House Heads Affirm Value Of Seminars

Officials of Adams and Quincy Houses sharply disagreed with John J. Conway, Master of Leverett House, on the success of House seminars.

Conway was quoted in yesterday's CRIMSON as saying that the seminars have been rendered "obsolete" by the Gill Plan for non-Honors Tutorial.

John M. Bullitt '43, Master of Quincy House, asserted that the seminars have a "very strong function," as they allow investigation of areas that "would not be covered at all in tutorial." He added that Quincy House has run six or seven seminars this year, all of which were "very well attended."

Andrew G. Jameson, Allston Burr Senior Tutor of Adams House, claimed that House seminars "should be completely dissociated from tutorial as we conceive it departmentally." Instead, he maintained, they should be considered a part of the House activities.

Jameson asserted that a "new line of attack" was necessary; he suggested seminars on such subjects as painting and the fine arts, but only if these fields produce undergraduate interest.

Owen, Taylor Disagree

Other Masters disagreed. David E. Owen, Master of Winthrop House, and Charles H. Taylor, Master of Kirkland House, both said that they agreed with Conway.

Owen maintained that his House had begun several "good" seminars last year but that they "died on the bough" through lack of interest. This year Winthrop is giving no seminars.

Taylor expressed similar views. He reported that Kirkland had a seminar on Latin American problems led by William S. Barnes, head of the Latin American Studies Program. Although this seminar was open to students in all of the Houses, Taylor said that it was able to attract only ten participants.

Taylor added that the general problem of the seminars is that "Harvard is super-saturated with outside attractions" and that the seminars "look like simply one more type of course."