House Masters, Faculty Express Varied Reactions to New Plans

The reactions of House Masters and Faculty members to the CEP proposals yesterday ran the full range from praise to criticism. Most of the commentators thought more should be done for non-Honors students and regretted giving up compulsory non-Honors junior tutorial.

John H. Finley, Jr. '25, Master of Eliot House, said the plan is "tremendous." He added, however, that "it is like tossing $50 to the 100 neediest cases." In a similar vein, Robert W. White '25, chairman of the Department of Social Relations, said the proposals "don't represent enough of a gain for non-Honors students." Another Faculty member felt the proposals would create too great a distinction between Honors and non-Honors students.

Both White and Charles H. Taylor, Master of Kirkland House, expressed concern about the strain on the Faculty of the more individualized tutorial teaching proposed.

Conflict With English Department Seen

A spokesman in the English Department criticized the plan for conflicting with the program adopted by that Department last November. "Non-Honors junior exams have been of little value in the last ten years," because the junior did not have to take tutorial or do any work in it, he said.

One member of the CEP commented that the report had neglected to consider the difficulty of switching fields of concentration. He noted, however, that candidates desiring Honors in a field can take Honors exams in the new field in the spring of their junior year.