Restore Reading Period

IN THE LAST half century, one of Harvard's most cherished traditions has been steadily eroded, and last week student members of the Committee on Undergraduate Education (CUE) rightfully recognized that it must be preserved.

Fifty-eight years ago, the Faculty voted to set aside the end of each term as a reading period. The purpose of this innovation was to give professors a respite from teaching and to allow students time for uninterrupted study, President A. Lawrence Lowell wrote at the time. Today, "reading period" bears little resemblance to its original self.

In the absence of any official restraints, professors use reading period to burden students with a relentless barrage of new material. Before students can get down to the actual business of reviewing for final exams, they often must wade through a mire of additional lectures, homework assignments, and even hourly exams. Five years ago, when reading period was last reviewed, a student-faculty committee found that more than half of the 100 most popular courses met during reading period to cover new ground.

Last week, student representatives to the CUE proposed a series of reforms to stem the erosion of reading period. Authored by the Undergraduate Council's Academics Committee, the proposal would eliminate tests during reading period, impose restrictions on reading period assignments, and prohibit lectures during the second week of reading period The student plan is a long-overdue step in the right direction, but it falls short of realizing the true objective.

When the CUE convenes new month to follow up on the proposals, it should recommend that the Faculty adopt a set of regulations that would prevent encroachments on reading period altogether.

Reading period should be entirely free from tests, new reading assignments, and class meetings other than optional review sessions. Any papers or projects due during reading period should be assigned at the beginning of the term so that students have the option of completing them in advance. Following the official academic calendar, professors should tailor their course plans to fit a 12-week semester: the two weeks of reading period should be reserved for study.

Opponents of these reforms argue that they would further encourage undergraduates to procrastinate and to cram for exams. Their protests defy the basic philosophy of reading period, which places a premium on study and synthesis. Reading period allows students to put a semester of lectures, readings, problem sets, labs, and papers in perspective before the final exam asks them to make sense of it all. Reading period is also a last chance to study readings that felt by the wayside and might otherwise go unread. By subverting this valued Harvard institution, professors only limit the possibilities for thoughtful reflection and thorough exam preparation.

We pay for reading period with a drastically shortened winter break, but somehow, we have been shortchanged. The issue of reading period is inextricably connected with that of Harvard's perenially debated calendar, which abbreviates Christmas vacation and places exams after the holidays. Reading period is billed as the main benefit of this arrangement, but its unchecked abuse has denied students the fruits of their sacrifice.

The Faculty and the CUE should take their cue from the Undergraduate Council: it's time to put the reading back in reading period.