U. Trustees delay name change vote

The University Trustees did not vote on the name change of the Oriental Studies Department Friday, passing the issue to the Trustees' Academic Policy Committee. The president of the United Minorities Council criticized the move, which will prolong the year-long debate over the proposed name change. "It would be unfortunate if anyone chose to characterize this struggle or this movement as a game of chicken," Kim said. The Trustees, who said they passed along the decision because changing the name is a matter of academic policy, also discussed the issue of political correctness as a motive for the name change. Until Friday's meeting, students and University officials alike thought that the name change proposal would be accepted by the Trustees. At a vote of Oriental Studies faculty on December 12, 14 faculty members voted to change the department's name to Asian-Middle Eastern Studies. Four were opposed to the proposed name, two abstained, and two were opposed to any change at all. School of Arts and Sciences Dean Rosemary Stevens and Provost Michael Aiken both gave their approval to the proposal, forwarding the matter to the Trustees for a vote. At Friday's meeting, Charter Trustee Paul Miller motioned to send the department's proposal to the Academic Policy Committee for its evaluation. The motion was put to a vote, and met with unanimous agreement. In addition, Miller said he disapproves of changing the name at all. "I don't think that the Trustees can afford to appear to be giving in to political correctness," Miller said. He also said that such a move could damage the University's current fundraising campaign. Donald Langenberg, chairperson of the Trustees' Academic Policy Committee, said the name change issue is "clearly a matter of academic policy." "It's an issue of some relative importance . . . I think it needs our careful attention," Langenberg said. Langenberg said that the question of the name change has been forwarded for the committee's consideration, and that he expects the committee members to decide the issue in June, by "telephone, or fax, or whatever." Langenberg said he felt the department's vote reflected its clear-cut stance on the issue. However, in a letter addressed to the Trustees and presented at the meeting, Oriental Studies professors Peter Gaeffke, Ake Sjoberg, Erle Leichty, James Muhly and William Hanaway said that "the idea of changing the name of the Department was forced on the Department by a campaign of relentless pressure that was carried outside the University, at least as far as the office of the Mayor of Philadelphia, and possibly farther." The professors said the move to change the name of the department was a matter of great concern to other universities nationwide, which, they said, are following the issue and hoping that a name change does not occur. "For the Trustees to give in to pressures of political correctness would send a most unfortunate message to other members of the American academic world," the letter said. The letter also voiced the objection that the proposed change to Asian-Middle Eastern Studies was not a good one, and that "nobody in the Department is really happy with it." Sjoberg, Leichty and Hanaway could not be reached for comment this weekend, and Gaeffke and Muhly did not wish to comment on the subject. Oriental Studies Professor Jeffrey Tigay, who is currently on leave, said the issue of political correctness played no role in the decision of faculty members to propose or support the name change. "I am absolutely certain that political correctness played no role whatsoever," Tigay said. He said that the name change had been proposed to better "represent the full spectrum" of the subjects studied within the department, adding that the name became an issue as a result of student protests. Ludo Rocher, the chairperson of the Oriental Studies department, said he was aware of the professors' dissent. "There have always been people within the department who absolutely did not want a change," Rocher said. Rocher said he felt the name change would eventually pass, and said that the proposal should have gone through some kind of academic committee before being put to the Trustees' vote. "Obviously, it was a technicality," Rocher said. "I still haven't digested it." Kim characterized the decision as an attempt on the Trustees' part to shelve the issue. She said the move is evidence of the Trustees perpetuating a "constant disenfranchisement" of students. "I feel like students have been taken for a ride. The issue is about what is right for the integrity of the University," Kim said. "This is something that's going to push us to do something," Kim added. "Push has come to shove."