The First Six Years 1963-69

entitled “ The University's Responsibility in International Edu cational Exchange: a Rationale ” ， it is pointed out tha t: “ The traditional role o f universities has ， un til recently ， been conceived o f as being principally two-fo ld : first ， teaching ， and secondly, re search … . Increasingly ， especially after the Second World W a r ， universities have become concerned w ith another dimension ， the international one ．… The universities must, therefore ， accept and welcome a commitment to this international frame o f reference ， and they must do so consciously as a means o f realizing their fullest po ten tia l. … A university that does not look outward to wider horizons o f the international community is not, in the true sense o f the word, a university in the second ha lf o f the twentieth century." These remarks are self-explanatory and need no elaboration. They describe precisely the direction which The Chinese University w ith its three-fold dedication to teaching, research and international commitment has pursued from the beginning. Adm itted ly ， the road ahead is a long and arduous one, but having made a start, the University looks forward to its journey w ith confidence and ex pectation. In pausing to reflect on past accomplishment ， the close re lationship, founded on mutual trust and cooperation, which has been established between the constituent Colleges and the Un iver sity Headquarters is particularly noteworthy and gratifying. There were and probably still are skeptics who doubt the wisdom and feasibility o f forming The Chinese University and advocate the adoption o f a highly structured and integrated or ganization as a means o f achieving maximum efficiency ， standardi zation and uniform ity. The apparent advantages o f complete cen tralization, however, are frequently offset by the disadvantages characteristic o f large, systematized organizations which sacrifice the personal element in the interests o f efficiency. This tends to alienate the ind ividua l and eventually leads to divisive and dis ruptive influences. Other opponents o f the federated system question the necessity for creating a large institution at all. They ask: “ Why not hold the Colleges to a size which would permit the entire academic and administrative community to function on a face-to-face basis?” They reason that it would not then be necessary to adopt imper sonal systems and procedures which tend to dehumanize and alienate the individual. A t face value, this is a tempting thought. Unfortunately, how ever, a small college cannot hope to attract the academic ex pertise or marshal the academic resources necessary to keep abreast o f the state o f the art in this complex and dynamic age o f science and technology. Students want to be able to participate 77