OLYMPUS REPLIES

The various attempts of undergraduate organizations here and elsewhere to help in the solving of university problems have been favorably criticised both intelligent public. But the faculties have for the most part, maintained an Olympic calm. That they should have done so is neither strange nor has it proved the futility of undergraduate attempts to assist in decisions customarily beyond their realm of major criticism. And recent events prove the truth of the matter: not only have the faculties respected undergraduate suggestions, they have acted upon them.

Here at Harvard the change in Biology 1 is a result of recommendations for a general science course, emphasizing lectures rather than laboratory, made by the Student Council's Committee on Education. That this is not alone the result of the publishing of the committee's report is fairly patent; but that it owes much to the suggestions contained in the report has been admitted by the biology department. Concentrated, constructive criticism has not deployed into purposeless channels in this case.

Nor has the reform movement in football failed to promote faculty action. The American Association of University Professors, meeting in New York, has agreed publicly that the present tendency to over accentuate the importance of intercollegiate football is a factor in unbalancing university life. Apparently the members of the Association in their statement of the ills concomitant with football have added a chapter to the book of college myths. For football has not corrupted the undergraduate mind. Nor should football be blamed for the fancies of its fans. Those are not intrinsic parts of that game. Yet the professional mind can, as the metropolitan press has lately revealed, err occasionally. Sufficient is it to realize that the faculty members have appreciated the undergraduate reaction to over inflation on the football market and have agreed with the critical observations of thoughtful undergraduates.

The day when faculty existence could be negatived by the vote of those who would not brook certain faculty legislation is a part of medieval, not modern history. Yet the day of rapport between undergraduate and faculty is apparently more a part of modern history than many perennial pessimists would care to admit.