James A. Perkins

Organization and Functions of the University.

The organization of the university is usually described in simple terms: a board of trustees, which receives a charter from the state, appoints a president to administer, and approves a faculty to teach and to select the students to learn. The board, the faculty, the administration, and the students together make up the academic community which embraces a familiar triumvirate of functions-teaching, research, and public service. But such simplicity is deceptive. Organizationally the university is, in fact, one of the most complex structures in modern society; it is also increasingly archaic. It is complex because its formal structure does not describe either actual power or responsibilities; it is archaic because the functions it must perform are not and cannot be discharged through the formal structure provided in its charter. The predicament of university organization has arisen, in part, because of its conflicting missions. Further, the university is asked not only to perform conflicting missions but also to perform them

Foreign Aid and the Brain Drain

OUR foreign policies are often much more closely related to our domestic policies than we realize?and not alone through the political struggles over appropriations, or even over Congressional approval of international agreements. Indeed, our foreign policies can come so sharply into conflict with our domestic policies that, unless this conflict is both understood and resolved by governmental leaders, domestic pressures can completely undermine and even nullify our foreign programs. There is in our contemporary national life a disturbing illus tration of this basic rule of statecraft, and it is one which is being discussed more and more widely, with a growing sense of concern. This is the conflict between the objectives of our foreign assist ance programs and the requirements of our expanding economy ?between our efforts to train people in the less developed coun tries and our drain of foreign specialists to fill important jobs here in the United States.

International Education in a Troubled World

The external and internal environment of the U.S. has changed significantly since World War Two. Our military preeminence has vanished, in economic affairs the American model is not valid for other countries, and the U.S. is no longer the scientific leader of the world. Our foreign policy has become much more closely intertwined with domestic issues among which cultural pluralism is important. In an inter dependent world we cannot solve problems independently but must work in concert with other nations. Expertise on the rest of the world is hence needed as never before in government, business, and especially in the universities. But the system for maintaining and strengthening this expertise is jeopardized by the erosion of financial support. Increasingly needed are specialists who combine foreign language and international studies expertise with training in professional fields, and specialists not only on other countries and geographic regions but also on major international issues such as energy and economic development. Paralleling the need for specialists is the need for greater international education for our citizens. This calls for much greater efforts in kindergarten through twelfth grade, in undergraduate studies, in foreign language teaching at all levels, and in adult and community education. The Presidents Commission directed recommendations on these matters to the federal and state governments, to schools, colleges and universities, and to the public at large. It is hoped that a privately funded national council, the establish ment of which was recommended by the Commission, will assist in seeing that the national needs in foreign language and international studies are met.

Administration of the National Security Program

THE National Security Act of 1947 provides the organizational structure in the executive branch for managing our program of national security. This act was amended in 1949 to correct some deficiencies, but the agencies of today are essentially those established in 1947. Before attempting an analysis of the present working of our security structure, let us make a quick review of the cast of characters and the roles they were and are expected to play.