Voluntary Tutorial II

The first editorial of this series suggested continued compulsory attendance as the basis for tutorial revisions. Not the compulsion is a favored academic tool, but no matter how successful the revisions might be, only regular participation in the program will convince the reluctant student of tutorial's value. Since tutorial is worth having at Harvard, two basic improvements follow: There must be some spur to prepare the assignments and attend the sessions, and there must be some incentive to take an active part in the proceedings.

Perhaps the best way to assure attendance is to give students a letter grade for their work instead of the present department rating, and to make that grade part of the permanent record. Many especially non-honors men--feel that, time-wise, they cannot afford to prepare for tutorial because it is unimportant to their academic standing. A permanent grade would correct that attitude. And the threat of a poor grade would bring back those who constantly cut without fear of reprisal.

The only permanent way to keep tutorial sessions, full, however, is to make them choice plums of the curriculum. This job belongs mainly to the tutors. But according to the CRIMSON poll, over half of those dissatisfied with the program named their tutor as the reason. He dominated the discussion, they claimed, and too often parcelled out assignments without consulting his tutees. That was bad, but when the tutor made his special field the subject of group study, tutorial became unbearable for those with different interests.

Certainly, the tutor, as the man who best knows, the area, should a have considerable influence in deciding the study material, but he should always be ready to accommodate the wishes of his tutees. First, the department heads should set the general path of study, then, with suggestions rather than commands, the tutor should allow interest to shape particular assignments within the group.

Just as tutors should not veto reasonable student requests, they should not dictate the work merely because the students do not seem interested in deciding for themselves. Stimulating discussion along lines of student interest should produce further footholds in new topics. If, allowing his tutees freedom to choose their own study, the tutor cannot interest them, he is probably a worse teacher than they are students.

As the students do more of the study planning, their varied interests will probably make the reading material cut across area lines. Further improvements might standardize frequency of meetings and number in the group. Four of five men meeting two hours every other week is the overwhelmingly popular combination. Also, whenever possible, those in a particular area might be assigned a tutor with the same interest.

But the minor technical changes can wait until the departments and tutors have reached an agreement as to proper procedure. When the tutors become little more than highly informed members of the groups, then tutorial will be at full effect, and students will need no compulsion to attend.