ANARCHY IN THE YARD

Dean Leighton in his latest report has moderately stated the ideal of the Freshmen Adviser system: "For most Freshmen proper placement in courses and a friendly interest and readiness on the part of the Adviser to talk over with them the various decisions that must be made are probably all that is needed." The only consistent thing about the institution is that it has failed to accomplish this end in any way.

In the beginning the Adviser system was set up to do for Freshmen what the Tutorial was meant to do, and, it must be said, has done for the upper three classes. For the first year man, just released from the regimentation of prep school life, some sort of nature leadership is definitely needed, and it was hoped that the Advisers would be able to hack the trail through the wilderness of the early months in college. More important and concrete than this friendly guidance, the duty of the Adviser was to aid in the choice of courses during the first year, and finally to help the Freshmen select his field of concentration. The new freedom of the Conant administration, the changes in both language and distribution requirements, with the consequent deflation of prescribed courses, has made the first of these duties more vital than ever before.

For such a task one world expect a hand-picked body of experienced instructors, but as far as any competent system of selection is concerned, the names of the Adviser might just as well be pulled out of a hat. The man chosen as a Vice-Presidential candidate in a smoke-filled hotel bedroom has more qualifications for his office than these men. Only one example out of many is the student who, having decided to concentrate in English, went for advice to his Adviser, an amiable young Frenchman with the best if intentions. But as for advising him in English, the man could hardly speak it! To remedy this the University should pick the Advisers from among the younger instructors, given them a rigid course of training in their duties, and in making the assignments keep in mind the general interests of the Freshman concerned.

With regard to Advisers Harvard has tried to get something for nothing and has met with the usual experience of bargain counters. The lack of pay, or, what is equivalent, an alleviation of their normal duties, is the most important cause of the breakdown of the Freshman Advisers. Throughout the history of the system the position has been regarded as a burden to be discharged as perfunctorily as possible. The man who really takes his work in this field seriously and meets with any measure of success, of whom Walsh Hammond, and Graustein are the most conspicuous examples, deserves to be placed with the Agassiz flowers as Harvard's outstanding rarities. Not until be receives a reward corresponding to the value of his work will the Adviser go ahead with any enthusiasm or initiative.

The short interval during which he serves combines with the lack of pay to stifle the spirit of the Freshman Adviser. It is hardly worthwhile for either the University of the individual to formulate any real plan of action when the group will soon be made up of entirely new men. Under such conditions it is surprising that out of 150 Adviser's reports that were supposed to be submitted this month to one of the major departments, only seventy-five were actually handed in, of which eight turned out to be of any practical use!

Harvard can no longer hide the issue behind the smoke screen of vague illusions and regrets in the reports of the President and Deans. At the present time the system of Advisers is worse than if there were none at all. The reform this time must be a complete one; no more sweeping the dirt into the corner of the room. The office must be raised to one of dignity and responsibility by selecting a group of young men to serve for a long period of time and picked for their ability to instill confidence in the younger students. They must be thoroughly trained in the subjects of courses and concentration, and rewarded for their work. Results must be insisted upon as they are in all other agencies of the University.

The reform of the Adviser system will of course mean an added expense, but it is by no means a luxury which Harvard can place among its distantly hoped-for attainments. The new fields President Conant has opened must be put under a regime of law and order before further harm is done to the inexperienced Freshmen. The Advisers must meet the challenge: Advise or get out! If the present system cannot be reformed, for the sake of time and effort, it might better be scrapped.