# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1950_S965
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

SEMINARIES AND COLLEGES 267

“b. The Board of Control shall be responsible for the condition
of the physical property of its respective institution and
shall operate, manage, control, and supervise the property,
grounds, buildings, and equipment, and maintain the same
in good repair and efficiency. It shall submit reports
regarding property and maintenance at regular intervals,
or upon request, to the Board for Higher Education for
reference to the Board of Directors as custodians of Synod’s
property.

c. Remains unchanged.

“d. The Board of Control shall be responsible for the efficient
business administration of its respective institution, in
accordance with such methods of accounting as may be
prescribed by the Board for Higher Education in consulta-
tion with the Board of Directors.

e, Remains unchanged.

“f. The Board of Control shall discharge its responsibility

through its executive officer; cf. 6.31.”

“

Handbook Section 6.51

The Centennial Convention authorized the introduction of
‘a ranking system in the synodical faculties at the preparatory insti-
tutions and at the teachers’ colleges. Present indications are that
when there has been an opportunity for the change to become fully
effective, some very real benefits will result. According to the
schedule set by the convention, the last of the authorized ranks,
full professors, became effective on February 1, 1950.

While it is true that there has been some disappointment
connected with the establishment of the full series of ranks (be-
cause the introduction of full professorships into an existing situa-
tion must, admittedly, involve some inequities), the values inherent
‘in the opportunity to secure and to train instructors, under the
appointment system, have been enthusiastically acknowledged and
endorsed by many of our college presidents. Under this system,
Synod now has the means of selecting and training promising
material and to either advance such teaching personnel gradually
or to decline reappointments as the conditions may warrant.

Although it is well known that the standard ranking arrange-
ment in the American college system involves four ranks, the
' Board for Higher Education included only three ranks in its
original recommendations on this. subject, because it was felt that
for our junior colleges and high schools the application of all four
ranks would be somewhat cumbersome and pretentious.

A careful study of our experience relating to this problem
indicates three primary reasons for making an adjusting recom-
mendation at this time:

1. Under the present system of three ranks there is no oppor-
tunity to recognize the satisfactory work which may be