Radcliffe Dean Kerby-Miller, Joan Braverman Discuss Joint Exams

Student and Administrative opinions concerning combined Harvard-Radcliffe finals were aired last Monday when Radio Radcliffe broadcast a joint discussion between Dean Kerby-Miller and Joan Braverman '49, chairman of the Student Government Committee investigating the examination merger issue.

Separate Exams

The following is a summary of the arguments presented:

According to Dean Kerby-Miller, the Administrative Board feels nay the present system of separate examinations involves educational disadvantages to Radcliffe students. She noted that professors with combined classes could not be present at the beginning of the tests to clarify instructions and answers about test material. "This is an important consideration in a matter as important as an examination," she said. "The time lost could mean a significant difference in a student's grade."

Cliffe Complaint

Dean Korby-Miller west on to say that there have been complaints as to the conduct of examinations at Radcliffe. "Girls who did not wish to come and go as the honor system allows, and go as the honor system allows, and who wanted every moment for concentration, have felt there was undue distraction."

Miss Braverman pointed out that students felt a professor could just as easily send an assistant to explain the examination, or that they could go on to the next questions and wait for the professor to arrive.

As a cross section of student opinion, Miss Braverman revealed that a discussion at Barnard Hall raised a two-point criticism of joint exams. "These girls felt it was up to the student how much time was wasted on an examination," she said. According to the girls questioned, Harvard exams were just as noisy, with proctors walking around and boys getting up and down.

Stating that this system could be investigated and corrected, Dean Kerby-Miller added that Radcliffe criticism does not apply if Harvard men think their system is satisfactory. "Why can't young women work under the same conditions as men?" she asked.

Honor System

The discussion then moved on to the Radcliffe honor system as the distinguishing characteristic between the two methods of examinations.

Dean Kerby-Miller emphasized that the Administration does not consider joint examinations a criticism of the basic principles of the honor system. "We have no reason to believe that the honor system is not working, but we must assume that there are some infringements as in the cases of dorm signing in and the library."

She defended administrative approval of proctored exams on the grounds that taking too much advantage of the honor system's freedom of time is to the detriment of the student.

In answer to Dean Kerby-Miller's query, "Is there a real advantage in the honor system as it operates," Miss Braverman cited student opinion that the honor system eliminates tension caused by proctoring or by the feeling of suspicion if one leaves the exam. "We are proud of this honor system privilege as it distinguishes Radcliffe from other schools and from Harvard," she said. "Ours is a mature type of exam because it approximates the manner in which we live after college."

Students Opposed

According to Miss Braverman, the student feels that if the exams are made joint, the honor system will lose its most important aspect and one which students want to retain. "We do not consider administrative efficiency a good enough substitute for the honor system," she declared.