220

8

THE NEW PLAN OF OPERATION

College. In both cases only the stall and courses already in exist-
ence for the major function would be available for the minor
function subject to strict University control. This, it was ex-
plained would enrich the offerings and life of both institutions.
This is a most worthy proposal, but its difficulty lies in the prac-
ticability of the limitation that would prevent a minor function
gradually through the years from becoming a major function.
With no clear-cut basis of allocation of functions, the courses in
the arts and sciences in the land grant college become in time a
school of science and business or a college of arts and sciences,
and a few engineering curricula become in the separate state uni-
versity a full-hedged School of Engineering. Thus duplication
goes on its way of the competitive drainage of support.

Within the Consolidated University a few of the engineering
courses at Chapel Hill can be continued in the curricula of a major
function of its allocated college or school. For example, sanitation
naturally belongs in the department of public health. At State
College, most of the courses in the arts and sciences can be made
basic to and a continuing part of the major functions of the
technological schools.

Facing squarely the issue of the clear-cut allocation of functions
as one way of consolidation, and the allocation of major functions
with their incidental minor functions as another way of consoli-
dation, the administrative council recommended in favor of a basic
two years with clear-cut allocation of functions on the upper col-
lege and graduate level.

Let us look squarely at the long-run issues before us. We have,
it appears, three main alternatives:

(1) Outright physical consolidation of two or all three institu-
tions on one campus, for example, at the historic seat of the Uni-
versity at Chapel Hill.

(2) The stopping of consolidation where it is, with duplica-
tion continuing in the upper years in the engineering school,
science curricula, and departments of education.

(3) Preservation of the locality, institutional integrity, historic
traditions, values, and loyalties around the basic purposes of each
institution, but with no duplication of schools or curricula in the
upper and graduate years.

We consider physical consolidation as impracticable and impos-
sible. It is now financially out of the question and contrary to the
wishes of the people. The state has given to each of these three
institutions an historic rootage deep and wide in the soil and life