Curriculum Reform Study Gets Enthusiastic Support

Dean May's review of "the nature, scope and goals of undergraduate education" has entered, he reports, "a second phase."

May has received about 50 replies from senior and junior Faculty members and students to his November request for curriculum reform proposals. All the Houses have set up study committees and several- notably those of Winthrop, Eliot, and Quincy- have been very active. May and his assistants have copied and bound several of the proposals, which will be distributed next week to the House committees.

"No one expected as many carefully thought-out proposals," Paul J. Corkery '68, one of May's assistants, said yesterday. "You expect people like David Riesman to be interested in curriculum reform, but we've even had a great response from people in the Natural Sciences."

Concerned Faculty

"These letters. . . should help set to rest any suspicion that the Faculty is unconcerned or unreceptive to change." May said.

Among the more interesting proposals:

Frank H. Westheimer, Morris Loeb Professor of Chemistry, suggested the climination of courses as degree requirements. Under his proposal, a student's progress would be measured by exams which he could take whenever he feels prepared.

Harvey Brooks, Dean of Engineering and Applied Physics, proposed allowing students to substitute "problem-oriented institutes" for traditional academic disciplines, and giving them fractional course credit for work experience or month-long special courses.

George W. Goethals, lecturer on Social Relations, wanted residence and course requirements reduced to allow accelerated graduation on the basis of examinations alone. "Four-year college is essentially a kind of trap," Goethals said. Goethals also had some suggestions on General Education. (See sidebar.)

Stephen J. Rapp '70, a member of the Harvard-Radcliffe Policy Com-

mittee, submitted a lengthy consideration of the problem of grades. He concluded that the best substitute for grades would be a system of "dossiers" on each student which would include papers, comments, and frequent evaluations by teachers.

Several of the recommendations were conflicting. Giles Constable, Henry Charles Lea Professor of Medieval History, urged the elimination of most tutorials, while Evon Z. Vogt, professor of Social Anthropology, urged that they be reemphasized. The Kirkland House study group attacked concentration requirements; the Eliot House one attacked distribution requirements.

May said he hopes to have concrete proposals from the Houses ready for Faculty consideration this Spring.

"Nobody seems to be pushing any hard line yet," Corkery said, "but maybe that's a function of the stage we're in."