331.

. - CSirculation: 13,000the renison af fai r wi l l certainly be talked about many years hence whe nwere al l get t ing o ld and grey hopefy l ly in favourable terms thoughrenison princ ipal john orchard towler might want to regis ter his disag-reement on the lat ter point or then again he might also be happy withthe exciting outcom e of this return to the days of confronta tion politics.Product ion on this spec ial issue: marisa m i l ler, barb innis , patty gi lbert ,phi l fernande z, carofyn sawyer, jane t Stee le, .rick degrass, ian layf ield ,the dumont ducks, the federat ion bureaucrats and)wo ageing chevronhacks.

8/14/2019 Harry Tuyn

4/4

4 the chevron tuesday, november 5, 1974.-

/- UPP theenison. penmeeting

TuesdayNovember57:oo P.M.Rm. 44 Renison11 .meet with Renisonboard of governors I

Federation dentsinformationmeetiThursdayNovember71:00 p.m. *campuscentre

1 ; - .